4126 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 26, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[IN 87–1a; FRL–6527–8]

Approval of Post-1996 Rate of

Progress Plan: Indiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: In this action, EPA is

approving the Lake and Porter Counties,

Indiana Post-1996 Rate of Progress

(ROP) Plan, including a 1990 inventory

adjustment, as revisions to the State

Implementation Plan (SIP). The Indiana

Department of Environmental

Management (IDEM) submitted the Post1996 ROP Plan on December 17, 1997,

with a supplemental submission on

January 22, 1998.

The control strategies in the plan are

designed to reduce volatile organic

compounds (VOC) emissions in Lake

and Porter Counties by 9 percent (%)

from 1990 baseline levels. The Clean Air

Act (the Act) requires that these

reductions occur by November 15, 1999.

The Post-1996 ROP Plan is designed to

reduce VOC emissions in Lake and

Porter Counties by at least 77,366

pounds (lbs) per day; from a projected

369,387 lbs/day to 292,021 pounds/day.

VOC emissions combine with oxides

of nitrogen in the atmosphere to form

ground-level ozone, a pollutant which

can cause inflammation of the lungs,

decrease lung capacity, and aggravate

asthma. The purpose of this Federal

Register action is to explain what EPA

is approving and to discuss the rationale

for today’s approval.

DATES: This rule is effective on March

27, 2000, unless EPA receives relevant

adverse written comments by February

25, 2000. If EPA receives adverse

comment, it will publish a timely

withdrawal of the rule in the Federal

Register and inform the public that the

rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to:

J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, Regulation

Development Section, Air Programs

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

Copies of the SIP revision request for

this direct final rule are available for

inspection at the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and

Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

Please telephone Ryan Bahr at (312)

353–4366, before visiting the Region 5

office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ryan Bahr, Environmental Engineer,

Regulation Development Section, at

(312) 353–4366.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document wherever

‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’, or ‘‘our’’, are used we mean

EPA. This Supplementary Information

section is organized as follows:

I. General Information on this Approval

What is EPA approving?

Why is EPA approving this submittal?

Who is affected by this action?

II. Background on IDEM Submittal

What is a Post-1996 ROP Plan?

What pollutants does the IDEM Post-1996

ROP Plan reduce?

What geographic area does the IDEM Post1996 ROP Plan affect?

Why did IDEM submit a SIP revision

request for the Post-1996 ROP Plan?

What information did IDEM submit in its

request?

What mobile source budget did IDEM

identify in the Post-1996 ROP Plan?

What action has EPA previously taken on

the mobile source budget?

What public review opportunities did

IDEM provide for the Post-1996 ROP

Plan?

What prior action has EPA taken on Rate

of Progress Plans for Lake and Porter,

Counties Indiana?

III. Content of IDEM Submittal

What changes did IDEM make to the 1990

VOC emission inventory in this

submission?

What control strategies did IDEM

implement to achieve reductions?

The Post-1996 ROP Plan control strategies

and their emission reductions.

The Post-1996 ROP Plan control strategies;

emission reduction calculations.

IV. EPA analysis of IDEM submittal

What guidance documents and

requirements apply to the Post-1996 ROP

Plan submittal?

Why was the 1996 15 Percent ROP Target

Level for Lake and Porter Counties

recalculated?

How was the 1996 Target Emission Level

for Lake and Porter Counties

recalculated?

How was the Post-1996 ROP Plan required

emission reduction calculated?

Why is EPA approving the Post-1996 ROP

Plan submittal?

V. Final Rulemaking Action

VI. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

B. Executive Order 13045

C. Executive Order 13084

D. Executive Order 13132

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

F. Unfunded Mandates

G. Submission to Congress and the

Comptroller General

H. National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act

I. Petitions for Judicial Review

I. General Information on this

Approval

What is EPA approving?

In today’s action, EPA is approving

the Lake and Porter Counties, Indiana

Post-1996 Rate of Progress (ROP) Plan,

including a 1990 inventory adjustment,

as a revision to the State

Implementation Plan (SIP). IDEM

submitted these items on December 17,

1997, and January 22, 1998.

Why is EPA approving this submittal?

The Post-1996 ROP Plan satisfies the

requirements of the Clean Air Act.

Specifically, the plan:

• Revises the 1990 base year emission

inventory,

• Identifies control measures to

achieve a projected 9% VOC emission

reduction in Lake and Porter Counties,

• Documents the 9% reductions to

occur by November 15, 1999, and,

• Identifies a 1999 mobile source

emissions budget for VOC.

EPA found that the Post-1996 ROP

Plan contains 77,660 pounds VOC/day

of emission reductions in Lake and

Porter Counties that are creditable. This

exceeds the required reduction of

77,366 pounds VOC/day. The Act

requires these reductions because VOC

emissions combine with oxides of

nitrogen in the atmosphere to form

ground-level ozone, a pollutant which

can cause inflammation of the lungs,

decrease lung capacity, and aggravate

asthma.

Section 182(c)(2)(B) of the Act

requires submittal of a demonstration

that the SIP will result in a 9% emission

reduction by November 15, 1999. This

9% needs to be in addition to the

emission reduction requirement for a

15% reduction by November 15, 1996.

Indiana submitted the demonstration as

part of the Post-1996 ROP Plan.

Who is affected by this action?

The Post-1996 ROP Plan refers to

various emission control regulations

which IDEM estimates will achieve the

9% emission reductions for Lake and

Porter Counties. The regulations, both

Federal and State, impact a wide variety

of industries and businesses. For the

most part, these regulations have

already been implemented. All of them

have already been approved into the SIP

or promulgated by EPA. Today’s

approval does not establish any new

requirements. The plan identifies and

documents how existing SIP and

Federal regulations achieve the

necessary 9% emission reductions. The

plan, by documenting emission

reductions, demonstrates the progress

being made toward cleaner air for the

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 26, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 4127

people that live and work in Lake and

Porter Counties, Indiana.

II. Background on IDEM Submittal

What is a Post-1996 Rate Of Progress

(ROP) Plan?

