24712 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 96 / Thursday, May 16, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

Dated: May 2, 1996.

Chuck Clarke,

Regional Administrator.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Subpart MM—Oregon

2. Section 52.1970 is amended by

adding paragraph (c) (113) to read as

follows:

§ 52.1970 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(113) On April 14, 1995, the Oregon

Department of Environmental Quality

submitted a revision to its SIP for the

State of Oregon to include the

Transportation Conformity: OAR 340–

20–710 through 340–20–1080.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) April 14, 1995 letter from ODEQ

director Lydia Taylor to EPA Regional

Administrator Chuck Clarke submitting

a revision to the Oregon SIP to include

the Transportation Conformity: OAR

340–20–710 through 340–20–1080;

Division 20, Air Pollution Control,

Criteria and Procedures for Determining

Conformity to State or Federal

Implementation Plans of Transportation

Plans, Programs, and Projects Funded or

Approved Under Title 23 U.S.C. or the

Federal Transit Act, effective March 29,

1995.

[FR Doc. 96–12353 Filed 5–15–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[AK6–1–6587; FRL–5465–2]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Implementation Plans: Alaska

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to

approve a State Implementation Plan

(SIP) revision submitted by the State of

Alaska on March 24, 1994 which

implements an oxygenated gasoline

program in the Municipality of

Anchorage. This SIP revision satisfies

certain Federal requirements for carbon

monoxide (CO) nonattainment areas

with a design value of 9.5 parts per

million (ppm) or greater to implement

an oxygenated gasoline program. Motor

vehicles are significant contributors of

CO emissions. An important measure

for reducing these emissions is the use

of cleaner burning oxygenated gasoline.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is

effective on June 17, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State’s request

and other information supporting this

action are available for inspection

during normal business hours at the

following locations: EPA, Office of Air

Quality, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,

Washington 98101, and the Alaska

Department of Environmental

Conservation, 410 Willoughby, Suite

105, Juneau, Alaska 99801–1795.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Montel Livingston, EPA, Office of Air

Quality, Seattle, Washington, (206) 553–

0180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Under section 211(m) of the Clean Air

Act, as amended (the ‘‘Act’’), Alaska

was required to submit a revised SIP

under section 110 and part D of title I

that includes an oxygenated gasoline

program for its CO nonattainment areas

(those areas with a design value of 9.5

ppm or greater). The CO standard is 9

ppm and was established based on

criteria which allows for an adequate

margin of safety to protect human

health. The 9 ppm standard is intended

to keep carboxyhemoglobin levels below

2.1% in order to protect the most

sensitive members of the general

population (i.e. individuals with heart

disease and other physiological

weaknesses).

Motor vehicles are significant

contributors of CO emissions. An

important measure for reducing these

emissions is the use of cleaner burning

oxygenated gasoline. Extra oxygen

enhances fuel combustion and helps to

offset fuel-rich operating conditions,

particularly during vehicle starting

which are more prevalent in the winter.

To comply with the Act, Alaska

implemented an oxygenated gasoline

program containing methyl tertiary

butyl ether (MTBE) as the oxygenate in

the early winter of 1992. Shortly

thereafter, the State received numerous

health and driveability complaints from

the public regarding exposure to and

use of MTBE blended gasoline. In

December 1992 the Governor of Alaska

temporarily suspended the oxygenated

fuel program, and the suspension

continued the following winter.

During this suspension, a series of

studies began which examined issues

including health and driveability at cold

temperatures using oxygenated gasoline

in climate fluctuations such as the

Municipalities of Anchorage and

Fairbanks experience. These studies

were initiated in part by the Alaska

Department of Environmental

Conservation (ADEC) and in part by

State health officials in Alaska who

invited the Centers for Disease Control

and Prevention and others to assist in

investigation of possible health effects.

Studies concluded that pumping the

ethanol blend does not appear to

increase the prevalence of acute adverse

health effects or unusual exposures

when compared to pumping regular

gasoline. Data also showed there were

no adverse driveability effects utilizing

ethanol in Anchorage during the study

period.

In response to the public’s concerns

about MTBE, Anchorage, through ADEC

and the industry providers, agreed to

implement an oxygenated fuel program

using ethanol as the oxygenate rather

than MTBE by diluting regular unleaded

gasoline with ethanol to 10 percent

ethanol by volume. This oxygenated

fuel program began in Anchorage in

January 1995 and lasted for about three

months. This initial control period for

Anchorage using an ethanol blend was

successful with the general public and

for air quality—there were no

exceedances of the CO National Air

Ambient Quality Standards (NAAQS)

during that period. The program

resumed again in the winter of 1995–96,

November 1, 1995 through February 29,

1996.

