17700 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 72 / Thursday, April 14, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

with jurisdiction over populations of less than 50,000.

This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature by the Acting Regional Administrator under the procedures published inthe Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54FR 2214-2225), asrevised by an October 4, 1993 memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator forAir andRadiation. A future document willinform the general public ofthesetables. On January 6, 1989, the Office ofManagement and Budget (OMB) waived Table 2 and Table 3 SIP revisions (54 FR 2222) from the requirements ofsection 3 ofExecutive Order 12291 fora period oftwo years. The USEPA has submitted a request for

a permanent waiverfor Table 2 and 3 SIP revisions. The OMBhas agreed to continue the waiver until such time as it rules on USEPA's request. This request continues ineffect under Executive Order 12866, which superseded Executive Order 12291 on September 30, 1993.

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicialreview of this action mustbe filed in the United States Court ofAppeals for the appropriate circuit by [Insert date 60 days from date ofpublication]. Filing a petition forreconsideration by the Administrator ofthis final rule does not affect the finality ofthis rule forthe
purposes ofjudicial review nor doesit extendthe time within which apetition forjudicial review may be filed, and shall notpostpone theeffectiveness of such rule or action. This action regarding EPA's approval ofrevisions to Maryland's air pollution emerency episode requirements (COMAR 26.11.05) may notbe challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List ofSubjects in40 CFRPart 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur Oxides.

Dated: March 21, 1994. Stanley L.Laskowski, ActingRegional Administrator, RegionIlL.

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52-AMENDED]

1.The authority citation forpart 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q. Subpart V-Maryland

2. Section 52.1070 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(100) toread as follows:
§52.1070 Identification of plan.

(c) * * * (100) Revisions to the Code of Maryland Administrative Regulations (COMAR) submitted onJune 7, 1990by the Maryland Department ofthe Environment:

(i) Incorporation by reference. (A) Letter ofJune 7,1990 from the Maryland Department ofthe Environment transmitting revisions to the Maryland State Implementation Plan. (B) The following revised regulations
to COMAR 26.11.05 (Air Pollution Episode Plans), effective June 18, 1990: 26.11.05.01A., .01B., .01H., and .01J.; 26.11.05.02B., .02C.; 26.11.05.03A., 03B., 03D.; 26.11.05.05A., 05B., 05C., and .05D. Deletion ofthe definition "coefficient ofhaze."

(ii) Additional material. (A) Remainder ofthe June 7,1990 State submittal. [FR Doc. 94-8964 Filed 4-13-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-0-F

40 CFR Part52
[MT1-1-6311; FRL-4859-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Montana; State Implementation Plan forColumbia Falls PMo Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: Inthis action, EPA approves the State implementation plan (SIP) submitted bythe State ofMontana to achieve attainment ofthe National ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter ith an aerodynamic diameter less than orequal
to anominal 10micrometers (PMo). The SIP was submitted by Montana to satisfy certain Federal requirements for

an approvable moderate nonattainment

area PM,o SIP for Columbia Falls. The State has committed to complete several actions forthis SIP, including issues regarding its New Source Review and Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration regulations, testmethods, emergency episode plan, operating permit program, and contingency measures. EPA will take separate action, as appropriate, on these rules when the State fulfills its related commitments.

- EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule will become effective on May 16, 1994. ADDRESSES: Copies ofthe State's submittal and other information are available for inspection during normal business hours at the following locations: Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, AirPrograms Branch, 999 18th Street, suite 500, Denver,Colorado 80202-2405; Montana Department ofHealth and Environmental Sciences, Air Quality Bureau, Cogswell Building,Helena, Montana 59620-0901; and USEPA Air & Radiation Docket Information Center, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meredith Bond, Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, (303) 293-1764. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Columbia Falls, Montana area

.was designated nonattainment for PMo and classified as moderate under sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) ofthe Clean Air Act, upon enactment ofthe Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.' See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991); 40 CFR 81.327 (Flathead County; Columbia Falls and vicinity). The air quality planning requirements for moderate PMo nonattajnment areas are set out in subparts I and 4 ofpart D, titleI ofthe Act.

The EPA has issued a "General Preamble" describing EPA's preliminary views on how EPA intends to review SIPs and SIP revisions submitted under title I of theAct.,including those State submittals containing moderate PMIo nonattainment area SIP requirements (see generally 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992)). Because EPA is describing its interpretations here only in broad terms, the reader should refer to the General Preamble for amore detailed discussion ofthe interpretations oftitle I advanced in this final action and the supporting rationale.

