2074 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 10 / Wednesday, January 15, 1997 / Proposed Rules

1As in effect October 6, 1995.

2As in effect on July 1, 1995.

8. Following page 65869, insert ‘‘2.8.3.6 In Figure 6, areas of the State included within MPA’s are shown within

heavy solid lines. Two MPA’s are illustrated. Areas in the State outside the MPA’s will also include monitors, but

this monitoring coverage may be limited. This portion of the State will also be represented by SAZ’s (shown by areas

enclosed within dotted lines). Monitors eligible for comparison to the NAAQS are indicated by ‘‘X.’’ The appropriate

monitors within an SAZ would be averaged for comparison to the annual NAAQS and examined individually for

comparison to the daily NAAQS. Other monitors are only eligible for comparison to the daily NAAQS. Both within

the MPA’s and in the remainder of the State, some special study monitors might not satisfy applicable Part 58 requirements

or will not be included in the State Monitoring Plan and will not be eligible for comparison to the NAAQS. The

latter may include SLAMS monitors designated to study regional transport or to support secondary NAAQS in unpopulated

areas.’’

[FR Doc. 97–893 Filed 1–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–C

40 CFR Part 63

[FRL–5676–9]

Request for Approval of Section 112(l)

Delegated Authority; Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed approval

and delegation.

SUMMARY: EPA invites public comment

on today’s proposal to approve the

Oregon Department of Environmental

Quality (ODEQ) and the Lane Regional

Air Pollution Authority (LRAPA)

(collectively referred to as ‘‘Oregon’’)

request for delegation of authority to

implement and enforce state-adopted

hazardous air pollutant regulations

which adopt by reference the federal

National Emission Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)

contained in 40 CFR Parts 61 and 63 as

these regulations apply to sources

required to obtain a federal operating

permit under Title V of the Clean Air

Act (CAA). EPA as well invites public

comment on its proposal to approve

specific state rules in order to recognize

conditions and limitations established

pursuant to these rules, or the rules

themselves, as federally enforceable.

DATES: All comments on the Oregon

submittal must be received by the close

of business on February 14, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Oregon

submittal are available during normal

business hours at the following

addresses for inspection and copying:

U.S. EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue,

Seattle, Washington 98101–9797, and

the Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality, 811 S.W. Sixth

Avenue, Portland, Oregon, 97204–1390.

Written comments should be addressed

sent to: Chris Hall, U.S. EPA Region 10,

1200 Sixth Avenue (OAQ–107), Seattle,

WA 98101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Chris Hall, U.S. EPA Region 10, at (206)

553–1949.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background and Purpose

Section 112(l) of the amended Clean

Air Act of 1990 (‘‘the Act’’ or ‘‘CAA’’)

established new, more stringent

requirements upon a State or Local

agency that wishes to implement and

enforce an air toxics program pursuant

to section 112 of the Act. Prior to

November 15, 1990, delegation of

NESHAP regulations to a State or Local

agency could occur without formal

rulemaking by EPA. However, the new

section 112(l) of the Act requires EPA to

approve State and Local toxics rules and

programs under section 112 through

formal notice and comment rulemaking.

Now State and Local air agencies that

wish to implement and enforce a

federally-approved air toxics program

must make a showing to EPA that they

have adequate authorities and resources.

Approval is granted by the EPA through

the authority contained in section

112(l), and implemented through the

Federal rule found in 40 Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR) Part 63, subpart E (58

FR 62262, November 26, 1993), if the

Agency finds that: (1) The State or Local

program or rule is ‘‘no less stringent’’

than the corresponding Federal rule or

program, (2) adequate authority and

resources exist to implement the State

or Local program or rule, (3) the

schedule for implementation and

compliance is sufficiently expeditious,

and (4) the State or Local program or

rule is otherwise in compliance with

Federal guidance.

II. Discussion of the Oregon 112(l)

Submittal

On November 15, 1993, Oregon

submitted to EPA an application

requesting the delegation of authority to

implement and enforce the stateadopted rules for ‘‘Hazardous Air

Pollutants’’ found in Oregon

Administrative Regulations (OAR)

Chapter 340, Division 32 in lieu of the

Federal NESHAP regulations contained

within 40 CFR Part 61. In the submittal,

Oregon also requested that comparable

delegation be provided to LRAPA to

enforce the state regulations in Lane

County.

