[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 13 (Thursday, January 21, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 3216-3225]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-1259]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[UT-001-0002a; FRL-6201-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
State of Utah; Salt Lake City Carbon Monoxide Redesignation to
Attainment, Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes, and
Approval of Related Revisions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On November 24, 1995, the Governor of Utah submitted a request
to redesignate the Salt Lake City (SLC) ``not classified'' carbon
monoxide (CO) nonattainment area to attainment for the CO National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The Governor also submitted a CO
maintenance plan and revisions to Utah Administrative Code Rule (UACR)
R307-1-3.3 to ensure that rules applicable to the SLC CO nonattainment
area remain in effect after SLC is redesignated to attainment. On
December 9, 1996, the Governor submitted a revised SLC CO maintenance
plan that incorporated revised contingency measures, updated air
quality monitoring data, and other minor revisions to the maintenance
plan. In this action, EPA is approving the SLC redesignation request,
the revised maintenance plan, and the changes to UACR R307-1-3.3.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective on March 22, 1999 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by February 22,
1999. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform
the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be mailed to: Richard R. Long,
Director, Air and Radiation Program, Mailcode 8P-AR, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite
500, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466.
Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available for
public inspection during normal business hours at the following
offices:
[[Page 3217]]
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, Air and
Radiation Program, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202-
2466; and,
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Docket
and Information Center, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460.
Copies of the State documents relevant to this action are available
for public inspection at: Utah Division of Air Quality, Department of
Environmental Quality, 150 North 1950 West, Salt Lake City Utah, 84114-
4820.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tim Russ, Air and Radiation Program,
Mailcode 8P-AR, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region
VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466,
Telephone number: (303) 312-6479.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
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). Under section 107(d)(1)(C) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA
designated the SLC area as nonattainment for CO because the area had
been previously designated as nonattainment before November 15, 1990.
The SLC area was classified as a ``not classified'' CO nonattainment
area as the area had not violated the CO NAAQS in 1988 and
1989.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The EPA describes areas as ``not classified'' if they were
designated nonattainment both prior to enactment and (pursuant to
CAA section 107(d)(1)(C)) at enactment, and if the area did not
violate the primary CO NAAQS in either year for the 2-year period of
1988 through 1989. Refer to the ``General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990'',
57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992. See specifically 57 FR 13535, April 16,
1992.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the CAA, designations can be changed if sufficient data are
available to warrant such changes and if certain other requirements are
met. See CAA section 107(d)(3)(D). Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA
provides that the Administrator may not promulgate a redesignation of a
nonattainment area to attainment unless:
(i) The Administrator determines that the area has attained the
national ambient air quality standard;
(ii) The Administrator has fully approved the applicable
implementation plan for the area under CAA section 110(k);
(iii) The Administrator determines that the improvement in air
quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the applicable implementation plan and
applicable Federal air pollutant control regulations and other
permanent and enforceable reductions;
(iv) The Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan for
the area as meeting the requirements of CAA section 175A; and,
(v) The State containing such area has met all requirements
applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
Thus, before EPA can approve the redesignation request, EPA must
find, among other things, that all applicable SIP elements have been
fully approved. Approval of the applicable SIP elements may occur prior
to final approval of the redesignation request or simultaneously with
final approval of the redesignation request. EPA notes there are no
outstanding SIP elements necessary for the redesignation. However, the
Governor has requested approval of revisions to R307-1-3.3 to ensure
that new source review rules applicable to the SLC nonattainment area
remain in effect after SLC is redesignated to attainment. Therefore,
EPA is approving the revisions to R307-1-3.3 at the same time it
approves the redesignation.
EPA has reviewed the State's redesignation request, maintenance
plan, and related SIP revisions and believes that approval of the
request is warranted, consistent with the requirements of CAA section
107(d)(3)(E). Descriptions of how the section 107(d)(3)(E) requirements
are being addressed are provided below.
Section 1. Brief Administrative History of the SLC CO Redesignation
Request, Maintenance Plan, and Related SIP Submittal
On November 24, 1995, the Governor of Utah submitted a CO
redesignation request and maintenance plan for the SLC area along with
revisions to the Utah Administrative Code Rule (UACR) R307-1-3.3 to
ensure that new source review rules applicable to the SLC nonattainment
area remain in effect after SLC is redesignated to attainment. On
December 9, 1996, the Governor submitted a revised maintenance plan.
The purpose of the December 9, 1996, submittal was to provide revised
contingency measures, updated air quality monitoring data, and other
minor revisions to the maintenance plan.
Section 2. Redesignation Criterion: The Area Must Have Attained the
Carbon Monoxide (CO) NAAQS
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) of the CAA states that for an area to be
redesignated to attainment, the Administrator must determine that the
area has attained the applicable NAAQS. As described in 40 CFR 50.8,
the national primary ambient air quality standard for carbon monoxide
is 9 parts per million (10 milligrams per cubic meter) for an 8-hour
average concentration not to be exceeded more than once per year. 40
CFR 50.8 continues by stating that the levels of CO in the ambient air
shall be measured by a reference method based on 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix C and designated in accordance with 40 CFR part 53 or an
equivalent method designated in accordance with 40 CFR part 53.