A Post-1996 ROP Plan documents the

control strategies a State is

implementing to reduce emissions of

ozone precursors by 9% from 1990

baseline emissions. Section 182(b)(1) of

the Act requires States to develop these

Post-1996 ROP Plans for ozone

nonattainment areas which have been

classified as serious and above. Lake

and Porter Counties are classified as

severe nonattainment for ozone. To be

approvable, a State must show that the

9% emission reduction will occur by

November 15, 1999.

The Plan is called a ‘‘Post-1996’’ ROP

Plan because the Act also requires that

by November 15, 1996, the States

implement control strategies achieving

15% emission reduction for ozone

nonattainment areas classified as

moderate and above. The Post-1996 ROP

Plan continues the 3% per year

reductions from November 16, 1996,

through November 15, 1999.

What pollutants does the IDEM Post1996 ROP Plan Reduce?

The IDEM Post-1996 ROP Plan

identifies VOC control strategies. VOC

emissions combine with oxides of

nitrogen in the atmosphere to form

ground-level ozone. Ozone can cause

inflammation of the lungs, decrease

lung capacity, and aggravate asthma.

What geographic area does the IDEM

Post-1996 ROP Plan affect?

IDEM’s Post-1996 ROP Plan is

applicable to the severe ozone

nonattainment area of Lake and Porter

Counties, Indiana. Lake and Porter

Counties are part of the Chicago-GaryLake County ozone nonattainment area,

which is classified as severe

nonattainment for ozone.

Why did IDEM submit a SIP revision

request for the Post-1996 ROP Plan?

Lake and Porter Counties are

classified as severe nonattainment for

ozone. For that reason, section

182(c)(2)(B) of the Act requires that

these areas reduce emissions of ozone

precursors by 3% per year, and that the

State submit a Post-1996 ROP Plan to

identify and document those reductions.

What information did IDEM submit in

its request?

On December 17, 1997, Indiana

submitted to EPA the Lake and Porter

Counties Indiana Post-1996 ROP Plan.

EPA found this submittal to be complete

in a letter to IDEM dated December 30,

1997.

The ROP Plan contains

documentation and control strategies for

both the 9% reduction requirement and

3% contingency measures, as well as a

revision to the 1990 VOC emission

inventory. The contingency measures

include agreed orders for Keil Chemical

and United States Steel Gary Works.

EPA will address the contingency

measures and these agreed orders in a

subsequent rulemaking action.

The submittal also contains a mobile

source emission budget for VOC. IDEM

supplemented its submittal on January

22, 1998, to clearly identify the mobile

source emission budget.

What Mobile Source Budget did IDEM

identify in the Post-1996 ROP Plan?

IDEM supplemented its submittal on

January 22, 1998 to clearly identify a

1999 mobile source budget for VOCs of

40,897 pounds VOC per summer day, as

contained in Table 16 of the Post-1996

ROP Plan.

What action has EPA previously taken

on the mobile source budget?

At the time that EPA received this

submittal, the transportation rules (62

FR 43780) required EPA to review

mobile source budgets within 45 days of

submittal. After receiving the

supplemental submittal regarding the

budget on January 22, 1998, EPA

completed that review of the budget.

EPA found the 1999 VOC budget of

40,897 pounds VOC per summer day

adequate in a February 2, 1998, letter.

Since that time, Lake and Porter

Counties have been required to restrict

their 1999 modeled mobile source VOC

emissions to below that budget.

What public review opportunities did

IDEM provide for the Post-1996 ROP

Plan?

On October 13, 1997, IDEM published

a notice of public hearing for the Post1996 ROP Plan and opened a public

comment period through December 1,

1997. IDEM held a public hearing on the

proposed ROP Plan on November 13,

1997. The submittal summarizes the

public comments and IDEM’s responses

to those comments.

What prior action has EPA taken on

Rate of Progress Plans for Lake and

Porter Counties Indiana?

On April 3, 1997, EPA proposed

approval and solicited public comment

on Indiana’s 15% ROP plan. EPA

finalized approval of the 15% ROP plan

on July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38457). The

15% ROP plan was designed to reduce

VOC emissions in Lake and Porter

Counties by 68,242 pounds per day.

III. Content of IDEM Submittal

What changes did IDEM make to the

1990 VOC emission inventory in this

submission?

IDEM has revised the 1990 Lake and

Porter Counties base year VOC

emissions inventory. The revision

increases the base year VOC emissions

inventory by 195,349 pounds/day, a

46% increase. The resulting 1990 VOC

emissions inventory for Lake and Porter

Counties is 620,070 pounds/day (typical

weekday emissions during the period of

June through August).

Both the 15 percent ROP plan and the

Post-1996 ROP Plan depend on the level

of the 1990 base year VOC emissions.

EPA has encouraged the States to

update the 1990 base year emissions as

needed, and to make appropriate

changes in ROP plans. EPA recognizes

that the base year emissions estimates

(or the estimated emissions for any

other year) are not fixed over time and

that new data can improve these

estimates. Such is the case in this ROP

submittal.

In July and August 1993, the United

States Steel Corporation (US Steel)

commented to IDEM on the 1990 base

year inventory. US Steel stated that the

1990 base year emissions inventory

underestimated VOC emissions from the

US Steel coke oven by-product recovery

plant. When IDEM received these

comments, it was in the final stages of

preparing the base year emissions

inventory and did not have time to

further investigate US Steel’s claim

prior to submitting the inventory to the

EPA.

EPA approved IDEM’s 1990 base year

emissions inventory for Lake and Porter

Counties on January 4, 1995 (60 FR

375). The rulemaking suggested that

IDEM give further consideration to the

comments of US Steel and

acknowledged that IDEM would need

extra time to consider relevant data

prior to amending the base year

emissions inventory, if warranted.

After taking a more detailed look at

the emissions from the coke oven byproduct recovery sector, IDEM

concluded that it was appropriate to

revise the 1990 base year emissions

inventory. Both State rule 326 IAC 14–

9 and the Federal National Emission

Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants

(NESHAP) regulate benzene emissions

from coke oven by-product recovery

plants. The rules were implemented in

1991 and not 1990, as assumed in the

original 1990 base year emissions

inventory. IDEM is now correcting this

4128 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 26, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

assumption, resulting in the need to

increase the 1990 base year emissions.