Those States containing initial moderate PMo nonattainment areas

were required to submit, among other things, the following provisions by November 15, 1991:

1. Provisions to assure that reasonably
available control measures (RACM)

'The 1990 Amendments to theClean Air Act made significant changes to theairquality planning requirements for areas that donotmeet (orthat significantly contribute to ambient airquality in a nearby area that does not meet) the PMmo National Ambient Air Quality Standards (see Public Law No. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399). References herein are to the CleanAir Act, as amended ("the Act"), 42 U.S.C. 7401, etseq.

HeinOnline -- 59 Fed. Reg. 17700 1994Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 72 / Thursday, April 14, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 17701

(including such reductions in emissions from existing sources inthe area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, ofreasonably available control technology (RACT)) shallbe implemented no laterthanDecember 10,1993;

2. Either a demonstration (including air qualitymodelling) that the plan will provide for attainment asexpeditiously

as practicable but nolater than December 31,1994, or ademonstration that attainment by that dateis impracticable;

3. Quantitative milestones which are tobe achieved every 3 years and which demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP) toward attainmentby December 31, 1994;and

4.Provisions to assurethat the control requirements applicable tomajor stationary sources ofPMmo also applyto major stationary sources ofPMmo precursors except where the Administrator determines that such

sources donot contribute significantly toPM,0 levels which exceed the NAAQS in the area. See sections 172(c), 188, and 189ofthe Act.

Some provisions aredue ata later date. States with initial moderate PM1O nonattainment areas were required to submit a permitprogram for the construction and operation ofnew and modified major stationary sources of PM,0 byJune 30, 1992 (seesection 189(a)). Such States also were required to submit contingency measures by November 15, 1993 that become effective without further action by the Stateor EPA, upon a determination by EPA thatthe area has failed to achieve RFP orto attain the PMo NAAQS by the applicable statutory deadline. See section 172(c)(9) and 57 FR 13543- 13544.

OnJanuary 27, 1994,EPA announced itsproposed approval ofthe Columbia Falls,Montana moderate nonattainment

area PMIO SP asmeeting those moderate PMo SIPrequirements due on November 15, 1991 (59FR 3804-3808). In that proposed rulemaking action and related Technical Support Document (TSD), EPA described in detail its interpretations oftitle Iand its rationale forproposing to approve the Columbia Falls moderate nonattainment area PMo SIP taking into consideration the specific factual issues presented.

EPA requested public comments on all aspects oftheproposal (please reference 59FR 3808), and no comments werereceived during the comment period, which ended on February 28, 1994. This final action on the Columbia Falls moderate nonattainment area PMo SIP is unchanged from the January 27, 1994 proposed approval action.

The discussion herein provides only a broad overview ofthe proposed action EPA is now finalizing. Thepublic is referred tothe January 27, 1994 proposed rule for a more indepth discussion ofthe action nowbeing finalized.

U. Response to Comments

EPA did not receive any public comments regarding itsJanuary 27, 1994 proposed approval ofthe Columbia Falls moderate nonattainment area PM1O SIP (59 FR 3804-3808). 

### This Action

Section 110(k) oftheAct sets out provisions governing EPA'sreview of SIP submittals (see 57 FR 13565-13566). The Columbia Falls SIPconsists oftwo submittals.The first contains the Flathead County AirPollution Control Program and Air Pollution Plan regulations. Flathead County contains two PM,0 nonattainment areas for which SIPs were due in November 1991: Columbia Falls and Kalispell. The Flathead Countyregulations apply to both areas and were submitted with the attainment demonstration forKalispell

onNovember 25, 1991, after being approved by theMontana Board of Health andEnvironmental Sciences (MBHES) onNovember 15, 1991. The Columbia Falls SIP and attainment demonstration were not submitted at that time since a permit necessary tothe control strategy for the SIP was not finalized. The MBHES issued that permit and approved the SIP onJanuary 24, 1992. This second submittal to EPA

was madebythe Governor onMay 6, 1992. Final technical corrections to the SIP were received by EPA onJune 15, 1993. The submittals were intended to satisfythose moderate PM,o SIP requirements due for Columbia Falls on November 15, 1991.

