[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 5 (Thursday, January 8, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1060-1063]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-433]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[OH111-1a; FRL-5947-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Maintenance Plan Revision; Ohio
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is
approving through ``direct final'' procedure, an October 20, 1997,
request from Ohio, for a State Implementation Plan (SIP) maintenance
plan revision for the Jefferson County ozone maintenance area. The
maintenance plan revision is allocating to the mobile source emission
budget for transportation conformity purposes a portion of the existing
safety margin. The safety margin is the difference between the
attainment inventory level of the total emissions and the projected
levels of the total emissions in the final year of the maintenance
plan.
DATES: This ``direct final'' rule is effective on March 9, 1998, unless
USEPA receives significant written adverse or critical comments by
February 9, 1998. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will
be published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are
available for inspection during normal business hours at the following
location: Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch, (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604.
Please contact Scott Hamilton at (312) 353-4775 before visiting the
Region 5 office.
Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch, (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois, 60604.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Hamilton, Environmental
Scientist, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-4775.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Clean Air Act in section 176(c) requires conformity of
activities to an implementation plan's purpose of attaining and
maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. On November 24,
1993, the USEPA promulgated a final rule establishing criteria and
procedures for determining conformity of transportation plans, programs
and projects funded or approved under Title 23 U.S.C. of the Federal
Transit Act.
The State of Ohio finalized and adopted State transportation
conformity rules on August 1, 1995, the rules
[[Page 1061]]
became effective August 21, 1995, and Ohio submitted the rules as a SIP
revision request on August 17, 1995. The rules were approved by the
USEPA on July 15, 1996 (61 FR 24702).
The transportation conformity rules require, among other things, a
comparison of emissions to the mobile source emissions budget
established by a control strategy SIP. A control strategy SIP is
defined by the conformity rules to be a maintenance plan, an attainment
demonstration, or a rate of progress plan. The USEPA approval of the
maintenance plan established the mobile source budget for
transportation conformity purposes.
The preamble to the November 24, 1993, transportation conformity
rule (58 FR 62188) explains the emissions budget concept. The preamble
also describes how to establish the motor vehicle emissions budget in
the SIP and how to revise the emissions budget. The State
transportation conformity rule at 3745-101-16 of the Ohio
Administrative Code allows the mobile source emissions budget to be
changed as long as the total level of emissions from all sources remain
below the milestone level. In the case of a maintenance plan the
milestone level is the attainment level established in the maintenance
plan.
The maintenance plan is designed to accomodate future growth while
still maintaining the ozone air quality standard. Growth in industries,
population and traffic is offset with reductions from cleaner cars and
other emissions reduction programs. Through the maintenance plan the
State and local agencies can manage the air quality while providing for
growth.
II. Evaluation of the State Submittal
On October 20, 1997, Ohio submitted to the USEPA a SIP revision
request for the Jefferson County area maintenance plan. A public
hearing for the area was held on October 14, 1997. Documentation on the
public hearing was submitted to the USEPA in order to complete the SIP
revision request.
Ohio has requested to allocate to the Jefferson County mobile
source budget part of the reductions achieved between the 1990
attainment inventory year and the 2005 projected emissions inventory
(4.4 tons/day Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) existing safety margin,
and 39.4 tons/day Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) existing safety
margin, as described in 59 FR 48395; September 21, 1994). The SIP
revision requests the allocation of 1.0 ton/day VOC, and 1.0 ton/day
NOX, into the area's mobile source budget from the existing
safety margin. Table 1 illustrates the approved emissions budgets for
VOC and NOX from point, mobile (on-road) and area sources.
The safety margin allocations are shown in Table 2.
Table 1.--NOX and VOC Emissions Budget; and Safety Margin Determinations, Jefferson County
[Tons/day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 1990 1996 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point.................................................................... 1.1 1.2 1.3
Mobile (on-road)......................................................... 8.5 4.9 4.1
Area..................................................................... 6.5 6.4 6.3
--------------------------------------
Totals............................................................. 16.1 12.5 11.7
Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 4.4 tons/day VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX Emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point.................................................................... 378 376 340
Mobile (on-road)......................................................... 4.7 4.1 3.4
Area..................................................................... 2.7 2.7 2.6
--------------------------------------
Totals............................................................. 385.4 382.8 346.0
Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 39.4 tons/day NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2.--Allocation of Safety Margin to the 2005 Mobile Source Budget, Jefferson County
[Tons/day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 1990 1996 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point.................................................................... 1.1 1.2 1.3
Mobile (on-road)......................................................... 8.5 4.9 5.1
Area..................................................................... 6.5 6.4 6.3
--------------------------------------
Totals............................................................. 16.1 12.5 12.7
Remaining Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 3.4 tons/day VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX Emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point.................................................................... 378 376 340
Mobile (on-road)......................................................... 4.7 4.1 4.4
Area..................................................................... 2.7 2.7 2.6
--------------------------------------
Totals............................................................. 385.4 382.8 347.0
Remaining Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 38.4 tons/day VOC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 1062]]
Table 2 illustrates that the requested portion of the safety margin
can be allocated to the mobile source budget and still remain at or
below the 1990 attainment level of total emissions for the Jefferson
County area. This allocation is allowed by the conformity rule since
the area would still be at or below the 1990 attainment level for the
total emissions in the area.
