Federal Register, Volume 62 Issue 164 (Monday, August 25, 1997)

[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 164 (Monday, August 25, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44903-44907]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-22067]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OH104-1A; FRL-5877-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Maintenance Plan Revisions; Ohio

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is
approving through ``direct final'' procedure, a June 10, 1997, request
from Ohio, for State Implementation Plan (SIP) maintenance plan
revisions for the following areas: Toledo area (including Lucas and
Wood counties), the Cleveland-Akron-Lorain area (including Lorain,
Cuyahoga, Lake, Ashtabula, Geauga, Medina, Summit and Portage
counties), and the Dayton-Springfield area (including Montgomery,
Clark, Greene, and Miami counties). The maintenance plan revisions are
allocating to the mobile source emission budget for transportation
conformity a portion of the existing ``Safety Margins.'' The safety
margin is the difference between the attainment inventory level of the
total emissions and the projected levels of the total emissions in the
final year of the maintenance plan.

DATES: This ``direct final'' rule is effective on October 24, 1997,
unless USEPA receives significant written adverse or critical comments
(which have not already been addressed) by September 24, 1997. If the
effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the
Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are
available for inspection during normal business hours at the following
location: Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch, (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604. Please contact Scott Hamilton at
(312) 353-4775 before visiting the Region 5 office.
Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch, (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois, 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Hamilton, Environmental
Scientist, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-4775.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Clean Air Act in section 176(c) requires conformity of
activities to an implementation plan's purpose of attaining and
maintaining the National ambient air quality standards. On November 24,
1993, the USEPA promulgated a final rule establishing criteria and
procedures for determining

[[Page 44904]]

conformity of transportation plans, programs and projects funded or
approved under Title 23 U.S.C. of the Federal Transit Act. The State of
Ohio finalized and adopted State transportation conformity rules on
August 1, 1995, the rules became effective August 21, 1995, and Ohio
submitted the rules as a SIP revision request on August 17, 1995. The
rules were approved by the USEPA on July 15, 1996 (61 FR 24702).
The transportation conformity rules require, among other things, a
comparison to the mobile source emissions budget established by a
control strategy SIP. A control strategy SIP is defined by the
conformity rules to be a maintenance plan, an attainment demonstration,
or a rate of progress plan. The Toledo area, Dayton/Springfield area,
and Cleveland/Akron/Lorain area in Ohio are all maintenance areas with
approved maintenance plans. The USEPA approval of the maintenance plans
established the mobile source budget for transportation conformity
purposes.
In the preamble to the November 24, 1993, transportation conformity
rule (58 FR 62188) the emissions budget concept is explained. The
preamble also describes how to establish the motor vehicle emissions
budget in the SIP and how to revise the emissions budget. The State
transportation conformity rule at 3745-101-16 of the Ohio
Administrative Code allows the mobile source emissions budget to be
changed as long as the total level of emissions from all sources remain
below the milestone level. In the case of a maintenance plan the
milestone level is the attainment level established in the maintenance
plan.
The maintenance plan is designed to plan for future growth while
still maintaining the ozone air quality standard. Growth in industries,
population and traffic is offset with reductions from cleaner cars and
other emissions reduction programs. Through the maintenance plan the
State and local agencies can manage the air quality while providing for
growth.

II. Evaluation of the State Submittals

On June 10, 1997, Ohio submitted to the USEPA SIP revision requests
for the Toledo area (including Lucas and Wood counties), the Cleveland-
Akron-Lorain area (including Lorain, Cuyahoga, Lake, Ashtabula, Geauga,
Medina, Summit and Portage counties), and the Dayton-Springfield area
(including Montgomery, Clark, Greene, and Miami counties). Public
hearings for the Cleveland-Akron-Lorain area and the Dayton-Springfield
area regarding these issues were held on June 3, 1997. A public hearing
for the Toledo area was held on July 3, 1997. Documentation on the
public hearings were submitted to complete the SIP revision requests.

