# + 2

(,1 1/,1(
Citation: 52 Fed. Reg. 29383 1987 Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Tue Mar 5 20:02:32 2013 -- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License -- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.

### Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 1987 / Rules and Regulations

nearest 1Ig/m 3 before comparison with the annual primary'standard (fractional values equal to or greater than 0.5 are to be rounded up)." is corrected to read "The expected annual arithmetic mean is rounded to the nearest 1pg/m3 before comparison with the anual standards (fractional values equal to orgreater than 0.5 are to be rounded up).".

18. On page 24667, Column 3, Section 3.0 ofAppendix K,change "Computational formulas for the 24-hour standard" to "Computational formulas for the 24-hour standards".

19. On page 24668, column 1,line 17 of Appendix K, change "q" to "q" and line 24,change "years" to "year".

20. On page 24668, the following formulas in Appendix K are corrected:

Formula (2) is corrected to read



### 4
e =t£ 

### eq

formula (3) is corrected toread

m 

## eq - (Nq/mq) x Eq 

## (vj/kj) j=l

formula (4) is corrected to read

nq 

### xq= (1/n.) x q xi

and lines 6 and 7 under formula (4) which read "x 1 =the ith concentration value recorded in the quarter." are corrected to read "xi=the ith concentration value recorded in the quarter.". formula (5) is corrected to read



### 4
= (1/4)'x Z 

### q=1

21. On page 24669, column 2, line4 of Appendix K, change "means" to "mean".

22. On page 24669 ofAppendix K,the formula which reads k = (1/4) x(52.4 + 75.3 + 82.1 + 63.2 = 68.25 or 68.3 is corrected to read k= (1/4) x(52.4 + 75.3 +82.1 + 63.2 = 68.25 or 68.3 23. On page 24669, formula (6) in Appendix K is corrected.to read



### 7q :.(l/mq) X r E J (xij/kj) 

### j=1 i=

[FR Doc. 87-17983 Filed 8-6-87; 8:45 am) BILUNG CODE 6560-50-M

40CFR Parts 51 and 52 [AD-FRL-3244-6J PM,o Group I and Group IIAreas AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: List ofPMo 

### Group Iand Group IIareas. SUMMARY: On July 1, 1987, 

### the EPA promulgated national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an aerometric diameter ofa nominal 10 micron ofless (PM 0) (see 52 FR 24634). The EPA also promulgated policies and regulations by which it will implement the PMo NAAQS (52FR 24672). In accordance with these policies. EPA'has categorized areas ofthe Nation into three groups based on the likelihood that the existing State implementation plan (SIP) must be revised to protect the PMo NAAQS. Areas with a strong likelihood of violating the.PMo NAAQS and requiring substantial SIP revisions were placed in Group I; areas where,attainment of the PMo NAAQS is uncertain and the SIP may require only slight adjustment were placed in Group II; and areas with a strong likelihood ofattaining the PM~o NAAQS, and therefore probably having an adequate control strategy, were placed in Group 11.

By this notice; EPA is identifying the Group Iand Group II areas in each State.The remainder of the State not in Group I orII is placed in Group II. ADDRESSES: Information supporting the placement of each area inGroup I,II,or IIIcan be obtained from the respective EPA Regional Office which services the particular State. The addresses ofthe Regional Offices are:

- State Air-Programs Branch, EPA, Region I,JFK Federal Building, Boston, Massachusetts 02203.

* AirPrograms Branch, EPA, Region II,

26 Federal Plaza, New York, New York 10278. * Air Programs Branch, EPA, Region I1, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107.

* Air Programs Branch, EPA, Region IV, 345 Courtland Street, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30365.

9 Air and Radiation Branch, EPA, Region V, 230 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 60604. * Air Programs Branch, EPA, Region VI, Allied Bank Tower, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas,Texas 75202-2733. 0 Air Branch, EPA, Region VII, 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. * Air Programs Branch, EPA,Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 1300Denver, Colorado 80202-2413.

* Air Programs Branch, EPA, Region IX, 215 Fremont Street, San Francisco, California, 94105.

* Air Programs Branch. EPA, Region X, 1200 6th Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Kenneth Woodard, Standards Implementation Branch (MD-15), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,, Research Triangle Park; North Carolina 27711. Telephone: (919) 541-5351 (FTS 629-5351). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background

On July 1,,1987 (52 FR 24672), EPA promulgated in 40 CFR Parts 51 and 52 policies and regulations by which it will implement the PMo NAAQS. TheEPA's policies for developing SIP's for PM 1o are discussed fully in section IV.C. ofthe preamble to that Federal Register (52 FR 24679). Also as noted in that preamble, section 110(a)(1) ofthe Clean Air Act (Act)requires that each State adopt and submit,.within 9months after revision of a NAAQS, a SIP providing for attainment and maintenance of the primary NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable but no later than 3 years from the date EPA approves the SIP.

