[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 206 (Friday, October 24, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 55368-55375]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27856]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CT-7202b; FRL-5902-3]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Conditional 
Approval of Implementation Plans; Connecticut

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing action on State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
revisions submitted by the State of Connecticut. The EPA is proposing 
approval of Connecticut's 1990 base year ozone emission inventories, 
and establishment of a Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations 
(PAMS) network, as revisions to the Connecticut SIP for ozone. The EPA 
proposes a conditional approval of SIP revisions submitted by the State 
of Connecticut to meet the 15 Percent Rate of Progress (ROP) Plan 
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA). A conditional approval is also 
proposed for the Connecticut contingency plan.
    The inventory was submitted by Connecticut to satisfy a CAA 
requirement that those States containing ozone nonattainment areas 
(NAAs)

[[Page 55369]]

classified as marginal to extreme submit inventories of actual ozone 
season emissions from all sources in accordance with EPA guidance. The 
PAMS SIP revision was submitted to provide for the establishment and 
maintenance of an enhanced ambient air quality monitoring network by 
November 15, 1993. The 15 percent ROP and contingency plans were 
submitted to satisfy CAA provisions that require ozone nonattainment 
areas classified as moderate and above to devise plans to reduce 
volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions 15 percent by 1996 when 
compared to a 1990 baseline.
    In the final rules section of today's Federal Register, the EPA is 
approving the Connecticut 1990 base year inventories, and the 
establishment of a PAMS network as a direct final rule without prior 
proposal, because the Agency views these as noncontroversial revision 
amendments and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale 
for each approval is set forth in the direct final rule. A direct final 
rule is not being published for the Connecticut 15 percent ROP and 
contingency plans. If no adverse comments are received on the direct 
final rule, no further activity is contemplated in relation to this 
proposed rule for these revisions. If EPA receives adverse comments, 
the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments 
received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this 
proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on 
this document. Any parties interested in commenting on this document 
should do so at this time.

DATES: Public comments on this document are requested and will be 
considered before taking final action on this SIP revision. Comments on 
this proposed action must be postmarked by November 24, 1997.

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, Connecticut, 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 Unit, EPA Region I, JFK Federal Building, Boston, 
Massachusetts 02203; telephone (617) 565-9266.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For supplementary information regarding the 
Connecticut 1990 base year emission inventories, and establishment of a 
PAMS network, see the information provided in the direct final action 
of the same title which is located in the rules section of the Federal 
Register.

