Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes: State of Ohio

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[OH50-1-6077a, FRL-5176-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation

of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes: State of Ohio

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: USEPA is approving, through ``direct final'' procedure, a

redesignation request and maintenance plan for the Toledo, Ohio area

(Lucas and Wood Counties) 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 this area from a moderate nonattainment area to

an attainment area for ozone, and to approve the maintenance plan for

the area. The State has met the requirements for redesignation

contained in the Clean Air Act (the Act), as amended in 1990. The

redesignation request is based on ambient monitoring data that show no

violations of the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)

during the three-year period from 1990 through 1992. In the proposed

rules section of this Federal Register, USEPA is proposing approval of

and soliciting public comment on this requested redesignation and SIP

revision. If adverse comments are received on this direct final rule,

USEPA will withdraw this final rule and address these comments in a

final rule based on the related proposed rule which is being published

in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register.

DATES: This action will be effective on July 3, 1995 unless adverse or

critical comments are received by June 1, 1995. If the effective date

is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the SIP revision and USEPA's analysis are

available for inspection at the following address: (It is recommended

that you telephone Angela Lee at (312) 353-5142 before visiting the

Region 5 Office.) United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region

5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604.

A copy of this SIP revision is available for inspection at the

following location: Office of Air and Radiation Docket and Information

Center, Room M1500, United States Environmental Protection Agency, 401

M Street SW., Washington, DC 20460, (202) 260-7548.

Written comments can be mailed to: William MacDowell, Chief,

Regulation Development Section, Air Enforcement Branch (AE-17J), United

States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Angela Lee, Regulation Development

Section, Air Enforcement Branch (AE-17J), United States Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604, (312) 353-5142.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 17, 1993, Ohio submitted a

redesignation request and section 175A maintenance plan for Lucas and

Wood Counties. The USEPA reviewed these submittals against the

redesignation criteria set forth by section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Act,

which are discussed in a September 4, 1992, memorandum from the

Director of the Air Quality Management Division, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, to Directors of Regional Air Divisions

entitled, ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to

Attainment'' (Calcagni Memorandum). A second memorandum dated September

17, 1993, signed by Michael Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for

Air and Radiation, entitled, ``State Implementation Plan (SIP)

Requirements for Areas Submitting [[Page 21457]] Requests for

Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide NAAQS on

or after November 15, 1992'' was also used to evaluate Ohio's request.

An analysis of these submittals is contained in a Technical Support

Document (TSD), dated December 9, 1994, and an addendum to this TSD

dated March 7, 1995.

I. Background

The 1977 Act required areas that were designated nonattainment to

develop SIPs with sufficient control measures to expeditiously attain

and maintain the standard. For Ohio, Lucas and Wood Counties were

designated nonattainment for ozone, see 43 FR 8962 (March 3, 1978), 43

FR 45993 (October 5, 1978), and 40 CFR Part 81.

After enactment of the amended Act on November 15, 1990, the

nonattainment designation of the Toledo area continued by operation of

law according to section 107(d)(1)(C)(i) of the Act; furthermore, it

was classified by operation of law as moderate for ozone pursuant to

section 181(a)(1) (56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991), codified at 40 CFR

81.336.

More recently, the Toledo area has ambient monitoring data that

show no violations of the ozone NAAQS, during the period from 1990

through 1992. The area, therefore, became eligible for redesignation

from nonattainment to attainment consistent with the amended Act. On

September 17, 1993, Ohio requested redesignation of the area to

attainment with respect to the ozone NAAQS. To ensure continued

attainment of the ozone standard, Ohio submitted an ozone maintenance

SIP for the Toledo area with the redesignation request. On November 1,

1993, Ohio held a public hearing on the maintenance plan and

redesignation request.

II. Evaluation Criteria

The 1990 Amendments revised section 107(d)(3)(E) to provide five

specific requirements that an area must meet in order to be

redesignated from nonattainment to attainment.

1. The area must have attained the applicable NAAQS.

2. The area has met all applicable requirements under section 110

and part D of the Act.

3. The area has a fully approved SIP under section 110(d) of the

Act.

4. The air quality improvement must be permanent and enforceable.

5. The area must have a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant to

section 175A of the Act.

Each of these requirements are addressed below.

A. Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i). The Administrator determines that the

area has attained the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).

For ozone, an area is considered in attainment of the NAAQS if there

are no violations, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.9, based

on quality assured monitoring data for three complete, consecutive

calendar years. A violation of the NAAQS occurs when the annual average

number of expected exceedances is greater than 1.0 at any site in the

area at issue. An exceedance occurs when the maximum hourly ozone

concentration exceeds 0.124 ppm. The data should be collected and

quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR Part 58, and recorded in the

Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) in order for it to be

available to the public for review. The monitors should have remained

at the same location for the duration of the monitoring period required

for demonstrating attainment.

