[Federal Register: May 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 83)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 23783-23789]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01my07-19]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0546; FRL-8308-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Ohio SO2 Air Quality
Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve an assortment of rules, submitted
by Ohio on May 16, 2006, setting limits on sulfur dioxide
(SO2) emissions. Most significantly, EPA is proposing to
approve rules for Franklin, Stark and Summit Counties and for one
source in Sandusky County that are currently regulated under limits
that EPA promulgated in 1976 as a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). If
finalized, this action would provide that the entire FIP for
SO2 in Ohio would be superseded by approved State limits.
Consequently, EPA is proposing to rescind the entire FIP. EPA is also
proposing to approve several substantive rule revisions and to approve
numerous Ohio rules that update various company names and unit
identifications. Finally, since this rulemaking resolves the issues
which led a court to remand the designation for a portion of Summit
County to EPA for reconsideration, EPA is proposing to promulgate a
designation of attainment for the presently undesignated portion of
this county.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before May 31, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2007-0546, by one of the following methods:
1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 886-5824.
4. Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information. The Regional Office 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 Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2006-0546. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, 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.
[[Page 23784]]
Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, 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 http://www.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 this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This Facility is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. We
recommend that you telephone John Summerhays at (312) 886-6067 before
visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Summerhays, Criteria Pollutant
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312)
886-6067, summerhays.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This supplementary information section is
arranged as follows:
I. Background
II. Review of Ohio's Submittal
A. General Rules
B. Rules To Replace FIP Rules
C. Additional Substantive Rule Revisions
D. Rules With Only Name Changes or Other Administrative Changes
E. Designation of Summit County
III. What Action Is EPA Taking?
IV. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
Ohio submitted its original State Implementation Plan on January
30, 1972, which EPA partially approved on May 31, 1972, and fully
approved on September 22, 1972. After a court remanded this approval
for EPA to solicit public comments on the rulemaking, Ohio withdrew its
submittal of rules for SO2. In the absence of State rules
for SO2, EPA promulgated a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP)
for SO2 on August 27, 1976, with numerous subsequent
amendments. The FIP provided limits for 55 Ohio counties.
On September 12, 1979, Ohio submitted a plan with limits for
SO2 in all 88 Ohio counties. This plan relied on a set of
rules that included 6 rules governing general provisions such as test
methods and compliance schedules, plus one rule for each of the 88
counties setting emission limits for sources in the county. On January
27, 1981, at 46 FR 8481, EPA approved most of the 6 general rules and
approved rules for parts of 13 counties and all of 61 counties. That
rulemaking action also disapproved rules for Summit County because EPA
concluded that the limits did not provide for attainment. That
rulemaking notice provided further history of regulation of
SO2 emissions in Ohio as of that date.
On April 20, 1982, at 47 FR 16784, EPA approved rules for parts of
3 additional counties and all of another three additional counties. EPA
approved rules for an additional county on June 30, 1982, at 47 FR
28377. EPA approved subsequently submitted Ohio SO2 rules on
May 20, 1988 (at 53 FR 18087), August 23, 1994 (at 59 FR 43290),
October 9, 1996 (at 61 FR 52882), March 30, 1998 (at 63 FR 15091), June
5, 2000 (at 65 FR 35577), January 31, 2002 (at 67 FR 4669), February 2,
2004 (at 69 FR 4856), and January 28, 2005 (at 70 FR 4023).
As a result of these prior rulemakings, EPA has approved State
rules for all sources in 84 of Ohio's 88 counties and for all but one
source in an 85th county. Counties for which sources remain subject to
the FIP include Franklin County (full county), Stark County (full
county), Summit County (full county), and Sandusky County (only for
Martin Marietta). Ohio submitted further rules on May 16, 2006, most
significantly including State rules to replace these Federal rules.
