20136 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

7. In newly redesignated § 9.4,

paragraphs (a), (c), (d), (f), (h), (i), and

(j) are removed; paragraphs (b), (e), and

(g) are redesignated as paragraphs (a),

(b), and (c), respectively; newly

redesignated paragraph (c) is amended

by removing ‘‘election of optional

settlement’’ and adding, in its place,

‘‘settlement option election’’;

introductory text is added; and newly

redesignated paragraph (a) is revised to

read as follows:

§ 9.4 Beneficiaries and options.

Any designation of beneficiary or

election of settlement options is subject

to the provisions of 38 U.S.C. 1970 and

1977 and the following provisions:

(a) Any designation of beneficiary or

settlement option election made by any

member insured under Servicemen’s

Group Life Insurance for full-time

coverage or part-time coverage will

remain in effect until properly changed

by the member or canceled

automatically for any of the following

reasons:

(1) The insurance terminates

following separation or release from all

duty in a uniformed service.

(2) The member enters on duty in

another uniformed service.

(3) The member reenters on duty in

the same uniformed service more than

1 calendar day after separation or

release from all duty in that uniformed

service.

* * * * *

8. In newly redesignated § 9.5,

paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (e) are

removed; paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) are

redesignated as paragraphs (a), (b), and

(c), respectively; introductory text is

added, and paragraph (d) is added to

read as follows:

§ 9.5 Payment of proceeds.

Proceeds shall be paid in accordance

with provisions set forth in 38 U.S.C.

1970 and the following provisions:

* * * * *

(d) If a member whose coverage is

extended due to total disability converts

the group insurance to an individual

policy which is effective before he or

she ceases to be totally disabled or

before the end of 1 year following

termination of duty, whichever is

earlier, and dies while group insurance

would be in effect, except for such

conversion, the group insurance will be

payable, provided the individual policy

is surrendered for a return of premiums

and without further claim. When there

is no such surrender, any amount of

group insurance in excess of the amount

of the individual policy will be payable.

(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501)

§ 9.7 [Amended]

9. In newly redesignated § 9.7,

paragraph (a)(1) is amended by

removing ‘‘under § 9.5(b)(3)’’ and

adding, in its place, ‘‘under 38 U.S.C.

1967(b)’’, and by removing ‘‘under

§ 9.7(b)’’. Paragraph (a)(4) is amended by

removing ‘‘and § 9.34’’. Paragraph (a)(5)

is amended by removing ‘‘under § 9.7 (a)

and (b)’’ and adding, in its place, ‘‘under

38 U.S.C. 1968’’. Paragraph (b) is

amended by removing ‘‘in § 9.34 of this

part’’ and adding, in its place, ‘‘under 38

U.S.C. 1973’’, and by removing ‘‘as

required by § 9.8(c) of this part’’ and

adding, in its place, ‘‘as required under

38 U.S.C. 1967(c)’’. Paragraph (d) is

amended by removing ‘‘Chief Benefits

Director and/or’’ and adding, in its

place, ‘‘Under Secretary for Benefits

and’’.

10. In newly redesignated § 9.8,

paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), and (e) are

removed; paragraphs (f) and (g) are

redesignated as paragraphs (a) and (b),

respectively; newly redesignated

paragraph (a) is amended by removing

‘‘§ 9.34,’’; and newly redesignated

paragraph (b) is amended by removing

‘‘under § 9.1(a)(3)’’ and adding, in its

place, ‘‘under 38 U.S.C. 1968(a)(4)(B)’’;

and introductory text is added to read

as follows:

§ 9.8 Termination of coverage.

Termination of coverage will be in

accordance with the provisions of 38

U.S.C. 1968 and § 9.3 of this part and

the following provisions:

* * * * *

11. In newly redesignated § 9.9,

paragraphs (a), (a)(1), (a)(3), (b)(1), (b)(2),

(b)(3), and (d) are removed; paragraph

(a)(2) is redesignated as paragraph (a).

Newly redesignated paragraph (a) is

amended by removing ‘‘§ 9.7(b)’’ and

adding, in its place, ‘‘38 U.S.C. 1967(b)

or 1968(a)’’; and by removing ‘‘, in

which event the insurance may be

converted effective the day after the end

of such 120-day period’’ and adding ‘‘.’’

after ‘‘duty’’; and paragraph (b) is

revised to read as follows:

§ 9.9 Conversion privilege.