Ohio submitted ozone monitoring data recorded in the Lucas and Wood

Counties Metropolitan Area (LWCMA) during the years 1984 through August

31, 1993. No violations were monitored for the three-year period 1990

through 1992 upon which the redesignation request was based.

Furthermore, no violations have been monitored since then. Monitored

exceedances (one-hour averaged) of 0.127 ppm in 1991, 0.126 ppm in

1993, and 0.142 ppm occurred at the Yondota Avenue monitor in 1994. An

exceedance of 0.136 ppm occurred at the Friendship Park monitor in

1993. The USEPA used data stored in AIRS to determine the annual

average expected exceedances for the years 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, and

1994. Since the annual average expected exceedances for each monitor

during these years is less than 1.0, Lucas and Wood Counties are

considered to have attained the standard.

B. Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii). The Administrator determines that the

improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable

measures. Ohio estimated emission reductions from a nonattainment year

(1988) to an attainment year (1990), and found that emission reductions

from federally mandated control on fuel volatility and new automobiles

reduced volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions by 25,843 lbs/day. In

1989, fuel volatility was restricted to 10.5 pounds per square inch

(psi) in the Toledo area. Currently, the fuel volatility standard is

9.0 psi. This standard was established in 1992. The USEPA considers the

emissions reductions from the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program

(FMVCP) and Federal volatility standards to be permanent and

enforceable and to have contributed to the improvement in air quality.

Controls placed on a wastewater ditch which was used to transport

wastewater from the British Petroleum (BP) refinery to a wastewater

treatment system also provided VOC emissions reductions during this

period. This wastewater ditch, which measured about 3600 feet in length

and an average of about 10 feet in width, is referred to as the ``oily

ditch.'' Prior to 1990, this ``oily ditch'' was uncontrolled and was

one of the largest single sources of VOCs in the LWCMA with emissions

of 19,802 lbs/summer day. The USEPA reviewed the methodology used to

calculate these emissions and agrees with the amount of emissions

estimated from this source. A major portion of the open ditch was

converted to a hard pipe to minimize VOC emissions. Ohio estimates that

the enclosure of 3000 feet of the ``oily ditch'' which was completed on

March 15, 1990, resulted in an emission reduction of 11,225 lbs/summer

day of VOCs. Since the USEPA is approving the Director's Findings and

Orders requiring this control into the SIP as part of the maintenance

plan, the emission reductions from the enclosure of the ``oily ditch''

at the BP Toledo Refinery are considered permanent and enforceable and

to have contributed to the improvement in air quality.

C. Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv). The Area must have a fully approved

maintenance plan meeting the requirements of Section 175A. Section 175A

of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan for areas

seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. The maintenance

plan is a SIP revision which provides for maintenance of the relevant

NAAQS in the area for at least 10 years after redesignation. The

Calcagni Memorandum provides further guidance on the required content

of a maintenance plan.

An ozone maintenance plan should address the following five areas:

the attainment inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring

network, verification of continued attainment and a contingency plan.

The attainment emissions inventory identifies the emissions level in

the area which is sufficient to attain the ozone NAAQS, and includes

emissions during the time period which had no monitored violations.

Maintenance is demonstrated by showing that future emissions will not

exceed the level established by the attainment inventory. Provisions

for continued operation of an appropriate air quality monitoring

network are to be [[Page 21458]] included in the maintenance plan. The

State must show how it will track and verify the progress of the

maintenance plan. Finally, the maintenance plan must include

contingency measures which ensure prompt correction of any violation of

the ozone standard.

1. Attainment Inventory

The State has developed an adequate attainment emission inventory

for 1990 that identifies the level of emissions in the Toledo area

sufficient to attain the ozone NAAQS. The 1990 attainment inventory was

based on the comprehensive inventories of VOC and nitrogen oxides

(NOX) emissions from area, stationary, and mobile sources for

1990. The 1990 base year emission inventory represents 1990 average

summer day actual emissions for the Toledo area and was prepared in

accordance with USEPA guidance. USEPA's TSD prepared for the 1990 base

year emission inventory SIP revision contains a detailed analysis of

this inventory. The USEPA approved this inventory as satisfying the

requirements of section 182(a)(1) for an emissions inventory on March

22, 1995 (60 FR 15053).

2. Maintenance Demonstration

To demonstrate continued attainment, Ohio projected point, area,

and mobile source emissions from the year 1990 to the year 2005. These

projections show that the level of emissions established by the

attainment inventory will not be exceeded during the maintenance

period, 1990-2005. Table 1 lists the emissions for the year 1990 and

projected emissions for the year 2005. Total point, mobile, and area

emissions are expected to be lower in 2005 than total emissions in the

1990 attainment inventory.

