RULES- AND: REGULATIONS;

(c). Gasoline, loading. (1C: No- personm

shall, load gasoline into any- truck,

trailer, railroad. tank car or- other

mobile: non-marne vesseL from any

gasoline, terminaL unless the-gasolineterminal is equipped- with a, vapor- re--

covery-disposal system, and- unless all

displaced vaporsi and gases of organicscompounds discharged. during- the

loading: operatiom are vented: only- to

the! vapor recovery-disposal- system.-

Measures shalL be takem to: prevent

liquid: drainage: before the loading

device is disconnected.

(2) No person shall load -gasoline

into any- tank truck, trailer; railroadtank car or other mobile non-marine

vessel from any bulk gasoline plant

unless, the bulk: gasoline plant is.

equipped with a vapor collectiom

system; and unless-noless than 90pecent by weight of vapors, and- gases o

organic compounds' discharged- during

the- loading: operation: are vented. to

thig vapor collection system. Measuresshall be takem to, preventliquid] drain-'

age- beforethe-loading- device isodisconnected:

(i) All vapors an& gases- collected, in:

the vapor collectior, system shall be directed, to a. vapor recovery-disposal

system

(ii) All intermediate, transfers. necessary to direct the-vapors-aridgasesin a,

vapor collection: systen to' at vapor re- covery-disposal system shall be -accomnplished- so, as- toprevent the release of

at. least 90. percent. by weight of these

vapors and gases, toi the atmosphere

during, eaclh- transfer

(d). Gasoline unloading., No persoshalli transfer gasoline nor- cause- orallow gasoline to be transferred fror.

any'delivery vesselr into any; stationary

storage container with- a capacitygreater than, 250i gallons- unless -suchcontainer Is equipped-- with a submerged fill pipe- and, unless the displaced vapors and gases& from. the storage container are collected and. directed to- a; vapor collection system' or- a- vapor recovery:disposaL, system.. Thecollection procedure- frormthe stationary storage container shall prevent,

therelease tor the- atmosphere- of-no,

less than, 901 percent by weight of o r- ganic- compounds in: said' vapors and

gases displaced. from- _the stationary

container locatiom The provisions: of

this paragraph shall' not. apply, to: deliveries. made to and storage, in, the

exempted storage containers, in- paragraph (g);. - (1 ). Thie collection ob displaced

vapors and. gases; shalL be- accomplished, utilizing the- following equip, -

ment:

(i) A vaportight, return line from

the storage container-to the delivery

vessel, and,

(ii)-A, system that:will-ensure' that no. gasoline can be transferied,, into> the

container unless. the vapor return line

is.connected

(2), I a - vapor collection system is;

used::

(i), All vapors: and gases- collected- in,

the. vapor-collectionsystem shall be, directed- to. a vapor recovery-disposal

system.'

(ii) All intermediate- transfers necessary to-direct thevapors and' gasesin a

vapor collection, system to- a vapor re- covery-disposar system shall be accom- plished, so as to: prevent- the release of

no Iess than' 90 percent by weitit of

these vapors, and gases to the, atmosphere during-each, transfer.

(e) Gjasolfne storage:, No- person- shalr

store gasoline in any- stationary storage container with a -capacity greater.

than 25W gallons-unless such container

is' equipped with' a submerged filI pipeand: equipment which will- permit no,

less than 90 percent by weight of organic compounds in the -vapors- andgases, displaced during- any gasoline

transferto- be collected and directedto' a vapor collection system or a, Vapor

recovery-disposal system. The- provisions of this paragraph shall not apply

to- deliveries- made- tor and storage irthe exempted- storage containers- inparagrapIr (g.

(f) Gasoline- de lvery- vessels- Any,

tank truck-, trailer, rairoad tank- car or

other non-marine delfvery-vessel used'

to transport gasoline, or gasoline

vapors and- gases shall. be subject to

the following conditions:

-(f). The deivery vessel shall be

equipped' so as to permit it to receive

vapors- and. gases- directed to- it during

any gasoline unloading- operations at

facilities- suiect to, this; regulation,

and to permit it tor direct collected:

vapors and gases to a vapor collection- or vapor recovery-disposal systemduring any' loading operation'.

