Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules 5357

Thursday, February 27, 1997

8:00 a.m.—12:00 p.m.—Session III—

Chemical Removal Technology

This session will explore the range of

viable containment, recovery, source

control or chemical treatment options

appropriate to reduce the risk to public

health and the environment.

Thursday, February 27, 1997

1:00 p.m.—5:00 p.m.—Session IV—

Public Responder versus Private

Responder Issues

This session will examine the roles of

local, public responders and the role of

private, contracted responders within

the context of hazardous substance

response plan regulations.

Thursday, February 27, 1997

7:00 p.m.—9:00 p.m.—Public Meeting

Discussion of workshop highlights

and open public comment.

Procedural

The workshop is open to the public;

however, in order to provide a forum for

balanced discussion on specific issues,

The Keystone Center has invited a

limited number of individuals to be

actual participants in the various

sessions. In sessions I through IV, the

facilitator of the conference will

schedule a period of time when the

public may present limited, oral

comments. As noted in the agenda, the

public meeting is open to all individuals

to make any comments or respond to

points made during the workshop.

Persons wishing to make oral

presentations during the public meeting

should notify the person listed above

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT no later than Thursday,

February 20, 1997. Written material may

be submitted prior to, during, or up to

30 days after the meeting.

Information on Services for Individuals

With Disabilities

For information on facilities or

services for individuals with disabilities

or to request special assistance at the

workshop, contact the person listed

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT.

Joseph J. Angelo,

Director of Standards.

[FR Doc. 97–2865 Filed 2–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[DE027–1006; FRL–5684–2]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans;

Delaware—15 Percent Rate of

Progress Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve,

conditionally, the State Implementation

Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the

State of Delaware to meet the 15 Percent

Rate of Progress Plan requirements of

the Clean Air Act. EPA is proposing to

conditionally approve the SIP because

the 15 Percent Plan, submitted by

Delaware, will result in significant

emission reductions in volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) from the 1990

baseline and thus, will provide progress

toward attainment of the ozone

standard. This action is being taken

under section 110 of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before March 7, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

David L. Arnold, Section Chief, Ozone/

CO & Mobile Sources Section, Mailcode

3AT21, Environmental Protection

Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut

Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19107. Copies of the documents relevant

to this action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the Air, Radiation, and Toxics

Division, Environmental Protection

Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut

Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19107; the Air and Radiation Docket

and Information Center, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M. Street, SW.,

Washington, D.C. 20460; and the

Delaware Department of Natural

Resources & Environmental Control, 89

Kings Highway, P.O. Box 1401, Dover,

Delaware 19903.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rose

Quinto, (215) 566–2182, at the EPA

Region III address above. Information

can also be requested via e-mail

(quinto.rose@epamail.epa.gov);

however, comments must still be

submitted in writing.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 182(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act

as amended in 1990 (CAAA), requires

ozone nonattainment areas with

classifications of moderate and above to

develop plans to reduce area-wide

volatile organic compound (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 CAAA 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 CAAA does not

allow credit for corrections to Vehicle

Inspection and Maintenance Programs

(I/M) or corrections to Reasonably

Available Control Technology (RACT)

rules as these programs were required

prior to 1990.

In addition, section 172(c)(9) of the

CAAA requires that contingency

measures be included in the plan

revision to be implemented if

reasonable further progress is not

achieved or if the standard is not

attained.

On February 17, 1995, the Delaware

Department of Natural Resources &

Environmental Control (DNREC)

submitted revisions to its SIP. One of

those revisions pertains to the 15% Rate

of Progress Plan (RPP) for the State of

Delaware. Kent and New Castle are the

two counties for which Delaware is

required to develop a 15% RPP. The

other SIP revisions submitted on

February 17, 1995 are the subject of

separate rulemaking notices.

EPA is soliciting public comments on

the issues discussed in this document or

on other relevant matters. These

comments will be considered before

taking final action. Interested parties

may participate in the Federal

rulemaking procedure by submitting

written comments to the EPA regional

offices listed in the ADDRESSES section

of this document.