To accurately reflect the overall

emissions from this category, IDEM

increased the resolution of the

emissions inventory for the emissions

from coke oven by-product recovery

plants. These enhanced emission

calculations provided the context for the

compliance data from US Steel,

allowing IDEM to more accurately

determine the correct 1990 emissions

level.

IDEM concluded that the 1990 base

year emissions were significantly higher

than the base year inventory originally

adopted and has requested that the 1990

SIP base year inventory be adjusted

accordingly.

What control strategies did IDEM

implement to achieve reductions?

The Post-1996 ROP Plan Control

Strategies and their Emission

Reductions.

Control Strategies

Emission

Reductions

(Pounds

VOC/day)

Date of EPA Promulgation or Approval

Coke Oven By-Product Recovery Plant NESHAP (40

CFR Part 61 Subpart L).

55,371 Promulgated September 14, 1989 (54 FR 38044) Amended September 19, 1991 (56 FR 47404)

Inland Steel Coke Battery Shutdowns (326 IAC 6–1–

10.1(k)(5)) (40 CFR 52.770(c)(99)).

6,666 Approved June 15, 1995 (60 FR 31412)

Reformulated Gasoline Use in Small Engines (40 CFR

Part 80).

575 Promulgated February 16, 1994 (59 FR 7716)

New Small Engine Emission Standards (40 CFR Part 90) 6,034 Promulgated July 3, 1995 (60 FR 34581)

Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Reasonably Available

Control Technology (326 IAC 8–9) (40 CFR

52.770(c)(111)).

2,700 Approved January 17, 1997 (62 FR 2593)

Coke Oven NESHAP (40 CFR Part 63 Subpart L) ........... 6,314 Promulgated October 27, 1993 (58 FR 57911)

Total Emission Reduction ........................................... 77,660

In determining what control measures

a State can use in its Post-1996 ROP

Plan strategy, emission reductions from

control measures are creditable to the

extent they occur before November 15,

1999. The General Preamble for the

Implementation of Title I of the Act also

interprets and clarifies the Act’s

requirements for crediting control

strategies. The Preamble provides that

all credited emission reductions must be

real, permanent, and enforceable, and

discusses how these criteria can be met

with specific strategies (57 FR 13497).

EPA has explained these requirements

in more detail in the guidance

documents listed in this Federal

Register.

The Post-1996 ROP Plan Control

Strategies; Emission Reduction

Calculations

To achieve the required 9% VOC

emission reduction requirement, IDEM

reviewed and chose the following

emission control measures.

Coke Oven By-Product Recovery

Plants NESHAP. This Federal NESHAP

at 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart L, applies to

all furnace and foundry coke oven byproduct recovery plants. The NESHAP

requires the use of gas blanketing to

control emissions from tar intercepting

sumps, process vessels, and

naphthalene processing operations. The

NESHAP also covers controlling

emissions from equipment leaks,

coolers, and light oil processes.

As noted above, Indiana promulgated

rule 326 IAC 14–9 in 1988, covering

some of the emissions for this source

category. It was scheduled for

implementation in 1990, but was

actually implemented in 1991. EPA

approved the rule as part of the State’s

Reasonably Available Control

Technology (RACT) SIP on September

17, 1992 (57 FR 42889).

IDEM has requested credit in its Post1996 ROP Plan for reductions from coke

oven by-product recovery plants that

went beyond rule 326 IAC 14–9. EPA

believes this approach is consistent with

EPA guidance which provides that only

the emission reductions from NESHAPS

that go beyond RACT rules in existence

before November 15, 1990, can be

credited in ROP plans. Based on this

guidance, the State determined the

emission reduction resulting from the

NESHAP that went beyond that of rule

326 IAC 14–9.

IDEM has determined that the

NESHAP has resulted in additional VOC

emission reductions of 45,300 pounds/

day at the US Steel mill and 10,071

pounds/day at the Bethlehem Steel mill,

for a total additional VOC emission

reduction of 55,371 pounds/day.

Furthermore, EPA has determined

that while the reductions from 326 IAC

14–9 are not creditable toward the 9%

reduction requirements, they should be

removed from the baseline emission

inventory before determining the

required reductions for the ROP

purposes. This approach acknowledges

that while these reductions were not

actually made before 1990, they are also

not part of the 1990 Act’s ROP process.

Inland Steel Coke Oven Battery

Shutdowns. Indiana rule 326 IAC 6–1–

10.1(k)(5) (adopted by the State in

March 1993), required Inland Steel Flat

Products to shut down coke batteries

numbers 6 through 11 before November

1996. Inland Steel no longer holds a

valid operating permit for these coke

batteries. In addition, based on a

consent decree between the State and

Inland Steel, Inland Steel cannot bank

the VOC emission reductions from these

coke battery closures for future use.

IDEM considers them to be permanent

emission reductions.

IDEM notes that, since it found

emissions from the coke oven byproducts recovery to be higher than was

originally reported in the 1990 base year

inventory, additional emission

reduction credits are available. Note that

IDEM increased the 1990 base year VOC

emissions in this source category, as

discussed above.

To calculate the emission reduction

credit for this source, IDEM had to take

into account emission reduction credits

already applied in prior submittals, in

particular in the 15 percent ROP plan,

to avoid double counting. IDEM

increased the resolution of the

emissions inventory for this source so

that it could consider the impacts of the

previously implemented rule 326 IAC

14–9 and previously credited controls.

IDEM found that it could credit an

additional VOC emission reduction

(beyond that credited in the 15 percent

ROP plan) of 6,666 pounds/day to the

Inland Steel coke oven battery

shutdowns. The IDEM submittal credits

6,288 pounds/day to the 9 percent ROP

emission reduction requirement, and

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 26, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 4129

378 pounds/day to the 3 percent

contingency requirement. However,

EPA is today crediting the full 6,666

pounds VOC/day toward the 9%

requirement. This excess reduction

accounts for discrepancies identified in

other sections of IDEM’s submittal.