As described inEPA's proposed action onthis SIP (59 FR 3804-3808, January 27, 1994), the Columbia Falls moderate nonattainment areaPM~o plan includes, among otherthings, a comprehensive and accurate emissions inventory, control measures that satisfy the RACM requirement, a demonstration (including air quality modelling) that attainment ofthe PM,o NAAQS will be achieved by January 1. 19952, provisions for meeting the November

2The Clean Air Act callsfor attainment by December 31, 1994. Section 188(c)(1). EPA interpretsthe State's demonstration asproviding for attainment ofthePMo NAAQS by January 1, 1995. EPA is approving the State's demonstration on the basis ofthede minimis differential between the two dates. 15. 1994 quantitative milestone and reasonable further progress, and enforceability documentation. Further, EPA proposed todetermine that major

sources ofprecursors ofPMo do not contribute significantly to PM, 0 levels in

excess ofthe NAAQS in Columbia Falls 3 Please refer to EPA's notice of proposed rulemaking (59FR 3805) and the TSD for that action for amore detailed discussion ofthese elements of the Columbia Falls plan.

In this final rule, EPA is announcing its approval ofthose elements ofthe Columbia Falls moderate nonattainment

area PMo SIP that were due on November 15, 1991, and submitted by the Governor onNovember 25, 1991 and' May 6, 1992, with technical-corrections submitted in a letter dated June 15, 1993. Specifically, EPA is approving the Flathead County rules (withthe exception ofrules 501 through 506 which are specific to the city of Kalispell-EPA willitake separate action

on the Kalispell PMo nonattainment

area control plan) and the Columbia Falls PMIO nonattainment area control plan.

EPA finds that the State ofMontana's PM,0 SIP for the Columbia Falls moderate nonattainment area meets the Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM), including Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT), requirement. Five sources/source categories were identified as contributing to the PMo nonattainment problem in Columbia Falls and, therefore, were targeted for control in the SIP. The State has demonstrated that by applying control measures to area

sources (re-entrained road dust, residential wood combustion, prescribed burning, and motor vehicle exhaust), aswell as reducing allowable emissions through air quality permit modifications for the Plum Creek sawmill and fiberboard plant, Columbia Falls will be in attainment by January 1, 1995 (see footnote # 2) and it does not appear that applying further control

measures to these sources would expedite attainment.

EPA views the following measures as reasonable, enforceable, and responsible for significant PM, 0 emissions reductions in Columbia Falls: (1) Flathead CountyRules No. qO-606, which provide re-entrained road dust controls, including sanding and chip

3The consequences of thisfinding aretoexclude these sources fromthe applicability ofPM,o nonattainment area control requirements. Note that EPA's finding isbased on the current character of thearea including for example, the existing mix of

sourcesin the area. Itis possible,therefore, that futuregrowth could change the significance of precursors inthearea. I

HeinOnline -- 59 Fed. Reg. 17701 199417702 Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 72 / Thursday, April 14, 1994 / Rules and Regulations

sealing standards and street sweeping and flushing requirements; (2) Flathead County Rules No. 201-209, which regulate prescribed burning; (3) Flathead County AirPollution Control Program, Chapter VIII, Sub-chapter 3, which contains a voluntary solid fuel burning device curtailment program, and Sub-chapter 4, which lists materials prohibited from burning in wood orcoal residential stoves; (4) industry permit modifications made at Plum Creek to reduce allowable plant-wide emissions; and (5)the Federal tailpipe standards, which provide an ongoing benefit due to fleet turnover. The RACM (including RACT) provisions in the SIPare described further in the technical support document associated with EPA'sJanuary 27, 1994 notice of proposed rulemaking on this SIP.

Further, although no credit was claimed in the SIP, EPA notes that the State has adopted, aspart ofthe Columbia Falls SIP, lie Montana Smoke Management Plan, which sets standards for the regulation ofprescribed burning. EPA approved this plan in aseparate rulemaking action. (59 FR2988, January 20, 1994).

A moredetailed discussion ofthe individual source contributions, their associated control measures (including available control technology) and an explanation ofwhy certain available control measures were not implemented, canbe found in theTSD accompanying EPA's proposed approval ofthe Columbia Falls moderate PMo nonattainment area SIP (59 FR 3804). EPA has reviewed the State's documentation and concluded that it adequately justifies the control
measures-to be implemented. The implementation ofMontana's PMo nonattainment plan for Columbia Falls will result in the attainment ofthe PMo NAAQS by January 1,1995 (seefootnote # 2). By this action EPA isapproving the Columbia Falls PMo plan's control

measures as satisfying the RACM, including RACT, requirement.

