12478 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

maintenance plan as required by 175A

of the Clean Air Act, as amended in

1990. Elements of the section 175A

maintenance plan include a base year

(1993 attainment year) emission

inventory for NOX and VOC, a

demonstration of maintenance of the

ozone NAAQS with projected emission

inventories (including interim years) to

the year 2005 for NOX and VOC, a plan

to verify continued attainment, a

contingency plan, and an obligation to

submit a subsequent maintenance plan

revision in 8 years as required by the

Clean Air Act. If the area records a

violation of the ozone NAAQS (which

must be confirmed by the State),

Michigan will implement one or more

appropriate contingency measure(s)

which are contained in the contingency

plan. Appropriateness of a contingency

measure will be determined by an urban

airshed modeling analysis. The

Governor or his designee will select the

contingency measure(s) to be

implemented based on the analysis and

the MDNR’s recommendation. The

menu of contingency measures includes

basic motor vehicle inspection and

maintenance program upgrades, Stage I

vapor recovery expansion, Stage II vapor

recovery, intensified RACT for

degreasing operations, NOX RACT, and

RVP reduction to 7.8 psi. The

redesignation request and maintenance

plan meet the redesignation

requirements in sections 107(d)(3)(E)

and 175A of the Act as amended in

1990, respectively. The redesignation

meets the Federal requirements of

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

a revision to the Michigan Ozone State

Implementation Plan for the above

mentioned counties.

PART 81—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 81

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

2. In § 81.323 the ozone table is

amended by revising the entry for the

Detroit-Ann Arbor area for ozone to read

as follows:

§ 81.323 Michigan.

* * * * *

MICHIGAN—OZONE

Designated areas

Designation Classification

Date1 Type Date1 Type

* * * * * * *

Detroit-Ann Arbor Area:

Livingston County ............................................................................. April 6, 1995 .......... Attainment

Macomb County ............................................................................... April 6, 1995 .......... Attainment

Monroe County ................................................................................. April 6, 1995 .......... Attainment

Oakland County ................................................................................ April 6, 1995 .......... Attainmnet

St. Clair County ................................................................................ April 6, 1995 .......... Attainment

Washtenaw County .......................................................................... April 6, 1995 .......... Attainment

Wayne County .................................................................................. April 6, 1995 .......... Attainment

* * * * * * *

1This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95–5445 Filed 3–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 70

[IL001; FRL–5164–6]

Clean Air Act Final Interim Approval of

Operating Permits Program; Illinois

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final interim approval.

SUMMARY: The EPA is promulgating

interim approval of the Operating

Permits Program submitted by Illinois

for the purpose of complying with

Federal requirements for an approvable

State program to issue operating permits

to all major stationary sources, and to

certain other sources.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 7, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State’s

submittal and other supporting

information used in developing the final

interim approval are available for

inspection during normal business

hours at the following location: United

States Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, AR–18J, Chicago, Illinois

60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jennifer Buzecky, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Permits and Grants Section

AR–18J, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312)

886–3194.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background and Purpose

A. Introduction

Title V of the 1990 Clean Air Act

Amendments (sections 501–507 of the

Clean Air Act (‘‘the Act’’)), and

implementing regulations at 40 Code of

Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 70

require that States develop and submit

operating permits programs to EPA by

November 15, 1993, and that EPA act to

approve or disapprove each program

within 1 year after receiving the

submittal. The EPA’s program review

occurs pursuant to section 502 of the

Act and the part 70 regulations, which

together outline criteria for approval or

disapproval. Where a program

substantially, but not fully, meets the

requirements of part 70, EPA may grant

the program interim approval for a

period of up to 2 years. If EPA has not

fully approved a program by 2 years

after the November 15, 1993 date, or by

the end of an interim program, it must

establish and implement a Federal

program.

On September 30, 1994, EPA

proposed interim approval of the

operating permits program for Illinois.

See 59 FR 49882. The EPA received

public comment on the proposal, and

compiled a Technical Support

Document (TSD) which describes the

operating permits program in greater

detail. In this notice EPA is taking final

action to promulgate interim approval of

the operating permits program for

Illinois.

II. Final Action and Implications

A. Analysis of State Submission

The EPA received comments from a

total of four organizations. The EPA’s

response to these comments is

summarized in this section. Comments
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12479

supporting EPA’s proposal are not

addressed in this notice; however,

EPA’s response to all comments is

available in a document contained in

the docket at the address noted in the

ADDRESSES section above.

