61378 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 201 / Thursday, October 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 2—INSPECTIONS

Reference No. Description 

Compliance time 

(whichever occurs later) Repeat inspection 

interval 

Threshold Grace period 

28–41–01–720–001–A00 .. Functionally Check Fuel 

Conditioning Unit (FCU).

Before the accumulation of 

10,000 total flight hours 

on the FCU.

Within 90 days after December 16, 2008.10,000 flight hours on the 

FCU since the last functional check. 

28–46–05–720–001–A00 .. Functionally Check Auxiliary Fuel Conditioning 

Unit (VFCU).

Before the accumulation of 

10,000 total flight hours 

on the auxiliary FCU.

Within 90 days after December 16, 2008.10,000 flight hours on the 

auxiliary FCU since the 

last functional check. 

(2) After accomplishing the actions 

specified in paragraphs (g)(1) of this AD, no 

alternative inspections, or inspection 

intervals, may be used unless the inspections 

or intervals are approved as an alternative 

method of compliance (AMOC) in 

accordance with the procedures specified in 

paragraph (h) of this AD. 

FAA AD Differences 

Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI 

and/or service information as follows: 

(1) The MCAI specifies a compliance date 

of ‘‘Before December 31, 2008’’ for doing the 

ALI revisions. We have already issued 

regulations that require operators to revise 

their maintenance/inspection programs to 

address fuel tank safety issues. The 

compliance date for these regulations is 

December 16, 2008. To provide for 

coordinated implementation of these 

regulations and this AD, we are using this 

same compliance date in this AD. 

(2) The MCAI specifies a compliance time 

of 180 days to revise the ALS of the ICA to 

incorporate items 1, 2, and 3 of Section A2.4 

of Appendix 2 of the MPG. This AD requires 

a compliance time of 90 days to do this 

revision. This difference has been 

coordinated with ANAC. 

(3) EMBRAER Legacy BJ—Maintenance 

Planning Guide MPG–1483, Revision 5, dated 

March 22, 2007, specifies compliance times 

to do tasks 28–41–01–720–001–A00 and 28– 

46–05–720–001–A00 for certain components 

based on flight hours of the airplane. This AD 

requires that the tasks be done at compliance 

times based on flight hours of the 

component. 

Other FAA AD Provisions 

(h) The following provisions also apply to 

this AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, International 

Branch, ANM–116, FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

Send information to ATTN: Sanjay Ralhan, 

Aerospace Engineer, International Branch, 

ANM–116, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

FAA, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 

Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 

227–1405; fax (425) 227–1149. Before using 

any approved AMOC on any airplane to 

which the AMOC applies, notify your 

appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the 

FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO), 

or lacking a PI, your local FSDO. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 

the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 

has approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(i) Refer to Brazilian Airworthiness 

Directive 2007–08–01, effective September 

27, 2007; and Sections A2.5.2, Fuel System 

Limitation Items, and A2.4, Critical Design 

Configuration Control Limitation (CDCCL), of 

Appendix 2 of the MPG; for related 

information. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on 

September 26, 2008. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–24583 Filed 10–15–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2007–28035; Directorate 

Identifier 2006–NM–293–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 767 Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Supplemental notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM); 

reopening of comment period. 

SUMMARY: We are revising an earlier 

proposed airworthiness directive (AD) 

for certain Boeing Model 767 airplanes. 

The original NPRM would have 

required sealing certain fasteners and 

stiffeners in the fuel tank, and changing 

certain wire bundle clamp 

configurations on the fuel tank walls. 

The original NPRM resulted from fuel 

system reviews conducted by the 

manufacturer. This action revises the 

original NPRM by adding inspections, 

for certain airplanes, of additional 

fasteners in the fuel tanks and of the 

method of attachment of the vortex 

generators, and corrective action if 

necessary. We are proposing this 

supplemental NPRM to prevent possible 

ignition sources in the auxiliary fuel 

tank, main fuel tanks, and surge tanks 

caused by a wiring short or lightning 

strike, which could result in fuel tank 

explosions and consequent loss of the 

airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this supplemental NPRM by November 

10, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by 

any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, 

Washington 98124–2207. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov; or in person at the 

Docket Management Facility between 

9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD 

docket contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 


ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 201 / Thursday, October 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules 61379 

(telephone (800) 647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Judy 

Coyle, Aerospace Engineer, Propulsion 

Branch, ANM–140S, FAA, Seattle 

Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind 

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; telephone (425) 917–6497; 

fax (425) 917–6590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposed AD. Send your comments 

to an address listed under the 

ADDRESSES section. Include ‘‘Docket No. 