* * * * *

(b) The individual policy of life

insurance to which an insured may

convert under 38 U.S.C. 1968(b) or

1977(e) shall not have disability or other

supplementary benefits and shall not be

term insurance or any policy which

does not provide for cash values. Term

riders providing level or decreasing

insurance for which an additional

premium is charged may be attached to

an eligible basic conversion policy, but

the rider will be excluded from the

conversion pool agreement under the

policy.

* * * * *

12. In newly redesignated § 9.12,

paragraph (a) is removed, and

paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) are

redesignated as paragraphs (a), (b), and

(c), respectively. Newly redesignated

paragraph (a), is amended by removing

‘‘of the remaining balance’’, and by

removing ‘‘on December 31, 1964,’’;

newly redesignated paragraph (b) is

amended by removing ‘‘paragraph

(b)’’and adding, in its place, ‘‘paragraph

(a)’’; newly redesignated paragraph (c) is

amended by removing ‘‘§ 9.28’’ and

adding, in its place, ‘‘§ 9.11’’; and the

introductory text is revised to read as

follows:

§ 9.12 Reinsurance formula.

The allocation of insurance to the

insurer and each reinsurer will be based

upon the following:

* * * * *

§ 9.13 [Amended]

12. In newly redesignated § 9.13, the

first sentence is removed.

[FR Doc. 96–11157 Filed 5–3–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8320–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 162–2–0002a FRL–5466–1]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; California State

Implementation Plan Revision, San

Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution

Control District, Santa Barbara County

Air Pollution Control District, South

Coast Air Quality Management District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final

action on revisions to the California

State Implementation Plan. The

revisions concern rules from the

following districts: San Joaquin Valley

Unified Air Pollution Control District

(SJVUAPCD), Santa Barbara County Air

Pollution Control District (SBCAPCD),

and South Coast Air Quality

Management District (SCAQMD). This

approval action will incorporate these

rules into the federally approved SIP.

The intended effect of approving these

rules is to regulate emissions of volatile

organic compounds (VOCs) in

accordance with the requirements of the

Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 20137

1Among other things, the pre-amendment

guidance consists of those portions of the proposed

post-1987 ozone and carbon monoxide policy that

concern RACT, 52 FR 45044 (November 24, 1987);

‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints,

Deficiencies, and Deviations, Clarification to

Appendix D of November 24, 1987 Federal Register

Notice’’ (Blue Book) (notice of availability was

published in the Federal Register on May 25, 1988);

and the existing control technique guidelines

(CTGs).

2San Joaquin Valley, Santa Barbara, and South

Coast retained their designation of nonattainment

and were classified by operation of law pursuant to

sections 107(d) and 181(a) upon the date of

enactment of the CAA. See 55 FR 56694 (November

6, 1991).

3EPA adopted the completeness criteria on

February 16, 1990 (55 FR 5830) and, pursuant to

section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA, revised the criteria

on August 26, 1991 (56 FR 42216).

(CAA or the Act). The revised rules

control VOC emissions from aerospace

assembly and component manufacturing

operations, motor vehicle and mobile

equipment coating operations, crude oil

production and separation, and storage

of reactive organic compound liquids

(ROC). Thus, EPA is finalizing the

approval of these revisions into the

California SIP under provisions of the

CAA regarding EPA action on SIP

submittals for national primary and

secondary ambient air quality standards

and plan requirements for

nonattainment areas.

DATES: This action is effective on July 5,

1996 unless adverse or critical

comments are received by June 5, 1996.

If the effective date is delayed, a timely

notice will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the rule revisions

and EPA’s evaluation report for each

rule are available for public inspection

at EPA’s Region IX office during normal

business hours. Copies of the submitted

rule revisions are available for

inspection at the following locations:

Rulemaking Section (A–5–3), Air and

Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region IX, 75

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA

94105.

Environmental Protection Agency, Air

Docket (6102), 401 ‘‘M’’ Street, S.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20460.

California Air Resources Board,

Stationary Source Division, Rule

Evaluation Section, 2020 ‘‘L’’ Street,

Sacramento, CA 92123–1095.

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air

Pollution Control District, 1999

Tuolumne Street, Suite #200, Fresno,

CA 93721.

Santa Barbara County Air Pollution

Control District, 26 Castilian Drive, B–

23, Goleta, CA 93117.