The USEPA's review of the SIP revision request finds that the
requested allocation of the safety margins for the Jefferson County
area is approvable since the approval of the new mobile source
emissions budget will keep the total emissions for the area at or below
the attainment year inventory level as required by the transportation
conformity regulations.
III. USEPA Action
The USEPA approves the requested allocation of the safety margin to
the mobile source budget for the Jefferson County area. This action
will be effective on March 9, 1998 unless, by February 9, 1998,
significant written adverse or critical comments on the approval are
received.
If the USEPA receives such written adverse comments, the approval
will be withdrawn before the effective date by publishing a subsequent
rulemaking that will withdraw the final action. All written public
comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on
this action serving as a proposed rule. The USEPA does not plan to
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. If
no such written comments are received, the public is advised that this
action will be effective on March 9, 1998.
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Future Requests
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any
SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be considered
separately in light of specific technical, economic, and environmental
factors and in relation to relevant statutory and regulatory
requirements.
B. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this regulatory
action from Executive Order 12866 review.
C. Regulatory Flexibility
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. section 600 et seq.,
USEPA must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the
impact of any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C.
sections 603 and 604. Alternatively, USEPA may certify that the rule
will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit
enterprises, and government entities with jurisdiction over populations
of less than 50,000.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Act
do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements
that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP
approval does not impose any new requirements, the Administrator
certifies that it does not have a significant impact on any small
entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State
relationship under the Act, preparation of a flexibility analysis would
constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of the
State action. The Clean Air Act forbids USEPA to base its actions
concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. USEPA., 427 U.S.
246, 256-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
D. Unfunded Mandates
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995,
signed into law on March 22, 1995, USEPA must undertake various actions
in association with any proposed or final rule that includes a Federal
mandate that may result in estimated costs to state, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate; or to the private sector, of $100 million
or more. This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under
state or local law, and imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no
additional costs to state, local, or tribal governments, or the private
sector, result from this action.
E. Audit Privilege and Immunity Law
Nothing in this action should be construed as making any
determination or expressing any position regarding Ohio's audit
privilege and immunity law (Sections 3745.70-3745.73 of the Ohio
Revised Code). U.S. EPA will be reviewing the effect of the Ohio audit
privilege and immunity law on various Ohio environmental programs,
including those under the Clean Air Act, and taking appropriate
action(s), if any, after thorough analysis and opportunity for Ohio to
state and explain its views and positions on the issues raised by the
law. The action taken herein does not express or imply any viewpoint on
the question of whether there are legal deficiencies in this or any
Ohio CAA program resulting from the effect of the audit privilege and
immunity law. As a consequence of the review process, the regulations
subject to the action taken herein may be disapproved, federal approval
for the Clean Air Act program under which they are implemented may be
withdrawn, or other appropriate action may be taken, as necessary.
F. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office
Under sec. 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, USEPA submitted a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller General of the
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's
Federal Register. This rule is not a major rule as defined by sec. 5
U.S.C. 804(2)
G. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by March 9, 1998. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See Section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Nitrogen oxides, Transportation
conformity.
Dated: December 24, 1997.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region V.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart KK--Ohio
2. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(7) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1885 Control Strategy: Ozone
(a) * * *
[[Page 1063]]
(7) Approval--On October 20, 1997, Ohio submitted a revision to the
maintenance plan for the Jefferson County area. The revision consists
of an allocation of a portion of the safety margin in the area to the
transportation conformity mobile source budget for that area. The
mobile source budget for transportation conformity purposes for
Jefferson County are now: 5.1 tons per day of volatile organic compound
emissions for the year 2005 and 4.4 tons per day of oxides of nitrogen
emissions for the year 2005.
[FR Doc. 98-433 Filed 1-7-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
