Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 7913

Antigua and Barbuda

Bahamas

Barbados

Belize

Bolivia

British Virgin Islands

Canada

Cape Verde

Costa Rica

Dominica

Dominican Republic

Ecuador

El Salvador

Grenada

Guyana

Honduras

Jamaica

Japan

Mali

Mexico

Montserrat

Nigeria

Panama

St. Christopher and Nevis

St. Lucia

St. Vincent and the Grenadines

Sierra Leone

Trinidad and Tobago

* * * * *

[Delete section 391.411 in its entirety.]

[Renumber former section 391.412 as

391.411.]

[Renumber former section 391.413 as

391.412 and add the countries in the

Summary to read as follows:]

Use the pink international money

order form (MP1) for money orders

payable in Anguilla, Antigua and

Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize,

Bolivia, British Virgin Islands, Canada,

Cape Verde, Costa Rica, Dominica,

Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El

Salvador, Grenada, Guyana, Honduras,

Jamaica, Japan, Mali, Mexico,

Montserrat, Nigeria, Panama, St.

Christopher and Nevis, St. Lucia, St.

Vincent and the Grenadines, Sierra

Leone, and Trinidad and Tobago.

Follow the issuance procedures in DMM

S020.

Note: Money orders payable in Canada, the

amount of the money order must be

expressed in U.S. currency only. Issuing

clerks must use the money order imprinter in

the usual manner, printing the amount

received in U.S. currency. Clerks must not

write the word ‘‘Canadian,’’ followed by the

equivalent amount in Canadian currency, on

the money order.

* * * * *

[Revise section 391.421 by deleting ‘‘the

domestic money order or’’ from the first

sentence to read as follows:]

When the international postal money

order form (MP1) is used to send funds,

the purchaser should complete the

information requested on both the

money order and the customer’s receipt.

The Postal Service is not liable for

money orders that are lost before the

purchaser completes this information.

Money orders may be made payable to

the purchaser, a person or a firm, or a

payee by official title. (Example:

Director of Publications, Canada.)

* * * * *

[Revise section 391.423 by deleting

country names to read as follows:]

Follow the instructions for preparing

domestic money orders in DMM S020

when using the pink international

postal money order form (MP1).

* * * * *

[Revise section 391.431 by deleting

‘‘Domestic Postal Money Orders and’’

from the title and by deleting country

names to read as follows:]

391.431 International Postal Money Order

Form (MP1)

Follow the instructions for preparing

domestic money orders in DMM S020

when issuing the pink international

postal money order form (MP1).

* * * * *

[Delete section 391.721 in its entirety.]

[Renumber former section 391.722 to

391.721.]

[Revise former section 391.723 by

renumbering to section 391.722 and by

deleting country names to read as

follows:]

Use Form 6401, Domestic Money

Order Inquiry, in accordance with DMM

S020.2.14 when filing inquiries or

requests for replacement of international

postal money order form (MP1). Only

the purchaser may file and receive

payment. Replacement will not be made

before 6 months after the date of

issuance.

* * * * *

[Delete sections 391.9, 391.91, and

391.92 in their entirety.]

* * * * *

A transmittal letter making the

changes in the pages of the International

Mail Manual will be published and

transmitted to subscribers

automatically. Notice of issuance of the

transmittal letter will be published in

the Federal Register as provided by 39

CFR 20.3.

Stanley F. Mires,

Chief Counsel, Legislative.

[FR Doc. 95–3433 Filed 2–9–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710–12–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[TN–139–1–6667a; FRL–5140–9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans;

Tennessee; Revision to New Source

Review, Construction and Operating

Permit Requirements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: In this document, EPA is

approving revisions to the State

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by

the State of Tennessee through the

Tennessee Department of Environment

and Conservation on August 17, 1994.

The submittal included revisions to the

State’s new source review (NSR)

regulations, which were promulgated to

bring the State’s regulations into

compliance with the 1990 amendments

to the Clean Air Act and the Federal

regulations. EPA finds that the revised

State rules meet the Federal

nonattainment NSR permitting

requirements of the Clean Air Act as

amended in 1990 (CAA) for the State’s

ozone (O3) nonattainment areas.

