# + 2

(,1 1/,1(

Citation: 62 Fed. Reg. 66279 1997
Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Wed Jun 16 16:46:10 2010
-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License
-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.

### No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 66279

the provisions ofthe Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, etseq.).

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted areport containing this document and any other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House ofRepresentatives, and the Comptroller General ofthe General Accounting Office prior to publication ofthis document in today's Federal Register. This action is not a "major rule" as defined in 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Dated: December 9, 1997. Richard D.Wilson, ActingAssistantAdministratorforA irand Radiation.

Accordingly, for the reasons set out above, the publication on October 24, 1997 ofthe final rule at 62 FR 55460 is corrected as follows:
1. On page 55470, first column, lines 45-47, the words "a 90-day period (i.e., the 30-day comment period and 60 days afterthe end ofthe period)" are removed and replaced by the words "a 120-day period (i.e., the 30-day
comment period and 90 days after the end oftheperiod)".

PART72-[CORRECTED] 

### §72.8 [Corrected]

2. On page 55477, third column, §72.8(b)(2), line 4, the words "which that the unit" areremoved and replaced by the words "which the unit".

PART77-[CORRECTED]
§77.4 [Corrected]

3. On page 55487, second column, amendatory instruction 49, line 4, the words "and removing paragraph (g)(2)(i)(D)" are added after the words "(k)(2)".

PART78-[CORRECTED] 

### §78.4 [Corrected]

4. On page 55488, second column, amendatory instruction 54, line 11, the word "shown" is added after the words "based on good cause". [FRDoc. 97 32927 Filed 12 17 97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P 

### ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52 [ILl17-3;FRL-5935-2] Approval and Promulgation ofState Implementation Plan; Illinois
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Finalrule.
SUMMARY: EPA istakingfinal action on the following revisions to the Illinois

ozone StateImplementation Plan (SIP): Rate-Of-Progress (ROP)plans for the purpose ofreducingVolatile Organic Compound (VOC) emissions in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area (Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, and Will Counties, Oswego Township in Kendall County, and Aux Sable and Goose Lake Townships in Grundy County) and in theMetro-East St. Louis

ozone nonattainment area (Madison, Monroe, and St. ClairCounties) by 15 percent byNovember 15, 1996, relative to 1990baseline emissions; contingency plans for the same ozone nonattainment

areas for thepurpose ofachieving an additional 3percentVOC emission reductions beyond the 15 percentROP plans; and transportation control

measures (TCM)forthe Metro-East St. Louis area. Previously, on July 14, 1997, EPA issued a direct final approval of these SIPrevisions. On the same day (July 14, 1997), EPA proposed approval and solicited public comment on the SIPrevisions. This proposed rule established a 30-day public comment period noting thatifadverse comments
were received regarding thedirect final rule EPA would withdraw the direct final rule and publish an additional final rule to addressthe public comments. Adverse comments were received during thepublic comment period, and EPA withdrew the direct final rule on September 3, 1997 (62 FR 46446). This final rule addresses these comments and finalizes the approval of the Chicago and Metro-East area 15 percent and contingency plans, and the Metro-East areaTCMs. DATES: This finalrule iseffective January 20, 1998. ADDRESSES: Copies ofthe SIPrevision request are available for inspection at the following address: (Itis recommended thatyou telephone Mark J.Palermo at (312) 886-6082, before visiting theRegion 5 office).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark J. Palermo, Environmental Protection Specialist, at (312) 886-6082.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background onRate-Of-Progress and Contingency Plan Requirements and EPA Review Criteria

On November 15, 1990, Congress enacted amendments to the Clean Air Act (Act); Public Law 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q. Section 182(b)(1) ofthe Act requires States with ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate and above to submit ROPplans to reduce VOC emissions by 15 percent from 1990 levels byNovember 15, 1996, accounting for growth in the VOC emissions occurring after 1990. For purposes ofthese plans, the Act, under sections 182(b)(1) (B) and (D), defines baseline emissions as the total amounts ofactual VOC emissions from all anthropogenic sources in the ozone nonattainment areas during the calendar year ofthe enactment ofthe revision of the Act (1990), subtracting or factoring
outemission reductions achieved bythe Federal Motor Vehicle Emissions Control Program (FMVCP) regulations promulgated before January 1, 1990, and by the 1990 gasoline Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) regulations (55 FR 23666, June 11, 1990). 1The baseline emissions are also referred to as the "1990 adjusted base year inventories." EPA interprets "calendar year" emissions to consist oftypical ozone
season weekday emissions, because the applicable ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) (0.12 parts per million, one-hour average) is generally exceeded or violated during

ozone season weekdays when ozone precursor emissions and meteorological conditions are the most conducive to

ozone formation. (See "State Implementation Plans: General Preamble for the Implementation of TitleI ofthe Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990," proposed rule (57 FR 13507), FederalRegister, April 16, 1992 (hereafterreferred to as the General Preamble)).

Section 182(b)(1)(D) ofthe Act places limits on what emission reductions can be claimed by ROPplans. All permanent and enforceable VOC emission reductions occurring after 1990 are creditable with the following exceptions: (1) Those resulting from any emission control measure relating to

1The 1990RVPregulations limit the volatility of gasoline in ozonenonattainment areas duringthe

ozoneseason. TheFMVCP provides vehicle emission limits that automobile manufacturers must meet in designing andbuilding new automobiles. 

### Federal Register / Vol. 62,

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66279 1997

### No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

motor vehicle exhaust and evaporative emissions promulgated bythe Administrator by January 1, 1990; (2) those due to RVP regulations promulgated by the Administrator by November 15, 1990, or due to regulations required under section 211(h) ofthe Act; (3) those due to

measures to correct Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) regulations as required under section 182(a)(2)(A) ofthe Act; and (4) those due to measures to correct previously noted problems in an existing vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program asrequired under section 182(a)(2)(B) ofthe Act.

Section 172(c)(9) ofthe Act as implemented by EPA requires States with ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate and above to adopt contingency measures by November 15, 1993. Such measures must provide for the implementation of specific emission control measures if an
ozone nonattainment area fails to achieve ROP or fails to attain the NAAQS within the time-frames specified under the Act. Section 182(c)(9) ofthe Act requires that, in addition to the contingency measures required under section 172(c)(9), the contingency measure SIPrevision for serious and above ozone nonattainment

areas must also provide for the implementation ofspecific measures if the area fails to meet any applicable milestone in the Act. As provided by these sections ofthe Act, the contingency measures must take effect without further action by the State or by the EPA Administrator upon failure by the State to meet ROP requirements or attainment ofthe NAAQS by the required deadline, or other applicable milestones ofthe Act.

The General Preamble states that the contingency measures, in total, must generally be able to provide for 3 percent reductions from the 1990 baseline emissions. While all contingency measures must be fully adopted rules or measures, States can
use the measures in two different ways. A State can choose to implement contingency measures before the November 15, 1996, ROP milestone deadline. Alternatively, a State may decide not to implement acontingency

measure until an area has actually failed
to achieve a ROP or attainment milestone. In the latter situation, the contingency measure emission reduction mustbe achieved within one year following identification ofa milestone failure.

The EPA has developed anumber of guidelines addressing the review ofROP and contingency plans and addressing such topics as: (1) The relationship of ROP plans to other SIP elements required bythe Act; (2) recommended emission reduction levels for various control measures including Federal emission control measures; and (3) emission inventory projection procedures. All relevant guidelines are listed below. 1.Proceduresfor Preparing Emissions Projections,EPA-450/4-91-019, Environmental Protection Agency, July 1991.

2. State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation ofTitle I ofthe Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990; Proposed rule (57 FR 13498), FederalRegister, April 16, 1992. 3. "November 15, 1992, Deliverables for Reasonable Further Progress and Modeling Emission Inventories," memorandum from J.David Mobley, Edwin L.Meyer, and G. T. Helms, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, August 7, 1992.

4. Guidanceon theAdjustedBase YearEmissionsInventoryand the 1996 Target forthe 15PercentRateof ProgressPlans,EPA-452/R-92-005, Environmental Protection Agency, October 1992.

5. "Quantification ofRule Effectiveness Improvements," memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, October 1992. 6. Guidance forGrowthFactors, Projections,and ControlStrategies for the 15PercentRate-of-Progress Plans, EPA-452/R-93-002, March 1993.

7. "Correction to 'Guidance on the Adjusted Base Year Emissions Inventory and the 1996 Target for the 15 Percent Rate ofProgress Plans'," memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief,Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, March 2, 1993. 8. "15 Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans," memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief,Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, March 16, 1993.

9. Guidanceon theRelationship Between the15 PercentRate-of-Progress PlansandOtherProvisionsofthe Clean AirAct, EPA-452/R-93-007, Environmental Protection Agency, May 1993.

10. "Credit Toward the 15 Percent Rate-of-Progress Reductions from Federal Measures," memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief,Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, May 6, 1993.

11. Guidanceon Preparing EnforceableRegulationsand CompliancePrograms forthe 15Percent Rate-of-ProgressPlans,EPA-452/R-93- 005, Environmental Protection Agency, June 1993. 12. "Correction Errata to the 15 Percent Rate-of-Progress Plan Guidance Series," memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief,Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, July 28, 1993.

13. "Early Implementation of Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas," memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief,Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, August 13, 1993.

14. "Region IIIQuestions on Emission Projections for the 15 Percent Rate-ofProgress Plans," memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief,Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, Office of AirQuality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, August 17, 1993.

15. "Guidance on Issues Related to 15 Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans," memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, Environmental Protection Agency, August 23, 1993.

16. "Credit Toward the 15 Percent Requirements from Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings," memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, September 10, 1993.

17. "Reclassification ofAreas to Nonattainment and 15 Percent Rate-ofProgress Plans," memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, September 20, 1993.

18. "Clarification ofGuidance for Growth Factors, Projections and Control Strategies for the 15 Percent Rate of Progress Plans," memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief,Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, Office of AirQuality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, October 6, 1993.

19. "Review and Rulemaking on 15 Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans," memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, October 6, 1993.

20. "Questions and Answers from the 15 Percent Rate-of-Progress Plan 

## 66280 Federal Register / Vol. 62,

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66280 1997

### Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 

## 66281

Workshop," memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief,Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, October 29, 1993.

21. "Rate-of-Progress Plan Guidance

on the 15 Percent Calculations," memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, October 29, 1993.

22. "Clarification ofIssues Regarding the Contingency Measures that are due November 15, 1993, for Moderate and Above Ozone Nonattainment Areas," memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, Environmental Protection Agency, November 8, 1993.

23. "Credit for 15percent Rate-ofProgress Plan Reductions from the Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coating Rule," memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, December 9, 1993.

24. "Rule Effectiveness Guidance: Integration ofInventory, Compliance, and Assessment Applications," memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, January 21, 1994.

25. "Guidance on Projection of Nonroad Inventories to Future Years," memorandum from Philip A. Lorang, Director, Emission Planning and Strategies Division, Office ofAir and Radiation, Environmental Protection Agency, February 4, 1994.

26. "Discussion at the Division Directors Meeting on June 1 Concerning the 15 Percent and 3 Percent Calculations," memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief,Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, June 2, 1994.