Attainment of the CO standard is not a momentary phenomenon based on
short-term data. Rather, for an area to be considered attainment, each
of the CO ambient air quality monitors in the area are allowed to
record no more than one exceedance of the CO standard over a one-year
period. 40 CFR 50.8 and 40 CFR part 50, Appendix C. If a single monitor
in the CO monitoring network records more than one exceedance of the CO
standard during a one-year calendar period, then the area is in
violation of the CO NAAQS. In addition, EPA's interpretation of the CAA
and EPA national policy 2 has been that an area seeking
redesignation to attainment must show attainment of the CO NAAQS for a
continuous two-year calendar period and, additionally, at least through
the date that EPA promulgates the redesignation to attainment in the
Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Refer to EPA's September 4, 1992, John Calcagni policy
memorandum entitled ``Procedures for Processing Requests to
Redesignate Areas to Attainment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Utah's CO redesignation request for the SLC area is based on an
analysis of quality assured ambient air quality monitoring data that
are relevant to the redesignation request. Ambient air quality
monitoring data for consecutive calendar years 1992 through 1997 show a
measured exceedance rate of 1.0 or less per year, per monitor, of the
CO NAAQS in the SLC nonattainment area. These data were collected and
analyzed as required by EPA (see 40 CFR 50.8 and 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix C) and have been archived by the State in EPA's Aerometric
Information and Retrieval System (AIRS) national database. Further
information on CO monitoring is presented in section IX.C.7.c of the
State's maintenance plan and in the State's TSD. Since 1988, only one
exceedance of the 9.0 ppm CO standard has been measured and this
occurred in 1994. EPA notes, however, that the SLC area has not
violated the CO standard and continues to demonstrate attainment.
[[Page 3218]]
Because the SLC nonattainment area has quality-assured data showing
no violations of the CO NAAQS for 1993 and 1994, the years the State
used to support the redesignation request, and additionally, over the
most recent consecutive two-calendar-year period, the SLC area has met
the first component for redesignation: demonstration of attainment of
the CO NAAQS. EPA notes that the State of Utah has also committed in
the maintenance plan to the necessary continued operation of the CO
monitoring network in compliance with all applicable federal
regulations and guidelines.
Section 3. Redesignation Criterion: The Area Must Have Met All
Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) requires that, to be redesignated to
attainment, an area must meet all applicable requirements under section
110 and part D of the CAA. EPA interprets section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) to
mean that for a redesignation to be approved, the State must meet all
requirements that applied to the subject area prior to or at the time
of the submission of a complete redesignation request. Requirements of
the CAA due after the submission of a complete redesignation request
need not be considered in evaluating the request.
A. CAA Section 110 Requirements
On August 15, 1984, EPA approved revisions to Utah's SIP (45 FR
32575) as meeting the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA.
Although section 110 of the CAA was amended in 1990, most of the
changes were not substantial. The only additional CAA requirement
assigned to the SLC area was the preparation and submittal of a 1990
base year CO emission inventory. The Governor submitted this base year
inventory on July 11, 1994. EPA approved this inventory on June 29,
1995 (60 FR 33745). Thus, EPA has determined that the SIP revisions
approved in 1984 continue to satisfy the requirements of section
110(a)(2). For further detail, please see 45 FR 32575.
B. Part D Requirements
Before the SLC not classified CO nonattainment area may be
redesignated to attainment, the State must have fulfilled the
applicable requirements of part D. Under part D, an area's
classification indicates the requirements to which it will be subject.
Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the basic nonattainment requirements
applicable to all nonattainment areas, whether classified or
nonclassifiable.
The relevant Subpart 1 requirements are contained in sections
172(c) and 176. The General Preamble (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992)
provides EPA's interpretations of the CAA requirements for not
classified CO areas (see 57 FR 13535):
``Although it seems clear that the CO-specific requirements of
subpart 3 of part D do not apply to CO ``not classified'' areas, the
1990 CAAA are silent as to how the requirements of subpart 1 of part
D, which contains general SIP planning requirements for all
designated nonattainment areas, should be interpreted for such CO
areas. Nevertheless, because these areas are designated
nonattainment, some aspects of subpart 1 necessarily apply.''
Under section 172(b), the applicable section 172(c) requirements,
as determined by the Administrator, were due no later than three years
after an area was designated as nonattainment under section 107(d) of
the amended CAA (see 56 FR 56694). In the case of the SLC area, the due
date was November 15, 1993. As the SLC CO redesignation request and
maintenance plan were not submitted by the Governor until November 24,
1995, the General Preamble (57 FR 13535) provides that the applicable
requirements of CAA section 172 are 172(c)(3) (emissions inventory),
172(c)(5) (new source review permitting program), and 172(c)(7) (the
section 110(a)(2) air quality monitoring requirements)). EPA has
determined that Part D requirements for Reasonably Available Control
Measures (RACM), an attainment demonstration, reasonable further
progress (RFP), and contingency measures (CAA section 172(c)(9)) are
not applicable to not classified CO areas. See 57 FR 13535, April 16,
1992. It is also worth noting that EPA has interpreted the requirements
of sections 172(c)(1) (reasonable available control measures--RACM),
172(c)(2) (reasonable further progress--RFP), 172(c)(6) (other
measures), and 172(c)(9) (contingency measures) as being irrelevant to
a redesignation request because they only have meaning for an area that
is not attaining the standard. See EPA's September 4, 1992, John
Calcagni memorandum entitled, ``Procedures for Processing Requests to
Redesignate Areas to Attainment'', and the General Preamble, 57 FR at
13564, dated April 16, 1992. Finally, the State has not sought to
exercise the options that would trigger sections 172(c)(4)
(identification of certain emissions increases) and 172(c)(8)
(equivalent techniques). Thus, these provisions are also not relevant
to this redesignation request.