South Coast Air Quality Management

District, 21865 E. Copley Drive,

Diamond Bar, CA 91765–4182.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Helen Liu, Rulemaking Section (A–5–3),

Air and Toxics Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415)

744–1199.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Applicability

The rules being approved into the

California SIP include: SJVUAPCD Rule

4602—Motor Vehicle and Mobile

Equipment Coating Operations,

SBCAPCD Rule 325—Crude Oil

Production and Separation, SBCAPCD

Rule 326—Storage of Reactive Organic

Compound Liquids, and SCAQMD Rule

1124—Aerospace Assembly and

Component Manufacturing Operations.

Background

On March 3, 1978, EPA promulgated

a list of ozone nonattainment areas

under the provisions of the Clean Air

Act, as amended in 1977 (1977 Act or

pre-amended Act), that included the

San Joaquin Valley Area, the Santa

Barbara Area, and the South Coast Air

Basin. 43 FR 8964, 40 CFR 81.305. On

May 26, 1988, EPA notified the

Governor of California, pursuant to

section 110(a)(2)(H) of the 1977 Act, that

the above districts’ portions of the

California SIP were inadequate to attain

and maintain the ozone standard and

requested that deficiencies in the

existing SIP be corrected (EPA’s SIPCall). On November 15, 1990, the Clean

Air Act Amendments of 1990 were

enacted. Pub. L. 101–549, 104 Stat.

2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

In amended section 182(a)(2)(A) of the

CAA, Congress statutorily adopted the

requirement that nonattainment areas

fix their deficient reasonably available

control technology (RACT) rules for

ozone and established a deadline of May

15, 1991 for states to submit corrections

of those deficiencies.

Section 182(a)(2)(A) applies to areas

designated as nonattainment prior to

enactment of the amendments and

classified as marginal or above as of the

date of enactment. It requires such areas

to adopt and correct RACT rules

pursuant to pre-amended section 172(b)

as interpreted in pre-amendment

guidance.1 EPA’s SIP-Call used that

guidance to indicate the necessary

corrections for specific nonattainment

areas. The San Joaquin Area is classified

as severe, Santa Barbara Area as

moderate, and the South Coast Air Basin

as extreme; 2 therefore, these areas were

subject to the RACT fix-up requirement

and the May 15, 1991 deadline. The State of California submitted

many revised RACT rules for

incorporation into its SIP. The following

table includes the dates of when the

districts adopted the rules, the dates

that California submitted them to EPA,

and the dates that they were found to be

complete pursuant to EPA’s

completeness criteria that are set forth

in 40 CFR part 51 Appendix V: 3

Rule Adoption Submittal Completeness

SJVUAPCD

4602 ... 6/15/95 10/13/95 11/28/95

SBAPCD

325 ..... 1/25/94 3/29/94 6/3/94

SBAPCD

326 ..... 12/14/93 3/29/94 6/3/94

SCAQMD

1124 ... 1/13/95 2/24/95 3/10/95

This notice addresses EPA’s direct-final

approval action for the above-mentioned

rules.

All of these rules control VOC

emissions from the operations listed

above. VOCs contribute to the

production of ground level ozone and

smog. These rules were originally

adopted by SJVUAPCD, SBAPCD, and

SCAQMD as part of an effort to achieve

the National Ambient Air Quality

Standard (NAAQS) for ozone and in

response to EPA’s SIP-Call and the

section 182(a)(2)(A) CAA requirement.

The following is EPA’s evaluation and

final action for these rules.

EPA Evaluation and Action

In determining the approvability of a

VOC rule, EPA must evaluate the rule

for consistency with the requirements of

the CAA and EPA regulations, as found

in section 110 and part D of the CAA

and 40 CFR part 51 (Requirements for

Preparation, Adoption, and Submittal of

Implementation Plans). The EPA

interpretation of these requirements,

which forms the basis for today’s action,

appears in the various EPA policy

guidance documents listed in footnote

1. Among those provisions is the

requirement that a VOC rule must, at a

minimum, provide for the

implementation of RACT for stationary

sources of VOC emissions. This

requirement was carried forth from the

pre-amended Act.

For the purpose of assisting state and

local agencies in developing RACT

rules, EPA prepared a series of Control

Technique Guideline (CTG) documents.