On January 15, 1993, in a letter from

Patrick M. Tobin to Governor Ned

McWherter, EPA notified the State of

Tennessee that EPA had made a finding

of failure to submit required programs

for the nonattainment area. The revised

State NSR rules satisfy those

requirements for this area. Therefore,

the sanctions clock was stopped by the

complete submittal and the Federal

implementation plan clock will be

stopped at the time of this approval.

DATES: This final rule will be effective

April 11, 1995 unless adverse or critical

comments are received by March 13,

1995. If the effective date is delayed,

timely notice will be published in the

Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to: Ms. Karen Borel, at the

Regional Office Address listed.

Copies of the material submitted by

the State of Tennessee may be examined

during normal business hours at the

following locations:

Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center (Air Docket 6102),

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC

20460.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 4 Air Programs Branch, 345

Courtland Street, NE., Atlanta, Georgia

30365.
7914 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Tennessee Division of Air Pollution

Control, 701 Broadway, Customs House,

4th Floor, Nashville, Tennessee 37247–

1531.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Karen Borel, Regulatory Planning and

Development Section, Air Programs

Branch, Air, Pesticides & Toxics

Management Division, Region 4

Environmental Protection Agency, 345

Courtland Street, NE., Atlanta, Georgia

30365. The telephone number is 404/

347–3555, x4197. Reference file TN–

139–1–6667a.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Nonattainment NSR Requirements of

the Amended Act

The air quality planning requirements

for nonattainment NSR are set out in

part D of title I of the CAA. EPA has

issued a ‘‘General Preamble’’ describing

EPA’s preliminary views on how EPA

intends to review SIPs and SIP revisions

submitted under part D, including those

state submittals containing

nonattainment area NSR SIP

requirements (see 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 a more detailed discussion

of the interpretations of part D advanced

in this document and the supporting

rationale. A brief discussion of the

specific elements required in a state’s

NSR program also is included in section

II.B. of this document.

EPA is currently developing rule

revisions to implement the changes

under the 1990 Clean Air Act

Amendments in the NSR provisions of

parts C and D of title I of the CAA. EPA

anticipates that the proposed rule will

be published for public comment in the

spring of 1995. If EPA has not taken

final action on states’ NSR submittals by

that time, EPA may generally refer to the

proposed rule as the most authoritative

guidance available regarding the

approvability of the submittals. EPA

expects to take final action to

promulgate the rule revisions to

implement the part C and D changes in

early 1996. Upon promulgation of those

revised regulations, EPA will review

NSR SIPs to determine whether

additional SIP revisions are necessary to

satisfy the requirements of the

rulemaking.

Prior to EPA approval of the State’s

NSR SIP submission, the State may

continue permitting only in accordance

with the new statutory requirements for

permit applications completed after the

relevant SIP submittal date. This policy

was explained in transition guidance

memoranda from John Seitz dated

March 11, 1991, and September 3, 1992.

As explained in the March 11, 1991,

memorandum, EPA does not believe

Congress intended to mandate the more

stringent title I NSR requirements

during the time provided for SIP

development. States were thus allowed

to continue to issue permits consistent

with requirements in their current NSR

SIPs during that period, or to apply 40

CFR part 51, appendix S for newly

designated areas that did not previously

have NSR SIP requirements.

The September 3, 1992, memorandum

addressed the situation where states did

not submit the part D NSR SIP revisions

by the applicable statutory deadline. For

permit applications complete by the SIP

submittal deadline, states may issue

final permits under the prior NSR rules,

assuming certain conditions in the

September 3, 1992, memorandum are

met. However, for applications

completed after the SIP submittal

deadline, EPA will consider the source

to be in compliance with the CAA

where the source obtains, from the state,

a permit that is consistent with the

substantive new NSR part D provisions

in the CAA. EPA believes this guidance

continues to apply to permitting

pending final action on Tennessee’s

NSR SIP submittal.

