![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Ohio
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: June 12, 1996 (Volume 61, Number 114)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 29662-29664] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [OH91-2; FRL-5506-5] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Ohio AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: On November 3, 1995, Ohio submitted revisions to its particulate matter plans for the Cleveland and Steubenville nonattainment areas. These revisions were submitted to address plan deficiencies that were identified by EPA in a final limited disapproval of the particulate matter plans published in the Federal Register on May 27, 1994. For the Cleveland area, these revisions provide earlier attainment of the air quality standard and correct the deficient test method disapproved in that rulemaking. For the Steubenville area, these revisions include an administrative order for tightening controls at Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel's basic oxygen furnace, and provide a fully updated modeling analysis demonstrating that the plan assures attainment. EPA is approving these revisions and terminating the potential for sanctions based on the deficiencies identified in the rulemaking of May 27, 1994. EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective July 12, 1996. ADDRESSES: Copies of the SIP revision and USEPA's analysis are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the following addresses: United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard (AR-18J), Chicago, Illinois 60604; and
Office of Air and Radiation (OAR), Docket and Information Center (Air Docket 6102) Room M1500, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
John Summerhays, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), United States Environmental Protection, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6067. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background Ohio submitted major revisions to its particulate matter regulations on November 14, 1991, with supplemental submittals on December 4, 1991, and January 8, 1992. EPA proposed rulemaking on these submittals on August 3, 1993, at 58 FR 41218, and published a notice of final rulemaking on May 27, 1994, at 59 FR 27464, granting limited approval/limited disapproval of these submittals. Although EPA approved most of Ohio's regulations, EPA concluded that Ohio had not satisfied selected requirements of the Clean Air Act applicable to its two particulate matter nonattainment areas, i.e., Cuyahoga County (including Cleveland) and the Steubenville area. This represented a disapproval finding under Section 179(a)(2), thus initiating an 18- month period after which sanctions were to be imposed in these areas under Section 179(b) unless or until the deficiencies are remedied. On November 3, 1995, Ohio submitted further revisions to its particulate matter plans, seeking to remedy the deficiencies identified in EPA's May 1994 rulemaking. On January 23, 1996 (at 61 FR 1727), EPA proposed to approve the State's submittal and proposed to conclude that all particulate matter SIP requirements were satisfied (except for new source review requirements, which were not addressed in either the January 1996 or the May 1994 rulemaking and are being addressed separately). Simultaneously, EPA issued an interim final determination that the deficiencies had been remedied (at 61 FR 1720), thereby staying application of sanctions.
In brief, for Cuyahoga County, the deficiencies were (1) failure to satisfy requirements for Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) by December 1992; and (2) failure to assure attainment due to deficiencies in the test method applicable to coke quenching. EPA proposed to find that these deficiencies were addressed when Ohio revised its rules to require a control strategy adequate to satisfy RACM requirements by December 1993 and improved the test method for coke quenching. For the Steubenville area, the deficiency was an inadequate attainment demonstration due to, among other factors, inadequate accounting for emissions from Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel's basic oxygen furnace. EPA proposed to find this deficiency remedied by submittal of Findings and Orders issued by Ohio to Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel requiring tightened control of basic oxygen furnace emissions and a revised attainment demonstration. A more detailed discussion of the prior deficiencies is provided in the Federal Register of May 27, 1994 (59 FR 27464), and a summary of that discussion and a more extensive discussion of Ohio's submittal which remedied those deficiencies is provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking of January 23, 1996 (61 FR 1727). Today's rule is final action on Ohio's November 1995 submittal and final action with respect to the previously identified deficiencies.