FAA–2007–28035; Directorate Identifier 

2006–NM–293–AD’’ at the beginning of 

your comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 

Discussion 

We issued a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) (the ‘‘original 

NPRM’’) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to 

include an airworthiness directive (AD) 

that would apply to certain Boeing 

Model 767 airplanes. That original 

NPRM was published in the Federal 

Register on April 30, 2007 (72 FR 

21166). That original NPRM proposed to 

require sealing certain fasteners and 

stiffeners in the fuel tank, and changing 

certain wire bundle clamp 

configurations on the fuel tank walls. 

Actions Since Original NPRM Was 

Issued 

The NPRM referred to Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletins 767–57A0102, dated 

October 25, 2006, and 767–57A0100, 

dated August 21, 2006, as the 

appropriate sources of service 

information for the proposed 

requirements. Since we issued the 

NPRM, Boeing revised the service 

bulletins. 

Service Bulletin 767–57A0102, 

Revision 1, dated November 27, 2007, 

provides the following changes: 

• Corrects the specified location of 

fasteners that must be sealed on the rear 

spar in the auxiliary fuel tank; 

• Corrects the specified location of 

fasteners that must be sealed at rib 28 

on the front spar; 

• Adds work packages, for airplanes 

on which the original issue of the 

service bulletin was accomplished, for 

general visual inspections of the sealant 

of the fasteners in the auxiliary fuel tank 

center bay and the fasteners at rib 28 of 

the left and right main fuel tanks, and 

sealing any unsealed fasteners; 

• Identifies additional access doors 

necessary for access to the fuel tanks; 

and 

• Specifies permitted alternative fuel 

tank sealants. 

The new work packages are necessary 

because the original issue of this service 

bulletin specified incorrect locations for 

certain fasteners on the rear spar of the 

auxiliary fuel tank and the front spar of 

the main wing. If the correct fasteners 

are not sealed, there is a risk that arcing 

from a short can enter the fuel tank and 

become an ignition source. We have 

revised paragraphs (c) and (g) of this 

supplemental NPRM to refer to Revision 

1 of the service bulletin. 

Service Bulletin 767–57A0100, 

Revision 1, dated June 19, 2008, adds 

procedures for certain airplanes (Group 

3 airplanes) for a general visual 

inspection to determine the method of 

attachment of the vortex generators. For 

vortex generators attached with 

adhesive alone, no more work is 

necessary. For vortex generators 

attached with fasteners, the service 

bulletin provides procedures for sealing 

the fasteners. 

Comments 

We gave the public the opportunity to 

participate in developing this AD. We 

considered the comments received. 

Support for the NPRM 

Continental Airlines has no objection 

to the NPRM. The Air Transport 

Association (ATA) agrees with the 

intent of the NPRM. American Airlines 

understands and agrees with our efforts 

to prevent the identified unsafe 

condition. 

Request for Warranty Coverage 

Hawaiian Airlines questions why 

Service Bulletin 767–57A0102 is not 

covered under warranty. The 

commenter states that the original 

equipment manufacturer (OEM) should 

cover the costs to do the required extra 

protection for fuel ignition shorts. The 

commenter added that 335 work hours 

and about $2,000 for parts per airplane 

is very costly for airline operators. 

We have no involvement in warranty 

agreements between the airlines and the 

OEM. We have not changed the final 

rule regarding this issue. 

Request To Extend Compliance Time 

The ATA and American Airlines 

request that we extend the proposed 

compliance time from 60 months to 72 

months. The longer interval would 

minimize fuel tank entry and 

corresponds to the existing ‘‘4C’’ 

maintenance interval established by the 

Boeing 767 Maintenance Review Board 

(MRB), when significant maintenance 

(such as maintenance requiring fuel 

tank entry) is scheduled. The ATA 

states that the use of that interval would 

avoid the need to accomplish the 

proposed actions in portions of airline 

inventories during unique, unscheduled 

visits. American Airlines states that its 

cost to comply with the AD would be 

7 percent higher with the proposed 60- 

month compliance time (versus a 72- 

month compliance time). 

While we agree that reducing fuel 

tank entries minimizes both the 

potential for damage and the disruption 

to operators’ maintenance schedules, we 

find that extending the compliance time 

is not appropriate. In developing the 

compliance time for this AD action, we 

considered not only the safety 

implications of the identified unsafe 

condition, but the average utilization 

rate of the affected fleet, the practical 

aspects of accomplishing the AD on the 

fleet during regular maintenance 

periods, the availability of required 

parts, and the time necessary for the 

rulemaking process. The proposed 

compliance time was determined to be 

appropriate. However, paragraph (h) of 

this supplemental NPRM would provide 

operators the opportunity to request 

adjustments to the compliance time and 

submit data to substantiate that such an 

adjustment would provide an acceptable 

level of safety. We have not changed 

this supplemental NPRM regarding this 

issue. 

