Approval and Promulgation of Maintenance Plan Revision; Ohio

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OH111-1a; FRL-5947-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Maintenance Plan Revision; Ohio

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is

approving through ``direct final'' procedure, an October 20, 1997,

request from Ohio, for a State Implementation Plan (SIP) maintenance

plan revision for the Jefferson County ozone maintenance area. The

maintenance plan revision is allocating to the mobile source emission

budget for transportation conformity purposes a portion of the existing

safety margin. The safety margin is the difference between the

attainment inventory level of the total emissions and the projected

levels of the total emissions in the final year of the maintenance

plan.

DATES: This ``direct final'' rule is effective on March 9, 1998, unless

USEPA receives significant written adverse or critical comments by

February 9, 1998. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will

be published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are

available for inspection during normal business hours at the following

location: Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch, (AR-

18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604.

Please contact Scott Hamilton at (312) 353-4775 before visiting the

Region 5 office.

Written comments should be sent 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.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Hamilton, Environmental

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

18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-4775.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Clean Air Act in section 176(c) requires conformity of

activities to an implementation plan's purpose of attaining and

maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. On November 24,

1993, the USEPA promulgated a final rule establishing criteria and

procedures for determining conformity of transportation plans, programs

and projects funded or approved under Title 23 U.S.C. of the Federal

Transit Act.

The State of Ohio finalized and adopted State transportation

conformity rules on August 1, 1995, the rules

[[Page 1061]]

became effective August 21, 1995, and Ohio submitted the rules as a SIP

revision request on August 17, 1995. The rules were approved by the

USEPA on July 15, 1996 (61 FR 24702).

The transportation conformity rules require, among other things, a

comparison of emissions to the mobile source emissions budget

established by a control strategy SIP. A control strategy SIP is

defined by the conformity rules to be a maintenance plan, an attainment

demonstration, or a rate of progress plan. The USEPA approval of the

maintenance plan established the mobile source budget for

transportation conformity purposes.

The preamble to the November 24, 1993, transportation conformity

rule (58 FR 62188) explains the emissions budget concept. The preamble

also describes how to establish the motor vehicle emissions budget in

the SIP and how to revise the emissions budget. The State

transportation conformity rule at 3745-101-16 of the Ohio

Administrative Code allows the mobile source emissions budget to be

changed as long as the total level of emissions from all sources remain

below the milestone level. In the case of a maintenance plan the

milestone level is the attainment level established in the maintenance

plan.

The maintenance plan is designed to accomodate future growth while

still maintaining the ozone air quality standard. Growth in industries,

population and traffic is offset with reductions from cleaner cars and

other emissions reduction programs. Through the maintenance plan the

State and local agencies can manage the air quality while providing for

growth.

II. Evaluation of the State Submittal

On October 20, 1997, Ohio submitted to the USEPA a SIP revision

request for the Jefferson County area maintenance plan. A public

hearing for the area was held on October 14, 1997. Documentation on the

public hearing was submitted to the USEPA in order to complete the SIP

revision request.

Ohio has requested to allocate to the Jefferson County mobile

source budget part of the reductions achieved between the 1990

attainment inventory year and the 2005 projected emissions inventory

(4.4 tons/day Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) existing safety margin,

and 39.4 tons/day Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) existing safety

margin, as described in 59 FR 48395; September 21, 1994). The SIP

revision requests the allocation of 1.0 ton/day VOC, and 1.0 ton/day

NOX, into the area's mobile source budget from the existing

safety margin. Table 1 illustrates the approved emissions budgets for

VOC and NOX from point, mobile (on-road) and area sources.

The safety margin allocations are shown in Table 2.

Table 1.--NOX and VOC Emissions Budget; and Safety Margin Determinations, Jefferson County

[Tons/day]

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

Source category 1990 1996 2005

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

VOC Emissions

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

Point.................................................................... 1.1 1.2 1.3

Mobile (on-road)......................................................... 8.5 4.9 4.1

Area..................................................................... 6.5 6.4 6.3

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

Totals............................................................. 16.1 12.5 11.7

Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 4.4 tons/day VOC

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

NOX Emissions

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

Point.................................................................... 378 376 340

Mobile (on-road)......................................................... 4.7 4.1 3.4

Area..................................................................... 2.7 2.7 2.6

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

Totals............................................................. 385.4 382.8 346.0

Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 39.4 tons/day NOX

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

Table 2.--Allocation of Safety Margin to the 2005 Mobile Source Budget, Jefferson County

