[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 22 (Thursday, February 1, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3591-3599]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-1933]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[OH60-1-6377a; FRL-5410-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans,
and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Ohio
AGENCY: United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The USEPA is approving the ozone State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision and redesignation requests submitted by the State of
Ohio for the purpose of redesignating Franklin, Delaware, and Licking
Counties (Columbus area) from marginal nonattainment to attainment for
ozone; and revising Ohio's SIP to include a 1990 base-year ozone
precursor emissions inventory for the Columbus ozone nonattainment
area. Ground-level ozone, commonly known as smog, is an air pollutant
which forms on hot summer days which harmfully affects lung tissue and
breathing passages. The redesignation to attainment of the health-based
ozone air quality standard is based on a request from the State of Ohio
to redesignate this area and approve its maintenance plan, and on the
supporting data the State submitted in support of the requests. Under
the Clean Air Act, designations can be changed if sufficient data are
available to warrant such change, and a maintenance plan is put in
place which is designed to ensure the area maintains the ozone air
quality standard for the next ten years. The emissions inventory was
submitted to satisfy a Federal requirement that States containing ozone
nonattainment areas submit
[[Page 3592]]
inventories of actual ozone precursor emissions for the year 1990. Data
from emission inventories aide States in developing plans to meet and/
or maintain the ozone air quality standard.
DATES: The ``direct final'' is effective on April 1, 1996, unless USEPA
receives adverse or critical comments by March 4, 1996. If the
effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the
Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the revision request and USEPA's analysis
(Technical Support Document) are available for inspection at the
following address: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air
and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604. (It is recommended that you telephone William Jones at (312)
886-6058 before visiting the Region 5 Office.)
Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Regulation Development Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Jones at (312) 886-6058.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 were enacted (CAA). Pub. L. 101-549, codified at 42
U.S.C. 7401-7671q. Pursuant to Section 107(d)(4)(A) of the CAA,
Franklin, Delaware, and Licking Counties (Columbus area) were
designated as nonattainment for ozone, see 56 FR 56694 (November 6,
1991). At the same time, the Columbus area was classified as a marginal
ozone nonattainment area.
I. Emissions Inventories
Section 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (Act)
requires States with ozone nonattainment areas to submit a
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual ozone precursor
emissions [which include volatile organic compounds (VOC), nitrogen
oxides (NOX), and carbon monoxide (CO)] for each ozone
nonattainment area by November 15, 1992. This inventory must include
anthropogenic base-year (1990) emissions from stationary point, area,
non-road mobile, and on-road mobile sources, as well as biogenic
(naturally occurring) emissions in all ozone nonattainment areas. The
emissions inventory must be based on conditions that exist during the
peak ozone season (generally the period when peak hourly ozone
concentrations occur in excess of the primary ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard--NAAQS). Ohio's annual ozone season is from April
1 to October 31.
A. Criteria for Evaluating Ozone Emissions Inventories
Guidance for preparing and reviewing the emission inventories is
provided in the following USEPA guidance documents or memoranda:
``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation
of Title I of the Act,'' (Preamble) published in the April 16, 1992
Federal Register (57 FR 13498); ``Emission Inventory Requirements for
Ozone State Implementation Plans,'' (EPA-450/4-91-010) dated March
1991; a memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management
Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, entitled
``Public Hearing Requirements for the 1990 Base-Year Emissions
Inventories for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' dated
September 29, 1992; ``Procedures for the Preparation of Emissions
Inventories for Carbon Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone, Volumes I and
II,'' (EPA-450/4-91-016 and EPA-450/4-91-014) dated May 1991;
``Procedures for Emissions Inventories Preparation, Volume IV: Mobile
Sources,'' (EPA-450/4-81-026d) dated 1992; and ``Supplement C to
Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Volume I: Stationary
Point and Area Sources,'' (AP-42) dated September 1990.
As a primary tool for the review of the quality of emission
inventories, the USEPA has also developed three levels (I, II, and III)
of emission inventories checklists. The Level I and II checklists are
used to determine that all required components of the base-year
emission inventory and associated documentation are present. These
reviews also evaluate the level of quality of the associated
documentation and the data provided by the State and assess whether the
emission estimates were developed according to the USEPA guidance. The
Level III review evaluates crucial aspects and the overall
acceptability of the emission inventory submittal. Failure to meet one
of the ten crucial aspects would lead to disapproval of the emissions
inventory submittal.