In 1978, EPA designated numerous areas in Ohio as nonattainment for
the SO2 air quality standard. EPA interprets section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990, to require
approval of state regulations rather than promulgation of a FIP as a
prerequisite for redesignation of areas from nonattainment to
attainment. Thus, some of Ohio's prior submittals of state rules to
replace federal rules served in part to satisfy this prerequisite for
redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
As stated in 40 CFR 52.1881(a), ``[w]here USEPA has approved the
State's sulfur dioxide plan, those regulations supersede the federal
sulfur dioxide plan contained in [40 CFR 52.1881(b)] and 40 CFR
52.1882.'' On June 29, 1995, at 60 FR 33915, EPA rescinded numerous
federally promulgated Ohio SO2 rules, observing that the
``superseded rules have no effect and are unenforceable, and thus no
longer need be retained in the CFR.'' On January 28, 2005, at 70 FR
4023, in conjunction with approving State rules for several counties,
EPA rescinded the corresponding federally promulgated rules (where
applicable) that were superseded by these State rules. As a result,
what remains of the federally promulgated rules are the following:
--40 CFR 52.1881 paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(6), providing
definitions and other general provisions,
--40 CFR 52.1881 paragraphs (b)(7) through (b)(10), providing limits
for sources in Franklin, Sandusky (Martin-Marietta only), Stark, and
Summit Counties, respectively, and
--40 CFR 52.1882, providing schedules for compliance with the federally
promulgated limits.
Ohio law requires that the State review its regulations every five
years. Ohio conducted this review and concluded that amendments were
warranted for 4 of its 6 general rules and 40 of its county-specific
rules. Since the regulations remain necessary for the State to continue
to attain the SO2 air quality standards, and since only in a
few cases did information become available warranting a revision to
emission limits, most of the revisions reflect administrative changes
such as updating company names and correcting unit identifications.
Ohio adopted these rules effective January 13, 2006, and submitted them
to USEPA on May 16, 2006.
Ohio currently has no areas designated nonattainment for
SO2. The final area redesignated from
[[Page 23785]]
nonattainment to attainment was in Cuyahoga County, which was
redesignated on January 28, 2005, at 70 FR 4023.
However, a portion of one county, Summit County, has no
designation. As the result of a 1980 remand by the Court of Appeals for
the 6th Circuit, in PPG Industries, Inc. v. Costle (630 F.2d 462), this
area has been undesignated pending EPA's review of modeling analyses
for the area. Such a review is an inherent part of EPA's review of the
adequacy of the rules Ohio submitted regulating SO2
emissions in Summit County. Consequently, in conjunction with
submitting a rule for SO2 emissions in Summit County, Ohio
also requested that EPA reestablish a designation for this area,
requesting that EPA designate this area as attaining the SO2
standard.
In 1981, EPA published multiple rulemaking notices that led to EPA
taking no action on provisions of Ohio SO2 regulations that
provided for compliance on a 30-day average basis. EPA has approved
only a stack test method (reflecting a 3-hour average) and other tests
reflecting averaging times of generally 24 hours or less. On February
11, 1980, at 45 FR 9101, EPA published notice that EPA would
nevertheless give priority to cases in which companies were violating
SO2 limits on a 30-day average basis or exceeding the limit
on any day by more than 50 percent. This policy remains in effect, and
today's rulemaking makes no change with respect to this issue.
II. Review of Ohio's Submittal
On May 16, 2006, Ohio EPA submitted 4 amended general
SO2 rules and 40 county-specific SO2 rules. The
county-specific rules include 4 rules that were submitted to supersede
remaining FIP rules, 4 rules that include substantive revisions to the
limits, and 32 rules which only change company names or unit
identifications or make other such administrative changes. Ohio
supplemented this submittal with an email from William Spires to John
Summerhays dated February 22, 2007, providing supplemental information
regarding a source in Sandusky County and requesting that EPA establish
a designation of attainment for Summit County.
A. General Rules
Ohio submitted revisions to four of its six general SO2
rules: Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) 3745-18-01, 3745-18-02, 3745-18-
03, and 3745-18-06. Rule 3745-18-01, entitled ``Definitions,'' was
modified to update the referencing of test methods in the Code of
Federal Regulations, to retain only a general referencing of methods
adopted by the American Society for Testing and Materials, to update
the Web site from which the Code of Federal Regulations may be
obtained, and to make editorial changes in the referencing of relevant
material. Rule 3745-18-02, entitled ``Ambient air quality standards--
sulfur dioxide,'' was modified only to add a preliminary note referring
readers to Rule 3745-18-01 to find dates for applicable reference
material and to specify which location of 40 CFR part 50 (namely,
Appendix A) contains the test method to be used in assessing ambient
air quality. Rule 3745-18-03, entitled ``Attainment dates and
compliance time schedules,'' was revised to correct several facility
identification numbers and to correct other referencing errors. The
updated Web site in Rule 3745-18-01 is incorrect: Instead of ending
``ecfr'', the Web site ends in ``cfr,'' to read http://www.access.gpo.gov/cfr (or http://www.access.gpo.gov/cfr). However,
this error does not change the stringency of any limits. Indeed, all of
the changes to Rules 3745-18-01, 3745-18-02, and 3745-18-03 may be
considered administrative changes that do not change the substance of
the SIP. EPA believes that all of these revisions are approvable.