IDEM had credited a VOC emission

reduction of 3,984 pounds/day for this

source closure in prior air quality plan

submittals, and is not taking credit for

that portion in the 9 percent post-1996

ROP Plan.

Effects of Reformulated Gasoline on

Small, Non-Road Engines. The emission

reduction for this source category

applies to 2-stroke and 4-stroke nonroad engines. The emission reduction

results from the implementation of the

Act’s requirement for the use of

reformulated gasoline in ozone

nonattainment areas classified as severe

and above.

To determine the emission reduction

credit, IDEM used August 1993

guidance from EPA to calculate the

emission reduction by engine type. The

emission reductions only apply to

exhaust and evaporative emissions.

Based on the EPA guidance, IDEM did

not account for emission reductions

resulting from changes in refueling

emissions.

Tables 1 and 17 of the Post-1996 ROP

Plan, document a VOC emission

reduction of 1,292 pounds/day for this

source category. However, the detailed

emissions summary contained in

Appendix C–1 of the submittal

calculates a VOC emission reduction of

575 pounds per day. The emission

reductions achieved by the use of

reformulated gasoline in small, nonroad engines and the regulation for new

small engines need to be calculated

together, since both affect small engines.

A calculation error was made when

disaggregating the results of that

analysis. In Tables 1 and 7, 715 pounds

VOC/day were inadvertently shifted

from the emissions listed for the ‘‘new

small engine standards’’ to the

emissions reduction credited for ‘‘effects

of reformulated gasoline on small, nonroad engines.’’ This approval corrects

that error and credits the effects of

reformulated gasoline on small, nonroad engines with a 575 pound VOC/

day emission reduction.

When this error was made, an

additional 2 pounds VOC/day were

added to the effects of reformulated

gasoline on small, non-road engines.

This 2 pound deficit will be made up by

the excess credit for the Inland Steel

coke oven battery shutdowns. In IDEM’s

submittal, it only took credit for Inland

Steel coke oven battery shutdowns for

6,288 out of a total 6,666 pounds VOC/

day. This approval more than makes up

the 2 pound deficit by applying all

6,666 pounds VOC/day to the Post-1996

9% reduction.

New Small Engine Standards. IDEM

calculated the impact of new federal

standards codified at 40 CFR Part 90 for

small engines by following November

28, 1994, EPA guidance titled ‘‘Future

Non-road Emission Reduction Credits

for Court-Ordered Non-Road

Standards’’. IDEM determined the

emission impacts for each equipment

type and engine type in Lake and Porter

Counties. Appendix C–2 of the Post1996 ROP Plan submittal specifies the

emission reduction for each equipment

and engine type combination by county.

IDEM calculated emission impacts after

removing the impacts of reformulated

gasoline, as specified in the EPA

guidance.

IDEM determined, as demonstrated in

Appendix C–2 of the Post-1996 ROP

Plan, that the small engine standards

would reduce 1999 emissions by 6,034

pounds VOC/day. However, tables 1 and

18 of the Post-1996 ROP submittal

document a VOC emission reduction

from this control category equaling only

5,319 pounds/day.

As noted above, IDEM inadvertently

shifted 715 pounds VOC/day to

reformulated gasoline when listing the

measures in the tables. EPA has made

this correction to the tables in today’s

Federal Register. The new small engine

standard is being credited at 6,034

pounds VOC/day reduction.

Volatile Organic Liquid Storage

Reasonably Available Control

Technology. The VOC impact of this

control is based on the calculated

impacts of State rule 326 IAC 8–9,

adopted by the Indiana Air Pollution

Control Board on May 3, 1995 and

approved by EPA on January 17, 1997

(62 FR 2593). This rule became effective

in Indiana on October 1, 1995, and was

to be phased in over several years, with

most sources needing to comply by May

1, 1996. The rule applies to storage

vessels with a capacity greater than

39,000 gallons that are used to store

volatile organic liquids with a

maximum true vapor pressure of 1.52

pounds per square inch or greater.

The rule requires the use of internal

floating roofs with vapor-mounted

primary and secondary seals with

controlled fittings in fixed roof tanks. It

also requires the replacement of vapormounted primary seals with liquidmounted primary seals or shoe seals and

installation of secondary seals with

controlled fittings in external floating

roof tanks.

The emission reduction total for this

control measure assumes a VOC

emission reduction of 96 percent in

fixed roof tanks, 29 percent in internal

floating roof tanks, and 65 percent for

external floating roof tanks. The

emission reduction calculation also

assumes an 80 percent rule effectiveness

level.

All external floating roof tanks have to

comply with the State rule by May 1,

1996. Existing internal floating roof

tanks have up to 10 years to comply

with the rule. IDEM only claims an

emission reduction credit for external

floating roof tanks and fixed roof tanks.

This approval credits a VOC emission

reduction of 2,700 pounds VOC/day for

this source control measure in 1999,

documented in Table 21 and Appendix

C–5 of the Post-1996 ROP submittal.

Coke Oven Batteries NESHAP. The

coke oven batteries NESHAP,

promulgated by EPA on October 27,

1993, and codified at 40 CFR Part 63,

Subpart L, applies to all coke oven

batteries in existence prior to December

4, 1992, including by-product and

nonrecovery coke oven batteries, and to

all new coke oven batteries constructed

on or after December 4, 1992. The rule

mandates emission limits and/or

controls for door leaks, topside port

leaks, offtake system leaks, visible

emissions, and charging systems.

IDEM calculated the emission

reductions based on EPA guidance in

the preamble to the 1993 NESHAP (58

FR 57898). Appendix C–4 of the ROP

Plan submittal documents in detail the

individual source calculations used by

IDEM to calculate the total VOC

emission reduction. This approval

credits a total VOC reduction of 6,314

pounds/day.

IV. EPA Analysis of IDEM Submittal

What guidance documents and

requirements apply to the Post-1996

ROP Plan submittal?