Due to a lack ofPMo ambient monitoring data, EPA considered different ways ofimplementing this requirement, including simply calling upon States to develop and submit a full PMo attainment demonstration and control strategy for every area ofthe country within the 9-month period. The EPA believes, however, that such a requirement would be unreasonable in many areas. An analysis ofambient total suspended particulate (TSP) data for 1984-1986 in conjunction with the methodology described in EPA's "probability guideline" (Procedures for Estimating Probability ofNonattainment ofa PMo NAAQS Using Total 

### 29383

HeinOnline -- 52 Fed. Reg. 29383 1987

### Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 1987 / Rules and Regulations Suspended Particulate Matter orPMo Data, EPA450/4--86-017) indicates that there could be from 50 to 150 counties in which the PMo NAAQS will not be attained. While these numbers are the best indication at this time ofthe potential nonattainment situation for PMo, they are only estimates-and will probably change as new ambient PM 0 data become available. The estimates are, however, useful as an indication of the degree ofPMo SIPdevelopment that may eventually be necessary. The key point is thatmany ofthe 3141 counties in the Nation may need no additional particulate matter SIPprovisions to meet the revised NAAQS. Thus, for many areas, the existing TSP SIP's may already provide for timely attainment and maintenance of the PMo NAAQS. To call upon areas that almost certainly have adequate SIP's to resubmit those SIP's along with full attainment demonstrations would be unnecessary and therefore wasteful oflimited State resources. 1 There are, also, several areas where available data indicate that air quality may be close to the level ofthe NAAQS. Many ofthese areas'may actually, be shown, with more ambient data, to be in attainment or may need only minor SIP changes. Therefore, EPA believes that a.- demand for immediate submissions of attainment demonstrations and control strategies for all ofthese areas is unreasonable when additional PM~o air quality data could provide a more clear picture ofthe status ofthe area. On the other hand, due to applicable Act requirements and the potential environmental risk, the Administrator did not consider it reasonable to permit delay in the development ofPM 0 control programs for areas with severe air quality problems until adequate PMo data were available to show that the area was violating the PM1oNAAQS.

For the reasons given immediately above, EPA adopted a policy by which it is dividing all areas ofthe country into three categories: (1)Areas with a strong likelihood of violating the PMo NAAQS and requiring substantial SIP adjustment (Group I),(2) areas where attainment of the standards is possible and existing SIP's probably need less adjustment (Group It), and (3) areas with a strong likelihood ofattaining the PMo NAAQS and therefore needing only adjustments
Developing a sound attainment demonstration ta generally resource intensive. It requires an in-depth study of the emission characteristics of specific sources in the demonstration area and a thorough evaluation ofthe anticipated effects of various emission levels from those sources. The EPA estimates it could require up to 4work years and $250,000to develop a SIP for each area found to be violating the NAAQS. .to the applicable prevention of significant deterioration/new source review (PSD/NSR) and monitoring :provisions in their SIP's (Group III). The EPA used a three-step 1process to categorize areas into Groups 1,I, and III. First, where only ambient TSP data orlimited amounts ofPMo data were available, EPA in cooperation with State agencies used those data and the probability guideline to classify areas• preliminarily as Group I, II, orI-II.The EPA presumed that, at a minimum, the' (1) areas with a probability ofnot attaining the PMo standard ofat least 95 percent fit into Group 1,(2) areas with a probability of between 20 and 95 percent fit into Group II, and (3) areas with a probability ofless than 20 percent fit into Group III.

Second, EPA's Regional Offices, after. consulting with the appropriate State and local agencies, evaluated the existing TSP SIP's, available existing source data, and other relevant information foreach area in their jurisdiction (1) to see whether information other than the probability of nonattainment justified changing the group for an area, and (2) to determine' the appropriate group for areas: that the ,EPA could not classify under the first step because ambient TSP data'were unavailable.

Third, to insure national consistency, all grouping was reviewed by representatives ofEPA's Headquarters staffand Regional Offices.

The EPA has completed the process of categorizing areas and the Group I and II areas are listed by State in the following section ofthis notice. Any area ofa State not listed as Group I orII is considered to be in Group II.

The requirements and schedules for developing PMo SIP's are different for Group I,II,and III areas. Immediate action to develop a full SIPthat will bring about attainment and maintenance ofthe PMo NAAQS is required for Group I areas because they have a strong likelihood ofviolating the NAAQS and requiring substantial revision ofthe existing SIP. Since the attainment status of Group II areas is uncertain, time is allowed for additional monitoring ofambient PM1o concentrations before revision ofthe existing control strategy is required. Group IIIareas have a strong likelihood ofattaining the PMo NAAQS. Therefore, for GroupIII areas, the State need only submit SIP revisions for,the preconstruction review program and monitoring network (52FR 24681) within 9months. The requirements for SIP development for each group are discussed fully at 52FR 24680-24682. The Group Iand II areas ofconcern are generally described below as a county, a township, or a planning area.' These descriptions are only the initial definitions ofthe areas that must be investigated in the SIP development process. In the process ofmonitoring and modeling PMo concentrations and determining the extent ofsources of PMo emissions that impact the areas, the States will better define the boundaries of the area that is or may be violating the standards.

