95-22958. Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Approval of the Carbon Monoxide Implementation Plan Submitted by the State of Connecticut Pursuant to Sections 186-187 and 211(m)  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 179 (Friday, September 15, 1995)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 47907-47911]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-22958]
    
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 52
    
    [CT26-1-7198; A-1-FRL-5296-4]
    
    
    Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
    Approval of the Carbon Monoxide Implementation Plan Submitted by the 
    State of Connecticut Pursuant to Sections 186-187 and 211(m)
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
    
    ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The EPA proposes approval of the State implementation plans 
    (SIP) submitted by the State of Connecticut for the purpose of bringing 
    about the attainment of the national ambient air quality standard 
    (NAAQS) for carbon monoxide (CO). The implementation plans were 
    submitted by the State to satisfy the requirements of Sections 
    187(a)(2)(A), 187(a)(3), 187(a)(7) and 211(m) of the Clean Air Act for 
    an approvable nonattainment area CO SIP for Connecticut's portion of 
    the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut CO nonattainment area. This action 
    is being taken under Section 110 of the Act. The rationale for the 
    approval is set in this document, additional information is available 
    at the address indicated below.
    
    DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by 
    October 16, 1995.
    
    ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Susan S. Studlien, Director, Air, 
    Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental 
    Protection Agency, Region I, JFK Federal Bldg. (AAA), Boston, MA 02203. 
    Copies of the state's submittal and EPA's technical support document 
    are available for inspection during normal business hours, by 
    appointment at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Jerry 
    Kurtzweg, ANR-443, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460; the Air, 
    Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental 
    Protection Agency, Region I, One Congress Street, 10th floor, Boston, 
    MA 02203; and the Bureau of Air Management, Department of Environmental 
    Protection, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Damien F. Houlihan, (617) 565-3266, of 
    the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Boston, MA.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 12, 1993, January 14, 1993, April 
    7, 1994, and August 1, 1995, the Connecticut Department of 
    Environmental Protection (DEP) submitted a revision to its State 
    Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality. The revision is designed to 
    satisfy the requirements of Sections 187(a)(2)(A), 187(a)(3), 187(a)(7) 
    and 211(m) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA).
    
    I. Background
    
        The air quality planning requirements for moderate CO nonattainment 
    areas are set out in Sections 186-187 and Section 211(m) of the Clean 
    Air Act (Act) Amendments of 1990 (CAAA). These requirements pertain to 
    the classification of CO nonattainment areas and to the submission 
    requirements of the SIP's for these areas, respectively. The EPA has 
    issued a ``General Preamble'' describing EPA's preliminary views on how 
    EPA intends to review SIP's and SIP revisions submitted under Title I 
    of the Act. 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 proposal and the supporting rationale. In today's 
    rulemaking action on the Connecticut CO SIP, EPA is proposing to apply 
    its interpretations taking into consideration the specific factual 
    issues presented. Thus, EPA will consider any timely submitted comments 
    before taking final action on today's proposal.
        Those States containing CO nonattainment areas with design values 
    greater than 12.7 parts per million (ppm) were required to submit, 
    among other things, a State Implementation Plan revision, by November 
    15, 1992, that contains a forecast of VMT in the nonattainment area for 
    each year before the year in which the SIP projects the NAAQS for CO to 
    be attained and an attainment demonstration such that the plan will 
    provide for attainment by December 31, 1995 for moderate CO 
    nonattainment areas. The SIP revision is also required to provide for 
    annual 
    
