[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 12, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31552-31554]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14608]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OH140-1a; FRL-6991-9]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; OH

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving revisions to sulfur dioxide 
(SO2) emissions regulations for the Lubrizol Corporation 
(Lubrizol). This facility is located in Lake County, Ohio. The Ohio 
Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) submitted Director's Final 
Findings and Orders (Orders) for the Lubrizol facility on November 9, 
2000. These Orders are revisions to the Ohio State Implementation Plan 
(SIP). The revisions are the adjustment of six short-term emissions 
limits, the addition of an annual emissions limit, and the addition of 
a continuous emission rate monitoring system (CERMS) requirement for 
the Lubrizol facility. Three short-term emissions limits are relaxed 
and three short-term are tightened. There is no increase in the total 
potential short-term SO2 emissions.

DATES: This rule is effective on August 13, 2001, unless the EPA 
receives relevant adverse written comments by July 12, 2001. If adverse 
comment is received, the EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the 
rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will 
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: You should mail written comments 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.
    You may inspect copies of Ohio's submittal at: 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: Matt Rau, Environmental Engineer, 
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, Illinois 60604, Telephone Number: (312) 886-6524, E-Mail 
Address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' are used we mean the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What is the EPA approving?
II. Limit changes from the current rules.
III. Analysis of supporting materials provided by Ohio.
IV. What are the environmental effects of these actions?
V. EPA rulemaking actions.
VI. Administrative requirements.

I. What Is the EPA Approving?

    The EPA is approving revisions to the sulfur dioxide emissions 
regulations for the Lubrizol facility in Lake County, Ohio. Ohio EPA 
submitted the revised regulation on November 9, 2000, as an amendment 
to its SIP.
    The revisions include the relaxation of three short-term 
SO2 emissions limits and the tightening of three short-term 
limits. There is no increase in the total potential short-term 
SO2 emissions. An annual SO2 emissions limit is 
established. Also, a continuous emission rate monitoring system is 
required.

II. Limit Changes From the Current Rules

    Ohio has revised six short-term emissions limits at Lubrizol's 
Painesville facility. The limit change for source L (Source ID P011) is 
from 12.6 to 2.4 pounds of sulfur dioxide per hour (lb/hr). Source M 
(P012) changes from 15.0 to 160.0 lb/hr, source N (P013) changes from 
23.5 to 25.0 lb/hr, source O changes from 14.5 to 10.0 lb/hr, source W 
(P022) changes from 163.5 to 20.0 lb/hr, and the limit for source AC 
(P030) changes from 18.4 to 30.0 lb/hr. The total emissions limit of 
the six sources remains at approximately 247.4 lb/hr. All six sources 
vent through incinerators to a common stack.
    An annual sulfur dioxide emissions limit of 100 tons per year (TPY) 
is established. Previously, the facility's potential to emit sulfur 
dioxide was 1084 TPY. A continuous emission rate monitoring system 
(CERMS) is required at the facility. The CERMS measures

[[Page 31553]]

SO2 in the common stack. Lubrizol will keep records of the 
CERMS data including the instantaneous (one-minute), hourly, and 
rolling three-hour average SO2 concentration.

III. Analysis of Supporting Materials Provided by Ohio

    The general criteria used by the EPA to evaluate such intra-
facility emissions trades, or ``bubbles,'' under the Clean Air Act and 
applicable regulations are set out in the EPA's, December 4, 1986 
Emissions Trading Policy Statement (ETPS) (see 51 FR 43814). The short-
term emissions trade at Lubrizol's Painesville facility qualifies as a 
Level I trade. This trade meets the six criteria in the ETPS. All six 
processes involved in this trade of short-term limits vent through a 
common stack. The maximum SO2 emissions limit from the 
common stack remains at approximately 247.4 lb/hr. Following the Level 
I trade guidance, it is assumed that this emissions trade will produce 
``ambient equivalence'', which is an equal effect on area air quality.
    The Ohio EPA Orders also add an annual SO2 limit of 100 
TPY for the facility and require a continuous emission rate monitoring 
system. Without an annual limit, Lubrizol has the potential to emit 
1084 TPY of sulfur dioxide. These requirements provide additional 
protection of human health and the environment.

IV. What Are the Environmental Effects of These Actions?

    Sulfur dioxide causes breathing difficulties and aggravation of 
existing cardiovascular disease. It is also a precursor of acid rain 
and fine particulate matter formation. Sulfur dioxide causes the loss 
of chloroform leading to vegetation damage. These SIP revisions should 
not result in an increase in short-term SO2 emissions from 
the Lubrizol facility. The addition of an annual limit enhances air 
quality protection.

V. EPA Rulemaking Actions

    The EPA is approving, though direct final rulemaking, revisions to 
the SO2 emissions regulations for the Lubrizol Corporation 
facility in Lake County, Ohio.
    The SIP revisions include the relaxation of three short-term 
SO2 emissions limits and the tightening of three short-term 
limits. There is no increase in the total potential short-term 
SO2 emissions. It remains at approximately 247.4 lb/hr. An 
annual SO2 emissions limit of 100 TPY is established. Also, 
a continuous emission rate monitoring system is required. The CERMS 
records the instantaneous (one-minute), hourly, and rolling three-hour 
average SO2 concentration. Lubrizol will keep its records 
for five years.
    We are publishing this action without a prior proposal because we 
view these as noncontroversial revisions and anticipate no adverse 
comments. However, in the ``Proposed Rules'' section of today's Federal 
Register, we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the 
proposal to approve the SIP revision if adverse comments are filed. 
This rule will be effective on August 13, 2001, without further notice 
unless we receive relevant adverse written comment by July 12, 2001. If 
the EPA receives adverse comment, we will publish a final rule 
informing the public that this rule will not take effect. We will 
address all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the 
proposed rule. The EPA does not intend to institute a second comment 
period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on these 
actions must do so at this time.

VI. Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. This action 
merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). This rule also does not 
have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the 
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on 
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it have substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified 
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it 
merely approves a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does 
not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is 
not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 
because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 
of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing 
this rule, EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate drafting 
errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and provide a 
clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied with 
Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining the 
takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney 
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and 
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order. 
This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et 
seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 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. EPA 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. A major rule 
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
section 804(2). This rule will be effective August 13, 2001

[[Page 31554]]

unless EPA receives adverse written comments by July 12, 2001.
    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 August 13, 2001. 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, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Sulfur oxides.

    Dated: May 18, 2001.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, 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 52.1870 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(124) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.1870  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (124) On November 9, 2000, Ohio submitted Director's Final Findings 
and Orders revising sulfur dioxide emissions regulations for the 
Lubrizol Corporation facility in Lake County, Ohio. The revisions 
include the adjustment of six short-term emissions limits, the addition 
of an annual emissions limit, and the addition of a continuous 
emissions monitoring system (CEMS). These state implementation plan 
revisions do not increase allowable sulfur dioxide emissions.
    (i) Incorporated by reference.
    Emissions limits for the Lubrizol Corporation facility in Lake 
County contained in Director's Final Findings and Orders. The orders 
were effective on November 2, 2000 and entered in the Director's 
Journal on November 9, 2000.

[FR Doc. 01-14608 Filed 6-11-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P