[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 81 (Thursday, April 25, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 18255-18257]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10131]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[OH21-2-7260; FRL-5450-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Ohio
AGENCY: United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to letter notice procedures described at 54 FR 2214
(January 19, 1989), USEPA approved minor revisions to the Ohio State
Implementation Plan (SIP) on October 31, 1995. This document describes
the approved revisions and incorporates the relevant material into the
Code of Federal Regulations. The SIP revisions are site-specific rules
that are required as part of an effort to achieve the National Ambient
Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. The rules will benefit the
environment and people who have asthma and other respiratory diseases
by reducing volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions, a precursor to
smog formation.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date is April 25, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the State SIP revision request and USEPA's letter
notice of approval are available for public inspection during normal
business hours at the following locations:
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and
Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard (AR-18J), Chicago,
Illinois 60604; and
Office of Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Air Docket
6102), United States Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW,
Washington, DC, 20460.
[[Page 18256]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Fayette Bright, Regulation Development
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6069.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA) originally submitted a SIP revision request on June 7, 1993,
which established VOC reasonably available control technology (RACT)
requirements for the facilities not covered by a control technique
guideline (CTG). VOC RACT requirements were established for the
following non-CTG sources 1:
\1\ The USEPA issued three sets of control technique guidelines
documents which established a ``presumptive norm'' for RACT for
various categories of VOC sources. Sources not covered by a CTG were
called non-CTG sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AK Steel Corporation (Armco Steel Company)
B.F. Goodrich Company--Akron Chemical Plant
Chevron U.S.A. Incorporated
Cincinnati Specialties Incorporated
Day-Glo Color Corporation
Firestone Synthetic Rubber and Latex Company
Formica Corporation
Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company--Akron Polymer
Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company--Plant C
International Paper Company
Lubrizol Corporation
Midwest Mica and Insulation Company
Morton International Incorporated
PPG Industries Incorporated
Reilly Industries Incorporated
Ritrama Duramark
Sprayon Products Incorporated
Steelcraft Manufacturing Company
Zeneca (ICI Americas, Perry)
USEPA considered the State's request a minor SIP revision request.
In response to USEPA comments on the request, the State submitted
revisions to the original submittal on February 17, 1995, and August
22, 1995. The first revision submitted by the State included revised
rules and permit requirements (implemented through Findings and Orders
issued to the facilities) for a number of the facilities which
established site-specific non-CTG VOC RACT regulations. The first
revision did not, however, establish requirements for all of the non-
CTG facilities and some of the revised rules contained deficiencies.
Therefore, the State submmitted a second revision on August 22, 1995,
correcting these deficiencies and establishing requirements for the
remaining non-CTG facilities.
On October 31, 1995, USEPA approved the SIP revision requests under
Section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) by notifying the affected
facilities and the OEPA by letter that USEPA was approving the SIP
revisions.2 The SIP revisions became final and effective on that
date. USEPA has determined that these SIP revisions satisfy
requirements for RACT for the non-CTG facilities and comply with all
other applicable requirements of the CAA and USEPA policy and
regulations concerning such revisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Notice of the proposed approval of these SIP revisions was
published in the Federal Register on July 10, 1995. Due to the minor
nature of these revisions, USEPA concluded that conducting the usual
notice-and-comment rulemaking prior to approving the revisions would
have been ``unnecessary and contrary to public interest,'' and
therefore was not required by the Administrative Procedure Act, 5
U.S.C. Section 553(b). USEPA therefore sent notice of the approval
by letter to the affected facilities and the OEPA in accordance with
the procedure described in a January 30, 1989, memorandum from
USEPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards to the Regional
Air Division Directors entitled ``Procedures for Letter Notice
Approval of Minor SIP Actions.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The October 31, 1995, letter notice approvals, in conjunction with
rule approvals published in the Federal Register on March 23, 1995 (60
FR 15235), correct all VOC RACT deficiencies cited in the action
published May 9, 1994 (59 FR 23796). In the May 9, 1994, rulemaking
action and the September 23, 1993, proposed rulemaking action (58 FR
49458), the rule deficiencies are described. The March 23, 1995,
rulemaking describes how the deficiencies are remedied. The
deficiencies for Canton, Youngstown, Toledo, and Dayton and some of the
deficiencies for Cleveland and Cincinnati were found to be remedied
when USEPA took final rulemaking action approving revisions to VOC RACT
regulations for those areas. (See 60 FR 15235, March 23, 1995).
