[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 122 (Monday, June 24, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32341-32345]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-15905]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA-19-2-725-a; FRL-5511-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California--
Mammoth Lakes Nonattainment Area; PM10
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA today approves the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
submitted by the State of California for the purpose of bringing about
attainment in the Mammoth Lakes Planning Area (MLPA) of the national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers
(PM10). The ``moderate'' area SIP was submitted by the State to
satisfy certain Federal requirements in the Clean Air Act for an
approvable nonattainment area PM10 plan for the MLPA.
The intended effect of approving this plan is to regulate emissions
of PM10 in accordance with the requirements of the CAA, as amended
in 1990.
DATES: This final rule is effective on August 23, 1996 unless adverse
or critical comments are received by July 24, 1996. If the effective
date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the State's submittal and other information are
contained in the docket for this rulemaking. The docket is available
for inspection during normal business hours at the following locations:
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105
California Air Resources Board, 2020 L Street, P.O. Box 2815,
Sacramento, CA 95814
Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, 157 Short Street,
Suite 6, Bishop, CA 93514.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephanie G. Valentine (A-2-2), U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, Air and Toxics Division, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 744-1178.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On the date of enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments,
PM10 areas, including the Mammoth Lakes Planning Area, meeting the
conditions of section 107(d) of the Act were designated nonattainment
by operation of law. Once an area is designated nonattainment, section
188 of the Act outlines the process for classification of the area and
establishes the area's attainment date. In accordance with section
188(a), at the time of designation, all PM10 nonattainment areas
were initially classified as ``moderate'' by operation of law. See 40
CFR 81.303 (1993) A moderate area may subsequently be reclassified as
``serious'' if at any time EPA determines that the area cannot
practicably attain the PM10 NAAQS by the applicable attainment
date for moderate areas, December 31, 1994. Moreover, a moderate area
must be reclassified if EPA determines within six months after the
applicable attainment date that the area is not in attainment after
that date. See section 188(b) of the Clean Air Act.
The air quality planning requirements for moderate PM10
nonattainment areas are set out in subparts 1 and 4 of Title I of the
Act. EPA has issued a ``General Preamble'' describing EPA's preliminary
views on how the Agency intends to review SIPs and SIP revisions
submitted under Title I of the Act, including those state submittals
containing moderate PM10 nonattainment area SIP provisions. See
generally 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070 (April 28,
1992). Because EPA is describing its interpretations here only in broad
terms, the reader should refer to the General Preamble for a more
detailed discussion of the interpretations of Title I advanced in
today's action and the supporting rationale. In today's rulemaking
action on California's moderate PM10 SIP for the MLPA, EPA is
applying its interpretations taking into consideration the specific
factual issues presented.
Those states containing initial moderate PM10 nonattainment
areas were required to submit, among other things, the following
provisions by November 15, 1991\1\:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are additional submittals associated with moderate
PM10 nonattainment plans, such as a permit program for the
construction of new and modified major stationary sources and
contingency measures. See sections 189(a) and 172(c)(9). These
submittals were required to be submitted in 1992 and 1993,
respectively, and are not the subject of today's action which
addresses only those plan provisions required to be submitted on
November 15, 1991.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Provisions to assure that reasonably available control measures
(RACM) (including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in
the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of
reasonably available control technology--RACT) shall be implemented no
later than December 10, 1993;
2. Either a demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the
plan will provide for attainment as expeditiously
[[Page 32342]]
as practicable but no later than December 31, 1994 or a demonstration
that attainment by that date is impracticable;
3. Pursuant to section 189(c) of the Act, for plan revisions
demonstrating attainment, quantitative milestones which are to be
achieved every 3 years and which demonstrate reasonable further
progress (RFP) toward attainment by December 31, 1994; and
4. Provisions to assure that the control requirements applicable to
major stationary sources of PM10 also apply to major stationary
sources of PM10 precursors except where the Administrator
determines that such sources do not contribute significantly to
PM10 levels which exceed the NAAQS in the area. See sections
172(c), 188, and 189 of the Act.
II. Today's Action
Section 110(k) of the Act sets out provisions governing EPA's
review of SIP submittals. See 57 FR 13565-66. In today's action, EPA
approves the plan revision submitted to EPA on September 11, 1991, and
the addenda submitted January 9, 1992, for the MLPA because it meets
all of the applicable requirements of the Act.
