96-15034. Approval and Promulgation of Section 182(f) Exemption to the Nitrogen Oxides (NOINFX) Control Requirements for the Calcasieu Parish Ozone Nonattainment Area; Louisiana  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 115 (Thursday, June 13, 1996)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 30024-30028]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-15034]
    
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    40 CFR Part 52
    
    [LA-22-1-6870; FRL-5520-4]
    
    
    Approval and Promulgation of Section 182(f) Exemption to the 
    Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Control Requirements for the Calcasieu 
    Parish Ozone Nonattainment Area; Louisiana
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Proposed rulemaking.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve a petition from the State of 
    Louisiana requesting that the Calcasieu Parish marginal ozone 
    nonattainment area be exempt from applicable NOX control 
    requirements of section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act (Act). The section 
    182(f) NOX requirement from which the area will be exempt is 
    NOX new source review (NSR). In addition, approval of the section 
    182(f) petition would remove the NOX general conformity provisions 
    and the NOX build/no build provisions of the transportation 
    conformity rule (for conformity provisions, see the November 24, 1993 
    and November 30, 1993 Federal Register). The exemption for conformity 
    NOX requirements is found, generally, in 40 CFR part 93, subparts 
    T and W. The section 182(f) NOX provisions are explained fully in 
    the EPA's NOX Supplement to the General Preamble, published in the 
    Federal Register (FR) on November 25, 1992. The State of Louisiana made 
    the request for Calcasieu Parish based on a demonstration that 
    additional NOX reductions would not contribute to ozone attainment 
    in the nonattainment area.
    
    DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing on 
    or before July 15, 1996.
    
    ADDRESSEES: Written comments on these actions should be addressed to 
    Mr. Thomas Diggs, Chief, Planning Section, at the EPA Regional Office 
    listed below. Copies of the documents relevant to these proposed 
    actions are available for public inspection during normal business 
    hours at the following locations. The interested persons wanting to 
    examine these documents should make an appointment with the appropriate 
    office at least 24 hours before the visiting day.
    
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Planning (6PD-L), 
    1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
    Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, N.B. Garlock Building, 
    7290 Bluebonnet, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70810.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Mr. Matthew Witosky or Mr. Quang Nguyen, Planning Section (6PD-L), 
    Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, U.S. EPA Region 6, 1445 
    Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-7214.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Background
    
        NOX are precursors to ground level (tropospheric) ozone, or 
    urban ``smog.'' When released into the atmosphere, NOX will react 
    with volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the presence of sunlight to 
    form ozone. Tropospheric ozone is an important factor in the nation's 
    urban air pollution problem.
        Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana, was designated nonattainment for ozone 
    and classified as marginal pursuant to sections 107(d)(4) and 181(a) of 
    the Act. Under section 181(a), marginal areas must attain the National 
    Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone (the ozone standard) by November 
    15, 1993. Please reference 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991, codified for 
    Louisiana at 40 CFR 81.319).
        The Amendments to the Act (1990 Amendments) made significant 
    changes to the air quality planning requirements for areas that do not 
    meet the ozone standard. Subparts 1 and 2 of part D, title I of the Act 
    contain the air quality planning requirements for ozone nonattainment 
    areas. Title I includes new requirements to control NOX emissions 
    in certain ozone nonattainment areas and ozone transport regions. 
    Section 182(f) requires States to apply the same control requirements 
    to major stationary sources of NOX as are applied to major 
    stationary sources of VOC. For marginal areas, the NOX requirement 
    is to provide for nonattainment new source review (NSR). In addition, 
    there are new NOX requirements under the general and 
    transportation conformity provisions of section 176(c). This approval 
    exempts the area from the section 182(f) NSR NOX requirements (see 
    the NOX Supplement to the General Preamble 57 FR 55620), and from 
    the NOX requirements of the general, as well as the NOX 
    requirements of the build/no build provisions of the transportation, 
    conformity rules (see also 58 FR 63214 published on November 24, 1993 
    and 58 FR 62188 published on November 30, 1993, as amended, 
    particularly at 60 FR 44790, 44794, of August 29, 1995).
    