    [[Page 47908]]
    updates of the VMT forecasts along with annual reports regarding the 
    extent to which the forecasts proved to be accurate. In addition, these 
    annual reports must contain estimates of actual VMT in each year for 
    which a forecast was required. The attainment demonstration must 
    include a SIP control strategy, which is also due by November 15, 1992. 
    The SIP control strategy for a given nonattainment area must be 
    designed to ensure that the area meets the specific annual emissions 
    reductions necessary for reaching attainment by the deadline. In 
    addition, section 187(a)(3) requires these areas to implement 
    contingency measures if any estimate of actual vehicle miles travelled 
    (VMT) or any updated VMT forecast for the area contained in an annual 
    report for any year prior to attainment exceeds the number predicted in 
    the most recent VMT forecast. Contingency measures are also triggered 
    by failure to attain the NAAQS for CO by the attainment deadline. 
    Contingency measures must be submitted with the CO SIP by November 15, 
    1992. In addition, Section 211(m) of the Act requires a SIP revision 
    containing a provision to require that after November 1, 1992, any 
    gasoline sold, or dispensed, to the ultimate consumer in the CO 
    nonattainment area be blended to contain not less than 2.7 percent 
    oxygen by weight during the portion of the year in which the area is 
    prone to high ambient CO levels.
        Section 187(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 
    required EPA, in consultation with the U.S. Department of 
    Transportation (DOT), to develop guidance for states to use in 
    complying with the VMT forecasting and tracking provisions of Section 
    187. A Notice of Availability for the resulting Section 187 VMT 
    Forecasting and Tracking Guidance was published in the Federal Register 
    on March 19, 1992.
        The Section 187 Guidance identifies the Federal Highway 
    Administration's Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) as the 
    foundation for VMT estimates and forecasts. To develop growth factors 
    for forecasting VMT, the Section 187 Guidance offers as one alternative 
    the use of network-based travel demand models. If these models are 
    properly updated and validated, and if they use an equilibrium approach 
    to allocating trips, they are considered to be the best predictor of 
    growth factors for VMT forecasts.
        When determining that actual annual VMT or a VMT forecast has 
    exceeded the most recent prior forecast and, therefore, that 
    contingency measures should be implemented, EPA believes that it is 
    appropriate to take into account the statistical variability in the 
    estimates of VMT generated through HPMS. Consequently, EPA has 
    identified a margin of error to be applied when making VMT comparisons. 
    With the expectation that HPMS sampling procedures will improve over 
    the next few years in response to recent FHWA guidance, the margin of 
    error starts at 5.0 percent for VMT comparisons made in 1994, becomes 
    4.0 percent for VMT comparisons made in 1995, and is reduced to 3.0 
    percent for VMT comparisons made in 1996 and thereafter. However, since 
    each revised VMT forecast becomes the VMT baseline for triggering 
    contingency measures, the application of a margin of error every year 
    could allow the forecasts to increase without bound, without ever 
    triggering contingencies. To prevent this occurrence, EPA believes it 
    is appropriate to allow the application of the margin of error only as 
    long as, cumulatively, neither an estimate of actual VMT nor a VMT 
    forecast ever exceed by more than 5.0 percent the VMT forecast relied 
    upon in the area's attainment demonstration.
        EPA interprets the requirement for contingency measures to ``take 
    effect without further action by the State or the Administrator'' to 
    mean that no further rulemaking activities by the State or EPA would be 
    needed to implement the measures. The General Preamble for the 
    Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 
    published in the Federal Register on April 16, 1992, offers guidance on 
    the type and size of contingencies to be included in the SIP revision. 
    This guidance is advisory in nature and is non-binding. (See the 
    Federal Register, April 16, 1992, Volume 57, Number 74, pages 13532 and 
    13533.)
        Section 110(k) of the Act sets out provisions governing EPA's 
    review of SIP submittals (see 57 FR 13565-66). The State of Connecticut 
    submitted SIP revisions to EPA on January 12, 1993, January 14, 1993, 
    April 7, 1994, and August 1, 1995 in order to satisfy the requirements 
    of Sections 186-187 and 211(m) of the Act. In order to gain approval, 
    the State submittals must provide for each of the following mandatory 
    elements: (1) a forecast of VMT in the non-attainment area for each 
    year prior to the attainment year; (2) a provision for annual updates 
    of the forecasts along with a provision for annual reports describing 
    the extent to which the forecasts proved to be accurate; these reports 
    shall provide estimates of actual VMT in each year for which a forecast 
    was required; (3) adopted and enforceable contingency measures to be 
    implemented without further action by the State or the Administrator if 
    actual annual VMT or an updated forecast exceeds the most recent prior 
    forecast or if the area fails to attain the CO NAAQS by the attainment 
    date; (4) Attainment Demonstration with Control Strategies and (5) a 
    provision to require that any gasoline sold, or dispensed, to the 
    ultimate consumer in the CO nonattainment area be blended to contain 
    not less than 2.7 percent oxygen by weight during the portion of the 
    year in which the area is prone to high ambient CO levels.
    
    II. Analysis
    
        In today's action EPA proposes to approve Connecticut's CO SIP 
    submittal for the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT CO nonattainment 
    area and invites public comment on the action. The following items are 
    the basis for approval of the SIP revision. Connecticut has met the 
    requirements of Section 186-187 and 211(m) of the Act by submitting SIP 
    revisions that implement all required elements as discussed below. The 
    state implementation plans submitted by Connecticut on January 12, 
    1993, January 14, 1993, April 7, 1994, and August 1, 1995, collectively 
    meet the requirements for those particular revisions to the SIP for the 
    Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT Moderate (greater than 12.7 ppm) CO 
    nonattainment area as set forth in Sections 187(a)(2)(A), 187(a)(3), 
    187(a)(7) and 211(m) of the Act.
    
    1. VMT Forecasts
    
        Section 187(a)(2)(A) requires that the State include in its SIP 
    submittal a forecast of VMT in the nonattainment area for each year 
    before the year in which the SIP projects the National Ambient Air 
    Quality Standard for CO to be attained. The forecasts are to be based 
    on guidance developed by EPA in consultation with DOT, i.e., the 
    Section 187 VMT Forecasting and Tracking Guidance. Connecticut has 
    satisfied this requirement with their January 12, 1993 and April 7, 
    1994 SIP submittals which include VMT forecasts beginning with the year 
    1993 and including all subsequent years up to the year of attainment 
    (1995). The forecasts were projected using an annual growth factor of 
    two percent as determined from Connecticut's network-based travel 
    demand model. This model is properly updated and validated and uses an 
    equilibrium approach to allocating trips, therefore, it is considered 
    to be the best 
    
    [[Page 47909]]
    predictor of growth factors for VMT forecasts in Connecticut and was 
    used appropriately as set forth in the Section 187 VMT Forecasting and 
    Tracking Guidance.
    2. Annual VMT Updates/Reports
    
        Section 187(a)(2)(A) specifies that the SIP revision provide for 
    annual updates of the VMT forecasts and annual reports that describe 
    the accuracy of the forecasts and that provide estimates of actual VMT 
    in each year for which a forecast was required. The Section 187 VMT 
    Forecasting and Tracking Guidance specifies that annual reports should 
    be submitted to EPA by September 30 of the year following the year for 
    which the VMT estimate is made. Connecticut satisfied this requirement 
    with their January 12, 1993 and April 7, 1994 SIP submittals.
    
    3. Contingency Measures
    
        Section 187(a)(3) specifies that the State, in its SIP revision, 
    adopt specific, enforceable contingency measures to be implemented if 
    the annual estimate of actual VMT or a subsequent VMT forecast exceeds 
    the most recent prior forecast of VMT or if the area fails to attain 
    the CO NAAQS by the attainment date. Implementation of the identified 
    contingency measures must not require further rulemaking activities by 
    the State or EPA. Certain actions, such as notification of sources, 
    would probably be needed before a measure could be implemented 
    effectively. Connecticut has satisfied this requirement with their 
    January 12, 1993 and April 7, 1994 SIP submittals which include 
    contingency measures to be implemented if the annual estimate of actual 
    VMT or a subsequent VMT forecast exceeds the most recent prior forecast 
    of VMT or if the area fails to attain the CO NAAQS by the attainment 
    date. Connecticut has demonstrated that expanded implementation of an 
    enhanced inspection and maintenance program, beyond what is required in 
    57 CFR 52950, will provide CO emission reductions to counteract the 
    effect of one years growth in VMT.
        Although implementation of an enhanced I/M program is required in 
    the urbanized area of Connecticut's portion of the NY-NJ-CT CO 
    nonattainment area, Connecticut has demonstrated that requiring 
    vehicles traveling within the nonattainment area, but originating 
    outside the urbanized area, to meet the CO performance standard of the 
    enhanced I/M program, will result in CO emission reductions which 
    offset the CO emissions attributable to a two percent growth (one years 
    growth) of the projected 1995 VMT in the area. The legal authority for 
    the implementation of the enhanced I/M program was passed by the 
    General Assembly of the State of Connecticut in Public Act 90-312 which 
    took effect on July 1, 1993. Connecticut further demonstrated that if 
    the area does not attain the CO standard by the December 31, 1995 
    attainment date, the state is committed to implementing the Employee 
    Commute Option in the nonattainment area, which will provide reductions 
    in VMT to offset the anticipated growth in VMT from 1994 to the 
    attainment year of 1995. The Connecticut Legislature has effectively 
    authorized implementation of the ECO program through the promulgation 
    Public Act 93-334 which has been codified it into the Connecticut 
    General Statutes.
    
    4. Attainment Demonstration
    
        As noted, CO nonattainment areas with design values greater than 
    12.7 parts per million (ppm) were required to submit a demonstration by 
    November 15, 1992; the plan must provide for attainment by December 31, 
    1995 for moderate CO nonattainment areas and December 31, 2000 for 
    serious CO nonattainment areas.
        To demonstrate attainment, the 1-hour and 8-hour and National 
    Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for CO are not to be exceeded 
    more than once per year. The 1-hour CO NAAQS is 35 ppm (40 mg/m \3\) 
    and the 8-hour CO NAAQS is 9 ppm (10 mg/m \3\). Connecticut has 
    satisfied this requirement with its April 7, 1994 SIP submittal in 
    which Connecticut conducted an attainment demonstration using 
    intersection modeling for a representative set of the most congested 
    intersections with high traffic volumes and the greatest potential to 
    generate high CO concentrations in the Connecticut portion of the NY-
    NJ-CT CO nonattainment area. This analysis also demonstrated that the 
    two CO monitors in downtown Bridgeport and downtown Stamford are in 
    fact sited where the local conditions result in the highest CO levels 
    in Connecticut's portion of the nonattainment area. The design value 
    for the entire NY-NJ-CT CO nonattainment area was 13.5 ppm in 1988, 
    based on monitoring data from site in Manhattan, New York. 
    Connecticut's SIP revision indicated that based solely on the two 
    monitors located in the Connecticut portion of the nonattainment area, 
    the design value for the Connecticut portion of the area would have 
    been 6.9 ppm, and these CO monitors have not monitored a violation of 
    the NAAQS since 1984. Therefore, Connecticut demonstrates that the 
    existing CO levels in the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT 
    nonattainment area are in attainment of the NAAQS and CO emissions will 
    continue to decrease throughout the attainment year of 1995 
    demonstrating continued attainment through the December 31, 1995 
    attainment date.
        The Act requires that the CO nonattainment area plan revisions 
    demonstrating attainment must contain measures which demonstrate 
    reasonable further progress through specific annual emission reductions 
    as are necessary to attain the standard by December 1995. EPA has 
    reviewed the attainment demonstration and control strategy for the area 
    to determine whether annual incremental reductions different from those 
    provided in the SIP should be required in order to ensure attainment of 
    the CO NAAQS by the applicable attainment date (see section 171(1)). 
    Connecticut has demonstrated that the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-
    CT nonattainment area is currently in attainment and although further 
    reduction in CO emissions will result from the implementation of 
    oxygenated fuels, enhanced inspection and maintenance and the Federal 
    Motor Vehicle Control Program, specific emission reductions are not 
    necessary to attain the standard by the attainment date. EPA believes 
    the implementation of these measures will assure that the area CO 
    emissions continue to decrease and therefore ensuring attainment of the 
    area in December 1995.
    
    5. Oxygenated Fuels Program
    
        Motor vehicles are significant contributors of CO emissions. An 
    important measure toward reducing these emissions is the use of 
    cleaner-burning oxygenated gasoline. Extra oxygen, contained within the 
    fuel, enhances fuel combustion and helps to offset fuel-rich operating 
    conditions, particularly during vehicle starting. Section 211(m) of the 
    CAAA requires that States with CO nonattainment areas classified as 
    moderate or above, submit state implementation plan revisions to 
    implement oxygenated gasoline programs by no later than November 1, 
    1992. The oxygenated gasoline program must require gasoline sold or 
    dispensed in the specified control area to contain not less than 2.7 
    percent oxygen by weight during that portion of the year in which the 
    area is prone to high ambient concentrations of CO (the control 
    period). EPA announced guidance on the establishment of control 
    periods, by area, in the Federal Register on October 20, 1992 which 
    also announced the availability of oxygenated gasoline credit program 
    guidelines. Under a credit program, marketable oxygen 
    
    [[Page 47910]]
    credits may be generated from the sale of gasoline with a higher oxygen 
    content than is required (i.e., an oxygen content greater than 2.7 
    percent by weight). These oxygen credits may be used to offset the sale 
    of gasoline with a lower oxygen content than is required. As an 
    alternate to the credit program, the State may elect a program in which 
    a minimum of 2.7 percent by weight oxygen must be present in every 
    gallon of gasoline sold. The EPA also issued labeling regulations under 
    section 211(m)(4) of the CAA. These labeling regulations were also 
    published in the Federal Register on October 20, 1992.
        Connecticut has satisfied the requirements of Section 211(m) with 
    their January 14, 1993, April 7, 1994, and August 1, 1995 SIP 
    submittals which contain adopted amendments and revisions to the 
    Regulation of Connecticut State Agencies (RCSA), to add Section 22a-
    174-28, which establishes an Oxygenated Fuel Program. EPA is approving, 
    in a separate direct final rulemaking notice, the oxygenated fuel 
    program, except as it applies to the Southwestern Control Area, as 
    defined in 22a-174-28. In this notice, EPA is proposing approval of the 
    definition for the Southwestern Control Area and that portion of the 
    definition of ``control period'' that applies to the Southwestern 
    Control Area. The program is one in which all oxygenated gasoline must 
    contain a minimum oxygen content of 2.7 percent by weight of oxygen. 
    Connecticut has adopted labeling regulations, enforcement procedures, 
    and oxygenate test methods in accordance with Section 211(m) of the 
    Act.
        On August 1, 1995, the State of Connecticut submitted a revision to 
    the control period for the Connecticut portion of the New Jersey/New 
    York/Connecticut CO nonattainment area changing the oxygenated fuels 
    control period to November 1 through the last day of February of each 
    year. Previously, the control period had been October 1 through April 
    30 of each year. Under Section 211(m) of the CAA, a control period must 
    be that portion of the year in which the control area is prone to high 
    ambient concentrations of CO, but no less than four months in length.
        Section 211(m)(2) requires this control period to be based on air 
    quality monitoring data and established by the EPA Administrator. EPA 
    is proposing to approve Connecticut's four-month control period for the 
    Southwestern Control Area because it is consistent with section 
    211(m)(2) and the EPA 1992 guidance.
        EPA is publishing concurrently with this notice a Notice of 
    Proposed Rulemaking to approve New York's oxygenated gasoline SIP 
    submission. That notice proposes to establish a four-month control 
    period for the New York portion of the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut 
    CO nonattainment area. Connecticut's establishment of a four-month 
    control period will be consistent with New York's four-month control 
    period.
        The setting of a four-month control period for the nonattainment 
    area is consistent with established Agency guidance (announced for 
    availability at 57 FR 47853, October 20, 1992) regarding oxygenated 
    gasoline control periods to determine the proper control period length 
    for the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut CO nonattainment area. As part 
    of the 1992 guidance document, based on air quality data from 1990 and 
    1991, EPA suggested that the proper control period for the New York-New 
    Jersey-Connecticut CO nonattainment area was October 1 through April 
    30. However, the 1992 guidance does not establish a binding norm 
    regarding control periods and provides that the determination of the 
    control period will be an issue to be finally decided by EPA as part of 
    the review of individual state SIP revisions for oxygenated gasoline 
    programs. EPA has set forth the reasons for its proposed approval of 
    the four-month control period for the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut 
    CO nonattainment area in the above-mentioned notice regarding New 
    York's oxygenated gasoline SIP revision published concurrently with 
    this notice. In that notice, EPA explains the rationale for determining 
    that the appropriate control period is from November 1 through the last 
    day of February for the entire nonattainment area. EPA believes sale of 
    gasoline oxygenated to 2.7 percent by weight during the months of 
    October, March and April is no longer necessary for adequate carbon 
    monoxide control in the entire nonattainment area. EPA will not repeat 
    the rationale provided in that notice, but rather incorporates by 
    reference the same rationale into this notice.
    
    Proposed Action
    
        The EPA is proposing to approve collectively the plan revisions 
    submitted to EPA for the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT CO 
    nonattainment area on January 12, 1993, January 14, 1993, April 7, 
    1994, and August 1, 1995. Among other things, Connecticut has 
    demonstrated that the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT CO 
    nonattainment area will continue to attain the CO NAAQS through 
    December 31, 1995, the applicable attainment date.
        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 review under Executive Order 
    12866.
        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 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.
        The CAA does 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 any small entities 
    affected. 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 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. 7410 (a)(2).
        As noted, additional submittals for the CO nonattainment areas are 
    required under Section 186 and 187 of the Act. The EPA will determine 
    the adequacy of any such submittal as appropriate. Nothing in this 
    action should be construed as permitting or allowing or establishing a 
    precedent for any future request for revision to any State 
    implementation plan. Each request for revision to the State 
    implementation plan shall be considered separately in light of specific 
    technical, economic, and environmental factors and in relation to 
    relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
        The Administrator's decision to approve or disapprove the SIP 
    revision will be based on whether it meets the requirements of Section 
    110(a)(2)(A)-(K) and 110(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act, as amended, and 
    EPA regulations in 40 CFR Part 51. 
    
    [[Page 47911]]
    
    
    Unfunded Mandates
    
        Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
    Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 25, 
    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 175A and 
    section 187(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act. The rules and commitments 
    approved in this action may bind State, local and tribal governments to 
    perform certain actions and also may ultimately lead to the private 
    sector being required to certain duties. To the extent that the 
    imposition of any mandate upon the State, local or tribal governments 
    either as the owner or operator of a source or as mandate upon the 
    private sector, EPA's action will impose no new requirements under 
    State law; such sources are already subject to these requirements under 
    State law. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal 
    governments, or to the private sector, results from this action. EPA 
    has also determined that this final 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, Carbon monoxide, 
    Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and record keeping requirements.
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
    
        Dated: August 31, 1995.
    John P. DeVillars,
    Regional Administrator, EPA-New England.
    [FR Doc. 95-22958 Filed 9-14-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    

Document Information

Published:
09/15/1995
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
Document Number:
95-22958
Dates:
Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by October 16, 1995.
Pages:
47907-47911 (5 pages)
Docket Numbers:
CT26-1-7198, A-1-FRL-5296-4
PDF File:
95-22958.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 52