![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; OH
Related Material
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: June 12, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 113)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 31552-31554]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr12jn01-9]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[OH140-1a; FRL-6991-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; OH
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving revisions to sulfur dioxide
(SO2) emissions regulations for the Lubrizol Corporation
(Lubrizol). This facility is located in Lake County, Ohio. The Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) submitted Director's Final
Findings and Orders (Orders) for the Lubrizol facility on November 9,
2000. These Orders are revisions to the Ohio State Implementation Plan
(SIP). The revisions are the adjustment of six short-term emissions
limits, the addition of an annual emissions limit, and the addition of
a continuous emission rate monitoring system (CERMS) requirement for
the Lubrizol facility. Three short-term emissions limits are relaxed
and three short-term are tightened. There is no increase in the total
potential short-term SO2 emissions.
DATES: This rule is effective on August 13, 2001, unless the EPA
receives relevant adverse written comments by July 12, 2001. If adverse
comment is received, the EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the
rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: You should mail written comments 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.
You may inspect copies of Ohio's submittal at: 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: Matt Rau, Environmental Engineer,
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, Telephone Number: (312) 886-6524, E-Mail
Address: rau.matthew@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' are used we mean the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. What is the EPA approving?
II. Limit changes from the current rules.
III. Analysis of supporting materials provided by Ohio.
IV. What are the environmental effects of these actions?
V. EPA rulemaking actions.
VI. Administrative requirements.
I. What Is the EPA Approving?
The EPA is approving revisions to the sulfur dioxide emissions
regulations for the Lubrizol facility in Lake County, Ohio. Ohio EPA
submitted the revised regulation on November 9, 2000, as an amendment
to its SIP.
The revisions include the relaxation of three short-term
SO2 emissions limits and the tightening of three short-term
limits. There is no increase in the total potential short-term
SO2 emissions. An annual SO2 emissions limit is
established. Also, a continuous emission rate monitoring system is
required.
II. Limit Changes From the Current Rules
Ohio has revised six short-term emissions limits at Lubrizol's
Painesville facility. The limit change for source L (Source ID P011) is
from 12.6 to 2.4 pounds of sulfur dioxide per hour (lb/hr). Source M
(P012) changes from 15.0 to 160.0 lb/hr, source N (P013) changes from
23.5 to 25.0 lb/hr, source O changes from 14.5 to 10.0 lb/hr, source W
(P022) changes from 163.5 to 20.0 lb/hr, and the limit for source AC
(P030) changes from 18.4 to 30.0 lb/hr. The total emissions limit of
the six sources remains at approximately 247.4 lb/hr. All six sources
vent through incinerators to a common stack.
An annual sulfur dioxide emissions limit of 100 tons per year (TPY)
is established. Previously, the facility's potential to emit sulfur
dioxide was 1084 TPY. A continuous emission rate monitoring system
(CERMS) is required at the facility. The CERMS measures
[[Page 31553]]
SO2 in the common stack. Lubrizol will keep records of the
CERMS data including the instantaneous (one-minute), hourly, and
rolling three-hour average SO2 concentration.
III. Analysis of Supporting Materials Provided by Ohio
The general criteria used by the EPA to evaluate such intra-
facility emissions trades, or ``bubbles,'' under the Clean Air Act and
applicable regulations are set out in the EPA's, December 4, 1986
Emissions Trading Policy Statement (ETPS) (see 51 FR 43814). The short-
term emissions trade at Lubrizol's Painesville facility qualifies as a
Level I trade. This trade meets the six criteria in the ETPS. All six
processes involved in this trade of short-term limits vent through a
common stack. The maximum SO2 emissions limit from the
common stack remains at approximately 247.4 lb/hr. Following the Level
I trade guidance, it is assumed that this emissions trade will produce
``ambient equivalence'', which is an equal effect on area air quality.
The Ohio EPA Orders also add an annual SO2 limit of 100
TPY for the facility and require a continuous emission rate monitoring
system. Without an annual limit, Lubrizol has the potential to emit
1084 TPY of sulfur dioxide. These requirements provide additional
protection of human health and the environment.
IV. What Are the Environmental Effects of These Actions?
Sulfur dioxide causes breathing difficulties and aggravation of
existing cardiovascular disease. It is also a precursor of acid rain
and fine particulate matter formation. Sulfur dioxide causes the loss
of chloroform leading to vegetation damage. These SIP revisions should
not result in an increase in short-term SO2 emissions from
the Lubrizol facility. The addition of an annual limit enhances air
quality protection.
V. EPA Rulemaking Actions
The EPA is approving, though direct final rulemaking, revisions to
the SO2 emissions regulations for the Lubrizol Corporation
facility in Lake County, Ohio.
The SIP revisions include the relaxation of three short-term
SO2 emissions limits and the tightening of three short-term
limits. There is no increase in the total potential short-term
SO2 emissions. It remains at approximately 247.4 lb/hr. An
annual SO2 emissions limit of 100 TPY is established. Also,
a continuous emission rate monitoring system is required. The CERMS
records the instantaneous (one-minute), hourly, and rolling three-hour
average SO2 concentration. Lubrizol will keep its records
for five years.
We are publishing this action without a prior proposal because we
view these as noncontroversial revisions and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal
Register, we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the
proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are filed.
This rule will be effective on August 13, 2001, without further notice
unless we receive relevant adverse written comment by July 12, 2001. If
the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a final rule
informing the public that this rule will not take effect. We will
address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. The EPA does not intend to institute a second comment
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on these
actions must do so at this time.
VI. Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. This action
merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). This rule also does not
have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it
merely approves a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is
not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3
of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing
this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a
clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with
Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the
takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order.
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as
added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller
General of the United States. EPA will submit 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 United States
prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
section 804(2). This rule will be effective August 13, 2001
[[Page 31554]]
unless EPA receives adverse written comments by July 12, 2001.
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 13, 2001. 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: May 18, 2001.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, 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 52.1870 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(124) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1870 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(124) On November 9, 2000, Ohio submitted Director's Final Findings
and Orders revising sulfur dioxide emissions regulations for the
Lubrizol Corporation facility in Lake County, Ohio. The revisions
include the adjustment of six short-term emissions limits, the addition
of an annual emissions limit, and the addition of a continuous
emissions monitoring system (CEMS). These state implementation plan
revisions do not increase allowable sulfur dioxide emissions.
(i) Incorporated by reference.
Emissions limits for the Lubrizol Corporation facility in Lake
County contained in Director's Final Findings and Orders. The orders
were effective on November 2, 2000 and entered in the Director's
Journal on November 9, 2000.
[FR Doc. 01-14608 Filed 6-11-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P