1. Section 112(G) Implementation

The EPA received several comments

regarding the proposed approval of

Illinois’ preconstruction permitting

program for the purpose of

implementing section 112(g) during the

transition period between title V

approval and adoption of a State rule

implementing EPA’s section 112(g)

regulations. Two commentors argued

that Illinois should not, and cannot,

implement section 112(g) until: (1) EPA

has promulgated a section 112(g)

regulation, and (2) the State has a

section 112(g) program in place. The

commentors also argued that Illinois’

preconstruction review program cannot

serve as a means to implement section

112(g) because it was not designed for

that purpose. One commentor also

asserted that such a regulatory program

is unconstitutional because the section

112(g) requirements are vague.

In its proposed interim approval of

Illinois’ part 70 program, EPA also

proposed to approve Illinois’

preconstruction review program for the

purpose of implementing section 112(g)

during the transition period before

promulgation of a Federal rule

implementing section 112(g). This

proposal was based in part on an

interpretation of the Act that would

require sources to comply with section

112(g) beginning on the date of approval

of the title V program, regardless of

whether EPA had completed its section

112(g) rulemaking. The EPA has since

revised this interpretation of the Act in

a Federal Register notice published on

February 14, 1995. 60 FR 8333. The

revised interpretation postpones the

effective date of section 112(g) until

after EPA has promulgated a rule

addressing that provision. The revised

notice sets forth in detail the rationale

for the revised interpretation.

The section 112(g) interpretive notice

explains that EPA is still considering

whether the effective date of section

112(g) should be delayed beyond the

date of promulgation of the Federal rule

so as to allow States time to adopt rules

implementing the Federal rule, and that

EPA will provide for any such

additional delay in the final section

112(g) rulemaking. Unless and until

EPA provides for such an additional

postponement of section 112(g), Illinois

must be able to implement section

112(g) during the period between

promulgation of the Federal section

112(g) rule and adoption of

implementing State regulations.

For this reason, EPA is finalizing its

approval of Illinois’ preconstruction

review program. This approval clarifies

that the preconstruction review program

is available as a mechanism to

implement section 112(g) during the

transition period between promulgation

of the section 112(g) rule and adoption

by Illinois of rules established to

implement section 112(g). However,

since the approval is for the single

purpose of providing a mechanism to

implement section 112(g) during the

transition period, the approval itself

will be without effect if EPA decides in

the final section 112(g) rule that sources

are not subject to the requirements of

the rule until State regulations are

adopted. Furthermore, EPA is limiting

the duration of this approval to 18

months following promulgation by EPA

of the section 112(g) rule.

The EPA believes that, although

Illinois currently lacks a program

designed specifically to implement

section 112(g), Illinois’ preconstruction

review program will serve as an

adequate implementation vehicle during

a transition period because it will allow

Illinois to select control measures that

would meet MACT, as defined in

section 112, and incorporate these

measures into a federally enforceable

preconstruction permit. Illinois will be

able to impose federally enforceable

measures reflecting MACT for most if

not all changes qualifying as a

modification, construction, or

reconstruction under section 112(g)

because Illinois’ preconstruction

permitting program is not limited to

criteria pollutants. 415 ILCS 5/9.1(d).

Another consequence of the fact that

Illinois lacks a program designed

specifically to implement section 112(g)

is that the applicability criteria found in

its preconstruction review program may

differ from those in the section 112(g)

rule. However, whether a particular

source change qualifies as a

modification, construction, or

reconstruction for section 112(g)

purposes during any transition period

will be determined according to the

final section 112(g) rule. The EPA

would expect Illinois to be able to issue

a preconstruction permit containing a

case-by-case determination of MACT

where necessary for purposes of section

112(g) even if review under its own

preconstruction review program would

not be triggered.

In addition, one commentor

incorporated by reference its comments

on the proposed section 112(g) rule, and

stated that the proposed rule has

technical, legal, and constitutional

defects that disqualify it as a valid or

workable approach to section 112(g)

implementation. The EPA believes the

appropriate forum for pursuing

objections to the legal validity of

Federal regulations is by: (1) Submitting

comments on a proposed rulemaking

during the public comment period for

that particular rulemaking, or (2)

petitioning for review of the

promulgated rule in the D.C. Circuit

Court of Appeals. If the commentor has

concerns with the final section 112(g)

rule, the commentor will have the

opportunity to pursue such action once

the section 112(g) rule is promulgated.

