Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 37 / Tuesday, February 25, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 8389

40 CFR Part 81

[PA034–4054a; FRL–5688–7]

Pennsylvania Attainment Date

Extension for the Pittsburgh-Beaver

Valley Ozone Nonattainment Area; PA

and VA Determination of Valid Air

Quality Data

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is extending the

attainment date for the PittsburghBeaver Valley moderate ozone

nonattainment area in Pennsylvania

from November 15, 1996 to November

15, 1997. This extension is based in part

on monitored air quality readings for the

national ambient air quality standard

(NAAQS) for ozone during 1996.

Accordingly, EPA is updating the table

in 40 CFR part 81 concerning attainment

dates in the Commonwealth of

Pennsylvania. EPA is also announcing

its determination that air quality data

collected during 1996 indicates

attainment of the ozone NAAQS in the

Reading, Pennsylvania and the

Richmond, Virginia moderate ozone

nonattainment areas by the November

15, 1996 deadline for moderate areas.

DATES: This extension becomes effective

April 11, 1997 unless within March 27,

1997 adverse or critical comments are

received. If the effective date is delayed,

timely notice will be published in the

Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

Marcia L. Spink, Associate Director, Air

Programs, Mailcode 3AT00, 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; Pennsylvania Department of

Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air

Quality, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market

Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105;

and the Virginia Department of

Environmental Quality, 629 East Main

Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marcia L. Spink at (215) 566–2104, or by

e-mail at

spink.marcia@epamail.epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Attainment Date Extension

for the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area

On November 25, 1996, the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

requested a one-year attainment date

extension for the Pittsburgh-Beaver

Valley moderate ozone nonattainment

area. This area, which consists of

Allegheny, Armstrong, Beaver, Butler,

Fayette, Washington, and Westmoreland

Counties, is currently designated a

moderate ozone nonattainment area.

The statutory ozone attainment date, as

prescribed by section 181(a) of the Clean

Air Act as amended in 1990 (‘‘the Act’’),

was November 15, 1996.

CAA Requirements and EPA Actions

Concerning Designation and

Classification

Section 107(d)(4) of the Act required

the States and EPA to designate areas as

attainment, nonattainment, or

unclassifiable for ozone as well as other

pollutants for which national ambient

air quality standards (NAAQS) have

been set. Section 181(a)(1) required that

ozone nonattainment areas be classified

as marginal, moderate, serious, severe,

or extreme, depending on their air

quality.

In a series of Federal Register

documents, EPA completed this process

by designating and classifying all areas

of the country for ozone. See, e.g., 56 FR

58694 (Nov. 6, 1991); 57 FR 56762 (Nov.

30, 1992); 59 FR 18967 (April 21, 1994).

Areas designated nonattainment for

ozone are required to meet attainment

dates specified under the Act. The

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, Pennsylvania

ozone nonattainment area was

designated nonattainment and classified

moderate for ozone pursuant to 56 FR

58694 (Nov. 6, 1991). By this

classification, its attainment date

became November 15, 1996. A

discussion of the attainment dates is

found in 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992)

(the General Preamble).

CAA Requirements and EPA Actions

Concerning Meeting the Attainment

Date

Section 181(b)(2)(A) requires the

Administrator, within six months of the

attainment date, to determine whether

ozone nonattainment areas attained the

NAAQS. For ozone, EPA determines

attainment status on the basis of the

expected number of exceedances of the

NAAQS over the three-year period up

to, and including, the attainment date.

See General Preamble, 57 FR 13506. In

the case of ozone moderate

nonattainment areas, the three-year

period is 1994–1996. CAA section

181(b)(2)(A) further states that, for areas

classified as marginal, moderate, or

serious, if the Administrator determines

that the area did not attain the standard

by its attainment date, the area must be

reclassified upwards.

However, CAA section 181(a)(5)

provides an exemption from these bump

up requirements. Under this exemption,

EPA may grant up to two one-year

extensions of the attainment date under

specified conditions:

Upon application by any State, the

Administrator may extend for 1 additional

year (hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Extension

Year’’) the date specified in table 1 of

paragraph (1) of this subsection if—

(A) the State has complied with all

requirements and commitments pertaining to

the area in the applicable implementation

plan, and

(B) no more than 1 exceedance of the

national ambient air quality standard level

for ozone has occurred in the area in the year

preceding the Extension Year.

No more than 2 one-year extensions may

be issued under this paragraph for a single

nonattainment area.