As noted, EPA did notpropose to approve some aspects ofthe Columbia Falls SIP, as explained in the notice of ,proposed rulemaking (59 FR 3804-3808) and associated TSD. To address deficiencies identified by EPA, the State adopted commitments after public hearings onNovember 15, 1991 and January 24, 1992, and submitted the commitments to EPA with the Governor's May 6, 1992 letter, as additional tasks tobe completed to correct the deficiencies in the Columbia Falls and statewide SIP. The State has fulfilled commitments related to SIP, requirements due November 15, 1991 for the Columbia Falls nonattainment area. Those items related to deficiencies in the statewide SIP will beaddressed in a separate action. EPA has determined that the Columbia Falls SIP

can be fully approved without the State fulfilling the remaining commitments. Therefore, EPA is tracking the State's efforts to meet these commitments, but approval ofthe SIP for the Columbia Falls nonattainment areais not contingent upon the State meeting them by the specified dates. Therefore, EPA. will take separate action, as appropriate, when the remaining commitments are fulfilled by the State. A more detailed discussion ofthe State's commitments

can be found in EPA's January 27, 1994 proposed approval oftheColumbia Fallsmoderate nonattainment area PMo SIP (59 FR 3804-3808) and the TSD for that action.

The State has made a separate commitment to testing and further' dispersion modeling ofemissions from the Columbia Falls Aluminum Company (CFAC) facility. This facility is located outside the nonattainment area and emissions from CFAC were not identified on the Chemical Mass Balance analysis of filters collected from the monitor inthe Columbia Falls nonattainment area. Emissions from CFAC are a potential concern, however, since this source accounts for 20 percent ofthe emission inventory (atpermitted allowable emissions). EPA will continue
to monitor the testing and assist the State withany action required by the results.
Final Action

This document announces EPA's final action on the rulemaking proposed at 59 FR 3804. As noted elsewhere inthis action, EPA received no adverse public
comments on the proposed action. As a direct result, the Regional Administrator has reclassified this action from Table 2
to Table 3 under the processing procedures established at 54FR 2214, January 19, 1989.

Nothing inthis action should be construed as permitting or allowing or establishing a precedent forany future request for a revision to any SIP. Each request for a revision to the SIP shall be considered separately in lightofspecific technical, economic, and environmental factors, and in relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements. Regulatory Process

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5U.S.C. 600, etseq.,EPAmust prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact ofany proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will nothave a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-forprofit enterprises, and government entities withjurisdiction over .populations oflessthan 50,000. SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I,part D ofthe Clean Air Act donot 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, I certify that it doesnot have a significant impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities affected. Moreover, due to the
nature ofthe Federal-state relationship under the Clean Air Act, preparation of

a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness ofstate action. The Clean AirAct forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.. UnionElectricCo.v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) ofthe Clean AirAct, petitions forjudicial review of thisaction must be filed in the United States Court ofAppeals for the appropriate circuit by June 13, 1994. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator ofthis final rule does
notaffect the finality ofthisrule forthe
purposes ofjudicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition forjudicial review may be file, and shall
not postpone the effectiveness ofsuch rule oraction. This action may notbe challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (See section 307(b)(2)).

Executive Order (EO) 12866

This action has been classified asa Table 3 action by the Regional Administrator underthe procedures published in the Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54FR 2214-2225), as revised by an October 4, 1993, memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator forAir and Radiation. A future document will inform the general public ofthese tables. On January 6, 1989,the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) waived Table 2 and 3 SIPrevisions (54FR 2222) from the requirements ofsection 3 of Executive Order 12291 for two years. EPA has submitted arequest fora permanent waiver for Table 2 and 3SIP revisions. The OMB has agreed to continue the waiver until such time as it rules on EPA'srequest. This request continues ineffect under Executive Order 12866 which superseded Executive Order 12291 on September 30, 1993.

HeinOnline -- 59 Fed. Reg. 17702 1994Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 72 / Thursday, April 14, 1994 / Rules and Regulations 

### 17703

ListofSubjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Note: Incorporation by reference ofthe State Implementation Plan for the State of Montana was approved by the Director ofthe Federal Registeron July 1,1982.

Dated: March 24, 1994. William P, Yellowtail, Regional Administrator. Chapter I, title 40 ofthe Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 52--{AMENDED]

1. The authority citation forpart 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart BB--Montana

2. Section 52.1370 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(31) to read as follows:
§52.1370 Identificationof plan.

