[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 105 (Thursday, June 1, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 31129-31131]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-8467]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0354; FRL-8177-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Ohio; Proposal To Approve Revision to Ohio State Implementation Plan To
Rescind Oxides of Nitrogen Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Ohio State
Implementation Plan (SIP) to rescind a rule which originally affected
stationary combustion sources located within Priority I regions of the
State and, new sources regardless of location. The rule revision we are
proposing to approve also applies to nitric acid manufacture. EPA is
proposing to approve this rule rescission because we agree with Ohio
that the rescinded rule is no longer the limiting regulation for any
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) emission units in the State. The
rule was originally approved over 30 years ago and has been superseded
by a number of State regulations and Federal Regulations of equivalent
or more stringent nature. The Ohio NOX SIP Call rules and
Federal emissions standards for utility and industrial units all have
greater potential for reducing emissions of NOX and
improving human health than does the State's rescinded rule. Rescinding
this rule removes any confusion in the affected community over which
rule applies to NOX sources in Ohio. EPA believes that an
approval of this rule revision request would have no adverse effect on
air quality.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 3, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2006-0354, by one of the following methods:
http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: [email protected].
Fax: (312) 886-5824.
Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section,
(AR-18J), Air Program Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant
Section, (AR-18J), Air Program Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
[[Page 31130]]
Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional
Office normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2006-0354. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting
comments, go to Section I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This Facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. We recommend that you telephone John Paskevicz, Engineer, at
(312) 886-6084 before visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Paskevicz, Engineer, Criteria
Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6084, or via e-mail at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
II. Who Is Affected by This Rule?
III. What Is the Impact on Air Quality Due to the Rescission of this
Rule?
IV. Did the Public Have Opportunity To Review and Make Comment on
the State's Action?
V. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.
I. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
A. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. Clearly mark the part or all of
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk
or CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI). In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
B. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
2. Follow directions--The EPA may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
II. Who Is Affected by This Rule?
In taking the action to rescind Ohio Administrative Code (OAC)
3745-23-06, the State of Ohio has determined that no one is affected by
this rule. We agree. The State reviewed its NOX plan and
found that this 30-year old rule no longer applies to any source in the
State. The rule has been made redundant and out-of-date by a series of
rulemakings over the past years. Most recently, the State's
NOX SIP Call rule which reduces NOX emissions, a
summertime ozone precursor, has a greater health benefit because the
emission rates associated with the NOX SIP Call are
significantly more stringent than OAC 3745-23-06. Similarly, 40 CFR
Part 60, subpart Da and subpart G emission rates are more stringent
than the rule Ohio is rescinding.
III. What Is the Impact on Air Quality Due to the Rescission of This
Rule?
The State noted that only one unit (a boiler at the General Motors
Corporation Moraine Assembly Plant) was affected by this rule, the only
unit in the State in which the Title V permit referenced this rule.
This source was closed permanently in August 2003. The closure of that
unit reduced the emissions of NOX into the atmosphere
resulting in a reduction of ozone precursor during the summertime and
the reduction of acid rain precursor during the other seasons. No other
source permits issued by Ohio rely on this rule to control emissions of
NOX.
IV. Did the Public Have Opportunity To Review and Make Comment on the
State's Action?
Yes. On December 1, 2004, a public hearing was held in Columbus,
Ohio. No comments were made at the hearing, and no comments were
received from the public during the comment period. Comment was
received from a staff member of Ohio EPA Division of Air Pollution
Control. The commenter noted that for one type of unit the rule is more
[[Page 31131]]
stringent than the Federal performance standard for the type of fuel
burned. The State responded by writing that Ohio relies on the Federal
New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) to set standards for
appropriate units and the State emission standards are not intended to
be more restrictive than NSPS. Ohio statute prohibits State rules more
stringent than Federal rules. While this action appears to be a
relaxation for an oil-fired unit, the backstop is the Federal NSPS.
However, as comments were being considered by the State, the source
(General Motors Corporation) shut down the Moraine Assembly Plant
boiler. This unit was the only boiler affected by the rescinded rule.
All other existing boilers of 250 million BTU per hour or larger in
size are covered by the NOX SIP Call and have emissions caps
during the ozone season.
V. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
We are proposing to approve the State's request to rescind the rule
OAC 3745-23-06. A review of the Ohio Title V permit list shows that the
only permit still in the system which references this rule is for a 250
million BTU boiler formerly owned by the General Motors Corporation
(GM). The GM Moraine assembly plant permit applies to a gas fired
boiler (with oil back-up) which ceased operation in 2003, about a year
before this action (to rescind this rule) was approved by the Ohio EPA
Director. Citizens who wish to comment on this action are encouraged to
do so within the time-frame noted in the front of this notice.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Executive Order 12866; Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, September 30, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule does not impose an information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Because this rule proposes to approve pre-existing requirements
under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty
beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as
described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
Executive Order 13132 Federalism
This action also does not have Federalism implications because it
does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999). This action merely proposes to approve a state rule
implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act.
Executive Order 13175 Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 13045 Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically
significant.
Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).
National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 15 U.S.C. 272, requires Federal agencies to use
technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus to carry out policy objectives, so long as such standards are
not inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. In
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Absent a
prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus
standards, EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for
failure to use such standards, and it would thus be inconsistent with
applicable law for EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in place of
a program submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the
Clean Air Act. Therefore, the requirements of section 12(d) of the NTTA
do not apply.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: May 17, 2006.
Norman Niedergang,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. E6-8467 Filed 5-31-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P