Rule 3745-18-06 was revised to add jet engine test stands to a list
of source types that are exempt from the emission limits given in
Ohio's rules for any day that the equipment burns only natural gas. EPA
has approved this exemption as previously worded, on January 28, 2005,
at 70 FR 4023 (see also 69 FR 41336, dated July 8, 2004). The first
listed source type is fuel burning equipment. Thus, this rule revision
may be considered simply a clarification that jet engine test stands
shall have the exemption that fuel burning equipment has. In any case,
the SO2 emissions from burning natural gas from jet engine
test stands is sufficiently low that this combustion need not be
subject to any specific emission regulation. The rule was also subject
to a minor rearrangement. EPA believes this rule is approvable.
B. Rules To Replace FIP Rules
As noted above, FIP rules remain in 4 counties: Franklin, Sandusky
(applicable only to Martin Marietta), Stark, and Summit Counties. Ohio
submitted rules for each of these counties to replace the FIP rules.
For Franklin and Summit Counties, Ohio amended its rules to assure
that all sources with emission limits in the FIP have the same limits
in the State rules. Criteria for EPA's review of these rules are
described in guidance issued from the Director of the Air Quality
Management Division to the Director of Region 5's Air and Radiation
Division on September 28, 1994. This memorandum recommended approving
State rules in place of FIP rules if three criteria are met:
1. That the FIP demonstrated the limits were adequately protective
at the time of promulgation.
2. There is no evidence now that the FIP and associated emission
limits are inadequate to protect the SO2 national ambient
air quality standards.
3. The rules do not relax existing emission limits. EPA believes
that these criteria are satisfied, i.e., that limits were appropriately
demonstrated at the time of FIP promulgation to provide for attainment,
that no subsequent evidence suggests otherwise, and that the State's
rules provide limits that are fully as stringent as the existing FIP
limits. The State rules also establish limits for sources that are not
included either in the FIP rules or in the modeling that demonstrated
that the FIP limits provide for attainment. Therefore, EPA believes
that the rules for Franklin and Summit County may be approved and may
supersede the existing FIP rules.
As noted above, EPA disapproved the State's rules for Summit County
in 1981, stating that modeling evidence indicated that the limits did
not assure attainment. Those rules differed substantially from the FIP
limits and relied on a separate modeling analysis. The prior
disapproval did not in any way indicate inadequacy of the FIP limits to
assure attainment. EPA continues to believe that the FIP limits for
Summit County provide for attainment. Thus, since the State rules have
been modified to reflect the FIP limits, EPA believes the rules now
provide for attainment, and the prior disapproval is moot.
For Stark County, as with Franklin and Summit Counties, the State
amended its rules as necessary for sources regulated under the FIP to
have limits that match those of the FIP. The Stark County rules also
tighten the limits for one source not regulated under the FIP, namely
Canton Drop Forge. Modeling was conducted to assess impacts of this
source and other nearby sources. This modeling used AERMOD, which is
EPA's recommended model for this application. The modeling included
emissions from all significant sources in this portion of Stark County.
The modeling used 1988 to 1992 meteorological data for Akron, and the
modeling considered the potential downwash effects of the buildings of
[[Page 23786]]
Canton Drop Forge and reflected the terrain elevations of the ambient
receptor locations analyzed. Based on its review, EPA finds that this
modeling was properly conducted and finds that the modeling
demonstrates that the State's limits provide for attainment in this
part of Stark County. For the rest of the County, EPA believes that
modeling conducted in support of the FIP continues to represent a
suitable demonstration that the remainder of the County will attain the
standard.
