Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12453

• Adding recordkeeping

requirements.

• Adding a ‘‘burden of proof’’

requirement for exemptions.

BAAQMD Rule 8–42, Large

Commercial Bakeries, is a new rule

which was adopted to control emissions

of VOCs from large commercial bread

bakeries. However, Rule 8–42 has been

in effect in the Bay Area since 1989. The

rule requires:

• All ovens to be vented to an

emission control system.

• Sources to maintain records of the

emissions control system’s key

operating parameters on a daily basis.

• Sources claiming exemptions to

provide the necessary information to

substantiate the exemption.

• Sources to use district method ST–

32 for determination of emissions.

• The use of an emissions factor table

for calculation of emissions.

BAAQMD Rule 8–50, Polyester Resin

Operations, is a new rule which limits

the emission of VOCs from polyester

resin operations. The rule provides the

following:

• Standards which affect the

application and curing of resin, gel coat

application and curing, and clean-up

solvents.

• Standards for resins and gel coats

are not applicable to polyester resin

operations that choose to install and

operate emission control equipment.

• Storage requirements for surface

preparation and clean-up solvents.

• Recordkeeping requirements and

test methods.

EPA has evaluated the submitted

rules and has determined that they are

consistent with the CAA, EPA

regulations, and EPA policy. Therefore,

the BAAQMD’s Rule 8–25, Pump and

Compressor Seals at Petroleum

Refineries, Chemical Plants, Bulk

Plants, and Bulk Terminals; Rule 8–42,

Large Commercial Bakeries; and Rule 8–

50, Polyester Resin Operations are being

approved under section 110(k)(3) of the

CAA as meeting the requirements of

section 110(a) and part D. The final

action on these rules serves as a final

determination that any deficiencies in

these rules noted in prior proposed

rulemakings have been corrected.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

implementation plan. Each request for

revision to the state implementation

plan shall be considered separately in

light of specific technical, economic,

and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

EPA is publishing this document

without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, the EPA is proposing to

approve the SIP revision should adverse

or critical comments be filed. This

action will be effective May 8, 1995,

unless, by April 6, 1995, adverse or

critical comments are received.

If the 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. The 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 May 8, 1995.

Regulatory Process

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises and government entities

with jurisdiction over population of less

than 50,000.

SIP approvals under sections 110 and

301(a) 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. U.S.

E.P.A., 427 U.S. 256–66 (S. Ct. 1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410 (a)(2).

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this action from review

under Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Volatile organic

compounds.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the

State Implementation Plan for the State of

California was approved by the Director of

the Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: February 10, 1995.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator.

Subpart F of 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 F—California

2. Section 52.220 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(199)(i)(A)(3) to

read as follows:

§ 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(199) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) * * *

(3) Rules 8–25 and 8–42, adopted on

June 1, 1994 and Rule 8–50, adopted on

June 15, 1994.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95–5348 Filed 3–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–W

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[TX–53–1–6843a; FRL–5163–5]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans and Designation

of Areas for Air Quality Planning

Purposes; State of Texas; Approval of

the Maintenance Plan for Victoria

County and Redesignation of the

Victoria County Ozone Nonattainment

Area to Attainment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: On July 27, 1994 the State of

Texas submitted a maintenance plan

and a request to redesignate the Victoria

County, Texas ozone nonattainment

area to attainment. Under the Clean Air

Act (CAA), nonattainment areas may be

redesignated to attainment if sufficient

data are available to warrant the

redesignation and the area meets the

other CAA redesignation requirements.

In this action, EPA is approving Texas’

redesignation request because it meets

the maintenance plan and redesignation
12454 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

requirements set forth in the CAA and

EPA is approving the 1992 base year

emissions inventory. The approved

maintenance plan will become a

federally enforceable part of the State

Implementation Plan (SIP) for Victoria

County, Texas.

DATES: This final rule is effective on

May 8, 1995, unless notice is received

by April 6, 1995 that someone wishes to

submit adverse or critical comments. If

the effective date is delayed, timely

notice will be published in the Federal

Register (FR).

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

mailed to Guy R. Donaldson, Acting

Chief, Air Planning Section (6T–AP),

U.S. EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Copies of the

State’s petition and other information

relevant to this action are available for

inspection during normal hours at the

following locations:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 6, Air Programs Branch (6T–

A), 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700,

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733.

Air and Radiation Docket and

Information Center, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

401 M Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.

20460.

Texas Natural Resource Conservation

Commission, Office of Air Quality,

12124 Park 35 Circle, P.O. Box 13087,

Austin, Texas 78711–3087.