Table 1.--Maintenance Demonstration

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source category 1990 1996 2000 2005

------------------------------------------------------------------------

VOC Emissions (pounds per day)

Point................... 120,154 78,978 78,611 77,742

Mobile (on-road)........ 132,659 102,560 82,494 57,412

Area.................... 74,502 74,693 75,119 75,209

-----------------------------------------------

Total................. 327,315 256,231 236,224 210,363

NOX Emissions (pounds per day)

Point................... 147,943 146,793 80,294 81,376

Mobile (on-road)........ 75,630 65,128 58,126 49,374

Area.................... 20,522 20,547 20,563 20,584

-----------------------------------------------

Total................. 244,095 232,468 158,983 151,334

------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Emission projections

Point source emissions were projected by accounting for known

changes to sources for each year between 1990 and 2005, and applying a

growth factor based on manufacturing employment data provided by the

Bureau of Economic Analysis, United States Department of Commerce, to

derive inventories for all ensuing years. The stationary source

emission projections incorporate existing control measures. The known

stationary source emission reductions came from the British Petroleum

(BP) Refinery reductions documented in annual Reasonable Further

Progress Reports, and stationary source shutdowns.

Some of the emission reductions from the BP refinery during the

maintenance period result from controls included in Ohio's non-control

technology guideline (non-CTG) Reasonably Available Control Technology

(RACT) rules, Ohio Administrative Code 3745-21-09(UU) and 3745-21-

04(c)(55). Additional VOC reductions at the BP Refinery result from the

conversion of two cooling towers to non-VOC emitting processes and the

removal of the Crude Vacuum blow down drum. Emission reductions from

source shutdowns can be considered permanent and enforceable to the

extent that those shutdowns have been reflected in the SIP and all

applicable permits have been modified accordingly. Once the maintenance

plan is approved into the SIP, these emission reductions will be

provided for by the SIP. Consequently, resumption of operation of these

sources would be treated as operation of a new source and would be

subject to preconstruction review under Part C of the Prevention of

Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. The net reduction in VOC

emissions at the BP refinery during the maintenance period is estimated

to be 40,582 lbs/day.

Stationary source emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) are

projected to decline from 1990 levels. This reduction is caused by

shutdowns of utility units, ``low-NOX burner'' requirements of

Title IV of the Clean Air Act, and declining growth in stationary

sources. In 1992, Toledo Edison permanently retired all units at its

Acme Generating Station other than Unit 16. The operating permits for

the retired units have been surrendered, making the resulting emission

reductions permanent and enforceable. These shutdowns reduced 1990

levels of NOX emission by 15,403 lbs/day. A negative growth factor

of 2.3 percent based on manufacturing employment from 1990 and 2005,

reduces NOX emissions by 973 lbs/day.

Mobile source emissions were projected by forecasting vehicle miles

travelled (VMT) for the year 2005. This was done by considering the

future highway networks and forecasts of socio-economic data. Growth

parameters for the year 2005 were developed from the travel forecasting

modeling programs and VMTs from the transportation modeling growth

factors and 1990 Highway Performance Modeling System data.

Area source emissions were projected using growth factors

consistent with Table III.3 in USEPA's guidance document entitled

``Procedures for Preparing Emissions Projections,'' dated July 1991.

4. Emissions Budgets

The emissions budget to be used for determining the conformity

status of transportation plans and transportation improvement plans is

29.85 tons VOC/day and 24.69 tons NOX/day. On November 28, 1994,

the USEPA received a request from Ohio to add 1.142 tons VOC/day of the

``safety margin'' to the year 2005 VOC emissions (28.71 tons/day) for

purposes of conformity. This is provided for by section 51.456(b) of

the conformity rule (58 FR 62188). (The safety margin is the difference

between the attainment [[Page 21459]] inventory level of mobile source

emissions from the projected levels of mobile source emissions in the

out year (i.e. 2005) of the maintenance plan.) The USEPA is approving

this submittal as part of the maintenance plan.

5. Contingency Plan

Ohio has committed to adopt and implement various contingency

measures following various triggering events. The contingency plan is

summarized in Table 3. If three exceedances at one monitor occur in the

same year, Stage II Vapor Recovery (Stage II) would be implemented.