27. "Future Nonroad Emission Reduction Credits for Court-Ordered Nonroad Standards," memorandum from Philip A. Lorang, Director, Emission Planning and Strategies Division, Office ofAir and Radiation, Environmental Protection Agency, November 28, 1994.

28. "Credit for the 15 Percent Rate-ofProgress Plans for Reductions from the Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coating Rule and the Autobody Refinishing Rule," memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, November 29, 1994.

29. "Transmittal ofRule Effectiveness Protocol for 1996 Demonstrations," memorandum from Susan E. Bromm, Director, Chemical, Commercial Services and Municipal Division, Office ofCompliance, Environmental Protection Agency, December 22, 1994. 30. "Future Nonroad Emission Reduction Credits for Locomotives," memorandum from Philip A. Lorang, Director, Emission Planning and Strategies Division, Office ofAir and Radiation, Environmental Protection Agency, January 3, 1995. 31. "Credit for the 15 Percent Rate-ofProgress Plans for Reductions from the Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coating Rule," memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, March 22, 1995. 32. "Fifteen Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans-Additional Guidance," memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, May 5, 1995. 33. "Regulatory Schedule for Consumer and Commercial Products under Section 183(e) ofthe Clean Air Act," memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, June 22, 1995. 34. "Update on the credit for the 15 percent Rate-of-Progress Plans for Reductions from the Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings Rule," memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, March 7, 1996.


### II. Rate-Of-Progress and Contingency Plan Submittalsfor the Chicago and Metro-East St. Louis Ozone Nonattainment Areas

A. Adm inistrative Actions! Requirements

The Act requires States to observe certain procedural requirements in developing SIPs and SIP revisions for submittal to the EPA. Sections 110(a)(2) and 110(1) ofthe Act provide that each SIP submitted by a State must be adopted by the State afterreasonable notice and public hearing.

The State ofIllinois held a public hearing on October 15, 1993, to hear and collect public comments on the 15 percent ROP and 3 percent contingency plans for both the Chicago and the Metro-East St. Louis ozone nonattainment areas. Subsequently, the plans were adopted bythe State and submitted to EPA on November 15, 1993. The submittals included records ofpublic comments, hearing records, and responses to public comments. The plans were supplemented with additional submittals to the EPA on February 18, 1994, November 22, 1994, January 31, 1995, and May 23, 1995. These subsequent submittals contain supplemental documentation on the State's emission reduction estimates for various source categories. At EPA's request, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) made additional submittals oftechnical support information and updated emission estimates on May 9, 1996, and July 22, 1996. All ofthe above submittals are considered to be part of the record ofdecision for this rulemaking. All submittals are available forreview at the EPA Region 5 offices noted above.

On January 21, 1994, by letter, the EPA found the November 1993, submittals to be incomplete due to an incomplete set ofState emission control regulations. Subsequently, the State adopted and submitted allrequired regulations. EPA found the ROP and contingency plan submittals to be complete, by letter, on June 15, 1995.

B. AccurateEmissionInventories
Sections 172(c)(3) and 182(b)(1) ofthe Actrequire nonattainment plans to include and be based on comprehensive, accurate, and current inventories ofactual emissions from all

sources ofrelevant pollutants in the nonattainment areas. On March 14, 1995 (60 FR 13631), EPA approved base year (1990) VOC emission inventories forthe Chicago and Metro-East St. Louis ozone nonattainment areas (the inventories also included major source emissions from surrounding areas). The VOC emissions from these emission inventories establish the baseline for Illinois' ROP and contingency plans.

It should be noted throughout the discussions that follow that volatile organic emissions are referred to asVOC emissions. In the Illinois ROP and contingency plans (as well as in the base year emission inventory documentation), the Stateuses the term "Volatile Organic Material (VOM)" rather than VOC. The State's definition ofVOM is equivalent to EPA's definition ofVOC. The two terms are interchangeable when discussing volatile organic emissions. For consistency with the Act and with EPA policy, the term VOCis used in this rulemaking. VOC emissions referred to in today's action are identical to VOM emissions referred to in Illinois' ROP and contingency measure plans.
C.Required VOCEmissionReductions

Following EPA ROP guidelines (primarily guidance contained in the Guidanceon theAdjustedBase Year

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66281 1997

## 66282 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

EmissionsInventoryandthe 1996 Targetofthe 15PercentRate ofProgress Plans,EPA-452/R-92-005, October 1992, and in the Guidance forGrowth Factors,Projections,andControl Strategies forthe 15PercentRate-ofProgressPlans, EPA-452/R-93-002, March 1993), the IEPA has determined that creditable VOC reductions (as opposed to noncreditable emission reductions defined in section 182(b)(1)(D) ofthe Act) of249.98 tons per day (TPD)for the Chicago ozone nonattainment area, and 26.66 TPD for the Metro-East St. Louis ozone nonattainment area are needed to achieve the 15% ROP requirement. To meet the 3 percent contingency requirement, the IEPA determined that the contingency measures must also be able to achieve a 31.92 TPD VOC emission reduction in the Chicago

ozone nonattainment area and 4.96 TPD VOC emission reduction in the MetroEast St. Louis ozone nonattainment area. The IEPA has fully documented the calculation ofthese emission reduction requirements and has shown that EPA recommended procedures were followed. This documentation includes identification ofemission/source growth factors and noncreditable emission reductions from emission controls referenced in section 182(b)(1)(D) ofthe Act. Tables 1 and 2 summarize the calculation ofemission reductions needed by 1996.

TABLE 

### 1
.- EMISSION REDUCTIONS REQUIRED BY 

### 1996 FOR THE CHICAGO AREA

Calculation of reduction needs by 1996 Tons VOC/day

1990 Chicago Area TotalVOC Emissions .......................................................................................................................................... 1,363.40 1990 ROP Emissions (A nthropogenic only)

........................................................................................................................................ 1,216.56 1990-1996 Noncreditable Reductions (Reductions from 1990 RVP, Pre-1990 FMVCP, and RACT Fix-up Regulations)

............... 199.93 1990 Adjusted Base Year Emissions (1990 ROP Emissions minus Noncreditable Reductions)

....................................................... 1,064.05 15 Percent of Adjusted Base Year Emissions

.................................................................................................................................... 159.61 Total Required Emission Reductions by 1996 (15 Percent ofAdjusted Base Year Emissions plus Noncreditable Reductions)

..... 359.54 1996 Target Level (1990 ROP Emissions minus Total Required Emission Reductions by 1996)

..................................................... 857.02 1996 Projected Emissions (1990 Adjusted Base Year Emissions plus Growth Factors)

................................................................... 1,107.00 Reduction Needs By 1996 To Achieve 15 Percent Net Of Growth (1996 Projected Emissions plus 1996 Target Level)

................ 249.98 Contingency Measure Requirement (3% ofAdjusted Base Year Emissions)

.................................................................................... 31.92

T

otalEmission Reductions Required

........................................................................................................................................... 281.90

TABLE 2.-EMISSION REDUCTIONS REQUIRED BY 

### 1996 FOR THE METRO-EAST ST. LOUIS AREA

Calculation of reduction needs by 1996 Tons VOC/day

1990 Metro-East AreaTotal V OCEmissions

...................................................................................................................................... 234.79 1990 ROP Emissions (A nthropogenic only)

........................................................................................................................................ 174.65 1990-1996 Noncreditable Reductions (1990 RVP, Pre-1990 FMVCP, and RACT Fix-Up Reductions)

........................................... 10.75 1990 Adjusted Base Year Emissions (1990 ROP Emissions minus Noncreditable Reductions)

....................................................... 165.24 15 Percent of Adjusted Base Year Emissions

.................................................................................................................................... 24.79 Total Required Emission Reductions by 1996 (15 Percent ofAdjusted Base Year Emissions plus Noncreditable Reductions)

..... 35.54 1996 Target Level (1990 ROP Emissions minus Total Required Emission Reductions by 1996)

..................................................... 139.11 1996 Projected Emissions (1990 Adjusted Base Year Emissions plus Growth Factors)

................................................................... 165.77 Reduction Needs By 1996 To Achieve 15 Percent Net Of Growth (1996 Projected Emissions minus 1996 Target Level)

............. 26.66 Contingency Measure Requirement (3% ofAdjusted Base Year Emissions)

.................................................................................... 4.96

T

otalEmission Reductions Required

........................................................................................................................................... 31.62

D. ControlMeasures

Tables 3 and 4below summarize the creditable emission reductions from the 15% ROP and 3% contingency plan control measures. These tables indicate the emission reduction credit the State has claimed for each control measure, and the actual emission reduction credit which EPA finds acceptable. Unless otherwise noted, the emission control

measures apply to both the Chicago and Metro-East St. Louis ozone nonattainment areas. Table 5 indicates the date ofEPA approval ofState adopted control measures, date ofEPA promulgation ofFederal control
measures, or an identification ofthe

source for taking credit for a control
measure, where EPApromulgation has not occurred. Following the tables is a discussion describing each ofthe emission control measures selected to help achieve ROP and contingency

measure plan requirements, and EPA's review ofthe emission reduction claimed for each control measure. (Note that the IEPA, in describing the selected emission control measures and emission reduction impacts, does not distinguish between ROP plan measures and contingency plan measures).

Emission reductions not needed to achieve 15 percent ROP and 3percent contingency requirements in the Chicago and Metro-East St. Louis ozone nonattainment areas, respectively, will be applied toward achieving the post1996 ROP requirement, leading to attainment ofthe ozone air quality standard. (Post-1996 ROP plans are required to be submitted under section 182(c)(2)(B) ofthe Act). Certain federal measures relied on by Illinois to meet the 15percent ROP requirement were not implemented by 1996: non-road small engine standards, Toxic Substance Disposal Facility (TSDF) RACT Phase II Controls, Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) coating, traffic coating, and consumer and commercial products solvent control. Many ofthe 15 percent ROP SIPs originally submitted
to EPAhave relied on some ofthese federal measures as well as reductions from enhanced I/M programs which

were not implemented by 1996. Consequently, itis no longer possible for these States to achieve the portion of the 15percent reductions attributed to theseprograms by November 15, 1996. Under these circumstances, disapproval ofthe 15 percent SIPs would serve no

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66282 1997

### Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 

### 66283

purpose. Therefore, in these circumstances, EPA will approve a 15 percent ROP plan SIP ifthe emission reductions under theplan will achieve the 15 percent level as soon after November 15, 1996, aspracticable. To make this "as soon aspracticable" determination, theEPA must determine that the 15percent ROP plan contains allVOC control strategies that are practicable for the nonattainment area in question and that meaningfully accelerate the date by which the 15 percent levelis achieved. TheEPA does not believe that measures meaningfully accelerate the 15 percent date ifthey provide only an insignificant amount of reductions. However, as aminimum requirement, EPAwill approve a 15 percent SIPonly ifit achieves the reductions from themeasures needed to reach the 15percent levelby no later than November 15, 1999.

The federal rules for federal non-road smallengine standards and TSDF RACT Phase Ihave been promulgated and emission reductions will occur before November 15, 1999. Proposed rules have been published forAIM coatings, traffic coatings, and consumer and commercial products, and EPAexpects finalrules tobe promulgated in 1998, with compliance dates for theserules to

occurno later than November 15, 1999. EPA hasreviewed otherVOC SIP

measures thatare at leasttheoretically available to Illinois, and has concluded thatimplementation ofany such

measure thatmightbe appropriate would not accelerate the dateof achieving the 15 percentreductions. Therefore,EPA finds that Illinois' ROP plans forthe Chicago and Metro-East

ozonenonattainment areas achieve 15 percent emission reduction as soon as practicable.