For O3 nonattainment areas, section

182(a)(2)(C) of the CAA requires the

states to submit to EPA by November 15,

1992, new or augmented NSR rules that

meet the provisions of part D of title I

of the CAA. The part D NSR permitting

provisions applicable in O3

nonattainment areas are generally in

sections 172(c)(5), 173, 182, and 184 of

the CAA. The State of Tennessee

adopted regulatory revisions necessary

to bring the State’s NSR regulations in

compliance with the CAA and amended

Federal regulations, and submitted

those revisions on August 17, 1994. The

State also submitted revisions to the

Nashville/Davidson County portion of

the Tennessee SIP on September 27,

1994. The only rule revisions being

approved in this action are the revised

statewide rules submitted on August 17,

1994. The EPA will take action on the

Nashville/Davidson County rule

revisions in a separate Federal Register

document.

B. Federal Implementation Plan (FIP)

Clock

On January 15, 1993, in a letter from

Patrick M. Tobin to Governor Ned

McWherter, EPA notified the State of

Tennessee that EPA had made a finding

of failure to submit required programs

for the nonattainment area. The revised

State NSR rules satisfy those

requirements for this area. Therefore,

the sanctions clock was stopped by the

complete submittal and the FIP clock

will be stopped at the time of this

approval.

C. Procedural Background

Section 110(k) of the CAA sets out

provisions governing EPA’s review of

SIP submittals (see 57 FR 13565).

The State of Tennessee held a public

hearing on February 22, 1994, on the

proposed revisions to the SIP. Following

the public hearing, the plan was

adopted by the State and submitted by

the Tennessee Department of

Environment and Conservation on

August 17, 1994, as a revision to the

SIP.

Specifically, the State submitted

revisions to its NSR permitting

regulations in Tennessee’s Chapter

1200–3 by submitting revised Paragraph

1200–3–9-.01(5) entitled Growth Policy.

The revisions to the State’s NSR

regulations were made to bring the

State’s rules into compliance with the

CAA, as amended in 1990, and Federal

regulations.

The SIP revision was reviewed by

EPA to determine completeness, and a

letter of completeness, dated August 18,

1994, was forwarded to the State of

Tennessee. EPA finds that the revisions

provide for consistency with the CAA

and corresponding Federal regulations,

and that the revisions meet the new

nonattainment NSR provisions for

ozone nonattainment areas.

D. Nonattainment NSR Requirements of

the CAA

The general statutory requirements for

nonattainment NSR SIPs and permitting

as amended by the 1990 Amendments

are found in sections 172 and 173 of the

CAA. Tennessee currently has

nonattainment areas for O3, sulfur

dioxide, and lead. These requirements

apply in all nonattainment areas. The

State of Tennessee’s nonattainment NSR

regulations, which had been approved

prior to the 1990 Amendments, were

written to be nonattainment areaspecific. The NSR permitting

requirements applied to new or

modified sources proposing to locate in

any nonattainment area in the State,

including those designated pursuant to

enactment of the 1990 Amendments.

Thus, in order to meet the

nonattainment NSR program submittal

requirements, the State needed to

address the new NSR requirements of

the amended CAA.

Many of the revisions to sections 172

and 173 of the CAA as discussed in the

General Preamble clarified previously

existing Federal regulations and policy.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 7915

The following represents EPA’s review

of the State’s submitted regulations for

meeting the requirements of the

amended CAA:

(1) The CAA repealed the

construction ban provisions previously

found in section 110(a)(2)(I) with certain

exceptions. No construction bans are

currently imposed in Tennessee, so this

provision is not applicable.

(2) Section 173(a)(1)(A) of the CAA

requires a demonstration for permit

issuance that the new source growth

does not interfere with reasonable

further progress (RFP) for the area (e.g.,

greater than 1:1 emission offsets should

insure no interference with RFP). In

addition, calculations of emissions

offsets must be based on the same

emissions baseline used in the

demonstration of RFP. In Section 1200–

3–9-.01(5)(b)(2)(iv) the State has

established provisions that adequately

address the requirements of section

173(a)(1).

(3) Section 173(c)(1) of the CAA

requires that offsets must generally be

obtained by the same source or other

sources in the same nonattainment area.