For Sandusky County, only one source, Martin Marietta, remains
subject to FIP rules. The FIP imposes a limit of 15.42 pounds of
SO2 per ton of material input into the lime kiln. Ohio's
Rule 3745-18-78 (E) imposes a limit of 25 pounds per ton of product. A
comparison of these limits requires a comparison of the quantity of
material input to the quantity of lime produced. Ohio notes in its
supplemental submittal that the weight ratio of limestone input to lime
produced is commonly about two to one, and the ratio of total material
input including fuel (coke and/or coal) is significantly higher than
that. Since the FIP limit involves dividing emissions from each kiln by
the larger quantity of input material, the corresponding limit on a per
ton of product basis (i.e. the limit that would allow the same total
emissions from the plant) would be a substantially higher number. In
particular, the FIP limit corresponds to a limit on a per ton of
product basis that is well over two times the number of pounds allowed
on a per ton of input material basis, i.e. well over 30 pounds per ton
of product. Thus, EPA believes that Ohio's limit is significantly more
stringent. Furthermore, the Federal limit sets a limit on the emissions
``from any stack.'' The facility has multiple stacks, and the federal
limit arguably allows 15.42 pounds per ton of material input from each
stack, which would allow several times that much emissions in total.
The state rule avoids this potential confusion by clearly imposing a
limit on total emissions per ton of product. For these reasons, EPA
believes that Ohio's limit may be approved as a replacement for the FIP
limit.
EPA has previously approved Ohio's rule for other sources in
Sandusky County. The amended rule updates the names of three companies
and deletes one source from the rule but makes no substantive changes
in the limits. EPA believes that the full rule is approvable.
C. Additional Substantive Rule Revisions
Two additional rules include substantive revisions to applicable
limits. The first is for Auglaize County. The applicable attainment
demonstration, approved on January 27, 1981 at 46 FR 8481, provides for
emissions above the county's generic limit of 2.6 pounds per million
BTU for several emission points at the Saint Mary's municipal power
plant, but the previously approved rules only authorize emissions above
that generic limit for one unit. Ohio amended its rules to replace a
limit of 6.5 /MM Btu just for boiler number 6 with a limit of
5.9 /MM Btu applicable to both the number 6 and the number 5
boilers. The previously approved attainment demonstration demonstrates
that these limits will provide for attainment, so these amendments are
approvable.
For Cuyahoga County, Ohio amended its rules to incorporate an
additional general emission limit. In the Cuyahoga County rules that
EPA approved in January 2005, Ohio had generally amended the rules to
match the federally promulgated rules for this county. In particular,
Ohio adopted the federally promulgated generic limit for coal-fired
boilers with greater than 350 MM Btu per hour heat input. However, the
State had failed to adopt the federally promulgated generic limit for
coal-fired boilers with heat input between 10 MM Btu and 350 MM Btu per
hour. The rule submitted on May 16, 2006 adds this second generic limit
that applies to smaller boilers. This limit is part of the plan that
has been demonstrated to provide for attainment, and so the addition of
this limit is approvable.
D. Rules With Only Name Changes or Other Administrative Changes
As a result of its periodic rule review, Ohio amended numerous
rules to update company names, to correct various unit identifications,
and to correct typographical errors. In addition to making these types
of amendments in the rules discussed above, Ohio made these types of
revisions to the rules for 34 additional counties. The counties for
which Ohio submitted such rules are Allen, Ashtabula, Athens, Butler,
Champaign, Clark, Erie, Fairfield, Geauga, Greene, Hamilton, Hancock,
Lake Lawrence, Lorain, Lucas, Marion, Miami, Montgomery, Muskingum,
Ottawa, Paulding, Pike, Richland, Ross, Scioto, Seneca, Shelby,
Trumbull, Tuscarawas, Van Wert, Washington, Wayne, and Wood Counties.
Ohio amended two rules because a source had been addressed in an
incorrect county's rules. Specifically, a facility owned by Archer
Daniels Midland (formerly A.E. Staley) is located in Hancock County,
not Seneca County, and so Ohio removed this facility's limits from the
Seneca County rule (Rule 3745-18-80) and inserted the identical limits
in the Hancock County rule (Rule 3745-18-38).
These various revisions do not affect the stringency of the SIP but
do enhance the clarity of the applicability of these limits. Therefore,
these revised rules are approvable.
E. Designation of Summit County
EPA published its initial designations on October 5, 1978, at 43 FR
46011. The designation for SO2 for a portion of Summit
County, Ohio, was litigated, with the result that the Court of Appeals
for the Sixth Circuit remanded the designation to EPA for
reconsideration. See PPG Industries, Inc. v. Costle 630 F2d 462 (6th
Cir. 1980). EPA's original nonattainment designation was based in large
part on dispersion modeling analyses indicating that attainment could
not be assured without reductions in allowable emissions from sources
in the county. Thus, the remand was accompanied by an injunction to
reassess the modeling analyses and the adequacy of the emission limits
to assure attainment. Although EPA has subsequently reestablished
designations for some portions of the county, an important part of the
county remains undesignated. Since this rulemaking addresses the
court's request for EPA to reconsider the modeling analysis of limits
necessary to assure attainment, Ohio requested that EPA also
reestablish a designation for this area, in particular requesting that
EPA designate the area attainment.
