13630 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

intended purpose of these regulations

has not been achieved. Nearly all search

and rescue responses are generated by

reports from sources other than the

check out system. Instead of aiding

rescuers, these regulations burden park

rangers with the task of checking on

countless cases of climbers and

backpackers who failed to check out.

These regulations have been enforced

selectively for several years, where local

climbers and guides have not been

forced to register because of an assumed

expertise and knowledge of the local

area. The deletion of these regulations

will not eliminate visitor protection

services provided by park personnel.

EFFECTIVE DATE: The final rule becomes

effective April 13, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

addressed to: Superintendent, Grand

Teton National Park, P.O. Drawer 170,

Moose, WY 83012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Colin W. Campbell, Law Enforcement

Specialist, Grand Teton National Park,

Telephone: 307–733–2880.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The existing National Park Service

(NPS) special regulations that pertain to

mountain climbing, off trail travel, and

winter travel trips in Grand Teton

National Park are codified at 36 CFR

7.22 (f) and (g). They require all

technical climbers, off trail travel, and

winter travel users to register or check

in prior to undertaking these activities

and to check out with a ranger upon

completion of the activity. The original

intent was primarily to provide park

search and rescue personnel with the

knowledge that a park user was in

essence overdue from a potentially

dangerous activity. In reality, almost all

perceived overdue parties concerned

climbers and backcountry users failing

to properly check out. In addition, the

vast majority of winter travelers either

ignore or do not know of the

requirement to register, and strict

enforcement of this regulation has not

been done for several years. The result

has been a combination of noncompliance, failure to check out, failure

to contact a ranger in a timely manner

and wasted time and energy on the part

of the park staff administering the

system. After working with these

restrictions since promulgation it has

been determined that they are not

achieving their original purpose of

saving lives by alerting search and

rescue personnel. In reality, almost all

park search and rescue efforts are the

result of initial reports by climbing

partners, other park backcountry users,

friends or relatives.

The NPS believes the deletion of these

rules will make the management of

mountain climbing and winter

backcountry trips more consistent with

the practices of both State and Federal

agencies whose lands are contiguous

with Grand Teton National Park.

Overnight backcountry trips will

continue to be regulated by general

camping regulations at 36 CFR 2.10.

A voluntary registration system will

be available to climbers and

backcountry travelers who choose to use

it. The exchange of information between

climbers, off-trail hikers, winter

travelers and park rangers will still be

available and encouraged without

mandating it through regulation.

Furthermore, the park staff will be

educating park users to leave trip

information with family or friends,

shifting responsibility for trip planning

onto the park user.

A proposed rule was published May

13, 1994 in the Federal Register (59 FR

25001). In addition to the Federal

Register, a press release concerning the

proposed change was released in the

Jackson, Wyoming area, as well as local

climbing shops and guides being

notified of the proposed change. No

responses were received during the

following 30-day public review and

comment period. Consequently, the rule

promulgated here is the same as the one

proposed.

Public Participation

The policy of the National Park

Service is, whenever practicable, to

afford the public an opportunity to

participate in the rulemaking process.

Accordingly, interested persons may

submit written comments regarding this

final rule to the address noted at the

beginning of this rulemaking. Grand

Teton National Park staff will also be

making public notices in local papers

and contacting representatives of the

local climbing community.

Drafting Information: The primary authors

of this proposed rule are Colin W. Campbell,

Law Enforcement Specialist and Mark L.

Magnuson, Jenny Lake Sub-District Ranger.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This rulemaking does not contain

information collection requirements that

require approval by the Office of

Management and Budget under 44

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

Compliance With Other Laws

The Department of the Interior has

determined that this document will not

have a significant economic effect on a

substantial number of small entities

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601 et. seq.), because it deletes an

existing requirement and gives more

discretion to the park visitor.