Section 176 of the CAA contains requirements related to conformity.
Although EPA's regulations (see 40 CFR Sec. 51.396) require that states
adopt transportation conformity provisions in their SIPs for areas
designated nonattainment or subject to an EPA-approved maintenance
plan, EPA has decided that a transportation conformity SIP is not an
applicable requirement for purposes of evaluating a redesignation
request under section 107(d) of the CAA. This decision is reflected in
EPA's 1996 approval of the Boston carbon monoxide redesignation. (See
61 FR 2918, January 30, 1996.)
In that action, EPA explained that its decision was based on a
combination of two factors. First, the requirement to submit SIP
revisions to comply with the conformity provisions of the CAA continues
to apply to areas after redesignation to attainment. Therefore, the
State remains obligated to adopt the transportation conformity rules
even after redesignation and would risk sanctions for failure to do so.
Unlike most requirements of section 110 and part D, which are linked to
the nonattainment status of an area, and are not required after
redesignation of an area to attainment, the conformity requirements
apply to both nonattainment and maintenance areas. Second, EPA's
federal conformity rules require the performance of conformity analyses
in the absence of State-adopted rules. Therefore, a delay in adopting
State rules does not relieve an area from the obligation to implement
conformity requirements.
Because areas are subject to the conformity requirements regardless
of whether they are redesignated to attainment and must implement
conformity under Federal rules if State rules are not yet adopted, EPA
believes it is reasonable to view these requirements as not being
applicable requirements for purposes of evaluating a redesignation
request. Further information regarding transportation conformity and
mobile source emission budgets are found below in section II
``Transportation Conformity''.
The applicable requirements of CAA section 172 are discussed below.
(1.) Section 172(c)(3)--Emissions Inventory. Section 172(c)(3) of
the CAA requires a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of all
actual emissions from all sources in the SLC nonattainment area. EPA's
interpretation of the emission inventory requirement for ``not
classified'' CO nonattainment areas is detailed in the General Preamble
(57 FR 13535, April 16, 1992). EPA determined that an emissions
inventory is specifically
[[Page 3219]]
required under CAA section 172(c)(3) and is not tied to an area's
proximity to attainment. EPA concluded that an emissions inventory must
be included as a revision to the SIP and was due 3 years from the time
of the area's designation. For ``not classified'' CO areas, this date
became November 15, 1993. To address the section 172(c)(3) requirement
for a ``current'' inventory, EPA interpreted ``current'' to mean
calendar year 1990 (See 57 FR 13502, April 16, 1992).
On July 11, 1994, the Governor submitted the 1990 base year
inventory for the SLC CO nonattainment area. EPA approved this 1990
base year CO inventory on June 29, 1995 (60 FR 33745).
(2.) Section 172(c)(5) New Source Review (NSR). The CAA requires
all nonattainment areas to meet several requirements regarding NSR,
including provisions to ensure that increased emissions will not result
from any new or modified stationary major sources and a general offset
rule. The State of Utah has a fully-approved NSR program (60 FR 22277,
May 5, 1995) that meets the requirements of CAA section 172(c)(5).
(3.) Section 172(c)(7)--Compliance With CAA section 110(a)(2): Air
Quality Monitoring Requirements. According to EPA's interpretations
presented in the General Preamble (57 FR 13535), ``not classified'' CO
nonattainment areas should meet the ``applicable'' air quality
monitoring requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA as explicitly
referenced by sections 172 (b) and (c) of the CAA. With respect to this
requirement, the State indicates in section IX, Part C.7.c. (``Carbon
Monoxide Monitoring'') of the maintenance plan, that ambient CO
monitoring data have been properly collected and uploaded to EPA's
Aerometric Information and Retrieval System (AIRS) since 1986 for the
SLC area. Air quality data through 1994 are included in section IX,
Part C.7.c. of the maintenance plan and Volume 1 of the State's TSD.
EPA has more recently polled the AIRS database and has verified that
the State has also uploaded additional ambient CO data through 1997.
The data in AIRS indicate that the SLC area has shown, and continues to
show, attainment of the CO NAAQS. The State also notes (section IX,
Part C.7.c.(1)) that information concerning CO monitoring in Utah is
included in the Monitoring Network Review (MNR) prepared by the State
and submitted to EPA. Since the early 1980's, the MNR has been updated
annually and submitted to EPA for approval. EPA personnel have
concurred with Utah's annual network reviews and have agreed that the
SLC network remains adequate. Finally, in section IX, Part C.7.c.(5) of
the maintenance plan, the State commits to the continued operation of
the existing CO monitors, according to all applicable Federal
regulations and guidelines, even after the SLC area is redesignated to
attainment for CO. The State also notes that it will reevaluate
monitoring site locations annually to determine whether new monitoring
sites are needed or if the existing monitors should be relocated or
removed.