(1) Toledo SIP Revision

Ohio has requested to allocate to the Toledo mobile source budget
part of the reductions achieved between the 1990 attainment inventory
year and the 2005 projected emissions inventory (57.338 tons/day
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) existing safety margin, and 46.38
tons/day Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) existing safety margin, as
described in 60 FR 21456 and 60 FR 21490; May 2, 1995). The SIP
revision requests the allocation of 6.0 tons/day VOC, and 10.5 tons/day
NOx, into the area's mobile source budget from the existing
safety margin. Table 1 illustrates the approved emissions budgets for
VOC and NOx from point, mobile (on-road) and area sources.
The safety margin allocations are shown in table 2.

Table 1.--NOx and VOC Emissions Budget; and Safety Margin Determinations, Toledo
[Tons/day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 1990 1996 2000 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions:
Point................................................... 60.08 39.49 39.31 38.87
Mobile (on-road)........................................ 66.33 51.28 41.25 \1\ 29.85
Area.................................................... 37.25 37.35 37.56 37.60
---------------------------------------------------
Totals................................................ 163.66 128.12 118.12 106.32

Safety Margin=1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions=57.34 tons/day VOC.

NOx Emissions:
Point................................................... 73.97 73.40 40.15 40.69
Mobile (on-road)........................................ 37.82 32.56 29.06 24.69
Area.................................................... 10.26 10.27 10.28 10.29
---------------------------------------------------
Totals................................................ 122.05 116.23 79.49 75.67

Safety Margin=1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions=46.38 tons/day NOx
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On May 2, 1995, the USEPA approved the addition of 1.142 tons/day VOC of the existing ``safety margin'' into
the year 2005 VOC mobile source budget for purposes of conformity. (60 FR 21458; May 2, 1995)

Table 2.--Allocation of Safety Margin to the 2005 Mobile Source Budget, Toledo
[Tons/day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 1990 1996 2000 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions:
Point................................................... 60.08 39.49 39.31 38.87
Mobile (on-road)........................................ 66.33 51.28 41.25 35.85
Area.................................................... 37.25 37.35 37.56 37.60
---------------------------------------------------
Totals................................................ 163.66 128.12 118.12 112.32

Remaining Safety Margin=1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions=51.34 tons/day VOC.

NOx Emissions:
Point................................................... 73.97 73.40 40.15 40.69
Mobile (on-road)........................................ 37.82 32.56 29.06 35.19

[[Page 44905]]

Area.................................................... 10.26 10.27 10.28 10.29
---------------------------------------------------
Totals................................................ 122.05 116.23 79.49 86.17
Remaining Safety Margin=1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions=35.88 tons/day NOx.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 2 illustrates that the requested portion of the safety margin
can be allocated to the mobile source budget and still remain at or
below the 1990 attainment level of total emissions for the Toledo area.
This allocation is allowed by the conformity rule since the area would
still be at or below the 1990 attainment level for the total emissions
in the area.

(2) Cleveland-Akron-Lorain SIP Revision

Ohio has requested to allocate to the Cleveland-Akron-Lorain mobile
source budget, part of the reduction achieved between the 1993
attainment inventory year and the 2006 projected emissions inventory
(120.2 tons/day VOC existing safety margin, and 41.5 tons/day
NOX existing safety margin, as described in 61 FR 20458; May
7, 1996). The SIP revision requests the allocation of 33.9 tons/day
VOC, and 29.0 tons/day NOX, into the area's mobile source
budget. Table 3 illustrates the approved emissions budgets for VOC and
NOX from point, mobile (on-road) and area sources. The
safety margin allocations are shown in table 4.

Table 3.--Summary of NOX and VOC Emissions Budget; and Safety Margin Determinations, Cleveland/Akron/Lorain
[Tons/day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 1990 1993 1996 2000 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions:
Point................................. 82.22 75.75 78.55 82.44 88.63
Mobile (on-road)...................... 248.4 181.4 131.2 78.4 48.8
Area.................................. 201.05 201.37 201.45 201.63 200.86
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals.............................. 531.7 458.5 411.2 362.5 338.3

Safety Margin=1993 total emissions--2006 total emissions=120.2 tons/day VOC.