A. Analysis of State Submission
1. Procedural Background
The Act requires states to observe certain procedural requirements
in developing implementation plans and plan revisions for submission to
EPA. Section 110(a)(2) of the Act provides that each implementation
plan submitted by a state must be adopted after reasonable notice and
public hearing.\2\ Section 110(l) of the Act similarly provides that
each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a state under the
Act must be adopted by such state after reasonable notice and public
hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Also section 172(c)(7) of the Act requires that plan
provisions for nonattainment areas meet the applicable provisions of
section 110(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA also must determine whether a submittal is complete and
therefore warrants further EPA review and action. See section 110(k)(1)
and 57 FR 13565. EPA's completeness criteria for SIP submittals are set
out at 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V (1993). EPA attempts to make
completeness determinations within 60 days of receiving a submission.
However, a submittal is deemed complete by operation of law if a
completeness determination is not made by EPA six months after receipt
of the submission.
The State of California originally submitted the Mammoth Lakes
Planning Area PM10 implementation plan revision to EPA on
September 11, 1991. By operation of law, this submittal was deemed
complete on March 11, 1992. On January 9, 1992, the State of California
submitted a second revision to the Mammoth Lakes Planning Area
PM10 SIP. This submittal contained revisions which are primarily
administrative in nature to assist in the effective implementation of
the SIP control strategies. By operation of law, this second submittal
was deemed complete on July 9, 1992.
In today's action, EPA approves California's PM10 SIP
submittal for the MLPA.
2. Accurate Emissions Inventory
Section 172(c)(3) of the Act requires that nonattainment plan
provisions include a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of
actual emissions from all sources of relevant pollutants in the
nonattainment area. Because such inventories are necessary to an area's
attainment demonstration (or demonstration that the area cannot
practicably attain), the emissions inventories must be received with
the submission. See 57 FR 13539.
California submitted a peak 24-hour PM10 emissions inventory
for the MLPA which is based on a 1987-88 emissions inventory survey.
This 1987-88 inventory identifies re-entrained dust and cinders from
paved roads and emissions from fireplaces and wood stoves as the
primary causes of nonattainment, contributing over 99 percent of total
PM10 emissions during times of peak concentrations. The remaining
1 percent of the emissions is comprised of motor vehicle exhaust, tire-
wear, and industrial sources. By applying known population growth
factors to the 1987-88 inventory, the Great Basin Unified APCD also
projected 1990, 1991, 1993, 1995, 2000, and 2005 inventories. The chart
below identifies 1987-88 contributions to the emission inventory.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peak 24-
hour PM10
Source category emissions Percentage
(kg/day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fireplaces....................................... 882 20.7
Woodstoves....................................... 957 22.5
Resuspended Road Dirt/Cinders.................... 2,390 56.1
Motor Vehicles................................... 23 0.5
Industrial....................................... 7 0.2
----------------------
Total...................................... 4,259 100
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA approves the emissions inventory because it generally appears
to be accurate and comprehensive, and provides a sufficient basis for
determining the adequacy of the plan revision's air quality analysis
consistent with the requirements of sections 172(c)(3) and 110(a)(2)(K)
of the Clean Air Act.\3\ For further details see the Technical Support
Document (TSD) that is contained in the docket for today's action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ EPA issued guidance on PM10 emissions inventories prior
to the enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments in the form of
the 1987 PM10 SIP Development Guideline. Pursuant to section
193 of the Amendments, the guidance provided in this document, as
well as all other pre-Amendment guidance cited in this notice,
remains in effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. RACM
As noted, the initial moderate PM10 nonattainment areas must
submit provisions to assure that RACM (including RACT) are implemented
no later than December 10, 1993. See sections 172(c)(1) and
189(a)(1)(C). EPA's General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I
of the Clean Air Act Amendments contains a detailed discussion of EPA's
interpretation of the RACM (including RACT) requirement. See 57 FR
13540-45 and 13560-61.
As stated in EPA's General Preamble, the suggested starting point
for determining RACM for a particular area is to list all of the RACM
measures for which EPA has issued guidance under section 190 of the
Act. If a state receives substantive public comment demonstrating that
additional measures may be reasonably available, those measures should
then be added to the original list.