Clocks imposing sanctions on Canton, Youngstown, Toledo, Dayton,
Cleveland, and Cincinnati were started as a result of the May 9, 1994,
rulemaking action on VOC RACT described above. In order to stop the
clocks, Ohio had to correct the VOC RACT deficiencies and have them
approved into the SIP by USEPA November 9, 1995. The rule approvals
published March 23, 1995, stopped the sanctions clocks for Canton,
Youngstown, Toledo, and Dayton. The same March 23, 1995, rule approval
corrected a number of the rule deficiencies for the Cleveland and
Cincinnati areas. The remaining deficiencies were corrected by the
October 31, 1995, letter notices and stopped the VOC RACT sanctions
clocks for those areas.
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.
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.
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 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 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 (S.Ct. 1976); 42
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995, signed into law on March 22, 1995, USEPA must undertake
various actions in association with proposed or final rules that
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to the private sector, or to State, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate.
Through submission of the state implementation plan or plan
revisions approved in this action, the State has elected to adopt the
program provided for under section 110 of the Clean Air Act. The rules
and commitments being approved in this action may bind State,
[[Page 18257]]
local and tribal governments to perform certain actions and also may
ultimately lead to the private sector being required to perform certain
duties. To the extent that the rules and commitments being approved by
this action will impose or lead to the imposition of any mandate upon
the State, local or tribal governments either as the owner or operator
of a source or as a regulator, or would impose or lead to the
imposition of any mandate upon the private sector, EPA's action will
impose no new requirements; such sources are already subject to these
requirements under State law. Accordingly, no additional costs to
State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result
from this action. The USEPA has also determined that this action does
not include a mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate
or to the private sector.
Under Section 307(b)(1) of the Act, as amended, judicial review of
this action is available only by filing a petition for review in the
United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 24,
1996. The action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce
their requirements. See section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: February 29, 1996.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40, of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended to read 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 52.1870 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(102) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1870 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(102) On June 7, 1993, and February 17, 1995, the Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) submitted revisions to the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone. The revisions include 19 new non-
Control Technique Guideline volatile organic compound (VOC) rules,
Findings and Orders for 5 companies, and two permits to install.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) OEPA OAC Rule 3745-21-01, Definitions, Paragraphs (Q); (T);
effective January 17, 1995.
(B) OEPA OAC Rule 3745-21-04, Attainment Dates and Compliance Time
Schedules, Paragraphs (C)(40); (C)(41); (C)(46); (C)(48); (C)(49);
(C)(50); (C)(51); (C)(53); (C)(54); (C)(59); (C)(60); (C)(61); (C)(62);
effective January 17, 1995.
(C) OEPA OAC Rule 3745-21-09, Control of Emissions of Volatile
Organic Compounds from Stationary Sources, Paragraphs (FF), (GG), (HH),
(II), (JJ), (KK), (LL), (MM), (NN), (OO), (PP), (QQ), (SS), (TT), (YY),
(ZZ), (AAA); (BBB); effective January 17, 1995.
(D) Director's Final Findings and Orders for AK Steel Corporation
(Middletown), International Paper Company (Cincinnati), Midwest Mica &
Insulation Company (Cleveland), Reilly Industries, Inc. (Cleveland),
and Sprayon Products, Inc. (Bedford Heights), Issued by Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency on August 18, 1995.
(E) Permit to Install, Application Number 13-2396, for Excello
Specialty Company, APS Premise Number 1318607686. The date of issuance
is December 11, 1991.
(F) Permit to Install, Application Number 14-2096, for Hilton Davis
Company, APS Premise Number 1431070039. The date of issuance is June
12, 1991.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 96-10131 Filed 4-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P