Detailed Level I and II review procedures can be found in the USEPA
guidance document entitled ``Quality Review Guidelines for 1990 Base
Year Emissions Inventories,'' (Quality Review) (EPA-454/R-92-007) dated
August 1992. Level III criteria were attached to a memorandum from John
S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
entitled ``Emission Inventory Issue,'' dated June 24, 1993. The Level
I, II, and III checklists used in reviewing this emissions inventory
submittal are attached to a USEPA technical support document (TSD)
dated October 3, 1995.
B. State Submittal
On March 15, 1994, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA)
submitted a revision to the ozone portion of Ohio's SIP which consisted
of the 1990 base-year ozone emissions inventory for the following ozone
nonattainment areas in Ohio: Canton, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus,
Dayton, Toledo and Youngstown. The emissions inventory for the Columbus
area was deemed complete on September 13, 1994. The USEPA has completed
its review of the emissions inventory submitted for the Columbus ozone
nonattainment area. The 1990 base-year emissions inventories submitted
for all other areas are addressed in separate rulemakings.
Inventory Preparation Plan/Quality Assurance Plan
All States were required to submit an Inventory Preparation Plan
(IPP) to USEPA for review and approval by October 1, 1991. The IPP
documents the procedures utilized in the development of an emissions
inventory and contains the quality assurance and quality control plan
(QA/QC). On March 19, 1992, the State of Ohio submitted a final ozone
emissions IPP. On April 15, 1992, USEPA informed the State that the IPP
was not approvable at the time. The USEPA has worked with the State
since that time in order to correct deficiencies in the IPP. With the
March 1994 SIP revision request, the State submitted documentation as
to how the emissions inventory was prepared, as well as a quality
assurance report for the point, area, and mobile source portions of the
emissions inventory. The USEPA finds that this documentation and
quality assurance reports are acceptable to meet the requirements of an
IPP.
Point Source Emissions Inventory
The State submitted a point source emissions inventory of all
facilities that emit at least 10 tons per year (tpy) of VOC, or 100 tpy
NOX or CO in the nonattainment area. The State also included
sources that emit 100 tpy of VOC, CO, or NOX located in a 25-mile
boundary surrounding the nonattainment area. The point source emissions
inventory contains general facility information, number of sources,
production schedules and related emissions for each source, emissions
limitation, control efficiency and rule
[[Page 3593]]
effectiveness (RE), as applicable, and total emissions on an annual and
daily ozone season basis. (Rule effectiveness is a factor designed to
take into account the assumption that control equipment does not
operate at 100 percent all of the time of source operation, due to
maintenance, malfunction, etc.)
The following methods were employed by the State to identify
sources to be included in the 1990 base-year emissions inventory: the
1989 records for plants in the Emissions Inventory System (EIS) were
checked and plants meeting the VOC, CO or NOX criteria were
updated with 1990 emissions data; the air permit records were reviewed
for plants that may be candidates for inclusion in the point source
inventory; and current industrial directories and the Toxic Release
Information System (TRIS) database were checked for additional sources.
For facilities in the point source inventory, the State acquired the
emissions data by means of the following: mail surveys; plant
inspections; telephone calls; and air permit files.
The USEPA reviewed the point source emissions data by cross
referencing the point source inventory to the following sources: (1)
USEPA's guidance document entitled ``Major CO, NO2, and VOC
Sources in the 25-Mile Boundary Around Ozone Nonattainment Areas,
Volume I: Classified Ozone Nonattainment Areas,'' (EPA-450/4-92-005a)
February 1992; a 1990 TRIS Retrieval; and a 1990 Aerometric Inventory
Retrieval System (AIRS) Facility Subsystem (AFS) AFS--Emission to
Compliance Comparison Report. The State was notified of any potentially
missing sources or discrepancies in their reported emissions and
provided any corrections necessary.
Where a source was governed by a regulation or a control device,
the emissions limit was stated. A RE factor was then applied in the
determination of emissions. In accordance with USEPA guidance, a
standard RE factor of 80 percent was utilized unless otherwise
justified.
