55336 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

indicated on the released portion of the

record, at the place in the record the

deletion is made if technically feasible,

unless indicating the extent of the

deletion would harm an interest

protected by the exemption pursuant to

which the deletion is made.

5. Section 2702.4 is revised to read as

follows:

§ 2702.4 Materials available.

Materials which may be made

promptly available from the

Commission include, but are not limited

to:

(a) A guide for requesting records or

publicly available information from the

Commission;

(b) Final opinions, including

concurring and dissenting opinions, as

well as orders, made in the adjudication

of cases;

(c) Indices providing identifying

information to the public as to the

opinions described in the preceding

paragraph which may be relied upon,

used, or cited as precedent;

(d) Statements of policy and

interpretations which have been

adopted by the Commission and are not

published in the Federal Register.

6. Section 2702.5(e) is revised to read

as follows:

§ 2702.5 Fees applicable—categories of

requesters.

* * * * *

(e) For purposes of paragraphs (b)

through (d) of this section, whenever it

reasonably appears that a requester, or

a group of requesters acting in concert,

is attempting to break down a single

request into a series of requests relating

to the same subject matter for the

purpose of evading the assessment of

fees, such requests will be aggregated

and fees assessed accordingly.

7. In Section 2702.6 the first sentence

of paragraph (a) and paragraphs (b) and

(c) are revised to read as follows:

§ 2702.6 Fee schedule.

(a) Search fee. The fee for searching

for information and records shall be $15

per hour for clerical time and $30 per

hour for professional time. * * *

(b) Review fee. The review fee shall be

charged for the initial examination by

the Executive Director of documents

located in response to a request in order

to determine if they may be withheld

from disclosure, and for the deletion of

portions that are exempt from

disclosure, but shall not be charged for

review by the Chairman or the

Commissioners. See § 2702.3. The

review fee is $45 per hour.

(c) Duplicating fee. The copy fee for

each page of paper up to 81⁄2′′ x 14′′

shall be $.15 per copy per page. Any

private section services required will be

assessed at the charge to the

Commission. The fee for copying

computer tapes or discs, photographs,

and other nonstandard documents will

be the actual direct cost incurred by the

Commission. If duplication charges are

likely to exceed $25, the requester shall

be notified of the estimated amount of

fees, unless the requester has indicated

in advance his willingness to pay fees

as high as those anticipated.

8. Section 2702.7(b) is revised to read

as follows:

§ 2702.7 No fees; waiver or reduction of

fees.

* * * * *

(b) Documents shall be furnished

without any charge, or at a charge

reduced below the fees otherwise

applicable, if disclosure of the

information is determined to be in the

public interest because it is likely to

contribute significantly to public

understanding of the operations or

activities of the government and is not

primarily in the commercial interest of

the requester.

* * * * *

Issued this 15th day of October, 1997 at

Washington, D.C.

Mary Lu Jordan,

Chairman, Federal Mine Safety and Health

Review Commission.

[FR Doc. 97–28206 Filed 10–23–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6735–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CT–7202a; FRL–5902–2]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Connecticut

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA today is approving

State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revisions submitted by the State of

Connecticut. These revisions consist of

1990 base year ozone emission

inventories, and establishment of a

Photochemical Assessment Monitoring

System (PAMS) network.

The inventories were submitted by

Connecticut to satisfy a Clean Air Act

(CAA) requirement that States

containing ozone nonattainment areas

submit inventories of actual ozone

precursor emissions in accordance with

guidance from the EPA. The ozone

emission inventories submitted by

Connecticut are for the State’s portion of

the New York, New Jersey, Connecticut

severe area, and the greater Hartford

serious area. The PAMS SIP revision

was submitted to satisfy the

requirements of the CAA and the PAMS

regulations. The intended effect of this

action is to approve as a revision to the

Connecticut SIP the state’s 1990 base

year ozone emission inventories, and to

approve the PAMS network into the

State’s SIP.

