Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 242 / Wednesday, December 17, 1997 / Proposed Rules 66043

1Among other things, the pre-amendment

guidance consists of those portions of the proposed

post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide policy that

concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987);

‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints,

Deficiencies, and Deviations, Clarification to

appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal Register

Continued

October 17, 1997. The extension to the

public comment period is being granted

by EPA in response to the State’s

request to have additional time to assess

the proposal, analyze the alternative

options available and submit comments

reflecting this analysis. A similar

request was also made by the National

Association of Fleet Administrators. For

additional information please refer to

the proposed disapproval document

published in the Federal Register on

October 17, 1997 (62 FR 53997).

DATES: Comments on the proposed

disapproval must be received in writing

by January 16, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to Mr. Thomas H. Diggs,

Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD–L), at

the EPA Regional Office listed below.

Copies of the documents about this

action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations. Persons

interested in examining these

documents should make an

appointment with the appropriate office

at least 24 hours before the visiting day:

Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street,

S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite

1200, Dallas, Texas 75202.

Texas Natural Resource Conservation

Commission, 12100 Park 35 Circle,

Austin, Texas 78711–3087.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Paul Scoggins, Air Planning Section

(6PD–L), Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,

Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas, 75202,

telephone (214) 665–7354.

Dated: December 4, 1997.

W.B. Hathaway,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–32785 Filed 12–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AZ 017–0004; FRL–5936–4]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Arizona State

Implementation Plan Revision,

Maricopa County

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve

revisions to the Arizona State

Implementation Plan (SIP) that concern

the control of volatile organic

compound (VOC) emissions from

solvent cleaning, petroleum solvent dry

cleaning, rubber sports ball

manufacturing, graphic arts,

semiconductor manufacturing, vegetable

oil extraction processes, wood furniture

and fixture coating, wood millwork

coating, and loading of organic liquids.

The intended effect of proposing

approval of these rules is to regulate

emissions of VOCs in accordance with

the requirements of the Clean Air Act,

as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act).

EPA’s final action on these proposed

rules will incorporate them into the

federally approved SIP. EPA has

evaluated each of these rules and is

proposing to approve them under

provisions of the CAA regarding EPA

action on SIP submittals, SIPs for

national primary and secondary ambient

air quality standards and plan

requirements for nonattainment areas.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before January 16, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed

to: Rulemaking Office, [AIR–4], Air

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.

Copies of the rule revisions and EPA’s

evaluation report of each rule are

available for public inspection at EPA’s

Region 9 office during normal business

hours. Copies of the submitted rule

revisions are also available for

inspection at the following locations:

Arizona Department of Environmental

Quality, 3003 North Central Avenue,

Phoenix, AZ 85012

Maricopa County Environmental Services

Department, 2406 S. 24th Street, Suite E–

214, Phoenix, AZ 85034

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andrew Steckel, Chief, Rulemaking

Office (AIR–4), Air Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105–3901, (415) 744–

1185.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

The rules being proposed for approval

into the Arizona SIP include: Maricopa

County Environmental Services

Department, Technical Services

Division (MCESD) Rules 331—Solvent

Cleaning, 333—Petroleum Solvent Dry

Cleaning, 334—Rubber Sports Ball

Manufacturing, 337—Graphic Arts,

338—Semiconductor Manufacturing,

339—Vegetable Oil Extraction

Processes, 342—Coating Wood

Furniture and Fixture, 346—Coating

Wood Millwork, and 351—Loading of

Organic Liquids. These rules were

submitted by the Arizona Department of

Environmental Quality (ADEQ) to EPA

on February 4, 1993 (Rule 339), August

31, 1995 (Rule 351), February 26, 1997

(Rules 331, 333, 334, 336, and 338) and

March 4, 1997 (Rules 342, 337, and 346)

respectively.

