[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 5 (Thursday, January 8, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1060-1063]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-433]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OH111-1a; FRL-5947-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Maintenance Plan Revision; Ohio

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is 
approving through ``direct final'' procedure, an October 20, 1997, 
request from Ohio, for a State Implementation Plan (SIP) maintenance 
plan revision for the Jefferson County ozone maintenance area. The 
maintenance plan revision is allocating to the mobile source emission 
budget for transportation conformity purposes a portion of the existing 
safety margin. 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 March 9, 1998, unless 
USEPA receives significant written adverse or critical comments by 
February 9, 1998. 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 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

[[Page 1061]]

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 of emissions 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 USEPA approval of the 
maintenance plan established the mobile source budget for 
transportation conformity purposes.
    The preamble to the November 24, 1993, transportation conformity 
rule (58 FR 62188) explains the emissions budget concept. 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 accomodate 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 Submittal

    On October 20, 1997, Ohio submitted to the USEPA a SIP revision 
request for the Jefferson County area maintenance plan. A public 
hearing for the area was held on October 14, 1997. Documentation on the 
public hearing was submitted to the USEPA in order to complete the SIP 
revision request.
    Ohio has requested to allocate to the Jefferson County mobile 
source budget part of the reductions achieved between the 1990 
attainment inventory year and the 2005 projected emissions inventory 
(4.4 tons/day Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) existing safety margin, 
and 39.4 tons/day Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) existing safety 
margin, as described in 59 FR 48395; September 21, 1994). The SIP 
revision requests the allocation of 1.0 ton/day VOC, and 1.0 ton/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, Jefferson County           
                                                   [Tons/day]                                                   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Source category                                   1990         1996         2005   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  VOC Emissions                                                 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point....................................................................          1.1          1.2          1.3
Mobile (on-road).........................................................          8.5          4.9          4.1
Area.....................................................................          6.5          6.4          6.3
                                                                          --------------------------------------
      Totals.............................................................         16.1         12.5        11.7 
Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 4.4 tons/day VOC                                   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  NOX Emissions                                                 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point....................................................................          378          376          340
Mobile (on-road).........................................................          4.7          4.1          3.4
Area.....................................................................          2.7          2.7          2.6
                                                                          --------------------------------------
      Totals.............................................................        385.4        382.8       346.0 
Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 39.4 tons/day NOX                                  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


            Table 2.--Allocation of Safety Margin to the 2005 Mobile Source Budget, Jefferson County            
                                                   [Tons/day]                                                   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                             Source category                                   1990         1996         2005   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  VOC Emissions                                                 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point....................................................................          1.1          1.2          1.3
Mobile (on-road).........................................................          8.5          4.9          5.1
Area.....................................................................          6.5          6.4          6.3
                                                                          --------------------------------------
      Totals.............................................................         16.1         12.5        12.7 
Remaining Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 3.4 tons/day VOC                         
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  NOX Emissions                                                 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point....................................................................          378          376          340
Mobile (on-road).........................................................          4.7          4.1          4.4
Area.....................................................................          2.7          2.7          2.6
                                                                          --------------------------------------
      Totals.............................................................        385.4        382.8       347.0 
Remaining Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions--2005 total emissions = 38.4 tons/day VOC.                       
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 1062]]

    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 Jefferson 
County 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.
    The USEPA's review of the SIP revision request finds that the 
requested allocation of the safety margins for the Jefferson County 
area is approvable since the approval of the new mobile source 
emissions budget 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 Jefferson County area. This action 
will be effective on March 9, 1998 unless, by February 9, 1998, 
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 March 9, 1998.

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.

C. Regulatory Flexibility

    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 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., 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 sec. 5 U.S.C. 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 sec. 5 
U.S.C. 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 March 9, 1998. 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: December 24, 1997.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region V.
    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 et seq.

Subpart KK--Ohio

    2. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (a)(7) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 52.1885  Control Strategy: Ozone

    (a) * * *

[[Page 1063]]

    (7) Approval--On October 20, 1997, Ohio submitted a revision to the 
maintenance plan for the Jefferson County area. The revision consists 
of an allocation of a portion of the safety margin in the area to the 
transportation conformity mobile source budget for that area. The 
mobile source budget for transportation conformity purposes for 
Jefferson County are now: 5.1 tons per day of volatile organic compound 
emissions for the year 2005 and 4.4 tons per day of oxides of nitrogen 
emissions for the year 2005.

[FR Doc. 98-433 Filed 1-7-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P