Anyone wishing to review this

petition at the U.S. EPA office is asked

to contact the person below to schedule

an appointment 24 hours in advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Mick Cote, Planning Section (6T–AP),

Air Programs Branch, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas,

Texas 75202–2733, telephone (214)

665–7219.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The CAA, as amended in 1977

required areas that were designated

nonattainment based on a failure to

meet the ozone national ambient air

quality standard (NAAQS) to develop

SIPs with sufficient control measures to

expeditiously attain and maintain the

standard. Victoria County, Texas was

designated under section 107 of the

1977 CAA as nonattainment with

respect to the ozone NAAQS on March

3, 1978 (40 CFR 81.344). In accordance

with section 110 of the 1977 CAA, the

State of Texas submitted an ozone SIP

as required by part D on April 13, 1979.

EPA fully approved this ozone SIP on

March 25, 1980 (45 FR 19244), and

August 13, 1984 (49 FR 32190).

On November 15, 1990, the CAA

Amendments of 1990 were enacted

(Public Law 101–549, 104 Stat. 2399,

codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q). The

ozone nonattainment designation for

Victoria County continued by operation

of law according to section

107(d)(1)(C)(i) of the CAA, as amended

in 1990 (See 56 FR 56694, November 6,

1991). Since the State had not yet

collected the required three years of

ambient air quality data necessary to

petition for redesignation to attainment,

the nonattainment area was further

designated as nonclassifiableincomplete data for ozone.

The Texas Natural Resource

Conservation Commission (TNRCC)

more recently has collected ambient

monitoring data that show no violations

of the ozone National Ambient Air

Quality Standard (NAAQS) of .12 parts

per million. The State developed a

maintenance plan for Victoria County,

and solicited public comment during a

public hearing on July 7, 1994.

Accordingly, on July 27, 1994, Texas

requested redesignation of the area to

attainment with respect to the ozone

NAAQS and submitted an ozone

maintenance SIP for Victoria County.

Please see the TSD for the detailed air

quality monitoring data.

Evaluation Criteria

The 1990 Amendments revised

section 107(d)(3)(E) to provide five

specific requirements that an area must

meet in order to be redesignated from

nonattainment to attainment: (1) The

area must have attained the applicable

NAAQS; (2) the area must meet all

applicable requirements under section

110 and part D of the CAA; (3) the area

must have a fully approved SIP under

section 110(k) of the CAA; (4) the air

quality improvement must be

permanent and enforceable; and, (5) the

area must have a fully approved

maintenance plan pursuant to section

175A of the CAA. Section 107(d)(3)(D)

allows a Governor to initiate the

redesignation process for an area to

apply for attainment status. Please see

EPA’s Technical Support Document

(TSD) for a detailed discussion of these

requirements.

(1) Attainment of the NAAQS for Ozone

Attainment of the ozone NAAQS is

determined based on the expected

number of exceedances in a calendar

year. The method for determining

attainment of the ozone NAAQS is

contained in 40 CFR 50.9 and appendix

H to that section. The simplest method

by which expected exceedances are

calculated is by averaging actual

exceedances at each monitoring site

over a three year period. An area is in

attainment of the standard if this

average results in expected exceedances

for each monitoring site of 1.0 or less

per calendar year. When a valid daily

maximum hourly average value is not

available for each required monitoring

day during the year, the missing days

must be accounted for when estimating

exceedances for the year. Appendix H

provides the formula used to estimate

the expected number of exceedances for

each year.

The State of Texas’ request is based

on an analysis of quality-assured ozone

air quality data which is relevant to both

the maintenance plan and to the

redesignation request. The data come

from the State and Local Air Monitoring

Station network. The request is based on

ambient air ozone monitoring data

collected for 36 consecutive months

from May 3, 1991, through May 2, 1994,

encompassing 3 valid ozone seasons

(1991–1993). The data clearly show an

expected exceedance rate of zero for the

ozone standard.

Appendix H does not explicitly

address the situation where a new site

collects data for only a portion of the

calendar year. However, this situation

has been addressed in an EPA

memorandum, ‘‘Ozone and Carbon

Monoxide Design Value Calculations,’’

William Laxton, Director, Technical

Support Division, OAQPS, June 18,

1990 (Laxton memo). The missing data

penalty created by the calculation is

designed to encourage prompt repair or

replacement of monitors, rather than to

discourage air pollution control

agencies from installing new monitoring

sites in excess of the number required

by 40 CFR part 58. For this reason, the

Laxton memo essentially allows an

agency which installs a monitoring site

to base the estimated exceedance

calculation for the initial year on the

portion of the year following start-up of

the monitor. Based on the underlying

reasoning of the Laxton memo and the

fact that there were no exceedances at

the monitoring site during the peak

ozone season of May through September

for the 3-year monitoring period, EPA

accepted the data as an adequate

demonstration that the ozone standard

was attained in Victoria County.