TABLE 3.-CONTROL MEASURES FOR THE CHICAGO OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA

VOC reduction VOC reduction Control Measure state claimed credit accepttons/day edtons/day

Mobile Source Measures: Enhanced Vehicle I/M Program

........................................................................................................................ 19.60 See below Conventional TCMs .......................................................................................................................................... 2.00 2.00 National Energy Policy Act of 1992

.................................................................................................................. 0.20 0.20 Post-1994 Tier 1Vehicle Emission Rates

........................................................................................................ 2.40 2.40 1995 Reformulated Gasoline

............................................................................................................................ 112.79 112.79 1992 Vehicle I/M Program Amendments

.......................................................................................................... 8.40 8.40 Federal Detergent Additive Gasoline

................................................................................................................ 2.20 2.20 Federal Non-Road Small Engine Standards

.................................................................................................... 4.37 4.37

Subto tal

...................................................................................................................................................... 151.96 132.36 Industrial Source Measures: RACT Geographic Expansion

........................................................................................................................... 3.43 3.43 Expanded RACT- Lowered Source Size Cutoffs (25 Tons Per Year)

............................................................ 2.78 2.78 New Control Technique Guidelines (CTG): Batch Processes ........................................................................................................................................ 12.60 3.21 Industrial Waste Treatment Facilities (IWTF)

............................................................................................ 0.14 0.14 Volatile Organic Liquid (VOL)Storage

...................................................................................................... 2.18 2.18 Plastic Parts Coating

................................................................................................................................. 0.28 0.28 L

ithographic Printing .................................................................................................................................. 4.06 4.06 Automobile Refinishing

.............................................................................................................................. 16.30 16.30 Coke Oven National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)/Maximum Available Control Technology (M ACT)

................................................................................................................................ 6.93 6.93 SOCMINE SH AP

.............................................................................................................................................. 1.33 1.33 TSDF RACT Phase Iand IIControls

............................................................................................................... 2.08 2.08 Marine Vessel Loading

..................................................................................................................................... 1.40 1.40 Tightening of RACT Standardsand Source Size Cutoffs

................................................................................ 12.05 12.05 Plant Shu t-Downs ............................................................................................................................................. 31.60 31.60 Improved Rule Effectiveness from Clean Air Act Permit Program (CAAPP)

................................................... 26.30 26.30

Subto tal

...................................................................................................................................................... 123.46 114.07 Area Source Measures: Stage IIService Station Vapor Recovery

......................................................................................................... 23.67 23.67 AIMCoating ...................................................................................................................................................... 13.28 10.60 Trafficand M aintenance Coatings

.................................................................................................................... 3.73 3.73 Underground Gasoline Storage Tank Breathing Control

................................................................................. 4.87 4.87 Consumer and Commercial Products Solvent Control

..................................................................................... 8.10 8.10

Subto tal

...................................................................................................................................................... 53.65 50.97

Total

........................................................................................................................................................... 329.07 297.40

TABLE 4.-CONTROL MEASURES FOR THE METRO-EAST ST. LOUIS OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA

VOC reduction VOC reduction Control measure credit re- credit apquested (TPD) proved (TPD)

Mobile Source Measures: Enhanced Vehicle I/M Program

........................................................................................................................ ConventionalTCM s .......................................................................................................................................... See below 0.20

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66283 1997

### 66284 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 4.-CONTROL MEASURES FOR THE METRO-EAST ST. LOUIS OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA-Continued

VOC reduction VOC reduction Control measure credit re- credit apquested (TPD) proved (TPD)

Post-1994 Tier 1Vehicle Emission Rates

....................................................................................................... 0.19 0.19 7.2/8.2 psi RVP Conventional Gasoline

........................................................................................................... 8.55 8.55 1992 Vehicle I/M Program Amendments

.......................................................................................................... 0.20 0.20 Federal Detergent Additive Gasoline

................................................................................................................ 0.20 0.20 Federal Non-Road Small Engine Standards

.................................................................................................... 0.42 0.42

Subto tal

...................................................................................................................................................... 14.56 9.76 Industrial Source Measures: New CTGs or Available CTGs: Batch Processes ........................................................................................................................................ 0.36 0.36 IWTF

.......................................................................................................................................................... 0.10 0.10 Automobile Refinishing

.............................................................................................................................. 1.20 1.20 Coke Oven NESHAP/MACT

............................................................................................................................. 0.10 0.10 SOCMINE SH AP

.............................................................................................................................................. 0.26 0.26 TSDF RACT Phase Iand IIControls

............................................................................................................... 0.06 0.06 Marine Vessel Loading

..................................................................................................................................... 11.82 11.82 Tightening of RACT Standardsand Source Size Cutoffs

................................................................................ 0.39 0.39 Plant Shu t-Downs ............................................................................................................................................. 1.44 1.44 Improved Rule Effectiveness from CAAPP

...................................................................................................... 9.50 9.50 Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) Standards Early Reduction Program

.............................................................. 0.74 0.74

Subto tal

...................................................................................................................................................... 25.97 25.97 Area Source Measures: AIMCoating ...................................................................................................................................................... 0.94 0.75 Trafficand M aintenance Coating

...................................................................................................................... 0.62 0.62 Underground Gasoline Storage Tank Breathing Control

................................................................................. 0.44 0.44 Consumer and Commercial Product Solvent Reduction

.................................................................................. 0.58 0.58

Subto tal

...................................................................................................................................................... 2.58 2.39

Total

........................................................................................................................................................... 43.11 38.12

TABLE 5.-FEDERAL APPROVAL OR PROMULGATION OF CONTROL MEASURES


### Control measure Date of EPA approval
Chicago AreaTCMs

........................................... Metro-East Area TCMs

....................................... 1992 National Energy Policy Act

........................ Post-1994 Tier 1Vehicle Emission Rates

.......... 1995 Reformulated Gasoline

.............................. Metro-East area 7.2 psi RVP Conventional Gasoline Rule. 1992 Vehicle I/M Program Amendments

............ Federal Gasoline Detergent Additive

.................. Federal Non-Road Small Engine Standards

......

Chicago Area RACT Geographic Expansion

..... Chicago Area Expanded RACT-Lowered Size

Cutoffs (25 TonsVOC PerYear). B

atch Processes
................................................. IWTF

................................................................... VOL Storage Tanks

............................................ Plastic Parts Coating

.......................................... Lithographic Printing

........................................... Automobile Refinishing

....................................... Coke Oven NESHAP

.......................................... SOCMI NESHAP

................................................ TSDF RACT (RCRA) Phase Iand II

..................

Marine Vessel Loading Control

.......................... Tightened RACT Coating Standards

.................. Tightened RACT SOCMI Air Oxidation

.............. Plant Shut-downs
................................................ Improved Rule Effectiveness from CAAPP

........ HAP Standards Early Reduction Program

......... Underground Gasoline Storage Tank Breathing

Controls. September21, 1995 (60 FR 4886). Date of EPA approval action is date oftoday's Federal Register. Seediscussion below. Federal Regulation March 14, 1996 (61 FR 10621). Federal Regulation June 5, 1991 (56 FR25724). Federal Regulation February 16, 1994 (59 FR 7716). March 23, 1995 (60 FR 5318).
April 9, 1996 (61 FR 15715). Federal Regulation November 1, 1994 (59 FR 54706). Federal Regulation August 2, 1995 (60 FR 34582) See Guidance on Projection of Nonroad

Inventories to Future Years," February 4, 1994, and "Future Nonroad Emission Reduction Credits for Court-Ordered Nonroad Standards," November 28, 1994. September 9, 1994 (59 FR46562). October21, 1996 (61 FR 54556).
April 2, 1996 (61 FR 14484). Federal Regulation April 22, 1994 (59 FR 19468). August 8, 1996 (61 FR41338). October26, 1995 (60 FR 54807). November 8, 1995 (60 FR56238). July 25, 1996 (61 FR 38577). Federal Regulation October 27, 1993 (58 FR 57911). Federal Regulation April 22, 1994 (59 FR 19454). Federal Regulation Phase I, June 21, 1990 (55 FR 25454) Phase II, December 6, 1994 (59

FR 62896) See "Credit Toward the 15 Percent Rate-Of-Progress Reductions from Federal Measures," May 6, 1993. April 3, 1995 (60 FR 16801). February 13, 1996 (61 FR 5511). September27, 1995 (60 FR 49770). Seediscussion below. March 7, 1995 (60 FR 12478). Federal Regulation November 21, 1994 (59 FR59924). March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15233).

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66284 1997

### Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 

## 66285

TABLE 5.-FEDERAL APPROVAL OR PROMULGATION OF CONTROL MEASURES-Continued

Control measure Date of EPA approval
Stage IIGasoline Vapor Recovery

..................... January 12, 1993 (58 FR 3841). AIM Coatings

...................................................... Creditable toward ROP. See "Update on the Credit for the 15 Percent ROP Plans for Reductions from the AIM Coatings Rule," March 7, 1996. Traffic and Maintenance Coatings

...................... Creditable toward ROP. See "Update on the Credit for the 15 Percent ROP Plans for Reductions from the AIM Coatings Rule," March 7, 1996. Consumer and Commercial Products Solvent Creditable toward ROP. See "Regulatory Schedule for Consumer and Commercial Products

Control. under Section 183(e) ofthe Clean Air Act," June 22, 1995.

1. Mobile Sources

a.EnhancedVehicle IM. The Illinois 15 percent ROP plan submittal claims emission reduction credit for enhanced vehicle I/Mfor the Chicago and MetroEast St. Louis areas. The State has signed a contract for the construction and implementation ofenhanced I/M, which provides that enhanced I/M testing will begin in January 1999. Based on EPA's review ofthe State's plan submittal, the State has adopted sufficient measures, in conjunction with credit from certain Federal measures, to achieve 15percent ROP and 3 percent contingency requirements without enhanced I/M. Enhanced I/M willplay

a significant role in achieving post-1996 9 percent ROP requirements, and ultimately, help bring the Chicago and Metro-East St. Louis ozone nonattainment areas into attainment of the public health based ozone air quality standards. The amount of emission reduction credit which can be taken for enhanced I/Mwill be determined when Illinois submits and EPA takes action on the State's 9 percent ROP plan.

b. ConventionalTCMs. The Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) for the Chicago and Metro-East St. Louis areas (Chicago Area Transportation Study and East-West Gateway Coordinating Council, respectively) are administering a number ofTCM projects to both reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and the
amount ofVOC emissions per VMT. The projects have been programmed and funded through the areas' Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP)under the federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ). 2 Illinois is claiming emission reductions from the TCMs in its 15percent ROP plans for the Chicago and Metro-East areas.

States can take credit for TCMs which

are approved as revisions to the SIP.

