[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 2, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21456-21464]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10693]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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