On August 3, 1994, Oregon

supplemented its initial application by

providing additional documentation to

support its initial request and seeking

approval of its 112(g) rules and its rules

for creating synthetic minor sources. On

March 29, 1996, Oregon further

supplemented its application by

limiting its initial request for delegation

to apply to Part 70 sources only;

requested delegation for Part 70 sources

only the authority to implement and

enforce certain 40 CFR Part 63 NESHAP

standards; and requested approval for

Part 70 sources only to substitute the

State asbestos regulations for the

asbestos NESHAP. In the March 1996

supplement, Oregon also requested

deferral of delegated federal authority to

implement sections 112(g) of the federal

CAA until the conclusion of federal

rulemaking on this program element. By

letter dated December 11, 1996, Oregon

rescinded its request to substitute its

state asbestos rule for the asbestos

NESHAP, therefore EPA will take no

action in this regard at this time.

Oregon’s section 112(l) application

contains the following documents: (1) A

written finding by the State Attorney

General and the independent legal

counsel for LRAPA stating that Oregon

has the legal authority to implement and

enforce state-adopted regulations as

well as assure compliance by all sources

within their jurisdiction; (2) a copy of

OAR Chapter 340, Division 32 1

(hereafter referred to as ‘‘OAR 340–

032’’), which contains the fully adopted

State NESHAP regulations which would

be substituted for the Federal NESHAP

regulations upon approval; (3) a copy of

OAR Chapter 340, Division 28 2

(hereafter referred to as ‘‘OAR 340–28’’),

which contains the permitting

requirements for each source subject to

OAR–340–032, including the State

synthetic minor rules, the State Air
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 10 / Wednesday, January 15, 1997 / Proposed Rules 2075

3See the Kathie A. Stein guidance memo of

January 25, 1995, titled ‘‘Guidance on

Enforceability Requirements for Limiting Potential

to Emit through SIP and Section 112 Rules and

General Permits’’ which addresses the technical

aspects of how criteria pollutant limits may be

recognized for purposes of limiting a source’s

potential to emit of HAP to below section 112 major

source levels.

4Since the original submission of this delegation

application, EPA has fully approved Oregon’s Part

70 operation permit program after determining that

Oregon’s enforcement authorities meet the

requirements of 40 CFR Part 70.11. 60 FR 50106

(November 27, 1995).

Contaminant Discharge Permit (ACDP)

program rules, and the State federal

operating permit (FOP) program rules;

and (4) a complete program description.

The full program submittal is available

for review for more detailed

information.

A. Emission Standards for Hazardous

Air Pollutants

Pursuant to 40 CFR 63.91, Oregon is

requesting delegation of authority to

implement and enforce the federal

NESHAP regulations contained in 40

CFR Part 61, subparts A through F, J, L,

N through P, V, and Y through FF, as

adopted by reference in OAR 340–032–

05520 through –5580, as these rules

apply to Part 70 sources. Oregon is also

seeking delegation of authority to

implement and enforce 40 CFR Part 63,

subparts A, F through I, N, O, Q, R, T,

and EE, as adopted into OAR 340–032–

0510, as these rules apply to Part 70

sources.

Also, EPA proposes to approve a

mechanism for Oregon to receive

delegation of future NESHAP

regulations that are adopted by

reference into state law unchanged. The

details of this mechanism are outlined

in section IV.C.

B. Voluntary Limits on Emissions

Oregon requests section 112(l)

approval of state-adopted regulations

which would allow Oregon permitting

authorities to establish federallyenforceable emission limitations by

permit limiting a source’s potential to

emit hazardous air pollutants (HAP)

below major source thresholds.

Oregon’s voluntary emission

limitation rules are contained in OAR

340–028–110(114); –1050; –1740; and

–2110. The provisions of these sections

are applicable as a matter of state law to

any air contaminant and not just

applicable to the criteria pollutants

regulated under the EPA-approved

Oregon state implementation plan (SIP).

Oregon’s ACDP program regulations

(OAR 340–28–1700 through 1790)

provide the mechanism for the owner or

operator of a source to apply for and

obtain enforceable permit conditions

that limit the source’s potential to emit.

