ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Ohio
59 FR 48395
DATE: Wednesday, September 21, 1994
SUMMARY: USEPA is approving a redesignation request and maintenance plan for Preble, Columbiana, and Jefferson Counties, Ohio as a revision to Ohio's State Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone.
The revision is based on a request from the State of Ohio to redesignate these areas, and approve their maintenance plans, and on the supporting data the State submitted. Under the Clean Air Act, designations can be changed if sufficient data are available to warrant such change.
DATES: This final rule becomes effective on November 21, 1994 unless notice is received by October 21, 1994, that someone wishes to submit adverse or critical comments. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: William L. MacDowell, Chief, Regulation Development Section, Air Enforcement Branch (AE-17J), United States Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Copies of the requested redesignation, maintenance plan, and other materials relating to this rulemaking 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 (AE-17J), Chicago, Illinois 60604; and Air Docket 6102, United States Environmental Protection, Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. (It is recommended that you telephone William Jones at (312) 886-6058, before visiting the Region 5 Office.)
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Jones, Regulation Development Section, Air Enforcement Branch (AE-17J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6058.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under Section 107(d) of the pre-amended Clean Air Act (CAA), the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) promulgated the ozone attainment status for each area of every State. For Ohio, Preble, Columbiana, and Jefferson Counties were designated as nonattainment areas for ozone. See 43 FR 8962 (March 3, 1978), and 43 FR 45993 (October 5, 1978). On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were enacted. Pub. L. No. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q. Pursuant to Section 107(d)(1)(C) of the CAA, Preble, Jefferson, and Columbiana Counties retained their designations of nonattainment for ozone by operation of law. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). At the same time Preble, and Jefferson Counties were classified as transitional areas; and Columbiana County was classified as an incomplete data area.
The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) requested that Preble County be redesignated to attainment in a letter dated May 23, 1986; and that Jefferson and Columbiana Counties be redesignated to attainment in a letter dated July 14, 1986. On December 20, 1993, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) proposed to disapprove the requested redesignations (see 58 FR 66334). The public comment period was from December 20, 1993, to January 19, 1994. In a January 18, 1994, letter, the State of Ohio requested a 90-day extension of the comment period. On February 18, 1994, the USEPA extended the comment period until April 19, 1994 (see 59 FR 8150). The OEPA submitted maintenance and contingency plans for the counties in a submittal dated April 14, 1994, and requested parallel processing of the submittal. The results of OEPA's public hearing and resulting revision to the maintenance and contingency plan was submitted in a letter dated August 10, 1994. Notwithstanding these submittals, no public comments specifically commenting on the proposed rulemaking were received during the extended comment period.
I. Review of the Requests
The State's May 23, 1986, and July 14, 1986, requests were previously reviewed in a proposed rulemaking published on December 20, 1993, (see 58 FR 66334) in which USEPA proposed to disapprove the requests due to a lack of maintenance and contingency plans and enforceability deficiencies in their Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) regulations. Since that time the State has submitted additional information to address the basis of the proposed disapproval. The review of the previous submittal and the basic redesignation requirements are not summarized in this notice, but the reader is referred to the December 20, 1993, notice referenced above for a summary of the requirements and the previous submittal. The April 14, 1994, and August 10, 1994, submittals are summarized below and the requirements that were not met in the original submittal are addressed below.
Section 176(c) of the Act requires States to revise their SIPs to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that Federal actions, before they are taken, conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation plans, programs and projects developed, funded or approved under title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act ("transportation conformity"), as well as to all other Federal actions ("general conformity"). Section 176 further provides that the conformity revisions to be submitted by States must be consistent with Federal conformity regulations that the Act required the USEPA to promulgate. Congress provided for the State revisions to be submitted one year after the date for promulgation of the final USEPA conformity regulations. When that date passed without such promulgation, USEPA's General Preamble for the implementation of Title I informed States that its conformity regulations would establish a submittal date. See 57 FR 13498, 13557 (April 16, 1992).
