Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 37255

M020 Packages and Bundles

1.0 BASIC STANDARDS

* * * * *

1.4 Palletization

[Amend the third sentence in 1.4 by

deleting the reference to mixed BMC

pallets to read as follows:]

* * * Packages and bundles on BMC

pallets must be shrinkwrapped and

machinable on BMC parcel sorters;

machinability is determined by the

USPS.* * *

* * * * *

M040 Pallets

M041 General Standards

* * * * *

5.0 PREPARATION

5.1 Presort

[Amend 5.1 by revising the last

sentence and adding new sentences to

read as follows:]

* * * For sacks, trays, or machinable

parcels on pallets, the mailer must

prepare all required pallet levels before

any mixed ADC or mixed BMC pallets

are prepared for a mailing or job.

Packages and bundles prepared under

M045 must not be placed on mixed ADC

or mixed BMC pallets. Packages and

bundles that cannot be placed on pallets

must be prepared in sacks under the

standards for the rate claimed.

5.2 Required Preparation

[Amend 5.2 by deleting the second

and third sentences and revising the

fourth sentence to read as follows:]

* * * Mixed pallets of sacks, trays, or

machinable parcels must be labeled to

the BMC or ADC (as appropriate)

serving the post office where mailings

are entered into the mailstream. * * *

* * * * *

5.6 Sacked Mail

[Amend 5.6 by revising the first

sentence to read as follows:]

Mail that is not palletized (e.g., the

mailer chooses not to prepare BMC

pallets, or the packages do not meet the

machinability standards in M020) must

be prepared under the standards for the

rate claimed. * * *

* * * * *

M045 Palletized Mailings

* * * * *

[Revise the heading of 2.0 to read as

follows:]

2.0 PACKAGES OF FLATS

2.1 Standards

[Amend 2.1 by revising the second

sentence to read as follows:]

* * * The palletized portion of a

mailing may not include packages

sorted to mixed ADCs, mixed BMCs, or

to foreign destinations.

* * * * *

2.4 Size—Standard Mail (B)

* * * * *

[Amend 2.4c by revising the second

sentence to read as follows:]

* * * Packages at other rates must be

sorted to 5-digit, 3-digit, optional SCF,

and ADC destinations, as appropriate.

* * * * *

3.0 OPTIONAL BUNDLES—

PERIODICALS AND STANDARD MAIL

(A)

3.1 Standards

[Amend 3.1 by revising the second

sentence to read as follows:]

* * * The palletized portion of a

mailing may not include bundles sorted

to mixed ADCs, mixed BMCs, or to

foreign destinations.

* * * * *

4.0 PALLET PRESORT AND

LABELING

[Amend the heading to read as

follows:]

4.1 Packages, Bundles, and Sacks

* * * * *

e. As appropriate:

[Amend the beginning of (1) by

adding ‘‘(sacks and trays only)’’ to read

as follows:]

(1) Periodicals (sacks and trays only):

mixed ADC: optional; * * *

[Amend the beginning of (2) by

adding ‘‘(sacks and trays only)’’ to read

as follows:]

(2) Standard Mail (sacks and trays

only): mixed BMC: optional; * * *

* * * * *

5.0 PALLETS OF PACKAGES,

BUNDLES, AND TRAYS OF LETTERSIZE MAIL

* * * * *

[Amend 5.3 to eliminate references to

mixed BMC pallets and to insert ‘‘(trays

only)’’ to read as follows:]

5.3 BMC and Mixed BMC Pallets

Packages and bundles placed on BMC

pallets must be machinable on BMC

parcel sorting equipment. Line 2 on

pallet labels must reflect the processing

category of the pieces. A BMC or mixed

BMC (trays only) pallet may include

pieces that are eligible for the DBMC

rate and others that are ineligible if the

mailer provides documentation showing

the pieces that qualify for the DBMC

rate.

* * * * *

Stanley F. Mires,

Chief Counsel, Legislative.

[FR Doc. 98–18434 Filed 7–9–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710–12–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OH 114–1a; FRL–6123–1]

Approval and Promulgation of

Maintenance Plan Revisions; Ohio

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The United States

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

is approving through ‘‘direct final’’

procedure, a March 13, 1998, request

from Ohio, for a State Implementation

Plan (SIP) maintenance plan revision for

the Columbus ozone maintenance area

(Franklin, Delaware and Licking

Counties). The maintenance plan

revision establishes a new maintenance

year of 2010 for the area and a new

transportation conformity mobile source

emissions budget for the year 2010. The

2010 emissions budget projections

incorporate future emission reductions

from area and point sources. The newly

established 2010 emissions projections

determine the area’s safety margins for

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) and Volatile

Organic Compounds (VOCs). Also being

approved is the State’s request that a

portion of the safety margins be

allocated to the area’s 2010 mobile

source emissions budget for

transportation conformity purposes. The

area’s safety margin is defined as the

difference between the attainment

inventory level (the Columbus area’s

attainment inventory year is 1990) of the

total emissions and the projected levels

of the total emissions in the final year

of the maintenance plan (as established

for Columbus in this rule to be 2010).