(2) The delivery vessel shall be

equippedf so as: to) be compatible with.

the vapor control equipment at all

non-exempt-facilitiesz utilized! or' serv--

iced. by' the delivery--vessel during gasolne loading or unloading operations.

(3) The dhelvery vessel must be' so

designedcr and maintained, as- to be

vapor-tight at all times, except for

pressure relief under emergency conditions.

C- - The vapor-laden delivery vessel

may be refilled, only at facilitieequipped, with- -a vapor collectiom

system and/or vapor recovery-disposaL

system;. an& such system- shall be uti--

lized during-any refillingoperation.

(g) Exempted storage containers-,

Gasoline deliveries: made- to- and storage in, the iollowing-, are classified asexempt:

(1), Stationary containers having.. a- capacit- of 550, gallons- or less which' are- used exclusively for the fueling of

implements of husbandry:_ -

(2 Any container Installed prior to

November 13, 1973tand having a capacity'less.than 200U gallons.

(3) Storage tanks equipped with

floatngroofs ortheir equivalent,

l o-.-A1r compliance dates and compil. ance schedules that previously appeared In

§r52!1597 and- § 52.1598 have been removed'

since all listed dates have passed.

-52.1597 [Reserved]

3-. Section 52.1597 is revoked and reserved]

§ 52=.5-58 [Reserved]

4. Section 52.1598 is-revoked and reserved.

(Sections 11(k anc 301 of the Clean Air Act, as amended (42 U.S.C 7410 7601).)

[FR. Doe. 79-8259 Flied'3-16-79: 8:45,ml

[6560-01-M];

SUBCIAPTErC-AIR PROGRAMS

[FRL 1076-31

PARt &t-AIR- QUAUTY- CONTROL,

REGIONS, CRITERIA, AND, CONTROt. TECHNIQUES

Attainment Status Designations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTIONl: Final rulemaking.

SUMMARY. This rulemaking, responds to comments and makes necessary amendments to the dbsignations

of attainment status. relative, to; the

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).for Arizona, California,

Nevada;. Hawai and) Guam. This, rulemakingsupplements~the national EPA

rulemaking of September U-, 1978 (43

FR 40412);. and Incorporates by refer

ende EPA's:posltiormon certain general

issues. presented- in- that rulemaking '.

Ir addition to this rulemaldng. al

notice of proposed rulemaking Is being,

prepared. for certair Regionm IX desig"

,nations that. EPA Is proposinV, to

change to nonattainmentL

DATES:. Effective Immediately,

ADDRESS: Comments on this, rulemaking, should be directed to: Arnold

Den-, Chief, Air Technical Branch,

EPA Region IX, 215 Frenont, Street

(A-4), San Francisco,!CA.94105,

FOR FURTHER' INFORMATION

CONTACT,

Charlotte Hopper, Acting Chlf,

TechnfcaL Analysis. Section, EPA

Region. IXPhone. C415) 556-2002

SUPPLEMENTAPWY INFORMATION'

The Clean: Air Act' Amendments or 1977 (the 197" Amendments;. Pub. L.

95-95,, added- Section. 107(d) to: the

CleanmAiAct (the Act), which, directed

FEDERAL REGISTER,.VOL,44; NO2. 54:-MONDA.Y, HAROL19, 19z9

16389
each State to submit to the Administrator a list of the NAAQS attainment

status of all areas within the State.

The Administrator was required under

Section 107(d)2) to promulgate the

State lists, with any necessary modifications. For each NAAQS. areas are classified as either not attaining the

standard or, for certain pollutants,

projected ihot to maintain the standard (nonattainment areas), meeting

the standard (attainment areas), or

lacking sufficient data or information

to be classified (unclassified areas).

The U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA or the Agency) pub1ished these lists in the FEDERAL REGISTR on March 3, 1978 (43 FR 8962Y and

invited the public to submit comments

to the Agency by May 2, 1978.