The CTGs are based on the underlying

requirements of the Act and specify the

presumptive norms for what is RACT

for specific source categories. Under the

CAA, Congress ratified EPA’s use of

these documents, as well as other

Agency policy, for requiring States to
20138 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

‘‘fix-up’’ their RACT rules. See section

182(a)(2)(A). The CTGs applicable to

some of these rules are as follows: EPA–

450/2–83–007, ‘‘Control of Volatile

Organic Compound Equipment Leaks

from Natural Gas/Gasoline Processing

Plants,’’ EPA–450/2–78–047, ‘‘Control

of Volatile Organic Emissions From

Petroleum Liquid Storage in External

Floating Roof Tanks,’’ and EPA–450/2–

77–036, ‘‘Control of Volatile Organic

Emissions From Storage of Petroleum

Liquid in Fixed-Roof Tanks.’’ Rules

4602 and 1124 control emissions from

source categories for which EPA has not

yet finalized CTGs. Accordingly, these

rules were evaluated against the

interpretations of EPA policy found in

the Blue Book, referred to in footnote 1,

and against other EPA policy. In

general, these guidance documents have

been set forth to ensure that VOC rules

are fully enforceable and strengthen or

maintain the SIP.

SJVUAPCD’s submitted Rule 4602—

Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment

Coating Operations includes the

following major provisions:

• Exempts operations involved with

touch-up coating, graphic art, and

radiator coating,

• Includes the maximum allowable

VOC contents for Group I and II

vehicle and equipment coatings,

• Specifies the requirements for using

add-on control equipment,

• Includes a list of acceptable methods

to apply coatings,

• Limits the VOC content and usage of

specialty coatings.

SBCAPCD’s submitted Rule 325—

Crude Oil Production and Separation

includes the following major provisions:

• The conditions under which a tank

would be exempt from the standards

portion of this rule,

• The control measures required for

storage tanks and any produced gas,

• The test methods that are to be used

to determine compliance. This

includes an alternative test method

that is to be used to measure vapor

pressure of an oil whose API gravity

is less than 20 degrees,

• Details as to how an inspection will

be conducted.

SBCAPCD’s submitted Rule 326—

Storage of Reactive Organic Compound

Liquids includes the following major

provisions:

• Exempts storange tanks with a

capacity of less than 5,000 gallons and

storage tanks containing an ROC

liquid having a vapor pressure less

than 0.5 psia from requirements of

this rule,

• Specifies that certain control

measures must be in place on the tank

in order to control emissions or that

vapor loss control devices may be

installed,

• Lists the allowable vapor loss control

devices,

• Lists the criteria for the closure device

on any external or internal floating

roof tank,

• Lists the requirements for inspection

and reporting.

SCAQMD’s submitted Rule 1124—

Aerospace Assembly and Component

Manufacturing Operations includes the

following major provisions:

• Includes a comprehensive list of

coatings, their corresponding VOC

limits, and the phase-in compliance

schedule of when facilities must use

coatings that meet certain VOC

content limits,

• Includes solvent use, clean-up, and

stripping requirements,

• Includes a list of the different

acceptable methods to apply coatings

that ensure a certain level of transfer

efficiency,

• If control equipment is used, it must

have a destruction efficiency of at

least 95% and a capture efficiency of

at least 90%,

• Prohibits a person from requiring the

use of any non-compliant coating,

• Requires a person who performs

qualification acceptance testing on

coatings to submit a status report

describing the progress toward the

development of coatings that satisfy

future compliance dates,

• Lists which facilities and what

coatings are exempt from this rule.

EPA has evaluated the submitted

rules and has determined that they are

consistent with the CAA, EPA

regulations, and EPA policy. Therefore,

SJVUAPCD 4602—Motor Vehicle and

Mobile Equipment Coating Operations,

SBCAPCD 326—Storage of Reactive

Organic Compound Liquids, and

SCAQMD 1124—Aerospace Assembly

and Component Manufacturing

Operations are being approved under

section 110(k)(3) of the CAA as meeting

the requirements of section 110(a) and

part D.

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 notice 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 July 5, 1996,

unless, by June 5, 1996, 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 July 5, 1996.

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-forprofit 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. 246, 256–66 (S. Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

Unfunded Mandates

Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of

the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995 (‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’),

signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must undertake various actions in

association with proposed or final rules

that include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to the private sector or to State,
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 88 / Monday, May 6, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 20139

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate.