Stage II and the vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program would

be implemented after a violation has been monitored. If a violation

occurred after both Stage II and the I/M program have been implemented,

NOX RACT would be adopted and implemented. If an emissions

inventory meeting the requirements of USEPA guidance shows that total

area-wide VOC emissions exceed 95 percent of the 1990 emissions

inventory, then either one or both Stage II and the I/M program would

be implemented. The implementation schedules for each contingency

measure are detailed in Table 4. If more violations were to occur, Ohio

has committed to identify and develop the legislative authority to

implement additional contingency measures.

Ohio has the legislative authority to implement the I/M program in

Toledo. Ohio's Stage II rule allows for the implementation of Stage II

as part of a maintenance and/or a contingency plan. The Director of the

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) issued a Director's

Findings and Orders on September 17, 1993, suspending Stage II in the

Toledo area. This suspension will continue until there are three

monitored exceedances of the ozone standard in one year or a violation

of the ozone standard is monitored. On October 20, 1994, the USEPA

partially approved and partially disapproved Ohio's SIP revision for

implementation of Stage II (58 FR 52911). As stated in that rulemaking

action, with the exception of paragraph 3745-21-09 (DDD)(5), USEPA

considers Ohio's Stage II program to fully satisfy the criteria set

forth in the USEPA guidance document for such programs entitled

``Enforcement Guidance for Stage II Vehicle Refueling Control

Programs.'' Ohio has adopted NOX RACT rules for the Toledo area.

The Director of OEPA has suspended the NOX RACT rules in the

Toledo area until a violation is monitored after the implementation of

I/M and Stage II.

Table 3.--Contingency Plan

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trigger Control measure

------------------------------------------------------------------------

3 exceedances of ozone standard in one year. Stage II.

Violation................................... Stage II and I/M.

Violation after implementation of Stage II NOX RACT.

and I/M.

VOC emissions greater than 95% of the 1990 Stage II and/or I/M.

level of VOC emissions.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 4.--Contingency Plan Schedule for Adoption and Implementation

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Completion time after

Activity triggering event

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stage II Vapor Recovery

Identify and verify third excursion in one 1 month.

year or violation of ozone standard.

Initiate compliance schedules contained in 2 months.

Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) 3745-21-04.

Source demonstration of compliance or 3 months.

submittal of schedules to achieve

compliance.

Achieve final compliance of non-independent 6 months.

facilities for which construction commenced

after 11/15/90.

Achieve final compliance of non-independent 12 months.

facilities greater than 100,000 gallons per

month.

Achieve final compliance of all other non- 24 months.

independent facilities.

Achieve final compliance of 33% of 12 months.

facilities owned by each marketer.

Achieve final compliance of 66% of 24 months.

facilities owned by each marketer.

Achieve final compliance of 100% of 36 months.

facilities owned by each marketer.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Time after triggering

Activity event

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance

Identify and verify violation of the ozone 1 month.

standard. Begin revisions to the Request

for Proposals for centralized portion of

program based on existing legislative

authority.

Begin drafting rules for contingency 1 month.

centralized I/M program, procedures and

guidelines.

Release Request for Proposals for 2 months.

centralized contractor.

File draft program rules with Legislative 3 months.

Service Commission.

Public hearing on new program rules......... 4 months and 15 days.

Rules approved by Joint Committee on Agency 4 months and 30 days.

Rule Review.

Request for Proposal responses for 4 months and 30 days.

centralized contract due.

Begin evaluation of Request for Proposal 5 months.

responses.

Award centralized contract for each zone.... 6 months and fifteen

days.

Program rules become effective.............. 6 months and 30 days.

Begin drafting Request for Proposal for Ohio 7 months.

Environmental Protection Agency (BAR90)

approved analyzer certification, if

necessary..

Begin drafting Request for Proposal for 7 months.

inspector certification training in the

Toledo metropolitan area.

Release Request for Proposal for analyzer 8 months.

certification services.

Release Request for Proposal for inspector 8 months.

certification training.

Proposals for analyzer certification 9 months and 15 days.

services due.

Proposals for inspector certification 9 months and 15 days.

training due.

Begin evaluation of proposals for analyzer 9 months and 16 days.

certification services.

Begin evaluation of proposals for inspector 9 months and 16 days.

certification training.

Award contract for analyzer certification 10 months.

services.

Award contract for inspector certification 10 months.

training.

Begin licensing process for reinspection 11 months.

stations. State will require Ohio Certified

BAR90 (or better) equipment, on-line real-

time systems, and ASE certified mechanics.

New analyzer specifications issued, if 12 months.

necessary. Begin certifying four-gas

analyzers.

[[Page 21460]]

Inspector certification begins.............. 14 months.

Begin final licensing of reinspection 15 months.

stations.

Initiate PR program including media blitz... 16 months.

Initiate motorist notification mailings..... 16 months and 15 days.

Begin limited voluntary inspections at 17 months.

centralized test stations. Allow first

month motorist to receive valid test.

