[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 122 (Monday, June 24, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32341-32345]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-15905]



-----------------------------------------------------------------------


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[CA-19-2-725-a; FRL-5511-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California--
Mammoth Lakes Nonattainment Area; PM<INF>10

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA today approves the State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
submitted by the State of California for the purpose of bringing about 
attainment in the Mammoth Lakes Planning Area (MLPA) of the national 
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an 
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers 
(PM<INF>10). The ``moderate'' area SIP was submitted by the State to 
satisfy certain Federal requirements in the Clean Air Act for an 
approvable nonattainment area PM<INF>10 plan for the MLPA.
    The intended effect of approving this plan is to regulate emissions 
of PM<INF>10 in accordance with the requirements of the CAA, as amended 
in 1990.

DATES: This final rule is effective on August 23, 1996 unless adverse 
or critical comments are received by July 24, 1996. If the effective 
date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal 
Register.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State's submittal and other information are 
contained in the docket for this rulemaking. The docket is available 
for inspection during normal business hours at the following locations:
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, 
San Francisco, CA 94105
California Air Resources Board, 2020 L Street, P.O. Box 2815, 
Sacramento, CA 95814
Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, 157 Short Street, 
Suite 6, Bishop, CA 93514.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie G. Valentine (A-2-2), U. S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, Air and Toxics Division, 75 
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 744-1178.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On the date of enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, 
PM<INF>10 areas, including the Mammoth Lakes Planning Area, meeting the 
conditions of section 107(d) of the Act were designated nonattainment 
by operation of law. Once an area is designated nonattainment, section 
188 of the Act outlines the process for classification of the area and 
establishes the area's attainment date. In accordance with section 
188(a), at the time of designation, all PM<INF>10 nonattainment areas 
were initially classified as ``moderate'' by operation of law. See 40 
CFR 81.303 (1993) A moderate area may subsequently be reclassified as 
``serious'' if at any time EPA determines that the area cannot 
practicably attain the PM<INF>10 NAAQS by the applicable attainment 
date for moderate areas, December 31, 1994. Moreover, a moderate area 
must be reclassified if EPA determines within six months after the 
applicable attainment date that the area is not in attainment after 
that date. See section 188(b) of the Clean Air Act.
    The air quality planning requirements for moderate PM<INF>10 
nonattainment areas are set out in subparts 1 and 4 of Title I of the 
Act. EPA has issued a ``General Preamble'' describing EPA's preliminary 
views on how the Agency intends to review SIPs and SIP revisions 
submitted under Title I of the Act, including those state submittals 
containing moderate PM<INF>10 nonattainment area SIP provisions. 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 
today's action and the supporting rationale. In today's rulemaking 
action on California's moderate PM<INF>10 SIP for the MLPA, EPA is 
applying its interpretations taking into consideration the specific 
factual issues presented.
    Those states containing initial moderate PM<INF>10 nonattainment 
areas were required to submit, among other things, the following 
provisions by November 15, 1991\1\:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ There are additional submittals associated with moderate 
PM<INF>10 nonattainment plans, such as a permit program for the 
construction of new and modified major stationary sources and 
contingency measures. See sections 189(a) and 172(c)(9). These 
submittals were required to be submitted in 1992 and 1993, 
respectively, and are not the subject of today's action which 
addresses only those plan provisions required to be submitted on 
November 15, 1991.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Provisions to assure that reasonably available control measures 
(RACM) (including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in 
the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of 
reasonably available control technology--RACT) shall be implemented no 
later than December 10, 1993;
    2. Either a demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the 
plan will provide for attainment as expeditiously

[[Page 32342]]

as practicable but no later than December 31, 1994 or a demonstration 
that attainment by that date is impracticable;
    3. Pursuant to section 189(c) of the Act, for plan revisions 
demonstrating attainment, quantitative milestones which are to be 
achieved every 3 years and which demonstrate reasonable further 
progress (RFP) toward attainment by December 31, 1994; and
    4. Provisions to assure that the control requirements applicable to 
major stationary sources of PM<INF>10 also apply to major stationary 
sources of PM<INF>10 precursors except where the Administrator 
determines that such sources do not contribute significantly to 
PM<INF>10 levels which exceed the NAAQS in the area. See sections 
172(c), 188, and 189 of the Act.

II. Today's Action

    Section 110(k) of the Act sets out provisions governing EPA's 
review of SIP submittals. See 57 FR 13565-66. In today's action, EPA 
approves the plan revision submitted to EPA on September 11, 1991, and 
the addenda submitted January 9, 1992, for the MLPA because it meets 
all of the applicable requirements of the Act.