2MPOs can utilizeUnited States Department of Transportation (DOT) funds from CMAQ. CMAQ is

a federal program which provides funding for transportation related projects and programs designed to contribute to attainment ofair quality standards. EPA's requirements for TCMs are summarized in the June 1993, EPA guidance document, Guidanceon Preparing EnforceableRegulationsand CompliancePrograms forthe 15Percent Rate-of-ProgressPlans.The required elements are (1) acomplete description ofthe measure, and, if possible, its estimated emissions reduction benefits; (2) evidence that the measure was properly adopted by ajurisdiction(s) with legal authority to execute the
measure; (3) evidence that funding will be available to implement the measure; (4) evidence that all necessary approvals have been obtained from all appropriate government offices; (5) evidence that a complete schedule to plan, implement, and enforce the measure has been adopted by the implementing agencies; and (6) a description ofany monitoring program to evaluate the measure's effectiveness and to allow for necessary in-place corrections or alterations.

The Chicago area TCMs were approved on September 21, 1995 (60 FR 4886). The Metro-East St. Louis area's 15 percent ROP plan includes work trip reductions, transit improvements, and traffic flow improvements TCMs. These TCMs arebeing approved in today's action as arevision to the SIP because they fully satisfy all therequirements based on the following: (1) a complete description ofthe program and estimated emission reduction are provided in documentation included in the docket for this rulemaking action; (2) the measure has been adopted by the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council, the authorized MPO for the St. Louis metropolitan area; (3) the program is currently operating and has received federal CMAQ program money for operation; (4) allnecessary approvals have been obtained from DOT in the FY 1994-1997 TIP (which includes the TCMs); (5) the TIPprovides the schedule, implementation mechanism, and also the enforcement mechanism for the TCM (theconformity provisions in 40 CFRpart 93 provide that TCMs in an approved SIP must be implemented on schedule before a conformity determination can be made by DOT); and (6) the CMAQ program requires monitoring ofprograms funded under CMAQ and annual reports to DOTon achieved emission reductions.

The emission reductions claimed in the ROP plans for both the Chicago and Metro-East TCMs are adequately documented and acceptable.

c. National EnergyPolicyAct of1992. The National Energy Policy Act (EPAct)

was enacted in October 1992. EPAct mandates implementation (use) of Alternative Fueled Vehicles (AFVs) in federal, State, and utility fleets. EPAct requires that 25% ofnew vehicle purchases by federal fleets, 10% ofnew vehicle purchases by State fleets, and 30% ofnew vehicle purchases byutility fleets must be AFVs beginning in 1996. IEPA estimated that EPAct would implement approximately 2,000AFVs in the Chicago Area by 1996. The EPA mobile source emission factor model, MOBILE5a, was used to determine the impacts ofEPAct on mobile source emissions. The State's emission reduction estimates for this federal

measure are adequately documented and acceptable.

d. Post-1994Tier] EmissionRates. Section 202 ofthe Act sets new Tier 1 emission standards for motorvehicles,

some ofwhich will be implemented prior to the end of 1996. The Tier 1 standards are approximately twice as stringent asprior (established prior to the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments)
motorvehicle emission standards. For passenger cars and light-duty trucks weighing up to 6,000 pounds, the implementation ofthe standards is to be phased-in over three years, 40 percent of the manufactured vehicles for model year 1994, 80 percent ofthe manufactured vehicles in model year 1995, and 100 percent ofthe manufactured vehicles in the model year 1996 and later. For gasoline and dieselpowered light-duty trucks weighing more than 6,000 pounds, the Tier 1 standards are to be met in 50 percent ofthe manufactured vehicles in model year 1996 and in 100 percent of the manufactured vehicles thereafter.

The IEPA has determined that the emission reductions resulting from these tightened vehicle standards are

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66285 1997

## 66286 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

creditable toward the 15 percent ROP plan and used the MOBILE5a emission factor model to calculate the VOC emission reductions for this control

measure. The State's emission reduction estimates are adequately documented and acceptable.

e. 1992 IM ProgramAmendments. As

aresult ofan agreement resolving a lawsuit between Wisconsin and EPA, the State ofIllinois added a tamper check and two-speed idle test to the basic I/M program in the Chicago metropolitan area. The I/Mprogram area coverage was also increased to encompass almost allofthe Chicago metropolitan area. These changes in the I/Mprogram were implemented in 1992, and were approved byEPA on April 9, 1996 (61 FR 15715). Similarchanges in the components ofthe I/M program
were implemented in the Metro-East St. Louis area, as well.

The IEPA used the MOBILE5a emission factor model to estimate the emission reductions for both areas. The State's emission reduction estimates are adequately documented and are acceptable.

f.

FederalDetergentGasoline Additive. The Federal detergent gasoline additive regulation was promulgated November 1, 1994 (59 FR54706). This regulation requires, beginning January 1, 1995, that gasoline sold nationwide contain additives to prevent accumulation ofdeposits in engines and fuel systems. Preventing such deposits maintains the efficiencies ofengine systems and reduces VOC emissions resulting from engine efficiency degradation.

The State has reviewed guidance from EPA's Office ofMobile Sources which indicates that the use ofgasoline containing therequired additives will reduce vehicle VOC emissions by0.7 percent in 1996. This guidance is the basis for the VOC emission reductions claimed in the 15 percent ROP plans for this control measure. The emission reduction estimates are acceptable.

g. Federal Non-RoadSm allEngine Standards.Federal standards for nonroad engines (25horsepower and below)

were promulgated on July 3, 1995 (60 FR 34582). The standards would primarily affect 2 stroke and 4 stroke lawn and garden equipment and light commercial, construction, and logging equipment. Although full implementation ofthis control measure will not occuruntil after November 15, 1996, the States can take credit for this

measure pursuant to EPApolicy memoranda, "Guidance on Projection of Nonroad Inventories to Future Years," February 4, 1994, and "Future Nonroad Emission Reduction Credits for CourtOrdered Nonroad Standards," November 28, 1994. Based on this policy, the IEPA assumed that the Federal non-road small engine standards would reduce 1996 VOC emissions from these sources by 4.5 percent. The IEPA also assumes that these rules will have arule effectiveness of 100percent because therules affect allmanufacturers ofsmall engines in the nation. The 4.5 percent emission reduction claim is assumed to appropriately account for rule penetration (the fraction ofsmall engine emissions affected by the rule).The assumed emission reduction percentage is acceptable.

h. ReformulatedGasoline.Beginning January 1, 1995, sellers ofgasoline in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area
were required to sell onlyreformulated gasoline as required under federal regulation promulgated February 16, 1994 (59 FR7716). Using the MOBILE5a emission factor model, the IEPA has determined that the use ofreformulated gasoline will result in a 15percent reduction in vehicle VOC emissions. The IEPA notes that the useof reformulated gasoline will also result in lower gasoline marketing and off-road engine emissions in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area. The emission reduction estimates are adequately documented and acceptable. i. 7.2 RVP Gasoline.On October 25, 1994, the IEPA submitted to the EPA a SIP revision request for the purpose of lowering the RVP ofgasoline from 9.0 pounds per square inch (psi)to 7.2psi in the Metro-East St. Louis ozone nonattainment area. EPA approved this SIP revision on March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15233). The Illinois rulerequires the use of7.2 psi RVP gasoline in the MetroEast St. Louis area during the period of June 1 through September 15 each year beginning in 1995. The rule grants a 1 psi waiver for ethanol blended gasolines that have an ethanol content between 9 and 10 percent ethanol by volume.

The IEPA used the MOBILE5a emission factor model to calculate the resulting VOC emission reduction for on-highway mobile sources. Illinois used aRVP ratio (reduced RVP versus average RVP ofgasoline sold in 1990) alongwith 1996 gasoline usage estimates to calculate the VOC emission reduction from gasoline marketing

sources. The calculation ofthe emission reduction is adequately documented and acceptable.

2. Industrial Sources

a.RA CTGeographicExpansion.The State, on August 13, 1992, adopted a rule to expand the coverage ofexisting RACT regulations to include Oswego Township in Kendall County, and Aux Sable and Goose Lake Townships in Grundy County. This geographic expansion has affected several facilities, which are adequately documented in the ROP plan submittal. EPA approved this expansion on September 9, 1994 (59 FR46562). The emission reduction estimate is acceptable.

b. RA CT-Reduction inMajorSource Threshold.Section 182(d) ofthe Act defines "major source" for severe ozone nonattainment areas to include any stationary source or group ofsources located within a contiguous area and under common control that emits, or has thepotential to emit, at least 25 tons ofVOC per year. This establishes a maximum source size cutofffor the application ofRACT rules (the Statehas adopted RACT rules with much smaller

source size cutoffs for most applicable

source categories) for severe ozone nonattainment areas, such as the Chicago area.

On January 6, 1994, the Illinois Pollution Control Board (IPCB) adopted modified source size cutoffs of25 tons per year, potential to emit, for flexographic/rotogravure printing operations, petroleum solvent dry cleaners, and non-Control Technology Guideline (non-CTG) sources in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area. Other source categories regulated in the Chicago area are covered by categoryspecific source size applicability cutoffs well below the 25 ton VOCper year specified in section 182(d) ofthe Act. EPA approved thisregulation on October 21, 1996 (61 FR54556). The State's emission reduction estimates for thisrule are adequately documented and acceptable.

c. Post-1990CTGRules. Section 182(b)(2)(A) ofthe Act requires States with moderate and above ozone nonattainment areas to adopt RACT rules coveringpost-1990 CTG source categories. Illinois claimed emission reduction credit for many ofthe State rules adopted to meet the section 182(b)(2)(A) requirement. The following briefly discusses these rules and claimed emission reduction credit taken by the State:

i. Batch Processes. Illinois' batch process rule controls VOC emissions from batch chemical processes found in the following industries: plastic materials and resin manufacturing; cyclic crudes and intermediates manufacturing and processing; industrial organic chemical manufacturing; pharmaceuticals manufacturing; gum and wood chemicals manufacturing; and agricultural chemicals manufacturing. Thisrule was derived from an EPA draft

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66286 1997

### Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 

## 66287

CTG dated December 29, 1993, and an EPA Alternative Control Techniques (ACT) document completed in February 1994. The rule was approved byEPA on April 2, 1996 (61 FR 14484). The IEPA used RACT flow rate equations from the draft CTG for the development ofthe control specifications ofbatch processes. Emissions must be controlled using condensers, absorbers, adsorbers, thermal destruction systems, flares, thermal incinerators, or catalytic incinerators. In determining the applicability ofthe control requirements oftherule, owners or operators must determine the actual average flow rates for vent streams. Ifthe actual average vent stream flow rate (standard cubic feet per minute) is below the applicability flow rate value calculated using the RACT flow rate equations (specific to volatility), the VOC from a process vent must be controlled with a reduction efficiency of90 percent (or down to a VOC concentration ofno
more than 20 parts per million volume). Sources are exempted from emission controls if the annual VOC emissions

are less than 500pounds for individual batch operations or less than 30,000 pounds for abatch process train. The

owner or operator mustkeep records of average flow rates during testingperiods and annual VOC mass emission rates. Compliance with this rule is required by March 15, 1996.

The IEPA has determined there are 15 affected facilities in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area and 3 affected facilities in the Metro-East St. Louis

ozone nonattainment area. The EPA accepts the emission reductions of3.21 TPD claimed for facilities in the Chicago
area, and 0.36 TPD in the Metro-East

area.