Such limitations would be inserted into

an ACDP issued by Oregon, after public

notice and an opportunity for comment,

and would include monitoring,

recordkeeping and reporting

requirements sufficient to ensure that

the source complies with these

limitations. If approved by EPA, limits

established pursuant to these

regulations would be considered

federally enforceable. Therefore, Oregon

would have the ability to set limits

which would be sufficient to exempt a

source from the requirement to obtain a

FOP and/or comply with Federal, State

or Local hazardous air pollutant

regulations. Approval of federally

enforceable permit limits under section

112(l) is necessary because the Oregon

SIP approved ACDP program only

extends to the control of criteria

pollutants. Federally enforceable limits

on criteria pollutants (i.e., VOCs or PM–

10) may have the incidental effect of

limiting certain HAP listed pursuant to

section 112(b) 3, however, section 112 of

the Act provides the underlying

authority for controlling all HAP

emissions. EPA plans to codify the

approval criteria for programs limiting

the potential to emit of HAPs through

amendments to Subpart E of 40 CFR

Part 63, the regulations promulgated to

implement section 112(l) of the Act. In

this respect, EPA is proposing to

approve OAR 340–028–1740, Oregon’s

synthetic area source permit program,

under the authority of section 112(l) of

the Act. Furthermore, EPA proposes

that, after final approval of this section,

synthetic area source permits issued

pursuant to these EPA-approved

regulations including terms and

conditions for HAP contained therein,

would be enforceable by the EPA and by

citizens under section 304 of the Act

regardless of whether such permits were

issued prior to EPA approval of this

section. However, such permits would

have to have been issued after the

effective date of OAR 340–028–1740

(i.e., after November 4, 1993) in

accordance with all of the provisions set

forth in that section. It is EPA’s position

that further actions approving OAR

340–028–1740 will not be necessary

even though 40 CFR part 63, subpart E

potential to emit language revisions may

not be finalized by the time this

proposed action is finalized.

III. Authority and Commitments for

Section 112 Implementation

Under 40 CFR Part 63, subpart E, the

minimum documentation needed as

part of this 40 CFR 63.91 delegation

request is: A written finding by the State

attorney general (and the independent

counsel for LRAPA) confirming that

Oregon has adequate legal authorities to

implement and enforce State rule(s) or

program(s); copies of the State statutes,

regulations and other documents which

contain the appropriate provisions for

which Oregon is requesting delegation;

a demonstration of adequate resources

to implement and enforce all aspects of

the delegated rules or program; a

schedule demonstrating expeditious

implementation of the delegated rules or

program; a plan that assures expeditious

compliance by all sources; and a

demonstration of adequate legal

authority to implement and enforce all

delegated rules or program and to assure

compliance by all sources upon

approval.

A. Written Findings by Legal Counsel

40 CFR 63.91(b)(1) requires that, at a

minimum, the State have the following

authorities: (1) Enforcement authorities

that meet the requirements of 40 CFR

70.11 of this chapter; (2) authority to

request information from regulated

sources regarding their compliance

status; (3) authority to inspect sources

and any records required to determine

a source’s compliance status; and (4) if

ODEQ delegates authorities to a Local

agency, ODEQ must retain enforcement

authority unless the Local agency’s

authorities meet the requirements of 40

CFR 70.11. Oregon has provided to EPA

legal opinions from the State Attorney

General and the independent legal

counsel for LRAPA which clearly

outline Oregon’s enforcement

authorities as they pertain to the

requirements of 40 CFR 63.91(b)(1).4

B. Copies of State Statutes and

Regulations

Complete copies of the Oregon

regulations, OAR 340–032 (1995) and

OAR 340–28 (1995), and Oregon

Revised Statutes (ORS) 468 and 468A

(1993) have been provided to EPA as

required by 40 CFR 63.91(b)(2). OAR

340–032 ‘‘Hazardous Air Pollutants’’

establishes Oregon’s procedures for

regulating sources subject to 40 CFR

Part 61 and Part 63. OAR 340–032–0130

‘‘List of Hazardous Air Pollutants’’

incorporates into state law all of the

HAP listed in section 112(b) of the Act.

OAR 340–032–0240 ‘‘Permit to Operate’’

requires all new, existing and modified

major sources of HAPs to obtain a FOP.