The USEPA promulgated final transportation conformity regulations on November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188) and general conformity regulations on November 24, 1993 (58 FR 63214). These conformity rules require that States adopt both transportation and general conformity provisions in the SIP for areas designated nonattainment or subject to a maintenance plan approved under section 175A of the Act. Pursuant to section 51.396 of the transportation conformity rule and section 51.851 of the general conformity rule, the State of Ohio is required to submit SIP revisions containing transportation and general conformity criteria and procedures consistent with those established in the Federal rule by November 25 and 30, 1994, respectively. Because the deadline for such submittals has not yet come due, it is not an applicable requirement, under section 107(d)(3)(E)(v), for approval of this redesignation request.
A. Preble County
The maintenance plan provided for this county consists of an emissions and air quality summary; a mobile, area, and point source emissions inventory; and Permits-to-Install for all subject sources in Preble County.
The emissions summary for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) are provided below:
Table 1. - VOC Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day Year Point Area Mobile Totals sources sources sources 1990 0.24 41.13 4.16 45.52 1995 0.27 41.33 2.53 44.12 2005 0.34 41.64 1.93 43.92 Table 2. - NOx Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day Year Point Area Mobile Totals sources sources sources 1990 0.00 5.91 4.80 10.71 1995 0.00 6.16 3.96 10.12 2005 0.00 6.29 2.81 9.10
The total emissions are projected to decrease in the county, and, as a result, the county is expected to maintain the ozone air quality standard for the next ten (10) years. The mobile source NOx and VOC emissions projections for the year 2005 will be the "budget" for transportation conformity purposes. The air quality monitoring data submitted by the State shows that the area is still in attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone.
Preble County, which was designated nonattainment prior to enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, must correct existing RACT rules for enforceability deficiencies. See 57 FR 13562. The State submitted copies of Permits-to-Install for all subject sources in the county. These permits indicate that no sources in the county are affected by a Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) rule that has an enforceability deficiency. The one source that would have been affected (degreaser) was permanently shut down. This satisfies the requirement for correcting enforceability deficiencies in the county.
The maintenance plan also includes a contingency measure that the State will use to ensure maintenance of the NAAQS for ozone. The State has committed to lower Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) gasoline as the contingency measure. This would be implemented in the case of a violation in the area. In order for the State to use lower RVP gasoline, a finding of necessity must first be made by USEPA under Section 211(c)(4)(C). If this finding of necessity is not provided, Ohio EPA has committed to choose an alternative unspecified emission control measure deemed appropriate based upon a consideration of cost-effectiveness, VOC reduction potential, economic and social considerations, or other factors that the State judges to be appropriate. This decision would be made and implemented within 12 months from the official notification by USEPA that a waiver would not be granted. OEPA also provided the following schedule for implementing the lower RVP measure:
Table 3. - Schedule for Implementing Lower RVP Date Action/event March 15, 1994 Submit draft rules to USEPA. October 15, 1994 Submit final rules to USEPA. Trigger event Monitored violation. 1 month from trigger Ohio EPA finding of violation announced. Ohio EPA submits request for program budget. Ohio EPA hires additional staff for program. 2 months from trigger Ohio EPA secures lab contracts. 3 months from trigger Ohio EPA purchases needed equipment. 4 months from trigger Ohio EPA initiates public awareness program. Ohio EPA secures lab equipment. Six months from trigger Gasoline Dispensing Facilities achieve final compliance.
B. Jefferson County
The maintenance plan provided for this county consists of emissions, and air quality summaries; and mobile, area, and point source emissions inventories.
The emissions summaries for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) are provided below:
Table 4. - VOC Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day Year Point Area Mobile Totals sources sources sources 1990 1.13 6.50 8.51 16.14 1996 1.20 6.40 4.93 12.53 2005 1.33 6.30 4.11 11.74 Table 5. - NOx Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day Year Point Area Mobile Totals sources sources sources 1990 378 2.7 4.7 385.4 1996 376 2.7 4.1 382.8 2005 340 2.6 3.4 346.0
The total emissions are projected to decrease in the county and, as a result, the county is expected to maintain the ozone air quality standard. The mobile source NOx and VOC emissions projections for the year 2005 will be the budget for transportation conformity purposes. The air quality monitoring data submitted by the State shows that the area is still in attainment of the NAAQS for ozone.