The State of Alaska submitted the

Oxygenated Gasoline Requirements (18

AAC 53.005–18 AAC 53.190) with

amendments adopted through March 19,

1994, to EPA on March 24, 1994, as a

revision to the Alaska SIP. EPA

reviewed the submittal and concluded

that the revision met the applicable

requirements of the Act. In a direct final

rule published October 24, 1995, EPA

approved the revision to be effective on

December 26, 1995, unless EPA received

adverse or critical comments by

November 24, 1995 (see 60 FR 54435).

In the same Federal Register, EPA also

published an accompanying proposed

rule (see 60 FR 54465), explaining that

if EPA received adverse comments on

the direct final rule approving ADEC’s

submittal re the oxygenated gasoline

program, then EPA would withdraw the

direct final rule and would respond to

all comments on the proposal in a

subsequent final rule. The proposed

action also indicated that anyone

wishing to comment should do so by

November 24, 1995.

EPA received an adverse comment on

November 22, 1995, pertaining to its

approval of Alaska’s SIP submittal. The
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 96 / Thursday, May 16, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 24713

direct final rule was withdrawn on

December 14, 1995. See 60 FR 64135.

EPA has thoroughly considered the

comment to determine the appropriate

action on the oxygenated gasoline

program for Anchorage, Alaska and

responds below in the ‘‘Response to

Comments.’’

In conclusion, EPA is approving the

oxygenated gasoline requirements

submitted by the State of Alaska as

described in the October 24, 1995

Federal Register notice at 60 FR 54436

and proposed in the October 24, 1995

Federal Register notice at 60 FR 54465.

II. Response to Comments

A. General Legal Authority

In objecting to several specific

provisions in Alaska’s regulations, the

commenter raised issues regarding

approval into a SIP of state provisions

not required by section 211(m). EPA

may approve into a SIP any lawful

provision concerning control of a

criteria pollutant that is submitted by a

state and that otherwise meets the

requirements of section 110. As a

general matter, apart from the

exceptions cited in section 116, the

Clean Air Act (CAA) does not restrict a

state’s authority to impose air pollution

controls in addition to those required

under the Act. See CAA section 116.

Section 211(m) establishes certain

minimum requirements regarding

oxygen content, but does not itself

prohibit states from adopting additional

requirements. While federal regulation

of fuels under section 211(c)(1)

preempts certain state regulations

regarding fuels, where there is no

federal ‘‘control or prohibition

applicable to [a] characteristic or

component of a fuel or fuel additive,’’ a

state is not preempted from regulating

such characteristic or component, such

as oxygen content. See section 211(c)(4).

Under EPA’s current interpretation of

section 211(c)(4), there is no federal

requirement applicable to oxygen

content in gasoline in the Anchorage

area because the only federal regulation

applicable to oxygen content is for

reformulated gasoline, which is not

required in the Anchorage area. Thus,

EPA may approve as a SIP revision a

requirement by Alaska that goes beyond

the requirements of section 211(m) in

regulating oxygen content.

B. Temporary Suspension of the

Regulation’s Applicability to Fairbanks

The commenter stated that the

provisions of section 211(m)

‘‘Oxygenated Fuels’’ of the Federal 1990

Clean Air Act applies to both the

Fairbanks and Anchorage CO

nonattainment areas, that the former

Governor unilaterally suspended the

regulation’s applicability to the

Fairbanks’ area, and there are no

provisions in this regulation for this

action.

As explained in the ‘‘Background’’

section of this rulemaking, there have

been congressional actions in the past

which did temporarily exempt

Fairbanks and Anchorage from the

oxygenated programs requirement while

ongoing health and driveability studies

were conducted. However, in this action

today, EPA is determining that Alaska’s

current submittal of March 24, 1994,

Fuel Requirements for Motor Vehicles,

as applied to the Anchorage area, meets

the requirements of 211(m)

‘‘Oxygenated Fuels’’ and is fully

approvable for inclusion into the SIP.

The fact that this submission does not

encompass the Fairbanks area does not

affect EPA’s authority to approve it for

Anchorage, and hence is not relevant to

this rulemaking.