Two commentors assumed that EPA

would delegate the section 112(g)

requirements to the State. The EPA

wishes to clarify that the

implementation of section 112(g) by the

State, including case-by-case MACT

determinations, is a requirement for

approval of a State title V program. In

other words, approval of the title V

operating permits program confers on

the State responsibility to implement

section 112(g). Since the requirement to

implement section 112(g) lies with the

State in the first instance, there is no

need for a delegation action apart from

the title V program approval

mechanism, except where the State

seeks approval of a ‘‘no less stringent’’

program under 40 CFR part 63 subpart

E. EPA’s approval of Illinois’ program

for delegation of section 112 standards

as promulgated does not affect this

responsibility to implement section

112(g).

2. Variance

EPA received two comments

regarding the variance provisions

contained in Illinois’ existing

regulations. The commentors objected to

EPA’s position that State variances are

not recognized by EPA unless a variance

is issued in accordance with part 70

procedures. The commentors stated that

dismissing all State-issued variances

would conflict with part 70. The

commentors also stated that while part

70’s requirements for compliance

schedules do not sanction noncompliance by a source, variances

provided by the state are consistent with

the recognition of non-complying

sources and the requirement for

compliance schedules in the permit

application.

EPA agrees with the commentors that

variances provided by the State could be

consistent with the issuance of a part 70

permit. The inclusion of a compliance

schedule in a part 70 permit is a part 70

requirement and, therefore, a State

variance from the applicable

requirements at the time of permit
12480 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

issuance that is provided to a noncomplying source may not be

inconsistent with part 70. EPA would

not, however, recognize variances that

grant relief from the duty to comply

with the terms of an issued federally

enforceable part 70 permit except where

such relief is granted through

procedures allowed by part 70. Once

again, EPA is not taking any action on

Illinois’ variance procedures. The

Agency is only clarifying that all

variances provided by the State for title

V sources must be granted in

accordance with part 70.

3. Insignificant Activities

Four commentors responded to EPA’s

proposed concerns regarding Illinois’

draft insignificant activities regulations.

In response to these comments EPA

reviewed the draft regulations a second

time. On February 2, 1995, EPA

formally received a final copy of these

regulations for inclusion in the State’s

CAAPP submittal. Please see the docket

for a more detailed review of the Illinois

rule.

All commentors objected to EPA’s

interpretation that the threshold levels

of 1.0 pound per hour (lb/hr) of criteria

pollutants and .1 lb/hr of HAP in 35

Illinois Administrative Code (IAC) Part

201.211 are not acceptable. These cutoff rates mentioned above are contained

in the State’s provision, ‘‘Application

for Classification as an Insignificant

Activity.’’ 35 IAC 201.211. One

commentor stated that the more

appropriate classification of

insignificant activities lies in different

sections of the State’s regulations. The

section referred to by the commentor

distinguishes between HAP and nonHAP emissions. For HAP calculations,

the rule relies on concentrations of

HAPs in the form of raw material fed to

an emission unit. 35 IAC 201.209(a)(1)

(A)–(C). For non-HAPs, the rule refers to

emission units that never exceed .1 lb/

hr or .44 tpy. 35 IAC 201.210(a) (2) and

(3). Although EPA cannot now

determine whether or not the HAP

calculations would result in emissions

in amounts greater than the significance

limits that will ultimately be finalized

in the section 112(g) rulemaking, EPA

also believes that the non-HAP

provisions in 35 IAC 201.210(a) (2) and

(3) do not now pose a problem for

approval of the State’s submittal. The

Agency, therefore, is taking no action on

these provisions. EPA originally

objected to 35 IAC 201.210(a)(1),

however, because this provision

includes emissions determined to be

insignificant according to the provisions

in 35 IAC 201.211 (allowing sources to

apply for insignificant activities that are

granted by IEPA’s discretion). The

regulatory sections offered by the

commentor, therefore, are not entirely

dispositive of the issue.

