Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 81 / Thursday, April 25, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 18255

include small businesses, small not-forprofit enterprises, and government

entities with jurisdiction over

populations of less than 50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and

subchapter I, Part D of the CAA 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, EPA

certifies that it does not have a

significant impact on any small entities

affected. Moreover, due to the nature of

the Federal-state relationship under the

CAA, preparation of a regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The CAA

forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds

(Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427

U.S. 246, 256–66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2)).

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action for signature by the

Regional Administrator under the

procedures published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR

2214–2225), as revised by a July 10,

1995, memorandum from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation. The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from E.O. 12866

review.

Under sections 202, 203, and 205 of

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995 (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’),

signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must undertake various actions in

association with proposed or final rules

that include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to the private sector, or to state,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate.

Through submission of this SIP, the

state has elected to adopt the program

provided for under section 110 of the

CAA. These rules may bind state and

local governments to perform certain

actions and also require the private

sector to perform certain duties. To the

extent that the rules being finalized for

approval by this action will impose new

requirements, sources are already

subject to these regulations under state

law. Accordingly, no additional costs to

state or local governments, or to the

private sector, result from this final

action. EPA has also determined that

this final action does not include a

mandate that may result in estimated

costs of $100 million or more to state or

local governments in the aggregate or to

the private sector. EPA has determined

that these rules result in no additional

costs to tribal government.

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

petitions for judicial review of this

action must be filed in the United States

Court of Appeals for the appropriate

circuit by June 24, 1996. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the

Administrator of this final rule does not

affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review, nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed, and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Volatile organic

compounds.

Dated: February 9, 1996.

Dennis Grams,

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 R—Kansas

2. Section 52.870 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(31) to read as

follows:

§ 52.870 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(31) On May 11, 1995, the Kansas

Department of Health and Environment

submitted an emissions inventory

update to the Kansas City maintenance

plan approved by EPA on June 23, 1992.

The submittal also establishes a motor

vehicle emissions budget for the

purpose of fulfilling the requirements of

the Federal Transportation Conformity

rule.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Kansas City Ozone Maintenance

State Implementation Plan Revision:

Emissions Inventories and Motor

Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the

Kansas City Metropolitan Area, adopted

on May 11, 1995.

Subpart AA—Missouri

3. Section 52.1320 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(94) to read as

follows:

§ 52.1320 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(94) On April 12, 1995, the Missouri

Department of Natural Resources

submitted an emissions inventory

update to the Kansas City maintenance

plan approved by EPA on June 23, 1992.

The submittal also establishes a motor

vehicle emissions budget for the

purpose of fulfilling the requirements of

the Federal Transportation Conformity

rule.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Kansas City Ozone Maintenance

SIP Revisions: Emission Inventories and

Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets,

adopted by the Missouri Air

Conservation Commission on March 30,

1995.

[FR Doc. 96–10132 Filed 4–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[OH21–2–7260; FRL–5450–5]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Ohio

AGENCY: United States Environmental

Protection Agency (USEPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to letter notice

procedures described at 54 FR 2214

(January 19, 1989), USEPA approved

minor revisions to the Ohio State

Implementation Plan (SIP) on October

31, 1995. This document describes the

approved revisions and incorporates the

relevant material into the Code of

Federal Regulations. The SIP revisions

are site-specific rules that are required

as part of an effort to achieve the

National Ambient Air Quality Standard

(NAAQS) for ozone. The rules will

benefit the environment and people

who have asthma and other respiratory

diseases by reducing volatile organic

compound (VOC) emissions, a precursor

to smog formation.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The effective date is

April 25, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State SIP

revision request and USEPA’s letter

notice of approval are available for

public inspection during normal

business hours at the following

locations:

United States Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard

(AR–18J), Chicago, Illinois 60604; and

Office of Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center (Air Docket 6102),

United States Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW,

Washington, DC, 20460.
18256 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 81 / Thursday, April 25, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

1The USEPA issued three sets of control

technique guidelines documents which established

a ‘‘presumptive norm’’ for RACT for various

categories of VOC sources. Sources not covered by

a CTG were called non-CTG sources.

2Notice of the proposed approval of these SIP

revisions was published in the Federal Register on

July 10, 1995. Due to the minor nature of these

revisions, USEPA concluded that conducting the

usual notice-and-comment rulemaking prior to

approving the revisions would have been

‘‘unnecessary and contrary to public interest,’’ and

therefore was not required by the Administrative

Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. Section 553(b). USEPA

therefore sent notice of the approval by letter to the

affected facilities and the OEPA in accordance with

the procedure described in a January 30, 1989,

memorandum from USEPA’s Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards to the Regional Air

Division Directors entitled ‘‘Procedures for Letter

Notice Approval of Minor SIP Actions.’’