The maintenance plan also includes a contingency measure that the State will use to ensure maintenance of the NAAQS for ozone. This is the same plan that is outlined above for Preble County.
This county is similar to Preble in that it is a transitional area. The main difference between them is that Jefferson County was never included in the post 1987 SIP call letters issued by USEPA to OEPA (dated May 26, 1988, and November 8, 1989), and was never cited as having RACT deficiencies, as Jefferson County was not in violation of the NAAQS. Thus Jefferson County is not subject to a requirement to correct RACT deficiencies.
C. Columbiana County
The maintenance plan provided for this county consisted of an emissions summary; and mobile, area, and point source emissions inventories.
The emissions summaries for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) are provided below:
Table 6. - VOC Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day Year Point Area Mobile Totals sources sources sources 1990 1.89 10.40 11.69 23.98 1996 1.98 10.60 6.79 19.37 2005 2.25 10.80 5.65 18.70 Table 7. - NOx Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day Year Point Area Mobile Totals sources sources sources 1990 0.06 4.60 7.00 11.66 1996 0.06 4.80 6.03 10.89 2005 0.07 4.90 5.05 10.02
The total emissions are projected to decrease in the county and, as a result, the county is expected to maintain the ozone air quality standard. The mobile source NOx and VOC emissions projections for the year 2005 will be the budget for transportation conformity. The maintenance plan also includes a contingency measure that the State will use to ensure maintenance of the NAAQS for ozone. This is the same plan that is outlined above for Preble County.
This county is similar to Jefferson in that it was not included in the post 1987 USEPA SIP call letters to OEPA, and was never cited as having RACT deficiencies, as Columbiana County was not in violation of the NAAQS. Thus Columbiana County is not subject to a requirement to correct RACT deficiencies.
The ozone redesignation requests for Preble, Jefferson, and Columbiana Counties are approved as meeting conditions of the CAA in section 107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation, since: (1) The area has attained the NAAQS for ozone; (ii) The Administrator has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for the area under Section 110(k); (iii) The improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable implementation plan and applicable Federal air pollutant control regulations; (iv) The Administrator is fully approving maintenance plans for the counties as meeting the requirements of section 175A; and (v) Ohio has met all requirements applicable to the counties under section 110 and part D.
Because USEPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and routine, the USEPA is approving it without prior approval. This action will become effective on November 21, 1994. However, if the USEPA receives adverse comments by October 21, 1994, then the USEPA will publish a document that withdraws the action, and will address these comments in the final rule on the requested redesignation and SIP revision which has been proposed for approval in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register. The comment period will not be extended or reopened.
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 three (3) action by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by an October 4, 1993, memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation. A future notice will inform the general public of these tables. On January 6, 1989, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) waived Table two (2) and three (3) SIP revisions (54 FR 222) from the requirements of section 3 of Executive Order 12291 for a period of two (2) years. USEPA has submitted a request for a permanent waiver for Table two (2) and Table three (3) SIP revisions. OMB has agreed to continue the temporary waiver until such time as it rules on USEPA's request. This request continues in effect under Executive Order 12866 which superseded Executive Order 12291 on September 30, 1993. OMB has exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 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. 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 CAA 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 CAA, preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The CAA 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).
Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA does not impose any new requirements on small entities. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not impose any regulatory requirements on sources. The Administrator certifies that the approval of the redesignation request will not affect a substantial number of small entities.
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 November 21, 1994. 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 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
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control.
Dated: September 8, 1994.
Valdas V. Adamkus, Regional Administrator.
Chapter 1, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
2. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding a new paragraph (a)(5) to read as follows:
@ 52.1885 -- Control strategy: Ozone.
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(5) The ozone maintenance plans for Preble, Columbiana, and Jefferson Counties.
* * * * *
PART 81-DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PURPOSES-OHIO
1. The authority citation of part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
2. In @ 81.336, the ozone table is amended by revising the entries for Columbiana, Preble, and Jefferson Counties to read as follows:
@ 81.336 -- Ohio. * * * * * Ohio-Ozone Designated area Designation Date fn 1 Type * * * * * * * Columbiana County October 21, 1994. Attainment
fn 1 This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 94-23296 Filed 9-20-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P