    Applicable EPA Guidance
    
        The Act specifies in section 182(f) that if one of the conditions 
    listed below is met, the new NOX requirements would not apply:
        1. In any area, the net air quality benefits are greater without 
    NOX reductions from the sources concerned;
        2. In a nontransport region, additional NOX reductions would 
    not contribute to ozone attainment in the nonattainment area; or
        3. In a transport region, additional NOX reductions would not 
    produce net ozone benefits in the transport region.
        In addition, section 182(f)(2) states that the application of the 
    new NOX requirements may be limited to the extent that any portion 
    of those reductions are demonstrated to result in ``excess reductions'' 
    of NOX. The previously-described NOX provisions of the 
    conformity rules would also not apply in certain areas that are granted 
    a section 182(f) exemption (see amendment to transportation conformity 
    rule and associated explanation at 60 FR 44794). In addition, certain 
    NOX provisions of the I/M rule would not apply in an area that is 
    granted a section 182(f) exemption (see 57 FR 52989).
        The EPA's Guideline for Determining the Applicability of Nitrogen 
    Oxides
    
    [[Page 30025]]
    
    Requirements Under Section 182(f) (December 1993), and 2 revisionary 
    memoranda signed by John S. Seitz, Director of the EPA Office of Air 
    Quality Planning and Standards, dated May 27, 1994 and February 8, 
    1995, describe how the EPA will interpret the NOX exemption 
    provisions of section 182(f). As described more fully in the Seitz 
    memoranda, petitions submitted under section 182(f)(3) are not required 
    to be submitted as State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions. 
    Consequently, the State is not required under the Act to hold a public 
    hearing in order to petition for an area-wide NOX exemption 
    determination. Similarly, it is not necessary to have the Governor 
    submit the petition.
        It should be noted with respect to the application of section 
    182(f) NOX waivers to certain NOx requirements of the 
    transportation conformity rule that the EPA has revised the 
    transportation conformity rule to ensure consistency with section 
    176(c) (see especially 60 FR 44790, 44794). This rule revision requires 
    areas subject to section 182(b)(1) (moderate and above, but not 
    marginal ozone nonattainment areas) to submit transportation conformity 
    NOX exemption requests as revisions to the SIP. Because Calcasieu 
    is classified as marginal, the revision addressing 182(b)(1) is not 
    applicable.
    
    State Submittal
    
        On October 28, 1994, the Louisiana Department of Environmental 
    Quality (LDEQ) submitted to the EPA a petition pursuant to section 
    182(f) which requests that the Calcasieu Parish nonattainment area be 
    exempted by the EPA from the NOX control requirements of section 
    182(f) of the Act. On December 21, 1995, the Governor of Louisiana 
    submitted a request for redesignation of the area to attainment which 
    contained additional information relevant to the State's NOX 
    exemption petition. The request for redesignation is currently under 
    review and will be addressed in a separate rulemaking action.
        The State's NOX waiver petition was based on urban airshed 
    modeling (UAM). Subsequently, an analysis of ambient air quality data 
    (``clean air data'') indicates that the area is currently in attainment 
    of the ozone standard, prompting the state to submit a request that the 
    area be redesignated as attainment. The state's modeling and monitoring 
    data together demonstrate that additional NOX reductions would not 
    contribute to attainment of the ozone standard in the area. Overall, 
    this demonstration is consistent with the EPA's section 182(f) 
    guidance. The State's submission includes a letter from Gustave Von 
    Bodungen, Assistant Secretary of the LDEQ, to Jane N. Saginaw, Regional 
    Administrator of the EPA Region 6, and LDEQ's summary of the State's 
    photochemical grid modeling results. Further, the State's submission 
    requesting redesignation to attainment for Calcasieu Parish contains 
    quality-assured and quality-controlled data showing attainment of the 
    ozone standard. This data is for the three-year time period of 1993 to 
    1995.
    