C. Oxygen Content

The commenter stated that fuel

providers for Anchorage were under no

regulation to meet a blend with an

oxygen content of 3.5 percent, and this

is correct. ADEC’s regulation under Fuel

Requirements for Motor Vehicles, 18

AAC 53.020, Average Oxygen Content

Standard, submitted to EPA on March

24, 1994, states, ‘‘All gasoline sold,

offered for sale, distributed, or

dispensed by a CAR or blender CAR for

use in a control area during a control

period must be oxygenated so that each

blend of gasoline has an average oxygen

content of not less than 2.7 percent by

weight.’’ EPA is approving this average

oxygen content of not less than 2.7

percent by weight as meeting the

requirements of 211(m) of the Act and

is incorporating this revision into the

federally enforceable SIP.

D. Legal Authority—Expansion of

Control Area

The commenter stated there are

provisions in ADEC’s 18 AAC 53 Fuel

Requirements for Motor Vehicles that go

beyond the authority of Section 211(m),

are unnecessary to satisfy the

nonattainment plan provisions of the

Act, or go beyond the authority granted

to ADEC under State law, and therefore

conflict with EPA’s requirements that

SIP amendments comply with

applicable State laws.

For example, the commenter does not

believe ADEC has the authority to

expand the oxygenated gasoline

program to areas other than the

officially designated CO nonattainment

area. The commenter stated it is not

provided for in the Act and, therefore,

is not required to be in the SIP, and

should not be part of the SIP.

As discussed above, the CAA does not

restrict Alaska’s authority to regulate

oxygen content in gasoline beyond what

is required in section 211(m). In

addition, EPA has determined that

ADEC will satisfy certain requirements

of the Act by including in this SIP

revision contingency measures which

provide for expansion of the control

area. The Act (section 172(c)(9)) requires

a State to undertake specific measures to

be undertaken if the area fails to make

reasonable further progress, or to attain

the national primary ambient air quality

standard by the (applicable) attainment

date. ADEC has met this requirement by

specifying a contingency measure for

Anchorage which provides for

expansion of its control area, if

necessary. Expansion of the control area

may help a nonattainment area come

into attainment by ensuring that

vehicles refueling outside the

nonattainment area but driving inside

the area are also controlling emissions

through use of oxygenated gasoline.

Oxygen-blended fuels have been shown

to be a cost-effective method for

reducing CO emissions.

Alaska has also used expansion of the

oxygenated fuels control area as a

contingency measure to satisfy another

requirement of the Act. Because

Anchorage is a nonattainment area with

a design value above 12.7 ppm, the Act

(section 187(a)(3)) further requires

implementation of contingency

measures if annual updates of the

forecasted Vehicle Miles Travelled

(VMT), or annual estimates of actual

VMT, exceed the number predicted in

the most recent prior forecast; or if the

area fails to attain the NAAQS by the

(applicable) attainment date. ADEC met

this requirement through its VMT SIP

revision, adopted on January 10, 1994,

and approved by EPA on June 29, 1995

(60 FR 33727). The contingency

measure contained in the VMT revision,

and approved by EPA, is the expansion

of the oxygenated fuels control area.

This contingency measure became

effective and federally enforceable on

August 28, 1995.

E. Oxygen Content Averaging and

Associated Provisions

The commenter stated the averaging

provisions and associated requirements

of ADEC’s regulation are superfluous

and can be replaced with a more

straightforward per-gallon oxygen

content provision. The commenter

added that the provisions for averaging

oxygen content method of compliance,

oxygen credits and debits, and
24714 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 96 / Thursday, May 16, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

minimum oxygen content are all

unnecessary and should not be

approved.

As described in the October 24, 1995

Federal Register notice at 60 54436,

EPA has determined that ADEC met the

requirements of 211(m) of the Act and

was consistent with EPA guidance (57

FR 47769, October 20, 1992) by offering

oxygen content averaging provisions as

an option to fuel providers. Fuel

providers need only use these

provisions if they so choose. The

commenter provides no legal or

practical reason why EPA should not

approve these optional provisions,

which are intended only to give fuel

providers greater compliance flexibility.

Even if fuel providers are not currently

using this approach, including these

provisions allows for future flexibility

in the program, which EPA finds is

appropriate here.

F. State Authority

The commenter stated there are no

provisions under Alaska State law

authorizing ADEC to assess the ‘‘CAR

and Blender CAR Fees’’ provided under

18 AAC 53.080. Therefore, the

commenter stated the fees provisions do

not belong in the SIP and are

unnecessary to satisfy the requirements

of the Act.