EPA has developed a number of

guidelines specifically addressing the

review of Post-1996 ROP Plans. In

addition, EPA guidelines concerning the

review of 15 percent ROP plans (1996

ROP plans) address many issues of

relevance in the review of the Post-1996

ROP Plans. These documents address

such topics as: (1) the requirements of

the Act; (2) development of baseline and

target emission estimates; (3) emission

inventory projection procedures; and,

(4) recommended emission reduction

levels for various emission control

measures.

Rate-of-Progress Plan Policy References

1. Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401–7626), as

amended November 15, 1990.

4130 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 26, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

2. Procedures for Preparing Emissions

Projections, EPA–450/4–91–019,

Environmental Protection Agency, July 1991.

3. ‘‘State Implementation Plans; General

Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of

the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’

Proposed Rule, Federal Register, 57 FR

13498, April 16, 1992.

4. Memorandum, ‘‘November 15, 1992,

Deliverables for Reasonable Further Progress

and Modeling Emission Inventories,’’ from J.

David Mobley, Edwin L. Meyer, and G.T.

Helms, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Environmental Protection Agency,

August 7, 1992.

5. Guidance on the Adjusted Base Year

Emissions Inventory and the 1996 Target for

the 15 Percent Rate of Progress Plans, EPA–

452/R–92–005, October 1992.

6. Memorandum, ‘‘Quantification of Rule

Effectiveness Improvements,’’ from G.T.

Helms, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Environmental Protection Agency,

October 1992.

7. Guidance for Growth Factors,

Projections, and Control Strategies for the 15

Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans, EPA–452/R–

93–002, March 1993.

8. Memorandum, ‘‘Correction to ‘Guidance

on the Adjusted Base Year Emissions

Inventory and the 1996 Target for the 15

Percent Rate of Progress Plans’,’’ from G.T.

Helms, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Environmental Protection Agency,

March 2, 1993.

9. Memorandum, ‘‘15 Percent Rate-ofProgress Plans,’’ from G.T. Helms, Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Environmental Protection Agency, March 16,

1993.

10. Guidance on the Relationship Between

the 15 Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans and

Other Provisions of the Clean Air Act, EPA–

452/R–93–007, May 1993.

11. Memorandum, ‘‘Credit Toward the 15

Percent Rate-of-Progress Reductions from

Federal Measures,’’ from G.T. Helms, Ozone/

Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, and

Susan Wyatt, Chemicals and Petroleum

Branch, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Environmental Protection Agency,

May 6, 1993.

12. Guidance on Preparing Enforceable

Regulations and Compliance Programs for

the 15 Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans, EPA–

452/R–93–005, June 1993.

13. Memorandum, ‘‘Correction Errata to the

15 Percent Rate-of-Progress Plan Guidance

Series,’’ from G.T. Helms, Office of Air

Quality Planning and Standards,

Environmental Protection Agency, July 28,

1993.

14. Memorandum, ‘‘Early Implementation

of Contingency Measures for Ozone and

Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment

Areas,’’ from G.T. Helms, Office of Air

Quality Planning and Standards,

Environmental Protection Agency, August

13, 1993.

15. Memorandum, ‘‘Region III Questions

on Emission Projections for the 15 Percent

Rate-of-Progress Plans,’’ from G.T. Helms,

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Environmental Protection Agency, August

17, 1993.

16. Memorandum, ‘‘VOC Emission Benefits

for Nonroad Equipment with the Use of

Federal Phase I Reformulated Gasoline,’’

from Phil Lorang, Office of Mobile Sources,

Environmental Protection Agency, August

18, 1993.

17. Memorandum, ‘‘Guidance on Issues

Related to 15 Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans,’’

from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant

Administrator for Air and Radiation,

Environmental Protection Agency, August

23, 1993.

18. Memorandum, ‘‘Credit Toward the 15

Percent Requirements from Architectural and

Industrial Maintenance Coatings,’’ from John

S. Seitz, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Environmental Protection Agency,

September 10, 1993.

19. Memorandum, ‘‘Reclassification of

Areas to Nonattainment and 15 Percent Rateof-Progress Plans,’’ from John S. Seitz, Office

of Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Environmental Protection Agency, September

20, 1993.

20. Memorandum, ‘‘Clarification of

Guidance for Growth Factors, Projections and

Control Strategies for the 15 Percent Rate of

Progress Plans,’’ from G.T. Helms, Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Environmental Protection Agency, October 6,

1993.

21. Memorandum, ‘‘Review and

Rulemaking on 15 Percent Rate-of-Progress

Plans,’’ from G.T. Helms, Office of Air

Quality Planning and Standards,

Environmental Protection Agency, October 6,

1993.

22. Memorandum, ‘‘Questions and

Answers from the 15 Percent Rate-of-Progress

Plan Workshop,’’ from G.T. Helms, Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Environmental Protection Agency, October

29, 1993.

23. Memorandum, ‘‘Rate-of-Progress Plan

Guidance on the 15 Percent Calculations,’’

from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air

Quality Management Division,

Environmental Protection Agency, October

29, 1993.

24. Memorandum, ‘‘Clarification of Issues

Regarding the Contingency Measures That

are Due November 15, 1993, for Moderate

and Above Ozone Nonattainment Areas,’’

from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air

Quality Management Division,

Environmental Protection Agency, November

8, 1993.

25. Memorandum, ‘‘Credit for 15 Percent

Rate-of-Progress Plan Reductions from the

Architectural and Industrial Maintenance

(AIM) Coating Rule,’’ from John S. Seitz,

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Environmental Protection Agency,

December 9, 1993.

26. Memorandum, ‘‘Transmittal of NO X

Substitution Guidance, ‘‘ from John S. Seitz,

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Environmental Protection Agency,

December 9, 1993.

27. Guidance on the Post-1996 Rate-ofProgress Plan and the Attainment

Demonstration, EPA–452/R–93–015, January

1994.

28. Memorandum, ‘‘Rule Effectiveness

Guidance: Integration of Inventory,

Compliance, and Assessment Applications,’’

from G.T. Helms, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, Environmental

Protection Agency, January 21, 1994.