As noted in the Emissions Inventory section of this document, 99
percent of the PM10 nonattainment problem in the MLPA comes from
resuspended road dust/cinders and fireplaces/woodstoves. The remaining
one percent comes from motor vehicles and industrial sources. Given
this emissions inventory with limited contributions from a number of
source categories, a list of control measures was developed by the
Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District for consideration in
a draft SIP revision. Through the public hearing process, the list was
refined to form a final control strategy that provides for attainment
by the Clean Air Act deadline of December 31, 1994.
Where sources of PM10 do not contribute significantly to the
PM10 problem in an area, EPA's policy is that a state is not
reasonably required to implement potentially available control measures
for such sources (57 FR 13543). Based upon the MLPA emissions inventory
which is dominated by wood burning and road
[[Page 32343]]
dust and cinders, and the fact that the area is able to demonstrate
attainment of the PM10 NAAQS by the CAA deadline, EPA believes
that the State has provided a reasoned justification for eliminating
measures from its initial list of possible RACM. The remaining measures
are legally enforceable. Therefore, EPA has concluded that the
regulations adopted for the State's moderate area PM10 SIP
revision represent RACM as required by sections 189(a)(1)(C) and 172(c)
of the Act.
4. Control Strategy
The control strategy was developed by the GBUAPCD and the Town of
Mammoth Lakes. The final control strategy relies upon the
implementation of nine measures which were adopted as a Town Ordinance
on November 7, 1990, and added into the Mammoth Lakes Municipal Code as
Chapter 8.30, Particulate Emissions Regulations. These regulations were
subsequently adopted by the Great Basin Unified APCD as Rule 431--
Particulate Emissions--Town of Mammoth on November 6, 1991. The
regulations will reduce emissions from re-entrained road cinders, will
phase out non-certified wood burning appliances, and will institute
wood burning curtailments during periods of high PM10
concentrations. The measures adopted by the Mammoth Lakes Town Council
and subsequently adopted as Great Basin Unified APCD Rule 431 to
control PM10 emissions are summarized in the following table.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Control measures Source category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Vacuum Street Sweeper for Cinders and Road Dust/Cinders.
Road Dust.
(1) Reduce Vehicle Traffic................ Road Dust/Cinders.
(1) Institute Public Awareness Program for Wood Stoves/Fireplaces.
Wood Burning.
(1) Replace or Remove Non-certified Wood Wood Stoves/Fireplaces.
Stoves Upon Resale.
(2) Limit Installation of Woodstoves......
(1) Ban Fireplaces in New Dwellings....... Wood Stoves/Fireplaces.
(2) Require Transient Occupancy Units to
Phase Out Fireplaces.
(3) Require Fireplace Phase Out Upon
Resale of Home.
((1) Require Certification for Wood Stove Wood Stoves/Fireplaces.
Installers.
(2) Require 20% Wood Moisture Limit for
Wood Retailers.
(3) Prohibit Trash and Coal Burning in
Wood Stoves.
(4) Set 20% Opacity Limit for Wood Burning
(1) Voluntary Wood Burning Ban During Wood Stoves/Fireplaces.
Periods of Poor Air Quality.
(2) Mandatory Wood Burning Ban when NAAQS
Violation Expected.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The regulations' primary measures will result in the eventual
phasing out of all non-EPA-certified wood stoves and wood burning
fireplaces. This will be accomplished by replacing non-certified
appliances with certified wood stoves, pellet stoves, or gas log
fireplaces before the resale of a dwelling. In addition to phasing out
non-certified appliances, the Town will rely on a mandatory wood
burning curtailment. This mandatory curtailment program will initially
exempt certified wood stoves, but may include all wood burning if more
reductions are needed to attain the standard.
Road dust reduction measures include vacuum street sweeping,
reduction measures for vehicle miles travelled (VMT) for new
developments, and an overall limit of VMT in the Town of Mammoth.
Section 6 of the MLPA SIP revision and Appendix F set forth the
selected control measures and expected emissions reductions. The
controls are evaluated for two cases; Case A, a wood burning dominated
day, and Case B, a road dust and cinder dominated day. Section 5 of the
SIP revision shows that Case B, the road dust and cinder dominated day
will require the most stringent controls. The control strategy,
therefore, was selected for Case B conditions. An additional analysis
to confirm the adequacy of the strategy is included in Appendix H.