It should be noted that the State, during discussions with the EPA, has raised thepoint that a significant additional VOC emission reduction may be claimed for this source category. In the earlier submittals, the State indicated a significant emission reduction of9.39 TPD for an alcohol stripperunit at the Stepan Company's Millsdale facility (Chicago ozone nonattainment area) (permit/source number 78030038087). The State and EPA are working with the affected company to determine the exact timing ofthe emission reduction. Ifit is ultimately determined that the emission reduction occurred after 1990, the State will seek the correction ofthe ROPplan
to credit this emission reduction in the post-1996 ROP plans.

ii. IWTF. The State is claiming emission reduction from the NESHAP for this source category, 40 CFRpart 63, subpart G,promulgated April 22, 1994 (59 FR 19468). The State's emission reduction estimates for this rule are adequately documented and acceptable. It should be noted, however, that the IEPA is still expected to develop a State rule for this source category to implement RACT. IfaRACT level rule is adopted and implemented in the near future, the State may claim additional emission reduction credits for this

source category in thepost-1996 ROP plans.

iii. VOL Storage. On November 30, 1994, the IEPA submitted an adopted rule and supporting information for the control ofVOC emissions at VOL storage operations in the Chicago and Metro-East St. Louis ozone nonattainment areas. The EPA approved this rule on August 8, 1996 (61 FR 41339).

The VOL storage emission control requirements apply to facilities storing VOLs with vapor pressures of0.75 pounds per square inch absolute (psia)

or greater (facilities storing VOLs with vapor pressures equal to or exceeding 0.5 psia must keep records ofVOLs stored including VOLvapor pressures) in any storage tank of40,000 gallons capacity or greater. The rule does not apply to vessels storingpetroleum liquids, which are covered under other rules.

For fixed rooftanks, the VOL storage rule requires the installation ofinternal floating roofs with foam or liquid-filled seals and secondary seals to close the gap between the tank's innerwall and the floating roof.These controls must be implemented byMarch 15, 1996.

External floating rooftanks must be equipped with primary and secondary seals before March 15, 2004, or at the time ofthe next tank cleaning, whichever comes first.

For internal floating rooftanks, the internal floating roofs must be equipped with primary and secondary seals before March 15, 2004, or atthe time ofthe
next tank cleaning, whichever comes first. Sources may also use closed vent systems and emission control devices provided the emission control systems

are operated with no detectable emissions or monitored VOC concentrations above 500 parts per million above background levels. Control devices must be operated to reduce VOC emissions by at least 95 percent. Storage vessels of40,000 gallons or greater storage capacity that
store VOLs with a maximum true vapor pressure equal to or greater than 11.1 psia must be equipped with a closed
vent system and emission control device with emission control efficiency equal
to or greater than 95 percent. Recognizing that only fixed rooftanks would be required to implement emission controls bythe end of 1996, the IEPA claimed emission reductions for onlythese types oftanks. The emission reduction estimates are adequately documented and acceptable.

iv. Plastic Parts Coating. On May 5, 1995, the IEPA submitted an adopted rule forthe control ofVOC emissions from automotive/transportation and business machine plastic parts coating operations in the Chicago and MetroEast St. Louis ozone nonattainment

areas (no applicable sources exist in the Metro-East St. Louis area). The EPA approved this rule on October 25, 1995 (60 FR54807).

The rule specifies the VOC content limits for various types ofcoating distinguishingbetween coating of automotive/transportation plastic parts and business machine plastic parts (see 60 FR54808). Sources may also choose
to use add-on control devices which achieve equivalent emission reductions. Compliance with this rule must be met by March 15, 1996. The emission reductions claimed for this source category are adequately documented and acceptable.

v. Lithographic Printing.Using EPA's September 1993 draft CTGfor this

source category, the IEPA developed a regulation establishing VOC content limits, emission control requirements, and required workpractices for this

source category. The State's rule includes limitations on the VOC content offountain solutions and cleaning solutions. The rule also provides for the

use ofafterburners and other emission control devices for heat set web offset lithographic printing operations. The rule establishes recordkeeping, testing, and reporting requirements as well as work-practice requirements, such as a requirement for the storage ofcleaning materials and spent cleaning solutions in air-tight containers.

The rule is applicable to all lithographic printing lines at a facility if the VOC emissions, in total, from the lithographic printing lines exceed 45.5 kilograms per day or 100pounds per day. The rule also applies to facilities with heat set web offset printing lines if the maximum theoretical emissions of VOC, in total, ever exceed 90.7 megagrams per year or 100tons per year. Compliance with the rule is required byMarch 15, 1996. The EPA approved this rule on November 8, 1995 (60 FR56238).

The IEPA has determined that 113 facilities in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area will be potentially affected by the rule, with 49 facilities likely to require new emission controls

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66287 1997

## 66288 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

or process modifications. Only one facility in the Metro-East St. Louis area is expected to be affected by the rule, with no anticipated reduction in VOC emissions. Emission reduction credits for the Chicago facilities were calculated using the emission reduction factors for add-on controls, fountain solution reformulation orprocess modification, and cleaning solution reformulation provided for model plants in the September 1993 draft CTG. The emissions reduction credit claimed is adequately documented and acceptable.

vi. Automobile Refinishing. The EPA,

on the behalf ofthe IEPA, contracted with Midwest Research Institute (MRI)
to conduct a study ofthe motor vehicle refinishing industry in the Chicago and Metro-East ozone nonattainment areas. This study included an estimate ofthe 1990 base year emissions and the study report recommended emission control strategies and possible resultant emission reductions. The study concluded that approximately 1,463 refinishing shops are located in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area, and 107 are located in the Metro-East ozone nonattainment area.

Based on the study, review ofsimilar regulations developed by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and discussions with local automobile refinishing representatives, the IEPA adopted the following coating VOC
content limits (pounds VOCper gallon ofcoating, minus water and exempt compounds): Pretreatment Wash Primer

.............. 6.5 Precoat

.............................................. 5.5 Primer/Primer Surfacer Coating

...... 4.8 Primer Sealer

................................... 4.6 Topcoat System

............................... 5.0 Basecoat/Clearcoat

........................... 5.0 Three or Four Stage Topcoat System

................................................ 5.2 Specialty Coatings

........................... 7.0 Anti-Glare/Safety Coating

............... 7.0

In addition to these VOC content limits, the regulation also establishes VOC content limits for surface preparation/cleaning products (6.5 pounds VOC per gallon ofplastic parts cleaning compounds and 1.4 pounds of VOC per gallon ofother surface cleaning/preparation products). The rule also requires the use ofgun cleaners designed to minimize solvent evaporation during the cleaning, rinsing, and draining operations with recirculation ofsolvent during the cleaning operation and collection of spent solvent. Spent and fresh solvent
must be stored in closed containers. Coating application mustbe doneusing High Volume, Low Pressure guns or electrostatic application systems. As an alternative to the VOC content limits, a facility may use add-on control systems, such asincinerators or carbon adsorbers, which would reduce VOC emissions by atleast 90 percent. Facilities thatuse less than 20 gallons ofcoatings per year total are exempted from the coating application and gun cleaner equipment requirements.

Refinishing facilities arerequired to keep monthly records ofcoating purchases and the VOC contents of these coatings. Facilities are also required to use coatings in accordance with the coating manufacturer's specifications. Compliance with therule
must be met by March 15, 1996. The EPA approved the rule on July 25, 1996 (61 FR 38577). The emission reduction estimates for this rule are adequately documented and acceptable.

d. Coke OvenNESHAP.The coke

oven NESHAP, 40 CFRpart 63, subpart L, promulgated on October 27, 1993 (58 FR57911), control emissions from coke

oven doors, off-takes, lids, and charging. The emission control requirements of the rule must be met bythe end of 1995. The emission reduction estimates are adequately documented and acceptable.

e. HazardousOrganicNESHAPSOCML The SOCMI NESHAP, 40 CFR part 63, subpart F, promulgated April 22, 1994, (59 FR 19454) affects processes which produce one or more of the 396 designated SOCMI chemicals using one or more designated HAPs as
areactant or producing HAPs as a byproduct or co-product. Under EPA policy memorandum, "Credit Toward the 15 Percent Rate-Of-Progress Reductions from Federal Measures," May 6, 1993, 5 percent emission reduction from 1990base line levels can be claimed from this rule. The State's emission reduction estimates are acceptable.

f. TSDFRA CTPhaseI andII. Under RCRA, EPA is taking action to control VOC emissions in three phases. Phase I regulations were promulgated by the EPA in June 1990 and became effective in December 1990. Phase IIregulations

were promulgated on December 6, 1994. The effective date for the Phase II regulations was suspended until December 6, 1996 (see 61 FR59932, November 25, 1996). The Phase II compliance date is December 8, 1997. Although final compliance with the Phase IIregulation will occur after November 15, 1996, States can take emission reduction credit for Phase II TSDF regulations toward the 15percent ROP plan pursuant to EPA policy memorandum, "Credit Toward the 15 Percent Rate-Of-Progress Reductions from Federal Measures," May 6, 1993. 

### Illinois' emission reduction estimates for these federal rules are acceptable.

g. MarineVesselLoadingControls. The State's rule requires a 95 percent reduction in VOC emissions resulting from the loading ofgasoline and crude oil into marine vessels at all marine terminals in the Chicago and Metro-East St. Louis ozone nonattainment areas which load gasoline or crude oil into tank ships and barges. The rule applies between May 1 and September 30 each yearbeginning in 1996, and requires that vessel cargo compartments be closed to the atmosphere during loading using: (1) Devices to protect tanks from underpressurization and overpressurization; (2) level-monitoring and alarm systems designed to prevent overfilling; and (3) devices for cargo gauging and sampling. VOC capture mustbe achieved with either (1) a vacuum-assisted vapor collection system, or (2) certification ofvessel vapor-tightness. Pipingused in the transferofgasoline or crude oil must be maintained and operated to prevent visible liquid leaks, significant odors, and visible fumes. Owners and operators mustuse leak inspection procedures similar to those used at petroleum refineries.

Based on IEPA'srecords, there are five affected facilities in the Chicago

ozone nonattainment area and six affected facilities in the Metro-East St. Louis ozone nonattainment area. To calculate VOC emission reduction for this source category, the IEPA assumed that vapor recovery and emissions control systems can reduce VOC emissions by 90 percent. The rule was adopted on October 20, 1994, and was approved by the EPA on April 3, 1995 (60 FR 16801). The emission reduction credits claimed are adequately documented and acceptable.

h. TighteningofRA CTStandardsand Cutoffs. Based on an April 1993, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC)report titled, "Technical Document for Reasonably Available Control Technology for Illinois to Assist in Achieving 15 Percent Reduction in Ozone Nonattainment Areas," the IEPA determined that the VOCcontent limits for coatings could be lowered for the following source categories: Automobile/Truck Coating; Paper Coating; Fabric Coating; Metal Furniture Coating; Flexographic/Rotogravure Printing; Miscellaneous Surface Coating; Can Coating; Metal Coil Coating; Vinyl Coating; Miscellaneous Metal Coating; and Large Appliance Coating.After further consideration, the IEPA determined that no additional tightening ofexisting coating VOC

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66288 1997

### No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 66289

content limitscould bejustified at this time for automobile/truck coating and flexographic/rotogravure printing.