II. Background

On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated

a list of ozone nonattainment areas

under the provisions of the Clean Air

Act, as amended in 1977 (1977 CAA or

pre-amended Act), which included

Maricopa County (43 FR 8964; 40 CFR

81.305). On March 19, 1979, EPA

changed the name and modified the

geographic boundaries of the ozone

nonattainment area to the Maricopa

Association of Governments (MAG)

Urban Planning Area (44 FR 16391, 40

CFR 81.303). On February 24, 1984, EPA

notified the Governor of Arizona,

pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(H) of the

pre-amended Act, that MAG’s portion of

the Arizona SIP was inadequate to attain

and maintain the ozone standard and

requested that deficiencies in the

existing SIP be corrected (EPA’s SIPCall, 49 FR 18827, May 3, 1984). On

May 26, 1988, EPA again notified the

Governor of Arizona that MAG’s portion

of the SIP was inadequate to attain and

maintain the ozone standard and

requested that deficiencies relating to

VOC controls and the application of

reasonably available control technology

(RACT) in the existing SIP be corrected

(EPA’s second SIP-Call, 53 FR 34500,

September 7, 1988). On November 15,

1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of

1990 were enacted. Public Law 101–

549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42

U.S.C. 7401–7671q. In amended section

182(a)(2)(A) of the CAA, Congress

statutorily adopted the requirement that

nonattainment areas fix their deficient

reasonably available control technology

(RACT) rules for ozone and established

a deadline of May 15, 1991 for states to

submit corrections of those deficiencies.

Section 182(a)(2)(A) applies to areas

designated as nonattainment prior to

enactment of the amendments and

classified as marginal or above as of the

date of enactment. It requires such areas

to adopt and correct RACT rules

pursuant to pre-amended section 172(b)

as interpreted in pre-amendment

guidance.1 EPA’s SIP-Call used that
66044 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 242 / Wednesday, December 17, 1997 / Proposed Rules

document’’ (Blue Book) (notice of availability was

published in the Federal Register on May 25, 1988);

and the existing control technique guidelines

(CTGs).

2The MAG Urban Planning Area retained its

designation of nonattainment and was classified by

operation of law pursuant to sections 107(d) and

181(a) upon the date of enactment of the CAA

amendments. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991).

On November 6, 1997 EPA published a final rule

reclassifying the MAG Urban Planning Area from

moderate to serious (FR 62 60001). This

reclassification became effective on December 8,

1997.

3EPA adopted the completeness criteria on

February 16, 1990 (55 FR 5830) and, pursuant to

section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA, revised the criteria

on August 26, 1991 (56 FR 42216).

guidance to indicate the necessary

corrections for specific nonattainment

areas. The MAG Urban Planning Area is

classified as serious; 2 therefore, this

area was subject to the RACT fix-up

requirement and the May 15, 1991

deadline.

The State of Arizona submitted

several RACT rules for incorporation

into its SIP on February 4, 1993, August

31, 1995, February 26, 1997 and March

4, 1997, including the rules being acted

on in this document. This document

addresses EPA’s proposed action for

MCESD Rules 331—Solvent Cleaning,

333—Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning,

334—Rubber Sports Ball Manufacturing,

337—Graphic Arts, 338—

Semiconductor Manufacturing, 339

Vegetable Oil Extraction Processes,

342—Coating Wood Furniture and

Fixtures, 346—Coating Wood Millwork

, and 351—Loading of Organic Liquids.

MCESD adopted Rules 331, 333, 334

and 338 on June 19, 1996; Rule 339 on

November 16, 1992; Rules 337, 342 and

346 on November 20, 1996 and Rule 351

on February 15, 1995. These submitted

rules were found to be complete on

March 10, 1993 (Rule 339), October 25,

1995 (Rule 351) and June 5, 1997 (Rules

331, 333, 334, 337, 338, 342 and 346,

pursuant to EPA’s completeness criteria

that are set forth in 40 CFR part 51,

appendix V 3 and are being proposed for

approval into the SIP.

Rule 331 limits the emissions of

volatile organic compounds (VOCs)

from surface cleaning and degreasing

operations, Rule 333 controls emissions

of VOCs from petroleum solvent dry

cleaning operations, Rule 334 limits

emission of VOCs from natural and

synthetic rubber adhesives used in the

manufacture of non-inflatable rubber

balls, Rule 337 limits emissions of VOCs

from screen, gravure, letterpress,

flexographic and lithographic printing

processes, including related coating and

laminating processes, Rule 338 limits

emissions of VOCs from semiconductor

manufacturing, Rule 339 limits the

emissions of VOCs from the extraction

of vegetable oil using solvents, Rule 342

controls the emissions of VOC’s

emanating from applying finishing

materials to furniture or fixtures made

of wood or wood derived materials,

Rule 346 limits VOC emissions from the

surface preparation and coating of wood

millwork, such as shutters, doors,

windows and their associated

woodwork, and Rule 351 controls

emissions of VOCs from organic liquid

loading operations at bulk plants and

bulk terminals. VOCs contribute to the

production of ground-level ozone and

smog. The rules were adopted as part of

MCESD’s efforts to achieve the National

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)

for ozone and in response to EPA’s SIPCall and the section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA

requirement. The following is EPA’s

evaluation and proposed action for

these rules.