Many of the proposed control measures are interrelated, so that
reduction credits are not simple independent calculations. The SIP also
includes contingency measures such as an accelerated replacement
schedule for non-certified wood stoves and wood burning fireplaces.
However, as noted in footnote #1, contingency measures will not be
addressed in today's action. Appendix I shows the effectiveness
calculations for the regulations, including the interrelationships of
the measures, and the potential impacts of the contingency measures.
These calculations are best summarized in Appendix I, pages I-21 and I-
22.
By this document, EPA approves the control strategy.
5. RACT
The General Preamble states that generally EPA recommends that
available control technology be applied to those existing sources in
the nonattainment area that are reasonable to control in light of the
attainment needs of the area and the feasibility of such controls. The
Mammoth Lakes Planning Area contains no major point sources of
PM10, and the imposition of available control technology on other
existing sources would not expedite attainment; therefore,
implementation of available control technology (RACT) is not reasonably
required in this plan (57 FR 13543). A more detailed discussion of the
control strategy in the SIP revision can be found in the Technical
Support Document (TSD).
6. Demonstration
As noted, the initial moderate PM10 nonattainment areas must
submit a demonstration (including air quality modeling) showing that
the plan will provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable
but no later than December 31, 1994. Alternatively, the state must show
that attainment by December 31, 1994 is impracticable. See section
189(a)(1)(B) of the Act.
In order for a state to properly demonstrate attainment of the
NAAQS, the SIP control strategy must provide for attainment of each
primary ambient air quality standard. There are two primary air quality
standards for PM10, a 24-hour standard (150 g/m3),
and an annual standard (50 g/m3). The 24-hour standard is
attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-
hour average concentration above 150 g/m3 is equal to or
less than one. The annual standard is attained when the expected annual
arithmetic mean concentration is less than or equal to 50 g/
m3 (lid). See 40 CFR 50.6.
In the MLPA, peak PM10 concentrations are directly related to
the influx of visitors to the area during peak periods of the ski
season, coupled with low wind speeds. Increased particulate air
pollution and stagnant air conditions lead to air pollution episodes
with violations of the 150g/m3 24-hour standard that may
last several days or more. The MLPA has not violated the 50 g/
m3 annual average standard. California used receptor modeling coupled
with a proportional rollback model for its MLPA air quality analysis.
This analysis indicates that the 24 hour standard for PM10 can be
attained by December 31, 1994. The SIP's design value for the 24 hour
PM10 NAAQS is
[[Page 32344]]
210 g/m3, 40 percent greater than the standard. The
control strategy used to achieve attainment concentrations is
summarized in the section of this notice entitled ``Control Strategy
.''
By this notice EPA approves the State's demonstration of attainment
of the PM10 NAAQS by December 31, 1994. For a more detailed
description of the demonstration of attainment, see the TSD
accompanying this notice.
7. PM10 Precursors
The control requirements which are applicable to major stationary
sources of PM10 also apply to major stationary sources of
PM10 precursors, unless EPA determines such sources do not
contribute significantly to PM10 levels in excess of the NAAQS in
that area. See section 189(e) of the Act. An analysis of air quality
and emissions data for the MLPA indicates that exceedances of the NAAQS
are attributable chiefly to direct particulate matter emissions from
re-entrained road dust and cinders and residential woodburning. Sources
of particulate matter precursor emissions of ammonium sulfate and
ammonium nitrate contribute a negligible percentage of the total annual
emissions of PM10. Consequently, EPA finds that sources of
precursors of PM10 in the MLPA do not contribute significantly to
PM10 levels in excess of the NAAQS. The consequence of this
finding is to exclude these sources from the applicability of PM10
moderate nonattainment area control requirements. Further discussion of
the analyses and supporting rationale for EPA's finding are contained
in the TSD accompanying this notice. Note that while EPA is making a
general finding for this area, today's finding is based on the current
character of the area including, for example, the existing mix of
sources in the area. It is possible, therefore, that future growth
could change the significance of precursors in the area. EPA intends to
issue future guidance addressing such potential changes in the
significance of precursor emissions in an area.
8. Enforceability
The particular control measures contained in the SIP revision for
the MLPA are addressed above under the section entitled ``Control
Strategy.'' These control measures apply to the types of PM10
emission sources identified in that discussion, predominantly road dust
and cinders and residential wood burning.