The NPS has determined that this

proposed rulemaking will not have a

significant effect on the quality of the

human environment, health and safety

because it is not expected to;

(a) Increase public use to the extent of

compromising the nature and character

of the area causing physical damage to

it:

(b) Introduce noncompatible uses

which might compromise the nature

and characteristics of the area, or cause

physical damage to it;

(c) Conflict with adjacent ownerships

or land uses; or

(d) Cause a nuisance to adjacent

owners or occupants.

Based on this determination, this

rulemaking is categorically excluded

from the procedural requirements of the

National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA) by Departmental Regulations in

516 DM 6, (49 FR 21438). As such,

neither an Environmental Assessment

nor an Environmental Impact Statement

has been prepared.

This rule was not subject to Office of

Management and Budget review under

Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 7

National parks.

In consideration of the foregoing, 36

CFR Chapter I is amended as follows:

PART 7—SPECIAL REGULATIONS,

AREAS OF THE NATIONAL PARK

SYSTEM

1. The authority citation for part 7

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1, 3, 9a, 460(q),

462(k); Sec. 7.96 also issued under D.C. Code

8–137 (1981) and D.C. Code 40–721 (1981).

2. In § 7.22, paragraphs (f) and (g) are

removed, and paragraphs (h) and (i) are

redesignated paragraphs (f) and (g)

respectively.

Dated: January 24, 1995.

George T. Frampton, Jr.,

Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and

Parks.

[FR Doc. 95–6241 Filed 3–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–70–P
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13631

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[IL63–3–6803; FRL–5170–5]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plan; State of Illinois

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: On September 13, 1994, the

United States Environmental Protection

Agency (USEPA) published direct final

rulemaking approving 1990 base year

ozone precursor emissions inventories

for the Chicago, Metro-East St. Louis,

and Jersey County, Illinois ozone

nonattainment areas as a revision to the

Illinois State Implementation Plan (SIP).

On the same day, a proposed rule was

also published which established a 30-

day public comment period, noting that,

if adverse comments were received

regarding the direct final rule, the

USEPA would withdraw the direct final

rule and publish an additional final rule

to address the public comments.

Adverse comments were received

during the public comment period. This

revised final rule summarizes the public

comments and USEPA’s responses and

finalizes the approval of the 1990 base

year ozone precursor emissions

inventories for the Illinois ozone

nonattainment areas.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action will be

effective April 13, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the SIP revision,

public comments and USEPA’s

responses are available for inspection at

the following address: (It is

recommended that you telephone

Edward Doty at (312) 886–6057 before

visiting the Region 5 office.)

United States Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Edward Doty, Regulation Development

Section (AR–18J), Regulation

Development Branch, Air and Radiation

Division, United States Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois

60604, Telephone Number (312) 886–

6057.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background Information

The 1990 base year emissions

inventories discussed in this rule were

submitted by the Illinois Environmental

Protection Agency (IEPA) on November

12, 1993 in compliance with the

requirements of section 182(a)(1) of the

Clean Air Act (Act). The emission

inventory submittal covers the

emissions of Volatile Organic

Compounds (VOC), Oxides of Nitrogen

(NOx), and Carbon Monoxide (CO) for

the following ozone nonattainment

areas: Chicago (Cook, DuPage, Kane,

Lake, McHenry, and Will Counties, Aux

Sable and Goose Lake Townships in

Grundy County, and Oswego Township

in Kendall County); Metro-East St. Louis

(Madison, Monroe, and St. Clair

Counties); and Jersey County. In

addition to emissions from the

nonattainment areas, the submittal also

covers VOC, NOx, and CO emissions

from major stationary sources located

within 25 miles of the ozone

nonattainment areas. The focus of this

rulemaking is the ozone precursor

emissions in the ozone nonattainment

areas.

On September 13, 1994 (59 FR 46920),

USEPA published a direct final rule

approving the emissions inventories as

a revision of the Illinois ozone SIP. On

the same day, USEPA published a

proposed rule (59 FR 46948) noting that

if adverse comments were received

regarding the direct final rule, the

USEPA would withdraw the direct final

and publish another final rule

addressing the public comments.