As discussed above, Ohio has requested approval of emission limits
that match the limits of the FIP, i.e. limits which modeling underlying
the FIP have demonstrated to provide for attainment. Therefore, no
further review of the modeling underlying the State limits of 1979 is
necessary, and EPA may proceed to establish a designation for the
portion of Summit County that is presently undesignated.
Air quality monitoring data from 2003 to 2006 indicate that
SO2 concentrations in Summit County are well below the
standards, generally about a third the level of the standards or less.
For the 24-hour standard of 365 ug/m3 (commonly the controlling
standard), the high second high value (i.e., after computing the second
high value for each monitoring site for each year, the highest of these
second high values) is 141 ug/m3. Compared to the annual standard of 80
ug/m3, the highest value is 24 ug/m3. Compared to the 3-hour standard
of 1300 ug/m3, the high second high value is 382 ug/m3.
[[Page 23787]]
Modeling evidence also indicates that the relevant portion of
Summit County is attaining the standard. EPA believes there are no
companies within the undesignated area significantly violating their
SO2 emission limits. EPA has identified one facility
elsewhere in Summit County as a high priority violator with excess
SO2 emissions. However, this facility is approximately 5
kilometers from the nearest edge of the undesignated area. Furthermore,
whereas the attainment modeling for the undesignated part of Summit
County reflects emissions from several significant sources, including
Firestone Rubber (a Barberton facility of a division called Seiberling
Tire and Rubber Company), Midwest Rubber Company, and Ohio Brass, these
facilities have now shut down. Therefore, if the modeling underlying
the attainment demonstration were redone with current actual emission
rates replacing maximum allowable emissions, the results of this
modeling would show that SO2 concentrations in the
undesignated area are well below the standard. Therefore, EPA believes
that this area should be designated attainment. While EPA has not
analyzed whether the excess emissions noted above might be causing
violations of the air quality standards elsewhere in the county, EPA
believes that any such violations will be resolved by its current
enforcement action, so that no change in the attainment designation of
the remainder of the county is warranted. Thus, in combination, EPA
believes that all of Summit County should be designated as attaining
the SO2 standards.
Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act describes several
prerequisites for redesignation of areas from nonattainment to
attainment. Because the relevant portion of Summit County is not
designated nonattainment and in fact has no designation, these
provisions of Section 107(d)(3)(E) are not germane here.
III. What Action Is EPA Taking?
EPA is proposing to approve 44 rules for SO2 in Ohio,
including 4 general rules, 4 county-specific rules that replace FIP
rules, 2 county-specific rules that incorporate substantive changes in
limits, and 34 county-specific rules that reflect only administrative
changes such as updating company names. EPA is also proposing to
establish an attainment designation for the portion of Summit County
that is presently undesignated. For simplicity, EPA is proposing to
combine the designations into a single designation for the entire
county rather than have separate designations for four subdivisions of
the county.
By this action, EPA is proposing that state rules would supersede
the last remaining portions of the FIP that was promulgated in 1976 et
seq. Therefore, the FIP may be removed from the CFR if and when EPA
makes final the action proposed today. Even after the FIP is removed,
EPA may continue to take enforcement action against violations of the
FIP limits discovered to have occurred during the time the FIP was in
effect.
Today's notice provides proposed revisions to the CFR to implement
the actions proposed here. EPA is proposing to rescind the entirety of
40 CFR 52.1881(b) (including general provisions and county-specific
limits) and of 40 CFR 52.1882 (providing FIP compliance schedules).
Since EPA is proposing that Ohio has approvable rules for the entire
State, EPA is proposing to rescind the sections of 40 CFR 52.1881(a)
that identify counties for which EPA has taken no action or has
disapproved the state's plan. EPA is proposing to replace the listing
of counties having approved rules with a rule-by-rule listing of
approved rules. EPA is proposing that the action concerning the
designation of Summit County would establish a simplified, county-wide
designation of attainment. Since EPA is proposing to address the court
remand that has affected the designations for Summit County, EPA is
proposing to rescind the footnotes that identify the effects of the
remand. (EPA is also proposing to rescind the footnote that was
inadvertently applied to the designation of Trumbull County.)
