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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[OH78-2; FRL-5689-N]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation

of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Ohio

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) has requested

the redesignation of the Ohio portion of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area

consisting of Hamilton, Clermont, Butler, and Warren Counties from

moderate nonattainment to attainment for ozone. The request was

received on November 15, 1994. USEPA proposed to approve the

redesignation request on May 5, 1995. However, during July of 1995 an

ozone monitor in the area recorded another exceedance of the ozone

standard resulting in a violation of the standard. As a result of the

violation the area is no longer attaining the ozone air quality

standard and USEPA is proposing to disapprove the redesignation request

for the area because it has not met all of the requirements for

redesignation specified under section 107(d)(3)(E), of the Clean Air

Act.

The Cincinnati-Hamilton moderate nonattainment area also includes

the Kentucky counties of Boone, Campbell, and Kenton. On September 27,

1996, USEPA disapproved the redesignation request for the Kentucky

portion of the Cincinnati-Hamilton moderate ozone nonattainment area.

DATES: Comments on this redesignation and on the proposed USEPA action

must be received by March 20, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: J. Elmer Bortzer,

Chief, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),

United States Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

Copies of the State's submittal and other information are available

for inspection during normal business

[[Page 7195]]

hours at the following location: Regulation Development Section, Air

Programs Branch (AR-18J), United States Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Jones, Environmental

Scientist, Air Programs Branch, Regulation Development Section (AR-

18J), United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago,

Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6058.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background Summary

The OEPA has requested the redesignation of the Ohio portion of the

Cincinnati-Hamilton Area (consisting of the counties of Hamilton,

Butler, Clermont and Warren) from nonattainment to attainment for

ozone.

Under Section 107(d) of the 1977 amended Clean Air Act (CAA), the

USEPA promulgated the ozone attainment status for each geographic area

of the country. All counties in the Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY area were

designated as an ozone nonattainment area in March 1978 (43 FR 8962).

On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were

enacted. Pursuant to Section 107(d)(4)(A), Butler, Clermont, Hamilton,

and Warren Counties, along with the Kentucky counties of Boone,

Campbell, and Kenton were designated as the Cincinnati-Hamilton

moderate ozone nonattainment area, as a result of monitored violations

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

1986-1988 time frame (56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991). A review of the

redesignation request for the Ohio portion of the Cincinnati-Hamilton

area was provided in a proposed rulemaking dated May 5, 1995 (60 FR

22337). To the extent that any comments received on the May 5, 1995,

proposed rulemaking are relevant to this proposed rulemaking, they will

be addressed in any final rulemaking on this action.

II. Redesignation Review Criteria

The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment

area to attainment. Specifically, Section 107(d)(3)(E) provides for

redesignation if: (i) The Administrator determines that the area has

attained the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS); (ii) The

Administrator has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for

the area under Section 110(k); (iii) The Administrator determines that

the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable

reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable

state implementation plan and applicable Federal air pollutant control

regulations and other permanent and enforceable reductions; (iv) The

Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as

meeting the requirements of Section 175(A); and (v) The State

containing such area has met all requirements applicable to the area

under Section 110 and Part D.

The USEPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General

Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act

Amendments of 1990, 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992), supplemented at 57 FR

18070 (April 28, 1992). The primary memorandum providing further

guidance with respect to section 107(d)(3)(E) of the amended Act is

dated September 4, 1992, and issued by the Director, Air Quality

Management Division, Subject: Procedures for Processing Requests to

Redesignate Areas to Attainment (Calcagni Memorandum).

III. Analysis of Cincinnati Area Redesignation Request

For ozone, an area may be considered attaining the NAAQS if there

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

Appendix H, based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of

quality assured monitoring data. A violation of the NAAQS occurs when

the annual average number of expected daily exceedances is equal to or

greater than 1.05 at a monitoring site. A daily exceedance occurs when

the maximum hourly ozone concentration during a given day is 0.125

parts per million (ppm) or higher. The data should be collected and

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

Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). The monitors should

have remained at the same location for the duration of the monitoring

period required for demonstrating attainment.