NOX Emissions:
Point................................. 245.59 254.61 263.91 277.05 298.00
Mobile (on-road)...................... 176.6 159.9 142.2 95.5 75.4
Area.................................. 80.46 80.56 80.51 80.61 80.18
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals.............................. 502.6 495.1 486.6 453.2 453.6

Safety Margin=1993 total emissions--2006 total emissions=41.5 tons/day NOX.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 4.--Allocation of VOC Emissions to the 2006 Mobile Source Budget, Cleveland/Akron/Lorain
[Tons/day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 1990 1993 1996 2000 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions:
Point................................. 82.22 75.75 78.55 82.44 88.63
Mobile (on-road)...................... 248.4 181.4 131.2 78.4 82.7
Area.................................. 201.05 201.37 201.45 201.63 200.86
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals.............................. 531.7 458.5 411.2 362.5 372.2

Remaining Safety Margin=1993 total emissions--2006 total emissions=86.3 tons/day VOC.

NOX Emissions:
Point................................. 245.59 254.61 263.91 277.05 298.00
Mobile (on-road)...................... 176.6 159.9 142.2 95.5 104.4
Area.................................. 80.46 80.56 80.51 80.61 80.18
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals.............................. 502.6 495.1 486.6 453.2 482.6

Remaining Safety Margin=1993 total emissions--2006 total emissions=12.5 tons/day NOX.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tables 3 and 4 illustrate that the SIP revision request can be
granted to allocate a portion of the safety margin to the mobile source
budget and still remain at or below the 1993 attainment year inventory
total for the Cleveland/Akron/Lorain area. This allocation is allowed
by the conformity rule since the area would still be at or below the
1993 attainment level for the total emissions in the area.

[[Page 44906]]

(3) Dayton-Springfield SIP Revision

Ohio has requested to allocate to the Dayton-Springfield mobile
source budget, the reduction achieved between the 1990 attainment
inventory year and the 2005 projected emissions inventory (2.4 tons/day
VOC existing safety margin, as described in 60 FR 22289; May 5, 1995).
The SIP revision requests the allocation of the 2.4 tons/day VOC safety
margin into the area's mobile source budget. Table 5 illustrates the
approved emissions budgets for VOC from point, mobile (on-road) and
area sources. The safety margin allocations are shown in table 6.

Table 5.--VOC Emissions Budget; and Safety Margin Determinations, Dayton-Springfield
[Tons/day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 1990 1996 2000 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions:
Point................................................... 37.4 61.6 77.7 97.4
Biogenic................................................ 105.2 105.2 105.2 105.2
Mobile (on-road)........................................ 103.6 45.5 39.4 31.7
Area.................................................... 54.9 58.3 60.6 64.4
---------------------------------------------------
Totals................................................ 301.1 270.6 282.9 298.7

Safety Margin=1990 total emissions-2005 total emissions=2.4 tons/day VOC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 6.--Allocation of VOC Emissions to the 2005 Mobile Source Budget, Dayton-Springfield
[Tons/day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 1990 1996 2000 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions:
Point................................................... 37.4 61.6 77.7 97.4
Biogenic................................................ 105.2 105.2 105.2 105.2
Mobile (on-road)........................................ 103.6 45.5 39.4 34.1
Area.................................................... 54.9 58.3 60.6 64.4
---------------------------------------------------
Totals................................................ 301.1 270.6 282.9 301.1

Remaining Safety Margin=1990 total emissions-2005 total emissions=0.0 tons/day VOC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As illustrated by Tables 5 and 6 the SIP revision requests to
allocate all of the VOC safety margin to the mobile source budget. This
allocation is allowed by the conformity rule since the area would still
be at the 1990 attainment level for the total emissions in the area.
The USEPA's review of the SIP revision requests finds that the
requested allocation of the safety margins for the Toledo, Cleveland/
Akron/Lorain and Dayton/Springfield areas are approvable since the
approval of the new mobile source emissions budgets will keep the total
emissions for the area at or below the attainment year inventory level
as required by the transportation conformity regulations.