EPA Region DC received numerous

comments on the March 3, 1978 rulemaking, particularly concerning Callfornia designations. Consequently,

EPA asked the State of California Air

Resources Board (ARB) to review and

respond to these comments. The comments and the State's responses to

them were made available for public

inspection because of the public interest bnd further commentspn all these

materials were solicited by EPA for 30

days (43 FR 39101. September 1, 1978)

Certain issues raised in these commentS were similar to those raised by

others throughout the nation. These

issues were addressed in the EPA national rulemaking" of September 11,

1978 (43 FR 40412), and include the

following-

(1) The impact of designations on individual sources;

(2) The State determination of geographic boundaries for designation

purposes;,

(3) The effect of designations on. new source review (NSR) and prevention of significant deterioration (PSD)

requirements;

(4) The use of projected future violations for nonattainment designation

purposes;

(5) The adequacy of TSP monitoring

sites;

(6) The EPA procedures in promulgating March 3, 1978 designations; and

.(7) The State procedures in determining attainment status designations.

The discussion of these issues in the

national rulemaking is incorporated

here by reference. Additional issues

which are specific to the states in- EPA

Region IX are addressed in this action.

Based on the information provided by

several commenters, EPA is revising

certain designatidns to unclassified or attainment. In a separate notice of

proposed rulemaking; EPA is proposing to. revise certain other Region IX

designations to- nonattainment and

public comments are being solicited.

On- January 26, 1979, EPA established a new NAAQS for ozorie of (.12

RULES AND REGULATIONS

ppm. (primary and secondary) to replace the photochemical oxidant

standard of 0.08 ppm. Because of this

change, some areas designated as nonattainment with respect to the oxidant

standard will become candidates for

redesignation as attainment areas by

the States. Region IX will review the

status of specific areas at the request

of interested state and local governments to determine whether they

should be attainment areas under the new standard. Any changes to the designations which are currently in effect

and those which are promulgated here

wil be published in a future FEDERAL

REGISTER.

For good cause, the designations revised by this rulemaking are effective

immediately. As discussed in the EPA

national rulemaking, the primary purpose of these designations is to Identify problem areas for which State planning must be completed by a statutory

deadline. These designations Impose no obligation on any source. There

would therefore be no point in deferring the effective date. The Issues

raised in the comments are discussed

by state in the following paragraphs.

CAWIFORNIA

Several ommenters criticized the

State of California's procedure whereby the Executive Officer of the ARB

developed the attainment status designations.- The ARB has certified that

the Executive Officer has the authority under State law to make the designations required by Section 107(d) of

the Act. Matters of alleged procedural

irregularities under State law are best

addressed at the State level.

One commenter suggested that violation of a NAAQS during one year

may be the result of unrepresentative

meteorological conditions and. therefore should not result in a nonattainment designation. No specific area was cited in the omment. The State. in

designating nonattainment areas, re- viewed the most recent two or more

years of data. In addition, EPA recognizes the possibility of unrepresentative data and, in accordance with 40

CFR 51.12(d). such, data may be excluded from the determination of attainment status.

TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATES (TsP)

The State of California recommended that the TSP designations of 1 areas in California be changed and

provided supporting Information to

document their requested changes.

These recommended cqesignations are

briefly discussed below:

Colusa County should be designated

unclassified because the limited

amount of data available recorded no violations of the TSP standards.

Marin, Napa, and San Mateo Counties and the portions of Solano and

16389

Sonoma Counties within the San

Francisco Bay Area Air Basin should

be designated attainment since monitoning data indicates no TSP standard

violations in these counties in recent

years.

Yolo County should be designated

nonattainment (secondary) since air

quality data has recorded violations of

secondary, but not primary, TSP

standards.

Monterey County and the Air Quality Maintenance Area CAQMA) portions of Placer and Santa Barbara

Counties should be designated attainment They had been inadvertently

designated nonattainment by the

State because recorded data exceeded

the annual average concentration

"guide" (40 CFR 50.7(a)) 60 jg/m?, but

not the annual standard of 75 pgfmx.

Humboldt, Tuolumne, and Sonoma

(North Coast Air Basin portion) Counties should be redesignated because

monitoring data used to make the

original designation was later invalidated by the State. Humboldt County

should be designated nonattainment

(secondary) because the remanfing

valid data. in the County recorded sec- ondary, but not primary, standard violations. Tuolumne County should be

designated unclassified because sufficient valid data is presently-not available to determine the County's attainment status. Sonoma County (the

North Coast Air Basin portion) should

be designated attainment because the

valid data recorded no violations of

the TSP standards.