Area Source Emissions Inventory
Area source emissions were calculated using State-specific data as
well as USEPA guidance documents and technical memoranda developed for
various categories. The State utilized emission factors from
``Procedures for the Preparation of Emission Inventories of Carbon
Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone, Volume I: General Guidance for
Stationary Sources, and IV: Mobile Sources,'' and AP-42 and provided
necessary documentation. The following area source categories were
included in the emissions inventory: Gasoline loading and distribution,
dry cleaning, degreasing, architectural surface coatings, traffic
markings, automobile refinishing, graphic arts, cutback asphalt,
pesticide application, commercial/consumer solvents, bakeries, waste
management practices (landfills), leaking underground storage tanks,
incineration of solid waste, stationary fossil fuel combustion, and
fires (structural, open burn, etc.). Vehicle refueling emissions were
included as part of the mobile source emissions inventory.
The area source inventory was reviewed utilizing USEPA's guidance
documents, and the Level I and II checklists, to ensure that all source
categories and their related emissions (and emission factors) were
included in the area source emissions inventory. Seasonal adjustments,
rule effectiveness, and rule penetration factors were applied as
indicated in the State submittal.
On-Road Mobile Source Emissions Inventory
In the development of the mobile source emissions inventory, the
State of Ohio utilized USEPA's mobile source emissions model, Mobile
5a, for the determination of the emission factors for all eight vehicle
types. Hard-copy documentation of the input and output files were
provided in the submittal. Where available, State-specific inputs were
utilized in the development of the input files for Mobile 5a.
The 1990 vehicle miles travelled (VMT) for each of the twelve
roadway types were developed by the Ohio Department of Transportation
(ODOT). ODOT maintains data on each section of highway in the State of
Ohio. VMT values were developed by ODOT and entered in the State Road
Inventory System (SRIS). The data from the SRIS was reported to the
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) by utilizing the Highway
Performance Monitoring System (HPMS).
The daily VMT (dVMT) for each roadway section was computed as the
annual average daily traffic (AADT) count for that section multiplied
by the length of the section. The total county DVMT is the sum of the
dVMTs for each of the twelve highway classifications in the county. The
total county DVMTS are then summed to determine the statewide total
DVMTS.
In order to determine consistency between the SRIS and the HPMS,
the statewide total DVMTS are then compared by functional class to the
HPMS submittal. For those classifications where traffic counts are
available for all or nearly all their sections, the totals between the
two systems were essentially the same. For those with more off-systems
roads, the resulting SRIS totals were larger than the HPMS's submittal
value (as expected). Correction factors were computed from the two sets
of totals and applied to the individual cells.
ODOT used permanent and portable vehicle classification equipment
to develop the vehicle mix by functional classification of highway.
Traficomp III vehicle classification equipment are used to support the
HPMS data collection effort. A software program called OHIO CONVERT
formats vehicle classification data into the FHWA Vehicle
Classification categories.
Off-Road Mobile Source Emissions Inventory
The State developed emissions estimates for the following off-road
categories according to USEPA guidance: aircraft, railroad locomotives,
recreational boating, off-road motorcycles, agricultural equipment,
construction equipment, industrial equipment, and lawn and garden
equipment. Documentation was provided as to the sources of emissions
factors utilized and were submitted in the area source emissions
inventory portion of the submittal.
The off-road mobile source inventory was reviewed utilizing the
Level I and II checklists and USEPA's guidance documents to ensure that
all source categories and their related emissions factors were included
in the off-road mobile source emissions inventory.
Biogenic Emissions Inventory
The State of Ohio determined the biogenic emissions for the
Columbus area according to a USEPA's guidance document entitled
``User's Guide to the Personal Computer Version of the Biogenic
Emissions Inventory System (PC-BEIS),'' (EPA-450/4-91-017) dated July,
1991. Meteorological data utilized in PC-BEIS was collected in
accordance with USEPA guidance. Data from the ten warmest days from the
period between 1988 to 1990 with the highest hourly peak ozone
concentrations in each ozone nonattainment area was collected and
reviewed. As required by USEPA guidance, the fourth highest daily
maximum ozone concentration for each nonattainment area was selected
and utilized in the model. The State provided hard copy documentation
as to the meteorological inputs utilized and PC-BEIS output files for
the biogenic emissions inventory for the Columbus nonattainment areas.