In addition to the demonstration

discussed above, EPA required

completion of air network monitoring

requirements set forth in 40 CFR part

58. This included a quality assurance

plan revision and a monitoring network

review to determine the adequacy of the

ozone monitoring network. The TNRCC

fulfilled these requirements to complete

documentation for the air quality

demonstration. The TNRCC has also
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12455

committed to continue monitoring in

this area in accordance with 40 CFR part

58.

In sum, EPA believes that the data

submitted by the TNRCC provides an

adequate demonstration that Victoria

County attained the ozone NAAQS.

Moreover, the monitoring data continue

to show attainment in 1994 and in 1995

to date.

If the monitoring data records a

violation of the NAAQS before the

direct final action is effective, the direct

final approval of the redesignation will

be withdrawn and a proposed

disapproval substituted for the direct

final approval.

(2) Section 110 Requirements

For purposes of redesignation, to meet

the requirement that the SIP contain all

applicable requirements under the CAA,

EPA has reviewed the SIP to ensure that

it contains all measures that were due

under the CAA prior to or at the time

the State submitted its redesignation

request, as set forth in EPA policy. EPA

interprets section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the

CAA to mean that, for a redesignation

request to be approved, the State must

have met all requirements that applied

to the subject area prior to or at the same

time as the submission of a complete

redesignation request. Requirements of

the CAA that come due subsequently

continue to be applicable to the area at

later dates (see section 175A(c)) and, if

redesignation of any of the areas is

disapproved, the State remains

obligated to fulfill those requirements.

These requirements are discussed in the

following EPA documents: ‘‘Procedures

for Processing Requests to Redesignate

Areas to Attainment,’’ John Calcagni,

Director, Air Quality Management

Division, September 4, 1992, ‘‘State

Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions

Submitted in Response to Clean Air Act

(CAA) Deadlines,’’ John Calcagni,

Director, Air Quality Management

Division, October 28, 1992, and ‘‘State

Implementation Plan (SIP)

Requirements for Areas Submitting

Requests for Redesignation to

Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon

Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air

Quality Standards (NAAQS) on or after

November 15, 1992,’’ Michael H.

Shapiro, Acting Assistant

Administrator, September 17, 1993.

EPA has analyzed the SIP and

determined that it is consistent with the

requirements of amended section

110(a)(2). The SIP contains enforceable

emission limitations, requires

monitoring, compiling, and analyzing

ambient air quality data, requires

preconstruction review of new major

stationary sources and major

modifications to existing ones, provides

for adequate funding, staff, and

associated resources necessary to

implement its requirements, and

requires stationary source emissions

monitoring and reporting.

(3) Additional Section 110 and Part D

Requirements

The TNRCC submitted a SIP revision

entitled ‘‘Revisions to Texas Regulation

V and the General Rules to Meet

Reasonably Available Control

Technology Requirements’’ (Texas

RACT Catch-up and Victoria County

Fix-up). This SIP revision contains

certain recordkeeping and monitoring

requirements necessary for Victoria

County to have a fully-approved SIP

under section 110. The EPA is

approving the Texas RACT Catch-up

and Victoria County Fix-up SIP

revisions together in a separate action

concurrent with this Victoria County

redesignation request. The Texas RACT

Catch-up and Victoria County Fix-up

direct final approval notice is located in

the final rules section of this Federal

Register. If adverse or critical comments

are received on the Texas RACT Catchup and Victoria County Fix-up action,

the notice will be converted from a

direct final action to a proposal and

those comments addressed in a

subsequent final action. In such a case,

the Victoria County redesignation direct

final action will be converted to a

proposal as well. As discussed earlier in

this document, all of the SIP

requirements must be met by the

TNRCC and approved by EPA into the

SIP prior to or concurrent with final

action on the redesignation request.

Before Victoria County can be

redesignated to attainment, it also must

have fulfilled the applicable

requirements of part D of the CAA.

Under part D, an area’s classification

indicates the requirements to which it

will be subject. Subpart 1 of part D sets

forth the basic nonattainment

requirements applicable to all

nonattainment areas, classified as well

as nonclassifiable. Subpart 2 of part D

establishes additional requirements for

nonattainment areas classified under

table 1 of section 181(a)(1). Since

Victoria County is considered

nonclassifiable, the State is only

required to meet the applicable

requirements of subpart 1 of part D—

specifically sections 172(c) and 176.

Section 172(c)(1) requires the

implementation of all reasonably

available control technology (RACT) as

expeditiously as possible. The State of

Texas has adopted VOC RACT rules

under the following general categories:

General Volatile Organic Compound

Sources, Volatile Organic Compound

Transfer Operations, Petroleum Refining

and Petrochemical Processes, SolventUsing Processes, Miscellaneous

Industrial Sources, Consumer-Related

Sources, and Administrative Provisions.