The OEPA submitted ozone monitoring data for the April through

October ozone season from 1976 to 1994. In addition USEPA has reviewed

the most recent ambient air quality monitoring data that is recorded in

USEPA's AIRS. The table below summarizes the air quality data from

1994-1996.

Table 1.--Peak 1-Hour Ozone Concentrations in the Cincinnati-Hamilton Area 1994 to 1996

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

Exceedances Expected

Site County Year measured exceedances

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

Oxford............................ Butler.................... 1994.................. 0 0.0

Middletown........................ Butler.................... 1994.................. 0 0.0

Middletown........................ Butler.................... 1995.................. 2 2.0

Middletown........................ Butler.................... 1996.................. 1 1.0

Hamilton.......................... Butler.................... 1994.................. 0 0.0

Hamilton.......................... Butler.................... 1995.................. 1 1.0

Hamilton.......................... Butler.................... 1996.................. 0 0.0

4430 SR 222....................... Clermont.................. 1994.................. 1 1.0

4430 SR 222....................... Clermont.................. 1995.................. 1 1.0

4430 SR 222....................... Clermont.................. 1996.................. 0 0.0

11590 Grooms Rd................... Hamilton.................. 1994.................. 0 0.0

11590 Grooms Rd................... Hamilton.................. 1995.................. 0 0.0

11590 Grooms Rd................... Hamilton.................. 1996.................. 0 0.0

6950 Ripple Road.................. Hamilton.................. 1994.................. 0 0.0

6950 Ripple Road.................. Hamilton.................. 1995.................. 1 1.0

6950 Ripple Road.................. Hamilton.................. 1996.................. 0 0.0

Cincinnati........................ Hamilton.................. 1994.................. 0 0.0

Cincinnati........................ Hamilton.................. 1995.................. 1 1.0

Cincinnati........................ Hamilton.................. 1996.................. 0 0.0

Lebanon........................... Warren.................... 1994.................. 2 2.0

Lebanon........................... Warren.................... 1995.................. 2 2.0

[[Page 7196]]

Lebanon........................... Warren.................... 1996.................. 0 0.0

KY 338............................ Boone..................... 1994.................. 0 0.0

KY 338............................ Boone..................... 1995.................. 0 0.0

KY 338............................ Boone..................... 1996.................. 0 0.0

Dayton............................ Campbell.................. 1994.................. 0 0.0

Dayton............................ Campbell.................. 1995.................. 0 0.0

Dayton............................ Campbell.................. 1996.................. 1 1.0

Covington......................... Kenton.................... 1994.................. 0 0.0

Covington......................... Kenton.................... 1995.................. 1 1.0

Covington......................... Kenton.................... 1996.................. 1 1.0

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

To demonstrate monitored attainment with the standard, the OEPA

submitted ozone air quality data for the years 1992 through 1994. This

data has been quality assured and is recorded in AIRS. During the 1994

to 1996 time period, the Lebanon monitor recorded a total of 4.0

expected exceedances. This averages out to 1.33 average expected

exceedances per year and as a result is a violation of the ozone

standard.

All five of the redesignation criteria given under section

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA must be satisfied in order for USEPA to

redesignate an area from nonattainment to attainment. Under the first

criterion, the Administrator of USEPA is prohibited from redesignating

an area to attainment when that area has not attained the NAAQS.

Furthermore, section 107(d)(1)(A) defines a nonattainment area as ``any

area that does not meet'' NAAQS and an attainment area as ``any area *

* * that meets the'' NAAQS. Consequently, if a violation occurs prior

to USEPA's final action, the area is no longer in attainment and USEPA

cannot redesignate the area to attainment status because, at the time

of that action, the area would not meet the definition of an attainment

area under section 107.

