### Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 1985 / Rules and Regulations

For each $I of annual income of each parent

The $190 monthly Wh

rate sh hhichmr BUtnot more tan reduced by than

.08 1,200 6,493

No DIC is payable under thisparagraph ifannual income exceeds $6,493.

(d) Twoparentslivingtogetheror remarried parentslivingwithspouses. (1)The rates in this paragraph apply to:

(i) Each parent living with another parent; and

(ii) Each remarried parent, when both parents are alive.The monthly rate of DIC paid to such parents willbe $179, reduced on the basis ofthe combined annual income ofthe two parents living together or the remarried parent or parents and spouse or spouses, as computed under the following formula:

For each $1 of combined annual income

The $179 monthly

rate shal be Which Is more Bu not more than =*Vy than reduced by

____ $0.00 0 $1.000

.03 1,000 1.800 .04 1,800 2,300 .05 2300 2800
.06 2,800 3,300 .07 3,300 3,800 .08 3.800 8,731

No DIC ispayable under this paragraph ifcombined annual income exceeds $8,731.

(e)Aidandattendance. The monthly rate ofDIC payable to a parent under this section shall be increased by $140 if such parent is: (1)A patient in a nursing home, or (2) helpless or blind, orso nearly helpless orblind as to need or require the regular aid and attendance ofanother person.

4. Section 3.26 is revised to read as follows: §3.26 Section 306 and old-lawpension annual Income Ilmitations.

(a)Section306pensionincome limitations.(1) Veteran or surviving spouse with no dependents, $8,493.

(2) Veteran with no dependents in need ofaid and attendance (38 U.S.C. 521(d), as in effect on December 31, 1978), $6,993.

(3) Veteran or surviving spouse with

one or more dependents, $8,731.

(4) Veteran with one ormore dependents in need ofaid and attendance (38 U.S.C. 521(d), as in effect

on December 31, 1978), $8,231.

(5) Child (no entitled veteran or surviving spouse), $5,306.

(b) Old-law pensionincome limitations.(1) Veteran or surviving spouse without dependents oran entitled child, $5,683.

(2) Veteran or surviving spouse with

one or more dependents, $8,197.

5.In §3.262, paragraph (b)(2) is revised to read as follows: §3.262 Evaluation ofIncome.

(b)Income ofspouse. (2) Veterans.The separate income of the spouse ofa disabled veteran who is entitled to pension under laws in effect

on June 30, 1960, will not be considered. Where pension ispayable under section 306(a) ofPub. L. 95-588, to a veteran who isliving with a spouse there willbe included as income ofthe veteran all income ofthe spouse in excess of whichever is the greater, $2,068 ($1,998 after November 30, 1983 and before December 1,1984) or the total earned income ofthe spouse, which is reasonably available to or forthe veteran, unless hardship to the veteran would result. The presumption that inclusion ofsuch income is available to the veteran and would not work a hardship on him or her may be rebutted by evidence ofunavailability or of expenses beyond the usual family requirements. (38 U.S.C. 521(f); sec. 306(a)(2)(B) ofPub. L.95-588)

[FR Doc. 85-14700Filed 6-18-85; 8:45am]
BILUNG CODE 8320-01-M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52 [A-9-FRL 2846-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Sacramento CountyAirPollution Control District, AirPollutionControl Regulations, State of California

AGENCY Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice offinal rulemaking.
SUMMARY: This notice approves Rule 202 ofthe Sacramento County Air Pollution Control District, a New Source Review Rule. Sacramento County adopted the Rule to satisfy conditions on the approval ofits previous NSR Rule and to obtain authority from EPA to issue permits for PSD. The Rule defines requirements forbuilding and modifying stationary sources of airpollution. It applies to both attainment and nonattainment pollutants, so that it addresses the federal requirements for both NSR and PSD. This notice also

removes a condition placed on approval of the District's NSR Rule in 1982 and rescinds EPA's PSD authority formost

sources. EFFECTIVE DATE: July 19, 1985.