However, offsets may be obtained from

other nonattainment areas if the

following conditions are met: the area in

which the offsets are obtained has an

equal or higher nonattainment

classification; and emissions from the

nonattainment area in which the offsets

are obtained contribute to a national

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)

violation in the area in which the source

would construct. In Chapter 1200–3–9-

.01(5)(b)(2)(v)(1), the State has

established provisions that adequately

meet these requirements of section

173(c)(1).

(4) Section 173(c)(1) of the CAA

requires that any emissions offsets

obtained in conjunction with the

issuance of a permit to a new or

modified source must be in effect and

enforceable by the time the new or

modified source commences operation

and that any emission increases from

new or modified major stationary

sources must be offset by reductions in

actual emissions. In Chapter 1200–3–9-

.01(5)(b)(2)(v), the State has established

provisions that adequately meet these

requirements of section 173(c)(1).

(5) Section 173(c)(2) of the CAA

prohibits emissions reductions

otherwise required by the CAA from

being credited for purposes of satisfying

the part D offset requirements. In

Chapter 1200–3–9-.01(5)(b)(2)(v)(VII),

the State has established provisions that

adequately meet the requirements of

section 173(c)(2).

(6) Revised sections 172(c)(4),

173(a)(1)(B), and 173(b) of the CAA

limit or invalidate use of certain growth

allowances in nonattainment areas. In

Chapter 1200–3–9-.01(5)(b)(2)(iv)(1), the

State has established provisions that

adequately meet the requirements of

sections 172(c)(4), 173(a)(1)(B), and

173(b).

(7) Revised section 173(a)(5) of the

CAA requires that, as a prerequisite to

issuing any part D permit, an analysis of

alternative sites, sizes, production

processes, and environmental control

techniques for a proposed source must

be completed, which demonstrates that

the benefits of the proposed source

significantly outweigh the

environmental and social costs imposed

as a result of its location, construction,

or modification. In Chapter 1200–3–9-

.01(5)(b)(2)(vi), the State has established

provisions that adequately meet the

requirements of section 173(a)(5).

(8) Section 173(d) of the CAA requires

States to submit control technology

information from permits to EPA for the

purposes of making such information

available through the RACT/BACT/

LAER clearinghouse. In Chapter 1200–

3–9-.01 (5)(b)(2)(iii)(V), the State has

established provisions that adequately

meet the requirements of section 173.

(9) In Chapter 1200–3–9-

.01(5)(b)(xviii) the State has submitted a

revised definition for the lowest

achievable emission rate (LAER). In the

previously approved SIP, LAER is

defined for the prevention of significant

deterioration (PSD) in subparagraph

1200–3–9-.01(4)(o)(5)(b)(3), and for new

sources in subparagraph 1200–3–9-

.01(5)(b)(3). The same definition is used

in both places. LAER is defined as that

rate of emissions which reflects the

most stringent emission limitation

which is achieved in practice by such

class or category of sources. In no event

shall a new or modified source emit any

pollutant in excess of the applicable

New Source Performance Standards

(NSPS).

Revisions to Tennessee’s PSD

regulations, which have been submitted

to EPA, but not yet acted upon, delete

the definition of LAER from paragraph

1200–3–9-.01(4) and add it to the

general definitions for the issuance of

construction permits, which will be

found in subparagraph 1200–3–9-

.01(2)(e). This section defines LAER, for

any major stationary source or major

modifications, as the more stringent rate

of emissions based on the following: (1)

The most stringent emissions limitation

which is contained in the applicable

standards under this Division 1200–3,

or in any SIP for such class or category

of stationary source, unless the owner or

operator of the proposed source

demonstrates that such limitations are

not achievable; or (2) The most stringent

emissions limitation which is achieved

in practice by such class or category of

stationary source. This limitation, when

applied to a modification, means the

lowest achievable emissions rate for the

new or modified emissions units within

the stationary source. In no event shall

the application of this term permit a

proposed new or modified stationary

source to emit any air contaminant in

excess of the amount allowable under

applicable new source standards of

performance.