At the time of the proposed rulemaking, Ohio had conducted a public hearing in connection with its Cuyahoga County rule revisions but had not yet held and submitted documentation of a public hearing with respect to revisions to the Steubenville area attainment demonstration. The State held a public hearing on the Steubenville area revisions on January 22, 1996, and provided materials to EPA documenting this hearing and demonstrating satisfaction of related public comment requirements in its December 21, 1995, and March 13, 1996, submittals. EPA has evaluated these materials and has concluded that the relevant procedural requirements have been satisfied. [[Page 29663]] II. Comments on Proposed Rulemaking One set of comments on the proposed rulemaking was received by EPA. These comments were submitted by Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur on behalf of Ford Motor Company (Ford). These comments urged EPA not to rulemake on the State's November 1995 submittal alone, and instead urged EPA to request that the State address Ford's concerns with the existing particulate matter regulations and to conduct rulemaking on a combined set of revised regulations. No comments were made concerning EPA's proposed analysis of the State's November 1995 submittal. EPA responds that it would be inappropriate to defer rulemaking on the State's November 1995 submittal pending receipt of a prospective future submittal, particularly in the absence of any expectation that the prospective future submittal would alter EPA's views of the existing submittal. EPA has an obligation to complete rulemaking in timely fashion on any SIP revision requested by the State. Both EPA and the State of Ohio have a particular interest in prompt completion of this rulemaking because sanctions, while stayed by the interim final determination, are nevertheless outstanding until final action approving the corrections to the deficiencies is published. The commenter does not claim that its requested rule revisions are mandated by the Clean Air Act, and the commenter identifies no other basis for EPA to require the State to conduct the desired rulemaking. In any case, assuming that Ohio adopts and submits rule revisions addressing Ford's concerns, EPA will undertake timely rulemaking on those rule revisions as well, in accordance with EPA's obligations under the Clean Air Act. III. Today's Action With respect to Cuyahoga County, EPA concludes that (1) the revised rules now provide for RACM by December 1993; (2) the coke quench water test method issue and the associated attainment demonstration issue have been resolved; and (3) additional revisions to the limitations for Ford's Cleveland Casting Plant do not jeopardize attainment. With respect to the Steubenville area, EPA concludes that the State has now submitted a fully approvable attainment demonstration for the area. In particular, EPA is approving the rule revisions for Cuyahoga County and the Findings and Order requiring control system enhancements at Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel's basic oxygen furnace. Based on these findings, EPA concludes that Ohio's particulate matter plans for the Cuyahoga County and Steubenville nonattainment areas now satisfy all applicable requirements under Part D of the Clean Air Act (except for new source review requirements, which are not addressed here or in the May 1994 rulemaking and are being addressed separately). Consequently, EPA finds that Ohio has remedied the deficiencies identified in the rulemaking of May 27, 1994. This finding fully terminates the potential for sanctions pursuant to that prior rulemaking.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of any proposed or final rule on small entities. (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.) Alternatively, EPA 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, I certify 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 regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 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.
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a July 10, 1995, memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review. Under Sections 202, 203 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
EPA has determined that the approval action taken today does not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves preexisting requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 12, 1996. 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, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Dated: May 2, 1996.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.
Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, chapter I, part 52, is amended as follows: PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
- The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q. 2. Section 52.1870 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(110) to read as follows: Secs. 52.1870 Identification of plan.
[[Page 29664]] OEPA submitted revisions to its particulate matter plan, addressing prior deficiencies in its plans for Cuyahoga and Jefferson Counties. (i) Incorporation by reference.
- * * * *
(c) * * *
(110) On November 3, 1995, December 21, 1995, and March 21, 1996,
(A) Rule 3745-17-03--Rule 3745-17-03--Measurement methods and procedures, effective November 15, 1995. (B) Rule 3745-17-04--Compliance time schedules, effective November 15, 1995.
(C) Rule 3745-17-12--Additional restrictions on particulate emissions from specific air contaminant sources in Cuyahoga County, effective November 15, 1995.
(D) Findings and Orders issued to the Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Corporation, signed by Donald Schregardus and effective on October 31, 1995.
(ii) Additional material--Dispersion modeling analyses for the Steubenville area and for Cuyahoga County near Ford's Cleveland Casting Plant. [FR Doc. 96-14787 Filed 6-11-96; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-M