EPA’s Analysis

EPA has reviewed Delaware’s

submittal for consistency with the

requirements of EPA regulations. A

summary of EPA’s analysis is provided

below. More detailed support for

approval of Delaware’s submittal is

contained in a Technical Support

Document (TSD), which is available

from the Region III office listed above.

A. Accurate Emission Inventory

Sections 172(c)(3) and 182(b)(1) of the

CAAA require that nonattainment plan

provisions include a comprehensive,
5358 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules

accurate, current inventory of actual

emissions from all sources of relevant

pollutants in the nonattainment area.

Because the approval of such

inventories is necessary to an area’s rate

of progress plan and attainment

demonstration, the emission inventory

must be approved prior to or with the

rate of progress plan submission.

On January 24, 1996, EPA approved

Delaware’s 1990 base year inventory (61

FR 1838). Therefore, Delaware has a

comprehensive, accurate, current

inventory of actual emissions from all

sources of relevant pollutants in the

nonattainment areas.

B. Calculation of the Adjusted Base

Year Inventory

The CAAA specifies the emission

baseline from which the 15 percent

reduction is calculated. This baseline

value is termed the 1990 adjusted base

year inventory. Section 182(b)(1)(D)

excludes from the baseline the

emissions that would be eliminated by

Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program

(FMVCP) regulations promulgated by

January 1, 1990, and Reid Vapor

Pressure (RVP) regulations (55 FR

23666, June 11, 1990), which require

maximum RVP limits in nonattainment

areas during the peak ozone season.

The adjusted base year inventory is

determined by starting with the

emission inventory, and taking out all

biogenic emissions as well as emissions

from sources located outside of the

designated nonattainment boundary.

The resulting inventory is termed rate of

progress base year inventory. The rate of

progress base year inventory is then

adjusted by subtracting the expected

FMVCP and RVP emissions reductions

in order to derive the adjusted base year

inventory.

The FMVCP and RVP emissions

reductions are determined using the onroad mobile source emissions modeling

software, Mobile 5a, provided by EPA.

Provided below is a tabular summary

of the emission inventories calculated as

described above.

Emissions inventory Tons per

day

A. 1990 Base Year Inventory ....... 196.529

B. 1990 Rate of Progress Inventory ............................................ 145.843

Emissions inventory Tons per

day

C. FMVCP and RVP Emission

Reductions between 1990 and

1996 .......................................... 9.590

D. 1990 Adjusted Base Year Inventory (B–C) ............................ 136.253

C. Required Reductions

The adjusted base year inventory is

multiplied by 0.15 to calculate the

amount of the required rate of progress

emission reduction. The amount of

reductions necessary to meet the

contingency plan requirement is 3

percent of the adjusted base year

inventory. Therefore the adjusted base

year inventory is multiplied by 0.03 to

calculate the amount of required

reductions for the contingency plan

requirement.

Shown below is a table summarizing

the amount of required reductions for

the rate of progress and contingency

plans.

Inventory Tons per

day

1990 Adjusted Base Year Inventory ............................................ 136.253

Reduction for Rate of Progress

Requirement .............................. 20.438

Reduction for Contingency Requirement .................................. 4.088

Therefore, to meet the rate of progress

requirement, Delaware’s plan must

provide at least a 20.438 tons per day

(tpd) reduction, net of growth, in VOC

emissions. In addition, to meet the

contingency requirement, Delaware’s

plan must provide at least a 4.088 tpd

reduction, net of growth, in VOC

emissions.

The 20.438 tpd is the amount of VOC

emissions by which Delaware must

reduce its 1990 Adjusted Base Year

Inventory in order to meet the 15

percent requirement. The 20.438 tpd

required reduction does not include the

amount of projected growth in

emissions by 1996 that must be offset in

the 15% RPP.