DATES: This action is effective on

December 23, 1997 unless EPA receives

adverse or critical comments by

November 24, 1997. If the effective date

is delayed, timely notice will be

published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

action should be addressed to Susan

Studlien, Deputy Director, Office of

Ecosystem Protection, Environmental

Protection Agency, Region I, JFK

Federal Building, Boston,

Massachusetts, 02203. Copies of the

documents relevant to this action are

available for public inspection during

normal business hours at the EPA

Region I office, and at the Connecticut

Department of Environmental

Protection, Bureau of Air Management,

79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106–1630.

Persons interested in examining these

documents should make an

appointment with the appropriate office

at least 24 hours before the visiting day.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert F. McConnell, Air Quality

Planning Group, EPA Region I, JFK

Federal Building, Boston,

Massachusetts, 02203; telephone (617)

565–9266.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Connecticut submitted its 1990 base

year emission inventories of ozone

precursors to the EPA on January 13,

1994, as a revision to the State’s SIP.

Revisions to the inventories were

received on February 3, 1994, and

February 16, 1995. Connecticut

submitted a SIP revision establishing a

PAMS network into the State’s overall

ambient air quality monitoring network

on March 2, 1995. This notice is divided

into four parts:

I. Background Information

II. Analysis of State Submission

III. Final Action

IV. Administrative Requirements

I. Background Information

1. Emission Inventory

Under the CAA as amended in 1990,

States have the responsibility to

inventory emissions contributing to

NAAQS nonattainment, to track these

emissions over time, and to ensure that

control strategies are being implemented
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 55337

1Also Section 172(c)(7) of the Act requires that

plan provisions for nonattainment areas meet the

applicable provisions of section 110(a)(2).

2Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air

Quality Management Division, and William G.

Laxton, Director, Technical Support Division, to

Regional Air Division Directors, Region I–X,

‘‘Public Hearing Requirements for 1990 Base-Year

Emission Inventories for Ozone and Carbon

Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,’’ September 29,

1992.

that reduce emissions and move areas

towards attainment. The CAA requires

ozone nonattainment areas designated

as moderate, serious, severe, and

extreme to submit a plan within three

years of 1990 to reduce volatile organic

compound (VOC) emissions by 15

percent within six years after 1990. The

baseline level of emissions, from which

the 15 percent reduction is calculated,

is determined by adjusting the base year

inventory to exclude biogenic

emissions, non-reactive VOC emissions

that do not form ozone, and to exclude

certain emission reductions not

creditable towards the 15 percent. The

1990 base year emissions inventory is

the primary inventory from which the

periodic inventory, the Reasonable

Further Progress (RFP) projection

inventory, and the modeling inventory

are derived. Further information on

these inventories and their purpose can

be found in the ‘‘Emission Inventory

Requirements for Ozone State

Implementation Plans,’’ U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Research Triangle Park,

North Carolina, March 1991. The base

year inventory may also serve as part of

statewide inventories for purposes of

regional modeling in transport areas.

The base year inventory plays an

important role in modeling

demonstrations for areas classified as

moderate and above.

The air quality planning requirements

for marginal to extreme ozone

nonattainment areas are set out in

section 182(a)–(e) of title I of the CAA.

The EPA has issued a General Preamble

describing the EPA’s preliminary views

on how the agency intends to review

SIP revisions submitted under title I of

the Act, including requirements for the

preparation of the 1990 base year

inventory (see 57 FR 13502 (April 16,

1992) and 57 FR 18070 (April 28,

1992)). In this action EPA will rely on

the General Preamble’s interpretation of

the CAA, and the reader should refer to

the General Preamble for a more

detailed discussion of the

interpretations of title I advanced in

today’s rule and the supporting

rationale.

