[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 78 (Monday, April 22, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17576-17577]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-9913]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OH97-1; FRL-5462-2]


Interim Final Determination That State Has Corrected the 
Deficiency; Ohio

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).

ACTION: Interim final determination.

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

SUMMARY: In the proposed rules section of this Federal Register, USEPA 
has proposed conditional approval of the State of Ohio's New Source 
Review (NSR) program rules. Based on the proposed conditional approval, 
USEPA is making an interim final determination by this action that Ohio 
has corrected the deficiency for which a sanctions clock began on 
October 21, 1994. This action will defer application of the offset 
sanction and defer the application of the highway sanction. Although 
this action is effective upon publication, USEPA will take comment and 
will publish a final rule taking into consideration any comments 
received on this interim final rule.

DATES: This action will be effective April 22, 1996. Comments must be 
received by May 22, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, 
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, IL 60604. The State submittal and USEPA's analysis for that 
submittal, which are the basis for this action, are available for 
public review at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Genevieve Nearmyer, Permits and Grants 
Section, Air Programs Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604. (312) 353-4761.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On August 20, 1993 the State submitted an NSR plan revision request 
which USEPA disapproved in full on September 24, 1994 (59 FR 48392). 
The USEPA's disapproval action started an

[[Page 17577]]

18-month clock for the application of one sanction (followed by a 
second sanction 6 months later) under section 179 of the Clean Air Act 
(CAA) and a 24-month clock for promulgation of a Federal implementation 
plan under section 110(c)(1) of the CAA. The State subsequently 
submitted a revised program on April 12, 1996. In the proposed rules 
section of this Federal Register, USEPA has proposed conditional 
approval of the State of Ohio's submittal of its NSR requested State 
Implementation Plan revision.

II. USEPA Action

    Based on the proposed conditional approval set forth in the 
proposed rules section of this Federal Register, USEPA believes that it 
is more likely than not that the State has corrected the original 
disapproval deficiency that started the sanction clock and, therefore, 
is taking this interim final action finding that the State has 
corrected the disapproval deficiency, effective on publication. This 
action does not stop the sanction clock that started for this area on 
October 21, 1994. However, this action will defer the application of 
the offsets sanction and will defer the application of the highway 
sanction. See 59 FR 39832 (Aug. 4, 1994) codified at 40 CFR 52.31. If 
USEPA takes final action conditionally approving the State's submittal, 
such action will continue any deferral of the offset and highway 
sanctions. When the State meets its commitment and USEPA takes final 
action fully approving the State's submittal meeting those commitments, 
such action will permanently stop the sanctions clock and will 
permanently lift any applied, stayed or deferred sanctions.
    At this time, USEPA is also providing the public with an 
opportunity to comment on this final action. If, based on the comments 
on this action and the comments on USEPA's proposed conditional 
approval of the State's submittal, USEPA determines that the State's 
submittal is not approvable and this final action was inappropriate, 
USEPA will take further action to disapprove the State's submittal and 
to find that the State has not corrected the original disapproval 
deficiency. Such action will retrigger the sanctions consequences as 
described in the sanctions rule. See 59 FR 39832.

III. Administrative Requirements

    Because USEPA has preliminarily determined that the State has an 
approvable plan, relief from sanctions should be provided as quickly as 
possible. Therefore, USEPA is invoking the good cause exception under 
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in not providing an opportunity 
for comment before this action takes effect.1 See 5 U.S.C. 
553(b)(B). The USEPA believes that notice-and-comment rulemaking before 
the effective date of this action is impracticable and contrary to the 
public interest. The USEPA has reviewed the State's submittal and, 
through its proposed action, is indicating that it is more likely than 
not that the State has corrected the deficiency that started the 
sanctions clock. Therefore, it is not in the public interest to 
initially apply sanctions or to keep applied sanctions in place when 
the State has most likely done all that it can to correct the 
deficiency that triggered the sanctions clock. Moreover, it would be 
impracticable to go through notice-and-comment rulemaking on a finding 
that the State has corrected the deficiency prior to the rulemaking 
approving the State's submittal. Therefore, USEPA believes that it is 
necessary to use the interim final rulemaking process to temporarily 
stay or defer sanctions while USEPA completes its rulemaking process on 
the approvability of the State's submittal. In addition, USEPA is 
invoking the good cause exception to the 30-day notice requirement of 
the APA because the purpose of this notice is to relieve a restriction. 
See 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As previously noted, however, by this action USEPA is 
providing the public with a chance to comment on USEPA's 
determination after the effective date and USEPA will consider any 
comments received in determining whether to reverse such action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from 
review under Executive Order 12866.
    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. Section 600 et seq., 
USEPA must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the 
impact of any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 
sections 603 and 604. Alternatively, USEPA may certify that the rule 
will not have a significant economic 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.
    This action temporarily relieves sources of an additional burden 
potentially placed on them by the sanctions provisions of the CAA. 
Therefore, I certify that it does not have an impact on any small 
entities.
    Under sections 202, 203 and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
of 1995 (Unfunded Mandates Act), signed into law on March 22, 1995, 
USEPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed or 
final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated 
costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to a State, 
local and/or tribal government(s) in the aggregate. The USEPA must also 
develop a plan with regard to small governments that would be 
significantly or uniquely affected by the rule.
    Because this direct final rule is estimated to result in the 
expenditure by State, local and tribal governments or the private 
sector of less than $100 million in any one year, 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, USEPA is not required to develop a plan 
for small governments. Further, this final rule only defers the 
imposition of sanctions; it imposes no new requirements.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental regulations, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements, Ozone, and Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: April 15, 1996.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 96-9913 Filed 4-19-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P