The State's tightened RACT coating limits are similar to those used in the South Coast Air Quality Management District ofCalifornia. The tightened limits were adopted by the Illinois Pollution Control Board on April 20, 1995, and were approved byEPA on February 13, 1996 (61 FR5511). The tightened SOCMI air oxidation requirements were adopted on October 20, 1994, and were approved by EPA on September 27, 1995 (60FR49770). The 15 percent ROP documentation indicates that for the Chicago area an estimated 8.00 TPDemission reduction has occurred from sources covered under the tightened RACT coating limit rule, and 4.05 TPDemission reduction has occurred from sources covered under the tightened SOCMI air oxidation rule. In the Metro-East area, 0.39 TPD were claimed, while no emission reductions occurred due to the SOCMI air oxidation rule. The emission reductions claimed are acceptable.

i. PlantShut-downs.Facilities or plant units which have been shut-down since 1990 were identified through: (1) Facility responses to permit renewals; (2) responses to Annual Emission Report (AER)requests; (3) direct field inspections; and (4) requests from the facilities themselves to have their source permits withdrawn due to shut-down. Facility closings and emission reductions were verified through review ofEmission Inventory System (EIS) records, permit file data, and field reports.

To further support the estimated emission reductions, the IEPA has provided the EPA with a list ofclosed facilities. The IEPA maintains a plant shut-down file which documents the methods ofverification.

The shut-down credits were calculated using 1990 emissions projected to 1996 using the Emissions Growth Assessment System (EGAS) growth factors for specific sourceunits. The projected 1996 emissions were used because these emissions had already been built into the projected 1996 emissions used to calculate the emission targets under the ROP plans.

Emission reductions from the plant shut-downs are made permanent through the closing ofsource permits and, therefore, are acceptable. The

sourcepermits for these facilities will
not be reissued by the IEPA. Ifthese

sources wish to restart, they will have
to go through new source review and will be controlled through new source emission controlrequirements. j. ImprovedRuleEffectiveness. Illinois' Title V program, the CAAPP,

covers most source facilities in the two

ozone nonattainment areas. The IEPA submitted the CAAPP to the EPA in November 1993, and the EPA gave the program interim approval on March 7, 1995 (60 FR 12478). The program became effective in 1996.

A primary emphasis ofthe CAAPP is rigorous recordkeeping, reporting, and monitoring. The CAAPP regulations include recordkeeping, reporting, and monitoring requirements not covered under existing regulations or emphasizes existing regulations for such requirements. Sources must submit progress reports to the IEPA ata minimum ofevery 6 months and the permittees must certify no less frequently than annually that the facilities are in compliance with the permit requirements. Source owners or operators must also promptly report any deviances from permit conditions to the IEPA. The CAAPP requirements contain significant civil and criminal penalties for source owners or operators failing to comply with the permit requirements, including the recordkeeping, reporting, and monitoring requirements.

The IEPA used EPA's rule effectiveness evaluation questionnaire, and, based on therequirements ofthe CAAPP regulations, determined that the CAAPP requirements should lead to a rule effectiveness of95 percent for all

source facilities covered by the CAAPP. The IEPA determined the VOC emission reduction credit for this rule effectiveness improvement by considering the "current" rule effectiveness for each facility or source category used to develop the 1990 base year emissions inventory (80 percent for
most facilities, with some facilities starting at 92 percent based on prior study results). The IEPA documented the rule effectiveness improvement findings in areport titled "Impact of CAAPP on Inventory RE."

In comments on a draft version ofthe ROP plan, the EPA had indicated to the IEPA that recent changes in Title V requirements and guidelines to allow

more source flexibility couldjeopardize the anticipated improvement in rule effectiveness since some ofthe changes in EPA policy could relax compliance monitoring. Particularly, the increased flexibility would allow sources to switch from enhanced monitoring procedures to less stringent Compliance Assurance Monitoring (CAM) procedures. The IEPA, however, views this increased source flexibility as having minimal impact on the rule effectiveness to be obtained from the CAAPP, in light ofthe overall requirements sources are still subject to under CAAPP. It is pointed out that the EPA engineers who are technically supporting the compliance assurance monitoring procedures in EPA's revised TitleV policy agree with arule effectiveness estimate of95 percent for programs like the CAAPP. The EPA agrees with this view and accepts the estimated emission reduction claimed.

k. HAPEarlyReductionProgram.This program, promulgated on November 21, 1994 (59 FR59924), allows an existing

source subject to an applicable section 112(d) standard to be granted a 6-year compliance extension upon commitment by the owner or operator of the source that the source has achieved

areduction of90 percent or more of HAPby 1994. Emission reductions are determined by comparing the postcontrol emissions with verifiable and actual emissions in abase year not earlier than 1987, except that 1985 or 1986 may be used as a base year if the emissions data are based on information received before November 15, 1990. In the Metro-East St. Louis nonattainment
area, only one applicable facility has committed to the earlyreduction program. Under theprogram, such commitments are federally enforceable. The reduction in VOCfrom this facility due to theprogram, therefore, is creditable.

3. Area Sources

a. StageII VaporRecovery. On August 13, 1992, Illinois adopted Stage IIvapor recovery rules, which require the return ofgasoline vapors to underground storage tanks during automobile refueling. Full phase-in ofthe requirements occurred on November 1, 1994. EPA approved these rules on January 12, 1993 (58 FR 3841).

The IEPA has monitored the effectiveness ofthe Stage II regulations and the status ofservice station compliance. The Stage II controls have been established atmost service stations in the Chicago nonattainment area and have been certified to reduce VOC emissions by at least 95 percent. The emission reduction estimates derived from this observation are acceptable.

b. ArchitecturalCoating.EPA is in the process ofadopting anational rule applicable to manufacturers ofAIM coatings. EPA proposed this rule on June 25, 1995 (61 FR 32729). Based on EPA policy memoranda, the State has assumed that an emission reduction credit of20 percent could be taken for this source category. Even though the final rule has not been promulgated, and the compliance with therule is not expected until 1998, the EPA is allowing States to take credit for20 

### Federal Register / Vol. 62,

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66289 1997

### No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

percent emission reduction credit for this source category, relative to 1990 emission levels. See "Credit for the 15 Percent Rate-Of-Progress Plans for Reductions from the AIM Coating Rule," March 22, 1995, and "Update on the Credit for the 15 Percent Rate-OfProgress Plans for Reductions from the Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings Rule," March 7, 1996. The State has calculated emission reductions for architectural coatings separate from the traffic marking and maintenance coating provisions ofthe AIM rule. The State's emission reduction estimates for architectural coatings are acceptable.

c. TrafficMarkingandMaintenance Coating.The Statehas chosen to rely on the Federal AIM rule (now expected to be implemented in 1998) for emission reductions in this source category. Although EPA policy memoranda,"Credit for the 15 Percent Rate-Of-Progress Plans for Reductions from the Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coating Rule," March 22, 1995, and "Update on the Credit for the 15 Percent Rate-Of-Progress Plans for Reductions from the Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings Rule," March 7, 1996, indicated that the State

can assume a20 percent emission reduction for this source category, the State notes that a more appropriate method for determining the emission reduction for traffic marking and maintenance coatings would involve consideration ofthe VOC content limit (150 grams VOC/liter coating)proposed in EPA's draft AIM rule. Data supplied by the Illinois Department of Transportation indicates that the median VOC content in traffic/ maintenance coatings in the State of Illinois in 1990 was 413 grams/liter coating (this median VOC content level is assumed to apply to both ozone nonattainment areas in the State). Comparing the proposed limit to this median VOC content level indicates that

a 63.7 percent reduction in VOC emissions would occur if the proposed VOC content limit were attained. This leads to VOC reduction estimates of3.73 TPD for the Chicago area and 0.62 TPD for the Metro-East St. Louis area. These estimates are acceptable.

d. UndergroundGasolineStorage TankBreathingControls.The State rule, adopted by the State on September 15, 1994, requires the installation of Pressure/Vacuum relief-control valves (P/Vvalves) on gasoline storage tank vents by March 15, 1995. The P/V valves mustremain closed against tank pressures ofat least 3.5 inches water column and tank vacuums ofat least 6 inches water column. Gasoline storage 

### tank owners must maintain records of malfunctions andrepairs and must register installation ofthe P/Vvalves with theIEPA prior toMarch 15, 1995. The P/V valves must betested annually and the owners must keep records ofthe tests. EPA approved this rule on March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15233).

The IEPAestimates that this rule will reduce gasoline breathing emissions by 90 percent. This emission reduction estimate is acceptable as are the emission reduction credits claimed for the Chicago and Metro-East St. Louis

areas.

e. ConsumerandCommercial Solvents.The March 23, 1995 Federal Register contained EPA's list ofaffected product categories and schedule for regulation ofconsumer and commercial solvent contents asrequired by section 183(e) oftheAct. TheEPA intends to regulate the solvent contents in 24 product categories. The Federal Register action states thatthe EPAexpects the regulation to achieve a25percent reduction in VOCemissions from the regulated product categories. This regulation was scheduled to be promulgated in 1996. Under EPApolicy memorandum "Regulatory Schedule for Consumer and Commercial Products under Section 183(e) ofthe Clean Air Act," June 22, 1995, EPAwill grant an emission reduction credit for this source category even though emission reductions are not expected to occur until after 1996.

The IEPAcites an EPA study which states thatthe bestestimate ofVOC emissions for consumer and commercial products is 8.03 pounds perperson per year. The study further states that the Federal regulation ofconsumer and commercial product solvents is expected toreduce these emissions by 1 pound perperson peryear. Usingthe 1996 projected populations and theratio of6.3 pounds VOCperperson per year used forthis source category in the 1990 base year emissions inventory to the 8.03pounds perperson peryear specified in theEPA study,the IEPA has determined that theFederal rule gives

an 8.10 tons VOCper dayreduction in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area and a0.58 tons VOCper dayreduction in the Metro-East St. Louis ozone nonattainment area. The emission reduction credits are acceptable.
Il. Public Comments and Response

Duringthe 30-day public comment period for theJuly 14, 1997, proposed rulemaking, EPA received two comment letters adverseto approval ofthe Chicago and Metro-East area 15percent plans: an August 13, 1997, letter from the American LungAssociation of Metropolitan Chicago, Citizens for a BetterEnvironment (Wisconsin), Citizens Commission for Clean Air in the Lake Michigan Basin, the Hoosier Environmental Council, the Illinois Chapter ofthe Sierra Club, and the Michigan Environmental Council (ALA
et al); and an August 6, 1997 letter from

a concerned citizen. The following discussion summarizes the comments and EPA's response to those comments.
A. Post-1996Federal Measures

Comments:ALA et alindicate that Illinois should not be allowed to take credit for certain federal control

measures which were notimplemented by November 15, 1996, including Federal Non-Road Small Engine Standards, TSDF RACT Phase II, AIM coating, and Consumer and Commercial Products Solvent Control. According to the commenters, section 182(b)(1) ofthe Act clearly requires States to submit plans that demonstrate a 15 percent emission reduction before November 15, 1996. The commenters also state the policy memoranda regarding credit for post-1996 measures cited in the July 14, 1997, proposed rulemaking provide no good basis for thwarting the clear intent and requirements ofthe Clean AirAct, and were issued without formal public
comment.