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Fayette Bright, Regulation Development

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

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312)

886–6069.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Ohio

Environmental Protection Agency

(OEPA) originally submitted a SIP

revision request on June 7, 1993, which

established VOC reasonably available

control technology (RACT) requirements

for the facilities not covered by a control

technique guideline (CTG). VOC RACT

requirements were established for the

following non-CTG sources 1:

AK Steel Corporation (Armco Steel

Company)

B.F. Goodrich Company—Akron Chemical

Plant

Chevron U.S.A. Incorporated

Cincinnati Specialties Incorporated

Day-Glo Color Corporation

Firestone Synthetic Rubber and Latex

Company

Formica Corporation

Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company—Akron

Polymer

Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company—Plant

C

International Paper Company

Lubrizol Corporation

Midwest Mica and Insulation Company

Morton International Incorporated

PPG Industries Incorporated

Reilly Industries Incorporated

Ritrama Duramark

Sprayon Products Incorporated

Steelcraft Manufacturing Company

Zeneca (ICI Americas, Perry)

USEPA considered the State’s request

a minor SIP revision request. In

response to USEPA comments on the

request, the State submitted revisions to

the original submittal on February 17,

1995, and August 22, 1995. The first

revision submitted by the State included

revised rules and permit requirements

(implemented through Findings and

Orders issued to the facilities) for a

number of the facilities which

established site-specific non-CTG VOC

RACT regulations. The first revision did

not, however, establish requirements for

all of the non-CTG facilities and some

of the revised rules contained

deficiencies. Therefore, the State

submmitted a second revision on

August 22, 1995, correcting these

deficiencies and establishing

requirements for the remaining nonCTG facilities.

On October 31, 1995, USEPA

approved the SIP revision requests

under Section 110(k) of the Clean Air

Act (CAA) by notifying the affected

facilities and the OEPA by letter that

USEPA was approving the SIP

revisions.2 The SIP revisions became

final and effective on that date. USEPA

has determined that these SIP revisions

satisfy requirements for RACT for the

non-CTG facilities and comply with all

other applicable requirements of the

CAA and USEPA policy and regulations

concerning such revisions.

The October 31, 1995, letter notice

approvals, in conjunction with rule

approvals published in the Federal

Register on March 23, 1995 (60 FR

15235), correct all VOC RACT

deficiencies cited in the action

published May 9, 1994 (59 FR 23796).

In the May 9, 1994, rulemaking action

and the September 23, 1993, proposed

rulemaking action (58 FR 49458), the

rule deficiencies are described. The

March 23, 1995, rulemaking describes

how the deficiencies are remedied. The

deficiencies for Canton, Youngstown,

Toledo, and Dayton and some of the

deficiencies for Cleveland and

Cincinnati were found to be remedied

when USEPA took final rulemaking

action approving revisions to VOC

RACT regulations for those areas. (See

60 FR 15235, March 23, 1995).

Clocks imposing sanctions on Canton,

Youngstown, Toledo, Dayton,

Cleveland, and Cincinnati were started

as a result of the May 9, 1994,

rulemaking action on VOC RACT

described above. In order to stop the

clocks, Ohio had to correct the VOC

RACT deficiencies and have them

approved into the SIP by USEPA

November 9, 1995. The rule approvals

published March 23, 1995, stopped the

sanctions clocks for Canton,

Youngstown, Toledo, and Dayton. The

same March 23, 1995, rule approval

corrected a number of the rule

deficiencies for the Cleveland and

Cincinnati areas. The remaining

deficiencies were corrected by the

October 31, 1995, letter notices and

stopped the VOC RACT sanctions clocks

for those areas.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting, allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. USEPA

shall consider each request for revision

to the SIP in light of specific technical,

economic, and environmental factors

and in relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action for signature by the

Regional Administrator under the

procedures published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR

2214–2225), as revised by a July 10,

1995, memorandum from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation. The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from Executive Order

12866 review.

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 impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Small entities

include small businesses, small not-forprofit enterprises, and government

entities with jurisdiction over

populations of less than 50,000.

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 any small entities affected.

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 USEPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. USEPA, 427 U.S.

246, 256–66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995, signed into law on March 22,

1995, USEPA must undertake various

actions in association with proposed or

final rules that include a Federal

mandate that may result in estimated

costs of $100 million or more to the

private sector, or to State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate.

Through submission of the state

implementation plan or plan revisions

approved in this action, the State has

elected to adopt the program provided

for under section 110 of the Clean Air

Act. The rules and commitments being

approved in this action may bind State,
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 81 / Thursday, April 25, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 18257

local and tribal governments to perform

certain actions and also may ultimately

lead to the private sector being required

to perform certain duties. To the extent

that the rules and commitments being

approved by this action will impose or

lead to the imposition of any mandate

upon the State, local or tribal

governments either as the owner or

operator of a source or as a regulator, or

would impose or lead to the imposition

of any mandate upon the private sector,

EPA’s action will impose no new

requirements; such sources are already

subject to these requirements under

State law. Accordingly, no additional

costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or to the private sector,

result from this action. The USEPA has

also determined that this action does

not include a mandate that may result

in estimated costs of $100 million or

more to State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate or to the

private sector.