A. Analysis of State Submission

1. Procedural Background
    The Act requires states to observe certain procedural requirements 
in developing implementation plans and plan revisions for submission to 
EPA. Section 110(a)(2) of the Act provides that each implementation 
plan submitted by a state must be adopted after reasonable notice and 
public hearing.\2\ Section 110(l) of the Act similarly provides that 
each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a state under the 
Act must be adopted by such state after reasonable notice and public 
hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Also section 172(c)(7) of the Act requires that plan 
provisions for nonattainment areas meet the applicable provisions of 
section 110(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA also must determine whether a submittal is complete and 
therefore warrants further EPA review and action. See section 110(k)(1) 
and 57 FR 13565. EPA's completeness criteria for SIP submittals are set 
out at 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V (1993). EPA attempts to make 
completeness determinations within 60 days of receiving a submission. 
However, a submittal is deemed complete by operation of law if a 
completeness determination is not made by EPA six months after receipt 
of the submission.
    The State of California originally submitted the Mammoth Lakes 
Planning Area PM<INF>10 implementation plan revision to EPA on 
September 11, 1991. By operation of law, this submittal was deemed 
complete on March 11, 1992. On January 9, 1992, the State of California 
submitted a second revision to the Mammoth Lakes Planning Area 
PM<INF>10 SIP. This submittal contained revisions which are primarily 
administrative in nature to assist in the effective implementation of 
the SIP control strategies. By operation of law, this second submittal 
was deemed complete on July 9, 1992.
    In today's action, EPA approves California's PM<INF>10 SIP 
submittal for the MLPA.
2. Accurate Emissions Inventory
    Section 172(c)(3) of the Act requires that nonattainment plan 
provisions include a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of 
actual emissions from all sources of relevant pollutants in the 
nonattainment area. Because such inventories are necessary to an area's 
attainment demonstration (or demonstration that the area cannot 
practicably attain), the emissions inventories must be received with 
the submission. See 57 FR 13539.
    California submitted a peak 24-hour PM<INF>10 emissions inventory 
for the MLPA which is based on a 1987-88 emissions inventory survey. 
This 1987-88 inventory identifies re-entrained dust and cinders from 
paved roads and emissions from fireplaces and wood stoves as the 
primary causes of nonattainment, contributing over 99 percent of total 
PM<INF>10 emissions during times of peak concentrations. The remaining 
1 percent of the emissions is comprised of motor vehicle exhaust, tire-
wear, and industrial sources. By applying known population growth 
factors to the 1987-88 inventory, the Great Basin Unified APCD also 
projected 1990, 1991, 1993, 1995, 2000, and 2005 inventories. The chart 
below identifies 1987-88 contributions to the emission inventory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Peak 24-            
                                                   hour PM<INF>10            
                 Source category                   emissions  Percentage
                                                    (kg/day)            
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fireplaces.......................................        882        20.7
Woodstoves.......................................        957        22.5
Resuspended Road Dirt/Cinders....................      2,390        56.1
Motor Vehicles...................................         23         0.5
Industrial.......................................          7         0.2
                                                  ----------------------
      Total......................................      4,259         100
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA approves the emissions inventory because it generally appears 
to be accurate and comprehensive, and provides a sufficient basis for 
determining the adequacy of the plan revision's air quality analysis 
consistent with the requirements of sections 172(c)(3) and 110(a)(2)(K) 
of the Clean Air Act.\3\ For further details see the Technical Support 
Document (TSD) that is contained in the docket for today's action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EPA issued guidance on PM<INF>10 emissions inventories prior 
to the enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments in the form of 
the 1987 PM<INF>10 SIP Development Guideline. Pursuant to section 
193 of the Amendments, the guidance provided in this document, as 
well as all other pre-Amendment guidance cited in this notice, 
remains in effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. RACM
    As noted, the initial moderate PM<INF>10 nonattainment areas must 
submit provisions to assure that RACM (including RACT) are implemented 
no later than December 10, 1993. See sections 172(c)(1) and 
189(a)(1)(C). EPA's General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I 
of the Clean Air Act Amendments contains a detailed discussion of EPA's 
interpretation of the RACM (including RACT) requirement. See 57 FR 
13540-45 and 13560-61.
    As stated in EPA's General Preamble, the suggested starting point 
for determining RACM for a particular area is to list all of the RACM 
measures for which EPA has issued guidance under section 190 of the 
Act. If a state receives substantive public comment demonstrating that 
additional measures may be reasonably available, those measures should 
then be added to the original list.
    As noted in the Emissions Inventory section of this document, 99 
percent of the PM<INF>10 nonattainment problem in the MLPA comes from 
resuspended road dust/cinders and fireplaces/woodstoves. The remaining 
one percent comes from motor vehicles and industrial sources. Given 
this emissions inventory with limited contributions from a number of 
source categories, a list of control measures was developed by the 
Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District for consideration in 
a draft SIP revision. Through the public hearing process, the list was 
refined to form a final control strategy that provides for attainment 
by the Clean Air Act deadline of December 31, 1994.
    Where sources of PM<INF>10 do not contribute significantly to the 
PM<INF>10 problem in an area, EPA's policy is that a state is not 
reasonably required to implement potentially available control measures 
for such sources (57 FR 13543). Based upon the MLPA emissions inventory 
which is dominated by wood burning and road