IV. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
When submitting comments, remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
2. Follow directions--The EPA may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, September 30, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed 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.).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this proposed 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 proposes to approve 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 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 proposes to approve 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.
[[Page 23788]]
Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This proposed 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 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
This proposed 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.
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 regulatory 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).
National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 15 U.S.C. 272, requires Federal agencies to use
technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus to carry out policy objectives, so long as such standards are
not inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. In
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Absent a
prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus
standards, EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for
failure to use such standards, and it would thus be inconsistent with
applicable law for EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in place of
a program submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the
Clean Air Act. Therefore, the requirements of section 12(d) of the
NTTAA do not apply.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Sulfur oxides.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Sulfur dioxide, Wilderness areas.
Dated: April 19, 2007.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, parts 52 and 81, chapter I,
of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations are proposed to be
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)(136) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1870 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(136) On May 16, 2006, Ohio submitted numerous regulations for
sulfur dioxide. These regulations were submitted to replace the
remaining federally promulgated regulations, to make selected revisions
to applicable limits, and to update company names and make other
similar administrative changes.
(i) Incorporation by reference. Ohio Administrative Code Rules
3745-18-01, 3745-18-02, 3745-18-03, 3745-18-06, 3745-18-08, 3745-18-10,
3745-18-11, 3745-18-12, 3745-18-15, 3745-18-17, 3745-18-18, 3745-18-24,
3745-18-28, 3745-18-29, 3745-18-31, 3745-18-34, 3745-18-35, 3745-18-37,
3745-18-38, 3745-18-49, 3745-18-50, 3745-18-53, 3745-18-54, 3745-18-57,
3745-18-61, 3745-18-63, 3745-18-66, 3745-18-68, 3745-18-69, 3745-18-72,
3745-18-76, 3745-18-77, 3745-18-78, 3745-18-79, 3745-18-80, 3745-18-81,
3745-18-82, 3745-18-83, 3745-18-84, 3745-18-85, 3745-18-87, 3745-18-90,
3745-18-91, and 3745-18-93, adopted on January 13, 2006, effective
January 23, 2006.
(ii) Additional material. Letter from Joseph P. Koncelik, Director,
Ohio EPA, to Bharat Mathur, EPA Region 5, dated May 16, 2006, with
attachments providing supporting material.
3. Section 52.1881 is amended as follows:
a. By revising paragraph (a)(4).
b. By removing and reserving paragraphs (a)(7), (a)(8), and (b).
Sec. 52.1881 Control strategy: Sulfur oxides (sulfur dioxide).
(a) * * *
(4) Notwithstanding the portions of Ohio's sulfur dioxide rules
identified in this section that EPA has either disapproved or taken no
action on, EPA has approved a complete plan addressing all counties in
the State of Ohio. EPA has approved the following rules, supplemented
by any additional approved rules specified in 40 CFR 52.1870:
(i) Rules as effective in Ohio on December 28, 1979: OAC 3745-18-04
(measurement methods)--except for five disapproved paragraphs ((D)(2),