    Analysis of State Submission
    
        The following items are the basis for the EPA's action proposing to 
    approve the State of Louisiana's section 182(f) NOX exemption 
    petition for the Calcasieu Parish ozone nonattainment area. Please 
    refer to the EPA's Technical Support Document and the State's submittal 
    for more detailed information.
    
    A. Consistency With EPA Section 182(f) Guidance
    
        Chapter 4 of the EPA's December 1993 section 182(f) guidance states 
    that the typical procedure for demonstrating that additional NOX 
    reductions would not contribute to ozone attainment is to utilize 
    photochemical grid modeling, such as UAM, to simulate conditions 
    resulting from three emission reduction scenarios: (1) Substantial VOC 
    reductions; (2) substantial NOX reductions; and (3) both VOC and 
    NOX reductions. To demonstrate that NOX reductions are not 
    beneficial to attainment, the area-wide predicted maximum 1-hour ozone 
    concentration for each day modeled under scenario (1) must be less than 
    or equal to that from scenarios (2) and (3) for the same day. Chapter 7 
    specifies that the application of UAM should be consistent with the 
    techniques specified in the EPA ``Guideline on Air Quality Models 
    (Revised),'' and ``Guideline for Regulatory Application of the UAM 
    (July 1991).'' This guidance specifically applies to moderate and 
    higher classification ozone nonattainment areas. As discussed in the 
    following sections, the EPA believes that the State's UAM demonstration 
    together with the ambient air quality data showing that the area is 
    attaining the ozone standard support the granting of an exemption from 
    the NOX requirements of section 182(f) of the CAA.
    
    B. UAM Modeling Analysis
    
        Although many ozone nonattainment areas used photochemical grid 
    modeling that was required by the Act for their attainment 
    demonstrations to apply for a NOX exemption as a marginal 
    nonattainment area, the Act did not require Calcasieu Parish to perform 
    such modeling for the purpose of an attainment demonstration. Thus, 
    where such an area can make an adequate showing of the effects of 
    NOX reductions with respect to attainment through alternative 
    means that are otherwise consistent with relevant guidance, EPA could 
    approve the area's demonstration.
        The LDEQ submitted the results of a photochemical grid modeling 
    exercise that was carried out, in conjunction with Calcasieu's 
    attainment efforts, to determine if the Calcasieu area was the object 
    of ozone and precursor transport. Although the modeling utilized for 
    this exercise does not precisely replicate the procedures EPA guidance 
    suggests be used to support a 182(f) exemption petition. However, the 
    EPA believes the modeling analysis that was performed by LDEQ when 
    combined with the area's clean air data is comprehensive enough to use 
    in determining if the area should receive an exemption.
        The LDEQ used UAM version IV, an EPA-approved photochemical grid 
    model, to develop the attainment demonstration for Calcasieu Parish. 
    The State's modeling activities were performed in accordance with the 
    EPA's ``Guideline for Regulatory Application of the Urban Airshed 
    Model.'' The discussion below summarizes the EPA's analysis on how the 
    State's modeling demonstrations complied with the EPA's guidance. 
    Please refer to the EPA's Technical Support Document for more detailed 
    information.
    1. Episode Selection
        The State used the EPA ``Guideline For Regulatory Application of 
    The Urban Airshed Model'' to select episodes for use in the Calcasieu 
    Parish UAM modeling exercises. Data from 1991 and 1992 were examined 
    for episodes which cover at least 48 consecutive hours and the worst-
    case meteorological conditions. Three episodes from 1992 were selected 
    for the UAM analysis for the area.
        Episodes selected for the Lake Charles modeling represent three 
    different meteorological regimes which can be characterized as 
    exhibiting potential for transport of pollutants from source areas near 
    Baton Rouge to the Lake Charles area, absence of transport potential, 
    and potential for transport from areas in Texas.
    2. Model Domain and Meteorological Input
        The LDEQ used a large modeling domain for Calcasieu Parish to 
    ensure that the model captured the movement
    