EPA interprets this provision to

authorize the granting of a one-year

extension under the following minimum

conditions: (1) The State requests a oneyear extension, (2) all requirements and

commitments in the EPA-approved SIP

for the area have been complied with,

and (3) the area has no more than one

measured exceedance of the NAAQS

during the year that includes the

attainment date (or the subsequent year,

if a second one-year extension is

requested).

A review of the actual ambient air

quality ozone data from the EPA

Aerometric Information Retrieval

System (AIRS), shows that six air

quality monitors located in the

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley ozone

nonattainment area recorded

exceedances of the NAAQS for ozone

during the three year period from 1994

to 1996. At three of these monitors, the

number of expected exceedances was

greater than 1.0 per year, and therefore

constituted a violation of the ozone

NAAQS.

However, in its November 25, 1996

request, the Commonwealth of

Pennsylvania certified that the

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley area monitored

no exceedances during 1996. The 1996

monitoring data has been quality

controlled and quality assured. EPA has

determined that the requirements for a

one-year extension of the attainment

date have been fulfilled as follows:

(1) Pennsylvania has formally submitted

the attainment date extension request.

(2) Pennsylvania is currently implementing

the EPA-approved SIP.
8390 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 37 / Tuesday, February 25, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

(3) Pennsylvania has certified that the area

has monitored no exceedances during 1996.

Therefore, EPA approves

Pennsylvania’s attainment date

extension request for the PittsburghBeaver Valley ozone nonattainment

area. As a result, the chart in 40 CFR

81.339 entitled ‘‘Pennsylvania—Ozone’’

is being modified to reflect EPA’s

approval of Pennsylvania’s attainment

date extension request.

Determination of Validated Air Quality

Data for the Reading, PA and

Richmond, VA Moderate Ozone

Nonattainment Areas

EPA has determined that both

Pennsylvania and Virginia have

validated as accurate the 1994, 1995 and

1996 ozone air quality data indicating

attainment of the ozone standard in the

Reading, PA and Richmond, VA

moderate ozone nonattainment areas.

Therefore, EPA has determined that the

Reading, Pennsylvania and Richmond,

Virginia areas have met the November

15, 1996 attainment date for moderate

areas specified in the Act. Although

EPA has determined that the Reading,

Pennsylvania and Richmond, Virginia

areas have air quality data indicating

that the NAAQS for ozone has been

attained, today’s action does not

formally redesignate these areas to

attainment. Any moderate area which

has attained the ozone NAAQS will

remain designated nonattainment and

classified moderate until a formal

redesignation request and maintenance

plan is submitted and EPA fully

approves it. Complying with specific

ambient air quality standards is only the

first step toward being officially

redesignated to ‘‘attainment’’.

‘‘Attainment’’ is a legal term defined

under the Act which determines

whether an area is subject to certain

emission control requirements

proscribed by the Act. There are

redesignation requests currently

pending before EPA for both of these

areas. EPA shall act upon those requests

submitted by the Commonwealths of

Pennsylvania and Virginia for their

respective areas in separate rulemaking

documents.

EPA Action

EPA is approving the attainment date

extension for the Pittsburgh-Beaver

Valley moderate ozone nonattainment

area from November 15, 1996 to

November 15, 1997 without prior

proposal because the Agency views this

as a noncontroversial amendment and

anticipates no adverse comments.

However, in a separate document in this

Federal Register publication, EPA is

proposing to approve this part 81 action

should adverse or critical comments be

filed. This action will be effective April

11, 1997 unless, by March 27, 1997

adverse or critical comments are

received.

If EPA receives such comments, this

action will be withdrawn before the

effective date by publishing a

subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public

comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a

second comment period on this action.

Any parties interested in commenting

on this action should do so at this time.

If no such comments are received, the

public is advised that this action will be

effective on April 11, 1997.

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.

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.

Extension of an area’s attainment date

under the CAA does not impose any

new requirements on small entities.

Extension of an attainment date is an

action that affects a geographical area

and does not impose any regulatory

requirements on sources. EPA certifies

that the approval of the attainment date

extension will not affect a substantial

number of small entities.

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 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

imposes no new requirements.

Accordingly, no additional costs to

State, local, or tribal governments, or to

the private sector, result from this

action.

D. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

Under section 801(a)(1)(A) as added

by the Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA

submitted a report containing this rule

and other required information to the

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

Representatives and the Comptroller

General of the General Accounting

Office prior to publication of the rule in

today’s Federal Register. This rule is

not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by section

804(2).

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

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

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit by April 28, 1997.