Those States containing ozone

nonattainment areas classified as

marginal to extreme are required under

section 182(a)(1) of the CAA to submit

a final, comprehensive, accurate, and

current inventory of actual ozone

season, weekday emissions from all

sources within 2 years of enactment

(November 15, 1992). This inventory is

for calendar year 1990 and is denoted as

the base year inventory. It includes both

anthropogenic and biogenic sources of

volatile organic compound (VOC),

nitrogen oxides (NOX), and carbon

monoxide (CO). The inventory is to

address actual VOC, NOX, and CO

emissions for the area during a peak

ozone season, which is generally

comprised of the summer months. All

stationary point and area sources, as

well as mobile sources within the

nonattainment area, are to be included

in the compilation. Available guidance

for preparing emission inventories is

provided in the General Preamble (57

FR 13498 (April 16, 1992)).

2. PAMS Network

On March 2, 1995, the Connecticut

Department of Environmental Protection

(DEP) submitted to the EPA a SIP

revision incorporating PAMS into the

ambient air quality monitoring network

of State or Local Air Monitoring Stations

(SLAMS) and National Air Monitoring

Stations (NAMS). The State will

establish and maintain PAMS as part of

its overall ambient air quality

monitoring network.

Section 182(c)(1) of the CAA and the

General Preamble (57 FR 13515) require

that the EPA promulgate rules for

enhanced monitoring of ozone, NOX,

and VOCs no later than 18 months after

the date of the enactment of the Act.

These rules will provide a mechanism

for obtaining more comprehensive and

representative data on ozone air

pollution in areas designated

nonattainment and classified as serious,

severe, or extreme.

The final PAMS rule was promulgated

by the EPA on February 12, 1993 (58 FR

8452). Section 58.40(a) of the revised

rule requires the State to submit a

PAMS network description, including a

schedule for implementation, to the

Administrator within six months after

promulgation or by August 12, 1993.

Further, § 58.20(f) requires the State to

provide for a PAMS network within

nine months after promulgation of the

final rule or by November 12, 1993.

On October 14, 1993, the Connecticut

DEP submitted a draft PAMS network

plan. The EPA reviewed the submittal

and informed the State it was

approvable and met the requirements of

section 58.40(a) via a letter dated July

21, 1994. On March 2, 1995,

Connecticut submitted a formal

amendment to the SIP regarding PAMS

Air Quality Monitoring. A letter finding

the submittal complete was sent to the

State on April 24, 1995. Since network

descriptions may change annually, they

are not part of the SIP as recommended

by the document, ‘‘Guideline for the

Implementation of the Ambient Air

Monitoring Regulations, 40 CFR part

58’’ (EPA–450/4–78–038, OAQPS,

November 1979).

Ambient air quality monitoring

network descriptions undergo annual

system reviews as required by 40 CFR

section 58.20(d). The review covers the

SLAMS, National Air Monitoring

Station (NAMS) and PAMS networks. In

addition, 40 CFR section 58.25

pertaining to SLAMS, section 58.36

pertaining to NAMS, and section 58.46

pertaining to PAMS each require that

any changes to the network description

as identified during the annual review

must be approved by EPA.

The Connecticut PAMS SIP revision

is intended to meet the requirements of

section 182(c)(1) of the Act and to

comply with the PAMS regulations,

codified at 40 CFR part 58. The

Connecticut DEP held a public hearing

on the PAMS SIP revision on January 7,

1994.

II. Analysis of State Submission

1. Emission Inventory

A. Procedural Background

The Act requires States to observe

certain procedural requirements in

developing emission inventory

submissions to the EPA. Section

110(a)(2) of the Act provides that each

emission inventory submitted by a State

must be adopted after reasonable notice

and public hearing. 1 Final approval of

the inventory will not occur until the

State revises the inventory to address

public comments. Changes to the

inventory that impact the 15 percent

reduction calculation and require a

revised control strategy will constitute a

SIP revision. EPA created a ‘‘de

minimis’’ exception to the public

hearing requirement for minor changes.