III. USEPA Action

The USEPA approves the requested allocation of the safety margin to
the mobile source budget for the Toledo, Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, and
Dayton-Springfield areas. This action will be effective on October 24,
1997 unless, by September 24, 1997, significant written adverse or
critical comments on the approval are received.
If the USEPA receives such written adverse comments, the approval
will be withdrawn before the effective date by publishing a subsequent
rulemaking that will withdraw the final action. All written public
comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on
this action serving as a proposed rule. The USEPA does not plan to
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. If
no such written comments are received, the public is advised that this
action will be effective on October 24, 1997.

IV. Administrative Requirements

(A) Future Requests

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any
SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be considered
separately in light of specific technical, economic, and environmental
factors and in relation to relevant statutory and regulatory
requirements.

(B) Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this regulatory
action from Executive Order 12866 review.

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, the Administrator
certifies that it does not have a significant impact on any small
entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State
relationship under the Act, preparation of a flexibility analysis would
constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of the
State action. The Clean Air Act forbids USEPA to base its actions
concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. USEPA.,

[[Page 44907]]

427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

(D) Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995,
signed into law on March 22, 1995, USEPA must undertake various actions
in association with any proposed or final rule that includes a Federal
mandate that may result in estimated costs to state, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate; or to the private sector, of $100 million
or more. This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under
state or local law, and imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no
additional costs to state, local, or tribal governments, or the private
sector, result from this action.

(E) Audit Privilege and Immunity Law

Nothing in this action should be construed as making any
determination or expressing any position regarding Ohio's audit
privilege and immunity law (Sections 3745.70-3745.73 of the Ohio
Revised Code). U.S. EPA will be reviewing the effect of the Ohio audit
privilege and immunity law on various Ohio environmental programs,
including those under the Clean Air Act, and taking appropriate
action(s), if any, after thorough analysis and opportunity for Ohio to
state and explain its views and positions on the issues raised by the
law. The action taken herein does not express or imply any viewpoint on
the question of whether there are legal deficiencies in this or any
Ohio CAA program resulting from the effect of the audit privilege and
immunity law. As a consequence of the review process, the regulations
subject to the action taken herein may be disapproved, federal approval
for the Clean Air Act program under which they are implemented may be
withdrawn, or other appropriate action may be taken, as necessary.

(F) Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

Under section 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, USEPA submitted a report
containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller General of the
General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's
Federal Register. This rule is not a major rule as defined by section
804(2).

(G) Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by October 24, 1997. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Nitrogen Oxides, Transportation
conformity.

Dated: August 8, 1997.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart KK--Ohio

2. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(6) to read as
follows:

Sec. 52.1885 Control strategy: Ozone.

(a) * * *
(6) Approval--On June 10, 1997, Ohio submitted revisions to the
maintenance plans for the Toledo area (including Lucas and Wood
counties), the Cleveland/Akron/Lorain area (including Lorain, Cuyahoga,
Lake, Ashtabula, Geauga, Medina, Summit and Portage counties), and the
Dayton-Springfield area (including Montgomery, Clark, Greene, and Miami
counties). The revisions consist of an allocation of a portion of the
safety margin in each area to the transportation conformity mobile
source budget for that area. The mobile source budgets for
transportation conformity purposes for Toledo are now: 35.85 tons per
day of volatile organic compound emissions for the year 2005 and 35.19
tons per day of oxides of nitrogen emissions for the year 2005. The
mobile source budgets for transportation conformity purposes for
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain are now: 82.7 tons per day of volatile organic
compound emissions for the year 2006 and 104.4 tons per day of oxides
of nitrogen emissions for the year 2006. For the Dayton-Springfield
area, the oxides of nitrogen mobile source budget remains the same and
the mobile source budget for volatile organic compounds is now 34.1
tons per day.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 97-22067 Filed 8-22-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P