The State previously submitted

revisions to their volatile organic

compound (VOC) regulations on June

22, 1993, which included a request for

the deletion of rule 1200–3–18-.03

Standard for New Sources. This rule

includes a definition of LAER which

means for any source, that rate of

emissions which reflects the most

stringent emission limitation which is

achieved in practice by such class or

category of source. In no event shall a

new or modified source emit any

pollutant in excess of the applicable

NSPS. This deletion was previously

disapproved by EPA (see 59 FR 18310)

because Tennessee did not have

federally approved NSR regulations

which would apply to some of the

sources covered by that chapter. In 59

FR 18310 EPA recommended that

Tennessee submit the deletion of this

rule with the submittal of their revised

NSR regulations.

The revised NSR rules define LAER as

the more stringent rate of emissions of

the most stringent emissions limitation

contained in Division 1200–3 of the

state rules or in any SIP for such class

or category of source. In no event may

LAER be in excess of the applicable

NSPS. This revised definition closely

parallels the statutory definition of

LAER in section 171(3) of the CAA and

eliminates the previous discrepancy

between the state definition and the

statutory, and EPA approves the

revision as satisfying part D

requirements.

In addition to all of the general

nonattainment NSR provisions

mentioned above, there are also

nonattainment area-specific NSR

provisions in subparts 2, 3, and 4 of part

D of the CAA, some of which supersede

general NSR provisions. The following

provisions are additional NSR

provisions that apply in Tennessee’s

nonattainment areas.

1. Ozone Nonattainment Areas

The State has adopted the appropriate

major source threshold in Rule 1200–3–

9-.01(5)(b)(1)(iv), 100 tons per year (tpy),
7916 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

for the nonattainment areas in the state,

including the ozone nonattainment

areas, which are currently classified as

marginal and moderate ozone

nonattainment areas. Because it has not

adopted the applicable lower major

thresholds for serious, severe, and

extreme ozone nonattainment areas, the

State would be required to revise its

rules if an ozone nonattainment area

becomes classified as serious, severe, or

extreme. In accordance with section 182

of the CAA, the State has adopted the

applicable emissions offset ratios for

increases in emissions of VOCs or NOx

in section 1200–3–9-.01(5)(b)(2)(v)(III),

namely: marginal–at least 1.1 to 1,

moderate–at least 1.15 to 1, serious–at

least 1.2 to 1, severe–at least 1.3 to 1,

and extreme–at least 1.5 to 1. The State

has adopted provisions in Rule 1200–3–

9-.01(5)(b)(1)(iv-v, x, and xxxiii) to

ensure that any new or modified major

source of NOx satisfies the requirements

applicable to any major source of VOCs,

unless a special exemption is granted by

the Administrator under section 182(f).

2. Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment

Areas

The State of Tennessee had one

carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment

area, which was designated as low

moderate; this was the Memphis-Shelby

County area. (See 40 CFR 81.343 for

Tennessee’s CO nonattainment area

designations). However, this area was

redesignated as an attainment area on

August 31, 1994 (59 FR 44938); NSR is

not required for the CO maintenance

plan.

3. Other Revisions to NSR Regulations

Other revisions to the State’s

regulations were made to bring the

State’s regulations into compliance with

the CAA as amended in 1990. EPA is

approving these revisions because they

provide for clarity and consistency with

the Federal requirements in the CAA

and 40 CFR 51.165 and 51.166. For

further information on the revisions

addressed in this submittal, please see

the Technical Support Document (TSD)

accompanying this document.

4. Deletion of Previous Disapproval to

Delete Rule 1200–3–18-.03

The State previously submitted

revisions to their VOC regulations on

June 22, 1993, which included a request

for the deletion of rule 1200–3–18-.03

Standard for New Sources. This deletion

was disapproved by EPA (see 59 FR

18310) because Tennessee did not have

federally approved NSR regulations that

would apply to some of the sources

covered by that rule. As recommended

by EPA, Tennessee resubmitted the

deletion of this rule together with their

revised NSR regulations (see 59 FR

18310). The deletion of Rule 1200–3–18-

.03 is approved, and the earlier EPA

disapproval is deleted, in conjunction

with the approval of the State’s revised

NSR regulations.