Response:Section 182(b)(1)(A) ofthe Actrequires States to submit their 15% SIP revisions byNovember 15, 1993. Section 182(b)(1)(C) ofthe Act provides the following general rule for creditability ofemissions reductions toward the 15 percent requirement: "Emissions reductions are creditable toward the 15 percent required, to the
extentthey have actually occurred, as of [November 15, 1996], from the implementation ofmeasures required under the applicable implementation plan, rules promulgated by the Administrator, or a permit under Title V." In addition, section 182(b)(1)(D) identifies specific control measures which cannot be creditable toward the 15 percent plan, including pre-1990 FMVCP, 1990 RVP, RACT fix-ups, and I/M fix-ups.

Between 1992 and 1996, EPA issued

a series ofpolicy memoranda indicating its intention to implement several federal measures before November 15, 1996, and provided emission reductions estimates from these measures for States
to usein their 15 percent plans. However, several federal measures have been significantly delayed. By the time it was realized that some federal

measures would not be implemented by November 1996, several States had already completed and submitted their 

### 66290 Federal Register / Vol. 62,

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66290 1997

### Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 

## 66291

15 percent plans relying on the federal

measures.

Section 182(b)(1)(C) is ambiguous as to whether emission reductions from federal measures expected to occur by November 1996 are creditable now that the deadline has passed. Read literally, section 182(b)(1)(C)provides that although the 15 percent SIPs are required to be submitted by November 1993, emissions reductions are creditable as part ofthose SIPs only if "they have actually occurred, as of [November 1996]". This literal reading renders theprovision internally inconsistent. Accordingly, EPA believes that the provision should be interpreted
to provide, in effect, that emissions reductions are creditable "to the extent they willhave actually occurred, as of [November 1996], from the implementation of [the specified measures]" (theterm "will" is added). This interpretation renders the provision internally consistent.

Moreover, section 182(b)(1)(C) ofthe Act explicitly includes as creditable reductions those resulting from "rules promulgated by the Administrator." This provision does not state the dateby which those measures must be promulgated, i.e., does not indicate whether the measures must be promulgated by the time the 15% SIPs

were due (November 1993), or whether the measures may be promulgated after this due date.

Because the statute is silent on this point, EPA has discretion to develop a reasonable interpretation, under Chevron U.S.A. Inc.v.NRDC,467 U.S. 837, 104 S.Ct. 2778, 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984). EPA believes itis reasonable to interpret section 182(b)(1)(C) ofthe Act
to credit reductions from federal

measures as long as those reductions

were expected to occur by November, 1996, even if the federal measures are not promulgated by the November 1993 due date for the 15 percent SIPs.

EPA's interpretation is consistent with the Congressionally mandated schedule for promulgating regulations for consumer and commercial products, under section 182(e) ofthe Act. This provision requires EPA to promulgate regulations controlling emissions from

consumer and commercial products that generate emissions in nonattainment

areas. Under the schedule, by November 1993-the same date that the States

were required to submit the 15% SIPsEPA was to issue a report and establish

arulemaking schedule for consumer and commercial products. Further, EPA

was to promulgate regulations for the 

### first setofconsumer and commercial products by November 1995. It is reasonable to conclude that Congress anticipated that reductions from these

measures would be creditable as part of the 15% SIPs.

Since all the federal measures Illinois relied on were expected to occur by November 1996, these measures are creditable for purposes ofthe 15percent plan. It is not intended under section 182(b)(1)(C) ofthe Act for EPAto disapprove 15percent plans which claim credit for federal measures which

were not implemented as was expected duringplan development. To interpret the Act otherwise would unfairly punish the State for delays in federal rule implementation for which the State had nopower to control.

In addition, all the post-1996 federal

measures for which Illinois has claimed credit are close to being implemented since the measures either have been promulgated orhave been proposed. The following table indicates the post1996 federal measures included in Illinois' 15percent plans, the statutory provisions which require the measures' promulgation, and the status ofthe measures' implementation:

Federal measure Statutory requirement Status

Non-road Engines 25 hp and below (Phase I) Act Section 213(a)(2)

......... Phase Istandards publishedJuly 3, 1995 (60 FR 34582). Final Compliance date MY 1997, except Class V engine families,

which mustcomply January 1, 1998. TSDF RACT and RCRA Phase IIControl

...... RCRA Section 3004(n)

...... Final rule published December 6, 1994 (59 FR 62896). Final Compliance Date December 8, 1997 (61 FR 59932). AIM Coatings

................................................... Act Section 183(e)(3)

......... Proposed rule publishedJune 25, 1996 (61 FR 32729). Traffic and Maintenance Coatings

.................. Act Section 183(e)(3)

......... Proposed rule publishedJune 25, 1996 (61 FR 32729). Consumer and Commercial Products

............. Act Section 183(e)(3)

......... Proposed rule publishedApril 2, 1996 (61 FR 14531).

To exclude credit for these mandated federal measures would mean the State would have to develop and submit a
new 15 percent plan and adopt substitute State measures. This would force the State to achieve more than a 15 percent emission reduction once the reductions from the mandated federal

measures occur. EPAbelieves this over compliance with the 15 percent requirement would not be supported by the intent ofthe Act and would be unreasonably burdensome for the State, especially since the State is already obligated to secure substantial additional VOC reductions in the Chicago area to meet post-1996 ROP requirements.

The fact that EPA cannot determine precisely the amount ofcredit available for federal measures not yet promulgated does not preclude granting the credit. The credit can be granted as long as EPA is able to develop reasonable estimates ofthe amount of VOC reductions from the measures EPA expects to promulgate. EPA believes that it is able to develop reasonable estimates, particularly because EPAhas either already proposed or promulgated the measures at issue. Many other parts ofthe SIP, including State measures, typically include estimates and assumptions concerning VOC amounts, rather than actual measurements. For example, EPA's document to estimate emissions, "Compilation ofAir Pollutant Emission Factors," January 1995, AP-42), provide emission factors used to estimate emissions from various

sources and source processes. AP-42 emission factors have been used, and continue to be used, by States and EPA
to determine base year emission inventory figures for sources and to estimate emissions from sources where such information is needed. Estimates in the expected amount ofVOC reductions are commonly made in air quality plans, even for those control

measures that are already promulgated. Moreover, the fact that EPA is occasionally delayed in its rulemaking is not an argument against granting credits from these measures. The

measures are statutorily required, and States and citizens could bring suit to enforce the requirements that EPA promulgate them. Ifthe amount ofcredit that EPA allows the State to claim turns outto be greater than the amount EPA determines to be appropriate when EPA promulgates the federal measures, EPA intends to take appropriate action to require correction of any shortfall in necessary emissions reductions that may occur.

The above analysis focuses on the statutory provisions that include

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66291 1997

### No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

specific dates for 15 percent submittal (November 1993) and implementation (November 1996). These dates have expired, and EPA has developed new dates for submittal and implementation. EPA does not believe that the expiration ofthe statutory dates, and the development ofnew ones, has implications for the issue ofwhether reductions form federal measures promulgated afterthe date ofthe 15 percent SIP approval may be counted toward those 15 percent SIPs. Although the statutory dates have passed, EPA believes that the analysis described above continues to be valid.

B. Rule EffectivenessImprovements
Comments:ALA et al indicate that the rule effectiveness improvement credit is

an "extraordinarily large paper reduction," and that neither Illinois nor EPA have adequately demonstrated that 95 percent rule effectiveness has been or will be achieved in light ofchanges to Title V monitoring requirements under the upcoming CAMrule. The
commenters also note that the emission reduction credit given for rule effectiveness improvements in the Chicago area is comparable to the emission reduction credit given for reformulated gasoline in the Milwaukee

ozone nonattainment area. The
commenters find their concerns substantiated by a recent University of Southern California study which found that industrial sources in Houston have been emitting VOC hundreds oftimes

more than what has been reported. Also, the commenters claim that neither Illinois nor EPA could provide the
commenters a complete list ofIllinois

sources subject to non-CTG RACT requirements, or compliance information related to these sources,

even after the commenters submitted a Freedom ofInformation Act (FOIA) request to the IEPA. The commenters recommend that credit should be allowed for only 85 percent rule effectiveness for most sources until the actual changes are verified through the 1996 update to Illinois' emission inventories.

Response:The CAAPP program realizes VOC emission reductions through improving the implementation ofexisting VOC add-on control requirements in the Chicago and MetroEast areas. CAAPP requires more stringent record keeping,reporting, compliance certification, and monitoring requirements, and provides

more severe enforcement penalties than the existing State rules. These provisions, in turn, assure higherrates ofcompliance, and, correspondingly, lower emissions from the sources. As was indicated in the July 14, 1997, direct final rule, IEPA's rule effectiveness evaluation is reported in the April 1995 document, "Impact of Clean Air Act Permit Program on Inventory Rule Effectiveness," included in the State submittal. One ofthe elements ofthe CAAPP program considered in the Illinois rule effectiveness evaluation was Title V enhanced monitoring. After IEPA completed the study, however, EPA decided to promulgate more flexible Title V monitoring requirements known

as CAM.

The original enhanced monitoring program would have required many affected facilities to install expensive Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (CEMS) or develop other monitoring directly correlated with emission values. After consultation with stakeholders, EPA decided that such requirements would be overly prescriptive and excessively burdensome for many industries to install and operate CEMS and on State and local agencies in implementing their operating permit programs. On October 22, 1997, the EPA promulgated the final CAM rule (62 FR54899), which requires monitoring ofoperating parameters ofadd-on control equipment
to assure compliance. The CAM rule is much less burdensome to administer by State and Local agencies than the original enhanced monitoring program, allowing agencies to direct resources in assuringcompliance more effectively. Furthermore, the CAM rule covers more

sources than the original enhanced monitoring proposal. The rule also provides State and local agencies an additional enforcement tool to address persistent control device operation problems through a Quality Improvement Plan (QIP). A QIP is a comprehensive two-step evaluation and correction process that will require the facility owner to prepare a formal plan and a schedule for correcting control device problems. Such activities may include significant repairs to or even replacement ofcontrol devices. The QIP provisions areintended to provide compliance assurance benefits equivalent to the direct monitoring provisions contained in the original enhanced monitoring. Finally, sources already subject to more stringent monitoring requirements are not provided any additional flexibility under CAM, and CAM does not affect the stringency ofany other record keeping, reporting and compliance certification requirements required under CAAPP. For these reasons, the EPA finds that the CAM rule does not negatively impact Illinois' estimate of rule effectiveness improvement from CAAPP.

EPA is not required under the Act to withhold 15 percent plan credit from control measures until the actual reduction is verified. Rather, EPA interprets section 182(b)(1) ofthe Actto allow States to rely on reasonable estimates ofemission reductions when developing the 15 percent plans. The State's report "Impact ofthe CAAPP on Inventory Rule Effectiveness," represents areasonable estimate ofrule effectiveness improvement due to CAAPP. It should also be noted that Illinois' rule effectiveness improvement estimate is consistent with EPA's Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) for the

new ozone NAAQS, which found 95 percent rule effectiveness to be the most representative value forproposed Act control assumptions (See appendix A of the RIA for the July 18, 1997 ozone NAAQS). To the extent that future verification ofthe rule effectiveness improvements from CAAPP demonstrates less emission reductions than anticipated, Illinois will be expected to make up the shortfall.