Copies ofthe rule are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the EPARegion IX office at the address below and at the following other locations:
EPA Library, Public Information

Reference Unit, 401 "M" Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 20460 Office ofFederal Register, 1100 "L"

Street, N.W., Room 8401, Washington, D.C. California State Air Resources Board,

Technical Support Division, 1131 "S" Street, Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento County Air Pollution

ControlDistrict, 3701 Branch Center Road, Sacramento, CA 95827
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Mark Brucker, Air Management Division,Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 215 Fremont Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 974- 7657/{FTS 454-7657). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

### This portion ofthe notice has four sections: Background, Supplementary Revisions (which discusses new submittals from the District), EPA Actions, and the Regulatory Process. There is no Public Comments section because there were

no comments on the proposed action. Background

On July 1, 1982, (47FR 28617), EPA approved the Nonattainment Area Plan and NSRRule for Sacramento County, subject to certain conditions. EPA required the District to revise its NSR Rule tomeet EPA's regulations of August 7, 1980 (40 CFR 51.18).

EPA requires NSR Rules for pollutants which are designated as not meeting the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. PSD rules apply to pollutants for which an area is designated attainment. The County isdesignated attainment by EPA for sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide. Ozone and particulates are designated nonattainment throughout the area. Carbon monoxide is designated nonattainment only in the Sacramento Metropolitan area.

Sacramento adopted a new Rule 56 in 1982 to satisfy the NSR condition and to

secure full authority from EPA for issuing PSD permits. The Rule was based on the NSR/PSD Rule developed by the California Air Pollution Control Officers' Association (CAPCOA) and the California Air Resources Board. It combines NSR and PSD in a single 

### 2,5417

HeinOnline -- 50 Fed. Reg. 25417 1985

### 25418 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 1985 / Rules and Regulations

program and was written to satisfy EPA's regulations.

In a notice datedJune 21, 1983, EPA proposed to approve Rule 56 (48FR 28288). It also proposed to remove the NSR condition and to rescind EPA's PSD authority in the Sacramento area.

This was done because though the rule did not fully and completely satisfy EPA'sregulations itwas very close to doing so. In addition, EPAhad received commitments from the District to remedy the remaining problems. The problems EPA reported are described below and the actions taken since then to remedy the problems are described in the Supplementary Revisions section.

EPA's review of the Rule foundminor deviations from EPA requirements. The problems were:

(1)The Rule failed to conform to EPA's restrictions on crediting shutdowns.

(2) The Rule allowed credits for transportation offsets without adequate

assurance ofconsistency with RFP.

(3) The District did nothave an approved method ofanalyzing increment consumption. Supplementary Revisions

Sacramento revised its Rule on November 20, 1984, and ARB submitted the revisions on February 6, 1985. The rule has been renumbered from 56 to 202. However, the content of therule is still extremely similarto the rule that EPA proposed to approve. Some changes have been made to satisfyEPA requirements and toclarify the Rule. EPA has prepared a detailed Evaluation Report which assesses the Rule. It describes how problems have been corrected or been shown by new evidence not to be problems. The Evaluation Report is available at the EPARegion IX office listed above.

With respect to the three major problems cited in the 1983 notice and described above, the following actions

were taken:

(1)The District revised therule to restrict credit for shutdowns.

(2) The Districtrevised the rule to require EPA approval for use ofany transportation offsets.

(3] The Districtrevised the Rule to require analysis ofincrement consumption using EPA models.

The actions taken by the District on these three issues satisfyEPA's requirements.

One additional issue arose'after the 1983 notice.Two court decisions concerning stack heights led EPA to ,impose new restrictions on PSD rules. In response to EPA's resulting policy the District has cooperated by revising their Rule to prohibit credit for stacks from 

### exceeding that allowed by "good engineering practice." EPA andthe District have also agreed that EPA will retain PSD permitting authority for

sources which are major under EPA's regulation and which would either have stacks higherthan 65 meters or which plan to use dispersion techniques, as defined by EPA. When EPAissues its final stack height regulations the District

can adopt requirements to satisfythe regulations andEPA would then be able to dropits permitting ofthose sources and leave sole authority forpermitting with theDistrict.

EPA finds that Rule 202 meetsthe applicable requirements ofthe CleanAir Act andEPA regulations andpolicy, with a few exceptions. In those cases EPA is either retaining authority over the sources itselforis excluding the sections ofthe rule whichpresent problems from this approval.

1.State law requires theDistrict to issue permits for cogeneration and

resource recovery sources even iftheir emissions would cause PSD increment violations. In ordertoprotect the increments, EPAwill retain authority for permitting suchprojects. EPA will have the authority to disapprove the projects

orto require sufficient mitigation to prevent increment violations.