[[Page 32343]]

dust and cinders, and the fact that the area is able to demonstrate 
attainment of the PM<INF>10 NAAQS by the CAA deadline, EPA believes 
that the State has provided a reasoned justification for eliminating 
measures from its initial list of possible RACM. The remaining measures 
are legally enforceable. Therefore, EPA has concluded that the 
regulations adopted for the State's moderate area PM<INF>10 SIP 
revision represent RACM as required by sections 189(a)(1)(C) and 172(c) 
of the Act.
4. Control Strategy
    The control strategy was developed by the GBUAPCD and the Town of 
Mammoth Lakes. The final control strategy relies upon the 
implementation of nine measures which were adopted as a Town Ordinance 
on November 7, 1990, and added into the Mammoth Lakes Municipal Code as 
Chapter 8.30, Particulate Emissions Regulations. These regulations were 
subsequently adopted by the Great Basin Unified APCD as Rule 431--
Particulate Emissions--Town of Mammoth on November 6, 1991. The 
regulations will reduce emissions from re-entrained road cinders, will 
phase out non-certified wood burning appliances, and will institute 
wood burning curtailments during periods of high PM<INF>10 
concentrations. The measures adopted by the Mammoth Lakes Town Council 
and subsequently adopted as Great Basin Unified APCD Rule 431 to 
control PM<INF>10 emissions are summarized in the following table.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Control measures                      Source category      
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Vacuum Street Sweeper for Cinders and   Road Dust/Cinders.          
 Road Dust.                                                             
(1) Reduce Vehicle Traffic................  Road Dust/Cinders.          
(1) Institute Public Awareness Program for  Wood Stoves/Fireplaces.     
 Wood Burning.                                                          
(1) Replace or Remove Non-certified Wood    Wood Stoves/Fireplaces.     
 Stoves Upon Resale.                                                    
(2) Limit Installation of Woodstoves......                              
(1) Ban Fireplaces in New Dwellings.......  Wood Stoves/Fireplaces.     
(2) Require Transient Occupancy Units to                                
 Phase Out Fireplaces.                                                  
(3) Require Fireplace Phase Out Upon                                    
 Resale of Home.                                                        
((1) Require Certification for Wood Stove   Wood Stoves/Fireplaces.     
 Installers.                                                            
(2) Require 20% Wood Moisture Limit for                                 
 Wood Retailers.                                                        
(3) Prohibit Trash and Coal Burning in                                  
 Wood Stoves.                                                           
(4) Set 20% Opacity Limit for Wood Burning                              
(1) Voluntary Wood Burning Ban During       Wood Stoves/Fireplaces.     
 Periods of Poor Air Quality.                                           
(2) Mandatory Wood Burning Ban when NAAQS                               
 Violation Expected.                                                    
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The regulations' primary measures will result in the eventual 
phasing out of all non-EPA-certified wood stoves and wood burning 
fireplaces. This will be accomplished by replacing non-certified 
appliances with certified wood stoves, pellet stoves, or gas log 
fireplaces before the resale of a dwelling. In addition to phasing out 
non-certified appliances, the Town will rely on a mandatory wood 
burning curtailment. This mandatory curtailment program will initially 
exempt certified wood stoves, but may include all wood burning if more 
reductions are needed to attain the standard.
    Road dust reduction measures include vacuum street sweeping, 
reduction measures for vehicle miles travelled (VMT) for new 
developments, and an overall limit of VMT in the Town of Mammoth.
    Section 6 of the MLPA SIP revision and Appendix F set forth the 
selected control measures and expected emissions reductions. The 
controls are evaluated for two cases; Case A, a wood burning dominated 
day, and Case B, a road dust and cinder dominated day. Section 5 of the 
SIP revision shows that Case B, the road dust and cinder dominated day 
will require the most stringent controls. The control strategy, 
therefore, was selected for Case B conditions. An additional analysis 
to confirm the adequacy of the strategy is included in Appendix H.
    Many of the proposed control measures are interrelated, so that 
reduction credits are not simple independent calculations. The SIP also 
includes contingency measures such as an accelerated replacement 
schedule for non-certified wood stoves and wood burning fireplaces. 
However, as noted in footnote #1, contingency measures will not be 
addressed in today's action. Appendix I shows the effectiveness 
calculations for the regulations, including the interrelationships of 
the measures, and the potential impacts of the contingency measures. 
These calculations are best summarized in Appendix I, pages I-21 and I-
22.
    By this document, EPA approves the control strategy.
5. RACT
    The General Preamble states that generally EPA recommends that 
available control technology be applied to those existing sources in 
the nonattainment area that are reasonable to control in light of the 
attainment needs of the area and the feasibility of such controls. The 
Mammoth Lakes Planning Area contains no major point sources of 
PM<INF>10, and the imposition of available control technology on other 
existing sources would not expedite attainment; therefore, 
implementation of available control technology (RACT) is not reasonably 
required in this plan (57 FR 13543). A more detailed discussion of the 
control strategy in the SIP revision can be found in the Technical 
Support Document (TSD).
6. Demonstration
    As noted, the initial moderate PM<INF>10 nonattainment areas must 
submit a demonstration (including air quality modeling) showing that 
the plan will provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable 
but no later than December 31, 1994. Alternatively, the state must show 
that attainment by December 31, 1994 is impracticable. See section 
189(a)(1)(B) of the Act.
    In order for a state to properly demonstrate attainment of the 
NAAQS, the SIP control strategy must provide for attainment of each 
primary ambient air quality standard. There are two primary air quality 
standards for PM<INF>10, a 24-hour standard (150 <greek-m>g/m<SUP>3), 
and an annual standard (50 <greek-m>g/m<SUP>3). The 24-hour standard is 
attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-
hour average concentration above 150 <greek-m>g/m<SUP>3 is equal to or 
less than one. The annual standard is attained when the expected annual 
arithmetic mean concentration is less than or equal to 50 <greek-m>g/
m<SUP>3 (lid). See 40 CFR 50.6.
    In the MLPA, peak PM<INF>10 concentrations are directly related to 
the influx of visitors to the area during peak periods of the ski 
season, coupled with low wind speeds. Increased particulate air 
pollution and stagnant air conditions lead to air pollution episodes 
with violations of the 150<greek-m>g/m<SUP>3 24-hour standard that may 
last several days or more. The MLPA has not violated the 50 <greek-m>g/
m3 annual average standard. California used receptor modeling coupled 
with a proportional rollback model for its MLPA air quality analysis. 
This analysis indicates that the 24 hour standard for PM<INF>10 can be 
attained by December 31, 1994. The SIP's design value for the 24 hour 
PM10 NAAQS is