29. Memorandum, ‘‘Post-1996 Rate-ofProgress Plan Guidance for Ozone

Nonattainment Areas,’’ from G.T. Helms,

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Environmental Protection Agency, January

24, 1994.

30. Memorandum, ‘‘Guidance on

Projection of Nonroad Inventories to Future

Years,’’ from Philip A. Lorang, Director,

Emission Planning and Strategies Division,

Office of Air and Radiation, Environmental

Protection Agency, February 4, 1994.

31. Memorandum, ‘‘Post-1996 Rate-of

Progress Plan Guidance for Ozone

Nonattainment Areas,’’ from G.T. Helms,

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,

Environmental Protection Agency, February

22, 1994.

32. Memorandum, ‘‘Clarification of Policy

for Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Substitution,’’

from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air

Quality Planning and Standards,

Environmental Protection Agency, August 5,

1994.

33. Memorandum, ‘‘Future Nonroad

Emission Reduction Credits for CourtOrdered Nonroad Standards,’’ from Philip A.

Lorang, Director, Emission Planning and

Strategies Division, Office of Air and

Radiation, Environmental Protection Agency,

November 28, 1994.

34. Memorandum, ‘‘Credit for the 15

Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans for Reductions

from the Architectural and Industrial

Maintenance (AIM) Coating Rule and the

Autobody Refinishing Rule,’’ from John S.

Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning

and Standards, Environmental Protection

Agency, November 29, 1994.

35. Memorandum, ‘‘Transmittal of Rule

Effectiveness Protocol for 1996

Demonstrations,’’ from Susan E. Bromm,

Director, Chemical, Commercial Services and

Municipal Division, Office of Compliance,

Environmental Protection Agency, December

22, 1994.

36. Memorandum, ‘‘Future Nonroad

Emission Reduction Credits for

Locomotives,’’ from Philip A. Lorang,

Director, Emission Planning and Strategies

Division, Office of Air and Radiation,

Environmental Protection Agency, January 3,

1995.

37. Memorandum, ‘‘Ozone Attainment

Demonstration,’’ from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and

Radiation, Environmental Protection Agency,

March 2, 1995.

38. Memorandum, ‘‘Credit for the 15

Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans for Reductions

from the Architectural and Industrial

Maintenance (AIM) Coating Rule,’’ from John

S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, Environmental

Protection Agency, March 22, 1995.

39. Memorandum, ‘‘Fifteen Percent Rateof-Progress Plans—Additional Guidance,’’

from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air

Quality Planning and Standards,

Environmental Protection Agency, May 5,

1995.

40. Memorandum, ‘‘Regulatory Schedule

for Consumer and Commercial Products

under Section 183(e) of the Clean Air Act,’’

from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air

Quality Planning and Standards,

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 26, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 4131

Environmental Protection Agency, June 22,

1995.

41. Memorandum, ‘‘Update on the Credit

for the 15 Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans for

Reductions from the Architectural and

Industrial Maintenance Coating Rule,’’ from

John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, Environmental

Protection Agency, March 7, 1996.

Why Was the 1996 15 Percent ROP

Target Level for Lake and Porter

Counties Recalculated?

The 15% plan target emission level

needed to be recalculated because IDEM

has revised the 1990 VOC emission

inventory. The Post-1996 ROP Plan uses

the 15% plan’s 1996 target level as a

starting point. IDEM calculated the 1999

target emission level directly from this

1996 target level. IDEM then subtracted

the 1999 target emission level from the

projected 1999 inventory to determine

how much VOC emission reductions are

needed. In this manner, instead of

revisiting the 15% plan, the Post-1996

ROP Plan has to provide for ample

reductions to meet the 1999 target.

How Was the 1996 Target Emission

Level for Lake and Porter Counties

Recalculated?

Recalculation of 1996 target

emission level

Pounds

VOC/day

1990 Total VOC Emissions ...... 620,070

1990 Rate-Of-Progress Emissions (A) (Anthropogenic

Emissions Only) .................... 577,190

1990–1996 Non-creditable Reductions ................................. 187,591

1990 Adjusted Base Year

Emissions (B) (1990 ROP

Emissions minus non-creditable reductions) ................... 389,599

15 Percent of 1990 Adjusted

Base Year Emissions (C) ..... 58,440

1996 Target Emission Level

(B)–(C) .................................. 331,159

1990–1996 Non-Creditable Reductions:

Coke Oven By-Product Recovery=129,913

pounds VOC/day; Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP)=59,950 pounds VOC/

day; Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP)=728 pounds

VOC/day.

To determine the 1990 adjusted base

year inventory, IDEM started with the

1990 base year emission inventory

approved by EPA on January 4, 1995 (60

FR 375), which EPA found met the

requirements of sections 172(c)(3) and

182(a)(1) of the Act for Lake and Porter

Counties. IDEM then revised the

inventory as described earlier. The

revision resulted in total 1990 adjusted

base year emissions of 620,070 pounds

VOC/day. IDEM subtracted biogenic

emissions and emissions from outside

Lake and Porter Counties from the 1990

base year inventory to determine that

the 1990 ROP inventory level is 577,190

pounds VOC/day.

IDEM used EPA’s Mobile Source

Emissions Model (MOBILE) 5a to

calculate the emission reductions from

the pre-1990 FMVCP and 1990 RVP

regulations; IDEM then subtracted these

reductions and the emission reductions

from coke oven by-product recovery

plants from the 1990 ROP inventory

level to find the 1990 adjusted base year

inventory level of 389,599 lbs VOC/day.

IDEM then multiplied the adjusted

base year emissions by 15% resulting in

a required reduction of 58,440 pounds

VOC/day. To obtain the 1996 emission

target level, IDEM subtracted the 15%

required emission reductions from the

1990 ROP emissions resulting in a 1996

target level of 331,159 pounds VOC/day.

How Was the Post-1996 ROP Plan

Required Emission Reduction

Calculated?