Incomplete/no data areas such as

Victoria County must correct any RACT

deficiencies regarding the enforceability

of existing rules in order to be

redesignated to attainment. To this end,

certain monitoring, recordkeeping, and

reporting requirements are being revised

to improve the enforceability of RACT

in Victoria County in the concurrent

action discussed above. With the

approval of these revisions the

requirements of section 172(c)(1) are

fully met for Victoria County.

Section 172(c)(2) lists requirements

for a demonstration of reasonable

further progress (RFP). An RFP

demonstration assumes a long

nonattainment period or a large amount

of reductions required to attain the

standard. Because Victoria County is

already in attainment, EPA considers

Federal measures, such as the Federal

Motor Vehicle Control Program and

Reid Vapor Pressure requirement,

sufficient to meet the RFP requirement.

See the General Preamble for the

Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498,

13525–26, 13564).

Section 172(c)(3) requires an

emissions inventory as part of an area’s

attainment demonstration. The

emissions inventory requirement has

been met by the submission and

approval with this action of the 1992

inventory for Victoria County.

Section 172(c)(9) requires that

contingency measures be developed

should an area fail to meet the

reasonable further progress requirement.

As explained in the General Preamble

(57 FR 13525), EPA believed it not

appropriate to apply this requirement to

incomplete/no data areas such as

Victoria County. Moreover, since

Victoria County has met the RFP

requirement, and has demonstrated

attainment through air monitoring data,

the contingency measures requirement

of section 172(c)(9) no longer applies

(57 FR 13564). Thus, the State is not

required to submit section 172(c)(9)

contingency measures for Victoria

County to be redesignated.

Section 172(c)(5) requires the

development of a New Source Review

(NSR) Program. Although Texas has had

an NSR program, revisions required by

the 1990 Act have not been approved by

EPA. Texas, therefore, does not

currently have a fully approved NSR

program. However, in an October 14,

1994 memo from Mary D. Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and
12456 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

Radiation, entitled ‘‘Part D New Source

Review (part D NSR) Requirements for

Areas Redesignating to Attainment’’

(NSR memo), EPA amended one aspect

of the redesignation guidance by

removing the requirement that an area

have an approved NSR program prior to

the area requesting redesignation to

attainment. The NSR memo explained

that EPA now believes that a de minimis

exception to the requirement of section

107(d)(3)(E) for an approved part D NSR

program is justifiable in certain cases

where the adoption and full approval of

a part D NSR program as a prerequisite

to redesignation would not be of

significant environmental value. Once

an area has been redesignated to

attainment, a part D NSR program must

be replaced by the Prevention of

Significant Deterioration (PSD) program.

Victoria County’s maintenance plan

demonstrates maintenance without the

use of the NSR program; therefore, EPA

does not require the part D NSR

program to be approved prior to

approval of this redesignation request.

Please see the TSD for a copy of the NSR

memo.

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires

States to revise their SIPs to establish

criteria and procedures to ensure that

Federal actions, before they are taken,

conform to the air quality planning

goals in the applicable State SIP. The

requirement to determine conformity

applies to transportation plans,

programs and projects developed,

funded, or approved under title 23

U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act

(‘‘transportation conformity’’), as well as

to all other Federal actions (‘‘general

conformity’’).

Section 176 further provides that the

conformity revisions to be submitted by

the States must be consistent with

Federal conformity regulations that the

CAA required EPA to promulgate.

Congress provided for the State

revisions to be submitted one year after

the date for promulgation of final EPA

conformity regulations. When that date

passed without such promulgation,

EPA’s General Preamble for the

implementation of title I informed the

State that its conformity regulations

would establish a submittal date (see 57

FR 13498, 13557 (April 16, 1992)). The

EPA promulgated final transportation

conformity regulations on November 24,

1993 (58 FR 62118) and general

conformity regulations on November 30,

1993 (58 FR 63214). These conformity

rules require that States adopt both

transportation and general conformity

provisions in the SIP for areas

designated nonattainment or subject to

a maintenance plan approved under

CAA section 175A.

Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.396 of the

transportation conformity rule and 40

CFR 51.851 of the general conformity

rule, the State of Texas was required to

submit a SIP revision containing

transportation conformity criteria and

procedures consistent with those

established in the Federal rule by

November 25, 1994. Similarly, Texas

was required to submit a SIP revision

containing general conformity criteria

and procedures consistent with those

established in the Federal rule by

December 1, 1994. Texas submitted its

transportation conformity rules to EPA

on November 6, 1994. The State’s

general conformity rules were submitted

to EPA on November 22, 1994. As these

requirements did not come due until

after the submission date of the

redesignation request, these conformity

rule submissions need not be approved

prior to taking action on this

redesignation request.