All measures and other elements in the SIP must be enforceable by
EPA and the State. See sections 172(c)(6), 110(a)(2)(A) and 57 FR
13556. The EPA criteria addressing the enforceability of SIPs and SIP
revisions are stated in a September 23, 1987 memorandum (with
attachments) from J. Craig Potter, Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, et al. See 57 FR 13541. The TSD for this notice contains
detailed information on enforceability requirements including
applicability, the source types subject to the rules, compliance
schedules as appropriate, and reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
In addition to meeting the enforceability requirements of the Act
and EPA guidance, nonattainment area plan provisions must also contain
a program that provides for enforcement of the control measures and
other elements in the SIP. See sections 110(a)(2)(C) and 172(c)(7).
Moreover, where the State relies on a local or regional government
agency for implementing any plan provision, the State has the
responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of that provision.
See section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii).
The State of California has a program that will ensure that the
measures contained in the SIP revision are adequately enforced. Primary
enforcement of the RACM rules will be under the jurisdiction of the
Great Basin Unified APCD and the Town of Mammoth Lakes.
Under section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii) of the Act, the State must also
provide necessary assurances that the State has responsibility for
ensuring adequate implementation of these plan provisions. The State
has the authority to take legal action against the District if the
State determines that the District is not carrying out its enforcement
responsibilities.
III. Implications of Today's Action
EPA approves the moderate nonattainment area PM10 plan
revision submitted to EPA for the Mammoth Lakes Planning Area on
September 11, 1991, and amended on January 9, 1992. The State of
California has demonstrated that the MLPA can practicably attain the
PM10 NAAQS by December 31, 1994.
As noted, additional submittals for the initial moderate PM10
nonattainment areas were due at later dates. EPA will determine the
adequacy of any such submittal as appropriate.
EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal
Register publication, EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision
should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be
effective August 23, 1996 unless by July 24, 1996, adverse or critical
comments are received.
If EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn before
the effective date by publishing a subsequent final rule that will
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this
action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is
advised that this action will be effective on August 23, 1996.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et. seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C 603 and 604.
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit
enterprises, and government entities with jurisdiction over populations
of less than 50,000.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the
Clean Air Act do not create any new requirements, but simply approve
requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the
federal SIP approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify
that it does not have a significant impact on small entities affected.
Moreover, due to the nature of the federal-state relationship under the
Clean Air Act, preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would
constitute federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state
action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning
SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246,
256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. section 7410 (a)(2).
V. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22,
1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed
or final rules that include a Federal Mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to
state, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
Through submission of the state implementation plan or plan
revisions
[[Page 32345]]
approved in this action, the State and any affected local governments
have elected to adopt the program provided for under Title I and
sections 110, 172, 189, and 190 of the Clean Air Act. The rules and
commitments approved in this action may bind state and local
governments to perform certain actions and also may ultimately lead to
the private sector being required to perform certain duties. To the
extent that the rules and commitments being approved by this action
will impose or lead to the imposition of any mandate upon the state or
local governments either as the owner or operator of a source or as a
regulator, or would impose or lead to the imposition of any mandate
upon the private sector, EPA's action will impose no new requirements;
such sources are already subject to these requirements under State law.
Accordingly, no additional costs to State or local governments, or to
the private sector, result from this action. Therefore, EPA has
determined that this final action does not include a mandate that may
result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to the State or local
governments in the aggregate or to the private sector.
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: March 31, 1996.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator.
Subpart F of part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart F--California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c) (226) and
(228) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
* * * * *
(226) Air Quality Management Plan for the following APCD was
submitted on September 11, 1991, by the Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Air Quality Management Plan for the Mammoth Lakes PM-10
Planning Area adopted December 12, 1990.
* * * * *
(228) Air Quality Management Plans for the following APCD were
submitted on January 9, 1992, by the Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District.
(1) Revisions to the Air Quality Management Plan for Mammoth Lakes
PM-10 Planning Area adopted November 6, 1991.
(i) Rule 431 adopted November 6, 1991.
(ii) Town of Mammoth Lakes Municipal Code Chapter 8.30 dated
October 2, 1991.
[FR Doc. 96-15905 Filed 6-21-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