EPA defines ‘‘de minimis’’ for such

purposes to be those in which the 15

percent reduction calculation and the

associated control strategy or the

maintenance plan showing, do not

change. States will aggregate all such

‘‘de minimis’’ changes together when

making the determination as to whether

the change constitutes a SIP revision.

The State will need to make the change

through the formal SIP revision process,

in conjunction with the change to the

control measure or other SIP programs. 2

Section 110(a)(2) of the Act similarly
55338 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

3Memorandum from J. David Mobley, Chief,

Emissions Inventory Branch, to Air Branch Chiefs,

Region I–X, ‘‘Final Emission Inventory Level III

Acceptance Criteria,’’ October 7, 1992; and

memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards, to Regional Air

Division Directors, Region I–X, ‘‘Emission Inventory

Issues,’’ June 24, 1993.

provides that each revision to an

implementation plan submitted by a

State under the Act must be adopted by

such State after reasonable notice and

public hearing.

On January 13, 1994, Connecticut

submitted to the EPA as a SIP revision

the 1990 base year inventories for its

two ozone nonattainment areas. Prior to

the State’s submittal of final inventories,

the State had submitted draft

inventories to EPA for review during

July, August, and October 1992. EPA

reviewed the draft inventories and sent

comments to the state by letter dated

November 20, 1992. Revised inventories

were submitted to EPA in January and

May of 1993 which addressed many of

EPA’s comments. The State held a

public hearing on the inventory on July

20, 1993. EPA reviewed the May

submittal and provided comments to the

State through the hearing process by

letter dated August 30, 1993. These

comments included comments

developed by an EPA contractor’s

review of the Connecticut inventories.

The contractor’s comments are

summarized within a report dated April

16, 1993. Connecticut submitted its final

1990 base year emission inventories as

revisions to the State’s SIP on January

13, 1994. Additional revisions were

submitted on February 3, 1994, and

February 16, 1995.

The EPA Region I Office has

compared the final Connecticut

inventories with the deficiencies noted

in the various comment letters and

concluded that the State has adequately

addressed the issues presented in the

comment letters.

B. Emission Inventory Review

Section 110(k) of the CAA sets out

provisions governing the EPA’s review

of base year emission inventory

submittals in order to determine

approval or disapproval under section

182(a)(1) (see 57 FR 13565–13566 (April

16, 1992)). The EPA is approving the

Connecticut ozone base year emission

inventories based on the Level I, II, and

III review findings. This section outlines

the review procedures performed to

determine if the base year emission

inventories are acceptable or should be

disapproved.

The Level I and II review process is

used to determine that all components

of the base year inventory are present.

The review also evaluates the level of

supporting documentation provided by

the State and assesses whether the

emissions were developed according to

current EPA guidance.

The Level III review process is

outlined here and consists of 10 points

that the inventory must include. For a

base year emission inventory to be

acceptable it must pass all of the

following acceptance criteria:

1. An approved Inventory Preparation

Plan (IPP) was provided and the QA

program contained in the IPP was

performed and its implementation

documented.

2. Adequate documentation was

provided that enabled the reviewer to

determine the emission estimation

procedures and the data sources used to

develop the inventory.

3. The point source inventory must be

complete.

4. Point source emissions must have

been prepared or calculated according

to the current EPA guidance.

5. The area source inventory must be

complete.

6. The area source emissions must

have been prepared or calculated

according to the current EPA guidance.

7. Biogenic emissions must have been

prepared according to current EPA

guidance or another approved

technique.

8. The method (e.g., Highway

Performance Modeling System or a

network transportation planning model)

used to develop vehicle miles travelled

(VMT) estimates must follow EPA

guidance, which is detailed in the

document, ‘‘Procedures for Emission

Inventory Preparation, Volume IV:

Mobile Sources,’’ U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Mobile

Sources and Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, Ann Arbor,

Michigan, and Research Triangle Park,

North Carolina, December 1992.