The EPA recently published

additional guidance on maintenance

plans and their applicability to

conformity issues in a memorandum

entitled ‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan

Option for Nonclassifiable Ozone

Nonattainment Areas,’’ (limited

maintenance plan memo) from Sally L.

Shaver, Director, Air Quality Strategies

& Standards Division, on November 16,

1994. This limited maintenance plan

memo discusses maintenance

requirements for certain areas

petitioning for redesignation to

attainment. Nonclassifiable ozone

nonattainment areas with design values

less than 85% of the exceedance level

of the ozone standard are no longer

required to project emissions over the

maintenance period.

The Federal transportation conformity

rule (58 FR 62188) and the Federal

general conformity rule (58 FR 63214)

apply to areas operating under

maintenance plans. Under either rule,

one means by which a maintenance area

can demonstrate conformity for Federal

projects is to indicate that expected

emissions from planned actions are

consistent with the emissions budget for

the area. Based on guidance discussed

in the limited maintenance plan memo,

emissions inventories in areas that

qualify for the limited maintenance plan

approach are not required to be

projected over the life of the

maintenance plan. EPA feels it is

unreasonable to expect that such an area

will experience so much growth in that

period that a violation of the NAAQS

would occur. Emissions budgets in

limited maintenance plan areas would

be treated as essentially not constraining

emissions growth, and would not need

to be capped for the maintenance

period. In these cases, Federal projects

subject to conformity determinations

could be considered to satisfy the

‘‘budget test’’ of the Federal conformity

rules.

(3) Fully Approved SIP

The EPA finds that, upon approval of

the Texas RACT Catch-up and Victoria

County Fix-up SIP revisions, the State of

Texas will have a fully approved SIP for

Victoria County.

(4) Permanent and Enforceable

Measures

Under the CAA, EPA approved Texas’

SIP control strategy for the Victoria

County nonattainment area, satisfied

that the rules and the emission

reductions achieved as a result of those

rules were enforceable. Several Federal

and Statewide rules are in place which

have significantly improved the ambient

air quality in Victoria County. Existing

Federal programs, such as the Federal

Motor Vehicle Control Program and the

Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) limit of 7.8

pounds per square inch for gasoline in

Victoria County, will not be lifted upon

redesignation. These programs will

counteract emissions growth as the

county experiences economic growth

over the life of the maintenance plan.

The State adopted VOC rules such as

degreasing and solvent clean-up

processes; surface coating rules for large

appliances, furniture, coils, paper,

fabric, vinyl, cans, miscellaneous metal

parts and products, and factory surface

coating of flat wood paneling; solventusing rules for graphic arts, and

miscellaneous industrial source rules

such as for cutback asphalt. The

applicable RACT rules will also remain

in place in Victoria County. In addition,

the State permits program, the PSD

permits program, and the Federal

Operating Permits program will help

counteract emissions growth.

The EPA finds that the combination of

existing EPA-approved SIP and Federal

measures ensure the permanence and

enforceability of reductions in ambient

ozone levels that have allowed the area

to attain the NAAQS.

(5) Fully Approved Maintenance Plan

Under Section 175A

In today’s document, EPA is

approving the State’s maintenance plan

for Victoria County because EPA finds

that the TNRCC’s submittal meets the

requirements of section 175A. Thus, the

Victoria County nonattainment area will

have a fully approved maintenance plan

in accordance with section 175A as of

the effective date of this redesignation.

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the

elements of a maintenance plan for
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12457

areas seeking redesignation from

nonattainment to attainment. The plan

must demonstrate continued attainment

of the applicable NAAQS for at least ten

years after the Administrator approves a

redesignation to attainment. Eight years

after the redesignation, the State must

submit a revised maintenance plan

which demonstrates that attainment will

continue to be maintained for the ten

years following the initial ten-year

period. To provide for the possibility of

future NAAQS violations, the

maintenance plan must contain

contingency measures, with a schedule

for implementation, adequate to assure

prompt correction of any air quality

problems. Each of the section 175A plan

requirements is discussed below.

Demonstration of Maintenance

The requirements for an area to

redesignate to attainment are discussed

in the memorandum entitled

‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to

Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ John

Calcagni, Director, Air Quality

Management Division, September 4,

1992 (Calcagni memo). One aspect of a

complete maintenance demonstration

discussed in the Calcagni memo is the

requirement to develop an emission

inventory from one of the three years

during which the area has demonstrated

attainment. This inventory should

include volatile organic compounds

(VOC), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), and

CO emissions from the area in tons per

day measurements. In addition to the

Calcagni memo, more recent guidance

on the redesignation of certain

nonattainment areas to attainment is

provided in the limited maintenance

plan memo.