EPA has reviewed the supporting

data for requested TSP designation

changes described above and agrees

with the rationale for each change.

The designations are revised as recommended by the State of California.

One commenter questiohed the

siting of monitoring stations, and the

validity of the air quality data used to

support the TSP nonattainment designation of Butte County. The designation was based on air quality data that

recorded numerous TSP violations.

EPA has reviewed the air quality data

and information regarding the monitoring sites, and confirms the TSP

nonattainment designation of Butte

County.

SULyUR DIOXIDE (So.)

Several commenters questioned the

SO nonattainment designation of the

South Coast Air Basin portion of Los

Angeles County. The State of California. commented that the original nonattainment designation had been

based on a. projection using an. incomplete emission inventory Projections

based on a complete inventory indicate

the SO standards w-il Continue to be

maintained. EPA's review of the current and projected air quality con- firms the State's conclusion and the

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 44; NO. 54-MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1979
16390

SO2 designation of the South Coast

Air Basin portion of Los Angeles

County is revised to attainment. I Several commenters questioned theSO2 nonattainment designations of the

San Joaquin Valley Air Basin portion

of Kern County. These comments were submitted by several oil companies, the Western Oil and Gas Association (WOGA), and the-Kern County

Air Pollution Control District. The

State of California based its designation on projected SO2 emissions

growtl resulting in future violations

of the annual SO2 standard. As discussed in the EPA national rulemaking, projections of future violations can provide the basis for a nonattainment designation. The projection technique used by the State IS consistent

with EPA estimating procedures. The

State's projection of nonattainment is

further supported by air quality dispersion modeling conducted for'an oil

company which shows future violations of the annual SO2 standard.

The commenters questioned the

State's method of projecting increased'

SO. emission levels in Kern County

and claimed that new source review

(NSR) and prevention of significant

deterioration (PSD) requirements will

result in decreased SO2 emissions in

the future. Kern County's new source

review rule does not apply to new minor point sources, area or mobile

sources, or existing sources. Therefore,

many new or modified sources not subJect to NSR or offset requirements be- cause of the size cutoff, could become

operational and create an increase in

SO2 emissions. The commenters did

not provide documentation or demonstrate that the brojected total SO

emissions would not increase, even if

NSR and PSD had been considered in•

the projections.

In addition to both the projected

and modeled future SQ. violations, dispersion modeling shows current violations in Kern County. A recent air

quality dispersion modeling study by

EPA Region IX showy current violations of the annual SO2 standard in

Kern County. In addition, modeling

studies submitted by WOGA show

past, present, and future violations of.

the annual SO2 standard.

Under Sections 171(2), and 107(d)(1)

(A) through (C) of the Clean Air Act,

two alternative criteria exist for designating an area as nonattainment for

SO. Any area that currently violates'

the SO2 standard, is to be designated as nonattainment, and any area where, in the State's judgment, the

primary standard for SO2 may not be

maintained shall also be designated as nonattainment. Under either criteria,

the nonattainment designation' bf

'Kern County is appropriate.

One comment questioned the use of

air quality modeling results in designa-

-RULES AND REGULATIONS

ting attainment status where monitoring data is available. Section 171 of

the Clean Air Act defines "nonattainment area" as an area which is shown

by monitored data or which is calculated by air quality modeling to exceed

any national. ambient air quality

standard. Thus .air quality modeling Is

specifically authorized as a basis for

determining whether an area is attaining the standards.

One commenter stated that the

State should have analyzed Kern

County's air quality on a subcounty

basis. Section 107(d) of the Act provides that attainment status designations are to be composed of air quality

control regions, or portions thereof.'

States may choose to Impose requiremerits over a broader or narrower geographic region than the precise area where sources exist that contribute to

particular concentrations of a pollutant. In this case, the State" chose to

designated -nonattainment' for that

portion of Kern County within the

San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. This

area encompasses all significant SO.

emission sources and is therefore acceptable.

Based upon a review of the available

information, there is insufficient documentation ,to justify a change in the

SO nonattainment designation for

the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin portion of Kern County. , •

CARBON MONOXIDE (CO) -

The State recommended that the

CO designation of Sutter County be

changed to unclassified because no CO

monitoring has been conducted in the,

County for several years. EPA agrees

with the State's recommendation and

designates Sutter County unclassified

for CO.