OAR 340–032–0500 ‘‘Emission

Limitations for New Major Sources’’

requires new major sources of

hazardous air pollutants to obtain a

permit prior to construction or

reconstruction, as well as requires such
2076 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 10 / Wednesday, January 15, 1997 / Proposed Rules

5For further discussion of ODEQ’s FOP fee

system, see the September 14, 1994 Federal

Register (59 FR 47105) rulemaking granting interim

approval to the state of Oregon of its FOP program,

including its three part fee system.

6For further discussion regarding Oregon’s

authorities and resources for implementing its FOP

program please refer to the language contained in

the September 14, 1994, Federal Register (59 FR

47105) notice proposing interim approval of the

Oregon FOP program and the December 2, 1994,

Federal Register (59 FR 61820) notice granting

interim approval of the Oregon FOP program, and

the September 28, 1995 Federal Register proposal

(60 FR 50166) and direct final Federal Register (60

FR 50106) which granted full approval of ODEQ’s

FOP program.

7See the December 10, 1993, EPA policy memo

from John Seitz of OAQPS titled ‘‘Straight

Delegation Issues Concerning Sections 111 and 112

Requirements and Title V.’’

new sources to utilize maximum

achievable control technology (MACT).

OAR 340–032–0510 through –0620

adopts by reference 40 CFR Part 63,

subparts A, F through I, M through O,

Q, R, T, and EE as they apply to new

major sources. OAR 340–032–2500

‘‘Emission Limitations for Existing

Major Sources’’ requires existing major

sources of HAP to comply with

applicable federal MACT standards and

if such standards are not timely

promulgated, then comply with stateadopted MACT regulations and to

obtain a state-issued FOP permit. OAR

340–032–2600 through –3010 adopt by

reference 40 CFR Part 63, subparts A, F

through I, M through O, Q, R, T, and EE

as they apply to existing major sources.

OAR 340–032–4500 ‘‘Requirements for

Modifications of Existing Major

Sources’’ requires existing major sources

of HAP to apply MACT whenever that

source is modified and the modification

results in an increase in HAP emissions

above de minimis levels.

OAR 340–032–5500 ‘‘Applicability’’

indicates which sections of OAR 340–

032 with which a stationary source

identified in OAR 340–032–5530

through 5650 must comply with. OAR

340–032–5510 ‘‘General Requirements’’

requires all new sources subject to the

state HAP regulations to notify Oregon

prior to and after start-up. OAR 340–

032–5520 ‘‘Federal Regulations Adopted

by Reference’’ adopt by reference 40

CFR 61, subparts A through F, I, J, L, N

through P, V, and Y through FF as in

effect on July 1, 1993. OAR 340–032–

5530 through OAR 340–032–5580

contain brief descriptions for each of the

Federal NESHAP standards adopted by

reference under OAR 340–032–5520

which helps a source determine

whether it is potentially subject to the

state-adopted standard without having

to refer to the Code of Federal

Regulations. OAR 3440–032–5590

through OAR 340–032–5650 contains

the state asbestos rule language. Finally,

OAR 340–32–5520 provides that if a

discrepancy exists between 40 CFR Part

61 and OAR 340–32–5530 through 340–

32–5650, then the applicable section of

40 CFR Part 61 shall apply.

C. Demonstration of Adequate

Resources

40 CFR 63.91(b)(3) requires Oregon to

provide for adequate resources to

implement and enforce all aspects of the

program or rule. Specifically, 40 CFR

63.91(b)(3) requires Oregon to provide:

1) a description in narrative form of the

scope, structure, coverage, and

processes of the State program; 2) a

description of the organization and

structure of the agency or agencies that

will have responsibility for

administering the program; and 3) a

description of the agency staff who will

carry out the State program, including

the number, occupation, and general

duties of the employees.

EPA believes Oregon has taken the

necessary steps to provide for adequate

resources to support implementation

and enforcement of its air toxics

program which are at least as stringent

as the federal program. OAR 340–032

and OAR 340–28 provide the regulatory

framework for administering Oregon’s

HAP program. OAR 340–32–0105 now

provides that the provisions of OAR

340–032 apply ‘‘to any new, modified,

or existing source that emits or has the

potential to emit any HAP’’ which is

defined in OAR 340–32–0120(23) as ‘‘an

air pollutant listed by the EPA pursuant

to § 112(b) of the Federal CAA.’’ Oregon

has defined ‘‘HAP’’ such that their

program at a minimum covers the same

list of HAPs found in the CAA.