III. EPA Evaluation and Proposed

Action

In determining the approvability of a

VOC rule, EPA must evaluate the rule

for consistency with the requirements of

the CAA and EPA regulations, as found

in section 110 and part D of the CAA

and 40 CFR part 51 (Requirements for

Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of

Implementation Plans). The EPA

interpretation of these requirements,

which forms the basis for today’s action,

appears in the various EPA policy

guidance documents listed in footnote

1. Among those provisions is the

requirement that a VOC rule must, at a

minimum, provide for the

implementation of RACT for stationary

sources of VOC emissions. This

requirement was carried forth from the

pre-amended Act.

For the purpose of assisting state and

local agencies in developing RACT

rules, EPA prepared a series of Control

Technique Guideline (CTG) documents.

The CTGs are based on the underlying

requirements of the Act and specify the

presumptive norms for what is RACT

for specific source categories. Under the

CAA amendments, Congress ratified

EPA’s use of these documents, as well

as other Agency policy, for requiring

States to ‘‘fix-up’’ their RACT rules. See

section 182(a)(2)(A). The CTG

applicable to Rule 331 is entitled,

‘‘Control of Volatile Organic Emissions

From Solvent Metal Cleaning,’’ EPA–

450/2–77–022; the CTG applicable to

Rule 333 is entitled, ‘‘Control of Volatile

Organic Compound Emissions from

Large Petroleum Dry Cleaners,’’ EPA–

450/3–82–009; the CTG applicable to

Rule 337 is entitled, ‘‘Control of Volatile

Organic Emissions from Existing

Stationary Sources—Volume VIII:

Graphic Arts—Rotogravure and

Flexography,’’ EPA–450/2–78–033; the

CTG applicable to Rule 342 is entitled,

‘‘Control of Volatile Organic Compound

Emissions from Wood Furniture

Manufacturing Operations’’ EPA–453/

R–96–007; and the CTGs applicable to

Rule 351 are entitled, ‘‘Control of

Volatile Organic Emissions from Bulk

Gasoline Plants,’’ EPA–450/2–77–035

and ‘‘Control of Hydrocarbons from

Tank Truck Gasoline Loading

Terminals,’’ EPA–450/2–77–026. Rules

334, 338, 339 and 346 control emissions

from source categories for which EPA

has not issued CTGs. Accordingly these

rules were evaluated for consistency

with the general RACT requirements of

the Clean Air Act (CAA section 110 and

part D). Further interpretations of EPA

policy are found in the Blue Book,

referred to in footnote 1. In general,

these guidance documents have been set

forth to ensure that VOC rules are fully

enforceable and strengthen or maintain

the SIP.

On February 1, 1996, EPA approved

into the SIP a version of MCESD’s Rule

331—Solvent Cleaning that had been

adopted by MCESD on June 22, 1992.

MCESD’s submitted Rule 331—Solvent

Cleaning includes the following changes

from the current SIP:

• Increased the record retention time

from 3 years to 5 years,

• Added the requirement to maintain

a current list of solvents stating the VOC

content in lbs/gal or g/l,

• Added the requirement to keep

monthly records of make-up solvents

added and other VOC containing

materials used.

On February 1, 1996, EPA approved

into the SIP a version of Rule 333—

Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning that

had been adopted by MCESD on June

22, 1992. MCESD’s submitted Rule

333—Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning

includes the following significant

changes from the current SIP:

• Increased the record retention

period from 3 years to 5 years,

• Requires the maintenance of a

current list of solvents and any other

VOC containing materials, including the

VOC content of each in lbs/gal or g/l.

• Requires monthly records of the

weight of clothing cleaned, the amount

of solvent used, and the weight and type

of any material disposed that contains

any amount of cleaning solvents. The

name of the company receiving such

material must also be recorded.

On February 12, 1996, EPA approved

into the SIP a version of Rule 334—

Rubber Sports Ball Manufacturing, that

had been adopted by MCESD on

September 20, 1994. MCESD’s

submitted Rule 334—Rubber Sports Ball
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 242 / Wednesday, December 17, 1997 / Proposed Rules 66045

Manufacturing includes the following

significant changes from the current SIP:

• Replaced daily cutoff of 300 lbs

VOC with monthly cutoff of 8333 lbs,

• Increased the record retention

period from 3 years to 5 years,

• Decreased frequency from daily to

monthly for usage records of adhesives,

solvents, and other VOC containing

materials.