Two commenters questioned the CO

nonattainment designation of Contra

Costa County in-view of the fact that no CO violations have been recorded

there in recent years. The state of

California chose to designate the

whole San Francisco Bay Area Air

Basin, of whibh Contra COsta County

is a part, as nonattainment for CO.

This basinwide designation is acceptable under Section 107(d) of the Act

Since designations can be defined in

terms of air quality control regions, or portionsthereof. Numerous CO violations have been recorded in the Air

Basin and motor yehicles account for

about 85 percent of the CO emissions.

Because the CO problem in the Air

Basin is-priniarily transportation re- lated, it needs to be addressed on a

region-wide basis. The State commented that a regional planning approach

has been irnitiated in the San Francisco' Bay Area and should be continued

to solve the CO problem. EPA agrees

with the State's rationale and is not

revising the CO nonattainment designation for the San Francisco Bay Area

Air Basin, Including Contra Costa

County.

Commenters recommended that CO

nonattainment boundaries in the

Santa Barbara AQMA, Fresno and

Butte Counties be reduced to either

the metropolitan area or the central

business district since violations had

not been recorded beyond those areas.

The State of California commented

that CO is generally regarded as an automobile related pollution problem.

Motor vehicles from outside the cen- tral city contribute to'the CO problem

when they travel to the central area and, therefore, efforts to develop pollutant control strategies should be for

as broad a geographical area as is reasonable. EPA agrees with the State's

rationale and notes again that the

State has the authority under Section

107(d) to determine designation

boundaries. No change in the CO non- attainment area boundaries of the

Santa Barbara AQMA, Fresno County, or Butte County are being made at

this time.

One commenter questioned the

siting of a monitoring station and the

validity of the air quality data used to

support the CO nonattainment design.

tion of Butte County. The State of

California designated Butte County

nonattainment on the basis of numer- ous violations of the 8-hour CO standard. A review of the air quality data

and information regarding the monitoring station does not support a change in the nonattaiment designation.

PHOTOCHEMICAL OXIDANTS (0) -

One commenter questioned the Ox

nonattainment designation for Glenn

County since there is no Ox monitoring station in the County. The entire

Sacramento Valley Air Basin, which

includes Glenn County, was designated nonattaiment by the State. The

basin-wide designation was made be- cause of the physical nature of oxidant formation and transport, the common geography and meteorology

within the Valley, and because every

oxidant monitor in the Valley has re- corded violations of the standard.

Since Ox violations are a basinwide

problem, It is reasonable to address

the problem through regional air quality planning. Therefore, the Ox nonattainment designation of Glenn County

is not being revised at this time.

One commenter questioned the va- lidity of the air quality data and the

monitoring stations used to support

the Ox nonattainment designation of

Butte County. The State of California

chose to designate the entire Sacramento Valley Air Basin, which includes Butte County, as nonattainment. As previously noted, Ox violations have been recorded throughout

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 44, NO. 54-MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1979
the Sacramento Valley Air Basin, including, numerous violations in Butte

County. A review of the air quality

data and information regarding the

monitoring station% does not support a

change in the Ox nonattainment designation.

Two comments questioned the nonattainment designation of Butte

County because there was less air pollution there than in other areas. Since

the designation is based on measured

violation of the standard and not on

comparisons of relative air quality between geographic areas, no change is

being considered in the Ox designation

of Butte County.

NEvADA

Two commenters questioned the geographic boundaries ol nonattainment

areas in Nevada. The State of Nevada

chose to designate areas based on air

quality measurements made in certain

portions of air quality control regions,

which is consistent with Section 107(d)

of the Act. EPA reaffirms the State's

boundary designations since the State

has selected these as the most reasonable planning areas.

HAWAII

TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATES (TSP)

On March 3, 1978 EPA designated

Maui Island and Hawaii Island as "unclassified" for TSP. The State of

Hawaii commented that the designations should be attainment because no

recent violations have been reported on either Island. A review of 1977 air

quality data shows that the annual

TSP standard is violated at Kahului,

Maui Island. This information will be

considered in a separate notice of proposed rulemaking. While no monitored

violations have been reported on

Hawaii Island in recent years, there is

insufficient monitoring in the vicinity

of major TSP emission sources along

the Hamukua Coast to determine attainment status. Therefore, there is

inadequate information to support re- vising the current designation. EPA

reaffirms the unclassified TSP designation of Hawaii Island.