Background

    Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA as amended in 1990 requires ozone 
nonattainment areas with classifications of moderate and above to 
develop plans to reduce area-wide VOC emissions by 15 percent from a 
1990 baseline. The plans were to be submitted by November 15, 1993 and 
the reductions were required to be achieved within 6 years of enactment 
or November 15, 1996. The Clean Air Act also sets limitations on the 
creditability of certain types of reductions. Specifically, States 
cannot take credit for reductions achieved by Federal Motor Vehicle 
Control Program (FMVCP) measures (new car emissions standards) 
promulgated prior to 1990 or for reductions resulting from requirements 
to lower the Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) of gasoline promulgated prior to 
1990. Furthermore, the CAA does not allow credit for corrections to 
Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Programs (I/M) or corrections to 
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) rules (so called ``RACT 
fix-ups) as these programs were required prior to 1990.
    In addition, sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) of the CAA require 
that contingency measures be included in the plan revision to be 
implemented if the area misses an ozone SIP milestone, or fails to 
attain the standard by the date required by the CAA.
    There are two nonattainment areas in Connecticut, one classified as 
a serious area, the other as a severe area. Connecticut is, therefore 
subject to the 15 percent ROP requirements. The areas are referred to 
as the Greater Hartford serious ozone nonattainment area (the 
``Hartford area''), and the Connecticut portion of the New York, New 
Jersey, Connecticut severe area (the ``NY-NJ-CT area''), which is a 
multi-state ozone nonattainment area. Connecticut did not enter into an 
agreement with New York and New Jersey to do a multi-state 15 percent 
plan, and therefore submitted a plan to reduce emissions only in the 
Connecticut portion of this area. EPA is taking action today only on 
the Connecticut portion of NY-NJ-CT 15 percent plan.
    Connecticut submitted final 15 percent ROP plans to EPA on January 
14, 1994. The plans, however, did not contain adopted rules for all of 
the VOC control measures listed within, and so they were deemed 
incomplete by EPA by letter dated January 26, 1994. During 1994, 
Connecticut submitted the adopted rules necessary for its 15 percent 
ROP plan. Revised 15 percent ROP and contingency plans were submitted 
on July 5, 1994 and December 30, 1994. By letter dated January 26, 
1995, EPA notified Connecticut that the 15 percent ROP plans had been 
found complete, thereby stopping a sanctions clock which had been 
started on January 26, 1994 due to the lack of complete 15 percent 
plans from the state.
    The EPA has analyzed Connecticut's submittal and believes that the 
15 percent ROP and contingency plans can be given conditional approval 
because the State correctly determined the required level of emission 
reductions, and the plans would strengthen the SIP by achieving 
reductions in VOC and Nitrogen Oxide (NO<INF>X</INF>) emissions. These 
plans, however, reference an enhanced automobile inspection and 
maintenance program which the State no longer intends to implement. By 
letter dated August 22, 1997 the Connecticut DEP committed to submittal 
of revised 15 percent ROP and contingency plans, and a revised I/M 
program, by April 1, 1998, that would reflect emission reduction credit 
appropriate for the type of automobile I/M program that the State will 
implement. Additionally, the letter contains a commitment to initiate 
testing of motor vehicles by January 1, 1998. Based on these 
commitments, the EPA is proposing a conditional approval of the plans. 
For a complete discussion of EPA's analysis of the Connecticut 15 
Percent ROP and Contingency plans, please refer to the Technical 
Support Document for this action which is available as part of the 
docket supporting this action. A summary of the EPA's findings follows.

Emission Inventory

    The base from which States determine the required reductions in the 
15 Percent Plan is the 1990 emission inventory. The EPA is approving 
the Connecticut 1990 emission inventories with a direct final action in 
the rules section of today's Federal Register. The inventory approved 
by the EPA exactly matches the one used in the 15 Percent ROP plan 
calculations, with one minor exception of less than \1/2\ ton per 
summer day (tpsd) out of a total anthropogenic emission estimate of 
416.9 tpsd for this area. EPA deems this discrepancy inconsequential.

[[Page 55370]]

Calculation of Target Level Emissions

    Connecticut subtracted the non-creditable reductions from the 
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP) from the 1990 inventory, 
and accurately adjusted the inventory to account for the reid vapor 
pressure (RVP) of gasoline sold in the state in 1990. These 
modifications result in the 1990 adjusted inventory.
    The total emission reduction required to meet the 15 percent ROP 
Plan requirements equals the sum of the following items: 15 percent of 
the adjusted inventory, reductions that occur from noncreditable 
programs such as the FMVCP and RVP programs as required prior to 1990, 
reductions needed to offset any growth in emissions that takes place 
between 1990 and 1996, and reductions that result from corrections to 
the I/M or VOC RACT rules. Table 1 summarizes these calculations for 
the two ozone nonattainment areas within the state:

              Table 1.--Calculation of Required Reductions              
                               [Tons/day]                               
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            NY-NJ-CT         Hartford   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 anthropogenic emission inventory                                   
 \1\.................................              131.7           414.2
1990 adjusted inventory \2\..........              121.8           389.3
15 percent of adjusted inventory.....               18.3            58.4
Noncreditable reductions.............                9.9            24.9
1996 target..........................              103.5           330.9
1996 \3\ projected, uncontrolled                                        
 emissions...........................              129.6           415.7
Required reduction \4\...............               26.1           84.8 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Manmade emissions only. Perchloroethylene emissions excluded due to 
  negligible photochemical reactivity.                                  
\2\ Adjusted inventory subtracts non-creditable FMVCP and RACT          
  reductions from the anthropogenic inventory.                          
\3\ 1996 emissions for on-road mobile sources were calculated using an  
  emission factor that reflected the level of control achieved by the   
  FMVCP in 1996.                                                        
\4\ Required Reductions were obtained by subtracting 1996 target from   
  the 1996 projected uncontrolled inventory.                            