DATES: This direct final rule is effective

on September 8, 1998, unless EPA

receives relevant adverse or critical

written comments by August 10, 1998.

If adverse comment is received, the EPA

will publish a timely withdrawal of the

direct final rule in the Federal Register

and inform the public that the rule will

not take effect. Any parties interested in

commenting on this action should do so

at this time. If no such comments are

received, the public is informed that
37256 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

this action will take effect on September

8, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents

relevant to this action are available for

inspection during normal business

hours at the following location:

Regulation Development Section, Air

Programs Branch, (AR–18J), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois, 60604.

Please contact Scott Hamilton at (312)

353–4775 before visiting the Region 5

office.

Written comments should be sent to:

J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, Regulation

Development Section, Air Programs

Branch, (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois,

60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Scott Hamilton, Environmental

Scientist, Regulation Development

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–4775.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Clean Air Act, in section 176(c),

requires conformity of activities to an

implementation plan’s purpose of

attaining and maintaining the National

Ambient Air Quality Standards. On

November 24, 1993, EPA promulgated a

final rule establishing criteria and

procedures for determining conformity

of transportation plans, programs and

projects funded or approved under Title

23 U.S.C. of the Federal Transit Act. The

State of Ohio finalized and adopted

State transportation conformity rules on

August 1, 1995, the rules became

effective August 21, 1995, and Ohio

submitted the rules as a SIP revision

request on August 17, 1995. The rules

were approved by EPA on July 15, 1996

(61 FR 24702).

The transportation conformity rules

require, among other things, a

comparison to the mobile source

emissions budget established by a

control strategy SIP. A control strategy

SIP is defined by the conformity rules

to be a maintenance plan, an attainment

demonstration, or a rate of progress

plan. The Columbus area is an

attainment area with an approved

maintenance plan. The EPA approval of

the maintenance plan established the

mobile source emissions budget for

transportation conformity purposes.

The emissions budget concept is

explained in the preamble to the

November 24, 1993, transportation

conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The

preamble also describes how to

establish the mobile source emissions

budget in the SIP and how to revise the

emissions budget. The State

transportation conformity rule at 3745–

101–16 of the Ohio Administrative Code

allows the mobile source emissions

budget to be changed as long as the total

level of emissions from all sources

remain below the milestone level. In the

case of a maintenance plan the

milestone level is the attainment level

established in the maintenance plan.

The maintenance plan is designed to

provide for future growth while still

maintaining the ozone air quality

standard. Growth in industries,

population and traffic is offset with

reductions from cleaner cars and other

emissions reduction programs. Through

the maintenance plan the State and

local agencies can manage and maintain

air quality while providing for growth.

II. Evaluation of the State Submittal

On March 13, 1998, Ohio submitted to

EPA a SIP revision request for the

Columbus maintenance area. A public

hearing on this proposal was held on

April 15, 1998. Documentation on the

public hearing was submitted on May

14, 1998 to complete the SIP revision

request.

In the submittal Ohio requested to

establish a new maintenance year of

2010, and new 2010 mobile source

emissions budget for transportation

conformity for the Columbus, Ohio

maintenance area.

A. 2010 Budget Projections for Point

and Area Sources

The 2010 emissions projections for

point and area sources were developed

by multiplying the individual 1990–

2010 population growth factors for each

county in the area by the individual

county 1990 baseline inventory. The

population growth factors used in the

point and area source projections were

derived from census population

forecasts from Ohio’s Data Users Center.

The projected emissions for each county

were then added together to arrive at the

total projected emissions for the point

and area source sectors for the year

2010.

B. NOX Point and Area Source Emission

Changes for the 2010 Budget

In developing the area’s 2010

emissions projections for NOX, the state

took credit for reductions from the point

and area source sectors. Projected NOX

reductions in point sources were

obtained from the shutdown of the

Columbus Trashburning Power Plant

(3.04 tons/day NOX) and the installation

of a pure oxygen combustion system at

Techniglass Inc. (1.43 tons/day NOX).

These point sources were included in

Ohio’s point source emissions inventory

that was submitted to EPA. The point

source NOX emission reductions were

subtracted from the total projected 2010

point source emission tonnage.

Projected reductions in area sources

were obtained by considering the new

federal ‘‘Emission Standards for

Locomotives and Locomotive Engines;

Final Rule’’ (63 FR 18977; April 16,

1998) for new and remanufactured

diesel-powered locomotives. The federal

locomotive standards are expected to

achieve a 41% reduction in NOX by the

year 2010. To be on the conservative

side, Ohio calculated its’ projected NOX

reductions from locomotives assuming

20% NOX reductions by 2010 instead of

41% for the 2010 budget (total reduction

of 16.07 tons/day NOX from area

sources). The 16.07 tons/day NOX

reduction was subtracted from the total

projected 2010 area source emission

tonnage.

The 2010 emission projections reflect

the point and area source reductions

and are illustrated in Table 1.

TABLE 1.—NOX AND VOC EMISSIONS BUDGET; AND SAFETY MARGIN DETERMINATIONS, COLUMBUS (TONS/DAY)

Source category 1990 1996 2005 2010

VOC Emissions

Point .................................................................................................................................. 16.44 17.52 19.33 20.27

Mobile (on-road) ............................................................................................................... 94.73 63.36 61.38 61.72

Area .................................................................................................................................. 101.18 107.47 117.30 123.94

Totals ..................................................................................................................... 212.35 188.35 198.01 205.93
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 37257

TABLE 1.—NOX AND VOC EMISSIONS BUDGET; AND SAFETY MARGIN DETERMINATIONS, COLUMBUS (TONS/DAY)—

Continued

Source category 1990 1996 2005 2010

Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions—2010 total emissions = 6.42 tons/day VOC

NOX Emissions

Point .................................................................................................................................. 13.79 14.35 15.27 12.17

Mobile (on-road) ............................................................................................................... 78.65 68.85 61.24 61.08

Area .................................................................................................................................. 96.68 102.62 111.82 101.99

Totals ..................................................................................................................... 189.12 185.82 188.33 175.24

Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions ¥2010 total emissions = 13.88 tons/day NOX

C. Safety Margin Allocations and 2010

Mobile Source Emissions Budget

In the submittal Ohio requested to

allocate to the mobile source emissions

budget part of the area’s safety margin.

The Columbus area’s safety margin is

the difference between the 1990

attainment inventory year and the 2010

projected emissions inventory (6.42

tons/day VOC safety margin, and 13.88

tons/day NOX safety margin) as shown

in Table 1. The SIP revision requests the

allocation of 6.27 tons/day VOC, and

9.91 tons/day NOX, into the area’s

mobile source emissions budget from

the safety margin. The 2010 mobile

source emissions budget showing the

safety margin allocations are outlined in

Table 2. The mobile source emissions

budget in Table 2 will be used for

transportation conformity purposes.

TABLE 2.—ALLOCATION OF SAFETY MARGIN TO THE 2010 MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS BUDGET, COLUMBUS (TONS/DAY)

Source category 1990 1996 2005 2010

VOC Emissions

Point .................................................................................................................................. 16.44 17.52 19.33 20.27

Mobile (on-road) ............................................................................................................... 94.73 63.36 61.38 67.99

Area .................................................................................................................................. 101.18 107.47 117.30 123.94

Totals ..................................................................................................................... 212.35 188.35 198.01 212.20

Remaining Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions ¥2010 total emissions = 0.15 tons/day VOC

NOX Emissions

Point .................................................................................................................................. 13.79 14.35 15.27 12.17

Mobile (on-road) ............................................................................................................... 78.65 68.85 61.24 70.99

Area .................................................................................................................................. 96.68 102.62 111.82 101.99

Totals ..................................................................................................................... 189.12 185.82 188.33 185.15

Remaining Safety Margin = 1990 total emissions ¥2010 total emissions = 3.97 tons/day NOX

Table 2 illustrates that the requested

portion of the safety margins can be

allocated to the 2010 mobile source

budget and still remain at or below the

1990 attainment level of total emissions

for the Columbus maintenance area.

This allocation is allowed by the

conformity rule since the area would

still be at or below the 1990 attainment

level for the total emissions.

III. EPA Action

After review of the SIP revision

request, EPA finds that the requested

allocation of the safety margin for the

Columbus area is approvable since the

approval of the new mobile source

emissions budgets for NOX and VOCs

illustrates that the total emissions for

the area will be at or below the

attainment year inventory level as

required by the transportation

conformity regulations. Therefore, EPA

is approving the requested allocation of

the safety margin to the mobile source

budget for the Columbus area.

The EPA is publishing this action

without prior proposal because EPA

views this as a noncontroversial

revision and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, the EPA is proposing to

approve the SIP revision should

specified written adverse or critical

comments be filed. This action will

become effective without further notice

unless the Agency receives relevant

adverse written comments within 30

days from the date of publication, as

indicated above. Should the Agency

receive such comments, it will publish

a final rule informing the public that

this action did not take effect. Any

parties interested in commenting on this

action should do so at this time.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this regulatory action

from Executive Order 12866 review.

B. Executive Order 13045

The Final rule is not subject to

Executive Order 13045, titled

‘‘Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks,’’ because it is not an

‘‘economically significant’’ action under

Executive Order 12866.

C. Future Requests

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting, allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. Each

request for revision to the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental
37258 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 132 / Friday, July 10, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

D. Regulatory Flexibility

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

generally requires an agency to conduct

a regulatory flexibility analysis of any

rule subject to notice and comment

rulemaking requirements unless the

agency certifies that the rule will not

have a significant economic impact on

a substantial number of small entities.

Small entities include small businesses,

small not-for-profit enterprises, and

small governmental jurisdictions. This

final rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities because SIP approvals under

section 110 and subchapter I, part D of

the Clean Air Act do not create any new

requirements but simply approve

requirements that the State is already

imposing. Therefore, because the

Federal SIP approval does not create

any new requirements, I certify that this

action will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Moreover, due

to the nature of the Federal-State

relationship under the Clean Air Act,

preparation of a flexibility analysis

would constitute Federal inquiry into

the economic reasonableness of state

action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA

to base its actions concerning SIPs on

such grounds. Union Electric Co., v.

U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976);

42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

E. Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the 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 a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs to state, local,

or tribal governments in the aggregate;

or to the private 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.

F. Audit Privilege and Immunity Law

Nothing in this action should be

construed as making any determination

or expressing any position regarding

Ohio’s audit privilege and immunity

law (sections 3745.70—3745.73 of the

Ohio Revised Code ). EPA will be

reviewing the effect of the Ohio audit

privilege and immunity law on various

Ohio environmental programs,

including those under the Clean Air

Act, and taking appropriate action(s), if

any, after thorough analysis and

opportunity for Ohio to state and

explain its views and positions on the

issues raised by the law. The action

taken herein does not express or imply

any viewpoint on the question of

whether there are legal deficiencies in

this or any Ohio Clean Air Act program

resulting from the effect of the audit

privilege and immunity law. As a

consequence of the review process, the

regulations subject to the action taken

herein may be disapproved, federal

approval for the Clean Air Act program

under which they are implemented may

be withdrawn, or other appropriate

action may be taken, as necessary.

G. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

The Congressional Review Act, 5

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides

that before a rule may take effect, the

agency promulgating the rule must

submit a rule report, which includes a

copy of the rule, to each House of the

Congress and to the Comptroller General

of the United States. EPA will submit a

report containing this rule and other

required information to the U.S. Senate,

the U.S. House of Representatives, and

the Comptroller General of the United

States prior to publication of the rule in

the Federal Register. This rule is not a

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

H. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act,

petitions for judicial review of this

action must be filed in the United States

Court of Appeals for the appropriate

circuit by September 8, 1998. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the

Administrator of this final rule does not

affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed, and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2)).

V. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Nitrogen oxides, Transportation

conformity.

Dated: July 1, 1998.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart KK—Ohio

2. Section 52.1885 is amended by

adding paragraph (a)(9) to read as

follows:

§ 52.1885 Control Strategy: Ozone

(a) * * *

(9) Approval—On March 13, 1998,

Ohio submitted a revision to the

maintenance plan for the Columbus

area. The revision consists of

establishing a new out year for the area’s

emissions budget. The new out year

emissions projections include

reductions from point and area sources;

the revision also defines new safety

margins according to the difference

between the areas 1990 baseline

inventory and the out year projection.

Additionally, the revision consists of

allocating a portion of the Columbus

area’s safety margins to the

transportation conformity mobile source

emissions budget. The mobile source

budgets for transportation conformity

purposes for the Columbus area are

now: 67.99 tons per day of volatile

organic compound emissions for the

year 2010 and 70.99 tons per day of

oxides of nitrogen emissions for the year

2010.

[FR Doc. 98–18420 Filed 7–9–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[CA–008–BU, FRL–6120–4]

Designation of Areas for Air Quality

Planning Purposes; State of California;

Redesignation of the San Francisco

Bay Area to Nonattainment for Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to

redesignate the San Francisco Bay Area

(Bay Area) as a nonattainment area for

the 1-hour ozone National Ambient Air

Quality Standard (NAAQS). The Clean