GUAM

TOTAL SUSPENDED PARTICULATES (TSP)

On March 3, 1978. EPA designated

Guam nonattainment for TSP. The

Government of Guam commented

that the designation for the Island

should not be nonattainment since the

monitors recording recent violations are unduly influenced by reentrained

road dust. EPA has reviewed the monitoring sites and agrees that reen- trained dust may contribute to the violations. Since there is insufficient data

from other monitorq to determine

Guam's attainment status at this time,

RULES AND REGULATIONS

the Island's designation for TSP is

changed to unclassified.

SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO)

On March 3, 1978. EPA designated Guam nonattainment for SO,. The

Government of Guam commented

that the Island's designation should be

attainment because there have been

no violations in recent years. A review

of monitoring data supports this

claim. However, the Piti power plant

uses a supplementary control system (SCS) which involves switching to low

sulfur fuel during certain wind conditions to avoid violations of the SO.

standards. Sections 123 and 302 of the

Act do not allow standards to be met

through the use of dispersion techniques, Le., SCS. As discussed in the

EPA national rulemaking of Septem- ber 1I, 1978, sources employing dispersion techniques in place of constant

control techniques to prevent SOz violations. are to be designated nonattainment. Therefore, no change In the SO,

nonattainment designation of Guam is

being made at this time

ARIZoNA

The attainment status designations

for Arizona were prepared and pro- mulgated by EPA on March 3, 1978 be.

cause the State did not submit Its designations to EPA in time to comply with the requirements of Sectionm

107(d) of the Act. The State subsequently submitted designations on

August 15, 1978. This rulemaking will

address only the State's designations concerning NO.. CO. and oxidants.

The State's designations for SOa and

TSP are being analyzed by EPA and

will be considered in a separate rulemaking.

NITROGEN DIOX)DE (NOr)-

The State of Arizona designated the

whole State as "cannot be classified or

better than national standards!' for

NO2. Since no violations of the NO.

standard have been reiborded In Arizona, EPA concurs with the State's des.

"ignation and notes that It is Identical

to EPA's promulgation, of March 3,

1978.

cARBoN MONOXIDE (CO)

The State of Arizona has designated

two areas as nonattainment for CO:

C) That portion of Marlcopa County known as the Maricopa Association of

Governments (MAG) Urban Planning Area; and (2) That portion, within

Pima County, of the area described by

connecting the following geographical coordinates:

Latitude 32'38.5' N, longitude 11124.0' W

Latitude 32'26.5' N. longitude 110"47.5" W

Latitude 3212.5"N, longitude 110"32.5" W

Latitude 31*49.5' N, longitude 110'25.5! W

Latitude 31*42.0" N. longitude 110'50.5 W

Latitude 31V52.5" N. longitude 111"12.5'Vr

16391

Latitude 32,.5" N. longitude 111'29.0" W

Excepting Townships TllS, RUlE

and TI2S, RIE. The State has designated the remainder of the State as

"cannot be classified or better than

national standards." The two nonattainment areas encompass Phoenix

and. Tucson where CO violations have

been recorded. EPA has reviewed the

CO data from Arizona and concurs

with the State's designations

One commenter recommended that

the CO nonattainment area in Maricopa County be limited to major traffic corridors in Phoenix. The State of

Arizona chose to designate the MAG

Urban Planning Area as the CO non- attainment area. The basis for this

area Is that motor vehicles are the

major source of CO emissions.

Much of the traffic that causes high

emissions in the downtown area comes from the suburbs and outlying areas

and a regional planning approach is

needed to solve the CO problem.

Therefore, no change is being made to

the State of Arizona's designated non- attainment boundar) which is the

M-G Urban Planning Area.

PHOzOCREzC&L OXIm1Nrs (ox)

The State of Arizona has designated

the Phoenx and Tucson areas (as described above) as nonattainment for

Ox. The remainder of the State has

been designated as "cannot be classified or better than national standards." EPA has reviewed the air monitoring data and concurs with the

State's designations.