Section 4. Redesignation Criterion: The Area Must Have A Fully
Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) Of The CAA. Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)
of the CAA states that for an area to be redesignated to attainment, it
must be determined that the Administrator has fully approved the
applicable implementation plan for the area under section 110(k).
Based on the approval into the SIP of provisions under the pre-1990
CAA and EPA's prior approval of SIP revisions required under the 1990
amendments to the CAA, EPA has determined that Utah has a fully
approved CO SIP under section 110(k) for the SLC CO nonattainment area.
Section 5. Redesignation Criterion: The Area Must Show That The
Improvement In Air Quality Is Due To Permanent And Enforceable
Emissions Reductions. Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA provides
that for an area to be redesignated to attainment, the Administrator
must determine that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent
and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation
of the applicable implementation plan (SLC CO revision as approved on
August 15, 1984, 49 FR 32575), implementation of applicable Federal air
pollutant control regulations, and other permanent and enforceable
reductions.
The CO emissions reductions that were derived from the August 15,
1984, SIP revision, and as further described in section IX.C.7.b of the
December 9, 1996, SLC maintenance plan, were achieved primarily through
a Federal emission control measure and CAA-required improvements to the
basic vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program. The Federal
measure involved CO emission reductions from fleet turnover, which is
regulated by the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP).
In general, the FMVCP provisions require vehicle manufacturers to
meet more stringent vehicle emission limitations for new vehicles in
future years. These emission limitations are phased in (as a percentage
of new vehicles manufactured) over a period of years. As new, lower
emitting vehicles replace older, higher emitting vehicles (``fleet
turnover''), emission reductions are realized for a particular area
such as SLC. For example, EPA promulgated lower hydrocarbon (HC) and CO
exhaust emission standards in 1991, known as Tier I standards for new
motor vehicles (light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks) in response
to the 1990 CAA amendments. These Tier I emissions standards were
phased in with 40% of the 1994 model year fleet, 80% of the 1995 model
year fleet, and 100% of the 1996 model year fleet.
As stated in section IX.C.7.b.(4) of the maintenance plan,
additional emission reductions from Salt Lake County's basic I/M
program resulted from a major revision that was fully implemented prior
to September 1, 1991. This revision was made in response to a 1990
State legislative mandate that Utah Counties administering the basic I/
M program use computerized analyzers, standardize their programs, and
provide reciprocity. These improvements involved the use of BAR90
technology emissions analyzers, the inclusion of vehicles owned by
federal agencies, federal employees, university and college employees
and students, an increased fail rate, the exclusive issuance of waivers
by I/M technical center staff, an increase in the dollar amount spent
on emission-related repairs to qualify for a waiver, automated data
management and audit functions, and coverage of more emission control
devices by the Salt Lake County anti-tampering program. Also, as a
result of separate State legislation, the number of vehicles qualifying
for exemption from the I/M program because of the ``farm truck''
classification was reduced.
EPA has evaluated the various State and Federal control measures,
the 1990 base year emission inventory, the 1993 attainment year
emission inventory, and the projected emissions described below, and
has concluded that the improvement in air quality in the SLC
nonattainment area has resulted from emission reductions that are
permanent and enforceable.
Section 6. Redesignation Criterion: The Area Must Have A Fully
Approved Maintenance Plan Under CAA Section 175A. Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the CAA provides that for an area to be
redesignated to attainment, the Administrator must have fully approved
a maintenance plan for the area meeting the requirements of section
175A of the CAA.
[[Page 3220]]
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
The maintenance plan must demonstrate continued attainment of the
applicable NAAQS for at least ten years after the Administrator
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the
promulgation of the redesignation, the State must submit a revised
maintenance plan that demonstrates continued attainment for the
subsequent ten-year period following the initial ten-year maintenance
period. To address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the
maintenance plan must contain contingency measures, with a schedule for
adoption and implementation, that are adequate to assure prompt
correction of a violation. In addition, EPA issued further maintenance
plan interpretations in the ``General Preamble for the Implementation
of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990'' (57 FR 13498,
April 16, 1992), ``General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I
of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990; Supplemental'' (57 FR 18070,
April 28, 1992), and the EPA guidance memorandum entitled ``Procedures
for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment'' from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, Office of Air
Quality and Planning Standards, to Regional Air Division Directors,
dated September 4, 1992. In this Federal Register action, EPA is
approving the State of Utah's maintenance plan for the SLC
nonattainment area because EPA has determined, as detailed below, that
the State's maintenance plan submittal meets the requirements of
section 175A and is consistent with the documents referenced above.