9. The MOBILE model (or EMFAC

model for California only) was correctly

used to produce emission factors for

each of the vehicle classes.

10. Non-road mobile emissions were

prepared according to current EPA

guidance for all of the source categories.

The base year emission inventory will

be approved if it passes Levels I, II, and

III of the review process. Detailed Level

I and II review procedures can be found

in ‘‘Quality Review Guidelines for 1990

Base Year Emission Inventories,’’ U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC,

July 27, 1992. Level III review

procedures are specified in EPA

memoranda noted in the margin. 3

The emission inventories prepared by

Connecticut for its two, serious ozone

nonattainment areas meet each of Level

III’s ten criteria. Documentation of the

EPA’s evaluation, including details of

the review procedure, is contained

within the technical support document

prepared for the Connecticut 1990 base

year inventory, which is available to the

public as part of the docket supporting

this action.

2. PAMS Network

The Connecticut PAMS SIP revision

will provide the State with the authority

to establish and operate the PAMS sites,

will secure State funds for PAMS, and

will provide the EPA with the authority

to enforce the implementation of PAMS,

since its implementation is required by

the Act.

The criteria used to review the

proposed SIP revision are derived from

the PAMS regulations, codified at 40

CFR Part 58, and are included in

‘‘Guideline for the Implementation of

the Ambient Air Monitoring

Regulations, 40 CFR part 58’’ (EPA–450/

4–78–038, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards, November

1979), the September 2, 1993,

memorandum from G. T. Helms

entitled, ‘‘Final Boilerplate Language for

the PAMS SIP Submittal,’’ the CAA, and

the General Preamble.

The September 2, 1993, Helms

memorandum stipulates that the PAMS

SIP, at a minimum, must:

1. Provide for monitoring of criteria

pollutants, such as ozone and nitrogen

dioxide and non-criteria pollutants,

such as nitrogen oxides, speciated

VOCs, including carbonyls, as well as

meteorological parameters;

2. Provide a copy of the approved (or

proposed) PAMS network description,

including the phase-in schedule, for

public inspection during the public

notice and/or comment period provided

for in the SIP revision or, alternatively,

provide information to the public upon

request concerning the State’s plans for

implementing the rules;

3. Make reference to the fact that

PAMS will become a part of the State or

local air monitoring stations (SLAMS)

network;

4. Provide a statement that SLAMS

will employ Federal reference methods

(FRM) or equivalent methods while

most PAMS sampling will be conducted

using methods approved by the EPA.

The Connecticut PAMS SIP revision

provides that the State will implement

PAMS as required in 40 CFR part 58, as

amended February 12, 1993. The State

will amend its SLAMS and its NAMS

monitoring systems to include the

PAMS requirements. It will develop its

PAMS network design and establish

monitoring sites pursuant to 40 CFR
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 55339

part 58 in accordance with an approved

network description and as negotiated

with the EPA through the 105 grant

process on an annual basis. The State

has begun implementing its PAMS

network as required in 40 CFR part 58.

The Connecticut PAMS SIP revision

also includes a provision to meet quality

assurance requirements as contained in

40 CFR part 58, Appendix A. The State’s

SIP revision also assures EPA that the

PAMS monitors will meet monitoring

methodology requirements contained in

40 CFR part 58, Appendix C. Lastly, the

State’s SIP revision requires that the

Connecticut PAMS network will be

phased in over a period of five years as

required in 40 CFR 58.44. The State’s

PAMS SIP submittal and the EPA’s

technical support document are

available for viewing at the EPA Region

I Office as outlined under the

ADDRESSES section of this Federal

Register document. The Connecticut

PAMS SIP submittal is also available for

viewing at the Connecticut State Office

as outlined under the ADDRESSES section

of this Federal Register document.