Reinspection stations begin to perform

retests.

Begin mandatory testing at centralized test 18 months.

stations.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Completion time after

Activity triggering event

------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOX RACT

Identify and verify violation following 1 month.

implementation of OAC 3745-21-09 and

automobile inspection and maintenance.

Source demonstration of compliance or 3 months.

submittal of schedule to achieve compliance.

Achieve compliance with requirements of OAC 18 months.

3745-14-03 or request extension.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. Tracking Maintenance

The State plans to track monitored levels of ozone. Emissions

inventories will be prepared every 3 years beginning with the year

1993. The point source inventory will be updated annually with facility

and permit data. OEPA will update emissions estimates from the BP

refinery wastewater system on an annual basis. The mobile source

inventory will be updated annually with new VMT estimates and revised

mobile emissions models if appropriate. Area source inventories will be

updated annually using new census data. The OEPA will submit annual

progress reports to USEPA which will include available emissions data

and a comparison of projected and actual emissions. The Toledo Division

of Pollution Control has committed to continue operating and

maintaining the four existing ozone monitors in a manner consistent

with Federal and State monitoring guidelines.

The USEPA has determined that the maintenance plan for Lucas and

Wood Counties meets the requirements set forth by the CAA.

D. Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). The Area must have met all applicable

requirements under Section 110 and Part D. Section 107(d)(3)(E)

requires that, for an area to be redesignated, an area must have met

all applicable requirements under section 110 and Part D. The USEPA

interprets section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) to mean that for a redesignation to

be approved, the State must have met all requirements that applied to

the subject area prior to or at the time of the submission of a

complete redesignation request. Requirements of the Act that come due

subsequently continue to be applicable to the area at those later dates

(see section 175A(c)) and, if the redesignation of the area is

disapproved, the State remains obligated to fulfill those requirements.

1. Section 110 Requirements

General SIP elements are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of Title

I, Part A. These requirements include but are not limited to submittal

of a SIP that has been adopted by the State after reasonable notice and

public hearing, provisions for establishment and operation of

appropriate apparatus, methods, systems and procedures necessary to

monitor ambient air quality, implementation of a permit program,

provisions for Part C (PSD) and D (NSR) permit programs, criteria for

stationary source emission control measures, monitoring, and reporting,

provisions for modeling, and provisions for public and local agency

participation. For purposes of redesignation, the Ohio SIP was reviewed

to ensure that all requirements under the amended Act were satisfied.

Although section 110 was amended in 1990, the Toledo area SIP meets the

requirements of the amended section 110(a)(2). A number of the

requirements did not change in substance and, therefore, USEPA believes

that the pre-1990 amendment SIP meets those requirements. As to those

requirements that were amended in 1990, many are duplicative of other

requirements in the Act and USEPA has determined that the Toledo SIP is

consistent with the requirements of section 110 of the amended Act.

2. Part D Requirements

Before the Toledo area may be redesignated to attainment, it must

have fulfilled the applicable requirements of part D. Under part D, an

area's classification determines the requirements to which it is

subject. Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the basic nonattainment

requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas. Subpart 2 of part D

establishes additional requirements for nonattainment areas classified

under Table 1 of section 181(a). As described in the General Preamble

for the Implementation of Title 1, specific requirements of subpart 2

may override subpart 1's general provisions (57 FR 13501 (April 16,

1992)). The Toledo area was classified as moderate (56 FR 56694).

Therefore, in order to be redesignated, the State must meet the

applicable requirements of subpart 1 of part D--specifically sections

172(c) and 176, as well as the applicable requirements of subpart 2 of

part D.

a. Section 172(c) Requirements

Section 172(c) sets forth general requirements applicable to all

nonattainment areas. Under section 172(b), the section 172(c)

requirements are applicable as determined by the Administrator, but no

later than 3 years after an area has been designated as nonattainment

under the amended Act. Furthermore, as noted above, some of these

section 172(c) requirements are superseded by more specific

requirements in subpart 2 of part D. In the case of Toledo, the State

has satisfied all of the section 172(c) requirements necessary for

Toledo to be redesignated upon the basis of the November 8, 1993

redesignation request.

USEPA has determined that the section 172(c)(2) reasonable further

progress (RFP) requirement (with parallel requirements for a moderate

ozone nonattainment area under subpart 2 of part D, due November 15,

1993) was not applicable as the State of Ohio submitted this

redesignation request on November 8, 1993. Also the section 172(c)(9)

contingency measures and additional section 172(c)(1) non-RACT

reasonable available control measures beyond what may already be

required in the SIP are no longer necessary, since no earlier date was

set for these measures [[Page 21461]] and as RFP was not due until

November 15, 1993.