EPA's analysis of the pertinent maintenance plan requirements, with
reference to the Governor's December 9, 1996, submittal, is provided as
follows:
A. Emissions Inventories--Attainment Year and Projections
EPA's interpretations of the CAA section 175A maintenance plan
requirements are generally provided in the General Preamble and the
September 4, 1992, policy memorandum referenced above. Under EPA's
interpretations, areas seeking to redesignate to attainment for CO may
demonstrate future maintenance of the NAAQS either by showing that
future CO emissions will be equal to or less than the attainment year
emissions or by providing a modeling demonstration. For the SLC area,
the State selected the emissions inventory approach for demonstrating
maintenance of the CO NAAQS.
The maintenance plan that the Governor submitted on December 9,
1996, included comprehensive inventories of CO emissions for the SLC
area. These inventories include emissions from stationary point
sources, area sources, non-road mobile sources, and on-road mobile
sources. The State selected 1993 as the year from which to develop the
attainment year inventory and included year-by-year projections out to
2006. More detailed descriptions of the 1993 attainment year inventory
and the projected inventories are documented in the maintenance plan,
sections IX.C.7.e and IX.C.7.f, and in the State's TSD. The State's
submittal contains detailed emission inventory information that was
prepared in accordance with EPA guidance. Summary emission figures from
the 1993 attainment year and a sampling of the projected years are
provided in the Table I.-1 below.
Table I.-1--Summary of CO Emissions in Tons per Day for SLC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1993 1997 2000 2003 2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Sources.................................. 0.55 1.57 1.63 1.71 1.79
Area Sources................................... 14.65 14.93 15.12 15.32 15.53
Non-Road Mobile Sources........................ 8.29 9.37 10.10 10.91 11.79
On-Road Mobile Sources......................... 202.24 169.56 154.66 145.64 145.37
----------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................................... 225.73 195.43 181.51 173.58 174.48
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Demonstration of Maintenance--Projected Inventories
As noted above, total CO emissions were projected by the State
year-by-year from 1994 through 2006. These projected inventories were
prepared in accordance with EPA guidance (further information is
provided in section IX.C.7.f of the maintenance plan). EPA notes,
however, that CAA section 175A(a) requires that the maintenance
demonstration ``* * * provide for the maintenance of the national
primary ambient air quality standard for such air pollutant in the area
concerned for at least 10 years after the redesignation.'' Therefore,
based on this CAA provision, the maintenance demonstration needed to
project emissions to at least 2008, not just 2006. To address this
issue, EPA consulted with the State to identify the specific materials
that were provided at the SLC CO redesignation public hearing and which
were subsequently adopted by the Utah Air Quality Board (UAQB). In a
letter dated February 19, 1998, from Ursula Trueman, Director, Utah
Division of Air Quality, to Richard Long, Director, Air Program, EPA
Region VIII, the State provided an excerpt from the SLC CO
redesignation Technical Support Document (TSD) that provided additional
projected CO daily emissions for all years from 1993 through 2016. As
indicated in the State's February 19, 1998, letter, these additional
projected CO emissions were part of the TSD that was provided with the
public hearing for the SLC CO redesignation and that was also adopted,
along with the redesignation request and maintenance plan, by the UAQB.
The projected inventories show that CO emissions are not estimated to
exceed the 1993 attainment level during the time period 1993 through
2008 and, therefore, the SLC area has satisfactorily demonstrated
maintenance. EPA has also extracted daily projected CO emissions for
2009 in the event that publication of this action in the Federal
Register is delayed until early 1999. The additional projected CO daily
emissions for 2007, 2008, and 2009 are provided in the Table I.-2
below:
Table I.-2--Summary of 1993 and Projected CO Emissions in Tons per Day for SLC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1993 2007 2008 2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Sources............................................... 0.55 1.81 1.84 1.87
[[Page 3221]]
Area Sources................................................ 14.65 15.60 15.67 15.74
Non-Road Mobile Sources..................................... 8.29 12.10 12.43 12.76
On-Road Mobile Sources...................................... 202.24 147.24 150.05 152.35
---------------------------------------------------
Total................................................... 225.73 176.75 179.99 182.72
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
Continued attainment of the CO NAAQS in the SLC area depends, in
part, on the State's efforts to track indicators throughout the
maintenance period. This requirement is met in two sections of the SLC
maintenance plan. In section IX.C.7.c.(5) and section IX.C.7.i.(3), the
State commits to continue the operation of the CO monitors in the SLC
area and to annually review this monitoring network and make changes as
appropriate. Also, in section IX.C.7.i.(1), the State commits to
prepare a comprehensive emission inventory of CO emissions every three
years after the maintenance plan is approved by EPA. These inventories
will be based on the most current Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) data,
actual point source emissions, and area source emissions based on the
most current population and industry growth information. The above
commitments by the State, which will be enforceable by EPA following
the final approval of the SLC maintenance plan SIP revision, are deemed
adequate by EPA.
D. Contingency Plan
Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include
contingency provisions. To meet this requirement, the State has
identified appropriate contingency measures along with a schedule for
the development and implementation of such measures. As stated in
Section IX.C.7.h of the maintenance plan, the contingency measures for
the SLC area will be triggered by any of the following situations: (a)
a future year verification emission inventory (see section
IX.C.7.i.(1)) of actual emissions indicates a level greater than the
1993 attainment emissions (225.73 tons of CO/peak season day), (b) a
second non-overlapping 8-hour average ambient CO measurement exceeds 9
ppm at a single monitoring site during a calendar year (i.e., a
violation of the 8-hour CO standard), or (c) a second one-hour average
ambient CO measurement exceeds 35 ppm at a single monitoring site
during a calendar year (i.e., a violation of the 1-hour CO standard).