As previously stated, under section

182(b)(1)(D) of the CAAA, the following

reductions are not creditable towards

the rate of progress reductions: (1)

FMVCP regulations promulgated by

January 1, 1990; (2) RVP regulations; (3)

RACT corrections; and (4) inspection

and maintenance (I/M) corrections.

Thus, the total expected reductions

comprise the amount of reductions

necessary to meet the rate of progress

requirement and the expected

reductions from the four noncreditable

programs just described.

Delaware has documented the correct

amount for the total expected reductions

in the nonattainment area by showing

each step, discussing any assumptions

made, and stating the origin of the

number used in the calculations.

D. Projected Emission Inventory

The 15% reduction in VOC emissions

net of growth required by the CAAA

amounts to 45.441 tons/day for Kent

and New Castle Counties. These

emissions will be accomplished by

implementation of new VOC control

measures between 1990 and 1996. In

order to show that the reductions

associated with these new control

measures are adequate to meet the 15%

reduction requirement, the 1990

baseline emissions are projected to

1996. The inventory that results from

projecting 1990 baseline emissions to

1996 including growth and new controls

is called the 1996 Control Strategy

Projection Inventory. The total amount

of VOC emissions in the 1996 Control

Strategy Projection Inventory must be

equal to or less than the 1996 Target

Level of VOC emissions in order to

show that the new control measures will

be adequate to meet the 15% rate of

progress requirement. The target level of

VOC was calculated to be 115.815 tons

VOC/day, and the total 1996 Control

Strategy Projection Inventory for VOC is

115.336 tons VOC/day. Therefore, the

control measures that are included in

the 1996 Control Strategy Projection are

adequate to meet the 15% rate of

progress requirement.

E. Control Measures

The total emissions reduction for Kent

and New Castle is 45.920 tons per peak

ozone season day. The amount of VOC

reduction that Delaware needs to meet

the 15% rate of progress requirement is

45.441 tons/day. Therefore, the control

measures listed in the tables below are

adequate to meet the 15% rate of

progress requirement.

CONTROL MEASURES AND EXPECTED VOC EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS

Control measures Creditable/non-creditable Expected emissions reductions (tons VOC/day)

Point Source Controls

RACT Catch-ups in Kent County:

Solvent Metal Cleaning .................................................................................................... Creditable ...................... 0.582

Surface Coating of Metal Furniture .................................................................................. Creditable ...................... 0.039
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules 5359

CONTROL MEASURES AND EXPECTED VOC EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS—Continued

Control measures Creditable/non-creditable Expected emissions reductions (tons VOC/day)

Leaks from Synthetic Organic Chemical, Polymer, and Resin Mfg Equipment .............. Creditable ...................... 0.004

Subtotal for RACT in Kent County ............................................................................... ........................................ 0.625

New RACT Regulations:

Bulk Gasoline Marine Tank Vessel Loading Facilities ..................................................... Creditable ...................... 1.896

SOCMI Reactor Processes and Distillation Operations ................................................... Creditable ...................... 0.024

Batch Processing Operations ........................................................................................... Creditable ...................... 0.406

Offset Lithography ............................................................................................................ Creditable ...................... 0.078

Aerospace Coatings ......................................................................................................... Creditable ...................... 0.008

Industrial Cleaning Solvents ............................................................................................. Creditable ...................... 0.499

Non-CTG RACT ............................................................................................................... Creditable ...................... 0.359

Subtotal for New RACT Regulations ............................................................................ ........................................ 3.270

Benzene Waste Rule ....................................................................................................... Creditable ...................... 1.733

Sanitary Landfills .............................................................................................................. Creditable ...................... 0.158

Irreversible Process Changes .......................................................................................... Creditable ...................... 1.381

Total Point Source Reductions ..................................................................................... ........................................ 7.167

Stationary Area Source Controls

RACT Catch-ups in Kent County:

Solvent Metal Cleaning .................................................................................................... Creditable ...................... 0.134

Cutback Asphalt ............................................................................................................... Creditable ...................... 0.025

Subtotal for RACT in Kent County ............................................................................... ........................................ 0.159