(D)(3), (E)(2), (E)(3), and (E)(4)) and three paragraphs approved later
((D)(8), (D)(9), and (E)(7)), OAC 3745-18-05 (ambient monitoring), OAC
3745-18-08 (Allen)--except for one paragraph approved later (Cairo
Chemical), OAC 3745-18-09 (Ashland County), OAC 3745-18-13 (Belmont),
OAC 3745-18-14 (Brown), OAC 3745-18-16 (Carroll), OAC 3745-18-19
(Clermont)--except for one paragraph approved later (CG&E Beckjord),
OAC 3745-18-20 (Clinton), OAC 3745-18-21 (Columbiana), OAC 3745-18-23
(Crawford), OAC 3745-18-25 (Darke), OAC 3745-18-26 (Defiance), OAC
3745-18-27 (Delaware), OAC 3745-18-30 (Fayette), OAC 3745-18-32
(Fulton), OAC 3745-18-36 (Guernsey), OAC 3745-18-39 (Hardin), OAC 3745-
18-40 (Harrison), OAC 3745-18-41 (Henry), OAC 3745-18-42 (Highland),
OAC 3745-18-43 (Hocking), OAC 3745-18-44 (Holmes), OAC 3745-18-45
(Huron), OAC 3745-18-46 (Jackson), OAC 3745-18-48 (Knox), OAC 3745-18-
51 (Licking), OAC 3745-18-52 (Logan), OAC 3745-18-55 (Madison), OAC
3745-18-58 (Medina), OAC 3745-18-59 (Meigs), OAC 3745-18-60 (Mercer),
OAC 3745-18-62 (Monroe), OAC 3745-18-64 (Morgan)--except for one
paragraph approved later (OP Muskinghum River), OAC 3745-18-65
(Morrow), OAC 3745-18-67 (Noble), OAC 3745-18-70 (Perry), OAC 3745-18-
73 (Portage), OAC 3745-18-74 (Preble), OAC 3745-18-75 (Putnam), OAC
3745-18-86 (Union), OAC 3745-18-88 (Vinton), OAC 3745-18-89 (Warren),
OAC 3745-18-92 (Williams), and OAC 3745-18-94 (Wyandot);
(ii) Rules as effective in Ohio on October 1, 1982: OAC 3745-18-64
(B) (OP Muskinghum River in Morgan County);
(iii) Rules as effective in Ohio on October 31, 1991: OAC 3745-18-
04 (D)(7), (D)(8)(a) to (D)(8)(e), (E)(5),
[[Page 23789]]
(E)(6)(a), (E)(6)(b), (F), (G)(1) to (G)(4), and (I);
(iv) Rules as effective in Ohio on July 25, 1996: OAC 3745-18-47
(Jefferson);
(v) Rules as effective in Ohio on March 21, 2006: OAC 3745-18-22
(Coshocton), OAC 3745-18-33 (Gallia), and OAC 3745-18-71 (Pickaway);
(vi) Rules as effective in Ohio on September 1, 2003: OAC 3745-18-
56 (Mahoning); and
(vii) Rules as effective in Ohio on January 23, 2006: OAC 3745-18-
01 (definitions), OAC 3745-18-02 (air quality standards), OAC 3745-18-
03 (compliance dates), OAC 3745-18-06 (general provisions), OAC 3745-
18-07 (Adams), OAC 3745-18-10 (Ashtabula), OAC 3745-18-11 (Athens), OAC
3745-18-12 (Auglaize), OAC 3745-18-15 (Butler), OAC 3745-18-17
(Champaign), OAC 3745-18-18 (Clark), OAC 3745-18-24 (Cuyahoga), OAC
3745-18-28 (Erie), OAC 3745-18-29 (Fairfield), OAC 3745-18-31
(Franklin), OAC 3745-18-34 (Geauga), OAC 3745-18-35 (Greene), OAC 3745-
18-37 (Hamilton), OAC 3745-18-38 (Hancock), OAC 3745-18-49 (Lake), OAC
3745-18-50 (Lawrence), OAC 3745-18-53 (Lorain), OAC 3745-18-54 (Lucas),
OAC 3745-18-57 (Marion), OAC 3745-18-61 (Miami), OAC 3745-18-63
(Montgomery), OAC 3745-18-66 (Muskingum), OAC 3745-18-68 (Ottawa), OAC
3745-18-69 (Paulding), OAC 3745-18-72 (Pike), OAC 3745-18-76
(Richland), OAC 3745-18-77 (Ross), OAC 3745-18-78 (Sandusky), OAC 3745-
18-79 (Scioto), OAC 3745-18-80 (Seneca), OAC 3745-18-81 (Shelby), OAC
3745-18-82 (Stark), OAC 3745-18-83 (Summit), OAC 3745-18-84 (Trumbull),
OAC 3745-18-85 (Tuscarawas), OAC 3745-18-87 (Van Wert), OAC 3745-18-90
(Washington), OAC 3745-18-91 (Wayne), and OAC 3745-18-93 (Wood).
* * * * *
Sec. 52.1882 [Removed]
4. Section 52.1882 is removed and reserved.
PART 81--[AMENDED]
5. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations
6. The table in Sec. 81.336 entitled ``Ohio--SO2'' is
amended by removing the three footnotes and revising the entries for
Summit and Trumbull Counties to read as follows:
Sec. 81.336 Ohio.
* * * * *
Ohio--SO2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than
Designated area Does not meet Does not meet Cannot be national
primary standards secondary standards classified standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Summit County................... ................... ................... ................... X
Trumbull County................. ................... ................... ................... X
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E7-8295 Filed 4-30-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P