The primary contingency measure is Alternative Commuting Options (ACO)
and the secondary is an enhanced motor vehicle inspection and
maintenance program (EI/M) or an equivalent I/M program. A more
complete description of the triggering mechanisms and these contingency
measures can be found in section IX.C.7.h of the maintenance plan.
EPA notes that both contingency measures have been partially
implemented as of the beginning of 1998. The ACO contingency measure
(UACR R307-11) was previously adopted by the State and was implemented
in 1995 for Federal, State, and local government agencies with 100 or
more employees at a worksite. The State has identified in the
maintenance plan that R307-11 could be expanded to include all
employers with 100 or more employees at a worksite. As a result of the
Salt Lake and Davis Counties' ozone maintenance plan, Salt Lake County
began implementing an improved I/M program for all of Salt Lake County
in early 1998. This improved I/M program is not the equivalent of an
enhanced I/M program, but it achieves greater reductions of CO
emissions than the basic I/M program identified in the SLC CO
maintenance plan. EPA notes that the additional CO emission reductions
realized from the partial pre-implementation of the ACO regulation and
the implementation of the improved I/M program were not included in the
December 9, 1996, maintenance plan's projected emissions to demonstrate
maintenance of the CO standard. The partial pre-implementation of
contingency measures is consistent with EPA's August 13, 1993, guidance
memorandum entitled ``Early Implementation of Contingency Measures for
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas.''
Based on the above, EPA finds that the contingency measures
provided in the State's maintenance plan are sufficient and meet the
requirements of section 175A(d) of the CAA.
E. Subsequent Maintenance Plan Revisions
In accordance with section 175A(b) of the CAA, the State of Utah
has committed to submit a revised maintenance plan SIP revision eight
years after redesignation. This provision and other State-triggered
mechanisms (such as in response to revisions to the CO NAAQS or to take
advantage of improved or more expeditious methods of maintaining the CO
standard) for revising the maintenance plan are contained in section
IX.C.7.i.(4) of the SLC maintenance plan.
II. Transportation Conformity
One key provision of EPA's conformity regulation requires a
demonstration that emissions from the transportation plan and
Transportation Improvement Program are consistent with the emissions
budgets in the SIP (40 CFR sections 93.118 and 93.124). The emissions
budget is defined as the level of mobile source emissions relied upon
in the attainment or maintenance demonstration to maintain compliance
with the NAAQS in the nonattainment area. The rule's requirements and
EPA's policy on emissions budgets are found in the preambles to the
November 24, 1993, and August 15, 1997, transportation conformity rules
(58 FR 62193-96 and 62 FR 43780 et seq.) and in the sections of the
rule referenced above.
The maintenance plan defines emissions budgets for each year
between 1994 and 2006 (see Table IX.C.35 of the maintenance plan) and
for 2016 (see Section IX, Part C.7.f.(2), page 110, of the maintenance
plan) that the metropolitan planning organization (Wasatch Front
Regional Council--WFRC) will use to demonstrate conformity. These year-
by-year emissions budgets are presented below in Table II and EPA is
approving them in this action. The plan also describes a safety margin
(called the ``emissions credit'') for each year (1994 through 2006),
which is the difference between total emissions from all sources in the
attainment year and in each of those future years.
The State discusses the potential allocation of these identified
year-by-year emission credits for the 1994 through 2006 time period in
section (3), ``Emissions Credit Allocation'', on page 110, Section IX,
Part C.7, of the
[[Page 3222]]
maintenance plan. Section (3) states that ``The emissions credit or any
portion of it may be allocated to any source category contributing to
the inventory; i.e., area sources, non-road sources, or on-road sources
mobile sources. The allocation of emission credits shall be made by
order of the Utah Air Quality Board and shall not be inconsistent with
this plan.''
This language is inconsistent with EPA's requirements for
allocating the safety margin, and, thus, is not sufficient to allow the
safety margin to be used for transportation conformity determinations
or for other purposes. For example, EPA's longstanding interpretation
is that the SIP itself must include some or all of the safety margin in
the motor vehicle emissions budget before the safety margin may be used
in transportation conformity determinations. See 58 FR 62195, November
24, 1993. Similarly, EPA has taken the position that conformity
determinations may not trade emissions among SIP budgets for highway/
transit versus other sources unless a SIP revision for the specific
trade is submitted and approved by EPA or the SIP establishes
appropriate mechanisms for such trading. Id. EPA's transportation
conformity rule reflects these concepts at 40 CFR 93.124(a), (b), and
(c).
