Approval and Promulgation of Maintenance Plan Revisions; Ohio, 13105-13108 [05-5409]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 52 (Friday, March 18, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13105-13108]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-5409]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52

[R05-OAR-2005-OH-0001; FRL-7886-7]


Approval and Promulgation of Maintenance Plan Revisions; Ohio

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving Ohio's March 1, 2005, submittal of a revision 
to the Clinton County 1-hour ozone maintenance plan. Ohio held a public 
hearing on the submittal on February 8, 2005. This maintenance plan 
revision establishes a new transportation conformity motor vehicle 
emissions budget (MVEB) for the year 2006. EPA is approving the 
allocation of a portion of the safety margin for oxides of nitrogen 
(NOX) to the area's 2006 MVEB for transportation conformity 
purposes. This allocation will still maintain the total emissions for 
the area at or below the attainment level required by the 
transportation conformity regulations. The transportation conformity 
budget for volatile organic compounds will remain the same as 
previously approved in the maintenance plan. In this action, EPA is 
also correcting the codification for a previous approval action for 
Cincinnati, Ohio.

DATES: This rule is effective on May 2, 2005, unless EPA receives 
adverse written comments by April 18, 2005. If EPA receives adverse 
comments, 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: Submit comments, identified by Regional Material in EDocket 
(RME) ID No. R05-OAR-2005-OH-0001, by one of the following methods: 
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions for submitting comments. Agency Web site: https://
docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. Regional RME, EPA's electronic public docket 
and comments system, is EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. 
Once in the system, select ``quick search,'' then key in the 
appropriate RME Docket identification number. Follow the on-line 
instructions for submitting comments.
    E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov.
    Fax: (312) 886-5824.
    Mail: You may send written comments to: John M. Mooney, Chief, 
Criteria Pollutant Section, (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    Hand delivery: Deliver your comments to: John M. Mooney, Chief, 
Criteria Pollutant Section, (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 18th floor, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604.
    Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's 
normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of 
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding 
Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to RME ID No. R05-OAR-2005-OH-
0001. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in 
the public docket without change, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through RME, regulations.gov, 
or e-mail. The EPA RME Web site and the Federal regulations.gov Web 
site are ``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know 
your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body 
of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through RME or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting 
comments, go to Section I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 
the related proposed rule which is published in the Proposed Rules 
section of this Federal Register.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
RME index at https://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/.

[[Page 13106]]

Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly 
available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Publicly available docket materials are 
available either electronically in RME or in hard copy at Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. We recommend that you 
telephone Patricia Morris, Environmental Scientist, at (312) 353-8656 
before visiting the Region 5 office. This Facility is open from 8:30 
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Morris, Environmental 
Scientist, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
EPA Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 
353-8656, morris.patricia@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Does This Action Apply to Me?
    B. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related 
Information?
    C. How and To Whom Do I Submit Comments?
II. Background
    A. When Did Ohio Hold a Public Hearing and Officially Submit the 
Revision Request?
    B. What Change Is Ohio Requesting?
III. Transportation Conformity Budgets
    A. What Are Transportation Conformity Budgets?
    B. What Is a Safety Margin?
    C. How Does This Action Change the Maintenance Plan?
    D. Why Is This Request Approvable?
IV. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Review

I. General Information

A. Does This Action Apply to Me?

    This action is rulemaking on a non-regulatory planning document 
intended to ensure the maintenance of air quality in Clinton County, 
Ohio. This action changes the MVEB used for transportation conformity.

B. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?

    1. The Regional Office has established an electronic public 
rulemaking file available for inspection at RME under ID No. R05-OAR-
2005-OH-0001, and a hard copy file which is available for inspection at 
the Regional Office. The official public file consists of the documents 
specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, 
and other information related to this action. Although a part of the 
official docket, the public rulemaking file does not include CBI or 
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The 
official public rulemaking file is the collection of materials that is 
available for public viewing at the Air Programs Branch, Air and 
Radiation Division, EPA Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604. EPA requests that, if at all possible, you contact the 
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of 
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding 
Federal holidays.
    2. Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document 
electronically through the regulations.gov Web site located at https://
www.regulations.gov where you can find, review, and submit comments on 
Federal rules that have been published in the Federal Register, the 
Government's legal newspaper, and that are open for comment.
    For public commenters, it is important to note that EPA's policy is 
that public comments, whether submitted electronically or in paper, 
will be made available for public viewing at the EPA Regional Office, 
as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains 
copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing 
copyrighted material, EPA will provide a reference to that material in 
the version of the comment that is placed in the official public 
rulemaking file. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted 
material, will be available at the Regional Office for public 
inspection.