Through submission of this state

implementation plan or plan revision,

the State and any affected local or tribal

governments have elected to adopt the

program provided for under Part D of

the Clean Air Act. These rules may bind

State, local, and tribal governments to

perform certain actions and also require

the private sector to perform certain

duties. The rules being approved by this

action will impose no new requirements

because affected sources are already

subject to these regulations under State

law. Therefore, no additional costs to

State, local, or tribal governments or to

the private sector result from this action.

EPA has also determined that this

direct-final action does not include a

mandate that may result in estimated

costs of $100 million or more to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate or to the private sector.

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action for signature by the

Regional Administrator under the

procedures published in the Federal

Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR

2214–2225), as revised by a July 10,

1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation. The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from Executive Order

12866 review.

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: April 18, 1996.

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 paragraphs (c)(196)(i)(C)(2),

(215)(i)(A)(5), and (225)(i)(D) to read as

follows:

§ 52.220 Identification of Plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(196) * * *

(i) * * *

(C) * * *

(2) Rules 325 & 326, adopted on

January 25, 1994 and December 14,

1993, respectively.

* * * * *

(215) * * *

(i) * * *

(A) * * *

(5) Rule 1124, adopted January 13,

1995.

* * * * *

(225) * * *

(i) * * *

(D) San Joaquin Valley Unified Air

Pollution Control District.

(1) Rule 4602, adopted June 15, 1995.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96–11205 Filed 5–3–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–W

40 CFR Part 52

[OH93–1–7290a; FRL–5467–3]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Ohio

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving the

Particulate Matter contingency measures

State implementation plan (SIP)

revisions submitted by the State of Ohio

on July 17, 1995. This submittal

addresses the Federal Clean Air Act

requirement to submit contingency

measures for particulate matter with an

aerodynamic diameter less than or equal

to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM) for

the areas designated as nonattainment

for the PM National Ambient Air

Quality Standards (NAAQS). In Ohio,

Cuyahoga County and portions of

Jefferson County are designated as

nonattainment for PM. Contingency

measures are emission reductions which

are to be implemented, with no further

action, in the event that an area fails to

meet air quality standards. This

submittal would result in an emissions

reduction of 34 pounds of PM per hour

in Cuyahoga County, and 2.9 pounds of

PM per hour in Jefferson County if

implementation of the contingency

measures becomes necessary.

DATES: This action is effective on July 5,

1996, unless EPA receives adverse or

critical comments by June 5, 1996. If the

effective date is delayed, timely notice

will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the revision

request are available for inspection at

the following address: U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604. (It is recommended that

you telephone David Pohlman at (312)

886–3299 before visiting the Region 5

Office.)

Written comments should be sent to:

J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, Regulation

Development Section, Air Programs

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Pohlman (312) 886–3299.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

In Ohio, Cuyahoga County and

portions of Jefferson County are

designated as nonattainment for PM and

classified as moderate under sections

107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) of the Clean Air

Act. See 56 FR 56694 (Nov. 6, 1991); 40

CFR 81.336. The air quality planning

requirements for moderate PM

nonattainment areas are set out in

subparts 1 and 4 of part D, Title I of the

Clean Air Act. The EPA has issued a

‘‘General Preamble’’ describing EPA’s

preliminary views on how EPA intends

to review SIPs and SIP revisions

submitted under Title I of the Clean Air

Act, including those State submittals

containing moderate PM nonattainment

area SIP requirements (see generally 57

FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR

18070 (April 28, 1992)). Because EPA is

describing its interpretations here only

in broad terms, the reader should refer

to the General Preamble for a more

detailed discussion of the

interpretations of Title I advanced in

this action and the supporting rationale.

Those States containing initial

moderate PM nonattainment areas were

required to submit contingency

measures by November 15, 1993 (see 57

FR 13543). This contingency plan

supplements the attainment plan, and

must include measures that become

effective, without further action by the

State or EPA, upon a determination by

EPA that the area has failed to achieve

reasonable further progress (RFP) or to

attain the PM NAAQS by the applicable

statutory deadline. See section

172(c)(9)of the Clean Air Act and 57 FR

13510–13512 and 13543–13544.

II. Analysis of State Submittal

The Ohio Environmental Protection

Agency (OEPA) submitted a requested

SIP revision to the EPA with a letter

dated July 17, 1995. The submittal