On September 5, 1995, EPA approved

into the SIP a version of Rule 337—

Graphic Arts that had been adopted by

MCESD on April 6, 1992. MCESD’s

submitted Rule 337—Graphic Arts

includes the following significant

changes from the current SIP:

• Added a definition for capture

efficiency,

• Establishes time phased lowering of

VOC limits for fountain solutions and

establishes VOC limits for fountain

solutions refrigerated below 60°F,

• Establishes time phased lowering of

vapor pressure of cleaning solutions,

• Allows monthly recordkeeping on

presses which do not use alcohol in

their fountain solution, provided they

emit less than 25 tons of VOC per year,

• Increases the record retention

period from 3 years to 5 years.

There is currently no version of

MCESD’s Rule 338—Semiconductor

Manufacturing in the SIP. The

submitted rule includes the following

provisions:

• Requires facilities that emit more

than 25 tons per year (tpy) of VOC from

negative photoresist operations to vent

the emissions to a control system with

an overall control efficiency of at least

80%,

• Requires facilities that emit more

than 50 tpy of VOC from positive

photoresist operations to vent the

emissions to a control system with an

overall control efficiency of at least

80%,

• Provides an exemption for positive

photoresist operations that use liquids

that use less than 10% VOC by weight

and never exceed a temperature of

104°F,

• Requires an operation and

maintenance plan specifying key system

operating parameters for the emission

control system,

• Requires the use of closed

containers for storing VOC containing

material,

• Requires monthly usage records of

all VOC containing material,

• Requires equipment operating

records.

There is currently no version of

MCESD’s Rule 339—Vegetable Oil

Extraction Processes in the SIP. The

submitted rule includes the following

provisions:

• Establishes a monthly VOC limit of

2.5 pounds per ton of processed seeds

for any consecutive 30 day period of

operation, and a weekly VOC limit of

3.0 pounds of VOC per ton of processed

seeds for any 7 consecutive days of

operation,

• Requires that VOC emissions from

any extractor or desolventizer-toaster be

controlled by a condenser and mineraloil scrubber with an overall control

efficiency of at least 90% by weight,

• Requires that the desolventizertoaster discharge conveyor is vented to

a mineral oil scrubber with an overall

control efficiency of 90% by weight,

• Requires an operation and

maintenance plan specifying key system

operating parameters for the emission

control system,

• Requires monthly inspection of

equipment in solvent service for gaseous

and liquid leaks and the keeping of a

permanent leak detection and repair

notebook,

• Requires daily recordkeeping.

There is currently no version of

MCESD’s Rule 342—Coating Wood

Furniture and Fixture in the SIP. The

submitted rule includes the following

provisions:

• A purpose and applicability

definition,

• Definition of terms,

• VOC standards consistent with the

CTG expressed in grams per liter as well

as pounds per pound of solids,

• A schedule of compliance for

sources emitting in excess of 50 tpy,

• A limitation of conventional airatomized spray and other spray

methods,

• Process equipment operation and

maintenance requirements,

• Procedures for the handling and

disposing of VOC containing material,

• Labeling requirement of VOC

containing storage containers,

• Monitoring and record keeping

requirements,

• Compliance test methods,

• An appendix describing the

averaging provisions.

There is currently no version of

MCESD’s Rule 346—Coating Wood

Millwork in the SIP. The submitted rule

includes the following provisions:

• A purpose and applicability

definition,

• Definition of terms,

• VOC limits of coatings used on

wood millwork,

• VOC trade-off options;

(1) lower VOC topcoat and unlimited

VOC sealer

(2) lower VOC sealer and higher VOC

topcoat

(3) single application finish,

• Allows alternative control by means

of an emission control system,

• Allows an exemption for sources

emitting less than 2 tons per year of

VOC,

• A limitation of conventional airatomized spray and other spray

methods,

• Process equipment operation and

maintenance requirements,

• Procedures for the handling and

disposing of VOC containing material,

• Labeling requirement of VOC

containing storage containers,

• Monitoring and record keeping

requirements,

• Compliance test methods.

On April 6, 1992 EPA, approved into

the SIP a version of MCESD’s Rule

351—Loading of Organic Liquids that

had been adopted by MCESD on April

6, 1992. MCESD’s submitted Rule 351—

Loading of Organic Liquids includes the

following significant changes from the

current SIP:

• Section 401 discussing equipment

leak provisions has been reformatted,

and a requirement to maintain a logbook

for monthly leak inspections has been

added,

• Section 503 now requires that all

records be retained for 3 years.