Attainment Inventory

The TNRCC adopted comprehensive

inventories of VOC, NOX, and CO

emissions from area, stationary, and

mobile sources using 1992 as the base

year to demonstrate maintenance of the

ozone NAAQS. EPA has determined

that 1992 is an appropriate year on

which to base attainment level

emissions because EPA policy allows

States to select any one of the three

years in the attainment period as the

attainment year inventory. The State

submittal contains the detailed

inventory data and summaries by source

category.

The TNRCC provided the stationary

source estimates for each company

meeting the emissions criteria by

requiring the submission of complete

emission inventory questionnaires

which had been designed to obtain sitespecific data. The TNRCC generated

area source emissions for each source

category based on EPA’s ‘‘Procedures for

the Preparation of Emissions Inventories

for Precursors of Carbon Monoxide and

Ozone, Volume I’’, and the EPA

document entitled ‘‘Compilation of Air

Pollutant Emission Factors’’. The nonroad mobile source inventory was

developed using methodology

recommended in EPA’s ‘‘Procedures for

Emission Inventory Preparation.

Volume IV: Mobile Sources’’.

Additional data was provided with

reference to an EPA-sponsored study

entitled ‘‘Nonroad Engine Emission

Inventories for CO and Ozone

Nonattainment Boundaries.’’ On-road

emissions of VOC, NOX, and CO were

calculated on a county-wide basis using

EPA’s MOBILE5a computer model. The

biogenic emissions were calculated

using the EPA software package entitled

PC-BEIS. This package yields results in

U.S. short tons per day (daily emissions

only).

In the limited maintenance plan

memo, EPA set forth new guidance on

maintenance plan requirements for

certain ozone nonattainment areas. The

limited maintenance plan memo

identified criteria through which certain

nonclassifiable ozone nonattainment

areas could choose to submit less

rigorous maintenance plans. As

mentioned earlier, the method for

calculating design values is presented in

the June 18, 1990 memorandum,

‘‘Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design

Value Calculations,’’ from William G.

Laxton, former Director of the Office of

Air Quality Planning and Standards

Technical Support Division.

Nonclassifiable ozone nonattainment

areas whose design values are

calculated at or below 0.106 parts per

million (ppm) at the time of

redesignation, are no longer required to

project emissions over the maintenance

period. The 0.106 ppm represents 85%

of the ozone exceedance level of 0.125

ppm. As explained in the November 16,

1994 limited maintenance plan memo,

the EPA believes if an area begins the

maintenance period at or below 85% of

the ozone exceedance level of the

NAAQS, the existing Federal and SIP

control measures, along with the PSD

program, will be adequate to assure

maintenance of the ozone NAAQS in

the area. Victoria County has a

calculated design value of 0.100 ppm. In

light of that, and the lack of any recent

history of violations of the ozone

NAAQS, EPA believes that it is

reasonable to conclude that the

combination of the RACT measures in

the SIP, the Federal Motor Vehicle

Control Program, the RVP limit of 7.8

pounds per square inch, and the

applicability of preconstruction review

in accordance with the PSD

requirements of part C of Title I,

provides adequate assurance that the

ozone NAAQS will be maintained.

Thus, the EPA believes Victoria County

qualifies for the limited maintenance

plan approach.

The following is a table of the revised

average peak ozone season weekday

VOC and NOX emissions for the

biogenic and major anthropogenic

source categories for the 1992

attainment year inventory.

SUMMARY OF VOC EMISSIONS

Source category Tons per

year

Tons

per day

Point Sources ............... 2180.10 5.97

Area Sources ................ 1940.41 6.04

Non-Road Mobile

Sources ..................... 962.24 3.55

On-Road Mobile

Sources* ................... ................ 4.44

Biogenic Sources* ........ ................ 26.32

Total* ................. ................ 46.32

*Tons per year calculations were not submitted for these categories.

SUMMARY OF NOX Emissions

Source category Tons per

year

Tons

per day

Point Sources ........... 13339.91 36.55

Area Sources ............ 206.73 0.35

Non-Road Mobile

Sources ................. 985.47 3.31

On-Road Mobile

Sources* ............... .................... 8.01

Biogenic Sources* .... .................... ............

Total* ................. .................... 48.22

F4700

The attainment inventory submitted

by TNRCC for Victoria County meets the

redesignation requirements as discussed

in the Calcagni memo and limited

maintenance plan memo. Therefore, the

EPA is today approving the emissions

inventory component of the

maintenance plan for Victoria County.

Continued Attainment

Continued attainment of the ozone

NAAQS in Victoria County will depend,

in part, on the Federal and State control

measures discussed previously.

However, the ambient air monitoring

site will remain active at its present

location during the entire length of the

maintenance period. This data will be

quality assured and submitted to the

Aerometric Information and Retrieval

System (AIRS) on a monthly basis. As
12458 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

discussed in the limited maintenance

plan memo, certain monitored ozone

levels will provide the basis for

triggering measures contained in the

contingency plan. Additionally, as

discussed above, during year 8 of the

maintenance period, TNRCC is required

to submit a revised plan to provide for

maintenance of the ozone standard in

Victoria County for the next ten years.