[[Page 32344]]

210 <greek-m>g/m<SUP>3, 40 percent greater than the standard. The 
control strategy used to achieve attainment concentrations is 
summarized in the section of this notice entitled ``Control Strategy 
.''
    By this notice EPA approves the State's demonstration of attainment 
of the PM<INF>10 NAAQS by December 31, 1994. For a more detailed 
description of the demonstration of attainment, see the TSD 
accompanying this notice.
7. PM<INF>10 Precursors
    The control requirements which are applicable to major stationary 
sources of PM<INF>10 also apply to major stationary sources of 
PM<INF>10 precursors, unless EPA determines such sources do not 
contribute significantly to PM<INF>10 levels in excess of the NAAQS in 
that area. See section 189(e) of the Act. An analysis of air quality 
and emissions data for the MLPA indicates that exceedances of the NAAQS 
are attributable chiefly to direct particulate matter emissions from 
re-entrained road dust and cinders and residential woodburning. Sources 
of particulate matter precursor emissions of ammonium sulfate and 
ammonium nitrate contribute a negligible percentage of the total annual 
emissions of PM<INF>10. Consequently, EPA finds that sources of 
precursors of PM<INF>10 in the MLPA do not contribute significantly to 
PM<INF>10 levels in excess of the NAAQS. The consequence of this 
finding is to exclude these sources from the applicability of PM<INF>10 
moderate nonattainment area control requirements. Further discussion of 
the analyses and supporting rationale for EPA's finding are contained 
in the TSD accompanying this notice. Note that while EPA is making a 
general finding for this area, today's finding is based on the current 
character of the area including, for example, the existing mix of 
sources in the area. It is possible, therefore, that future growth 
could change the significance of precursors in the area. EPA intends to 
issue future guidance addressing such potential changes in the 
significance of precursor emissions in an area.
8. Enforceability
    The particular control measures contained in the SIP revision for 
the MLPA are addressed above under the section entitled ``Control 
Strategy.'' These control measures apply to the types of PM<INF>10 
emission sources identified in that discussion, predominantly road dust 
and cinders and residential wood burning.
    All measures and other elements in the SIP must be enforceable by 
EPA and the State. See sections 172(c)(6), 110(a)(2)(A) and 57 FR 
13556. The EPA criteria addressing the enforceability of SIPs and SIP 
revisions are stated in a September 23, 1987 memorandum (with 
attachments) from J. Craig Potter, Assistant Administrator for Air and 
Radiation, et al. See 57 FR 13541. The TSD for this notice contains 
detailed information on enforceability requirements including 
applicability, the source types subject to the rules, compliance 
schedules as appropriate, and reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
    In addition to meeting the enforceability requirements of the Act 
and EPA guidance, nonattainment area plan provisions must also contain 
a program that provides for enforcement of the control measures and 
other elements in the SIP. See sections 110(a)(2)(C) and 172(c)(7). 
Moreover, where the State relies on a local or regional government 
agency for implementing any plan provision, the State has the 
responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of that provision. 
See section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii).
    The State of California has a program that will ensure that the 
measures contained in the SIP revision are adequately enforced. Primary 
enforcement of the RACM rules will be under the jurisdiction of the 
Great Basin Unified APCD and the Town of Mammoth Lakes.
    Under section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii) of the Act, the State must also 
provide necessary assurances that the State has responsibility for 
ensuring adequate implementation of these plan provisions. The State 
has the authority to take legal action against the District if the 
State determines that the District is not carrying out its enforcement 
responsibilities.