Under Section 307(b)(1) of the Act, as

amended, judicial review of this action

is available only by filing a petition for

review in the United States Court of

Appeals for the appropriate circuit by

June 24, 1996. The action may not be

challenged later in proceedings to

enforce their requirements. See section

307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Intergovernmental relations,

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Volatile organic

compounds.

Dated: February 29, 1996.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40, of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended to

read 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 KK—Ohio

2. Section 52.1870 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(102) to read as

follows:

§ 52.1870 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(102) On June 7, 1993, and February

17, 1995, the Ohio Environmental

Protection Agency (OEPA) submitted

revisions to the State Implementation

Plan (SIP) for ozone. The revisions

include 19 new non-Control Technique

Guideline volatile organic compound

(VOC) rules, Findings and Orders for 5

companies, and two permits to install.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) OEPA OAC Rule 3745–21–01,

Definitions, Paragraphs (Q); (T);

effective January 17, 1995.

(B) OEPA OAC Rule 3745–21–04,

Attainment Dates and Compliance Time

Schedules, Paragraphs (C)(40); (C)(41);

(C)(46); (C)(48); (C)(49); (C)(50); (C)(51);

(C)(53); (C)(54); (C)(59); (C)(60); (C)(61);

(C)(62); effective January 17, 1995.

(C) OEPA OAC Rule 3745–21–09,

Control of Emissions of Volatile Organic

Compounds from Stationary Sources,

Paragraphs (FF), (GG), (HH), (II), (JJ),

(KK), (LL), (MM), (NN), (OO), (PP),

(QQ), (SS), (TT), (YY), (ZZ), (AAA);

(BBB); effective January 17, 1995.

(D) Director’s Final Findings and

Orders for AK Steel Corporation

(Middletown), International Paper

Company (Cincinnati), Midwest Mica &

Insulation Company (Cleveland), Reilly

Industries, Inc. (Cleveland), and

Sprayon Products, Inc. (Bedford

Heights), Issued by Ohio Environmental

Protection Agency on August 18, 1995.

(E) Permit to Install, Application

Number 13–2396, for Excello Specialty

Company, APS Premise Number

1318607686. The date of issuance is

December 11, 1991.

(F) Permit to Install, Application

Number 14–2096, for Hilton Davis

Company, APS Premise Number

1431070039. The date of issuance is

June 12, 1991.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96–10131 Filed 4–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[WI68–01–7294a; FRL–5461–7]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Implementation Plan; Wisconsin;

Industrial Adhesives SIP Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA approves a revision

to the Wisconsin State Implementation

Plan (SIP) for ozone that was submitted

on December 12, 1995, and later

supplemented on January 12, 1996. This

revision requires the control of volatile

organic compound (VOC) emissions

from facilities that utilize industrial

adhesives. This submittal was made to

satisfy the requirement of the 1990

Clean Air Act (CAA) that all major VOC

sources in moderate, or worse, ozone

nonattainment areas have Reasonably

Available Control Technology (RACT)

applied to them. This regulation will

also be used to generate reductions in

VOC emissions, which the State will use

to fulfill the CAA requirement to reduce

VOC emissions by at least 15 percent

from the 1990 baseline emissions. In the

proposed rules section of this Federal

Register, the EPA is proposing approval

of, and soliciting comments on, this

requested SIP revision. If adverse

comments are received on this action,

the EPA will withdraw this final rule

and address the comments received in

response to this action in a final rule on

the related proposed rule, which is

being published in the proposed rules

section of this Federal Register. A

second public comment period will not

be held. Parties interested in

commenting on this action should do so

at this time. This approval makes

federally enforceable the State’s rule

that has been incorporated by reference.

DATES: The ‘‘direct final’’ is effective on

June 24, 1996, unless EPA receives

adverse or critical comments by May 28,

1996. If the effective date is delayed,

timely notice will be published in the

Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to: Carlton T. Nash, Chief,

Regulation Development Section, Air

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. EPA, 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604.

Copies of the proposed SIP revision

and EPA’s analysis are available for

inspection at the U.S. EPA, Region 5,

Air and Radiation Division, 77 West

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois

60604. (Please telephone Douglas

Aburano at (312) 353–6960 before

visiting the Region 5 Office.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Douglas Aburano, Environmental

Engineer, Regulation Development

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

U.S. EPA , Region 5, Chicago, Illinois

60604, (312) 353–6960.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Section 182(b) of the CAA sets forth

the requirements for ozone

nonattainment areas which have been

classified as moderate or above. Section

182(b)(1)(A) requires those States with

ozone nonattainment areas classified as

moderate or above to submit plans to

reduce VOC emissions by at least 15

percent from the 1990 baseline

emissions. The 1990 baseline, as

described by EPA’s emission inventory

guidance, is the amount of

anthropogenic VOC emissions emitted

on a typical summer day.