[[Page 3594]]
C. Summary of Ozone Emissions Inventory
A summary has been prepared of the emissions inventory for an
average ozone summer weekday for the Columbus ozone nonattainment area
as follows. The emissions are stated in tons per ozone season weekday:
Table 1.--Columbus Ozone Nonattainment Area, 1990 Base-Year Emissions
Inventory
[tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source type VOC CO NOx
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Sources.......................... 16.44 8.52 13.79
Area Sources........................... 53.56 9.09 7.37
On-Road Mobile Sources................. 94.73 580.75 78.65
Off-Road Mobile Sources................ 47.62 438.21 89.31
Biogenic Sources....................... 105.92
--------------------------------
Totals............................... 318.27 1,036.57 189.12
------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Ozone Redesignation Request
The OEPA requested that the area be redesignated in a letter dated
January 7, 1994, and received by USEPA on January 14, 1994. The public
hearing information portion was transmitted to USEPA in a letter from
Robert Hodanbosi, Chief of the Division of Air Pollution Control, OEPA,
dated April 11, 1994, and received by USEPA on April 14, 1994.
The State provided monitoring, and emissions data to support its
redesignation request. The review criteria and a review of the request
are provided below.
A. Redesignation Review Criteria
Under the CAA, designations can be changed if sufficient data are
available to warrant such change. 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 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
175A; and (v) The State containing such area has met all requirements
applicable to the area under Section 110 and Part D.
The USEPA has provided guidance on processing redesignation
requests in documents including the following:
1. ``Part D New Source Review (part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Mary D. Nichols, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994.
2. ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' D. Kent Berry,
Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, November 30, 1993.
3. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) on
or after November 15, 1992,'' Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993.
4. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response
to Clean Air Act (ACT) Deadlines,'' John Calcagni, Director, Air
Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992.
5. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division,
September 4, 1992.
6. ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,'' G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs
Branch, June 1, 1992.
7. State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (57
FR 13498), April 16, 1992.
B. Review of the Redesignation Request
1. The Area Must Have Attained the Ozone NAAQS
For ozone, an area may be considered attaining the NAAQS if there
are no violations, as determined in accordance with the regulation
codified at 40 CFR Sec. 50.9, based on three (3) consecutive calendar
years of quality assured monitoring data. A violation occurs when the
ozone air quality monitoring data show greater than one (1) average
expected exceedance per year at any site in the area at issue. An
exceedance occurs when the maximum hourly ozone concentration exceeds
0.124 parts per million (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 redesignation request for the Columbus area relies on ozone
monitoring data for the years 1990 through 1992, to show that they are
meeting the NAAQS for ozone. Ozone monitoring data for 1993 and 1994
continue to show that the area has reached attainment. The Columbus
area is currently meeting the requirement of attaining the ozone NAAQS.
The ozone monitoring network consists of three monitors. Two of the
monitors are located in Franklin County and one is located in Licking
County. No monitors are currently located in Delaware County; however,
the other monitors in Franklin and Licking Counties adequately
represent the entire Columbus area. Two exceedances of the ozone
standard have been monitored since 1990, both of these occurred at the
Maple Canyon monitor in Franklin County. At this site, the first
exceedance of 0.128 ppm occurred in 1990, and the second exceedance of
0.131 ppm occurred in 1991. Data stored in AIRS was used to determine
the annual average expected exceedances for the years 1992, 1993, and
1994. Data contained in AIRS have undergone quality assurance review by
the State and USEPA. Since the annual average number of expected
exceedances for each monitor during the most recent three years is less
than 1.0, the Columbus-Springfield area is considered to have attained
the standard.
2. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k); and
the Area Must Have Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110
and Part D
Before the Columbus area may be redesignated to attainment for
ozone, it must have fulfilled the applicable requirements of section
110 and part D. USEPA interprets section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) to mean that,
for a redesignation request to be approved, the State must have met all
requirements that became applicable to the subject area prior to or at
the time of the submission of the redesignation
[[Page 3595]]
request. As the Columbus redesignation request was submitted to USEPA
in January, 1994, requirements that came due prior to that time must be
met for the request to be approved. Section 110 and Part D requirements
of the CAA that come due subsequent to the submission of the
redesignation request continue to be applicable to the area (see
section 175A(c)) and, if the redesignation is disapproved, the State
remains obligated to fulfill those requirements.
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 the
following: 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, Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD), and D, New Source Review (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.