In 1977, Congress added section 107(d)(1J to the Act which required EPA to designate areas as nonattainment, unclassifiable, or attainment for the NAAQS existing at that time.In 40 CFR Part 81, EPA made such designations for TSP. Since the PMIo NAAQS is being implemented under the provisions of section 110 ofthe Act, such designations are not necessary for PMo. Thus, EPA .will not make such designations for PMo (see 52 FR 24682). However, EPA will retain the TSPdesignations to " implement the requirements ofPart Cof the Act relating to PSD (see 52 FR 24685). II.List of Areas

Separate lists ofGroup I andGroup II areas follow. They are listedby county within each State.The area ofconcern orplanning area within the county is specified where appropriate.
GROUP I AREAS
State and Area of Concern Counties

Alaska:

Anchorage.... Juneau........... Arizona:

Cochise. Pinal
............... Gila .............. Mancopa. Yuma ............. Pima
............... California:

InyO
................ Mono
............. Fresno
........... Kern ............... Kings
.............. Tulare. Los Angeles. California:

Orange
.......... Riverside. San

Bernardino. Imperial
.......... Colorado:

Archuleta. Adams
........... Denver .......... Arapahoe. Jefferson. San Miguel.... Prowers. Pillion

............ Anchorage. Juneau. Paul Spur/Douglas area. Hayden/Miami area and Phoenix plating

area. Hayden/Miami area. Phoenix planning area. Yuma planning area. Ruto planning area. ,Owens Valley planning area and Searles

Valley planning area Mammoth Lakes planning area. San Joau Valley. San JoaquinValley and Searles Valley planning area. San Joaquin Valley. San Joaquin Valley. LA metropolitan area. LA metropolitan area. South Coast Air Basin and Coachella

Valley. South Coast Air Basin and Searles, Valley

planning area. imperial Valley planning area and Yuma

planning area. Pagosa Springs. Denver metropolitan area. i Denver metropolitan area. Denver metropolitan area.. Denver metropolitan area. Tellunde. Lamer. Aspen. 

### 29364

HeinOnline -- 52 Fed. Reg. 29384 1987

### Federal Register / Vol. 52, No. 152 / Friday, August 7, 1987 / Rules and Regulations

GROUP IAREAS-Continued
State and Counties Area of Concern
Fremont

. Canyon City. Connecticut:

New Haven.. Interstate 95 corridor. Fairfield

. Interstate 95 corridor. Idaho:

Ada
............... Boise. Shoshone

. Pinehurst. Bonner
.......... Sandpoint. Bannock

. Pocatello. Power
........... Pocatello. Illinois:

Madison

. County. Cook
............. County. Indiana:

Lake

............. County. Porter ............ County. Maine:

Aroostook Presque Isle. Michigan:

Wayne

.......... County. Minnesota:

Ramsey

. County. Montana:

Flathead

. Kalispell. Uncon.......... Ubby. Lake
.............. Ronan. Poison. Missoula

. Missoula. Rosebud

. Lame Deer. Silver Bow. Butte. Nevada:

Washoe. Reno planning area. Clark

............. L Las Vegas planningarea. New Mexico:

DonaAna

. County. Ohio:

Cuyahoga

. County. Jefferson

. County. Oregon:

Jackson

. Medford and White City. Josephine

. Grants Pass. Lane
.............. Eugene and Springfield. Klamath. Klamath Falls. Texas:

El Paso
......... County. Utah:

Salt Lake

. Salt Lake metropolitan area and Magna. Utah
.............. Provo. West Virginia:

Brooke
.......... Follansbee area. Washington:

King
.............. Seattle metrep;oitan area. Pierce
........... Tacoma metropolitan area. Spokane

. Spokane. Yakima

......... Yakima. Thurston

. Lacey. Walla Walla... Wallula. Wyoming:

Sheridan. Sheridan.