Oregon has adopted by reference into

state law all of the 40 CFR Part 61 and

Part 63 subparts for which they are

requesting delegation under the

authority of 40 CFR 63.91. Therefore,

Oregon’s air toxics programs covers the

same sources and the same pollutants

which are presently being covered

under the Federal NESHAP regulations.

ODEQ will be implementing and

enforcing OAR 340–032 and OAR 340–

28 throughout the State of Oregon (with

the exception of Lane County) under the

authority of ORS 468 and ORS 468A.

Implementation and enforcement of

OAR 340–032 and 340–028 or similar

local regulations will be administered

by LRAPA in Lane County. OAR 340–

032–0110 and ORS 468A.135 gives

LRAPA authority to implement and

enforce OAR regulations or adopt their

own more stringent regulations.

Resources to fund implementation

and enforcement of the Oregon air

toxics program for sources subject to the

Federal NESHAP regulations but which

are not subject to FOP requirements are

covered by a three-part fee system

comprised of a filing fee, a processing

fee, and a compliance determination fee

administered through its ACDP

program. Oregon has been operating this

fee program since 1972. Program costs

for major sources subject concurrently

to NESHAP regulations and FOP

requirements are covered through a

separate three-part fee system composed

of an emission fee, a base fee and user

fees administered through its FOP

program. EPA believes that Oregon

assess fees which are adequate to cover

the costs of implementing and enforcing

the terms of each permit issued under

these programs.5

Oregon was granted full approval of

its FOP program on November 27, 1995.

See 60 FR 50106. As part of this

approval, EPA found that Oregon

possessed adequate legal authorities and

resources to implement and enforce its

statewide FOP program as it applies to

Part 70 sources.6 Since Oregon has met

the requirements of Part 70 for an

approved Title V operating permit

program, EPA considers this finding of

adequate resources and authorities to be

sufficient for section 112(l) purposes as

well as it applies to Part 70 sources.7

D. Demonstration of Expeditious

Implementation

Oregon has the broad legal authority

to implement and enforce all Federal

NESHAP regulations adopted into State

law or included in a State-issued permit

pursuant to OAR 340–28. EPA believes

that Oregon’s statutory and regulatory

authorities are adequate to

expeditiously implement those 40 CFR

Parts 61 and 63 regulations adopted by

reference in OAR 340–032 for which

they are requesting delegation.

Oregon will adopt all new and

amended NESHAP regulations into OAR

340–032. Oregon will implement and

enforce these regulations for Part 70

sources through its FOP program. All

existing major sources of HAP will be

required to obtain a FOP. See OAR 340–

032–0220(1) and OAR 340–28–2110(1).

New major sources of HAP must obtain

an ACDP construction permit prior to

commencing construction. See OAR

340–032–0230(1).

E. Demonstration of Expeditious

Compliance

The EPA believes that Oregon’s FOP

program provides for an expeditious

schedule for assuring compliance with

NESHAP requirements as required by

63.91(b)(5). The FOP program

regulations contain adequate authority
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 10 / Wednesday, January 15, 1997 / Proposed Rules 2077

8The source would thereby become a ‘‘synthetic

area source’’ or a ‘‘synthetic minor source.’’

9See section 5.1.2.b of the document ‘‘Interim

Enabling Guidance for the Implementation of 40

CFR part 63, subpart E’’ (EPA–453/R–93–040,

November 1993).

to provide for an expeditious schedule

for assuring compliance with all

NESHAP requirements. Nothing in OAR

340–032 or OAR 340–028 would allow

a source to avoid or delay compliance

with any CAA requirement beyond the

compliance date required by the Federal

NESHAP regulations.

EPA also believes that the Oregon

synthetic area source program meets the

requirements of 40 CFR 63.91(b)(5)

since this program does not allow for

the waiver of any NESHAP requirement.

To be more specific, sources that

become minor through a permit issued

pursuant to this program will still be

required to meet all NESHAP

requirements applicable to non-major

sources.

F. Demonstration of Adequate Legal

Authority

40 CFR 63.91(b)(6) requires Oregon to

demonstrate that it has adequate legal

authority to assure compliance as well

as assure minimum enforcement

authority which includes: (1)

enforcement authorities that meet the

requirements of 40 CFR 70.11; and (2)

ability to retain enforcement authority

in jurisdictions where this program has

been re-delegated by the State to a local

authority, unless the local authority has

enforcement authorities that meet the

requirements of 40 CFR 70.11. As

previously indicated, ODEQ and LRAPA

have enforcement authorities that meet

the requirements of 40 CFR 70.11.