EPA has evaluated the submitted

rules and has determined that they are

consistent with the CAA, EPA

regulations, and EPA policy. Therefore,

MCESD Rules 331—Solvent Cleaning

Operations, 333—Petroleum Solvent

Dry Cleaning, 334—Rubber Sports Ball

Manufacturing, 337—Graphic Arts,

338—Semiconductor Manufacturing,

339 Vegetable Oil Extraction Processes,

342—Wood Furniture and Fixture

Coating, 346—Wood Millwork Coating,

and 351—Loading of Organic Liquids

are being proposed for approval under

section 110(k)(3) of the CAA as meeting

the requirements of section 110(a) and

Part D.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any state

implementation plan. Each request for

revision to the state implementation

plan shall be 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,
66046 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 242 / Wednesday, December 17, 1997 / Proposed Rules

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 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 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 Federal requirements.

Accordingly, no additional costs to

State, local, or tribal governments, or to

the private sector, result from this

action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Volatile organic

compound.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: December 9, 1997.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator, Region IX.

[FR Doc. 97–32929 Filed 12–16–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[FRL–5933–7]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Colorado;

Correction

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing corrections

to the State Implementation Plan (SIP)

for the State of Colorado. First, EPA is

proposing corrections to its January 21,

1997 rulemaking in which EPA

approved several Colorado new source

review (NSR) SIP revisions. Specifically,

pursuant to a December 17, 1996 request

from the State of Colorado, EPA is

proposing to remove from the approved

SIP two sections of Colorado’s

prevention of significant deterioration

(PSD) rules in Regulation No. 3. EPA is

also proposing to disapprove a

provision in the State’s definition of

‘‘federally enforceable’’ in Regulation

No. 3 that EPA inadvertently failed to

disapprove in its January 21, 1997

rulemaking. Specifically, the provision

in that definition states that provisions

which are not required by the Federal

Clean Air Act (Act) shall not be

submitted as part of the SIP and shall

not be federally enforceable. This

provision is being proposed for

disapproval because the Act provides

that any provision approved by EPA as

part of the SIP is federally enforceable

unless and until the State requests, and

EPA approves, a SIP revision removing

such provision.

Second, EPA is proposing to correct

an October 5, 1979 rulemaking in which

EPA incorrectly listed Colorado House

Bill 1109 as being approved as part of

the Colorado SIP.

Last, EPA is proposing to correct a

September 23, 1980 rulemaking, in

which EPA mistakenly replaced a

Colorado SIP approval in 40 CFR 52.320

with a Montana SIP approval.

DATES: Comments must be received in

writing on or before January 16, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

action should be addressed to Vicki

Stamper, 8P2-A, Environmental

Protection Agency, Region VIII, 999

18th Street, suite 500, Denver, Colorado

80202–2466. Copies of the documents

relative to this action are available for

inspection during normal business

hours at the following location: Air

Program, Environmental Protection

Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street,

suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202–

2466.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Vicki Stamper, EPA Region VIII,(303)

312–6445.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Corrections to January 21, 1997

Rulemaking

On January 21, 1997, EPA

promulgated approval of five Colorado

SIP revisions submitted on November

12, 1993, August 25, 1994, September

29, 1994, November 17, 1994, and

January 29, 1996. (See 62 FR 2910–

2914.) All of these SIP submittals

contained revisions to the State’s NSR

and PSD provisions in Parts A and B of

Colorado Regulation No. 3.

A. Correction to Exclude Sections V.B.

and VII.A.5. of Part B of Colorado

Regulation No. 3 From the SIP

The November 12, 1993 SIP submittal

contained revisions to Regulation No. 3

that were adopted by the Colorado Air

Quality Control Commission (AQCC) at

a July 15, 1993 public hearing. The

primary purpose of the State’s July 1993

rulemaking was to adopt an operating

permit program to address the

requirements of title V of the Clean Air

Act Amendments of 1990 and 40 CFR

part 70. Concurrent with the adoption of

its operating permit program, the State

made revisions to its construction

permit regulations, which are also in

Regulation No. 3, to make the two

programs work together and to allow for

the implementation of certain title V

operating permit provisions. At the

same time, the State also completely

restructured and renumbered the

provisions in Regulation No. 3. While

the majority of the provisions in the