2. For sources subject to stack height restrictions theDistrict has no way to remedy theproblem. EPA is therefore maintaining its authority to require permits forthose sources underPSD. EPA is also deferring action on the stack heightrestrictions in therule under NSR. EPA cannot take any action until its final stack heightregulations are published, at which time it will address stack heights in Sacramento.

3.Rule 202partially exempts cogeneration and resource recovery
sources from offset requirements. EPA is taking no action on those exemptions as they applyto volatile organic compounds (VOC] andnitrogen oxides (NO.). The exemptions cannot be approved because they weaken the SIP andbecause they violate Clean AirAct requirements forNSR.They cannotbe disapproved in this notice, however, because EPA has notproposed disapproval. EPAhad notrealized at the time ofproposing action on theNSR/ PSD Rule that the 1982 Plan would fail to demonstrate attainment ofthe ozone standard. EPA willpropose action on those exemptions in a separate rulemaking within the next several months.



### The exemptions would weaken the SIPbyremoving theprotection for standards that is included currently. They also violate the Act's requirement that NSR rules be consistent with RFP. The 1982 NAP failed to demonstrate attainment ofthe ozone standard by the deadline of1987. EPA cannot approve exemptions for pollutants which contribute to standards violations which
cannot be remedied by 1987. VOC and NO. are both precursors to ozone and

are both implicated in Sacramento's

ozone pollution problem.

4. EPA is taking no action on Sections 109 and 229 ofthe rule. These sections would provide offset exemptions to food
processors. Those provisions were not included in therule on which EPA proposed action in 1983, so EPA will have to prepare a separate notice which does propose action. That notice willbe issued within the next several months. EPA cannot approve the exemption because itweakens the existing SIP.

EPA Actions

In this notice, EPA is taking three actions:

1.EPA is approving Rule 202 under Section 110 ofthe Clean Air Act and Parts C, Subpart 1 (PSD) and D (NSR) and is incorporating it into the California State Implementation Plan (SIP, with the following exceptions:

a. Sections 104 and 105 as they pertain
toVOC and NO,

b. Sections 109 and 229, and

c. the portion ofSection 405 which addresses stack heights, as itpertains to NSR.

EPA will address the stack height issue when it has issued final stack height regulations and will propose action on the other items within the next several months.

2. EPA is removing the condition placed on Sacramento's NSR Rule on July 1, 1982, requiring conformance with 40 CFR 51.18. The condition has been satisfied by Rule 202.

3, EPA is rescinding 40 CFR 52.270, except for a) major cogeneration sources and modifications which would cause increment violations, b) sources subject
to stack height credit restrictions, and (c) those sources which have EPAissued PSD permits, which EPA will continue to enforce. Rescinding 52.270 eliminates EPA's PSD permitting authority in the Sacramento area except forthose sources. Regulatory Process

The Office ofManagement and Budget has exempted this rule from the requirements ofSection 3 ofExecutive Order 12291. Under 5 U.S.C. Section 605(b). Icertify that this SIP revision will
not have a significant economic impact

on a substantial number ofsmall entities. (See 46 FR 8709). Incorporation by reference ofthe State

HeinOnline -- 50 Fed. Reg. 25418 1985

### Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 118 / Wednesday, June 19, 1985 / Rules and Regulations

Implementation Plan for the State of California was approved by the Director of the Federal Register on July 1,1982:

Under Section 307(b)(1) ofthe Clean Air Act,petitions forjudicial review of this action mustbe filed in the United States Court ofAppeals for the appropriate circuit by (60 days from today). This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See 307(b)(2)).

List ofSubjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Air pollution control agency, Incorporation byreference, Ozone, Sulfur oxides, Nitrogen dioxide, Lead, Particulate matter, Carbon monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental relations.

Dated: May 24, 1985. Lee M.Thomas, Administrator.

Subpart FofPart 52, Chapter I, Title 40 ofthe Code ofFederal Regulations is amended as follows:
Subpart F-California

1.The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7642.
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(159) to read as follows: §52.220 Identification ofplan.

*r * * * *

(c) * * (159) Revised regulations for the following APCD's were submitted on February 6, 1985 by the Governor's designee.