EPA has determined that ADEC has

fee authority to collect fees to cover

costs associated with permits, under AS

44.46.025. Revenues generated from

industry enable the program to be selfsufficient in the future. EPA also notes

that 18 AAC 53.080(c) requires ADEC to

‘‘refund fees in excess of those required

to cover the costs for implementing the

requirements of this chapter.’’ As an

integral part of Alaska’s oxygenated

gasoline program, which the State has

authority to implement, it is appropriate

for EPA to approve these provisions into

the SIP.

G. Reporting; Product Transfer

Document/Attest Engagements

The commenter stated that 18 AAC

53.1000 ‘‘Reporting; Product Transfer

Document’’ paragraph (b) requires a

CAR or blender CAR to ‘‘* * * have an

attest engagement conducted in

accordance with 18 AAC 53.170, ‘‘Attest

Engagements,’’ and that neither of these

provisions is necessary when

compliance is demonstrated on a pergallon basis. The commenter stated they

were superfluous.

As repeated above and described in

the October 24, 1995 Federal Register

notice at 60 54436, EPA has determined

that ADEC is following EPA guidance

published on October 20, 1992, by

offering these provisions as an option to

fuel providers, and EPA finds this is an

appropriate option to offer fuel

providers in this instance.

H. State Authority—‘‘Dispenser

Labeling’’

The commenter stated that ADEC’s

label saying ‘‘Caution: This fuel may not

be suitable for use in aircraft,’’ goes

beyond the authority granted by EPA in

its labeling requirements. The

commenter also questioned the State of

Alaska’s authority to require that the

label on fuel dispensers contain this

cautionary statement. In response, the

State Attorney General’s office has

provided an opinion to EPA explaining

the legal basis for this provision.

Specifically, the Attorney General

opinion cites to Title 46, Chapter 3,

entitled Environmental Conservation,

which includes a declaration of policy

stating that it is the State’s policy to

control air pollution to enhance the

‘‘health, safety, and welfare’’ of its

citizens (emphasis added). See AS

46.03.010(a). The opinion also cites to

AS 46.03.020(8), (9), and (10) which

give ADEC the authority to advise and

cooperate with local and other state

agencies to carry out the pollution laws,

to act as the official agency in all

matters affecting the purposes of ADEC

under federal laws, and to adopt

regulations to effectuate the purposes of

Chapter 3, including control of air

pollution and ‘‘other purposes as may

be required for the implementation’’ of

Chapter 3’s declaration of policy. In

addition, AS 44.62.030 states that a

regulation is effective if it is ‘‘consistent

with and reasonably necessary’’ to the

purposes of State law.

Given ADEC’s broad statutory

authorities, and the opinion of the

Attorney General’s office that these

provisions give ADEC the authority to

promulgate the labeling requirement

regarding aviation use of oxygenated

fuel, EPA is approving this requirement

along with the State’s other labelling

requirements. A more detailed

discussion of ADEC’s authorities is

contained in the State Attorney

General’s letter, included in the record

for this rulemaking.

EPA has determined that ADEC has

complied with EPA regulations and

guidance for labeling requirements (57

FR 47770, October 20, 1992) and as

described in the October 24, 1995

Federal Register notice. As EPA stated

in the preamble to the labelling

regulations, those regulations are not

meant to restrict states from imposing

additional information requirements,

and there is no language in the

regulations that would impose such a

restriction (See 57 FR 47771).

I. Suspension of Requirements

The commenter stated that section

211(m) provides only that the

oxygenated gasoline program be

imposed in areas exceeding 9.5 ppm

and are adversely affected by vehicular

emissions. The commenter stated that

18 AAC 53.190, ‘‘Suspension of

Requirements’’ provides that

oxygenated gasoline may be reimposed,

after the program has been suspended

upon attainment, if the area exceeds an

8.5 ppm 8 hour average concentration of

CO. The commenter concluded that

section 211(m) does not authorize a

federally-enforceable oxygenated

gasoline program in an attainment area,

as this provision of 18 AAC 53.190

would require; therefore, this provision

should not be part of the SIP.

Section 211(m) does not require an

oxygenated gasoline program in an area

in attainment for CO, except as is

necessary to maintain the standard.

However, as discussed above, there is

also no Federal restraint on Alaska

imposing additional requirements on

oxygen content beyond what is required

under section 211(m).

Moreover, EPA has determined that

ADEC is complying with the

requirement under section 211(m)(6) of

the Act that the program remain in

effect ‘‘to the extent such program is

necessary’’ to maintain the standard.