Upon further reflection, EPA

generally agrees with the commentors

that the rate itself of 1.0 lb/hr of criteria

pollutant emission cut-off contained in

35 IAC 201.211 need not be amended

for full approval. Emission cut-offs

approved for insignificant activities are

based upon State-specific circumstances

and analysis. One State’s cut-offs may

not be appropriate for another State’s

programs due to variations in local

factors such as non-attainment areas,

State Implementation Plans (SIP),

source types, and emissions. EPA

believes the State should be given

substantial deference in this matter and

finds the insignificance levels

established by Illinois will not, in and

of themselves, interfere with the State’s

ability to ensure that part 70 sources

meet all applicable requirements of the

SIP. Although a severe ozone

nonattainment area exists in the State,

EPA believes that it is reasonable in this

case to project that the insignificant

levels established in the State of Illinois’

regulations will not interfere with its

effort to be reclassified as attainment.

Illinois believes that this level will not

only reduce its administrative burden,

but allow it to eventually meet its

attainment demonstrations.

The Agency, however, is still

concerned with the development of

these regulations and continues to

believe that interim approval is

appropriate for these rules at this time.

35 IAC 201.208 of the State’s rule does

not meet the requirements of 40 CFR

70.5(c), which requires that an

application may not omit information

needed to determine the applicability

of, or to impose, any applicable

requirements, or to evaluate the fee

amount required under the schedule

approved pursuant to 40 CFR 70.9.

These provisions are intended to ensure

that sources do not file incomplete

permit applications due to inadvertent

usage of a State’s insignificant activity

provisions. In addition, 35 IAC

201.210(b) must be amended to clarify

that a source must specifically list in its

permit application the activities present

at its facility and not just rely on a

general statement that denotes the

presence of activities.

Although the emission cut-offs for

criteria pollutants are not a concern at

this time, revisions to the State’s

insignificant regulations will still be

necessary for full approval of the State’s

program. EPA believes the State must

make the following changes for full

approval: (1) the language of 201.208

must worded to state that at the time of

filing an application, the application

must include all necessary information

to determine the applicability of or to

impose any applicable requirements or

fees and (2) 201.210(b) must be

amended so that sources specifically list

the insignificant activities present at

their facilities.

4. Administrative Amendments

EPA received three comments on the

inclusion of the State’s incorporation of

emission trades based upon a SIPapproved trading program into a title V

permit based upon the administrative

amendment procedure. Two of the

commentors requested clarification as to

whether EPA intends to subject

emissions trading that occurs under an

emissions cap established in a part 70

permit to significant modification

procedures. One commentor stated that

it is not necessary for EPA to consider

this provision now since Illinois has no

such regulations developed concerning

emissions trading.

Responding to the commentors’

request for clarification, EPA does not

interpret part 70 to require states to

subject emissions trades that occur

under an emissions cap established in a

part 70 permit to significant

modification procedures. These trades

are established by a part 70 permit and,

therefore, sources do not need to revise

their part 70 permits when utilizing

these trading provisions.

Part 70, however, does not allow the

use of an administrative permit

amendment to accomplish

incorporation of emissions trades

resulting from the application of an

approved economic incentives rule, a

marketable permits rule or a generic

emissions trading rule into a part 70

permit. 40 CFR 70.7(d). Any substantive

change to a permit term or condition

must follow the permit revision

procedures of part 70. Future part 70

rulemakings may change this

requirement, but for the present, EPA

can only review State submittals in

accordance with the promulgated part

70 rulemaking of July 21, 1992.

Despite the fact that Illinois does not

currently have an approved trading

program, it is appropriate for EPA to

now consider this State legislative

provision allowing emission trades to be

incorporated through the administrative

amendment procedure. EPA cannot

approve regulations in a State program

that would conflict with provisions in

the part 70 regulations.

5. Compliance Certification

Three commentors objected to EPA’s

proposed interim approval regarding the
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12481

State’s legislation concerning

compliance certification by a

responsible official. The Illinois statute

requires that applications be certified

for truth, accuracy, and completeness by

a responsible official in accordance with

applicable regulations. 415 ILCS 5/

39.5(5)(e). Part 70 requires that

certifications be based upon a

‘‘reasonable belief’’ or that statements be

based upon ‘‘information and belief.’’ 40

CFR 70.5(d) and 70.6(c)(1).