Measures Achieving the Projected Reductions

    Connecticut has provided plans to achieve the reductions required 
for the two ozone nonattainment areas within the state. The following 
is a description of each control measure Connecticut used to achieve 
emission reduction credit within its 15 percent ROP plans. The EPA 
agrees with the emission reductions projected in the State submittals 
except where noted in the text and in Table 2 under the heading 
``Noncreditable Reductions.''

A. Point Source Controls

Non-CTG Sources

    Connecticut has claimed 3.1 tpsd in emission reduction credit from 
the implementation of VOC RACT on stationary sources. The reductions 
are claimed from facilities subject to the State's non-CTG RACT rule. 
The State's rule has been submitted to EPA, but has not as of yet been 
approved by EPA into the State's SIP. EPA intends to take final action 
on the State's rule by the time final action are issued for the State's 
15 percent plans. The State's 15 percent plans included documentation 
for the level of emission reduction credit claimed. The emission 
reductions claimed by the State are approvable.

Gasoline Loading Racks, Rule Effectiveness Improvement

    The Connecticut DEP plans on undertaking a rule effectiveness 
improvement program to improve compliance with a regulation on gasoline 
loading racks. The State's SIP outlines the manner in which Connecticut 
intends to improve compliance with this rule, including conducting 3 
unannounced inspections at each of the 14 facilities in the state over 
a 24 month period. Additionally, the State submitted a rule 
effectiveness improvements protocol to EPA which outlines the manner in 
which the State will verify that these emission reductions have 
occurred. At the conclusion of the State's rule effectiveness program, 
a report documenting the results of the effort will be submitted to the 
EPA. The State anticipates achieving a 3.6 tpsd emission reduction 
statewide for this source category due to the rule effectiveness 
improvement program, and due to the effect that the sale of 
reformulated gasoline in the State will have on gasoline loading rack 
emissions.

B. Area Source Controls

Vehicle Refueling (Stage II)

    Connecticut has adopted and submitted to EPA a Stage II vehicle 
refueling regulation. EPA approved the rule into the State's SIP on 
December 17, 1993 (58 FR 65930). Connecticut calculated 1996 vehicle 
refueling emissions and underground tank breathing emissions jointly, 
and determined that a 15.6 tpsd emission reduction would occur from 
these emission sources. Emissions from underground tanks will be 
reduced due to the sale of reformulated gasoline in the State.

Automobile Refinishing

    On November 29, 1994, EPA issued a final guidance memorandum that 
allowed States to assume a 37% control level for this source category 
without adopting a State rule due to a pending National rule. The State 
correctly applied this guidance and determined that emissions will be 
reduced 7.4 tpsd statewide due to implementation of the federal rule.

Architectural Coatings

    In a memo dated March 22, 1995, EPA provided guidance on the 
expected reductions from a pending national rulemaking on AIM coatings. 
The memo projects that emissions would be reduced by 20% for both 
architectural coatings and industrial maintenance coatings. The State 
correctly applied this guidance and determined that emissions will be 
reduced 6.5 tpsd statewide due to implementation of the federal rule.

Cutback Asphalt, Increased Rule Effectiveness

    The December 30, 1994 revision to the Connecticut 15 percent ROP 
plans included a plan to increase the rule effectiveness of the State's 
cutback asphalt regulations, such that a total of 15.3 tpsd in emission 
reductions would be achieved. The State's SIP outlines the manner in 
which Connecticut intends to improve compliance with this rule, 
including notifying all towns in the

[[Page 55371]]

State of their responsibilities pursuant to the rule, and requiring all 
towns to annually report their cutback asphalt usage. The State 
submitted a rule effectiveness improvements protocol to EPA which 
outlines the manner in which the State will verify that these emission 
reductions have occurred. At the conclusion of the State's rule 
effectiveness program, a report documenting the results of the effort 
will be submitted to the EPA. The emission reductions claimed by the 
State are approvable.

Effect of Reformulated Gasoline on Remaining Gasoline Marketing 
Operations

    Reformulated gasoline will be required to be sold in Connecticut in 
1996. This fuel has a lower volatility than conventional gasoline, and 
therefore produces less evaporative emissions than conventional 
gasoline. Appendix C of Connecticut's 15 percent plan outlines the 
effect that the sale of ``Class C'' reformulated gasoline will have on 
emissions in 1996 from the gasoline distribution network. The State 
estimated the emission reduction expected from the source categories 
where this reduction was not previously quantified, such as bulk 
gasoline storage tanks, barges, gasoline trucks in transit, and Stage I 
tank filling operations. The net result was a 1.0 tpsd emission 
reduction statewide. The projected emission reductions are approvable.

C. On-Road Mobile Source Controls

Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance

    The 15 percent ROP plans relied on an enhanced vehicle I/M program 
that was developed by Connecticut and submitted to EPA on May 13, 1994. 
In light of the recent I/M flexibility policy issued by EPA, 
Connecticut has indicated an interest in re-evaluating their enhanced 
I/M program to take advantage of the I/M flexibility. However, 
Connecticut has not yet submitted a revised I/M program design to EPA. 
By letter dated August 22, 1997, Connecticut committed to submitting a 
revised I/M program to EPA by April 1, 1998, revised 15 percent and 
contingency plans reflecting the credit from the revised I/M program by 
April 1, 1998, and importantly, the State committed to begin testing 
motor vehicles by January 1, 1998. Since the enhanced I/M program 
described within the 15 percent plan submitted to EPA on December 30, 
1994 will not be implemented, EPA cannot fully approve the emission 
reductions from this program. However, based on the commitments 
contained within the State's August 22, 1997 letter, EPA proposes to 
conditionally approve the Connecticut 15 percent ROP and contingency 
plans.
    Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA requires that States containing ozone 
nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above prepare plans that 
provide for a 15 percent VOC emission reduction by November 15, 1996. 
Most of the 15 percent SIPs originally submitted to the EPA contained 
enhanced I/M programs because this program achieves more VOC emission 
reductions than most, if not all other, control strategies. However, 
because most States experienced substantial difficulties with these 
enhanced I/M programs, only a few States are currently actually testing 
cars using the original enhanced I/M protocol.
    In September, 1995, the EPA finalized revisions to its enhanced I/M 
rule allowing states significant flexibility in designing I/M programs 
appropriate for their needs. The substantial amount of time needed by 
States to re-design enhanced I/M programs in accordance with the 
guidance contained within EPA's revised I/M rule, secure state 
legislative approval when necessary, and set up the infrastructure to 
perform the testing program has precluded States that revise their I/M 
programs from obtaining emission reductions from such revised programs 
by November 15, 1996.
    Given the heavy reliance by many States upon enhanced I/M programs 
to help achieve the 15 percent VOC emission reduction required under 
CAA section 182(b)(1), and the recent regulatory changes regarding 
enhanced I/M programs, the EPA recognized that it is no longer possible 
for many States to achieve the portion of the 15 percent reductions 
that are attributed to I/M by November 15, 1996. Under these 
circumstances, disapproval of the 15 percent SIPs would serve no 
purpose. Consequently, under certain circumstances, EPA will propose to 
allow States that pursue re-design of enhanced I/M programs to receive 
emission reduction credit from these programs within their 15 percent 
plans, even though the emission reductions from the I/M program will 
occur after November 15, 1996.
    Specifically, the EPA will propose approval of 15 percent SIPs if 
the emission reductions from the revised, enhanced I/M programs, as 
well as from the other 15 percent SIP measures, will achieve the 15 
percent level as soon after November 15, 1996 as practicable. To make 
this ``as soon as practicable'' determination, the EPA must determine 
that the SIP contains all VOC control strategies that are practicable 
for the nonattainment area in question and that meaningfully accelerate 
the date by which the 15 percent level is achieved. The EPA does not 
believe that measures meaningfully accelerate the 15 percent date if 
they provide only an insignificant amount of reductions.
    In the case of the NY-NJ-CT area and the Hartford area, Connecticut 
has committed to submittal of 15 percent SIPs that would achieve the 
amount of reductions needed from I/M by November, 1999. The EPA 
proposes to determine that these SIP revisions contain all measures, 
including automobile I/M, that achieve the required reductions as soon 
as practicable.
    The EPA has examined other potentially available SIP measures to 
determine if they are practicable for the two Connecticut ozone 
nonattainment areas, and if they would meaningfully accelerate the date 
by which these areas reach the 15 percent level of reductions. The EPA 
proposes to determine that these SIPs contain the appropriate measures. 
The rationale for this determination is outlined within the technical 
support document available in the docket for this action. In summary, 
several area source measures exist which could conceivably be 
implemented prior to November 1999. However, these measures would not 
achieve the same level of emission reductions expected from 
Connecticut's I/M program, and additionally, would not meaningfully 
accelerate the achievement of the required reductions.

Reformulated Gasoline (RFG)

    Section 211(k) of the Clean Air Act requires that after January 1, 
1995, in the nine areas of the country with the worst air quality, only 
reformulated gasoline be sold or dispensed. Portions of the State of 
Connecticut are covered by this requirement. On October 28, 1991, 
Connecticut submitted a letter from their Governor requesting that the 
portions of the State not specifically required by the CAA to use 
reformulated gasoline ``opt into'' the reformulated fuels program. This 
request was published in the Federal Register on December 23, 1991, 56 
FR 66444. Connecticut correctly used the MOBILE5a model to calculate 
the emission reductions due to the implementation of the reformulated 
gasoline program.

Tier I Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program

    The EPA promulgated standards for 1994 and later model year light-
duty vehicles and light-duty trucks (56 FR

[[Page 55372]]

25724, June 5, 1991). Since the standards were adopted after the Clean 
Air Act amendments of 1990, the resulting emission reductions are 
creditable toward the 15 percent reduction goal. Connecticut correctly 
calculated these reductions using the MOBILE5a model.

Employee Commute Option

    Connecticut has adopted legislation requiring employers in the 
State's severe nonattainment area with 100 or more employees implement 
measures to increase average passenger occupancy by 25%. The EPA has 
not approved this program into the State's SIP. A discussion with staff 
from the CT-DEP indicates that this program is not being implemented. 
The State included the effect of this program in the MOBILE modeling 
runs done to estimate emission reductions in the severe area. This 
resulted in the State assuming 0.4 tpsd in emission reduction credit 
which will not occur in the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT area 
due to the failure to implement this program.

D. Non-Road Mobile Source Controls

Use of Reformulated Gasoline in Non-road Engines

    On August 18, 1993, EPA's Office of Mobile Sources issued a 
guidance memorandum regarding the VOC emission reduction benefits for 
non-road equipment in a nonattainment area that uses Federal Phase I 
RFG. Connecticut has correctly used the guidance to compute that VOC 
emissions will be reduced 0.6 tpsd in the severe area, and 2.4 tpsd in 
the serious area.
    Table 2 summarizes the creditable and noncreditable emission 
reductions contained within the Connecticut 15 percent ROP plans:

 Table 2.--Summary of Creditable and Noncreditable Emission Reductions: 
                  Connecticut Ozone Nonattainment Areas                 
                               [Tons/day]                               
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            NY-NJ-CT         Hartford   
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required reduction...................               26.1            84.8
Creditable reductions:                                                  
  Non-CTG RACT.......................                0.9             2.2
  Gasoline Loading Racks.............                0.7             2.9
  Stage II + Tank Breathing..........                3.9            11.7
  Auto Refinishing...................                2.0             5.4
  AIM Coatings.......................                1.6             4.9
  Cutback Asphalt (RE imp.)..........                3.8            11.5
  Reform, other gas market...........                0.2             0.8
  On-road mobile strategies (I/M,                                       
   Reform, Tier I)...................               16.1            46.1
  Reform, Off-road...................                0.6             2.4
                                      ----------------------------------
      Total..........................               29.8            87.9
                                      ==================================
Noncreditable reductions:                                               
  Employee commute option............                0.4  ..............
  Surplus............................                3.7             3.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Contingency Measures

    Ozone nonattainment areas classified as serious or above must 
submit to the EPA, pursuant to sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) of the 
CAA, contingency measures to be implemented if an area misses an ozone 
SIP milestone or does not attain the national ambient air quality 
standard by the applicable date. The General Preamble to Title I, (57 
FR 13498 (April 16, 1992)) states that the contingency measures should, 
at a minimum, ensure that an appropriate level of emission reduction 
progress continues to be made if attainment or RFP is not achieved and 
additional planning by the State is needed. The EPA interprets this 
provision of the CAA to require States with moderate and above ozone 
nonattainment areas to submit sufficient contingency measures so that 
upon implementation of such measures, additional emission reductions of 
three percent of the adjusted base year inventory (or a lesser 
percentage that will make up the identified shortfall) would be 
achieved in the year after the failure has been identified (57 FR at 
13511). States must show that their contingency measures can be 
implemented with minimal further action on their part and with no 
additional rulemaking actions such as public hearings or legislative 
review.

Analysis of Contingency Measures

Surplus Emission Reduction From 15 Percent Plan

    Connecticut's contingency plan included emission reduction credits 
that were considered surplus reductions from the state's 15 percent ROP 
plans. A 4.0 tpsd surplus was identified for the NY-NJ-CT area, and a 
3.1 tpsd surplus for the Hartford area. EPA notes that due to the lack 
of implementation of the employee commute program in the NY-NJ-CT area, 
the adjusted surplus is 3.7 tpsd for that area. This equals the 
contingency obligation for this area, and so no additional reductions 
are needed for the NY-NJ-CT area.
NO<INF>X</INF> Contingency Measures for Serious Area
    The State determined that the serious area would need to achieve 
additional emission reductions beyond those generated by the 15 percent 
plan surplus for this area. The State chose to meet the remainder of 
this requirement using NO<INF>X</INF> emission reductions, which is 
allowed pursuant to guidance issued by EPA on August 23, 1993. The 
state correctly determined that a 2.2 percent reduction of the adjusted 
NO<INF>X</INF> inventory (321.5 tpsd) would be required to fulfill the 
emission reduction obligations for the serious area. (The adjusted 
NO<INF>X</INF> inventory is so named because pre-1990 emission 
reductions from the FMVCP are subtracted to derive the ``adjusted'' 
NO<INF>X</INF> inventory). This yields a 7.1 tpsd NO<INF>X</INF> 
emission reduction obligation.
    Connecticut chose to meet the NO<INF>X</INF> contingency measure 
obligation using a portion of the emission reductions achieved by its 
NO<INF>X</INF> RACT rule. Connecticut has submitted a NO<INF>X</INF> 
RACT

[[Page 55373]]

rule to the EPA. EPA intends to approve the State's rule prior to or 
concurrent with final approval of the State's 15 percent and 
contingency plans. The State's NO<INF>X</INF> RACT rule is more 
stringent than required by the CAA. The State performed an analysis to 
determine the quantity of emission reductions generated by the rule 
which are beyond the reductions required by the CAA. The results of the 
analysis were included with the State's submittal, and indicate that 
6.3 tpsd surplus credit will be generated in the severe area, and 3.4 
tpsd surplus credit in the serious area.
    As stated above, Connecticut needs to identify 7.1 tpsd in 
NO<INF>X</INF> emission reduction credits to fulfill the contingency 
measure obligation for the serious area. Only 3.4 tpsd are identified 
from the State's analysis of surplus NO<INF>X</INF> credits. However, 
since the State's NO<INF>X</INF> RACT rule contains a Statewide 
NO<INF>X</INF> cap provision, which allows sources from the serious 
area to over-control and trade emission reduction credits to facilities 
in the severe area (and vice versa), the State will use a portion of 
the credit generated in the severe area to meet the remainder (3.7 
tpsd) of the serious area's contingency obligation.<SUP>5</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The NY-NJ-CT severe area is also upwind from the Hartford 
serious area, so these NO<INF>X</INF> reductions will contribute to 
air quality improvement in the serious area. Any NO<INF>X</INF> 
reduction the State uses in its contingency demonstration would no 
longer be available for use as a trade or other purposes under the 
CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 3 summarizes the creditable emission reductions contained 
within the State's contingency plans:

  Table 3.--Summary of Creditable and Noncreditable Contingency Measure 
               Reductions: Connecticut Nonattainment Areas              
                               [Tons/day]                               
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         NJ-NJ-CT           Hartford    
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required contingency..............         3.7 (VOC)          3.1 (VOC) 
                                                              7.1 (NO<INF>X) 
Creditable contingency reductions:                                      
  Excess from 15 percent plans                                          
   (VOC)..........................         3.7                3.1       
  Beyond CAA NO<INF>X RACT.............  .............<INF>....         7.1       
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Transportation Conformity Budgets

    In recognition of the proposed approval of the 15 percent ROP 
plans, EPA also proposes approval of motor vehicle emission budgets for 
VOCs and NO<INF>X</INF>. Final approval of the 15 percent plan will 
eliminate the need for the transportation conformity emission reduction 
tests, which are the build/no build test and the less than 1990 
emissions test, for these pollutants.
    A control strategy SIP is required to establish a motor vehicle 
emission budget which places a cap on emissions that cannot be exceeded 
by predicted highway and transit vehicle emissions. The Connecticut DEP 
did not provide a break down of the 1996 projected inventory denoting 
transit emissions as an individual category. Therefore EPA is proposing 
to utilize the on-road mobile emissions provided in the SIP submittal 
as the motor vehicle emission budget for transportation conformity 
purposes. The 1996 projected on-road mobile emission estimates 
contained within the State's 15 percent plans are shown in the 
following table:

              Table 4.--1996 Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets             
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          NY-NJ-CT  area  Hartford  area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC.....................................            23.2            71.1
NO<INF>X.....................................            39.4           126.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA recommends that the DEP submit a specific motor vehicle 
emission budget for conformity purposes that includes both the highway 
and transit components. If such a submittal is made, EPA will address 
the revised motor vehicle budget within the final rulemaking on 
Connecticut's 15 percent plan.
    EPA notes that the DEP derived these emission values using the 
assumption that the State's motor vehicle I/M program will achieve 
emission reductions equivalent to the reductions achievable from an 
enhanced I/M program. As stated elsewhere in this notice, EPA is aware 
that Connecticut no longer intends to implement an enhanced I/M 
program, but rather will implement an ``ASM 25/25'' type program 
beginning on January 1, 1998. The DEP has committed to submittal of a 
revised 15 percent plan which contains emission estimates reflective of 
the State's ASM 25/25 motor vehicle emission testing program. If the 
revised 15 percent plans are found to contain adequate motor vehicle 
emission budgets, those budgets will supersede the budgets proposed for 
approval in today's notice. Additionally, the budgets will be adjusted 
if the State's evaluation of the emission reductions obtained from its 
I/M program reveal that the projected benefits were inaccurate.

Proposed Action

    The EPA has evaluated these submittals for consistency with the 
CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. The Connecticut 15 Percent ROP 
plans will achieve enough reductions to meet the 15 percent ROP 
requirements of section 182(b)(1) of the CAA. In addition, the 
Connecticut contingency plans will achieve enough emission reductions 
to meet the three percent reduction requirement under sections 
172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) of the CAA. However, the ability of these plans 
to achieve the indicated quantity of emission reductions depends in 
large part on the successful implementation of an automobile emission 
testing program. By letter dated August 22, 1997, Connecticut indicated 
that the I/M 240 program described within the December 30, 1994 15 
percent plans would not be implemented, and that an ASM 25/25 type 
program would be implemented in its place beginning on January 1, 1998. 
The letter states that a preliminary analysis performed by the DEP 
indicates that Connecticut can meet its emission reduction requirements 
for 15 percent and contingency plan purposes based on a January 1, 1998 
start date for the ASM 25/25 I/M program. The letter also committed to 
submittal of a revised 15 percent and contingency demonstration, and 
submittal of a revised I/M program, by April 1, 1998. Based on these 
commitments, the EPA is proposing