The maintenance plan does not explicitly include the safety margin
in the motor vehicle emissions budget or any other budget. (The one
exception is for the year 2016. The 2016 budget is described in detail
below.) Instead, the maintenance plan attempts to allow the Utah Air
Quality Board to make an allocation of the safety margin to one or more
of the budgets at some future date. This is not the explicit SIP
allocation contemplated by EPA's conformity rule. Nor does this
approach constitute an appropriate trading mechanism. Thus, under the
language of the maintenance plan as it now stands, the safety margin
may not be used for conformity determinations or any other purpose. All
conformity determinations must demonstrate conformity with the
emissions budgets in the maintenance plan as cited above and summarized
in Table II below. The State may seek EPA approval of a SIP revision to
allocate some or all of the available safety margin for transportation
conformity, general conformity, or other purposes.
Consistent with the foregoing, and to avoid confusion, EPA is
taking no action on Section IX, Part C.7.f.(3) of the maintenance plan.
For 2016, the State specifically included the safety margin in the
on-road mobile source CO emissions budget, and thus, for 2016, the
safety margin may be used for transportation conformity purposes.
However, in calculating the emission budget for the year 2016, the
State made mathematical errors. Section IX, Part C.7.f.(2) of the
maintenance plan indicates the emission budget is 192.22 tons of CO per
winter week day. The correct value is 192.06 tons of CO. To arrive at
the 2016 budget value, the State subtracted the 2016 emissions
projections for all source categories other than on-road mobile from
the 1993 CO attainment year emissions inventory for all sources. For
the 1993 CO total inventory value, the State used 225.42 tons of CO per
winter week day, when it should have used 225.73 tons per day as
reflected in Table IX.C.35 of the maintenance plan. For the 2016
emissions projections for all source categories other than on-road
mobile, the State used 33.20 tons per day, when it should have used
33.67 tons per day as reflected in Section 3 of Volume 3 of the State's
TSD. The Utah Division Air Quality corrected these mathematical errors
by making a non-substantive change to the maintenance plan on July 14,
1998. These corrections became effective on July 27, 1998, and were
received by EPA on August 12, 1998. As reflected in Table II below, EPA
hereby approves the State's corrected emission budget for 2016 of
192.06 tons of CO per day. This budget, which, as noted above,
specifically allocates the safety margin available in 2016 for
transportation conformity purposes, may be used for transportation
conformity determinations for the year 2016 and beyond.
The maintenance plan also states that, ``[a]n emission budget for
the period extending from 2007 to 2016 has been established. (See
TSD).'' As noted above, the maintenance plan clearly identifies
emission budgets for years 1994 through 2006 and 2016. However, the
maintenance plan does not clearly identify an emission budget for the
period 2007 to 2015. The reference to the TSD is not helpful for two
reasons. First, EPA's Transportation Conformity Rule requires that
budgets be established by the SIP (see 40 CFR 93.118(a), (b), and
(e)(4); 62 FR 43781, August 15, 1997), and EPA does not consider the
TSD to be part of the SIP. Second, the TSD does not contain language
that explicitly identifies an emission budget. It is not appropriate to
infer an emission budget beyond the maintenance year unless the SIP
explicitly identifies such an emission budget. See 58 FR 62195,
November 24, 1993. Therefore, EPA is not approving any emission budget
for the period 2007 through 2015, and any transportation conformity
determinations for such years must be based on the 2006 emission
budget. If the State wishes to establish an emission budget or budgets
for the years 2007 through 2015, it may revise the maintenance plan and
seek EPA's approval.
Table II.--On-Road Mobile Source CO Emissions Budgets for SLC
[In tons of CO per day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year............................................ 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Budget.......................................... 202.24 193.95 184.84 175.30 169.56 163.90 158.80 154.66
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year............................................ 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 ........... 2016
Budget.......................................... 149.13 148.45 145.64 143.79 144.66 145.37 ........... 192.06
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. UACR R307-1-3.3
In his November 24, 1995, submittal of the redesignation request
and maintenance plan for SLC, the Governor also included minor
revisions to UACR R307-1-3.3, which contains requirements for new
source review. These revisions made the rule's requirements applicable
in both nonattainment and maintenance areas instead of just
nonattainment areas. These revisions are acceptable to EPA and should
help foster continued attainment of the CO standard in the SLC area.
The above changes to UACR R307-1-3.3 were adopted by the UAQB October
4, 1995, and, with changes, December 6, 1995, and became State
effective January 31, 1996.
IV. Final Action
In this action, EPA is approving the SLC carbon monoxide
redesignation
[[Page 3223]]
request, maintenance plan, and the revisions to UACR R307-1-3.3.
However, as noted above, EPA is not taking any action on Section IX,
Part C.7.f.(3) of the maintenance plan, ``Emissions Credit
Allocation.''
EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective March 22, 1999
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by
February 22, 1999.
If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule informing the public that the rule
will not take effect. All public comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The
EPA will not institute a second comment period on this rule. Any
parties interested in commenting on this rule should do so at this
time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this
rule will be effective on March 22, 1999 and no further action will be
taken on the proposed rule.
V. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory
Planning and Review.''
B. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership
Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local,
or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by
consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected state, local, and tribal
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of state, local, and tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local, or tribal
governments. Redesignation of an area to attainment under sections
107(d)(3)(D) and (E) of the Clean Air Act does not impose any new
requirements. Redesignation to attainment is an action that affects the
status of a geographical area and does not impose any regulatory
requirements on state, local, or tribal governments. Thus, the rule
does not impose any enforceable duties on state, local, or tribal
governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of Executive
Order 12875 do not apply to this rule.