EPA agrees with the commentors to

the extent that interim approval for this

issue is not appropriate. Upon further

review, Illinois’ legislative authority for

certification of responsible officials

carries the same meaning as part 70. A

responsible official of the permit

applicant would presumably need to

make some inquiry into the document

being certified to ensure that the

official’s certification meets the

requirements of the Illinois statute. In

light of this, EPA will remove the

compliance certification issue from the

items needing further State action for

final approval.

6. Enhanced NSR

Three commentors objected to EPA’s

proposal of interim approval for Illinois’

inclusion of preconstruction review

permits into part 70 permits via the

administrative amendment procedures

of part 70. To summarize, all three

commentors object to requiring the

development of specific regulations that

would outline the substantive,

procedural and compliance

requirements necessary for

incorporation of a preconstruction

permit into a part 70 permit through the

administrative amendment procedure.

This incorporation of a preconstruction

permit into a part 70 permit is known

as ‘‘enhanced new source review

(NSR).’’

In EPA’s proposal, EPA stated that 40

CFR 70.7(d)(1)(v) allows such

incorporation only when the State’s

preconstruction review program meets

procedural and compliance

requirements substantially equivalent to

the requirements of 40 CFR 70.7 and

70.8 and compliance requirements

substantially equivalent to those

contained in 40 CFR 70.6. To utilize 40

CFR 70.7(d)(1)(v), the state must

develop regulations which outline the

actual requirements necessary for

preconstruction permits to qualify for

inclusion in part 70 permits using the

administrative amendment procedure

and for EPA to approve these

regulations as ‘‘substantially

equivalent.’’ Without these regulations,

the public and EPA cannot track the

issuance and amendments of part 70

permits to ensure that the permits

contain all requirements. The public

also needs assurance that a source will

not be able to avoid the requirements of

the part 70 process through a different

permitting program such as

preconstruction review.

Although 40 CFR 70.7(d)(1)(v) is not

a necessary element of a part 70

program, the State of Illinois submitted

a title V permit program that provides

for the use of this procedure. EPA,

therefore, must determine the adequacy

of this aspect of the State’s submittal.

Because Illinois’ existing legislative

authority allows the use of enhanced

NSR, without any further regulations

defining substantially equivalent

procedures to 40 CFR 70.6, 70.7 and

70.8, this provision is currently

deficient. To cure this deficiency, the

State must: (1) develop regulations

outlining the exact substantive,

procedural and compliance

requirements for incorporation of

preconstruction permits into part 70

permits and (2) submit these regulations

to EPA for review and approval to

ensure that these regulations are

‘‘substantially equivalent’’ to the part 70

regulations.

415 ILCS 5/39.5(13)(c)(v), therefore,

will remain on the interim approval list

until the State corrects this deficiency.

Until regulations are developed

outlining the elements of an enhanced

NSR program, the State will be expected

to interpret ‘‘substantially equivalent’’

in 415 ILCS 5/39.5(13)(c)(v) consistently

with part 70.

7. Knowingly Tampering with

Monitoring Devices

Two commentors objected to EPA’s

inclusion of Illinois’ statutory provision

concerning enforcement of knowingly

tampering with any ‘‘monitoring device

or record.’’ 415 ILCS 5/44(j)(4)(D). Part

70 requires that criminal fines be

imposed upon one who knowingly

renders inaccurate any required

‘‘monitoring device or method.’’ 40 CFR

70.11(a)(3)(iii). One commentor stated

that Illinois’ enforcement provision is

identical in meaning and effect to the

language in part 70 and is appropriate

in the context of Illinois’ law.

Upon further review, EPA agrees with

the commentors that the Illinois

legislative provisions for enforcement

for knowingly tampering with

monitoring devices or records is

equivalent in meaning to the

requirements of part 70. EPA will,

therefore, remove from the list of

interim approval issues the requirement

that the State make a legislative change

to its enforcement provisions.

8. Prompt Reporting of Deviations

EPA received two comments

supporting its review of Illinois’

submittal concerning the prompt

reporting of deviations from permit

conditions required by 40 CFR

70.6(a)(3)(iii)(B). Because Illinois did

not include a definition of ‘‘prompt’’ in

its legislation or regulations, an

acceptable alternative is for the State to

define ‘‘prompt’’ in each part 70 permit.

This definition will be dependent upon

the individual circumstances of each

source.