III. Final Action

1. Emission Inventory

Connecticut has submitted complete

inventories containing point, area,

biogenic, on-road mobile, and non-road

mobile source data, and accompanying

documentation. Emissions from these

sources are presented in the following

table:

VOC 4

[Ozone Seasonal Emissions in Tons Per Day]

NAA Area source

emissions

Point

source

emissions

On-road

mobile

emissions

Non-road

mobile

emissions

Biogenic Total emissions

NY–NJ–CT ........................................................................ 59.42 8.67 43.83 20.95 54.41 187.28

Hartford ............................................................................. 178.05 33.74 127.12 78.44 383.39 800.74

4 Note that these VOC inventory numbers include emissions of perchloroethylene. EPA has determined that perchloroethylene is

photochemically non-reactive and does not significantly contribute to ozone production. Therefore, these inventory numbers have been adjusted

to remove emissions of this compound in the proposed conditional approval of Connecticut’s 15 percent plans published elsewhere in today’s

FEDERAL REGISTER.

NOX

[Ozone Seasonal Emissions in Tons Per Day]

NAA Area source

emissions

Point

source

emissions

On-road

mobile

emissions

Non-road

mobile

emissions

Biogenic Total emissions

NY–NJ–CT ........................................................................ 2.73 43.72 55.73 15.73 NA 117.91

Hartford ............................................................................. 8.07 87.31 175.56 82.61 NA 353.55

CO

[Ozone Seasonal Emissions in Tons Per Day]

NAA Area source

emissions

Point

source

emissions

On-road mobile emissionsNon-road

mobile

emissions

Biogenic Total emissions

NY–NJ–CT ...................................................................... 3.51 13.09 356.87 165.52 NA 538.99

Hartford ........................................................................... 10.90 20.30 1,032.9 530.41 NA 1,594.51

Connecticut has satisfied all of the

EPA’s requirements for providing a

comprehensive, accurate, and current

inventory of actual ozone precursor

emissions in the Connecticut portion of

the NY–NJ–CT severe area and the

Hartford serious ozone nonattainment

area. The inventories are complete and

approvable according to the criteria set

out in the November 12, 1992

memorandum from J. David Mobley,

Chief Emission Inventory Branch, TSD

to G. T. Helms, Chief Ozone/Carbon

Monoxide Programs Branch, AQMD. In

today’s final action, the EPA is

approving the SIP 1990 base year ozone

emission inventories submitted by

Connecticut for the state’s portion of the

NY–NJ–CT severe area and the Hartford

serious nonattainment area as meeting

the requirements of section 182(a)(1) of

the CAA.

2. PAMS Network

In today’s action, the EPA is fully

approving the revision to the

Connecticut ozone SIP for PAMS.

The EPA is publishing these actions

without prior proposal because the

Agency views them as noncontroversial

amendments and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, the EPA is proposing to

approve these SIP revisions and is

soliciting public comment on them.

This action will be effective December

23, 1997 unless, by November 24, 1997,

adverse or critical comments are

received.

If the EPA receives such comments,

this action will be withdrawn before the

effective date by publishing a

subsequent document that will

withdraw the final actions. All public

comments received will be addressed in

a subsequent final rule based on this

action serving as a proposed rule. The

EPA will not institute a second

comment period on this action. Any

parties interested in commenting on this

action should do so at this time. If no

such comments are received, the public

is advised that this action will be

effective December 23, 1997.

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 the SIP shall be
55340 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

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.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. § 600 et seq., EPA 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, EPA 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-for

profit 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 Clean Air 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, the

Administrator 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

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such

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

427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

prepare a budgetary impact statement to

accompany any proposed or final rule

that includes a Federal mandate that

may result in estimated costs to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to the private sector, of

$100 million or more. Under Section

205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203

requires EPA to establish a plan for

informing and advising any small

governments that may be significantly

or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval

action promulgated does not include a

Federal mandate that may result in

estimated costs of $100 million or more

to either State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector. This Federal action

approves pre-existing requirements

under State or local law, and imposes

no new requirements. Accordingly, no

additional costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or to the private sector,

result from this action.

D. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A) as added

by the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA

submitted a report containing this rule

and other required information to the

U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of

Representatives and the Comptroller

General of the General Accounting

Office prior to publication of the rule in

today’s Federal Register. This rule is

not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5

U.S.C. 804(2).

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit by December 23,

1997. 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).) EPA encourages interested

parties to comment in response to the

proposed rule rather than petition for

judicial review, unless the objection

arises after the comment period allowed

for in the proposal.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the

State Implementation Plan for the State of

Connecticut was approved by the Director of

the Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: September 19, 1997.

John P. DeVillars,

Regional Administrator, Region I.

40 CFR Part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7641q.

Subpart H—Connecticut

2. Section 52.370 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(74) to read as

follows:

* * * * *

§ 52. 370 Identification of plan.

(c) * * *

(74) A revision to the Connecticut SIP

regarding ozone monitoring.

Connecticut will modify its SLAMS and

its NAMS monitoring systems to

include a PAMS network design and

establish monitoring sites. Connecticut’s

SIP revision satisfies 40 CFR 58.20(f)

PAMS requirements.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) PAMS SIP Commitment Narrative,

which incorporates PAMS into the

ambient air quality monitoring network

of State or Local Air Monitoring Stations

(SLAMS) and National Air Monitoring

Stations (NAMS).

(ii) Additional material.

(A) Letter from the Connecticut

Department of Environmental Protection

dated March 2, 1995 submitting a

revision to the Connecticut State

Implementation Plan.

3. Section 52.384 is added to read as

follows:

§ 52.384 Emission inventories.

(a) The Governor’s designee for the

State of Connecticut submitted the 1990

base year emission inventories for the

Connecticut portion of the New YorkNew Jersey-Connecticut severe ozone

nonattainment area and the Hartford

serious ozone nonattainment area on

January 13, 1994 as revisions to the

State’s Implementation Plan (SIP).

Revisions to the inventories were

submitted on February 3, 1994 and

February 16, 1995. The 1990 base year

emission inventory requirement of

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

amended in 1990, has been satisfied for

these areas.

(b) The inventories are for the ozone

precursors which are volatile organic

compounds, nitrogen oxides, and

carbon monoxide. The inventories
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 206 / Friday, October 24, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 55341

covers point, area, non-road mobile, onroad mobile, and biogenic sources.

(c) Taken together, the Connecticut

portion of the New York-New JerseyConnecticut severe nonattainment area

and the Hartford serious nonattainment

area encompass the entire geographic

area of the State.

[FR Doc. 97–27855 Filed 10–23–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[Region II Docket No. NY22–1–163, FRL–

5913–7]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; New York;

Motor Vehicle Inspection and

Maintenance Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Interim final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is granting interim

approval of a State Implementation Plan

(SIP) revision submitted by New York.

This revision establishes and requires

the implementation of an enhanced

inspection and maintenance (I/M)

program in the counties of the Bronx,

Kings, Nassau, New York, Queens,

Richmond, Rockland, Suffolk (except

Fisher’s Island), and Westchester

Counties. The intended effect of this

action is to give interim approval to the

State’s proposed enhanced I/M program

for an interim period to last 18 months.

This action is being taken under section

110 of the Clean Air Act and section 348

of the National Highway System

Designation Act.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule will be

effective November 24, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State’s

submittal are available at the following

addresses for inspection during normal

business hours at the following

locations: Environmental Protection

Agency, Region II Office, Air Programs

Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New

York, New York 10007–1866 and New

York State Department of

Environmental Conservation, 50 Wolf

Road, Albany, New York 12233.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Rudolph K. Kapichak, Mobile Source

Team Leader, Air Programs Branch,

Environmental Protection Agency, 290

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New

York 10007–1866, (212) 637–4249.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On November 27, 1996, (61 FR 60242)

EPA proposed conditional interim

approval of New York’s enhanced I/M

program. New York submitted revisions

to the existing program on March 27,

1996 to satisfy applicable requirements

of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and the

National Highway System Designation

Act of 1995 (NHSDA).