C. How and To Whom Do I Submit Comments?

    You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand 
delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the 
appropriate rulemaking identification number by including the text 
``Public comment on proposed rulemaking Region 5 Air Docket R05-OAR-
2005-OH-0001'' in the subject line on the first page of your comment. 
Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified 
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period 
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late 
comments.
    For detailed instructions on submitting public comments and on what 
to consider as you prepare your comments see the ADDRESSES section and 
the section I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of the related 
proposed rule which is published in the proposed rules section of this 
Federal Register.

II. Background

A. When Did Ohio Hold a Public Hearing and Officially Submit the 
Revision Request?

    Ohio held a public hearing on the State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
revision request on February 8, 2005, in Clinton County, Ohio. The 
formal comment period extended from December 30, 2004, until February 
11, 2005. No adverse comments were received. Ohio submitted transcripts 
of the public hearing and copies of the announcement of the 30 day 
public comment period to EPA. Ohio sent a letter dated December 22, 
2004, which requested that EPA initiate review of the draft SIP 
revision and proceed to parallel process the request. The official 
submittal with all documentation including transcripts of the hearing 
were submitted in a letter dated March 1, 2005.

B. What Change Is Ohio Requesting?

    Ohio is requesting a change to the transportation conformity budget 
in the approved 1-hour ozone maintenance plan for Clinton County, Ohio. 
Clinton County is an ozone maintenance area under the 1-hour ozone 
standard. Clinton County is part of the Cincinnati 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment area, however this change only addresses the 1-hour ozone 
maintenance plan. The maintenance plan was approved by EPA on March 21, 
1996, (61 FR 11560).
    In this submittal, Ohio is requesting a change to the 
transportation conformity budget. The approved maintenance plan has a 
``safety margin'' of emissions which can be allocated to the MVEB. The 
requested change only changes the NOX budget for 
transportation conformity.

III. Transportation Conformity Budgets

A. What Are Transportation Conformity Budgets?

    A transportation conformity budget is the projected level of 
controlled emissions from the transportation sector (mobile sources) 
that is estimated in the SIP. The SIP controls emissions through 
regulations, for example, on fuels and exhaust levels for cars. The 
emissions budget concept is further explained in the preamble to the 
November 24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The 
preamble also describes

[[Page 13107]]

how to establish the MVEB in the SIP and how to revise the emissions 
budget. The transportation conformity rule allows the MVEB to be 
changed as long as the total level of emissions from all sources 
remains below the attainment level.

B. What Is a Safety Margin?

    A ``safety margin'' is the difference between the attainment level 
of emissions (from all sources) and the projected level of emissions 
(from all sources) in the maintenance plan. The attainment level of 
emissions is the level of emissions during one of the years in which 
the area met the air quality health standard. For example: Clinton 
County first attained the one hour ozone standard during the 1993-1996 
time period. The State uses 1996 as the attainment level of emissions 
for Clinton County. The emissions from point, area and mobile sources 
in 1996 equaled 5.82 tons per day of NOX. The Ohio 
Environmental Protection Agency projected emissions out to the year 
2006 and projected a total of 4.91 tons per day of NOX from 
all sources. The safety margin for the Ohio portion of the Cincinnati 
area is calculated to be the difference between these amounts or 0.91 
tons per day of NOX. Detailed information on the estimated 
emissions from each source category is summarized in the proposed 
approval of the maintenance plan at 61 FR 11560 published on March 21, 
1996. Ohio has requested to allocate 0.2 tons per day of the 
NOX safety margin to the mobile source emission budgets for 
NOX. With the added safety margin in the motor vehicle 
emission estimate for 2006, the total NOX emissions for the 
area continue to be below the 1996 attainment year. Ohio is not asking 
to use the entire safety margin in the maintenance plan. Even with the 
allocation of 0.2 tons per day of NOX to mobile sources, it 
leaves the area with 0.71 tons per day NOX safety margin.
    The emissions are projected to maintain the area's air quality 
consistent with the air quality health standard. The safety margin 
credit can be allocated to the transportation sector. The total 
emission level, even with this allocation will be below the attainment 
level or safety level and thus is acceptable. The safety margin is the 
extra safety points that can be allocated as long as the total level is 
maintained.