Adverse comments were received

regarding the direct final rule. This

subsequent final rule addresses the

adverse comments and announces

USEPA’s final action regarding Illinois’

base year ozone precursor emission

inventories.

II. Public Comments

The following discussion summarizes

the comments received regarding the

emissions inventories and the USEPA

responses to those comments. All

comments were included in a single set

of comments submitted jointly by the

American Lung Association of

Metropolitan Chicago and the Citizens

Commission for Clean Air in the Lake

Michigan Basin.

Comment: The commenters note that

air quality monitoring and modeling

performed by the Lake Michigan Air

Directors Consortium (LADCO)

indicates that the Chicago area

emissions inventory underestimates

VOC emissions by as much as 1.5 times

and overestimates NOx emissions. VOC

speciation profiles indicate that the

inventory is underestimating mobile

and/or area source emissions.

The commenters point out that the

accuracy of the emissions inventory is

critical since it is difficult to solve an

ozone attainment problem when the

source of the problem is not understood.

Errors in the emissions inventory could

lead to errors in the calculated emission

reduction requirement (both in total and

by source category) and the efficacy of

the VOC versus NOx controls, all of

which are important issues in the Lake

Michigan Basin.

The commenters note that monitoring

data contradicting emission inventories

is not unique to northeastern Illinois,

suggesting that there may be a

fundamental flaw in the process

recommended by the USEPA for

developing emission inventories. The

commenters state that the USEPA

should act to resolve these problems

immediately. Furthermore, the

inventories should be adjusted to be

consistent with convincing monitoring

data like those collected by LADCO.

Response: The USEPA is aware of the

monitoring data collected during the

Lake Michigan Ozone Study (LMOS)

and their implications regarding the

emissions inventory. The data imply

that VOC emissions in the LMOS

domain, and particularly in the Chicago

and Milwaukee ozone nonattainment

areas, are underestimated or that NOx

emissions are overestimated. It is noted,

however, that these monitoring data are

not sufficient in quantity and detail to

allow detailed, source category-specific

corrections to the emissions inventory.

The data imply that the States and the

USEPA should continue to pursue

improved emission inventory

techniques.

It is further noted that the LMOS

States (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and

Wisconsin) have pursued improvements

in the emissions inventories subsequent

to the submittal of the 1990 base year

emissions inventories. These emissions

inventory improvements have led to

significantly improved agreement with

the monitoring data collected during the

LMOS. The emissions data to be used in

the Lake Michigan Ozone Control

Program (LMOP) (the modeling analysis

conducted to select emission control

measures, to assess the merits of VOC

versus NOx controls, and to demonstrate

attainment of the ozone standard in the

LMOS/LMOP modeling domain) agree

favorably with the monitoring data.

Some changes in the base year

emissions inventories are expected to

result from this process. These changes

will be assessed by the USEPA when the

demonstrations of attainment are

submitted. If significant changes in the

base year emissions inventories are

implied by the modeling input data, the

USEPA may consider requesting the

States to revise the base year emission

inventories approved previously by the

USEPA. Alternatively, with concurrence

from the State, the USEPA may
13632 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

rulemake to revise the approved base

year emissions inventories at the same

time that the USEPA acts on the

demonstration of attainment.

Because the State followed USEPA

guidelines in preparing the emission

inventories covered in this rulemaking,

the USEPA does not believe it is

appropriate to disapprove the base year

emissions inventories at this time. Such

a disapproval would not be adequately

supported by the monitoring data

collected during the LMOS.