9% ROP SUMMARY FOR LAKE AND

PORTER COUNTIES

Calculation of reduction needs

by 1999

Pounds

VOC/day

1990 Lake and Porter Counties

Total VOC Emissions (A) ...... 620,070

1990 Rate-Of-Progress Emissions (B) (Anthropogenic

Emissions Only) .................... 577,190

1990–1999 Non-creditable Reductions ................................. 224,841

1990 Adjusted Base Year

Emissions (C) (1990 ROP

Emissions minus Noncreditable Reductions) ................. 352,349

9 Percent of 1990 Adjusted

Base Year Emissions (D) ..... 31,711

FMVCP Fleet Turnover Correction (The difference between

1996 and 1999 FMVCP implementation) ........................ 7,427

1996 Emission Target Level ..... 331,159

1999 Target Emission Level (E)

(1996 Emissions Target

Level minus 9% and fleet

turnover) ................................ 292,021

Projected 1999 VOC Emissions

(F) (1990 Adjusted Base

Year Emissions plus Growth

Factors) ................................. 369,387

ROP Reduction Requirement to

achieve 9 percent net of

growth (G) (1999 Projected

Emission (F) minus 1999

Target Level (E)) ................... 77,366

1990–1999 Non-Creditable Reductions:

Coke Oven By-Product Recovery=159,736

pounds VOC/day; Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP)=64,377 pounds VOC/

day; Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP)=728 pounds

VOC/day.

(A) IDEM revised the ‘‘1990 Lake and Porter

Counties total VOC emissions’’, as described

earlier, resulting in 1990 emissions of 620,070

pounds VOC/day.

9% ROP SUMMARY FOR LAKE AND

PORTER COUNTIES

Calculation of reduction needs

by 1999

Pounds

VOC/day

(B) IDEM determined the ‘‘1990 ROP emissions’’ (577,190 pounds VOC/day) by subtracting from the 1990 total emissions the biogenic emissions and emissions outside of the

nonattainment area.

(C) IDEM calculated the ‘‘1990 adjusted

base year emissions’’ as 351,440 pounds

VOC/day by subtracting from the 1990 ROP

inventory any non creditable emission reductions which are projected to occur between

1990 and 1999. EPA slightly revised IDEM’s

calculations when a computational error was

found. The corrected ‘‘1990 adjusted base

year emissions’’ are 352,349 pounds VOC/

day. This correction results in a higher adjusted base year and affects each of the remaining computations, except for the 1999

projected VOC emissions.

(D) EPA calculated the ‘‘9% of adjusted

base year emissions’’ as 31,711 pounds VOC/

day by multiplying the 1990 adjusted base

year inventory by 9%.

(E) EPA calculated the ‘‘1999 emissions target level’’ as 292,021 pounds VOC/day by

subtracting from the 1996 emission target

level inventory the FMVCP fleet turnover correction and the 9% reduction requirement.

(F) IDEM calculated the ‘‘1999 projected

VOC emissions’’ as 369,387 pounds VOC/day.

In the Post-1996 ROP Plan, IDEM projected

the point, area, and non-road mobile source

emission inventories using either source-supplied data, population forecasts, historical

data, or, the U.S. Department of Commerce

Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) regional

growth data. IDEM included in the Post-1996

ROP Plan the growth factors used together

with documentation for the assumptions made.

IDEM projected the on-road mobile source

emission inventory using MOBILE5a. IDEM

calculated these growth estimates in a manner

consistent with EPA’s guidance documents.

(G) EPA then determined the ‘‘ROP reduction requirement to achieve 9 percent net of

growth’’ as 77,366 pounds VOC/day by subtracting the 1999 emission target level from

the 1999 projected VOC emissions.

Why is EPA approving the Post-1996

ROP Plan submittal?

The Post-1996 ROP Plan satisfies the

requirements of the Clean Air Act.

Specifically, the plan:

• Revises the 1990 base year emission

inventory,

• Identifies control measures to

achieve a projected 9% VOC emissions

reductions in Lake and Porter Counties,

• Documents the 9% reductions to

occur by November 15, 1999, and,

• Identifies a 1999 mobile source

emissions budget for VOC.

The Post-1996 ROP Plan projects

reductions in VOC emissions in Lake

and Porter Counties of 77,660 pounds

VOC/day. This exceeds the required

reduction of 77,366 pounds VOC/day.

Indiana can use the excess reduction of

294 pounds VOC/day toward meeting

future ROP emission reduction

requirements.

4132 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 26, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Section 182(c)(2)(B) of the Act

requires submittal of a demonstration

that the SIP will result in a 9% emission

reduction by November 15, 1999. This

9% needs to be in addition to the

emission reduction requirement for a

15% reduction by November 15, 1996.

Indiana submitted the demonstration as

part of the Post-1996 ROP Plan.

V. Final Rulemaking Action

EPA approves Indiana’s Post-1996

ROP Plan, including the 1990 inventory

adjustments, submitted December 17,

1997, and January 22, 1998, for Lake

and Porter Counties, as a revision to the

SIP. Final approval of the Post-1996

ROP Plan also approves the 1999 mobile

source emission budget of 40,897

pounds VOC per summer day.

This action will be effective on March

27, 2000.

EPA is publishing this action without

prior proposal because EPA views this

as a noncontroversial revision and

anticipates no adverse comments.

However, in a separate document in this

Federal Register publication, EPA is

proposing to approve the SIP revision

should adverse written comments be

filed. This action will be effective

without further notice unless EPA

receives relevant adverse written

comment by February 25, 2000. Should

the Agency receive such comments, it

will publish a withdrawal informing the

public that this action will not take

effect. Any parties interested in

commenting on this action should do so

at this time. If no such comments are

received, this action will be effective on

March 27, 2000.

VI. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has exempted this regulatory

action from Executive Order (E.O.)

12866, entitled ‘‘Regulatory Planning

and Review.’’

B. Executive Order 13045

Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),

applies to any rule that: (1) is

determined to be ‘‘economically

significant’’ as defined under E.O.

12866, and (2) concerns an

environmental health or safety risk that

EPA has reason to believe may have a

disproportionate effect on children. If

the regulatory action meets both criteria,

the Agency must evaluate the

environmental health or safety effects of

the planned rule on children, and

explain why the planned regulation is

preferable to other potentially effective

and reasonably feasible alternatives

considered by the Agency.