The NHSDA directs EPA to grant

interim approval for a period of 18

months to approvable I/M submittals.

The NHSDA also directs EPA and the

states to review the interim program

results at the end of the 18-month

period and to make a determination as

to the effectiveness of the interim

program. Following this demonstration,

EPA will adjust any credit claims made

by the state in its good faith estimate to

reflect the emissions reductions actually

measured by the state during the

program evaluation period. The NHSDA

is clear that the interim approval shall

last for only 18 months and that the

program evaluation is due to EPA at the

end of that period. Therefore, EPA

believes that Congress intended for

these programs to start-up as soon as

possible, which EPA had believed

should have been on or before

November 15, 1997, so that at least six

months of operational program data can

be collected to evaluate the interim

programs. EPA believes that in setting

such a strict timetable for program

evaluations under the NHSDA, Congress

recognized and attempted to mitigate

any further delay with the start-up of

these programs.

Since publication of New York’s

proposed conditional approval, the

State presented new information that

led EPA to believe that ‘‘as soon as

practicable’’ is not November 15, 1997

for New York. As a result, EPA

recognizes New York’s intent to start the

program as soon as possible, but no later

than November 15, 1998. In recognizing

this later start date, EPA considered a

number of issues related to the start of

this program. Specifically:

• Emission Credits

Most I/M programs currently planned

are requiring biennial inspections,

however, New York will require annual

inspections. As a result, New York will

complete one full cycle of inspections,

as will other states with biennial

programs, by November 1999. This will

allow New York to achieve all of the I/

M program related emission reduction

credits claimed in the 15 percent plan

and the 9 percent rate-of-progress (ROP)

plan. New York submitted these plans

on September 4, 1997. EPA will take

action on the State’s 15 percent and 9

percent ROP plans at a later date.

• Revisions to the Test Procedure and

Equipment Specifications

On December 17, 1996, New York

held a kickoff meeting with test

equipment vendors and potential

bidders to discuss the State’s

requirements regarding time of delivery

and adherence to the State’s standard of

performance. As a result, the State asked

that by April 1, 1997 vendors express

their interest in providing such test

equipment prior to the November 15,

1997 program start date required by

EPA. None of the vendors expressed

such interest, and in fact considered the

schedule time-constrained and

unfeasible. This forced the State to

reevaluate its overall program

development plans and ultimately led

New York to abandon its requirement

for vendors to adhere to a standard of

performance for the test equipment.

• Potential Benefits to Other States

The State has developed a new

transient test procedure that provides

mass emission measurement results

(similar to IM240) with less expensive

analyzer equipment generally associated

with Acceleration Simulation Mode

(ASM) testing. Development of this new

test procedure has taken considerable

time and effort on the part of New York.

A mass emissions transient test (METT),

like the one developed by New York,

captures overall vehicle emissions

during a simulated trip while an ASM

test uses one constant speed and load.

As a result, the ‘‘NYTEST’’ procedure

has the potential for significant cost

savings and may provide other states

with another viable transient test

procedure.

• Network Size

New York anticipates that 2,500 to

3,000 test-and-repair stations will need

to be retrofitted to accommodate testing

of the downstate vehicle fleet, which is

approximately five million vehicles.

Given that other states have begun

program implementation and are further

along in this process, New York will

need to compete for similar equipment

from a very limited number of sources.

As a result, the magnitude of this

program will require a longer phase-in

period to ensure that sufficient stations

are properly equipped prior to program

start up.

If New York fails to start its program

according to the schedule described in

this notice, the interim approval granted

under the provisions of the NHSDA,

which allows the State to take full credit