Comment: LADCO monitoring and

speciation data indicate that mobile

source emissions are underestimated in

the Chicago area emissions inventory. A

contributing factor may be inaccurate

speed data. In comments addressing the

conformity findings for the 1993–1997

and 1994–1998 Transportation

Improvement Programs and

Transportation System Development

Plans, a number of organizations

identified problems with the Chicago

Area Transit Study (CATS)

transportation model that could lead to

inaccurate speed estimates. The

problems identified were:

1. The speeds used to estimate mobile

source emissions are not based on actual

measurements but instead are a function

of applicable speed limits, numbers of

traffic lights, type of road, etc. With

little or no empirical data to support the

speed estimates, they are highly suspect.

2. In order to generate accurate

speeds, the model should post-process

link speeds.

3. The model should account for

intersection delays.

These problems are likely to lead to

underestimation of emissions.

Other model deficiencies may have

skewed speeds in a manner that resulted

in overestimation of emissions or had

no effect on emissions. For example, the

model should feed trip times back to the

mode choice and trip distribution

portions of the model to account for

persons who choose a different mode or

avoid congested areas. The model

should also have separate peak and nonpeak components that account for

drivers taking trips during less

congested hours of the day, instead of

the fixed time-of-day factors that the

model currently uses.

The above problems should be

remedied before USEPA gives final

approval to the emissions inventory.

Response: It is true that the link

speeds given in the transportation

model output are not actual measured

speeds, but rather ‘‘impedances’’ with

the dimensions of speed that are used to

make the model’s estimated traffic

levels balance. Both the IEPA and CATS

subjected the CATS network speed

(impedance) data, used in the

development of the 1990 base year

mobile source emission estimates, to

considerable scrutiny before they were

used in the estimation of emissions. It

was determined that the model speed

data were representative and could be

properly used ‘‘as is.’’

As described in the emissions

inventory documentation, the IEPA

checked the model link speeds by road

type and found them to be reasonable

and representative. In particular, model

speeds were checked by road type under

free and congested conditions. Model

speeds were, in general, less under

congested conditions than under free

flow conditions; and average speeds for

different road types differed as

expected. Local streets had the lowest

average speeds, typically in the 20 to 35

mile per hour range, while rural

interstates had the highest average

speeds, up to 65 miles per hour. Speeds

on very congested streets were below 10

miles per hour, as would be expected

during ‘‘rush hour’’ periods. Model

speeds for most roads, except interstates

and freeways, were in the 25 to 45 mile

per hour range. The model speeds for

each roadway type agree broadly with

speeds observed on roads of that type

both in Chicago and elsewhere. It

should be noted that the transportation

model used by CATS takes intersection

delays into account.

With regard to the comments

concerning the overestimation of

emissions, CATS has recently

introduced a modeling method of

feeding trip times back into the mode

choice and trip distribution parts of the

transportation model. In addition, CATS

has introduced the use of peak and offpeak modeling components. These new

model features have had a negligible

effect on the model output.

Comment: Accurate emissions are

missing for the following source

categories:

1. Publicly Owned Treatment Works

(POTWs);

2. Hazardous Waste Landfills;

3. Municipal Landfills;

4. Leaking Underground Storage Tanks

(LUSTs);

5. Lawn Care Pesticide Applications;

6. Agricultural Burning;

7. Catastrophic/Accidental Releases;

8. Waste Disposal Incinerators; and

9. Small (10 to 25 tons per year) VOCemitting Facilities.

Response: Each of the source

categories are individually responded to

below:

Publicly-Owned Treatment Works

The Publicly-Owned Treatment

Works (POTW) category was treated by

the IEPA as a point source category and

not as an area source category in the

Chicago ozone nonattainment area. A

total of 62 POTW facilities were

addressed in the Chicago nonattainment

point source inventory.

The IEPA estimates were primarily

based on data obtained from the IEPA’s

Division of Water Pollution Control,

which issues permits to all POTW

facilities. The permit files contain

facility-specific data including, but not

limited to, a facility’s monthly average

flowrates and the location of the facility.