III. Implications of Today's Action

    EPA approves the moderate nonattainment area PM<INF>10 plan 
revision submitted to EPA for the Mammoth Lakes Planning Area on 
September 11, 1991, and amended on January 9, 1992. The State of 
California has demonstrated that the MLPA can practicably attain the 
PM<INF>10 NAAQS by December 31, 1994.
    As noted, additional submittals for the initial moderate PM<INF>10 
nonattainment areas were due at later dates. EPA will determine the 
adequacy of any such submittal as appropriate.
    EPA is publishing this action 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, EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision 
should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be 
effective August 23, 1996 unless by July 24, 1996, adverse or critical 
comments are received.
    If EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn before 
the effective date by publishing a subsequent final rule 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. 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 on August 23, 1996.

IV. Regulatory Flexibility

    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 economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit 
enterprises, and government entities with jurisdiction over populations 
of less than 50,000.
    SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the 
Clean Air Act do not create any new requirements, but simply approve 
requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the 
federal SIP approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify 
that it does not have a significant impact on small entities affected. 
Moreover, due to the nature of the federal-state relationship under the 
Clean Air Act, preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would 
constitute federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state 
action. The Clean Air Act 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. section 7410 (a)(2).

V. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    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, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
    Through submission of the state implementation plan or plan 
revisions

[[Page 32345]]

approved in this action, the State and any affected local governments 
have elected to adopt the program provided for under Title I and 
sections 110, 172, 189, and 190 of the Clean Air Act. The rules and 
commitments approved in this action may bind state and local 
governments to perform certain actions and also may ultimately lead to 
the private sector being required to perform certain duties. To the 
extent that the rules and commitments being approved by this action 
will impose or lead to the imposition of any mandate upon the state or 
local governments either as the owner or operator of a source or as a 
regulator, or would impose or lead to the imposition of any mandate 
upon the private sector, EPA's action will impose no new requirements; 
such sources are already subject to these requirements under State law. 
Accordingly, no additional costs to State or local governments, or to 
the private sector, result from this action. Therefore, EPA has 
determined that this final action does not include a mandate that may 
result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to the State or local 
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, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: March 31, 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) (226) and 
(228) to read as follows:


Sec. 52.220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
* * * * *
    (226) Air Quality Management Plan for the following APCD was 
submitted on September 11, 1991, by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Air Quality Management Plan for the Mammoth Lakes PM-10 
Planning Area adopted December 12, 1990.
* * * * *
    (228) Air Quality Management Plans for the following APCD were 
submitted on January 9, 1992, by the Governor's designee.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District.
    (1) Revisions to the Air Quality Management Plan for Mammoth Lakes 
PM-10 Planning Area adopted November 6, 1991.
    (i) Rule 431 adopted November 6, 1991.
    (ii) Town of Mammoth Lakes Municipal Code Chapter 8.30 dated 
October 2, 1991.

[FR Doc. 96-15905 Filed 6-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P