On October 31, 1980, the USEPA conditionally approved Ohio's SIP under
Part D of Title I (as amended in 1977) (45 FR 27122). The Ohio VOC
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements, or
requirements for certain stationary sources to use technically and
economically feasible technology to reduce emissions of VOC, are being
addressed in a separate TSD and Federal Register actions, (59 FR 23796
and 60 FR 15235), except for a few outstanding requirements in the
Cleveland and Cincinnati areas. There are no outstanding VOC RACT
requirements for the Columbus area, as explained under ``Part D
Requirements'' below.
Part D Requirements
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 I,
specific requirements of subpart 2 may override subpart 1's general
provisions [57 FR at 13501 (April 16, 1992)]. The Columbus area was
classified as marginal. Therefore, in order to be redesignated to
attainment, 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 that apply to marginal
areas such as Columbus.
(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 CAA. 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 Columbus, the State
has satisfied all of the section 172(c) requirements necessary for
Columbus to be redesignated upon the basis of the redesignation request
submitted on January 7, 1994, and April 14, 1994.
The Columbus area was designated marginal nonattainment on November
6, 1991 (56 FR at 56694), effective January 6, 1992). In the case of
marginal ozone nonattainment areas, the section 172(c)(1) Reasonably
Available Control Measures requirement was superseded by the section
182(a)(2) RACT requirements, which did not require nonattainment areas
designated marginal after enactment of 1990 CAA amendments to submit
RACT corrections. See General Preamble for the Implementation of Title
I, 57 FR at 13503, and the VOC RACT Fix-up rulemaking published at 58
FR 49458. Thus, no additional RACT submissions were required for the
Columbus area to be redesignated. Also, by virtue of provisions of
section 182(a), which provides that any area designated as marginal
does no have to submit an attainment demonstration.
With respect to the section 172(c)(2) Reasonable Further Progress
(RFP) requirement, as Columbus has attained the ozone NAAQS no RFP
requirements apply. See General Preamble for the Implementation of
Title I, 57 FR at 13564.
The section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory requirement has been met
by the submission and approval (in this action) of the 1990 base year
inventory required under subpart 2 of part D, section 182(a)(1).
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. A 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,'' fully describes the
rationale for this view, 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 Columbus
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 Columbus.
Once the area is redesignated to attainment, the PSD program
(applicable to attainment areas), which has been delegated to Ohio,
will become effective immediately. The PSD program was delegated to
Ohio on May 1, 1980, and amended November 7, 1988. See 40 C.F.R.
52.21(u)
The section 172(c)(9) contingency measure requirements also do not
apply to marginal ozone nonattainment areas. See section 182(a) and 57
FR at 13571.
Finally, for purposes of redesignation, the Columbus 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.
(b) Section 176 Conformity Requirements
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'').
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). Pursuant to section 51.396 of the
[[Page 3596]]
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, and
November 30, 1994, respectively. Because the redesignation request was
submitted before these SIP revisions came due, they are not applicable
requirements under section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) and, thus, do not affect
approval of this redesignation request.
(c) Subpart 2 Requirements
Marginal ozone nonattainment areas are subject to the requirements
of section 182(a) of subpart 2. Ohio has met all of the applicable
requirements of that subsection with respect to the Columbus area. The
emissions inventory required by section 182(a)(1) is being approved in
this action. The emission statement SIP required by section
182(a)(3)(B) was approved on October 13, 1994. See 59 FR 51863. As
noted above, RACT corrections are not required under section 182(a)(2)
for areas such as Columbus that were not designated nonattainment until
after the 1990 CAA Amendments. Similarly, section 182(a)(2) does not
require the submission of inspection and maintenance SIP revisions for
Columbus since the area was not required to have an I/M program before
the enactment of the 1990 CAA Amendments. Finally, the State need not
comply with the requirements of section 182(a) concerning revisions to
the part D NSR program in order for the Columbus area to be
redesignated for the reasons explained above in connection with the
discussion of the section 172(c)(5) NSR requirement.
3. The Improvement in Air Quality Must Be Due to Permanent and
Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting From the SIP, Federal
Measures and Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
The submittal demonstrates that the improvement in air quality is
due to emissions reductions due to the Federal Motor Vehicle Emissions
Control Program (FMVECP). This program is codified in 40 CFR Part 86.
Between 1988 and 1990 the area's volatile organic compound emissions
were reduced by 2.7 percent, due to FMVECP. This trend is expected to
continue in the area with a ten (10) percent reduction in overall
emissions by 1996 due to the FMVECP program and Federal restrictions on
gasoline volatility. Based on this reduction, the State has shown that
the improvement in air quality is based on permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions.