Other information not obtained from the

permit files, such as industrial

wastewater contribution, were either

directly solicited from the facilities

themselves or were given a default value

consistent with the recommendations of

the USEPA based on the guidelines

contained in Procedures for the

Preparation of Emission Inventories for

Precursors of Ozone, Volume I (EPA–

450/4–88–021). The emissions

inventory documentation submitted by

the IEPA contained a detailed

discussion of IEPA’s emission

estimation methodology for this source

category.

Hazardous Waste Landfills and

Municipal Landfills

The Chicago ozone nonattainment

area emissions inventory includes

emissions for landfills within the point

source emissions inventory rather than

as an area source category. The IEPA

used information from the IEPA

Division of Land Pollution Control to

determine the size, type, age, and

location of landfills in the Chicago

nonattainment area. In cases where

some of the information was missing,

estimates were based on the best

available information. The emissions

inventory contains emissions estimates

for 229 landfills with a total of 4.59 tons

per day of VOC emissions.

Calculation of landfill emissions was

based on the 1988 document, Air

Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste

Landfills—Background Information for

Proposed Standards and Guidelines. An

emission factor of 35.36 tons VOC per

year per million tons of refuse was used

in the emission estimations. This was

based on a recommended emission

factor of 13.6 tons VOC per year per

million tons of refuse multiplied by 2.6

to account for the fact that the Chicago

area receives more than 23 inches of

precipitation per year.

Catastrophic/Accidental Releases and

Leaking Underground Storage Tanks

Catastrophic/accidental releases were

not included in the Chicago

nonattainment area inventory due to the
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 13633

lack of USEPA emission inventory

guidance for this source category and

the lack of available data. In addition,

note that the USEPA guidance requires

that the emissions be estimated for a

typical ozone season weekday. Since

such releases are random and the extent

of emissions can not be calculated, the

IEPA, with concurrence from the

USEPA, did not include emissions from

this category in the emissions inventory.

There is a similar lack of information

regarding VOC emissions from Leaking

Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs).

Although information on the location of

LUST cleanups is available, quantifying

the VOC emissions resulting from the

leaks and from the cleanup operations is

complicated by the lack of information

on the amount of gasoline or other

volatile materials released, the amount

of material that has reached the water

table, and the amount of material that

has been trapped in the soil. The

USEPA concurs with the omission of

these emissions given the lack of data.

Lawn Care Pesticide Applications

The IEPA did not calculate these

emissions due to a lack of available

USEPA guidance for this source and to

a lack of available data. In addition, the

IEPA believes that such emissions are

already accounted for under the

household pesticide subcategory of the

commercial/consumer solvents

category. The USEPA concurs with the

omission of these emissions given the

lack of data and guidance.

Agricultural Burning

Agricultural burning was not

considered to be significant

summertime source of VOC emissions

in the Chicago ozone nonattainment

area since such burning occurs

primarily outside of the summer

months. The Chicago nonattainment

area does contain VOC emissions

resulting from forest fires as well as

from burning of landscape waste under

the open burning category.

Waste Disposal Incinerators

The Chicago nonattainment area

emissions inventory includes VOC

emissions from waste disposal

incinerators. The summary of these

emissions can be found in Table 2–2 of

the Chicago area emissions inventory

submittal under the category, Municipal

Waste: Combustion. This category

summarizes the point source inventory

for Commercial/Institutional,

Governmental, and Industrial Waste

Incineration. There are a total of 121

source facilities in this category,

emitting a total of 1.62 tons VOM per

day.

Small (10 to 25 Tons Per Year) VOCEmitting Facilities

The Chicago nonattainment area point

source emissions inventory includes

emissions from small facilities emitting

less than 25 tons VOC per year. All

permitted emission sources were

included in the point source emissions

inventory regardless of their size. The

emissions inventory includes source

facilities with emissions as low as 0.01

tons per day or 0.1 pounds per hour.

Although these facilities were not

individually documented in the major

source summary documentation of the

emissions inventory submittal, their

emissions were totalled in the

appropriate activity-related source

categories.