At the time of the OEPA's redesignation submittal in 1994, the

Cincinnati-Hamilton moderate nonattainment area appeared to have

attained the NAAQS, based on air quality data monitored from 1992

through 1994. However, during USEPA's review of the public comments

received on the proposal, ambient air quality data indicated that the

area had registered a violation of the ozone NAAQS in 1995. This

ambient data has been quality assured according to established

procedures for validating such monitoring data. As a result, the

Cincinnati-Hamilton area does not meet the statutory criterion for

redesignation to attainment of the ozone NAAQS found in section

107(d)(3)(E)(i) of the CAA.

USEPA notes that it has previously disapproved redesignation

requests on the basis of violations occurring after the submission of

the redesignation request. In particular, USEPA has already disapproved

the redesignation request for the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati-

Hamilton nonattainment area on the basis of the same violations that

are the basis for this proposal. See 61 FR 50718 (September 27, 1996).

See also 61 FR 19193 (May 1, 1996) (disapproval of redesignation

request for Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania).

The maintenance plan State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision is

not approvable because its demonstration is based on a level of ozone

precursor emissions in the ambient air thought to represent an

inventory of emissions that would provide for attainment and

maintenance. That underlying basis of the maintenance plan's

demonstration is no longer valid due to the violation of the NAAQS that

occurred during the 1995 ozone season, a season in which the emissions

inventory was at or below the level of the emissions inventory in the

base year.

IV. Proposed Rulemaking Action and Solicitation of Public Comment

The Cincinnati-Hamilton area does not meet the redesignation and

maintenance plan requirements of the CAA. Therefore, the USEPA is

proposing disapproval of the maintenance plan and the redesignation of

the Ohio portion of the Cincinnati moderate ozone nonattainment area,

consisting of the counties of Butler, Warren, Clermont, and Hamilton,

to attainment for ozone.

Public comments are solicited on USEPA's proposed rulemaking

action. Public comments received by March 20, 1997 will be considered

in the development of USEPA's final rulemaking action. To the extent

that any comments received on the May 5, 1995, proposed approval are

relevant to this proposed rulemaking, they will be addressed in any

final rulemaking on this action.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing

or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any

SIP. Each request for revision to 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 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 has 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.

USEPA's disapproval of the State request under Section 110 and

subchapter I, Part D of the CAA would not affect any existing

requirements applicable to small entities. Any pre-existing federal

requirements would remain in place after this disapproval. Moreover,

USEPA's disapproval of the submittal would not impose any new Federal

requirements. Furthermore, the direct affects of the designation status

of a nonattainment area fall on a State, not a small entity. Therefore,

USEPA certifies that this proposed disapproval action does not have a

significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because it

does not remove

[[Page 7197]]

existing requirements and impose any new Federal requirements.

USEPA's denial of the State's redesignation request under section

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA does not affect any existing requirements

applicable to small entities nor does it impose new requirements. The

area retains its current designation status and continues to be subject

to the same statutory requirements. To the extent that the area must

adopt regulations, based on its nonattainment status, USEPA will review

the effect of those actions on small entities at the time the State

submits those regulations. Therefore, the Administrator certifies that

any disapproval of the redesignation request will not affect a

substantial number of small entities.

Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform

Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22,

1995, USEPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed

or final 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. Through

submission of this state implementation plan or plan revision, the

State and any affected local or tribal governments have elected to

adopt the program provided for under Section 110 of the CAA. These

rules may bind State, local and tribal governments to perform certain

actions and also require the private sector to perform certain duties.

USEPA has examined whether the rules being disapproved by this action

would impose any new requirements. Since such sources are already

subject to these regulations under State law, no new requirements would

be imposed by a disapproval. Moreover, as this action would merely

leave the area with its current designation, it imposes no new

requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or

tribal governments, or to the private sector, would result from this

action, and therefore there will be no significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

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

Dated: February 6, 1997.

Michelle D. Jordan,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97-3925 Filed 2-14-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P