GROUP II AREAS
Stateand Area of concern counties

Alabama:

Jefferson. Alaska:

Fairbanks. Arizona:

Coconino. Graham. Navajo
........... Apache
.......... Santa Cruz.... Pina ............... Cochise. Pinal ............... California:

Santa Clara.. San Joaquin.. Stanislaus. Kern ............... Los Angeles. Colorado:

Adams ........... Boulder
.......... Delta
.............. Eagle
............. El Paso
.......... North Birmingham and Leeds
Fairbanks.
Flagstaff planning area. Safford planning area. Show Low and Joseph City planning areas. Show Low planning area. Nogales planning area. Ajo and Tucson planning areas. Tucson planning area. Casa Grande planning area. County. County. County. Southeast Desert Air Basin. Southeast Desert Air Basin. Brighton. Longmont. Delta. Vail. Colorado Springs. GROUP II AREAS-Continued
State ad Area of concern counties
Garfield. Glenwood Springs. Rifle. Gunnison

. Crested Butte. Routt
.............. Steamboat Springs. Mesa
.............. Grand Junction. Fruits. Weld

. Greeley. Guam: Piti

.... County. Idaho: Caribou.. Cond. Illinois:

LaSalle
........... Oglesby. Randolph

. Baldwin. Macon
........... Decatur. Rock Island... Rock Island, Moline. Will................ Joliet. St. Clair. East St Louis. DuPage
.......... Addison. Indiana:

Marion
........... Subpart of Indianapolis. Vigo
................ Terre Haute. Iowa:

Cerro Gordo. Mason City.. Unn
................ Cedar Rapids. Polk
................ Des Moinea. Kansas: Kansas City.

Wyandotte Kentucky., Cattletsburg and Ashland.

Boyd. Maryland: Baltimore.

Baltimore. Michigan:

.

Saginaw

. Carrollton. Monroe
.......... Monroe. Minnesota:

Hennepin

. Minneapolis. St. Louis

. Duluthand Iron Range. Itasca

........... Iron Range. Lake
............... Two Harborstwp. Steams
.......... St. Cloud twp. Montana:

Blaine
............ Hays. Flathead

. Columbia Falls. Deer Lodge... Anaconda. Lewis & Helena.

Clark. Sanders

. Thompson Falls. Lincoln........... Eureka. Nebraska:'

Cass.
.............. Weeping Water. Douglas

. Omaha. Nevada:

Lander
........... Battle Mountain area. Humbolt
. Battle Mountain area. Elko
................ Battle Mountain area. Eureka

........... Battle Mountain ares. NewJersey

Hudson
.......... Jersey City. Camden

. Camden. New York: Solvay.

Onondaga. New Mexico:

Bernalillo

. County. Grant

. County. Santa Fe. County. Sandoval

. County. Taos
............... County. Ohio:

Wyandot

. Carey. Scioto
............ New Boston. Trumbul

. Warren, Howlandtwp. Lorain
............ Sheffield twp. Butler

............. Middletown. Seneca
.......... Thompson twp. Sandusky

. Jacksontwp. Belmont

. Martins Ferry. Colum- East Liverpool.

bianna. Franklin

. Columbus. Hamilton

. Cincinnati. Mahoning

. Youngstown. Montgomery.. Dayton. Richand

. Mansfield. Stark
.............. Canton. Summit
.......... Akron. Oklahoma: County.

Comanche. Oregon:

Deschutea. Bond. Multnomah... Portland. Union
............ La Grande. Lane.............. Oakridge. Pennsylvania:

Allegheny

. County. GROUP IIAREAS-Continued
Stateand counties Area of concern
Philadelphia. Erie ................ Lawrence. Mercer ......... Puerto Rico:

San Juan. South Dakota:

Pennington, Texas:

Dallas
........... Harris
............ Lubbock. Nueces. Virginia:

Buchanan. West Virginia:

Hancock. Brooke......... Washington:

Benton
.......... King .............. Wisconsin:

Brown ........... Milwaukee.. Waukesha. Douglas. Dane ........ Wyomi g

FremonL Bridesburg-Port Richmond. County. County. County. San Juan. Rapid City.

County. County. County. County. County.
county. Remainder of county not In Group 1. Kennewick. Bellevue.
DePere. Milwaukee. Waukesha. Superior. Madison. Lander.


### Authority: Sections 110 and 301 ofthe Act give the Administrator authority to adopt policies necessary to implement NAAQS.

Date: August 3, 1987. Craig Potter, Assistant Administrator for Airand Radiation. [FR Doc. 87-17990 Filed 8-6-87; 8:45 am)
BILLING CODE 6560-U

40 CFR Parts 51 and 52 [AD-FRL-3244-31 Regulations for Implementing Revised Particulate Matter Standards; Correction AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule; correction. SUMMARY: The EPA is correcting errors in the regulations for implementing the revised particulate matter standards which appeared in the Federal Register on July 1, 1987 (52 FR 24672). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Mr. Daniel deRoeck at (919) 541-5593 (FTS 629-5593). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

### The EPA has promulgated revisions to its regulations for the review of new and modified sources and the prevention of significant deterioration ofair quality. These revisions address the fact that EPA has revised its national ambient air quality standards for particulate matter. The revised regulations contained errors 

### 29385 

### 29385

HeinOnline -- 52 Fed. Reg. 29385 1987