[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 160 (Wednesday, August 19, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44399-44401]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-22337]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OH117-1; FRL-6147-9]


Approval and Promulgation of Maintenance Plan Revisions; Ohio

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is 
finalizing a June 18, 1998, proposal to approve an Ohio State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to remove the air quality triggers 
from the Dayton-Springfield (Montgomery, Clark, Greene, and Miami 
Counties), Ohio maintenance area contingency plan.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action will be effective on August 19, 1998.

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 William Jones at (312) 886-6058 before visiting the 
Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William Jones, 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) 886-6058.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Since the initial Clean Air Act (CAA) attainment status 
designations were made, the Dayton-Springfield area has attained the 
one hour ozone standard and has been redesignated to attainment status 
for ozone. As a requirement of being redesignated to attainment status, 
the area developed a maintenance plan. The purpose of the maintenance 
plan is to assure maintenance of the one hour ozone National Ambient 
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for at least ten years.
    The area's maintenance plan included contingency provisions. The 
contingency provisions are intended to identify and correct violations 
of the one hour ozone NAAQS in a timely fashion. Triggers are included 
in the contingency provisions to identify the need to implement 
measures and correct air quality problems until such time as a revised 
maintenance or attainment plan could be developed to address the level 
of the air quality problem. Triggering events in the contingency plans 
could be linked to ozone air quality and/or an emission level of ozone 
precursors.
    USEPA approved the Dayton-Springfield ozone maintenance plan in the 
Federal Register on May 5, 1995 (60 FR 22289).

II. One Hour Ozone Standard Revocation

    On July 18, 1997, USEPA approved a revision to the NAAQS for ozone 
which changed the standard from 0.12 parts per million (ppm) averaged 
over one hour, to 0.08 ppm, averaged over eight hours. The USEPA is 
revoking the one hour standard in separate rulemakings based on an 
area's attainment of the one hour ozone standard. The first round of 
revocations was for areas attaining the one hour standard based on 
quality assured air monitoring data for the years 1994-1996. The second 
round of one hour ozone standard revocations was for areas attaining 
the one hour standard based on quality assured air monitoring data for 
the years 1995-1997. USEPA intends to publish rulemakings on an annual 
basis revoking the one hour ozone standard for additional areas that 
come into attainment of the one hour standard.
    On July 22, 1998, USEPA published a final rule (63 FR 39432) in the 
Federal Register revoking the one hour ozone standard in areas 
attaining the one hour standard based on quality assured air monitoring 
data for the years 1995-1997. In that action, USEPA revoked the one 
hour ozone standard in the Dayton-Springfield, Ohio ozone maintenance 
area, effective July 22, 1998.
    On July 16, 1997, President Clinton issued a directive to 
Administrator Browner on implementation of the new ozone standard, as 
well as the current one hour ozone standard (62 FR 38421). In that 
directive the President laid out a plan on how the new ozone and 
particulate matter standards, as well as the current one hour standard, 
are to be implemented. A December 29, 1997 memorandum entitled 
``Guidance for Implementing the 1-Hour and Pre-Existing PM10 NAAQS,'' 
signed by Richard D. Wilson, USEPA's Acting Assistant Administrator for 
Air and Radiation, reflected that directive. The purpose of the 
guidance set forth in the memorandum is to ensure that the momentum 
gained by States to attain the one hour ozone NAAQS was not lost when 
moving toward implementing the eight hour ozone NAAQS.
    The guidance document explains that maintenance plans will remain 
in effect for areas where the one hour standard is revoked; however, 
those maintenance plans may be revised to withdraw certain contingency 
measure provisions that have not been triggered or implemented prior to 
USEPA's determination of attainment and revocation. Where the 
contingency measure is linked to the one hour ozone standard or air 
quality ozone concentrations, the measures may be removed from the 
maintenance plan. Measures linked to non-air quality elements, such as 
emissions increases or vehicle miles traveled, may be removed if the 
State demonstrates that removing the measure will not affect an area's 
ability to attain the eight hour ozone standard.
    In other words, after the one hour standard is revoked for an area, 
USEPA believes it is permissible to withdraw contingency measures 
designed to correct violations of that standard. Since such measures 
were designed to address future violations of a standard that no longer 
exists, it is no longer necessary to retain them. Furthermore, USEPA 
believes that future attainment and maintenance planning efforts should 
be directed toward attaining the eight hour ozone NAAQS. As part of the 
implementation of the eight hour ozone standard, the State's ozone air 
quality will be evaluated and eight hour attainment and nonattainment 
designations will be made.

III. Review of the State Submittal

    In a letter from Donald R. Schregardus, Director, Ohio 
Environmental Protection Agency (OEPA) received by USEPA on April 27, 
1998, OEPA officially requested that all air quality triggers be 
deleted from the maintenance plans for the areas in Ohio now attaining 
the one hour ozone standard and where USEPA proposed to revoke the one 
hour standard. In a letter from Robert Hodanbosi, Chief of the Division 
of Air Pollution Control, dated June 11, 1998, OEPA transmitted the 
results of its public hearing held on June 1, 1998. No public comments 
were made at the hearing and no written comments were received.
    The USEPA believes that Ohio's request is consistent with the 
December 29, 1997 guidance document and the

[[Page 44400]]

July 16, 1997 Presidential Directive, and that the request is 
approvable. On June 18, 1998, USEPA proposed to approve Ohio's request 
to remove the air quality triggers from the Dayton-Springfield, Ohio 
maintenance plan. On July 22, 1998, USEPA revoked the one hour ozone 
standard in the Dayton-Springfield area.

IV. Public Comments on the Proposed Rulemaking

    The public comment period on USEPA's June 18, 1998, proposal to 
approve Ohio's request ended on July 20, 1998. See 63 FR 33314. No 
public comments were received on USEPA's proposed approval.

V. USEPA Final Action

    USEPA is approving in final the maintenance plan revisions to 
remove the air quality triggers in the Dayton-Springfield, Ohio ozone 
maintenance area.

VI. Administrative Procedure Act

    This action will be effective immediately upon publication in the 
Federal Register pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 
553(d) (1) and (3) (APA) for good cause. A delayed effective date is 
unnecessary due to the nature of this action, which removes certain SIP 
measures related to the 1-hour ozone standard, which has been revoked. 
The thirty day delay of the effective date of this action generally 
required by the Administrative Procedure Act is unwarranted in that it 
does not serve the public interest to unnecessarily delay the effective 
date of this action.

VII. Administrative Requirements

(A) Executive Order 12866

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

(B) Executive Order 13045

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045, titled 
``Protection of Children's Health From Environmental Health Risks and 
Safety Risks,'' because it is not an ``economically significant'' 
action under Executive Order 12866.

(C) Regulatory Flexibility

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 
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 small governmental 
jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a 
substantial number of small entities because it does not create any new 
requirements. Therefore, because this Federal SIP approval does not 
create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the 
Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute 
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
Clean Air Act forbids USEPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such 
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (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 the removal of 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). USEPA 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 Clean Air Act 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) Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. USEPA will submit 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 United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a 
``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

(G) Petitions for Judicial Review

    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 October 19, 1998. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for 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.

    Dated: August 11, 1998.
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)(10) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.1885  Control Strategy: Ozone.

    (a) * * *
    (10) Approval--On April 27, 1998, Ohio submitted a revision to 
remove the

[[Page 44401]]

air quality triggers from the ozone maintenance plan for the Dayton-
Springfield, Ohio Area (Miami, Montgomery, Clark, and Greene Counties)
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 98-22337 Filed 8-18-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P