Rule 1200–3–18-.03 provided that:

new or modified sources anywhere in

the State which emit or have the

potential to emit 100 tpy or more of

VOCs must utilize LAER, as then

defined; new or modified sources in

Davidson, Shelby, and Hamilton

Counties with the potential to emit less

than 100 tpy must utilize BACT; and

new or modified sources in other

counties with the potential to emit less

than 100 tpy must utilize reasonable

and proper controls. The revised NSR

rules for VOC sources, which would

replace Rule 1200–3–18-.03, provides

that: in ozone nonattainment areas, new

or major modifications of sources which

emit or have the potential to emit 100

tpy must utilize LAER, as defined in a

revised definition; in ozone

nonattainment areas, new or modified

sources which have the potential to emit

less than 100 tpy must utilize BACT;

and in ozone attainment areas, the PSD

rules, rather than the nonattainment

NSR rules, apply.

Tennessee’s revised NSR rules closely

follow the statutory NSR requirements

of part D, and provide additional

protection in nonattainment areas by

requiring BACT for minor sources and

minor modifications. As discussed

above, the revised definition of LAER

also follows the CAA. Although the

State will no longer impose a 100 tpy

major source threshold for all source

categories or require LAER in ozone

attainment areas, based on a review of

the deletion of rule 1200–3–18-.03 and

the revised NSR rules, EPA concludes

that the revisions satisfy the

requirements of part D and the General

Savings Clause in section 193 of the

CAA. However, sources that were

permitted under rule 1200–3–18-.03

will remain under the controls

previously specified in their permits

pursuant to that rule. Additionally, all

sources located in attainment areas with

the potential to emit 100 tpy or greater

uncontrolled are required to implement

Reasonably Available Control

Technology (RACT).

Final Action

EPA is approving the revised

Tennessee Chapter 1200–3–9-.01(5)

Growth Policy, which is a replacement

for the State’s current federally

approved Chapter 1200–3–9-.01(5).

Specifically, EPA is approving the

State’s submittal as meeting the NSR

requirements of the CAA as amended in

1990 for the State’s ozone

nonattainment areas. EPA is also

rescinding the previous disapproval (59

FR 18310) of the deletion of rule 1200–

3–18-.03 Standard for New Sources and

is approving the deletion.

EPA is publishing this action without

prior proposal because the Agency

views this as a noncontroversial action

and anticipates no adverse comments.

However, in a separate document in this

Federal Register publication, EPA is

proposing to approve the SIP revision

should adverse or critical comments be

submitted. This action will be effective

on April 11, 1995 unless, by March 13,

1995, adverse or critical comments are

received.

If EPA receives such comments, this

action will be withdrawn before the

effective date by publishing a

subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public

comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a

second comment period on this action.

Any parties interested in commenting

on this action should do so at this time.

If no such comments are received, the

public is advised that this action will be

effective on April 11, 1995.

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,

42 U.S.C. 7607 (b)(1), petitions for

judicial review of this action must be

filed in the United States Court of

Appeals for the appropriate circuit by

April 11, 1995. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of

this final rule does not affect the finality

of this rule for the purposes of judicial

review nor does it extend the time

within which a petition for judicial

review may be filed, and shall not

postpone the effectiveness of such rule

or action. This action may not be

challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7607

(b)(2)).

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has exempted these actions from

review under Executive Order 12866.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. Each

request for revision to any SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

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
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 7917

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Small entities

include small business, small not-forprofit enterprises, and government

entities with jurisdiction over

populations of less than 50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and

subchapter I, part D of the CAA do not

create any new requirements, but

simply approve requirements that the

State is already imposing. Therefore,

because the Federal SIP-approval does

not impose any new requirements, I

certify that it does not have a significant

impact on any small entities affected.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

Federal-state relationship under the

CAA, preparation of a regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The CAA

forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. E.P.A., 427 U.S.

246, 256–66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,

Particulate matter, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: January 9, 1995.

Patrick M. Tobin,

Acting Regional Administrator.