The Milwaukee area 15 percent plan is not an appropriate basis from which
tojudge the reasonableness ofthe Chicago 15percent plan's rule effectiveness improvement credit. This is because the two plans arebased on vastlydifferent emission baselines (see EPA's March 22, 1996, approval ofthe Milwaukee 15percent ROP plan (61 FR 11735)). There is significantly more industrial activity and vehicle miles traveled in the Chicago area compared
to the Milwaukee area, and, correspondingly, control measures implemented in the Chicago area achieve ahigher aggregate emission reduction than similar control measures in Milwaukee. The 1990base-year emission inventory for the Milwaukee

area is 559.9 TPDofVOC, while the 1990 inventory for the Chicago area is 1,363.4 TPD. The commenters note that the emission reduction estimate for improved rule effectiveness in Chicago (26.3 TPD), is comparable with the emission estimate ofreformulated gasoline in Milwaukee (34.06 TPD accounting forboth reformulated gasoline and enhanced I/M).However, the reformulated gasoline program in Chicago alone secures a 112.79 TPD emission reduction. Given this disparity, the EPA finds the emission reduction estimates in the Milwaukee and Chicago 15 percent plans are incomparable forpurposes ofthe determining the adequacy ofeither plan.

Finally, in regard to the commenters'

concern regarding non-CTG sources, 

## 66292 Federal Register / Vol. 62,

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66292 1997

### Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 

## 66293

EPA contacted IEPA to determine the status ofthe FOIA request for a complete list ofnon-CTG sources in the Chicago area. IEPA has indicated that it responded by sending two lists to Citizens for aBetter Environment, a January 25, 1996, list ofnon-CTG

sources with Maximum Theoretical Emissions (MTE)of 100 TPY ofVOC and above, and a May 16, 1996, listof

sources which emit greater than or equal
to 100 TPY ofVOC. IEPA also provided
to the American Lung Association of Metropolitan Chicago alist ofnon-CTG

sources with aPotential To Emit (PTE) ofgreater than or equal to 25 TPYof VOM, and Maximum Theoretical Emissions (MTE)ofless than 100 TPY ofVOC. These lists should have been sufficient to meet the commenters' requests. Ifthe commenters' would like additional information about these lists, the commenters should contact the IEPA.

C.PlantClosures

Comments:ALA et al indicated that it is unclear how the emission reduction credits associated with plant shutdowns

were calculated, and that Illinois should receive only credit equal to the extra emissions that were built into the 1996 projections specifically for the individual facilities thathave shut down. The commenters also note that EPA should make it clear that no market-based credits can be attributed to these shutdowns once the reductions have been credited toward a SIP. This prohibition should apply to New Source Review (NSR)offset credits and any credits or allowances that are transacted

as part ofIllinois' proposed VOC cap and trade program.

Response:Each plant shutdown emission estimaterepresents the projected 1996 VOC emission estimate used in calculating the State's overall emission reduction requirement under the 15 percent plan. Section 182(b)(1) requires the 15 percent emission reduction to account for source growth,

so IEPA had factored into its 15 percent calculation what emissions would be in 1996 had no 15 percent control strategies occurred. (See Guidance for GrowthFactors,Projections,and ControlStrategies forthe 15Percent Rate-of-Progress Plansfor more detailed discussion on the growth projection requirement). Because IEPA used projected 1996 emissions from the closed plants when calculating the emission reduction needed for 15 percent reduction, the IEPA claimed those 1996 projections as creditable emission reductions in the 15 percent plan. The projected 1996 emissions

were calculated using EGAS growth factors for specific emission units. These same growth factors were used to determine theplant closure emission reductions. Therefore, Illinois has received plant closure credit equal to the emission projections built into the 15 percent requirement calculation.

As for the concern regarding the double-counting ofemission reductions from plant closures in other VOC control programs, the State's NSRrules prohibit source closure reductions which are credited toward ROP to be used to meet NSR offset requirements. Illinois adopted aVOC trading program
on November 20, 1997, aspart ofits post-1996 ROP plan. Under the rules, no shutdown emissions reduction claimed in the 15percent plan can be used as credits in the trading program.
D. StageIIGasolineVaporRecovery
Comments:A comment from a citizen indicates that emission reductions associated with the Stage IIvapor recovery rule arebeing overestimated because oflow levels ofcooperation with therule. This comment was made based on visits to five gasoline dispensing stations in the Chicago nonattainment area and findingfour of the stations have either "no controls" or "breaks in the existing controls." Specifically, out ofthe five stations the
commenter visited, the commenter contends that one station has allboots,

one station has "no vapor controls," one station has "no boots," and two stations have "some broken or missing boots."

Response:The IEPA has indicated that the four stations in question have been inspected according to an annual inspection schedule and use Stage II equipment which do not need boots to work effectively. The "boot" the
commenter refers to is the device used in conjunction with a particular Stage II control system called the "vapor balance system." The vapor balance system collects vapors by using the displacement pressure between the vehicle tank and the station's underground tank during vehicle refueling. For the vapor balance system to work effectively, atight seal must be made atthe interface between the gasoline dispensing nozzle and the vehicle fuel inlet. The boot, orbellow, is the device fitted onto the nozzle which creates the tight seal during refueling.

Another type of Stage II system, known as a "vacuum assist system" draws in vapors during refueling by using avacuum-generating device. Because ofthis design, vacuum assist systems can recover vapors effectively without atight seal atthe nozzle/ fillpipe interface. Therefore, boots are notneeded for assist systems, and the lack ofaboot is by itselfno indication that the gasoline dispensing nozzle has

no Stage II control.

The four stations considered bythe
commenter to be out ofcompliance are allregistered with the IEPA to use
vacuum assist systems, while the one station considered by the commenter to be in compliance uses avapor balance system. The commenter apparently

assumes that all Stage II systems utilize balance systems with booted nozzles and used their existence as evidence of

a Stage II vapor recovery system, or
more importantly, that their absence indicates no vapor recovery system. Both vapor balance and vacuum assist systems arerequired under Illinois' Stage IIrules to be certified byCARB to have a95 percent control efficiency. The IEPA has conducted inspections of the five stations between December 1996 and January 1997, in accordance with an annual Stage II inspection program, and has found that all five stations use Stage IIequipment which
meet the CARB certification requirement. Therefore, unless the IEPA discovers compliance violations at the stations at future inspections, the EPA

assumes the stations to be in compliance with Stage II controls.

In addition, it should be noted that the IEPA has built into its Stage II emission reduction estimates the assumption that not all gasoline dispensing stations in the Chicago nonattainment area may be in compliance at all times; malfunctions in the Stage II equipment can occur. Therefore, IEPA used EPA guidance to determine the in-use efficiency ofits overall Stage IIprogram. (See "Technical Guidance-Stage IIVapor Recovery Systems for Control ofVehicle RefuelingEmissions at Gasoline Dispensing Stations," November 1991). Under the Technical guidance, the State's throughput exemption level of 10,000 gallons per month, combined with an annual inspection frequency yields a program efficiency of 84 percent. Illinois has applied the in-use efficiency of84 percent when calculating the emission reduction estimate forthis source category.

Because the four stations the
commenterbelieved to be outof compliance use Stage II equipment which were found to be in compliance
atthe time ofthe most recent IEPA inspection, and that equipment malfunctions are taken into account in IEPA's emission reduction estimate for the Stage II program, the EPA finds IEPA's estimate ofStage II emission reductions is reliable.

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66293 1997

### No. 243 / Thursday, December 18, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

IV. EPA Rulemaking Action

The EPA is approving, through final rulemaking action, Illinois' 15 percent ROP and 3 percent contingency plan SIP revisions for the Chicago and Metro-East St. Louis ozone nonattainment areas, and the Metro East St.Louis TCM work trip reductions; transit improvements; and traffic flow improvements.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request forrevision to any SIP. Each request forrevision to the SIP shall be considered separately in light ofspecific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order12866

The Office ofManagement and Budget has exempted thisregulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.

B. RegulatoryFlexibility

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 etseq.,EPA must prepare

aregulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact ofany proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and government entities withjurisdiction over populations of less than 50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I,part D ofthe 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 impose any new requirements, the Administrator certifies that it does not have a significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the
nature ofthe Federal-State relationship under the Act, preparation ofa flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness ofthe State action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. UnionElectricCo. v. EPA., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (1976); 42U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
C. UnfundedMandates

Under section 202 ofthe Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with any proposed or final rule that includes aFederal mandate that may result in estimated costs to state, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate;

or to theprivate sector, of $100 million

or more. 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 the private sector, result from this action.

D. Submission to Congressandthe GeneralAccountingOffice

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted areport containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives and the Comptroller General ofthe General Accounting Office prior to publication ofthe rule in today's Federal Register. This rule is
not a "major rule" as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

E. Petitions forJudicialReview
Under section 307(b)(1) ofthe Act, petitions forjudicial review ofthis action must be filed in the United States Court ofAppeals for the appropriate circuit by February 17, 1998. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator ofthis final rule does not affect the finality ofthis rule for the purposes ofjudicial review nor does it extend the time within which apetition forjudicial 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)).
Listof Subjects in 40 CFRPart52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone.

Dated: December 5, 1997. Michelle D.Jordan, ActingRegionalAdministrator.

For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code ofFederal 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.
Subpart O-Illinois

2. Section 52.726 is amended by addingparagraphs (p),(q), and (r)to read as follows:
§52.726 ControlStrategy: Ozone. (p) Approval-On November 15, 1993, Illinois submitted 15 percent rateof-progress and 3 percent contingency plans forthe Chicago ozone nonattainment area as a requested revision to the Illinois State Implementation Plan. These plans satisfy sections 182(b)(1), 172(c)(9), and 182(c)(9) ofthe Clean AirAct, as amended in 1990.

(q) Approval-On November 15, 1993, Illinois submitted 15 percent rate-ofprogress and 3 percent contingency plans forthe Metro-East St. Louis ozone nonattainment area as a requested revision to the Illinois State Implementation Plan. These plans satisfy sections 182(b)(1) and 172(c)(9) ofthe Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990.

(r)Approval-On November 15, 1993, Illinois submitted the following transportation control measures aspart ofthe 15 percent rate-of-progress and 3 percent contingency plans for the Metro-East ozone nonattainment area: Work trip reductions; transit improvements; and traffic flow improvements. [FR Doc. 97 32641 Filed 12 17 97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-U

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47CFR Part 73 [MM Docket No. 97-195; RM-9126]

Radio Broadcasting Services; Haiku, HI
AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission. ACTION:Final rule.

SUMMARY: This document allots Channel 293Cto Haiku, Hawaii, as that community's first local FM transmission service, in response to a petition for rule makingfiled on behalfofNative Hawaiian Broadcasting. See 62 FR 47786, September 11, 1997. Coordinates used for Channel 293C at Haiku, Hawaii, are 20-55-03 and 156-19-33. With this action, theproceeding is terminated. DATES: Effective January 26, 1998. A filingwindow forChannel 293C at Haiku, Hawaii, will not be opened at this time. Instead, the issue ofopening

a filingwindow forthis channel will be addressed by the Commission in a subsequent Order. FORFURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Joyner, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 418-2180. Questions related to the window application filingprocess 

## 66294 Federal Register / Vol. 62,

HeinOnline -- 62 Fed. Reg. 66294 1997