The State has selected exceedance of 8.5

ppm in an 8 hour average as the trigger

point for reimplementation of the

program. EPA believes this is an

appropriate trigger point. The CO

NAAQS is 9 ppm; and pursuant to EPA

guidance, values from 8.5 ppm and up

are rounded up to 9. At 8.5 ppm, the

area’s air quality is considered to be just

meeting the standard. The purpose of

the trigger point is to protect the health

and welfare of citizens by ensuring that

the area maintains compliance with the

CO standard. The trigger point chosen

by Alaska provides for reimplementing

oxygenated gasoline promptly upon a

strong indication that the area is in

danger of violation of the standard,

rather than waiting for CO levels to

violate the NAAQS before instituting

measures to bring the area back into

attainment.

III. Significance of Today’s Action

EPA is approving this plan revision

submitted to EPA by the State of Alaska

on March 24, 1994 which implements

an oxygenated gasoline program in the

Municipality of Anchorage. This SIP

revision was submitted by the State to

satisfy certain Federal requirements for

CO nonattainment areas with a design

value of 9.5 ppm or greater to
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 96 / Thursday, May 16, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 24715

implement an oxygenated gasoline

program.

IV. Administrative Review

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 populations of

less than 50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and

subchapter I, Part D of the CAA do not

create any new requirements, but

simply approve requirements that the

state is already imposing. Therefore,

because the federal SIP-approval does

not impose any new requirements, I

certify that it does not have a significant

impact on any small entities affected.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

federal-state relationship under the

CAA, preparation of a regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The CAA

forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

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

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

7410(a)(2).

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

prepare a budgetary impact statement to

accompany any proposed or final rule

that includes a Federal mandate that

may result in estimated costs to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to the private sector, of

$100 million or more. Under Section

205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203

requires EPA to establish a plan for

informing and advising any small

governments that may be significantly

or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval

action promulgated does not include a

Federal mandate that may result in

estimated costs of $100 million or more

to either State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector. This Federal action

approves pre-existing requirements

under State or local law, and imposes

no new Federal requirements.

Accordingly, no additional costs to

State, local, or tribal governments, or to

the private sector, result from this

action.

The EPA has reviewed this request for

revision of the federally-approved SIP

for conformance with the provisions of

the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments

enacted on November 15, 1990. The

EPA has determined that this action

conforms with those requirements.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. Each

request for revision to the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

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 E.O. 12866

review.

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit by July 15, 1996.

Filing a petition for reconsideration by

the Administrator of this final rule does

not affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

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

List of subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the

Implementation Plan for the State of Alaska

was approved by the Director of the Office of

Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: April 23, 1996.

Chuck Clarke,

Regional Administrator.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code

of Federal Regulations is amended as

follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Subpart C—Alaska

2. Section 52.70 is amended by

adding paragraph (c) (25) to read as

follows:

§ 52.70 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(25) On March 24, 1994, ADEC

submitted a revision to its SIP for the

State of Alaska addressing the

attainment and maintenance of the

NAAQS for CO in the Anchorage CO

nonattainment area.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) March 24, 1994 letter from the

Alaska Governor to the EPA Regional

Administrator including as a revision to

the SIP the State of Alaska, Department

of Environmental Conservation, 18 AAC

53, ‘‘Fuel Requirements for Motor

Vehicles,’’ (Article 1, 18 AAC 53.005—

18 AAC 53.190 and Article 9, 18 AAC

53.990, with the exception of 18 AAC

53.010(c)(2)), filed March 24, 1994 and

effective on April 23, 1994.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 96–12352 Filed 5–15–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 70

[NJ001; FRL–5505–7]

Clean Air Act Final Interim Approval Of

Operating Permit Program; New Jersey

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final interim approval.

SUMMARY: The EPA is promulgating final

interim approval of the operating permit

program which the State of New Jersey

had submitted in accordance with Title

V of the Clean Air Act (the Act) and its

implementing regulations codified at

Part 70 of Title 40 of the Code of Federal

Regulations (40 CFR Part 70). This

approved interim program allows New

Jersey to issue federally enforceable

operating permits to all major stationary

sources and to certain other sources for

a period of two years, at which time it

must be replaced by a fully approved

program.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This interim program

will be effective June 17, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State’s

submittal and other supporting

information used in developing the final

interim approval as well as the

Technical Support Document are

available for inspection during normal

business hours at the following location:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 2, 290 Broadway, 21st Floor,