The commentors, however, believe

that the EPA must revise several of its

earlier interim approval notices, in

which the Agency conditioned final

approval on including a definition of

prompt in the State program, in order to

provide a consistent application of the

appropriate interpretation of its rules.

EPA is not aware of any program

approval notices that need to be

corrected at this time.

B. Additional Issues

The Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency (IEPA) informed the EPA, after

publication of the proposed interim

approval of the State’s title V program,

that the State cannot meet its January 1,

1995, commitment for an effective acid

rain program. In light of the structure of

existing state legislation, in order for an

eventual full approval of the State’s

CAAPP, the State must incorporate by

reference the Federal acid rain program

into the State’s existing CAAPP

legislation. 415 ILCS 5/39.5(17). IEPA

requested an extension of its

commitment to incorporate by reference

the Federal program so that the State

can combine this incorporation by

reference with the amendments to its

CAAPP legislation required for interim

approval. This presentation to the

legislature would occur in the January,

1996, legislative session, rather than the

January, 1995, session originally

contemplated. IEPA argues that

amending its CAAPP legislation once

rather than twice would not interfere

with the State’s implementation of

Phase II of the Acid Rain Program.

On January 9, 1994, EPA received a

letter from Bharat Mathur, Chief, Bureau

of Air, IEPA, to Stephen Rothblatt,

Chief, Regulation Development Branch,

EPA Region 5, detailing why the State

cannot meet its January 1, 1995,

commitment and reiterating its

commitment to implement the Acid

Rain program.

Due to the State’s existing enabling

legislation for titles IV and V and its

commitment to implement the acid rain

program in the interim period between
12482 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

this final notice and an effective

incorporation by reference of the

Federal acid rain program into the

State’s legislation, EPA believes an

extension of the State’s commitment to

adopt acid rain legislation is

appropriate. Existing State legislation

allows the State to collect applications

for Phase II affected source and allows

the State to process these applications

and evidences the State’s ability to

implement the Federal acid rain

program in accordance with all Federal

regulations. 415 ILCS 5/39.5(17). Until

the State officially incorporates the

Federal acid rain program by reference,

EPA expects the State to use its broad

legislative authority for the receipt and

processing of phase II applications in

accordance with all Federal regulations.

C. Final Action

The EPA is promulgating interim

approval of the operating permits

program submitted by Illinois on

November 15, 1993. The State must

make the following changes to receive

full approval:

1. The State must correct all

deficiencies in its insignificant activities

regulations (refer to previous discussion

of insignificant activities for actual

changes);

2. The State must amend 415 ILCS 5/

39.5(13)(c)(vi) to require the use of the

significant modification procedure to

incorporate emission trades into a

CAAPP permit;

3. The State must develop regulations

defining enhanced NSR for the purposes

of implementing 40 CFR 70.7(d)(1)(v);

and

4. Due to the State’s present

legislative provisions concerning the

Acid Rain program, the State must

incorporate by reference the federal

regulations for implementation of the

acid rain program.

The scope of Illinois’ part 70 program

approved in this notice applies to all

part 70 sources (as defined in the

approved program) within the State of

Illinois, except any sources of air

pollution over which an Indian Tribe

has jurisdiction. See, e.g., 59 FR 55813,

55815–55818 (Nov. 9, 1994). The term

‘‘Indian Tribe’’ is defined under the Act

as ‘‘any Indian tribe, band, nation, or

other organized group or community,

including any Alaska Native village,

which is Federally recognized as

eligible for the special programs and

services provided by the United States

to Indians because of their status as

Indians.’’ See section 302(r) of the CAA;

see also 59 FR 43956, 43962 (Aug. 25,

1994); 58 FR 54364 (Oct. 21, 1993).

This interim approval, which may not

be renewed, extends until March 7,

1997. During this interim approval

period, the State of Illinois is protected

from sanctions, and EPA is not obligated

to promulgate, administer and enforce a

Federal operating permits program in

Illinois. Permits issued under a program

with interim approval have full standing

with respect to part 70, and the 1-year

time period for submittal of permit

applications by subject sources begins

upon the effective date of this interim

approval, as does the 3-year time period

for processing the initial permit

applications.