New RACT Regulations:

Stage I Vapor Recovery ................................................................................................... Creditable ...................... 0.629

Emulsified Asphalt ............................................................................................................ Creditable ...................... 0.052

Motor Vehicle Refinishing ................................................................................................ Creditable ...................... 1.242

Offset Lithography ............................................................................................................ Creditable ...................... 0.070

Aerospace Coatings ......................................................................................................... Creditable ...................... 0.030

Subtotal for New RACT Regulations ............................................................................ ........................................ 2.023

Stage II Vapor Recovery .................................................................................................. Creditable ...................... 1.740

Open Burning ................................................................................................................... Creditable ...................... 3.992

Total Stationary Area Source Reductions .................................................................... ........................................ 7.9141

Off-Road Mobile Source Controls:

Reformulated Fuel ............................................................................................................ Creditable ...................... 0.509

Total Off-Road Mobile Source Reductions ................................................................... ........................................ 0.509

On-Road Mobile Source Controls:

FMVCP and RVP ............................................................................................................. Noncreditable ................. 24.120

Tier I Vehicle Emissions Standards ................................................................................. Creditable ...................... 0.170

For Kent County: a. Low Enhanced I/M, b. Pressure and ATP ...................................... Creditable ...................... 1.420

Pressure & ATP in New Castle County ........................................................................... Creditable ...................... 2.180

Reformulated Fuel ............................................................................................................ Creditable ...................... 2.440

Total On-Road Mobile Source Reductions ................................................................... ........................................ 30.330

TOTAL REDUCTIONS FROM ALL CONTROL MEASURES ...................................... ........................................ 45.920

Contingency Measures

For ozone areas classified as moderate

or above, states must include in their

submittal, under section 172(c)(9) of the

CAAA, contingency measures to be

implemented if Reasonable Further

Progress (RFP) is not achieved or if the

standard is not attained by the

applicable date. The General Preamble

to Title I, (57 FR 13498) states that the

contingency measures should, at a

minimum, ensure that an appropriate

level of emissions reduction progress

continues to be made if attainment or

RFP is not achieved and additional

planning by the state is needed.

Therefore, EPA interprets the CAAA to

require states with moderate and above

ozone nonattainment areas to include

sufficient contingency measures in the

RPP submittal, so that upon

implementation of such measures,

additional emissions reductions of up to

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. Contingency

measures must be fully adopted so that,

upon failure to meet a milestone, the

contingency measures may be

implemented without any further

rulemaking activities by the state.

Analysis of Specific Contingency

Measures

The following is a discussion of each

of the contingency measures that have
5360 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules

been included in the SIP submittal and

an analysis of their acceptableness.

1. Stage II Vapor Recovery. The

CAAA requires states with moderate

and above ozone nonattainment areas to

submit a SIP revision requiring owners

or operators of gasoline dispensing

systems to install and operate a system

for gasoline vapor recovery of emissions

from the fueling of motor vehicles.

Delaware’s Stage II Vapor Recovery

program, Section 36 of Delaware Air

Regulation 24, includes state

inspections of affected facilities every

three years. Delaware took credit for

VOC emissions reductions from a Stage

II Vapor Recovery program with

triennial inspections as part of its

required 15% reduction. Emissions

reduction from this type of program are

estimated using a rule effectiveness

value. The rule effectiveness increases,

if the program is conducted with annual

state inspections. That is, the program is

more effective at reducing VOC

emissions with the higher inspection

frequency. Therefore, Delaware plans to

implement an annual inspection

program for Stage II Vapor Recovery as

a contingency measure.

2. Open Burning. Delaware has

adopted revisions to its open burning

regulation which include more stringent

restrictions than the previous version. A

portion of the VOC emissions

reductions resulting from the open

burning regulation will be used as

contingency measures.

EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS FROM CONTINGENCY MEASURES IN TONS PER

PEAK OZONE SEASON DAY

Contingency measures

VOC

emissions

reductions

Stage II Vapor Recovery with Annual Inspections ........................ 0.619

Open Burning ................................ 3.469

Total ................................... 4.088

Proposed Action

EPA has evaluated the Delaware 15%

RPP SIP submittal for consistency with

the CAAA, EPA regulations, and EPA

policy. The 15% RPP SIP submittal will

achieve enough reductions to meet the

15 percent rate of progress requirements

of section 182(b)(1) of the CAAA. In

addition, the contingency plans in the

SIP submittal will achieve enough

emission reductions, if implemented, to

meet the three percent reduction

requirement under 172(c)(9) of the

CAAA. EPA is proposing conditional

approval of this plan revision under

section 110(k)(3) and Part D.

EPA believes that approval of the

control measures in the 15% RPP will

strengthen the Delaware SIP. Therefore,

EPA is proposing conditional approval

of the control measures in the 15% Rate

of Progress and Contingency Plans.

All of the control measures which

produce creditable reductions in VOCs

have been approved by EPA with one

exception. Delaware has amended

provision of its vehicle inspection and

maintenance (I/M) program for pressure

testing and anti-tampering. EPA is,

today, via a separate rulemaking, also

proposing conditional approval of

Delaware’s amendments to its enhanced

I/M SIP. As credits from that program

are part of the 15% plan, EPA must

conditionally propose approval of the

15% plan SIP as well.

EPA is proposing to conditionally

approve Delaware’s enhanced I/M SIP if

Delaware commits within 30 days of

EPA’s proposal to correct the

deficiencies identified in our proposed

rulemaking notice on the I/M SIP by a

date certain within 1 year of the final

conditional ruling. If Delaware corrects

the deficiencies by that date, and

submits a new enhanced I/M SIP

revision, EPA will conduct rulemaking

to fully approve the revision. Each of

the conditions must be fulfilled by

Delaware and submitted to EPA as an

amendment to Delaware’s I/M SIP

revision. If such commitment is not

made within 30 days, EPA is proposing

in the alternative to disapprove the I/M

SIP revision. If Delaware does make a

timely commitment, but the conditions

are not met by the specified date within

1 year, EPA is proposing that the

rulemaking will convert to a final

disapproval. EPA would notify

Delaware by letter that the conditions

have not been met and that the

conditional approval of the enhanced

I/M SIP has converted to a disapproval.

Once Delaware satisfies the condition of

its I/M rulemaking and receives full

approval, EPA will fully approve the

15% plan SIP. Conversely, if the I/M

rulemaking converts to a final

disapproval, EPA’s conditional approval

of the 15% plan SIP would also convert

to a disapproval.

Nothing in this proposed rule 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 any SIP

shall be considered separately in light of

specific technical, economic, and

environmental factors and in relation to

relevant statutory and regulatory

requirements.

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.

Conditional approvals of SIP

submittals under section 110 and

subchapter I, part D of the CAAA 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, EPA

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

CAAA, preparation of a regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The

CAAA forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v US EPA, 427 US

246, 256–66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

If the conditional approval is

converted to a disapproval under

section 110(k), based on the State’s

failure to meet the commitment, it will

not affect any existing state

requirements applicable to small

entities. Federal disapproval of the state

submittal does not affect its stateenforceability. 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.
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 24 / Wednesday, February 5, 1997 / Proposed Rules 5361

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under Sections 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 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 approval

action proposed/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,

Delaware 15% Rate of Progress Plan,

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 private sector, result

from this action.

The Administrator’s decision to

approve or disapprove the Delaware

15% Rate of Progress Plan SIP revision

will be based on whether it meets the

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)–(K)

and part D of the CAAA, and EPA

regulation in 40 CFR part 51.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental

regulations, Nitrogen oxide, Reporting

and recordkeeping, Ozone, Volatile

organic compounds.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: January 24, 1997.