Comment: An area of concern is the

lack of rule effectiveness factors for

many source categories in the emission

inventories. For sources that do have

rule effectiveness estimates, there is

little information explaining how the

estimates were selected.

Response: As noted in the emission

inventory documentation, the State

assumed a default rule effectiveness of

80 percent for most source categories, as

recommended in USEPA guidelines. A

rule effectiveness of 100 percent was

used for sources that estimated

emissions using direct measurement

methodologies, such as mass balance.

These procedures comply with Illinois’

Inventory Preparation Plan, previously

approved by the USEPA.

The State, as part of the LMOS,

determined facility-specific rule

effectiveness levels for major facilities

with emission control efficiencies in

excess of 95 percent. All non-studied

facilities with emission control

efficiencies in excess of 95 percent were

assumed to have rule effectiveness

levels equal to the median rule

effectiveness determined in the facilityspecific study, approximately 92

percent. The study parameters and

results were included in documentation

referenced in the emissions inventory

submittal. The USEPA has reviewed this

documentation, and has determined it

to be acceptable. Therefore, the State

has taken an acceptable approach to

applying rule effectiveness and has

adequately documented this approach

and the resulting rule effectiveness

estimates.

Comment: The use of questionable

population-based emissions factors

appears to have contributed to low

emission estimates for some area

sources. For example, estimates of

graphic arts, auto body refinishing, and

non-road construction equipment VOC

emissions are significantly lower per

capita than for other urban areas. Given

that additional controls on area sources

are likely to be included in Illinois’

attainment plan, accuracy of the area

source emissions is especially

important.

Response: With regard to the graphic

arts category, USEPA guidelines, as

used by the IEPA, recommended the use

of population-based per capita emission

factors to estimate county total graphic

arts emissions. However, since the

Illinois point source emissions

inventory contains emissions from

graphic arts facilities, the IEPA followed

USEPA guidelines and subtracted point

source emissions for this source

category from the calculated area source

emissions total. This subtraction is

performed to avoid double counting of

emissions. If one compares the total of

point and area source emissions for this

source category on a per capita basis

with similar emission rates for other

major areas, one would find better

agreement. The low area source per

capita emission rate is an artifact of the

thoroughness of Illinois’ point source

emissions inventory.

Regarding the automobile refinishing

area source category, emissions were not

estimated using only a population-based

emission factor. The Chicago

automobile refinishing area source

emission estimates were determined by

apportioning national automobile

refinishing activity data, such as the

amount of coating usage, to the Chicago

area on the basis of population. This

method was chosen, with the approval

and support (through the use of a

USEPA contract) of the USEPA, to better

quantify the emissions from different

operations involved in automobile

refinishing and for better estimation of

emission reductions resulting from

required controls. The method

employed would lead to per capita

emission rates differing from those in

urban areas where a strict per capita

emission rate were used. The

directionality of the differences does not

imply that the technique used by the

IEPA is in error.

Regarding emissions from non-road

construction equipment, it must be

noted that IEPA simply used emission

estimates provided by USEPA’s Office

of Mobile Sources. In 1991, the USEPA

issued an emissions inventory for each

of the ozone and carbon monoxide

nonattainment areas. The IEPA used the

emissions inventory provided by the

USEPA for the Chicago ozone

nonattainment area. Given the detail of

the data used and the extent of the

quality assurance of this emissions

inventory, the IEPA believes, and the

USEPA agrees, that no better estimate of
13634 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 14, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

non-road construction equipment

emissions is available at this time and

that the current emissions estimate is

appropriate. It is additionally noted that

the emissions inventory submitted by

the IEPA incorporated by reference the

documentation of the non-road

construction equipment emissions

estimates supplied by the USEPA.

Comment: The commenters note that

the emissions for railroads and airport

lack documentation. In addition, the

commenters note that, given that a high

speed rail and a third airport are both

under consideration for the Chicago

area, this lack of documentation is

especially troublesome.