This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045

because it does not involve decisions

intended to mitigate environmental

health or safety risks.

C. Executive Order 13084

Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue

a regulation that is not required by

statute, that significantly affects or

uniquely affects the communities of

Indian tribal governments, and that

imposes substantial direct compliance

costs on those communities, unless the

Federal government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by the tribal

governments. If the mandate is

unfunded, EPA must provide to the

Office of Management and Budget, in a

separately identified section of the

preamble to the rule, a description of

the extent of EPA’s prior consultation

with representatives of affected tribal

governments, a summary of the nature

of their concerns, and a statement

supporting the need to issue the

regulation.

In addition, E.O. 13084 requires EPA

to develop an effective process

permitting elected and other

representatives of Indian tribal

governments ‘‘to provide meaningful

and timely input in the development of

regulatory policies on matters that

significantly or uniquely affect their

communities.’’ Today’s rule does not

significantly or uniquely affect the

communities of Indian tribal

governments. Accordingly, the

requirements of section 3(b) of E.O.

13084 do not apply to this rule.

D. Executive Order 13132

Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10,

1999) revokes and replaces E.O. 12612

(Federalism) and E.O. 12875 (Enhancing

the Intergovernmental Partnership). E.O.

13132 requires EPA to develop an

accountable process to ensure

‘‘meaningful and timely input by State

and local officials in the development of

regulatory policies that have federalism

implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have

federalism implications’’ is defined in

the E.O. to include regulations that 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.’’ Under E.O.

13132, EPA may not issue a regulation

that has federalism implications, that

imposes substantial direct compliance

costs, and that is not required by statute,

unless the Federal government provides

the funds necessary to pay the direct

compliance costs incurred by State and

local governments, or EPA consults with

State and local officials early in the

process of developing the proposed

regulation. EPA also may not issue a

regulation that has federalism

implications and that preempts State

law unless the Agency consults with

State and local officials early in the

process of developing the proposed

regulation.

This final rule will 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

E.O. 13132, 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. Thus, the requirements of

section 6 of the E.O. do not apply to this

rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

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 SIP

approvals under section 110 and

subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act

do not create any new requirements but

simply approve requirements that the

State is already imposing. Therefore,

because the Federal SIP approval does

not 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 EPA 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).

F. Unfunded Mandates 

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 17 / Wednesday, January 26, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 4133

prepare a budgetary impact statement to

accompany any proposed or final rule

that includes a Federal mandate that

may result in estimated annual costs to

State, local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to the private sector, of

$100 million or more. Under Section

205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203

requires EPA to establish a plan for

informing and advising any small

governments that may be significantly

or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval

action promulgated does not include a

Federal mandate that may result in

estimated annual costs of $100 million

or more to either State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector. This Federal action

approves pre-existing requirements

under State or local law, and imposes

no new requirements. Accordingly, no

additional costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or to the private sector,

result from this action.

G. Submission to Congress and the

Comptroller General 

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 rule is not a ‘‘major’’ rule as

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

H. National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act 

Section 12 of the National Technology

Transfer and Advancement Act

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal

agencies to evaluate existing technical

standards when developing a new

regulation. To comply with NTTAA,

EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary

consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available

and applicable when developing

programs and policies unless doing so

would be inconsistent with applicable

law or otherwise impractical.

EPA believes that VCS are

inapplicable to this action. Today’s

action does not require the public to

perform activities conducive to the use

of VCS.

I. 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 March 27, 2000.

Filing a petition for reconsideration by

the Administrator of this final rule does

not affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed, and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone.

Dated: January 6, 2000.

Francis X. Lyons,

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. 7401–7671q.

2. Section 52.777 is amended by

adding paragraph (u) to read as follows:

§ 52.777 Control Strategy: Photochemical

oxidants (hydrocarbon).

* * * * *

(u) On December 17, 1997, and

January 22, 1998, Indiana submitted the

Post-1996 rate-of-progress plan for the

Lake and Porter Counties portion of the

Chicago-Gary-Lake County ozone

nonattainment area. This plan satisfies

the counties’ requirements under

section 182(c)(2)(B) of the Clean Air Act,

as amended in 1990. The plan contains

a 1999 mobile source vehicle emission

budget for volatile organic compounds

of 40,897 pounds per average summer

day.

[FR Doc. 00–1558 Filed 1–25–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[GA–043–1–9905a; and GA–045–1–9906a;

FRL–6528–9]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans Georgia:

Approval of Revisions to Enhanced

Inspection and Maintenance Portion

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving the

State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revisions submitted, in two separate

packages, by the State of Georgia in

November and December of 1998. Both

submittals request revisions to the

enhanced Inspection and Maintenance

(I/M) program, in accordance with the

requirements of Section 110 of the Clean

Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA) and

section 348 of the National Highway

Systems Designation Act (NHSDA). In

total, these submittals request revisions

to modify the following sections:

‘‘Emission Inspection Procedures,’’

‘‘Inspection Station Requirements,’’

‘‘Certificate of Emissions Inspection,’’

‘‘Definitions,’’ ‘‘Waivers,’’ ‘‘Inspection

Fees,’’ and the ‘‘Accelerated Simulated

Mode (ASM) Start-up Standards’’ found

in Appendix H of the Enhanced I/M

Test Equipment, Procedures, and

Specifications—Phase II.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective

March 27, 2000 without further notice,

unless EPA receives adverse comment

by February 25, 2000. If adverse

comment is received, EPA will publish

a timely withdrawal of the direct final

rule in the Federal Register and inform

the public that the rule will not take

effect.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be

addressed to: Dale Aspy (November

1998 submittal) or Lynorae Benjamin

(December 1998 submittal) at the EPA,

Region 4 Air Planning Branch, 61

Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia

30303.

Copies of the state submittals are

available at the following addresses for

inspection during normal business

hours: Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW,

Washington, DC 20460.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 4, Air Planning Branch, 61

Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia

30303–8960. Dale Aspy, 404/562–

9041; Lynorae Benjamin, 404/562–

9040.