Contingency Plan

Section 175A of the CAA requires that

a maintenance plan include contingency

provisions, as necessary, to promptly

correct any violation of the NAAQS that

occurs after redesignation of the area to

attainment. The contingency plan

should clearly identify the measures to

be adopted, a schedule and procedure

for adoption and implementation, and a

specific time limit for action by the

State. The State should also identify

specific triggers which will be used to

determine when the measures need to

be implemented.

The TNRCC has selected Stage I vapor

control as its contingency measure. At

any time during the maintenance

period, if the Victoria County air quality

monitor records a third exceedance of

the ozone NAAQS within any

consecutive three-year period (a level

below the NAAQS), the TNRCC will

promulgate a rule change to implement

Stage I gasoline controls in Victoria

County. This rule will be submitted to

EPA within 6 months of the third

exceedance. The compliance date for

applicable sources in Victoria County

will be 6 months after TNRCC adopts

the rule change. This contingency

measure and schedule satisfies the

requirements of section 175A(d).

In addition, the State has adopted

several voluntary measures that,

although not enforceable and therefore

not contingency measures that could

satisfy section 175A, are expected to

contribute to the maintenance of air

quality. The triggers for the voluntary

measures, with the exception of the

emissions projection measure, are at

ozone levels below the standard, to

allow the State to take early action to

address a possible violation of the

NAAQS before it occurs. The following

trigger levels would activate measures:

The ozone design value equals or

exceeds 85% of the exceedance level of

the ozone NAAQS, or 0.106 ppm; or the

monitor shows one to four exceedances

of the ozone NAAQS during any

consecutive three-year period.

If the design value of Victoria County

exceeds .106 ppm at any time during the

maintenance period, Victoria County

officials will establish a voluntary ozone

advisory program. The TNRCC will

coordinate the dissemination of

information to the county with respect

to ozone advisory predictions, voluntary

compliance measures on ozone advisory

days, and public notification. The ozone

advisory program will be functional

within 6 months of notification by the

TNRCC that the ozone design value for

Victoria County has reached the trigger

level.

If the monitor records an exceedance

of the ozone NAAQS, Victoria County

officials will establish a formal ozone

advisory program. This formal program

will be staffed sufficiently to operate the

program on a daily basis during the

peak ozone season (May 1–September

30). The formal program will be staffed

and functional within 6 months of

notification by TNRCC that the trigger

level has been reached.

If the monitor records a second

exceedance of the ozone NAAQS during

any consecutive three-year period, the

newly-formed ozone advisory board will

institute a voluntary program with area

industry to reschedule, revise, or curtail

activities for the ozone advisory days.

This program will be developed and

available for use within 30 days after

notification by the TNRCC that this

contingency measure will be required.

If Victoria County should violate the

ozone NAAQS (4 exceedances during

any consecutive three-year period)

during the maintenance period, the

TNRCC will require an additional

voluntary measure to be implemented

within one year of a violation of the

ozone NAAQS. A complete description

of these voluntary measures and their

triggers can be found in the State’s

submittal. Although these voluntary

measures do not qualify as contingency

measures under section 175A, EPA is

hereby approving them under section

110 for whatever strengthening effect

they may have on the SIP.

Final Action

The EPA has evaluated the State’s

redesignation request for Victoria

County, Texas, for consistency with the

CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy.

The EPA believes that, with the

concurrent approval of the Texas RACT

Catch-up and Victoria County Fix-up

submission, the redesignation request

and monitoring data demonstrate that

Victoria County, Texas, has attained the

ozone standard. In addition, the EPA

has determined that, with the

concurrent approval of the Texas RACT

Catch-up and Victoria County Fix-up

submission, the redesignation request

meets the requirements and policy set

forth in the General Preamble and

policy memorandum discussed in this

notice for area redesignations, and today

is approving Texas’ redesignation

request for Victoria County.

The EPA is publishing this action

without prior proposal because the EPA

views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, the EPA is proposing to

approve the SIP revision should adverse

or critical comments be filed. This

action will be effective May 8, 1995,

unless adverse or critical comments are

received by April 6, 1995. If the 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. The 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 on this action or the Texas

RACT Catch-up and Victoria County

Fix-up action, the public is advised that

this action will be effective May 8, 1995.

Similarly, if adverse or critical

comments are received on the Texas

RACT Catch-up and Victoria County

Fix-up action, the notice on that action

will be converted to a proposal and

those comments addressed in a

subsequent final action. In such a case,

the Victoria County redesignation direct

final action will be converted to a

proposal as well.

The EPA has reviewed this

redesignation request for conformance

with the provisions of the CAA and has

determined that this action conforms to

those requirements.

Regulatory Process

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., the EPA must

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. 603

and 604). Alternatively, under 5 U.S.C.

605(b), the EPA may certify that the rule

will not have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities (see

46 FR 8709). Small entities include

small businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and governmental entities

with jurisdiction over populations of

less than 50,000.

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

petitions for judicial review of this

action must be filed in the United States

Court of Appeals for the appropriate

circuit by May 8, 1995. Filing a petition

for reconsideration of this final rule by

the Administrator does not affect the

finality of this rule for purposes of
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12459

judicial review; nor does it extend the

time within which a petition for judicial

review may be filed, or postpone the

effectiveness of this rule. This action

may not be challenged later in

proceedings to enforce its requirements

(see section 307(b)(2)).

Nothing in this action shall be

construed as permitting, allowing, or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for a revision to any SIP. Each

request for revision to the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

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 small entities. 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 from

basing its actions concerning SIPs on

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

E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256–66 (S.Ct.

1976); 42 U.S.C. section 7410(a)(2). The

Office of Management and Budget has

exempted this action from review under

Executive Order 12866.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 52 and

81

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Area designations,

Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by

reference, Intergovernmental

regulations, National parks, Reporting

and recordkeeping, Ozone, Volatile

organic compounds, and Wilderness

areas.

Dated: February 22, 1995.

Jane N. Saginaw,

Regional Administrator (6A).

40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are 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 SS—Texas

2. Section 52.2275 is amended by

adding paragraph (e) to read as follows:

§ 52.2275 Control strategy and

regulations: Ozone.

* * * * *

(e) Approval—The Texas Natural

Resource Conservation Commission

(TNRCC) submitted an ozone

redesignation request and maintenance

plan on July 27, 1994, requesting that

the Victoria County ozone

nonattainment area be redesignated to

attainment for ozone. Both the

redesignation request and maintenance

plan were adopted by TNRCC in

Commission Order No. 94–29 on July

27, 1994. The redesignation request and

maintenance plan meet the

redesignation requirements in section

107(d)(3)(E) of the Act as amended in

1990. The redesignation meets the

Federal requirements of section

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

revision to the Texas Ozone State

Implementation Plan for Victoria

County. The EPA approved the request

for redesignation to attainment with

respect to ozone for Victoria County on

May 8, 1995.

PART 81—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 81

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7871q.

2. In Section 81.344, the attainment

status designation table for ozone is

amended by revising the entry for

Victoria County under ‘‘Designated

Area’’ to read as follows:

§ 81.344 Texas.

* * * * *

TEXAS—OZONE

Designated

area

Designation date

Classification

Type Date

type

Victoria

Area,

Victoria

County.

May 8,

1995.

Attainment.

* * * * *

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95–5347 Filed 3–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[MI21–04–6753, MI18–03–6754; FRL–5160–6]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans and Designation

of Areas for Air Quality Planning

Purposes; State of Michigan

AGENCY: United States Environmental

Protection Agency (USEPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: On July 21, 1994 the USEPA

published a proposal to approve the

1990 base year emission inventory,

basic vehicle inspection and

maintenance (I/M) and the

redesignation to attainment and

associated section 175A maintenance

plan for the ozone National Ambient Air

Quality Standard (NAAQS) for the

seven-county Detroit-Ann Arbor,

Michigan area as a State Implementation

Plan (SIP) revisions. The 30-day

comment period concluded on August

22, 1994. A total of 72 comment letters

were received in response to the July 21,

1994 proposal, 62 favorable, 9 adverse

and 1 request to extend the comment

period. On September 8, 1994, however,

the USEPA published a correction

document and 15-day extension of the

comment period as a result of the

inadvertent omission of a number of

lines from the July 21, 1994 proposal.

The reopened comment period

concluded on September 23, 1994. An

additional 25 comment letters were

received in response to the September 8,

1994, extension of public comment

period regarding the July 21, 1994

proposal approval, 2 favorable, 22

adverse and 1 informational. This final

rule summarizes all comments and

USEPA’s responses, and finalizes the

approval of the 1990 base year emission

inventory, and basic I/M, and the

redesignation to attainment for ozone

and associated section 175A

maintenance plan for the Detroit-Ann

Arbor area.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action will be

effective April 6, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the SIP revisions,

public comments and USEPA’s

responses are available for inspection at

the following address: (It is

recommended that you telephone

Jacqueline Nwia at (312) 886–6081

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:

Jacqueline Nwia, Regulation

Development Section (AT–18J), Air

Toxics and Radiation Branch, Air and

Radiation Division, United States

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604, Telephone

Number (312) 886–6081.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background Information

The 1990 base year emission

inventory, basic I/M, and redesignation