[[Page 55374]]

conditional interim approval of the Connecticut 15 percent and 
contingency plans as a revision to the SIP.
    EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this 
proposal or on other relevant matters. These comments will be 
considered before EPA takes final action. Interested parties may 
participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure by submitting written 
comments to the EPA regional office listed in the ADDRESSES section of 
this action.
    EPA is proposing to grant conditional approval of the Connecticut 
15 percent and contingency plans. The outstanding issues with these SIP 
revisions are as follows:
    1. By January 1, 1998, Connecticut must begin testing motor 
vehicles using the ASM 25/25 program which is described within the 
State's August 22, 1997 letter.
    2. By April 1, 1998, Connecticut must submit revised 15 percent and 
contingency plans as revisions to the State's SIP which show that the 
emission reductions from the ASM 25/25 automobile emission testing 
program, when coupled with emission reductions from other measures, 
will meet the emission reduction goals of these requirements.
    3. By April 1, 1998, Connecticut must submit a revised I/M program 
as a revision to the State's SIP.<SUP>6</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Any conditions, such as a program evaluation, that EPA 
attaches to its approval of the revised I/M program may effectively 
also become conditions on the continuing validity of Connecticut's 
15 percent plans, because the I/M program represents a major portion 
of CT's 15 percent reductions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under section 110(k)(4) of the Act, EPA may conditionally approve a 
plan based on a commitment from the State to adopt specific enforceable 
measures by a date certain, but not later than 1 year from the date of 
approval. If EPA conditionally approves the commitments in a final 
rulemaking action, the State must meet its commitments as described in 
the preceding paragraph. If the State fails to do so, this action will 
become a limited approval, limited disapproval at the time of the 
State's failure to meet one of the conditions listed above. EPA will 
notify the State by letter that this action has occurred. At that time, 
this commitment will no longer be a part of the approved Connecticut 
SIP. EPA subsequently will publish a document in the Federal Register 
notifying the public that the conditional approval automatically 
converted to a limited approval, limited disapproval. If the State 
meets its commitments within the applicable time frames, the 
conditionally approved submission will remain a part of the SIP until 
EPA takes final action approving or disapproving the Connecticut 15 
percent and contingency plans. If EPA disapproves the Connecticut I/M 
program, the 15 percent and contingency plans will receive limited 
approvals, limited disapprovals at that time. If EPA approves the 
Connecticut I/M program, the 15 percent and contingency plans will be 
fully approved in their entirety and replace the conditionally approved 
program in the SIP.
    If EPA determines that it must issue a limited disapproval rather 
than a final conditional approval, or if the conditional approval is 
later converted to a limited approval, limited disapproval, such action 
will trigger EPA's authority to impose sanctions under section 179(a) 
of the CAA at the time EPA issues the final limited approval, limited 
disapproval or on the date that Connecticut fails to meet a commitment. 
In the latter case, EPA will notify Connecticut by letter that the 
conditional approval has been converted to a limited approval, limited 
disapproval and that EPA's sanctions authority has been triggered. In 
addition, the final disapproval triggers the federal implementation 
plan (FIP) requirement under section 110(c).

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 Executive Order 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. section 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 sections 603 
and 604). Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant economic 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.
    Conditional approvals of SIP submittals under section 110 and 
subchapter I, part D of the CAA do not create any new requirements but 
simply approve requirements that the State is already imposing. 
Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not impose any new 
requirements, I certify that it does not have a significant impact on 
any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the 
Federal-State relationship under the 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).
    If the conditional approval is converted to a disapproval under 
section 110(k), based on Connecticut's failure to meet a commitment, it 
will not affect any existing state requirements applicable to small 
entities. Federal disapproval of the state submittal does not affect 
its state-enforceability. Moreover, EPA's disapproval of the submittal 
does not impose a new Federal requirement. Therefore, EPA certifies 
that this disapproval action does not have a significant impact on a 
substantial number of small entities because it does not remove 
existing requirements nor does it substitute a new federal requirement.

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 cost-effective 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 actions proposed in this notice do 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 proposes 
approval of pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and 
imposes no new Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs 
to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, 
result from this action.

[[Page 55375]]

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
Reporting and recordkeeping, Nitrogen Oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic 
compounds.

    Dated: September 19, 1997.
John P. DeVillars,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region I.
[FR Doc. 97-27856 Filed 10-23-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P