W. Michael McCabe,

Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 97–2848 Filed 2–4–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[DE–28–1007; FRL–5684–3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans; State of

Delaware; Enhanced Motor Vehicle

Inspection and Maintenance Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed conditional approval.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing conditional

approval of a State Implementation Plan

(SIP) revision submitted by the State of

Delaware. This revision establishes and

requires the implementation of a low

enhanced motor vehicle inspection and

maintenance (I/M) program in the

counties of Kent and New Castle. The

intended effect of this action is to

propose conditional approval of the

Delaware enhanced motor vehicle I/M

program. EPA is proposing conditional

approval because Delaware’s SIP

revision is deficient in certain aspects

with respect to the requirements of the

Clean Air Act and EPA’s I/M program

regulations. EPA regards the following

deficiencies of the Delaware program as

those most significantly affecting the

program’s operation: Lack of legal

authority, finalized program regulations,

certain testing and quality control

procedures, waiver requirements;

program evaluation requirements,

sufficient quality control procedures

and requirements; complete equipment

specifications; specific enforcement

requirements; certain public

information and consumer enforcement

requirements; certain public

information and consumer protection

requirements; sufficient enforcement

authority; sufficient test documentation

through test memoranda and procedural

memoranda. EPA is currently working

with the State on correcting these

deficiencies. Delaware conducted a

public hearing on December 18, 1996 on

additional revisions to the Delaware

I/M SIP which are intended to remedy

some of the deficiencies noted in this

notice. However, today’s rulemaking

applies to Delaware’s I/M SIP

submissions of February 24, 1995 and

November 30, 1995 which are currently

pending before EPA. EPA expects that

Delaware will work, promptly to

remedy these items, through future

submissions necessary to meet the I/M

rule requirements. In this notice, EPA

cites its concerns with the Delaware

I/M program. While some of these

concerns are less significant to the

program’s immediate success, they still

need to be corrected so as to achieve the

program’s full air quality protection

potential. This action is taken under

section 110 of the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before March 7, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

David L. Arnold, Chief, Ozone/CO &

Mobile Sources Section, Mailcode

3AT21, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut

Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19107. Copies of the documents relevant

to this action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the Air, Radiation, and Toxics

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut

Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19107 and the Delaware Department of

Natural Resources and Environmental

Control, Air Quality Management

Section, Division of Air and Waste

Management, 89 Kings Highway, PO

Box 1401, Dover, Delaware, 19903.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul

T. Wentworth, P.E. at 215566–2183 at

the EPA Region III address above, or via

e-mail at

Wentworth.Paul@epamail.epa.gov.

While information may be requested via

e-mail, comments must be submitted in

writing to the Region III office.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

Motor vehicles are significant

contributors of volatile organic

compounds (VOC), carbon monoxide

(CO) and nitrogen oxide (NOX)

emissions. An important control

measure to reduce these emissions is the

implementation of a motor vehicle I/M

program. Despite being subject to the

most rigorous vehicle pollution control

program in the world, cars and trucks

still create toxic contaminants, about

half of the ozone air pollution and

nearly all of the carbon monoxide air

pollution in United States cities. Of all

highway vehicles, passenger cars and

light-duty trucks emit most of the

vehicle-related carbon monoxide and

ozone-forming hydrocarbons. They also

emit substantial amounts of nitrogen

oxides and air toxics. Although the U.S.

has made progress in reducing

emissions of these pollutants, total fleet

emissions remain high. This is because

the number of vehicle miles traveled on

U.S. roads has doubled in the last 20

years to 2 trillion miles per year,

offsetting much of the technological

progress in vehicle emission control

over the same two decades. Projections

indicate that the steady growth in

vehicle travel will continue. Ongoing

efforts to reduce emissions from

individual vehicles will be necessary to

achieve our air quality goals.

Today’s cars are absolutely dependent

on properly functioning emission

controls to keep pollution levels low.

Minor malfunctions in the emission

control system can increase emissions

significantly, and the average car on the

road emits three to four times the new

car standard. Major malfunctions in the

emission control system can cause

emissions to skyrocket. As a result, 10