    [[Page 30026]]
    
    of VOC and NOX emissions generated by the surface sources. The 
    domain covers all or part of seven counties in Texas and eight parishes 
    in Louisiana. The domain modeled encompassed 32,000 square kilometers 
    of surface area. Meteorological data were collected from numerous 
    monitoring stations in the area. The LDEQ followed the methods 
    described in the UAM User's Guides to develop model inputs for wind 
    field data, mixing heights, temperature, and meteorological scalars for 
    the areas. Data was obtained from the Aerometric Information and 
    Retrieval System (AIRS), LDEQ data gathering activities, the Texas 
    Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC), and other direct 
    measurement techniques.
    3. Boundary and Initial Conditions
        LDEQ used the air quality data collected at monitoring stations 
    throughout the domain to construct the initial conditions of the model 
    exercise. Some default values were used where actual measurements were 
    not available. The applied boundary conditions were developed to 
    measure possible transport into the area from the east and west.
    4. Emissions Inventory
        The Calcasieu Parish modeling exercises were conducted using VOC 
    and NOX emission inventories compiled by survey and direct 
    measurement by the LDEQ. The modeling emissions inventories are 
    composed of point source, area, on-road mobile, off-road mobile, and 
    biogenic emissions. Where applicable, emissions were adjusted for 
    pertinent conditions related to the episode day to be modeled, thus 
    producing day-specific emissions. The EPA procedures for developing 
    episode-specific emission inventories were followed.
        For Calcasieu Parish, the LDEQ developed three emission inventories 
    for all three episodes modeled. Although the projected inventory does 
    not reflect the attainment year for the area, the inventory projected 
    for 1993 does not differ significantly from 1991 and 1992 inventories. 
    Hence, the EPA believes the State's analysis still provides a valid 
    technical basis to evaluate the NOX contributions.
    5. Model Performance
        For all UAM activities, model performance is measured 
    quantitatively and qualitatively. The EPA has issued guidelines to 
    statistically measure accuracy. In addition, the EPA strongly 
    recommends that agencies submit graphical analysis, as a complement to 
    statistical analysis. While the EPA has recommended ranges for 
    statistical accuracy, there are no rigid criterion to accept or reject 
    a model exercise. Similarly, qualitative characterizations such as 
    good, satisfactory, fair, or poor describe the EPA's best professional 
    judgment about graphed model performance, but are not used to grade the 
    model exercise as acceptable or unacceptable.
        Based on the above criteria, the Calcasieu model performance was 
    satisfactory. Both graphical and statistical performance measures were 
    employed for all meteorological episodes and monitoring networks. 
    Sensitivity analysis was also conducted to assess the stability of the 
    models across a range of possible input parameters.
        For the August 20-21, 1991 episode, two of the three EPA-criterion 
    statistical measures obtained for the area are well within the EPA's 
    recommended ranges for good model performance (see Table 2 of the 
    technical support document). For the April 7-8, 1992 episode, the 
    statistical analysis for the primary day, April 8, indicates fair model 
    performance. The statistical measures were well within the EPA-
    recommended ranges for the primary episode day. However, simulated 
    maximum concentrations are, in general, lower than observed peak 
    concentrations. For the April 20-21, 1992 episode, the model 
    performance is good. The statistical measures all fall within the EPA-
    recommended ranges, and the temporal profiles of many sites were fairly 
    well simulated.
        Both graphical and statistical performance measures were used to 
    evaluate the model. Using these analyses, the predicted results from 
    the model were compared to the observed results for each episode. These 
    analyses indicate that the model performed satisfactorily for the three 
    episodes used for the UAM demonstration.
    6. Section 182(f) Demonstration
        As noted previously, Calcasieu Parish is a marginal ozone 
    nonattainment area and EPA's NOX exemption guidance does not fully 
    address the requirements for less than moderate nonattainment areas 
    that were not required to utilize photochemical grid modeling for their 
    attainment demonstrations. For purposes of their 182(f) demonstration, 
    the LDEQ modeled the three episodes discussed above under a substantial 
    NOX reduction strategy only. The VOC-only and VOC plus NOX 
    reduction modeling strategies listed in EPA guidance were not 
    performed. EPA nonetheless feels that the State's UAM demonstration in 
    combination with the area's ambient air quality data provide adequate 
    justification for proposing approval of the NOX exemption 
    petition. The justification related to clean air quality data is 
    discussed in Section C of this notice.
        The LDEQ's modeling considered across-the-board reductions in the 
    projected NOX point source emission inventories. The State modeled 
    50 and 25 percent emission reductions in the NOX point sources 
    inventory for each of the three episode-days. This generated six 
    different sensitivity tests to gauge the direction and intensity of the 
    atmospheric reaction to NOX reductions. The State modeled 25 
    percent NOX reductions to characterize the effect of NOX 
    control strategies that could have a more immediate impact. For all 
    three episodes at 25 and 50 percent reductions, the results for the 
    controlling day show that domain-wide predicted maximum ozone 
    concentrations increase as the NOX reductions are applied.
        As explained in the EPA's 182(f) guidance, the EPA believes it is 
    appropriate to focus this analysis on the area-wide maximum 1-hour 
    predicted ozone concentration, since this value is critical for the 
    typical attainment demonstration. For all three episodes, the 
    controlling day showed that the domain-wide predicted maximum ozone 
    concentrations are lower without NOX reductions. The model results 
    lead to the conclusion that NOX reductions would increase the 
    domain-wide maximum ozone concentrations. Please refer to the EPA's 
    Technical Support Document for more detailed information.
    
    C. Clean Data Eligibility for NOX Exemption
    
        On December 21, 1995, the EPA received a request from the State to 
    redesignate the Calcasieu area to attainment. The request for 
    redesignation is based upon three years of quality-assured monitoring 
    data that show no violations of the ozone standard. The data that 
    constitute the substance of the redesignation request is available to 
    the EPA through the Aerometric Information and Retrieval System (AIRS). 
    Since the data were not available when the State initially requested a 
    NOX exemption, the State chose to base its waiver request on 
    modeling data. Now that monitoring data are available, the EPA believes 
    it is appropriate to consider the air quality data in conjunction with 
    the modeling information contained in the State's NOX exemption 
    petition in determining whether to approve the State's NOX 
    exemption request. Moreover, since the
    
    [[Page 30027]]
    
    EPA's NOX guidance provides for granting NOX exemptions based 
    solely on clean air data, the State could have resubmitted a request 
    for a NOX waiver based only on clean data. However, rather than 
    having the state resubmit an additional petition, the EPA decided that 
    the air quality data and modeling information already before the 
    Agency, when analyzed in combination, constituted an adequate basis to 
    propose approval of the waiver request. The EPA will act upon the 
    State's request for redesignation in a subsequent notice.
        An EPA review of the AIRS ambient air quality data concluded that 
    no violations of the ozone standard occurred in the area from 1993 
    through 1995. Since the absence of such violations over a 3-year period 
    indicates that an area is in attainment of the ozone standard, this 
    data provides further support for the conclusion that the section 
    182(f) test is met. This is true because for an area, like Calcasieu, 
    that is already attaining it is clear that additional reductions of 
    oxides of nitrogen would not contribute to ozone attainment in that 
    area. ``Guideline for Determining the Applicability of Nitrogen Oxide 
    Requirements Under section 182(f)'' December 1993. See the TSD for 
    additional information regarding the area's air quality data.
    