C. How Does This Action Change the Maintenance Plan?

    This action changes the budget for mobile sources. The maintenance 
plan is designed to provide 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 emission 
reduction programs. Through the maintenance plan, the State and local 
agencies can manage and maintain air quality while providing for 
growth.
    In the submittal, Ohio requested to allocate a portion of the 
NOX safely margin to the 2006 MVEB. The VOC MVEB will remain 
the same as approved and only the NOX budget is requested to 
change. The NOX MVEB will change from 3.25 tons of 
NOX to 3.45 tons per day of NOX. This budget 
would be the constraining number for mobile sources and transportation 
conformity. The Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement 
Program for Cincinnati will need to be below the MVEB to demonstrate 
conformity. These requirements are detailed in the transportation 
conformity regulations which were approved as part of the Ohio SIP on 
May 16, 1996 (61 FR 24702) and approved as amended in a Federal 
Register notice dated May 30, 2000 (65 FR 34395).

D. Why Is the Request Approvable?

    The emissions from point, area and mobile sources in 1996 equaled 
5.82 tons per day of NOX. This is the level of emissions 
which allow attainment of the one hour ozone standard. The Ohio 
Environmental Protection Agency projected emissions out to the year 
2006 and projected a total of 4.91 tons per day of NOX from 
all sources in Clinton County, Ohio. The allocation of the safety 
margin will keep the total emissions below the attainment level. Thus, 
the emissions are projected to maintain the area's air quality 
consistent with the air quality health standard. After review of the 
SIP revision request, EPA finds that the allocation of the 0.2 tons per 
day from the safety margin to the 2006 NOX MVEB for the 
Clinton County, Ohio area is approvable because the new MVEB for 
NOX will maintain the total emissions at or below the 
attainment year inventory level as required by the transportation 
conformity regulations.

IV. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    EPA is approving Ohio's March 1, 2005, submittal of a revision to 
the Clinton County 1-Hour ozone maintenance plan establishing a new 
transportation conformity MVEB for the year 2006. EPA is approving the 
allocation of a portion of the NOX safety margin to the 
area's 2006 MVEB for transportation conformity purposes. This 
allocation will still maintain the total emissions for the area at or 
below the attainment level required by the transportation conformity 
regulations. The transportation conformity budget for volatile organic 
compounds will remain the same as previously approved in the 
maintenance plan.
    For convenience, EPA is also using this rulemaking to correct the 
codification of its prior approval of the revision to the ozone 
maintenance plan for the Cincinnati, Ohio area. In our July 20, 2004, 
approval at 69 FR 43322, the revision was incorrectly added into 40 CFR 
52 as paragraph 52.1885(b)(12). EPA is amending the codification of 40 
CFR 52 by moving the approved Ohio revision to paragraph 
52.1885(a)(16).
    We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we 
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse 
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal 
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will 
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse 
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective May 2, 2005, 
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written 
comments by April 18, 2005. If we receive such comments, we will 
withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a 
subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public 
comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule 
based on the proposed action. The EPA will not institute a second 
comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action 
should do so at this time. If we do not receive any comments, this 
action will be effective May 2, 2005.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Executive Order 12866; Regulatory Planning and Review

    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.

Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 
Distribution, or Use

    Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action 
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

[[Page 13108]]

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    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.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    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 (Pub. L. 104-4).

Executive Order 13175 Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal 
Governments

    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
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 (59 
FR 22951, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order 13132 Federalism

    This action also does not have federalism implications because it 
does not 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). This action 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.

Executive Order 13045 Protection of Children From Environmental Health 
and Safety Risks

    This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    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.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    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.).

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. 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. 
804(2).
    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 May 17, 2005. 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, Intergovernmental 
relations, Volatile organic compounds, Ozone.

    Dated: March 7, 2005.
Norman Niedergang,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

0
Part 52, Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart KK--Ohio

0
2. Section 52.1885 is amended by removing paragraph (b)(12) and by 
adding paragraphs (a)(16) and (17) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.1885  Control Strategy: Ozone.

    (a) * * *
    (16) Approval--On April 19, 2004, Ohio submitted a revision to the 
ozone maintenance plan for the Cincinnati, Ohio area. The revision 
consists of allocating a portion of the area's NOX safety 
margin to the transportation conformity motor vehicle emissions budget. 
The motor vehicle emissions budget for NOX for the 
Cincinnati, Ohio area is now 62.3 tons per day for the year 2010. This 
approval only changes the NOX transportation conformity 
emission budget for Cincinnati, Ohio.
    (17) Approval--On March 1, 2005, Ohio submitted a revision to the 
1-hour ozone maintenance plan for Clinton County, Ohio. The revision 
consists of allocating a portion of the area's oxides of nitrogen 
(NOX) safety margin to the transportation conformity motor 
vehicle emissions budget. The motor vehicle emissions budget for 
NOX for the Clinton County, Ohio area is now 3.45 tons per 
day for the year 2006. This approval only changes the NOX 
transportation conformity emission budget for Clinton County, Ohio.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-5409 Filed 3-17-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P