Response: Discussion of the

estimation procedures used for railroad

and airport emissions is contained on

pages 196 through 221 of the Chicago

emissions inventory documentation

submitted to the USEPA. The discussion

of railroad emissions includes an

estimate of statewide railroad fuel

usage, which was apportioned to the

nonattainment area counties based on

the county to State ratios of railroad

track mileage. The county fuel usage

figures were then multiplied by a per

unit fuel usage emission rate factor. This

approach is acceptable to the USEPA.

The method used for airport

emissions evaluated commercial aircraft

activity at O’Hare and Midway Airports

on an aircraft engine-specific basis

incorporating modal emission rates. The

modal emission rate for each engine is

a function of the amount of fuel burned

for each of the four modes power

settings. The four modes are taxi/idle,

takeoff, climbout, and approach.

Emissions were estimated for

approximately 60 different commercial

engine types. Emissions from the

remaining aircraft categories, military

and general aviation, were estimated

based on the number of landing and

take-off (LTO) cycles of each aircraft

type. These LTO cycles were also the

basis of the emissions estimates

performed for all of the other airports in

the Chicago ozone nonattainment area.

These estimation procedures were

documented in IEPA’s emissions

inventory submittal and were found to

be acceptable by the USEPA.

III. Final Rulemaking Action

The State of Illinois has met the

requirements [section 182(a)(1)] of the

Act for the submittal of base year ozone

precursor emissions inventories. The

USEPA approves the State’s 1990 base

year ozone precursor emission

inventories for the Chicago, Metro-East

St. Louis, and Jersey County ozone

nonattainment areas.

This action has been classified as a

Table 2 action by the Regional

Administrator under the procedures

published in the Federal Register on

January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214–2225), as

revised by an October 4, 1993,

memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro,

Acting Assistant Administrator for Air

and Radiation. The Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) has

exempted this regulatory action from

Executive Order 12866 review.

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., USEPA 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, USEPA may

certify that the rule will not have a

significant economic 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.

The SIP approvals under section 110

and subchapter I, part D, of the Act 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 small entities. Moreover, due

to the nature of the Federal-State

relationship under the Act, preparation

of a regulatory flexibility analysis would

constitute Federal inquiry into the

economic reasonableness of State

action. The Act forbids the USEPA to

base its actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S.

E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256–66 (1976).

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

petitions for judicial review of this

action must be filed in the United States

Court of Appeals for the appropriate

circuit by May 15, 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 section may

not be callenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements (see section

307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,

Volatile organic compounds.

Dated: February 23, 1995.

Robert Springer,

Acting Regional Administrator.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the 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 O—Illinois

2. Section 52.726 is amended by

adding paragraph (i) to read as follows:

§ 52.726 Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *

(i) The base year (1990) ozone

emission inventory requirement of

section 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, as

amended in 1990, has been satisfied for

the following Illinois ozone

nonattainment areas: the Chicago

nonattainment area—Cook, DuPage,

Kane, Lake, Will and McHenry

Counties, Aux Sable and Gooselake

Townships in Grundy County, and

Oswego Township in Kendall County;

the Metro-East St. Louis nonattainment

area—Madison, Monroe, and St. Clair

Counties; and Jersey County.

[FR Doc. 95–6161 Filed 3–13–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[IL80–3–6838; FRL–5170–4]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans and

Designations of Areas for Air Quality

Planning Purposes; Illinois

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (USEPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: On November 25, 1994,

USEPA proposed to approve a State

Implementation Plan (SIP) request to

redesignate the Jersey County, Illinois

marginal ozone nonattainment area to

attainment of the public health based

ozone air quality standard. The USEPA

also proposed approval of the

accompanying maintenance plan as a

SIP revision. The redesignation request

and maintenance plan were submitted

by the Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency (IEPA) on November 12, 1993.