[Tons/day]

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

Source category 1990 1996 2005

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

VOC Emissions

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

Point.................................................................... 1.1 1.2 1.3

Mobile (on-road)......................................................... 8.5 4.9 5.1

Area..................................................................... 6.5 6.4 6.3

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

Totals............................................................. 16.1 12.5 12.7

Remaining Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 3.4 tons/day VOC

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

NOX Emissions

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

Point.................................................................... 378 376 340

Mobile (on-road)......................................................... 4.7 4.1 4.4

Area..................................................................... 2.7 2.7 2.6

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

Totals............................................................. 385.4 382.8 347.0

Remaining Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 38.4 tons/day VOC.

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

[[Page 1062]]

Table 2 illustrates that the requested portion of the safety margin

can be allocated to the mobile source budget and still remain at or

below the 1990 attainment level of total emissions for the Jefferson

County area. This allocation is allowed by the conformity rule since

the area would still be at or below the 1990 attainment level for the

total emissions in the area.

The USEPA's review of the SIP revision request finds that the

requested allocation of the safety margins for the Jefferson County

area is approvable since the approval of the new mobile source

emissions budget will keep the total emissions for the area at or below

the attainment year inventory level as required by the transportation

conformity regulations.

III. USEPA Action

The USEPA approves the requested allocation of the safety margin to

the mobile source budget for the Jefferson County area. This action

will be effective on March 9, 1998 unless, by February 9, 1998,

significant written adverse or critical comments on the approval are

received.

If the USEPA receives such written adverse comments, the approval

will be withdrawn before the effective date by publishing a subsequent

rulemaking that will withdraw the final action. All written public

comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on

this action serving as a proposed rule. The USEPA does not plan to

institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties

interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. If

no such written comments are received, the public is advised that this

action will be effective on March 9, 1998.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Future Requests

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 the SIP shall be considered

separately in light of specific technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant statutory and regulatory

requirements.

B. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this regulatory

action from Executive Order 12866 review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. section 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.

sections 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 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, the Administrator

certifies that it does not have a significant impact on any small

entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State

relationship under the Act, preparation of a flexibility analysis would

constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of the

State action. The Clean Air Act 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).

D. Unfunded Mandates

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995,

signed into law on March 22, 1995, USEPA must undertake various actions

in association with any proposed or final rule that includes a Federal

mandate that may result in estimated costs to state, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate; or to the private sector, of $100 million

or more. This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under

state or local law, and imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no

additional costs to state, local, or tribal governments, or the private

sector, result from this action.

E. Audit Privilege and Immunity Law

Nothing in this action should be construed as making any

determination or expressing any position regarding Ohio's audit

privilege and immunity law (Sections 3745.70-3745.73 of the Ohio

Revised Code). U.S. EPA will be reviewing the effect of the Ohio audit

privilege and immunity law on various Ohio environmental programs,

including those under the Clean Air Act, and taking appropriate

action(s), if any, after thorough analysis and opportunity for Ohio to

state and explain its views and positions on the issues raised by the

law. The action taken herein does not express or imply any viewpoint on

the question of whether there are legal deficiencies in this or any

Ohio CAA program resulting from the effect of the audit privilege and

immunity law. As a consequence of the review process, the regulations

subject to the action taken herein may be disapproved, federal approval

for the Clean Air Act program under which they are implemented may be

withdrawn, or other appropriate action may be taken, as necessary.

F. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

Under sec. 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, USEPA submitted 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

General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's

Federal Register. This rule is not a major rule as defined by sec. 5

U.S.C. 804(2)

G. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review

of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for

the appropriate circuit by March 9, 1998. 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, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Nitrogen oxides, Transportation

conformity.

Dated: December 24, 1997.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region V.

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 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(7) to read as

follows:

Sec. 52.1885 Control Strategy: Ozone

(a) * * *

[[Page 1063]]

(7) Approval--On October 20, 1997, Ohio submitted a revision to the

maintenance plan for the Jefferson County area. The revision consists

of an allocation of a portion of the safety margin in the area to the

transportation conformity mobile source budget for that area. The

mobile source budget for transportation conformity purposes for

Jefferson County are now: 5.1 tons per day of volatile organic compound

emissions for the year 2005 and 4.4 tons per day of oxides of nitrogen

emissions for the year 2005.

[FR Doc. 98-433 Filed 1-7-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P