Part 52, of chapter I, title 40, Code of

Federal Regulations, is amended as

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Subpart RR—Tennessee

2. Section 52.2220 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(124) to read as

follows:

§ 52.2220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(124) On August 17, 1994, the

Tennessee Department of Environment

and Conservation submitted revisions to

the new source review requirements in

the Tennessee Division of Air Pollution

Control Regulations. These revisions

incorporate changes to Chapter 1200–3–

9 by substituting for the present

paragraph 1200–3–9-.01(5) of the

Tennessee SIP with new requirements,

which are required in the Clean Air Act

as amended in 1990 and 40 CFR part 51,

subpart I.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

Tennessee Division of Air Pollution

Control Regulations, Chapter 1200–3–9-

.01(5) Growth Policy, effective August

15, 1994.

(ii) Other material. None.

3. Section 52.2228 is amended by

adding a new paragraph (f) to read as

follows:

§ 52.2228 Review of new sources and

modifications.

* * * * *

(f) The State of Tennessee proposed to

delete rule 1200–3–18-.03 ‘‘Standard for

New Sources’’ from the Tennessee State

Implementation Plan (SIP). In paragraph

(e) of this section, EPA disapproved the

deletion of this rule because Tennessee

did not have federally approved New

Source Review (NSR) regulations that

applied to some of the sources in this

chapter. EPA is hereby approving the

deletion of section 1200–3–18-.03 of the

Tennessee SIP, and is deleting EPA’s

earlier disapproval in paragraph (e) of

this section.

[FR Doc. 95–3332 Filed 2–9–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 672

[Docket No. 941249–4349; I.D. 020695B]

Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska;

Pollock in Area 62

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Modification of a closure.

SUMMARY: NMFS is terminating the

closure to directed fishing for pollock in

Statistical Area 62 in the Gulf of Alaska

(GOA) to allow a 48–hour directed

fishery. This action is necessary to fully

utilize the total allowable catch (TAC) of

pollock in that area.

EFFECTIVE DATE: Effective 12 noon,

Alaska local time (A.l.t.), February 8,

1995, the closure to directed fishing for

pollock in Statistical Area 62 of the

GOA is terminated and the fishery is

reopened. Effective 12 noon A.l.t.,

February 10, 1995, the closure to

directed fishing for pollock in Statistical

Area 62 of the GOA is reinstated and

directed fishing is prohibited; this

closure is effective until 12 noon, A.l.t.,

April 1, 1995, or until changed by

subsequent notification in the Federal

Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andrew N. Smoker, 907–586-7228.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

groundfish fishery in the GOA exclusive

economic zone is managed by NMFS

according to the Fishery Management

Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of

Alaska (FMP) prepared by the North

Pacific Fishery Management Council

under authority of the Magnuson

Fishery Conservation and Management

Act. Fishing by U.S. vessels is governed

by regulations implementing the FMP at

50 CFR parts 620 and 672.

The interim specification of the

pollock TAC in Statistical Area 62 was

established by interim specifications (59

FR 65975, December 22, 1994) as 3,827

metric tons (mt), determined in

accordance with § 672.20(c)(1)(ii)(A).

The directed fishery for pollock in

Statistical Area 62 of the GOA was

closed under § 672.20(c)(2)(ii) on

January 24, 1995, (60 FR 5337, January

27, 1995). Therefore, NMFS is

terminating the closure of January 24,

1995 (60 FR 5337, January 27, 1995).

The Director, Alaska Region, NMFS,

(Regional Director) in accordance with

§ 672.20(c)(2)(ii), has determined that

the remaining interim specification of

pollock TAC in Statistical Area 62 is

sufficient to allow a 48–hour directed

fishery.

As the interim specification of pollock

TAC catch in Statistical Area 62 of the

GOA will be reached before the end of

the year, the Regional Director, in

accordance with § 672.20(c)(2)(ii),

established a directed fishing allowance

of 3,627 mt, with consideration that 200

mt will be taken as incidental catch in

directed fishing for other species in that

area. The Regional Director has

determined that the directed fishing

allowance of pollock in Area 62 will be

reached within a 48–hour directed

fishery. Consequently, NMFS is

prohibiting directed fishing for pollock

in Statistical Area 62 of the GOA,

effective from 12 noon, A.l.t., February

10, 1995, until the end of the first

quarter unless superseded by

subsequent notification in the Federal

Register.

Classification

This action is taken under § 672.20

and is exempt from review under E.O.

12866.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.