As was already discussed, this area is not required to adopt new
enforceable regulations in order to meet the CAA requirements of
section 110 and Part D. Therefore, USEPA believes that it is reasonable
to attribute the improvement in air quality to be due just to Federal
measures and it is not necessary in this case to link emission
reduction to enforceable regulations in the SIP.
4. 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. A September 4, 1992, USEPA memorandum from the Director
of the Air Quality Management Division, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, to Directors of Regional Air Divisions regarding
redesignation 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 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.
The State has included a copy of the base year 1990 emissions
inventory as the attainment inventory. The Columbus maintenance plan
provides emissions estimates from 1990 to 2005 for volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), and from 1990 to 2005 for oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) for the Columbus area. These emissions estimates have been
revised based on comments that Ohio received from USEPA, and the tables
reflect the revised emissions estimates. These estimates are consistent
with the base year 1990 emissions inventory for the area. The emissions
in the Columbus area are projected to decrease. The results of this
analysis show that the area is expected to maintain the air quality
standard for at least ten (10) years into the future.
The emissions summary for VOCs and NOX are provided below for
the Columbus area:
Table 2.--VOC Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Mobile
Year Sources Area Sources Sources Totals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990......... 16.44 101.18 94.73 212.35
1996......... 17.52 107.47 63.36 188.35
2005......... 19.33 117.30 61.38 198.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3. NOX Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Mobile
Year Sources Area Sources Sources Totals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990......... 13.79 96.68 78.65 189.12
1996......... 14.35 102.62 68.85 185.82
2005......... 15.27 111.82 61.24 188.33
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 3597]]
The State also commits to continuing the operation of the monitors
in the area. It will also track the maintenance of the area by
regularly updating the emissions inventory for the area. The emission
projections for 2005 are the budgets for transportation conformity.
The State commits to Automobile Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) as
the first contingency measure. This first measure would be triggered by
a violation of the NAAQS. The second contingency measure is Stage II
vapor recovery. If both measures are implemented, the area will choose
additional measures. The State also provided the following schedule in
Table 4 for implementing the I/M measure. Based on these measures, the
maintenance requirement has been met.
Table 4.--Schedule for Implementing I/M
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Action/Event
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contingency Triggered........ Initiate contingency I/M plan measures.
New legislative authority will not be
necessary for implementation.
Month 1/Day 1................ Begin revisions to Request for Proposals
(RFP). Coordinate with appropriate
agencies. Begin drafting rules for I/M
program, procedures and guidelines.
Month 2/Day 1................ Release RFP for centralized contractor.
Month 3/Day 1................ File draft rule rev. with Legislative
Serv. Commission.
Month 4/Day 15............... Public hearing on program rule revisions.
Month 4/Day 30............... Rules approved by Joint Committee on
Agency Rule Review. RFP responses for
centralized contract due.
Month 5/Day 1................ Begin evaluation of RFP responses.
Month 6/Day 15............... Award centralized contract. Seek
Controlling Board approval of
contract(s) by end of month 7.
Month 6/Day 30............... Program rule revisions become effective.
Month 7/Day 1................ Draft RFPs for Ohio EPA (BAR 90) approved
analyzer certification, if necessary,
and inspector certification training in
the Columbus metropolitan area.
Month 8/Day 1................ Release RFPs for inspector certification
training and analyzer certification
services.
Month 9/Day 15............... Proposals for analyzer certification
services (ACS) and inspector
certification training (ICT) due.
Month 9/Day 16............... Begin evaluation of proposals for ACS and
ICT.
Month 10/Day 1............... Award contracts for ACS and ICT.
Month 11/Day 1............... Begin licensing process for reinspection
stations.
Month 12/Day 1............... New Analyzer spec. issued. Begin
certifying four-gas analyzers.
Month 14/Day 1............... Inspector certification begins
Month 15/Day 1............... Begin final licensing of reinspection
stations.
Month 16/Day 1............... Initiate Public Relations program
including media blitz.
Month 16/D 15................ Initiate motorist notification mailings.
Month 17/Day 1............... Begin limited voluntary inspections at
centralized test stations. Reinspection
stations begin to perform retests.