    Proposed Rulemaking Action
    
        In this action, the EPA proposes to approve the 182(f) NOX 
    exemption petition submitted by the State of Louisiana for the 
    Calcasieu Parish ozone nonattainment area. The EPA believes that all 
    section 182(f) exemptions that are approved should be approved only on 
    a contingent basis. As described in the EPA's NOX Supplement to 
    the General Preamble (57 FR 55628, November 25, 1992), the EPA would 
    rescind a NOX exemption in cases where NOX reductions were 
    later found to be beneficial in the area's attainment plan. That is, a 
    modeling based exemption would last for only as long as the area's 
    modeling continued to demonstrate attainment without the additional 
    NOX reductions required by section 182(f). Similarly, if an area 
    that received an exemption based on clean air quality data which shows 
    that the area is attaining the ozone standard experiences a violation 
    prior to redesignation of the area to attainment, the exemption would 
    no longer be applicable.
        If the EPA later determines, based on new photochemical grid 
    modeling that NOX reductions would be beneficial in Calcasieu 
    Parish, or because of an ozone violation, the area would be removed 
    from exempt status and would be required to adopt the applicable 
    NOX provisions of the NSR and conformity rules except to the 
    extent that NOX reductions are shown to be ``excess reductions.'' 
    In the rulemaking action which removes the exempt status, the EPA would 
    provide specific information regarding the reapplication of the NSR 
    rules and the conformity rules.
        The subsequent modeling analyses mentioned above need not be 
    limited to the purpose of demonstrating attainment as required by 
    section 182(c)(2)(A). For example, an area might want to consider a 
    strategy that phases in NOX reductions only after certain VOC 
    reductions are implemented. As improved emission inventories and 
    ambient data become available, areas may choose to remodel. In 
    addition, alternative control strategy scenarios might be considered in 
    subsequent modeling analyses in order to improve the cost-effectiveness 
    of the attainment plan.
        In summary, the UAM modeling results together with ambient air 
    quality data showing no violations of the ozone standard during the 
    last 3 years in Calcasieu Parish support the conclusion that additional 
    NOX reductions would not contribute to attainment of the ozone 
    standard in this area. The EPA therefore proposes to approve a NOX 
    exemption for the Calcasieu Parish area. Approval of this petition 
    means that the area is exempt from new source review for sources of 
    NOX, the NOX requirements of the general conformity rule, and 
    the NOX ``build/no build'' provisions of the transportation 
    conformity rule (see 58 FR 63214 and 58 FR 62188). This exemption will 
    remain effective for only as long as modeling continues to show that 
    NOX control activities would not be beneficial in the Calcasieu 
    Parish nonattainment area, and/or so long as, prior to redesignation to 
    attainment, the area does not violate the ozone standard.
    
    Request for Public Comments
    
        The EPA requests comments on all aspects of this proposal. As 
    indicated at the outset of this action, the EPA will consider any 
    comments received by July 15, 1996.
    
    Regulatory Process
    
        Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et. seq., the 
    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, the 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.
        Approvals of NOX exemption petitions under section 182(f) of 
    the CAA do not create any new requirements. Therefore, because the 
    Federal approval of the petition does not impose any new requirements, 
    the EPA certifies that it does not have a significant impact on 
    affected small entities. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-
    State relationship under the CAA, preparation of a regulatory 
    flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic 
    reasonableness of State action. The CAA forbids the EPA to base its 
    actions concerning SIP's on such grounds [Union Electric Co. v. U.S. 
    E.P.A. , 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S. Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410 (a)(2)]. 
    The Office of Management and Budget has exempted this action from 
    review under Executive Order 12866.
    
    Unfunded Mandates
    
        Under sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
    Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 
    1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed 
    or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in 
    estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to 
    State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
        Through submission of this state implementation plan or plan 
    revision, the State and any affected local or tribal governments have 
    elected to adopt the program provided for under section 110 of the 
    Clean Air Act. These rules may bind State, local and tribal governments 
    to perform certain actions and also require the private sector to 
    perform certain duties. To the extent that the rules being approved by 
    this action will impose no new requirements, such sources are already 
    subject to these regulations under State law. Accordingly, no 
    additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the 
    private sector, result from this action. EPA has also determined that 
    this action does not include a mandate that may result in estimated 
    costs of $100 million or more to State, local, or tribal governments in 
    the aggregate or to the private sector.
    
    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
    
        Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
    Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic 
    compounds.
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
    
    
    [[Page 30028]]
    
    
        Dated: June 7, 1996.
    Carol M. Browner,
    Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 96-15034 Filed 6-12-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    

Document Information

Published:
06/13/1996
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Proposed rulemaking.
Document Number:
96-15034
Dates:
Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing on or before July 15, 1996.
Pages:
30024-30028 (5 pages)
Docket Numbers:
LA-22-1-6870, FRL-5520-4
PDF File:
96-15034.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 52