IV. Programs for Proposed Approval

A. Adoptions by Reference

It is EPA’s belief that the Oregon

submittal substantially meets the

requirements of 40 CFR 63.91.

Therefore, with this notice EPA

proposes to grant full approval to

Oregon’s request for delegated authority

to implement and enforce 40 CFR Part

61, subparts A through F, J, L, N through

P, V, and Y through FF; and 40 CFR Part

63, subparts A, F through I, N, O, Q, R,

T, and EE, as adopted into OAR 340–

032. This delegation of authority to

implement and enforce these rules

applies only as these rules apply to 40

CFR part 70 sources. EPA will continue

to administer and enforce these

regulations as they apply to non-Part 70.

B. Voluntary Limits on HAP Emissions

EPA is proposing to grant approval of

OAR 340–028 sections –110(114),

–1050, –1740, and –2110 under the

authority of section 112(l) of the Act to

recognize the Oregon ACDP program as

federally enforceable for the purpose of

establishing potential to emit

limitations. Approval of these

regulations will allow Oregon to create

federally enforceable emission

limitations by permit for sources who

have the potential to emit HAP above

major threshold levels but have actual

HAP emissions which are below major

source levels.8

C. Mechanism for Delegation of Future

NESHAP Standards

In addition, EPA proposes to approve

a mechanism for future delegation of

those Federal NESHAP regulations that

Oregon adopts by reference into state

law.9 Under this streamlined approach,

upon adoption of a NESHAP regulation

Oregon would only need to send a letter

to EPA requesting delegation for that

regulation. EPA would in turn respond

to this request by sending a letter back

to Oregon delegating the NESHAP

regulation as requested. No further

formal response from Oregon would be

necessary at this point, and if a negative

response from Oregon is not received

within 10 days of this letter of

delegation from EPA, the delegation

would then become final.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Request for Public Comments

The EPA is requesting comments on

all aspects of today’s proposed approval.

Copies of the Oregon submittal and

other information relied upon for this

action are contained in a docket

maintained at the EPA Regional Office.

The docket is a file of information

submitted to, or otherwise considered

by, EPA in the development of this

proposed rulemaking. The principal

purposes of the docket are: (1) To allow

interested parties a means to identify

and locate documents so that they can

effectively participate in the rulemaking

process, and (2) to serve as the record

in case of judicial review. The EPA will

consider any comments received by

February 14, 1997.

B. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this regulatory action

from Executive Order 12866 review.

C. 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.

NESHAP rule or program delegation

approvals under section 112(l) of the

Act do not create any new requirements,

but simply confer federal authority for

those requirements that the State of

Oregon is already imposing. Therefore,

because the section 112 delegation

approvals do not impose any new

requirements, the Agency has

determined that it would not have a

significant impact on any small entities

affected.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

EPA has determined that the

proposed approval action promulgated

today 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.

VI. Summary of Action

EPA is soliciting public comment on

its proposed delegation and approval of

implementation and enforcement

authority to Oregon pursuant to the

authority of section 112(l) of the Act.

EPA is also proposing to approve a

mechanism for Oregon to receive future

delegation of section 112 standards that

are unchanged from the federal

standards, but only as these standards

apply to Part 70 sources. At the request

of Oregon, EPA is proposing to take no

action at this time in regard to their 40

CFR 63.93 rule substitution request for

the state asbestos regulations contained

in OAR 340–32–5590 through 340–32–

5650. Interested parties are invited to

comment on all aspects of this proposed

rule. Comments should be submitted in

triplicate, to the address listed in the

front of this Notice. Public comments

postmarked by February 14, 1997 will

be considered in the final rulemaking

action taken by EPA. Issues raised by

those comments will be carefully

reviewed and considered in the decision

to approve or disapprove the submittal.

The EPA expects to make a final

decision on whether or not to approve

the Oregon submittal by July 14, 1997

and will give notice of the decision in

the Federal Register. The notice will

include a summary of the reasons for
2078 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 10 / Wednesday, January 15, 1997 / Proposed Rules

the final determination and a response

to all major comments.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: January 6, 1997.

Chuck Clark,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–977 Filed 1–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P