* * * *

(c) * * (31) The Governor ofMontana submitted aportion ofthe requirements forthe moderate nonattainment area PM1oState Implementation Plan (SIP) for Columbia Falls, Montana with letters dated November 25, 1991 and May 6, 1992, with technical corrections dated June 15, 1993. The submittals were made to satisfy those moderate PM1o nonattainment area SIP requirements due for Columbia Falls on November 15, 1991.

(i) Incorporation by reference. (A) Stipulation signed November 15, 1991 between the Montana Department ofHealth and Environmental Sciences, the Flathead County Commission, and the Kalispell City Council and the Columbia Falls City Council, which delineates responsibilities and authorities between the MDHES and Flathead County.

(B) Board order issued on November 15, 1991 by the Montana Board of Health and Environmental Sciences approving theFlathead County Air Pollution Control Program.

(C) Flathead County Board of Commissioners Resolution No. 867, adopting the Flathead County Air Pollution Control Program and Flathead County Air Pollution Control Regulations, with the exception ofrules 501 through 506, signed October 3, 1991.

(i) Additional material. (A) Montana Department ofHealth and Environmental Sciences Air Quality Permit # 2667-M, with a final modification date ofJanuary 24, 1992, for Plum Creek Manufacturing, Inc. Columbia Falls Operations.

(B) Montana Smoke Management Plan, effective April 28, 1988, which addresses prescribed burning requirements.

(C) Federal tailpipe standards, which provide an ongoing benefit due to fleet
turnover. (FRDoc. 94-8965 Filed 4-13-94; 8:45 am)

ILUNG CODE 6560-0-F

40 CFR Part 52
[MN12-1-6110; FRL-4858-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Minnesota

AGENCY: United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The USEPA isapproving revisions to Minnesota's State Implementation Plan (SIP) for sulfur dioxide (SO 2) forthe Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) 131 area (excluding the Pine Bend area ofDakota County and the St. Paul Park/Ashland area), which were submitted to USEPA

on May 29, 1992. These SIP revisions

were submitted by the State of Minnesota as a means ofdemonstrating attainment ofthe National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for SO 2. The USEPA proposed to disapprove the originally submitted SIP revisions on September 13, 1993. However, that notice ofproposed rulemaking stated that ifthe issues identified within were satisfactorily addressed by the State by the end ofthe 30-day comment period, and ifno other significant adverse
comments were received, USEPA would proceed with a final approval. The issues were adequately addressed by the State and submitted to the USEPA on July 12, 1993. Nocomments were received on the September 13, 1993, proposed action. Consequently, the USEPA is fully approving the SO 2 SIP revisions for AQCR 131.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule becomes effective on May16, 1994. ADDRESSES: Copies ofthe SIPrevision and other materials relating to this rulemaking are available for inspection
at the following address: (It is recommended that you telephone Randy Robinson, (312) 353-6713, before visiting the-Region 5 Office.)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

A copy oftoday's revision to the Minnesota SIP is available for inspection at:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket, 6102, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randy Robinson, Air Enforcement Branch, Regulation Development Section (AE-17J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353;-6713.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On May 29, 1992, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) submitted to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for sulfur dioxide (SO 2) in Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) 131. The seven-county metropolitan area (AQCR 131) has been' designated, by the USEPA, as nonattainment for SO2. This submittal

was intended to demonstrate attainment ofthe National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for SO2in AQCR 131, excluding an area surrounding the

S0 2 emission sources at Ashland Petroleum Company, and an area surrounding the SO2 emission sources at and near Koch Refining Company, located in Dakota County. These two

sources and the surrounding areas were subject to separate submittals and are addressed in separate rulemakings.

On September 13, 1993, a document

was published in the Federal Register (58 FR 47840) which proposed disapproval ofthe SO2 SIPrevision for AQCR 131. The proposed notice discussed the State submittal, including background information, attainment demonstration, specific aspects ofeach administrative order, USEPA comments regarding the administrative orders, comparison ofsubmittal with sections 110 and 172 requirements, and proposed rulemaking action. The disapproval was based on the issues which had been identified in the notice by the USEPA. However, the action also stated that ifthe issues were satisfactorily addressed by the end of the 30-day comment period, and if no adverse comments were received, the USEPA would proceed with a final approval. This final rule will present a brief summary ofthe State submittal, detail how the USEPA identified issues

were addressed, and present our recommendation for final approval.

HeinOnline -- 59 Fed. Reg. 17703 1994