Clarification of Inspection Type 

In this supplemental NPRM, the 

‘‘general visual inspection’’ specified in 

Revision 1 of the referenced service 

information is referred to as a ‘‘detailed 

inspection.’’ We have included the 

definition for a detailed inspection in a 

note in the supplemental NPRM. 

FAA’s Determination and Proposed 

Requirements of the Supplemental 

NPRM 

We are proposing this supplemental 

NPRM because we evaluated all 

pertinent information and determined 

that an unsafe condition exists and is 

likely to exist or develop on other 

products of the same type design. 


ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
61380 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 201 / Thursday, October 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules 

Certain changes described above expand 

the scope of the original NPRM. As a 

result, we have determined that it is 

necessary to reopen the comment period 

to provide additional opportunity for 

the public to comment on this 

supplemental NPRM. 

Costs of Compliance 

There are about 925 airplanes of the 

affected design in the worldwide fleet. 

The following table provides the 

estimated costs for U.S. operators to 

comply with this proposed AD. There 

are no U.S.-registered airplanes in 

Group 3 of Service Bulletin 767– 

57A0102. The average labor rate is $80 

per work hour. 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Service Bulletin Group Work 

hours Parts Cost per airplane 

Number 

of U.S.- 

registered 

airplanes 

Fleet cost 

767–57A0100 ............................................ 1 6 minimal ........................................ $480 341 $163,680 

2 114 minimal ........................................ 9,120 21 191,520 

3 1 none ............................................. 80 17 1,360 

767–57A0102 ............................................ 1 246 1,632 ............................................ 21,312 341 7,267,392 

2 874 1,304 ............................................ 71,224 21 1,495,704 

3 24 338 ............................................... 2,258 0 0 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. ‘‘Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs,’’ describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in ‘‘Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

1. Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

2. Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under the 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures 

(44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979), and 

3. Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

You can find our regulatory 

evaluation and the estimated costs of 

compliance in the AD Docket. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new AD: 

Boeing: Docket No. FAA–2007–28035; 

Directorate Identifier 2006–NM–293–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) We must receive comments by 

November 10, 2008. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Model 767–200, 

¥300, ¥300F, and ¥400ER series airplanes; 

certificated in any category; as identified in 

Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–57A0100, 

Revision 1, dated June 19, 2008; and Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–57A0102, Revision 1, 

dated November 27, 2007. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from fuel system 

reviews conducted by the manufacturer. We 

are issuing this AD to prevent possible 

ignition sources in the auxiliary fuel tank, 

main fuel tanks, and surge tanks caused by 

a wiring short or lightning strike, which 

could result in fuel tank explosions and 

consequent loss of the airplane. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Fastener Sealant Application 

(f) For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert 

Service Bulletin 767–57A0100, Revision 1, 

dated June 19, 2008: Within 60 months after 

the effective date of this AD, do the actions 

in paragraphs (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD. Do 

the actions in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the service 

bulletin, as applicable. 

(1) For Groups 1 and 2 airplanes: Seal the 

ends of the fasteners on the brackets that 

hold the vortex generators, and seal the ends 

of the fasteners on certain stiffeners on the 

rear spar, as applicable. 

(2) For Group 3 airplanes: Do a detailed 

inspection to determine the method of 

attachment of the vortex generators, and, 

before further flight, do all applicable 

specified corrective actions. 

Wire Bundle Sleeve and Clamp Installation 

and Fastener Sealant Application 

(g) For airplanes identified in Boeing 

Service Bulletin 767–57A0102, Revision 1, 

dated November 27, 2007: Within 60 months 

after the effective date of this AD, do the 

actions specified in paragraphs (g)(1), (g)(2), 

and (g)(3) of this AD, as applicable. Do the 

actions in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of the service 

bulletin. 

(1) Change the wire bundle clamp 

configurations at specified locations on the 

fuel tank walls. 

(2) Seal the fasteners and certain stiffeners 

at specified locations on the fuel tank. 

(3) Do a detailed inspection of the sealant 

of the fasteners in the auxiliary tank center 

bay and rib 28 of the left and right main fuel 

tanks. Seal any unsealed fasteners before 

further flight. 


ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 201 / Thursday, October 16, 2008 / Proposed Rules 61381 

Note 1: For the purposes of this AD, a 

detailed inspection is: ‘‘An intensive 

examination of a specific item, installation, 

or assembly to detect damage, failure, or 

irregularity. Available lighting is normally 

supplemented with a direct source of good 

lighting at an intensity deemed appropriate. 