If the State of Illinois fails to submit

a complete corrective program for full

approval by September 9, 1996, EPA

will start an 18-month clock for

mandatory sanctions. If Illinois then

fails to submit a corrective program that

EPA finds complete before the

expiration of that 18-month period, EPA

will be required to apply one of the

sanctions in section 179(b) of the Act,

which will remain in effect until EPA

determines that Illinois has corrected

the deficiency by submitting a complete

corrective program. Moreover, if the

Administrator finds a lack of good faith

on the part of the State of Illinois, both

sanctions under section 179(b) will

apply after the expiration of the 18-

month period until the Administrator

determined that Illinois had come into

compliance. In any case, if, six months

after application of the first sanction,

Illinois still has not submitted a

corrective program that EPA has found

complete, a second sanction will be

required.

If EPA disapproves Illinois’ complete

corrective program, EPA will be

required to apply one of the section

179(b) sanctions on the date 18 months

after the effective date of the

disapproval, unless prior to that date the

State of Illinois has submitted a revised

program and EPA has determined that it

corrected the deficiencies that prompted

the disapproval. Moreover, if the

Administrator finds a lack of good faith

on the part of Illinois, both sanctions

under section 179(b) shall apply after

the expiration of the 18-month period

until the Administrator determines that

Illinois has come into compliance. In all

cases, if, six months after EPA applies

the first sanction, Illinois has not

submitted a revised program that EPA

has determined corrects the

deficiencies, a second sanction is

required.

In addition, discretionary sanctions

may be applied where warranted any

time after the expiration of an interim

approval period if Illinois has not timely

submitted a complete corrective

program or EPA has disapproved its

submitted corrective program.

Moreover, if EPA has not granted full

approval to the Illinois program by the

expiration of this interim approval and

that expiration occurs after November

15, 1995, EPA must promulgate,

administer and enforce a Federal

permits program for Illinois upon

interim approval expiration.

Requirements for approval, specified

in 40 CFR 70.4(b), encompass section

112(l)(5) requirements for approval of a

program for delegation of section 112

standards as promulgated by EPA as

they apply to Part 70 sources. Section

112(l)(5) requires that the State’s

program contain adequate authorities,

adequate resources for implementation,

and an expeditious compliance

schedule, which are also requirements

under part 70. Therefore, the EPA is also

promulgating approval under section

112(l)(5) and 40 CFR 63.91 of the State’s

program for receiving delegation of

section 112 standards that are

unchanged from Federal standards as

promulgated. This program for

delegations only applies to sources

covered by the Part 70 program.

The EPA is also promulgating

approval of Illinois’ federally

enforceable state operating permit

program (FESOP) for the purposes of

creating federally enforceable

limitations on the potential to emit of

Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAP)

regulated under section 112 of the CAA.

The EPA is approving this program as

meeting the criteria articulated in the

June 28, 1989, Federal Register notice

for State operating permit programs to

establish limits federally enforceable on

potential to emit and the criteria

established in section 112(l).

The EPA is also promulgating

approval of Illinois’s preconstruction

permitting program found in 35 Ill.

Adm. Code 201–203, under the

authority of title V and part 70 solely for

the purpose of implementing section

112(g) to the extent necessary during the

period between final promulgation of

section 112(g) and adoption of any

necessary State rules to implement

EPA’s section 112(g) regulations.

However, since the approval is for the

single purpose of providing a

mechanism to implement section 112(g)

during the transition period, the

approval itself will be without effect if

EPA decides in the final section 112(g)

rule that sources are not subject to the

requirements of the rule until State

regulations are adopted. Although

section 112(l) generally provides

authority for approval of State air

programs to implement section 112(g),

title V and section 112(g) provide

authority for this limited approval

because of the direct linkage between
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 44 / Tuesday, March 7, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 12483

the implementation of section 112(g)

and title V. The scope of this approval

is narrowly limited to section 112(g) and

does not confer or imply approval for

purposes of any other provision under

the Act, for example, section 110. The

duration of this approval is limited to 18

months following promulgation by EPA

of section 112(g) regulations, to provide

Illinois adequate time for the State to

adopt any necessary regulations

consistent with the Federal

requirements.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Docket

Copies of the State’s submittal and

other information relied upon for the

final interim approval, including four

public comments received and reviewed

by EPA on the proposal, are contained

in a docket maintained at the EPA

Regional Office. The docket is an

organized and complete file of all the

information submitted to, or otherwise

considered by, EPA in the development

of this final interim approval. The

docket is available for public inspection

at the location listed under the

ADDRESSES section of this document.

B. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget

has exempted this action from Executive

Order 12866 review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The EPA’s actions under section 502

of the Act do not create any new

requirements, but simply address

operating permits programs submitted

to satisfy the requirements of 40 CFR

Part 70. Because this action does not

impose any new requirements, it does

not have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

D. Effective Date

An administrative agency engaging in

rulemaking must comport with the

requirements of section 553 of the

Administrative Procedures Act (5

U.S.C.A., chapter 5). Section 553

requires that an agency allow at least 30

days from the date of publication before

the effective date of a substantive

rulemaking. If, however, good cause can

be shown, then the agency may impose

an effective date of less than 30 days

after publication. Good cause exists to

initiate an effective date less than 30

days after publication when it is in the

public interest and the shorter time

period does not cause prejudice to those

regulated by the rule. British American

Commodity Options Corp. v. Bagley, 552

F.2d 482, at 488–89 (1977). For the

reasons explained below, EPA believes

that good cause exists for the effective

date of Illinois’ CAAPP to be the date of

publication of this rulemaking.

An immediate effective date is in the

public’s interest for several reasons. The

requirement for sources to submit

CAAPP applications to the State is

contingent in the Illinois regulations

upon the effective date of the program,

not the date of publication. All sources

subject to title V in Illinois must submit

their title V applications to the state

within one year of the effective date of

the State’s program. Likewise, the

collection of fees, hiring of permit

engineers and analysis of applicants’

permits cannot begin until the State’s

program is effective. Illinois’ program,

therefore, should be adopted without

any further delay inasmuch as the

public has been without the protection

of this comprehensive regulatory

program and because any further delay

would not serve the public interest.

Although it is in the public’s interest

to commence Illinois’ title V program

upon the date of publication, EPA must

ensure that this action will not have any

prejudicial effects upon the regulated

community. Rowell v. Andrus, 631 F.2d

699, at 702–703 (1980). For example,

EPA must ensure that the regulated

community has sufficient notice of this

rulemaking and ample opportunity to

comment. EPA believes that all

interested parties have had sufficient

notice of this rulemaking and ample

time to comment. The development of

the State’s CAAPP occurred over the last

few years. As such, it contains a

combination of legislation and

regulations. These regulations were all

previously subjected to public comment

at the State level. The State’s legislation

has been effective and fully enforceable

as a matter of State law since September

26, 1992, and the first set of State

CAAPP regulations became effective on

June 10, 1993. Illinois’ CAAPP program,

therefore, has been fully effective and

enforceable as a matter of State law for

over the past year. In addition, EPA also

subjected these same regulations and

legislation to public comment when it

published its proposed interim approval

of the State’s CAAPP on September 30,

1994. From the preceding facts, it is

obvious that all interested parties have

had ample time both to participate in

the rulemaking process and to ready

themselves to comply with this

program.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 70

Environmental Protection,

Administrative practice and procedure,

Air pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Operating permits, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: February 24, 1995.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator.

40 CFR part 70 is amended as follows:

PART 70—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 70

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. sections 7401 et seq.

2. Appendix A to part 70 is amended

by adding the entry for Illinois in

alphabetical order to read as follows:

Appendix A to Part 70—Approval

Status of State and Local Operating

Permits Programs

* * * * *

Illinois

(a) The Illinois Environmental Protection

Agency: submitted on November 15, 1993;

interim approval effective on March 7, 1995;

interim approval expires March 7, 1997.

(b) Reserved

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95–5516 Filed 3–6–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018–AC28

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants; Determination of

Threatened Status for Gesneria

pauciflora

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Service determines

Gesneria pauciflora (no common name)

to be a threatened species pursuant to

the Endangered Species Act (Act) of

1973, as amended. This small shrub is

endemic to Puerto Rico, where only

three populations are known to exist in

the western mountains in the

municipalities of Maricao and Sabana

Grande. The species is threatened by the

potential for natural disasters and

modification of its highly restricted

habitat. This final rule extends the Act’s

protection and recovery provisions to

Gesneria pauciflora.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 6, 1995.

ADDRESSES: The complete file for this

rule is available for inspection, by

appointment, during normal business

hours, at the Caribbean Field Office,

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box