Month 18/Day 1............... Begin mandatory testing at centralized
test stations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Columbus area will remain below attainment levels for
the next ten years. If the monitored air quality levels exceed the
NAAQS, then the contingency plan will be triggered. In addition, Ohio
is required to submit a revision to the maintenance plan eight years
after redesignation to attainment which demonstrates that the NAAQS
will be maintained until the year 2015. 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.
Rulemaking Action
The USEPA is approving the 1990 base-year ozone precursor emissions
inventories for the Columbus nonattainment area as meeting the
requirements of section 182(a)(1) of the CAA based upon the evidence
presented by the State and the State's compliance with the requirements
outlines in the applicable USEPA guidance. In addition, the USEPA is
also approving the redesignation of the Columbus ozone nonattainment
area to attainment for ozone since Ohio's request meets the conditions
of the CAA in section 107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation.
VI. Comment and Approval Procedure
The USEPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because
USEPA views this action as a noncontroversial revision and anticipates
no adverse comments. However, USEPA is publishing a separate document
in this Federal Register publication, which constitutes a ``proposed
approval'' of the requested SIP revision and clarifies that the
rulemaking will not be deemed final if timely adverse or critical
comments are filed. The ``direct final'' approval of the Columbus area
emissions inventory shall be effective on April 1, 1996, unless USEPA
receives adverse or critical comments by March 4, 1996. If USEPA
receives comments adverse to or critical of the approval discussed
above, USEPA will withdraw that approval before its effective date by
publishing a subsequent Federal Register document which withdraws this
final action. It should be noted, however, that an adverse or critical
comment on the approval of the Columbus area redesignation request or
maintenance plan will not result in a withdrawal of the approval of the
Columbus emission inventory, unless USEPA receives adverse or critical
comments on the emission inventory approval, as well. All public
comments received will be addressed in a subsequent rulemaking
document. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time. If no such comments are received, USEPA hereby advises
the public that this action will be effective on April 1, 1996.
[[Page 3598]]
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 Nichols, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing,
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any
SIP. USEPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP in light
of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``Unfunded
Mandates Act'') (signed into law on March 22, 1995) requires that the
USEPA prepare a budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule
that includes a Federal mandate that may result in expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $100 million or more in any one year. Section 203 requires
the USEPA to establish a plan for obtaining input from and informing,
educating, and advising any small governments that may be significantly
or uniquely affected by the rule.
Under section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act, the USEPA must
identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives
before promulgating a rule for which a budgetary impact statement must
be prepared. The USEPA must select from those alternatives the least
costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative that
achieves the objectives of the rule, unless the USEPA explains why this
alternative is not selected or the selection of this alternative is
inconsistent with law.
Because this final rule is estimated to result in the expenditure
by State, local, and tribal governments or the private sector of less
then $100 million in any one year, the USEPA has not prepared a
budgetary impact statement or specifically addressed the selection of
the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative.
Because small governments will not be significantly or uniquely
affected by this rule, the USEPA is not required to develop a plan with
regard to small governments. This rule only approves the incorporation
of existing state rules into the SIP. It imposes no additional
requirements.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., USEPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.)
Alternatively, USEPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the
Clean Air 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 any 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 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 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
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 April 1, 1996. 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
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Hydrocarbons,
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.
Note:--Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation
Plan for the State of Ohio was approved by the Director of the
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
Dated: November 30, 1995.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.
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. 7401-7671q.
Subpart KK--Ohio
2. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding new paragraph (u) to read
as follows: Sec. 52.1885 Control Strategy: Ozone.
* * * * *
(u) Approval--The 1990 base-year ozone emissions inventory
requirement of Section 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act has been
satisfied for the Columbus ozone nonattainment area (which includes the
Counties of Delaware, Franklin, and Licking).
3. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (b)(6) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1885 Control strategy: Ozone.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(6) Franklin, Delaware, and Licking Counties.
* * * * *
PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PURPOSES--OHIO
1. The authority citation of Part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q, unless otherwise noted.
2. In Sec. 81.336 ozone table is amended by revising entries for
the Franklin, Delaware, and Licking Counties to read as follows:
Sec. 81.336 Ohio.
* * * * *
[[Page 3599]]
Ohio--Ozone
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Classification
Designated Area -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Columbus Area
Delaware County............. April 1, 1996..... Attainment........
Franklin County............. April 1, 1996..... Attainment........
Licking County.............. April 1, 1996..... Attainment........
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.
[FR Doc. 96-1933 Filed 1-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P