One conmenter recommended that

the Ox nonattainment area in Maricopa County be limited to major traffic corridors in Phoenix. The State of

Arizona chose to designate the MAG

Urban Planning Area as nonattainment since oxidant is an area-wide

probldm which requires a regional - planning approach. Limiting the designation to the major traffic corridors

would not be consistent with the physical nature of oxidant formation and

transport. Therefore, no change is

being made to the State of Arizona's

designated nonattainment boundary

which is the MAO Urban Planning

Area.

Two commenters recommended that

nonattainment areas in Pima County

should be either countywide or based on air sheds as defined by mountain

peaks and the natural ridgelines between them. The State of Arizona has

elected to define nonattainment

boundaries in terms of townships and

straight line segments between peaks.

The commenter did not provide suffidlent technical data to support revising the Ox nonattainment boundaries

in Pima County. Therefore, no change

to the State of Arizona's designated

boundary Is being considered at this

time.

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 44, NO. 54-MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1979
16392

TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR

The State of California submitted a comment pointing out a typographical error in the March 3, 1978 rulemaking

(43 FR 8974) for California CO. The

designation table has been corrected

to read "Los Angeles County (S.E.

Desert Air Basin Portion)" instead of,

in part, " .* * S.E. Desert AQMA"

As noted in the EPA national rulemaking of September 11, 1978 (43 FR

40412), to have any designation

amended, a person should submit a peRULES AND REGULATIONS

tition with supporting data and analysis to the State, with a copy to the

EPA Region IX Office at the lQcation

given in the ADDRESS section of this

rulemaklng:. If the person is not satisfied with the-State's response to the

petition, he may then petition the

EPA Region IX Office to modify the

current designation.

NoT.-The Environmental Protection

Agency, has determined that this document

is not a significant regulation and does not

require preparation of a regulatory analysis under Executive Order 12044.

ARIZONA-O.

AuTHoirry: Sections 107(d). 171(2). 301(a)

of the Clean Air Act. as amended (42 U.S.C.

7407(d), 7501(2), 7601(a)).

Dated: March 7, 1979.

DOUGLAS M. COSTLE,

Administrator.

1. In 81.303-Arizona, the attain

ment status designatibn table for 0,,

CO, and NO, are revised to read as follows:

§ 81.303 Arizona.

Does not Cannot be

meet classified or

Designated area primary better than

standards national

standards

Maricopa Association of Governments Urban Planning Area ...... X................ Tucson Area. X ................

Rest of State ........ X

ARizoNA-CO

Maricopa Association of Governments Urban Planning Area . ........ X .........

Tucson Area X ................ Rest of State..... ...

ARIZONA-NO.'

Whole State... ..................... . ......... .. . .... X

2. In 81.305-California, the attainment designation tables are amended as follows:

A. The tables for TSP are revised in

their entirety.

B. That portion of the table for SO2

beginning with "South Central Coast

Air Basin: San Luis Obispo County"

and ending with "South Coast Basin

Portion of Riverside County" is re- vised.

C. The table for CO beginning with

"San Joaquin Valley Air Basin: Fresno

County" and ending with "Sacramento Valley Air Basin: Tehama County" is revised.

D. The table for CO beginning with

"Los Angeles County (Portion within

S.E. Desert AQMA)" and ending with

"Tahoe Air Basin" is revised.

The amended portions of the tables

for 81.305-California read as set forth

below:

§ 81.305 California.

CALIFoRNL-TSP

Does not Does not Better than

Designated area meet meet Cannot be national primary secondary classified standards

standards standards

North Coast Air Basin:

Delo rt. County (otCosAi. anPri.... ....................................... X Humboldt Mendocino ... X..................................... Co ny. .... . . ... . ... . X .. ...... .................

Sonoma County (North Coast Air Basin Portion)-...................... X

Trinity County ..... . .... ........................ X Lake County Air Basin ... . ............................... •X

North Central Coast Air Basin-... ........... .............. X South Central Coast Air Basim

San Luis Obispo County:. Salinas Valley-El Pomar Bstrella Planning

Non-.alinas X

Santa Barbara County (AQUA Portion)- .. ..................