Inspection aids such as mirror, magnifying 

lenses, etc., may be necessary. Surface 

cleaning and elaborate procedures may be 

required.’’ 

Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(h)(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, ATTN: Judy 

Coyle, Aerospace Engineer, ANM–140S, 1601 

Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 

98057–3356; telephone (425) 917–6497; fax 

(425) 917–6590; has the authority to approve 

AMOCs for this AD, if requested in 

accordance with the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 

FSDO. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 

6, 2008. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E8–24579 Filed 10–15–08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2008–0693; FRL–8729–4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans: 1-Hour Ozone 

Extreme Area Plan for San Joaquin 

Valley, CA 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

state implementation plan revisions 

submitted by the State of California to 

meet the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

requirements applicable to the San 

Joaquin Valley (SJV), California 1-hour 

ozone nonattainment area. These 

requirements applied to the SJV 

following its reclassification from severe 

to extreme for the 1-hour ozone national 

ambient air quality standard on April 

16, 2004. Although EPA subsequently 

revoked the 1-hour ozone standard 

effective June 15, 2005, the requirement 

to submit a plan for that standard 

remains in effect for the SJV. EPA is 

proposing to approve the SIP revisions 

for the SJV as meeting applicable CAA 

requirements except for the provision 

addressing the reasonably available 

control technology requirements that 

the State has withdrawn. 

DATES: Comments may be submitted 

until November 17, 2008. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, 

identified by docket number EPA–R09– 

OAR–2008–0693, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. Agency Web site: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. EPA prefers 

receiving comments through this 

electronic public docket and comment 

system. Follow the on-line instructions 

to submit comments. 

2. Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions. 

3. E-mail: wicher.frances@epa.gov 

4. Mail or deliver: Marty Robin, Office 

of Air Planning (AIR–2), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street, San 

Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at http://www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through the 

agency Web site, eRulemaking portal, or 

e-mail. The agency Web site and 

eRulemaking portal are anonymous 

access systems, and EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send e-mail 

directly to EPA, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the public comment. 

If EPA cannot read your comment due 

to technical difficulties and cannot 

contact you for clarification, EPA may 

not be able to consider your comment. 

Docket: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

http://www.regulations.gov and in hard 

copy at EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, California. While 

all documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Frances Wicher, U.S. EPA Region 9, 

415–972–3957, wicher.frances@epa.gov 

or http://www.epa.gov/region09/air/ 

actions. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, the terms 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ and ‘‘our’’ mean U.S. EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. What is the history of 1-hour ozone air 

quality planning in the SJV? 

B. What are the elements in the new plan? 

C. What Clean Air Act requirements apply 

to this extreme area 1-hour ozone plan? 

II. Review of the 2004 SIP, the SJV Portion 

of the Final 2003 State Strategy and the 

2008 SIP Clarification 

A. Did the SJVAPCD and ARB meet the 

CAA procedural requirements? 

B. Do the baseline and projected emissions 

inventories meet CAA requirements? 

C. Is the air quality modeling consistent 

with the CAA and EPA’s modeling 

guidelines? 

D. Do the control measures meet CAA 

requirements? 

E. Does the plan show the CAA-required 

rate of progress? 

F. Does the plan provide for attainment by 

the CAA-required deadline? 

G. Do the contingency measures meet CAA 

requirements? 

H. Are the motor vehicle emissions budgets 

approvable? 

III. Summary of Proposed Actions 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A. What is the history of 1-hour ozone 

air quality planning in the SJV? 

The San Joaquin Valley 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment area (SJV) includes the 

following counties in California’s 

central valley: San Joaquin, part of Kern, 

Fresno, Kings, Madera, Merced, 

Stanislaus and Tulare. 40 CFR 81.305. 

Upon enactment of the 1990 Clean Air 

Act Amendments, the SJV was classified 

by operation of law as a serious 

nonattainment area with an attainment 

date of no later than November 15, 1999. 

56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). On 

November 15, 1994, the California Air 

Resources Board (ARB) submitted ‘‘The 

1994 California State Implementation 

Plan for Ozone’’ (1994 SIP), a 

comprehensive ozone plan for the State 

of California that included a local 

nonattainment plan developed for the 

SJV by the San Joaquin Valley Air 

Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD or 

the District). On January 8, 1997, EPA 

approved the 1994 SIP. 62 FR 1150. 

On November 8, 2001, EPA found that 

the SJV had failed to attain the 1-hour 

ozone standard by the serious area 

deadline of November 15, 1999 and 

reclassified the area by operation of law 

to severe. 66 FR 56476. In the final 


ebenthall on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS