Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 2 / Wednesday, January 4, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 377

noted that the USEPA encourages the

use of site-specific emissions data if

data acceptable to the State and the

USEPA are available. The commentor

should present all available sampling

data and a discussion of the sampling

procedures to the State for review. It is

the State and not the USEPA that must

determine whether these data warrant a

revision to the 1990 base year emissions

inventory. As noted in the State’s

response, the State may have some

concerns regarding the acceptability of

the source-specific emission factors for

the sinter plant windboxes.

Nonetheless, the State is encouraged to

consider the data presented by the

commentor, and, if appropriate, to

revise the 1990 base year emissions

inventory through a SIP revision request

(the emission adjustments

recommended by the commentor, if

accepted by the State, would warrant a

SIP revision). The rulemaking process

that has been initiated by the State is the

appropriate forum for resolving this

issue and should be completed in a

timeframe that minimizes the need for

related SIP revisions in the State’s

reasonable further progress and

demonstration of attainment SIP

currently under development by the

State.

The USEPA agrees with the State that

the most appropriate time to have

adjusted the emissions inventory was

during the State’s public review period.

Requesting disapproval of the emissions

inventory based on data collected more

than one year after the public review

period is needlessly disruptive to the

State’s SIP development process.

USEPA agrees with the State that the

State used the best available data at the

time the emissions inventory was

prepared. Therefore, the USEPA

disagrees with the commentor that the

emissions inventory should be

disapproved now that new data may

have come to light. The USEPA fully

expects some base year emission

inventories to be revised after-the-fact

through follow-up quality assurance

checks and input of improved emission

factors. Many States are pursuing such

emissions inventory improvements. The

USEPA does not wish to discourage

such quality assurance efforts through

disapproval of emission inventory SIP

revisions based on emission factor

changes made after the adoption and

submittal of the base year emission

inventories.

With regard to the conversion of

annual emissions to ozone season daily

emissions, IDEM assumed for this

source category that emissions occur

uniformly throughout the year.

Therefore, no distinction was made

between hourly emission rates within

the summer months (the months

assumed to be associated with high

ozone concentrations) and those from

other months. Given the lack of seasonspecific and day-specific data, the

approach taken by the State is

acceptable. The fewer hours of sinter

plant operation during 1990 at the US

Steel facility would logically have led to

higher per hour emission rates when

annual emissions were converted to

daily emissions by dividing the annual

emissions by the hours of operation.

IDEM’s conversion procedures are

acceptable to the USEPA.

V. Final Rulemaking Action

The State of Indiana has met the

requirements of the Act for the

submittal of a base year ozone precursor

emissions inventory. The USEPA

approves Indiana’s 1990 base year ozone

precursor emissions inventory for Lake

and Porter Counties. It is noted,

however, that the State of Indiana will

consider the issues raised by Bethlehem

Steel Corporation, and may, dependent

on the extent of the revisions needed in

the emissions inventory, submit another

base year emissions inventory SIP

revision request in the future.

This action has been classified as a

Table 2 action by the Regional

Administrator under the procedures

published in the Federal Register on

January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214–2225), as

revised by an October 4, 1993

memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro,

Acting Assistant Administrator for Air

and Radiation. The Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) has

exempted this regulatory action from

Executive Order 12866 review.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. Each

request for revision to any SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., USEPA must

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603

and 604. Alternatively, USEPA may

certify 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

government entities with jurisdiction

over populations of less than 50,000.

The SIP approvals under section 110

and subchapter I, part D, of the 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, I

certify that it does not have a significant

impact on small entities. Moreover, due

to the nature of the Federal-State

relationship under the Act, preparation

of a regulatory flexibility analysis would

constitute Federal inquiry into the

economic reasonableness of State

action. The Act forbids the USEPA to

base its actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S.

E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256–66 (1976).

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 March 6, 1995. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the

Administrator of this final rule does not

affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed, and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See Section

307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,

Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: December 23, 1994.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

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. 7401–7671q.

Subpart P—Indiana

2. Section 52.777 is amended by

adding paragraph (j) to read as follows:

§ 52.777 Control strategy: Photochemical

oxidants (hydrocarbons).

* * * * *

(j) The base year ozone precursor

emission inventory requirement of

section 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, as

amended in 1990, has been satisfied for

Lake and Porter Counties, Indiana.

[FR Doc. 95–148 Filed 1–3–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P