The section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory requirement has been met

by the submission and approval of the 1990 base year inventory required

under subpart 2 of part D, section 182(a)(1) (60 FR 15053).

As for the section 172(c)(5) NSR requirement, USEPA has determined

that areas being redesignated need not comply with the NSR requirement

prior to redesignation provided that the area demonstrates maintenance

of the standard without part D NSR in effect. Memorandum from Mary

Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October

14, 1994, entitled Part D New Source Review (part D NSR) Requirements

for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment. The rationale for

this view is described fully in that memorandum, and is based on the

Agency's authority to establish de minimis exceptions to statutory

requirements. See Alabama Power Co. v. Costle, 636 F. 2d 323, 360-61

(D.C. Cir. 1979). As discussed below, the State of Ohio has

demonstrated that the Toledo area will be able to maintain the standard

without part D NSR in effect and, therefore, the State need not have a

fully-approved part D NSR program prior to approval of the

redesignation request for Toledo. Ohio's part C PSD program will become

effective in the Toledo area upon redesignation to attainment.

Finally, for purposes of redesignation, the Toledo SIP was reviewed

to ensure that all requirements of section 110(a)(2), containing

general SIP elements, were satisfied. As noted above, USEPA believes

the SIP satisfies all of those requirements. Section 176 Conformity

Plan Provisions Section 176(c) of the Act requires States to revise

their SIPs to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that, before

they are taken, Federal actions conform to the air quality planning

goals in the applicable State 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 EPA to

promulgate. Congress provided for the State revisions to be submitted

one year after the date for promulgation of final EPA 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 30, 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 CAA section 175A. 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 a SIP revision

containing transportation conformity criteria and procedures consistent

with those established in the Federal rule by November 25, 1994.

Similarly, Ohio is required to submit a SIP revision containing general

conformity criteria and procedures consistent with those established in

the Federal rule by December 1, 1994. Because the deadlines for these

submittals did not come due prior to the date the Toledo redesignation

request was submitted, however, they are not applicable requirements

under section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) and, thus, do not affect approval of this

redesignation request.

b. Subpart 2 Requirements

The Toledo area is classified moderate nonattainment; therefore,

part D, subpart 2, section 182(b) requirements apply. The requirements

which came due prior to the submission of the request to redesignate

the Toledo area must be fully approved into the SIP prior to

redesignating the area to attainment. These requirements are discussed

below:

(i) 1990 Base Year Emission Inventory. The 1990 base year emission

inventory was due on November 15, 1992. It was submitted to the USEPA

on March 15, 1994. The USEPA approved this submittal on March 22, 1995

(60 FR 15053).

(ii) Emission Statements. The emissions statement SIP was due on

November 15, 1992. It was submitted to the USEPA on March 15, 1994. The

USEPA approved this SIP revision through a direct final rulemaking

action published on October 13, 1994 (59 FR 51863).

(iii) VOC RACT Fix-ups and Catch-ups. Sections 182(a)(2)(A) and

182(b)(2) establish VOC RACT requirements applicable to moderate ozone

nonattainment areas such as Toledo. Section 182(a)(2)(A) required the

submission to USEPA of all rules and corrections to existing VOC RACT

rules that were required under the RACT provision of the pre-1990 CAA

(referred to as RACT ``fix-ups''). Section 182(b)(2) required the

submission to USEPA of (1) VOC RACT rules for all VOC sources covered

by a CTG issued before the date of enactment of the 1990 CAA amendments

(a requirement that the State has previously met), (2) VOC RACT for

each VOC source covered by a CTG issued between the enactment of the

1990 CAAA and the attainment date (which is not an applicable

requirement for purposes of this redesignation since the due date for

these rules is November 15, 1994, a date after the submission of the

redesignation request), and (3) VOC RACT for all other major stationary

sources of VOC located in the area.

On June 9, 1988, August 24, 1990, and June 7, 1993, Ohio submitted

VOC RACT rules. In a final rulemaking action, the USEPA partially

approved, partially disapproved and granted partial limited approval/

limited disapproval to portions of Ohio's VOC RACT rules on May 9, 1994

(see 58 FR 49458). The USEPA processed draft VOC RACT rules which

addressed identified deficiencies in Ohio's VOC RACT rules in parallel

with the ozone redesignation request. Ohio adopted these rules and

submitted them to USEPA on February 14, 1995. Ohio's VOC RACT rules

submittals have now been approved in a direct final notice published on

March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15235). Thus, the State has now satisfied all of

the VOC RACT requirements applicable to the Toledo area. (The approval

of the redesignation is contingent upon the approval of the VOC RACT

rules and the 1990 Base-Year Emissions Inventory. Thus, this

redesignation will not become effective until the approval of the VOC

RACT rules and the 1990 Base-Year Emissions Inventory become effective.