Santa Barbara County (Non.AQMA Portion):

A. West area of north-south boundary separating Santa Ynez and Lompoc Valleys-..... X .....................

B. East area of north-south boundary separating Santa Ynes and Lompoc Valleys .....-.. .. .. X ........

Ventura County: North of Los Padres Nat' Forest boundaries..... ............. X ................... South of Los Padres Natl Forest boundaries X ..... ................ .......................

Channel Islands X ........

San Diego Air Basin* San Diego County (West Portion). ..... X ...................-.........................

San Diego County (East Portion) .. ......................... X ................. Souith Coast Air Basin X ...-...................-.................... San Joaquin Valley Air Basin X..................................................

Sacramento Valley Air Basin:

Sacramento County---.........- X -. .. ............... Solano County (Sacramento Valley Air Basin Por- tion) -- - - - - X . . . ... . ...

Yolo Butte County--........____ ConyX .. X .................... ...... ............. Colusa County . . .X . .......... . ... Glenn out.. .... X .......

Shasta County (Sacramento Valley Air Basin Portion)..... X ... ........................ Sutter County- .... .. . ................ Tehama County.- ... : :-:. .. X . . .............. Yuba County--........ . X ............... Great Basin Valleys Air Basin--. X ............... Northeast Plateau Air Basin ................. ---.. Los Angeles County (S.1. Desert Air Basin PorRiverside County (S.E. Desert AQMA Portion)~.... X

San Bernardino County (S.E. Desert AQMA Portion)

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 44, NO. 54-MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1979
RULES AND REGULATIONS 16393

CALxFORN -TSP--Contnued

Does not Does not Better than

Designated area meet meet Cannot be national

prlmary secondary clssaed standards

standards standards

Riverside County (non-AQMA Portion) * X San Bernardino (non-AQMA Portion)_ _ _ _ Lake Tahoe Air Basin__

San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin: Solano County (S.F. Bay Area Air Basin Portion) _ _

San Mateo County .

Marln County .. ..... X Napa County. ..... - .X

Sonoma County (S.F. Bay Area Air Basin Portion). X

Alameda County X Rest of State_........._ X Mountain Counties Air Basin: Placer County (AQMA Portion) X Placer County (excluding AQUA Portion and Lake

Tahoe Portion)___ X Amdor County____________ X Calaveras County -_

El Dorado County (excluding iake Tahoe Air

Basin Portion) X Mardposa County X

Nevada County X Plumas County ... . X Sierra County X Tuolumne County X

Southeast Desert Air Basin: Kern County (S.Y. Desert Air Basin Portion) . X

Imperial County X

CAIFORI-SO,

South Central Coast Air Basin'

San LuLs Obispo County X Santa Barbara County (AQMA Portion)__ X San Barbara County (non-AQMA Portion) - X Ventura County X Channel Islan" X

San Diego Air Basin: San Diego County (West Portion) .

San Diego County (East Portion) K

South Coast Air Basin: Los Angeles County (South Coast Air Basin Por- tion) X

Orange County X Riverside County (South Coast Air Basin Portion) . X

CALMrRNIA-CO

Does not Cannot be

meet classified or Designated area primary better than

standards national

standards

San Joaquln Valley Air Basin: Fresno County X Kern County (SJVAB Portion) X

Maden County

Merced County

San Joaquin County X Stanislaus County K

Tulare County ...... X

Sacramento Valley Air Basin: Sacramento County X Solano County (SVAB Portion)

Yolo'County

Butte County X Colusa County .

Glenn County

Shasta County (SVAB Portion)

Sutter County Tehama County Los Angeles County (SYB. Desert Air Basin Portion)

Riverside County (S.E. Desert AQMA Portion) San Bernardino 4non-AQMA Portion) Riverside County (non-AQMA Portion)

San Bernardino (non-AQMA Portion) Lake Tahoe Air Basin X

XX

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

K

K

3. In 81.353-Guam. the attainment designation table Is revised.

§ 81.353 Guam.

GQum-TSP

Does not Ekoes not Better than Designated area meet meet Cannotbe national

primary secondary classified standards

standards standards

Whole State Ax

EPA designation replaces State designation.

[FR Do=. 79-8048 Filed 3-16-79; 8:45 am]

FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 44, NO. 54-MONDAY, MARCH 19, 1979