Filing a petition for reconsideration by

the Administrator of this final rule does

not affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed, and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action to grant

Pennsylvania an extension to attain the

ozone NAAQS in the Pittsburgh/Beaver
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 37 / Tuesday, February 25, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 8391

Valley ozone nonattainment area as

defined in 40 CFR 81.339 may not be

challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

Dated: February 5, 1997.

W. Michael McCabe,

Regional Administrator, Region III.

Part 81 of chapter I, title 40 of the

Code of Federal Regulations is amended

as follows:

PART 81—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 81

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

2. In § 81.339, the ‘‘Pennsylvania—

Ozone’’ table is amended by revising the

entry for ‘‘Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley

Area’’ to read as follows:

§ 81.339 Pennsylvania.

* * * * *

PENNSYLVANIA—OZONE

Designated area

Designation Classification

Date 1 Type Date 1 Type

* * * * * * *

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley Area:

Allegheny County ................................................................................. ........................ Nonattainment ........................ Moderate.2

Armstrong County ................................................................................ ........................ Nonattainment ........................ Moderate.2

Beaver County ..................................................................................... ........................ Nonattainment ........................ Moderate.2

Butler County ....................................................................................... ........................ Nonattainment ........................ Moderate.2

Fayette County ..................................................................................... ........................ Nonattainment ........................ Moderate.2

Washington County .............................................................................. ........................ Nonattainment ........................ Moderate.2

Westmoreland County ......................................................................... ........................ Nonattainment ........................ Moderate.2

* * * * * * *

1This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.

2Attainment date extended to 11/15/97.

[FR Doc. 97–4119 Filed 2–24–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

44 CFR Part 61

RIN 3067–AC54

National Flood Insurance Program;

Standard Flood Insurance Policy

AGENCY: Federal Insurance

Administration (FEMA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This rule amends the National

Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)

regulations to add coverage under the

Standard Flood Insurance Policy to pay

for the increased cost to rebuild or

otherwise alter flood-damaged

structures to conform with State or local

floodplain management ordinances or

laws consistent with the requirements

and guidance of the NFIP.

EFFECTIVE DATE: June 1, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Charles M. Plaxico, Jr., Federal

Insurance Administration, 500 C Street

SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646–

3422.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

September 23, 1996, FEMA published in

the Federal Register, 61 FR 49717, a

proposed rule to amend the National

Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)

regulations by adding coverage under

the Standard Flood Insurance Policy

(SFIP) for the increased cost, up to a

maximum liability of $15,000, to bring

structures into compliance with State or

community floodplain management

laws or ordinances after flood losses.

This coverage, which is referred to in

the proposed rule as ‘‘increased cost of

construction’’ coverage but hereinafter

referred to in this final rule as

‘‘increased cost of compliance’’ coverage

(ICC), is mandated by § 555 of Public

Law 103–325 which requires the NFIP

to ‘‘enable the purchase of insurance to

cover the cost of compliance with land

use and control measures established

under section 1361 * * *.’’

The following are the principal

features of the September 23, 1996

proposed rule:

(1) The limit for ICC coverage would

be $15,000.

(2) Only flood-damaged structures

would be eligible for the coverage.

(3) Only those structures substantially

or repetitively damaged by flood would

be eligible for ICC coverage.

(4) Only structures in areas of special

flood hazard would be eligible for ICC

payments.

(5) ICC payments would be limited to

the amount necessary to meet but not

exceed the NFIP elevation requirements

after flood damage. (This feature of the

proposed rule has been changed. See

below.)

(6) Repetitive loss structures would be

eligible for ICC payments when two

conditions are met:

(a) The community has adopted and

is enforcing a cumulative substantial

damage provision or repetitive loss

provision in its floodplain management

ordinance that requires action by the

property owner; and

(b) The structure has a history of flood

claims under the NFIP that satisfies the

statutory definition of repetitive loss

structure.

During the comment period, sixteen

(16) sets of comments were received by

FEMA. In many cases, commenters

shared similar views and

recommendations on individual issues.

The commenters’ recommendations,

concerns, and questions have been

considered and, where appropriate,

incorporated into this final rule.

$15,000 Maximum Benefit

Five commenters objected to the

maximum benefit of $15,000 proposed

in the rule for ICC coverage. The

underlying concern is that $15,000 will

be insufficient to pay for the increased

costs to elevate or floodproof a structure

substantially or repetitively damaged by

flood. For example, one commenter

concluded, ‘‘the ICC’s maximum

coverage of $15,000 is far below the

$35,000 average cost to elevate a