Consequently, should the direct final notice approving the VOC RACT

rules or 1990 Base-Year Inventory be withdrawn as a consequence of

adverse comment, this direct final notice approving the redesignation

will also be withdrawn and final action will be taken on the

redesignation at a later date.)

(iv) Stage II Vapor Recovery (Stage II). Section 182(b)(3) required

States to submit Stage II rules to USEPA for moderate ozone

nonattainment areas by November 15, 1992. Ohio submitted Stage II

regulations as a SIP revision on June 7, 1993. However, as the USEPA

promulgated onboard rules on April 6, 1994 (59 FR 16262), Stage II is

no longer required for moderate ozone nonattainment areas (see section

[[Page 21462]] 202(a)(b). Thus, Stage II is not an applicable

requirement for purposes of evaluating this redesignation.

(v) Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M). On January 5, 1995,

the USEPA revised the I/M Program Requirements promulgated on November

5, 1992 (60 FR 1735). See 60 FR 1735. The revision allows areas subject

to the basic I/M program requirements and that otherwise qualify for

redesignation from nonattainment to attainment for ozone or carbon

monoxide NAAQS to defer adoption and implementation of some of the

otherwise applicable requirements established in the original

promulgation of the I/M rule. USEPA amended Subpart S to allow such

areas to be redesignated if they submit a SIP that contains the

following four elements: (1) Legal authority for a basic I/M program

(or an enhanced program, as defined in the Federal rule, if the state

chooses to opt up), meeting all of the requirements of Subpart S such

that implementing regulations can be adopted without further

legislation; (2) a request to place the I/M plan or upgrades, as

defined in the Federal rule, (as applicable) in the contingency

measures portion of the maintenance plan upon redesignation as

described in the fourth element below; (3) a contingency measure to go

into effect as soon as a triggering event occurs, consisting of a

commitment by the Governor or the governor's designee to adopt

regulations to implement the

I/M program in response to the specified triggering event; and (4) a

commitment that includes an enforceable schedule for adopting and

implementing the I/M program, including appropriate milestones, in the

event the contingency measure is triggered (milestones shall be defined

in terms of months since the triggering event). USEPA believes that for

areas that otherwise qualify for redesignation, a SIP meeting these

four requirements would satisfy the obligation to submit ``provisions

to provide'' for a satisfactory I/M program, as required by the

stature.

Ohio has met each of the above four requirements. Section

3704.14(B) of Ohio's Administrative Code states ``* * * The Director

shall implement and supervise a basic or an enhanced motor vehicle

inspection and maintenance program in a county that is within an area

classified as nonattainment for carbon monoxide or ozone when such a

program is included in the air quality maintenance plan or contingency

plan for the nonattainment area that includes the county and that is

submitted to the USEPA by the Director as required under section 175A

of the CAAA as part of a request for redesignation of the nonattainment

area as attainment for carbon monoxide or ozone under section 107(d) of

that Act, and the Director determines that the conditions requiring

implementation of such a program and set forth in either such plan have

been met.'' This provision allows the I/M program to be implemented in

the Toledo area as part of a contingency plan. In addition, I/M

programs in Ohio have been approved by USEPA (46 FR 31881). As noted in

tables 3 and 4, Ohio has identified appropriate triggering events and

submitted an enforceable implementation schedule for the I/M program.

The commitment to implement I/M was contained in the letter from the

Director of OEPA, the Governor's designee, requesting the redesignation

of the Toledo area to attainment for ozone. This satisfies the

remaining requirements of the I/M rule revision.

(vi) 1.15:1 VOC and NOX Offsets Requirement for NSR. As

explained above, USEPA has determined that areas need not comply with

the part D NSR requirements of the Act in order to be redesignated

provided that the area is able to demonstrate maintenance without part

D NSR in effect. As maintenance has been demonstrated for the Toledo

area without part D NSR being in effect, USEPA is not requiring that

the area have a fully-approved part D NSR plan meeting the requirements

of sections 182(a) and (b) prior to redesignation.

(vii) NOX Requirement. Section 182(f) establishes NOX

requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. However, it provides that

it does not apply to an area such as Toledo if the Administrator

determines that NOX reductions would not contribute to attainment.

The Administrator has made such a determination and has approved the

State of Ohio's request to exempt the Toledo area from the section

182(f) NOX requirements (60 FR 3760). Thus, the State of Ohio need

not comply with the NOX requirements of section 182(f) for Toledo

to be redesignated. If a violation is monitored in the Toledo area,

Ohio has committed to adopt and implement NOX RACT rules as a

contingency measure.

E. Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). The Administrator has fully approved

the applicable implementation plan for the area under Section 110(k).

USEPA has reviewed the SIP to ensure that it contains all measures that

were due under the amended 1990 Act. Based on the approval of

submittals under the pre-amended CAA, and USEPA's approval of SIP

revisions under the amended CAA, USEPA has determined that the Toledo

area has a fully approved SIP under section 110(k), which also meets

the applicable requirements of section 110 and part D as discussed

above (45 FR 72122, 59 FR 51863, 60 FR 3760, 60 FR 15053, 60 FR 15235).

III. Transport of Ozone Precursors to Downwind Areas

Preliminary modeling results utilizing USEPA's regional oxidant

model (ROM) indicate that ozone precursor emissions from various States

west of the ozone transport region (OTR) in the northeastern United

States contribute to increases in ozone concentrations in the OTR. The

State of Ohio has provided documentation that VOC and NOx emissions in

the Toledo area will decrease 35 percent and 38 percent, respectively,

from attainment levels by the year 2005. Given this decrease in

emissions, the Toledo area's impact on ozone concentrations in the OTR

will correspondingly be reduced. The USEPA is currently developing

policy which will address long range impacts of ozone transport. The

USEPA is working with the States and other organizations to design and

complete studies which consider upwind sources and quantify their

impacts. The USEPA intends to address the transport issue through

Section 110 based on a domain-wide modeling analysis.

The USEPA notified Environment Canada of this action. The

redesignation is not expected to have any adverse impact on Canada

since emissions are expected to remain below levels associated with

attainment conditions in the Toledo area.

IV. Final Rulemaking Action

The State of Ohio has met the requirements of the Act for revising

the Ohio ozone SIP. The USEPA approves the redesignation of Lucas and

Wood Counties to attainment areas for ozone. In addition, the USEPA

approves the maintenance plan into the ozone SIP for these Counties. As

noted earlier, this approval is contingent upon the direct final

approval of Toledo's VOC RACT rules and 1990 Base-Year Emissions

Inventory becoming effective.

Because USEPA considers this action to be noncontroversial and

routine, USEPA is publishing this notice of approval without prior

proposal. This action will become effective on July 3, 1995. However,

if the USEPA receives adverse comments by June 1, 1995 on this action

or by April 24, 1995, regarding the VOC RACT notice published at 60 FR

15235, or by April 21, 1995, regarding the 1990 Base-Year Emissions

Inventory published at 60 FR [[Page 21463]] 15053, then the USEPA will

publish a notice 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.

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 any 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 2 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. The Office of Management and Budget exempted this

regulatory action from Executive Order 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.

The 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 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 USEPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. USEPA, 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (1976).

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 July 3, 1995. 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

40 CFR Part 52

Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

Dated: March 14, 1995.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator.

40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

1. 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 a new paragraph (c)(105) to

read as follows:

Sec. 52.1870 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(105) On September 17, 1993, the Ohio Environmental Protection

Agency requested the redesignation of Lucas and Wood Counties to

attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone. To

meet the redesignation criteria set forth by section 107(d)(3)(E) (iii)

and (iv), Ohio credited emissions reductions from the enclosure of the

``oily ditch'' at the British Petroleum Refinery in Oregon, Ohio. The

USEPA is approving the Director's Finding and Order which requires the

enclosure of the ``oily ditch'' into the SIP for Lucas and Wood

Counties.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

Letter dated June 2, 1994, from Donald R. Schregardus, Director,

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, to Valdas Adamkus, Regional

Administrator, USEPA, Region 5, and one enclosure which is the revised

Director's Final Findings and Orders in the matter of BP Oil company,

Toledo Refinery, 4001 Cedar Point Road, Oregon, Ohio, Fugitive

Emissions from the Refinery Waste Water System ``Oily Ditch'', dated

June 2, 1994.

3. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (b) to read as

follows:

Sec. 52.1885 Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *

(b) The maintenance plans for the following counties are approved:

(1)-(4) [Reserved].

(5) Lucas and Wood Counties.

* * * * *

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PURPOSES

1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

2. Section 81.336 is amended by revising the entry in the ozone

table for Toledo area to read as follows:

Sec. 81.336 Ohio.

* * * * *

Ohio--Ozone

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Designation Classification

Designated area ---------------------------------------------------------------

Date\1\ Type Date\1\ Type

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * *

*

Toledo Area.....................................

Lucas County.................................. July 3, 1995. Attainment

Wood County................................... July 3, 1995. Attainment

* * * * * *

*

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.

[[Page 21464]] [FR Doc. 95-10693 Filed 5-1-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P