(i)Sacramento County APCD. (A) Amended Rule 202 (except for a) sections 104 and 105 as they apply to volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides, b) sections 109 and 229, and c) the portion ofsection 405 which

concerns stack heights [under NSRJ).

* * * * *

3. Section 52.232 is amended by revising the introductory text of(a)(11) and the introductory text of (a)(11)(i) to read as follows: §52.232 Part Dconditional approval.



### (a) * * * (11) Fresno County and Ventura County nonattainment areas.

(i)For ozone, CO (for Fresno County), and PM:

* * * * *

4. Section 52.270 is revised to read as follows: §52.270 Significantdeterioration of air quality.

(a) With the exception ofthe areas listed in paragraph (b) of this section: (1)

### The requirements of Sections 160 through 165 ofthe Clean AirAct are not met in" California. (2)The plan does not include approvable procedures forpreventing the significant deterioration ofair quality.

(3)The provisions of §52.21(b) through (w) are hereby incorporated and made a part ofthe applicable state plan forthe State ofCalifornia.

(b)District PSDPlans.

### (1)The PSD 

### rules for the Sacramento County Air Pollution ControlDistrict are approved underPart C,Subpart 1,ofthe Clean Air Act.However, EPA is retaining authority to apply §52.21 incertain

cases.The provisionsof §52.21 (b) through (w)are therefore incorporated andmade a partofthe state plan for California for the Sacramento County AirPollution Control District for:

(i)Those cogeneration andresource recovery projects which are major stationary sources or major modifications under §52.21 and which would cause violations ofPSD increments.

(ii) Those projects which are major stationary sources or major modifications under §52.21 and which would eitherhave stacks tallerthan 65 meters or would use "dispersion techniques" as defined in §51.1.

(ii!) Sources forwhich EPA has issued permits under §52.21, including the following permit and any others for which applications are received byJune 19, 1985.

Procter & Gamble, SAC 83-01, 5/6/83. [FR Doc. 85-14716 Filed 6-18-85; 8:45 am]

HILLNG CODE 05C0-01-M



### FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENTAGENCY

44 CFR Part 64 [Docket No. FEMA 6663] 

### Suspension ofCommunity Eligibility

AGENCY: 

### Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule lists communities, where the sale offlood insurance has been authorized under the National FloodInsurance Program (NFIP), that

are suspended on the effective dates listed within this rule because of noncompliance with the floodplain management requirements ofthe program. IfFEMA receives documentation that the community has adopted the required floodplain management measures prior to the effective suspension date given in this rule, the suspension will be withdrawn by publication in the Federal Register.

EFFECTIVE DATES: The third date ("Susp.") listed in the fourth column.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FrankH. Thomas, Assistant Administrator, Office of Loss Reduction, Federal Insurance Administration, (202) 646-2717, 500 CStreet, Southwest, FEMA-Room 416, Washington, D.C. 20472.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), enables property owners to purchase flood insurance at rates made reasonable through a Federal subsidy. In return, communities agree to adopt and administer local floodplain management

measures aimed at protecting lives and

new construction from future flooding. Section 1315 of the National Flood Insurance Act of1968, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4022) prohibits flood insurance coverage as authorized under the National Flood Insurance Program (42 U.S.C. 4001-4128) unless an appropriate public body shall have adopted adequate floodplain management

measures with effective enforcement

measures. The communities listed in this notice no longer meet that statutory requirement for compliance with program regulations (44 CFR Part 59 et seq.). Accordingly, the communities are suspended on the effective date in the fourth column, so that as ofthat date floodinsurance is no longer available in the community. However, those communities which, prior to the suspension date, adopt and submit documentation of legally enforceable floodplain management measures requiredby the program, will continue their eligibility for the sale of insurance. Where adequate documentation is received by FEMA, a notice withdrawing the suspension will be published in the Federal Register. In addition, the Director ofFederal Emergency Management Agency has identified the special flood hazard areas in these communities by publishing a Flood Hazard Boundary Map. The date of the flood map, ifonehas been published, is indicated in the fifth column ofthe table. No direct Federal financial assistance (except assistance pursuant to the Disaster Relief Act of 1974not in connection with a flood) may legally be provided for construction or acquisition ofbuildings in the identified special flood hazard area of communities not participating in the NFIP and identified for more than a year, on the Federal Emergency Management Agency's initial flood 

### 25419

HeinOnline -- 50 Fed. Reg. 25419 1985