C. Executive Order 13045
Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to
any rule that: (1) Is determined to be ``economically significant'' as
defined under E. O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or
safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate
effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the
Agency must evaluate the environmental health and safety effects of the
planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible
alternatives considered by the Agency.
This rule is not subject to E. O. 13045 because it does not involve
decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.
D. Executive Order 13084: Executive Order 13084: Consultation and
Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects
the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes
substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the
Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct
compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults
with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order
12084 requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget,
in a separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments. Redesignation of an area to
attainment under sections 107(d)(3)(D) and (E) of the Clean Air Act
does not impose any new requirements. Redesignation to attainment is an
action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not
impose any regulatory requirements. Accordingly, the requirements of
section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
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 small governmental
jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities because 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
create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the
Clean Air Act, preparation of a 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. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2). Redesignation of an area to attainment under
sections 107(d)(3)(D) and (E) of the Clean Air Act does not impose any
new requirements on small entities. Redesignation to attainment is an
action that affects the status of a geographical area and does
[[Page 3224]]
not impose any regulatory requirements on sources. Therefore, I certify
that the approval of the redesignation request will not affect a
substantial number of small entities.
F. Unfunded Mandates
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 cost-effective 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 a
redesignation to attainment and pre-existing requirements under State
or local law, and imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no
additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the
private sector, will result from this action.
G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as
added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy
of the rule, to each House of Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to the publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is
not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. section 804(2).
H. Petitions for Judicial 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 March 22, 1999. 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).)
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon Monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.
Dated: November 23, 1998.
Jack W. McGraw,
Acting Regional Administrator Region VIII.
Chapter I, title 40, parts 52 and 81 of the Code of Federal
Regulations are amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart TT--UTAH
2. Section 52.2320 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(39) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.2320 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(39) Revisions to the Utah State Implementation Plan, Section IX,
Control Measures for Area and Point Sources, Part C, Carbon Monoxide as
submitted by the Governor on December 6, 1996 (with minor mathematical
corrections submitted by the Utah Division of Air Quality on August 12,
1998), excluding Section IX, Part C.7.f.(3) of the plan, ``Emissions
Credit Allocation,'' as EPA is not taking any action on that section of
the plan. UACR R307-1-3.3 Requirements for Nonattainment and
Maintenance Areas--New and Modified Sources; as submitted by the
Governor on November 24, 1995.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) UACR R307-2-12, adopted by the Utah Air Quality Board on August
7, 1996 and September 4, 1996, effective November 1, 1996, as modified
through a notice of nonsubstantive rule change dated July 14, 1998,
effective July 27, 1998, to correct minor mathematical errors in
Section IX, Part C.7.f.(2) of the Utah State Implementation Plan (SIP).
UACR R307-2-12 incorporates by reference a number of provisions of the
Utah SIP, only some of which are relevant to this rulemaking action.
EPA's incorporation by reference of UACR R307-2-12 only extends to the
following Utah SIP provisions and excludes any other provisions that
UACR R307-2-12 incorporates by reference:
Section IX, Part C.7 (except for Section IX, Part C.7.f.(3)),
Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Provisions for Salt Lake City, adopted by
Utah Air Quality Board on August 7, 1996, and September 4, 1996,
effective November 1, 1996, as modified by the nonsubstantive rule
change noted above.
(B) UACR R307-1-3.3, a portion of Requirements for Nonattainment
and Maintenance Areas--New and Modified Sources, as adopted by the Utah
Air Quality Board on October 4, 1995, December 6, 1995, effective
January 31, 1996.
(ii) Additional material.
(A) February 19, 1998, letter from Ursula Trueman, Director, Utah
Division of Air Quality, Department of Environmental Quality to Richard
R. Long, Director, Air and Radiation Program, EPA Region VIII, entitled
``DAQS-0188-98; Technical Support Documents--Ogden City and Salt Lake
City CO Maintenance Plans.'' This letter confirmed that all the
emission projections, contained in the technical support documents for
both the Salt Lake City and Ogden City redesignation requests, were
properly adopted by the Utah Air Quality Board in accordance with the
Utah Air Quality Rules.
(B) Materials from Jan Miller, Utah Division of Air Quality,
Department of Environmental Quality, received by Tim Russ, Air and
Radiation Program, EPA Region VIII, displaying the minor mathematical
corrections to the on-road mobile source emission budgets in Section
IX, Part C. 7.f.(2) of the Salt Lake City CO Maintenance Plan. These
nonsubstantive changes were made in accordance with the Utah Air
Quality Rules and were effective July 27, 1998.
PART 81--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. In Sec. 81.345, the table entitled ``Utah-Carbon Monoxide'' is
amended by revising the entry for ``Salt Lake City Area'' to read as
follows:
[[Page 3225]]
Sec. 81.345 Utah.
* * * * *
Utah--Carbon Monoxide
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Classification
Designated area ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Salt Lake City Area: 3-22-99 Attainment...............................
Salt Lake County (part), Salt Lake
City.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-1259 Filed 1-20-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
