Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes: Wisconsin

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52 and 81

[WI70-1-7296; FRL-5510-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation

of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes: Wisconsin

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve the Wisconsin Department of

Natural Resources (WDNR) request to redesignate Walworth County to

attainment for ozone. In addition, EPA is proposing to approve the

associated maintenance plan as a revision to the Wisconsin State

Implementation Plan (SIP).

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received by July 5,

1996.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Carlton T. Nash,

Chief, Regulation Development Section, Air Toxics and Radiation Branch

(AR-18J), United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

Copies of the State's submittal and EPA's analysis (Technical

Support Document) are available for inspection at the following

location: United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air

and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois

60604. (It is recommended that you telephone Randy Robinson at (312)

353-6713 before visiting the Region 5 Office.)

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Randy Robinson at (312) 353-6713.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

In accordance with requirements of the Clean Air Act Amendments of

1990 (ACT), Walworth County was designated as a marginal ozone

nonattainment area on November 6, 1991, (56 FR 56850). The

nonattainment designation was based on air quality monitored violations

of the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

Recent air quality data shows that Walworth County is not in

violation of the ozone NAAQS. Therefore, the area is eligible for

redesignation to attainment based on a minimum of 3 years of ``clean''

air quality data, as required in the Act. On December 15, 1995, the

WDNR submitted a request for redesignation to attainment and a

maintenance plan for ozone for Walworth County. The remainder of this

notice will discuss the regulatory requirements for redesignation to

attainment, the details of the Wisconsin submittal, and EPA's

rulemaking action.

II. Redesignation Review Criteria

The Act provide the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment

area to attainment. Specifically, Section 107(d)(3)(E) provides for

redesignation if: (i) The Administrator determines that the area has

attained the NAAQS; (ii) The Administrator has fully approved the

applicable implementation plan for the area under section 110(k); (iii)

The Administrator determines that the improvement in air quality is due

to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from

implementation of the applicable implementation plan and applicable

Federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent and

enforceable reductions; (iv) The Administrator has fully approved a

maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of Section

175(A); and (v) The State containing such area has met all requirements

applicable to the area under Section 110 and Part D.

The EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble

for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of

1990 (General Preamble), 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992), supplemented at

57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992). Three key memoranda provide further

guidance with respect to Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Act. The first,

dated September 4, 1992, was issued by John Calcagni, Director, Air

Quality Management Division, Subject: Procedures for Processing

Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment (Calcagni Memorandum). The

second, dated September 17, 1993, was issued by Michael Shapiro, Acting

Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, Subject: State

Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Area Submitting Requests for

Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) NAAQS

on or after November 15, 1992, (Shapiro Memorandum). The third, dated

October 14, 1994, was issued by Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator

for Air and Radiation, Subject: Part D New Source Review Requirements

for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment (Nichols Memorandum).

Analysis of State Submittal

A. The Area must have attained the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality

Standard

For ozone, an area may be considered attaining the NAAQS if there

are no violations, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR Sec. 50.9,

based on 3 complete, consecutive calendar years of quality assured

monitoring data. The data that are used should be the product of

ambient monitoring that is representative of the area believed to have

the highest concentration. A violation of the NAAQS occurs when the

annual average number of expected daily exceedances is equal to or

greater than 1 at any site under consideration. A daily exceedance

occurs when the maximum hourly ozone concentration during a given day

exceeds 0.124 parts per million (ppm). The data should be collected and

quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR Part 58, and recorded in the

Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS).

Walworth County contains one ozone monitor, located in Lake Geneva,

Wisconsin. To demonstrate monitored attainment with the standard, the

WDNR submitted ozone monitoring data for the April 15 through October

15 ozone season for 1992, 1993, and 1994.

Monitored Ozone Concentrations

[Parts per billion]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

County Year 1st High 2nd High 3rd High 4th High

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Walworth................................................. 1992 120 101 97 96

1993 107 93 91 89

[[Page 28542]]

1994 98 94 91 84

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The annual average expected exceedance for this 3-year time period

is 0.0. No violations were recorded during this 3-year time period.

Additionally, no exceedances were recorded during the 1995 ozone

monitoring season. This data has been quality assured and is recorded

in AIRS.

B. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved State Implementation Plan (SIP)

Under Section 110(k); and the Area Must Have Met All Applicable

Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D

In November 1991, Walworth County was designated marginal

nonattainment for ozone based on monitored ozone violations occurring

in 1988. As a result of this designation, the WDNR was required to

submit a revised SIP that meets the requirements of the Act and

demonstrates attainment with the ozone standards.

Section 110: General Requirements for Implementation Plans. Section

110(a)(2) of the Act lists the elements to be included in each SIP

after adoption by the State and reasonable notice and public hearing.

The elements include, but are not limited to, provisions for

establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems,

and procedures necessary to monitor ambient air quality; implementation

of a permit program, provisions for Part C Prevention of Significant

Deterioration (PSD) and D New Source Review (NSR) permit programs,

criteria for stationary source emission control measures, monitoring,

and reporting, provisions for modeling, and provisions for public and

local agency participation. For purposes of redesignation, the Walworth

County SIP was reviewed to ensure that all requirements under the

amended Act were satisfied. The EPA has determined that the Walworth

County SIP is consistent with the requirements of Section 110 of the

Act.

Part D: General Provisions for Nonattainment Areas. Before Walworth

County may be redesignated as attainment, it must have fulfilled the

applicable requirements of Part D. Under Part D, an area's

classification determines the requirements to which it is subject.

Subpart 1 of Part D sets forth the basic nonattainment requirements

applicable to all nonattainment areas. Subpart 2 of Part D establishes

additional requirements for ozone nonattainment areas classified under

table 1 of Section 181(a). As described in the General Preamble,

specific requirements of Subpart 2 may override Subpart 1's general

provisions (57 FR 13501 (April 16, 1992)). Walworth County was

classified as a marginal nonattainment area. Therefore, in order to be

redesignated, the State must meet the applicable requirements of

Subpart 1 of Part D--specifically Sections 172 and 176, as well as the

applicable requirements of Subpart 2 of Part D.

Section 172 Requirements. The State redesignation request for

Walworth County has satisfied all of the relevant submittal

requirements under Section 172 necessary for the area to be

redesignated to attainment.

The reasonable further progress (RFP) requirement under Section

172(c)(2) is defined as progress that must be made toward attainment.

This requirement is not relevant because Walworth County has already

demonstrated monitored attainment of the ozone NAAQS (General Preamble,

57 FR 13564).

Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a

comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions. The

requirement was superseded by the inventory requirement in Section

182(a)(1). The WDNR submitted such an inventory on November 15, 1992.

It was approved on June 15, 1994 (59 FR 30702).

Section 172(c)(5) requires permits for the construction and

operation of new and modified major stationary sources anywhere in the

nonattainment area. The WDNR submitted information on nonattainment

area new source review rules on November 15, 1992. The rules were

approved by EPA on January 18, 1995 (60 FR 3538 ). The State's

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program will become

effective in Walworth County upon redesignation to attainment. The

State was delegated the PSD program on November 4, 1987.

Section 176 Conformity Requirements. Section 176 of the Clean Air

Act requires States to revise their SIPs to establish criteria and

procedures to ensure that, before they are taken, Federal actions

conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable State SIP.

The requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation

plans, programs and projects developed, funded or approved under Title

23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act (``transportation conformity''),

as well as to all other Federal actions (``general conformity'').

Section 176 further provides that the conformity revision to be

submitted by the States must be consistent with Federal conformity

regulations that the Act required the EPA to promulgate. Congress

provided for the State revisions to be submitted 1 year after the date

of promulgation of final EPA conformity regulations.

The EPA promulgated final transportation conformity regulations on

November 24, 1993, (58 FR 62188) and general conformity regulations on

November 30, 1993, (58 FR 63214). Pursuant to Section 51.396 of the

transportation conformity rule and Section 51.851 of the general

conformity rule, the State of Wisconsin submitted a SIP revision

containing transportation and general conformity criteria and

procedures on November 23, 1994, and November 30, 1994, respectively.

The EPA has not yet approved these rules as part of the SIP.

The EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity

requirements as not being applicable requirements for purposes of

evaluating the redesignation request under Section 107(d). The

rationale for this is based on a combination of two factors. First, the

requirement to submit SIP revisions to comply with the conformity

provisions of the Act continues to apply to areas after redesignation

to attainment, since such areas would be subject to a Section 175A

maintenance plan. Second, EPA's Federal conformity rules require the

performance of conformity analyses in the absence of federally approved

State rules. Therefore, because areas are subject to the conformity

requirements regardless of whether they are redesignated to attainment

and must implement conformity under Federal rules if State rules are

not yet approved, the EPA believes it is reasonable to view these

requirements as not being applicable requirements for purposes of

evaluation of a redesignation request. Consequently, the ozone

redesignation request for the Walworth County area may be approved

notwithstanding the lack of fully approved State

[[Page 28543]]

transportation and general conformity rules. This policy was also

exercised in the Tampa, Florida ozone redesignation finalized on

December 7, 1995 (60 FR 62748).

Subpart 2 Section 182 Requirements. Walworth County is classified

marginal nonattainment; therefore, Part D, Subpart 2, Section 182(a)

requirements apply. In accordance with guidance presented in the

Shapiro memorandum, the requirements which came due prior to the

submission of the request to redesignate the Walworth County area must

be fully approved into the SIP before the request to redesignate the

area to attainment can be approved. Those requirements are discussed

below:

Section 182(a)(1) 1990 Base Year Inventory. The 1990 base year

emission inventory was due on November 15, 1992. It was submitted to

EPA on November 15, 1992, and approved by EPA on June 15, 1994, (59 FR

30702).

Section 182(a)(3)(B) Emission Statements. The emission statements

SIP was due on November 15, 1992. It was submitted to the EPA on

November 15, 1992, and approved by EPA on December 6, 1993 (58 FR

64155).

Section 182(a)(2)(A) RACT Corrections. The WDNR submitted

information regarding RACT corrections on November 15, 1992. The EPA

approved the RACT corrections on August 15, 1994 (59 FR 41709).

Section 182(a)(4) 1.1 to 1.0 Offset. Section 182(a)(4) requires all

major new sources or modifications in a marginal nonattainment area to

achieve offsetting reductions of VOCs at a ratio of at least 1.1 to 1.0

as part of New Source Review (NSR). The Mary Nichols memorandum states

that areas being redesignated need not comply with the requirement that

an NSR program be approved prior to redesignation if the State can

demonstrate maintenance of the standard without the NSR restrictions.

The State has demonstrated that maintenance can be maintained without

NSR offsets in effect. Therefore, this requirement is not applicable.

Upon redesignation to attainment, the sources will become subject to

PSD requirements and offsets will no longer apply. Emissions will

continue to be tracked every 3 years.

Section 182(f) NOX Requirement. Section 182(f) establishes

NOX requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. However, it

provides that these requirements do not apply to an area if the

Administrator determines that NOX reductions would not contribute

to attainment. On July 13, 1994, WDNR submitted, along with the other

Lake Michigan area states (i.e., Illinois, Indiana, and Michigan), a

Section 182(f) NOX petition to be relieved of the Section 182(f)

NOX requirements based on urban airshed modeling. The modeling

demonstrated that NOX reductions would not contribute to

attainment of the NAAQS for ozone in the modeled area, which includes

Walworth County. The EPA approved the petition on January 26, 1996 (61

FR 2428).

C. The Improvement in Air Quality Must Be Due to Permanent and

Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting From the SIP, Federal

Measures and Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions

The State must be able to reasonably attribute the improvement in

air quality to emission reductions which are permanent and enforceable.

To satisfy this requirement, the State should estimate the percent

reduction from the year that it used to determine the design value for

designation and classification, to the attainment year (Calcagni

Memorandum). These reductions may be achieved from Federal measures and

control measures that have been adopted and implemented by the State.

Emission rates, production capacities and other information should be

used in the estimation. Sources should be assumed to operate at

permitted or historic peak levels unless evidence is presented that

such an assumption is unrealistic.

The WDNR submittal documents reductions in VOC and NOX

emissions from 1988 (the design year) to 1993 (the attainment year).

Those reductions are shown in the tables below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sector 1988 1990 1993

------------------------------------------------------------------------

VOC Emissions (Tons per day):

Point...................... 1.48 1.51 1.55

Area....................... 7.53 7.58 7.63

Mobile..................... 13.87 12.14 9.59

----------------------------------------

Totals................. 22.88 21.23 18.77

========================================

% Change from 1988 (design

year)..................... ........... -7.17 -17.9

------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sector 1988 1990 1993

------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOX Emissions (Tons per day):

Point...................... 0.53 0.54 0.55

Area....................... 0.77 0.79 0.73

Mobile..................... 12.07 11.89 11.60

----------------------------------------

Totals................. 13.37 13.22 12.88

========================================

% Change from 1988 (design

year)..................... ........... -1.1 -3.7

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The tables show that VOC and NOX emissions decreased 4.1 and

0.49 tons per day, respectively from 1988 to 1993. The 1988 emissions

in the above Tables were back casted from 1990 base year emissions,

according to variables such as population growth, economic growth, and

vehicle miles traveled. Although Walworth County experienced economic

and population growth during the years 1988 to 1993, county-wide VOC

and NOX decreased during that time period. The majority of the

reductions are due to lower highway motor vehicle emissions. These

reductions are directly attributable to the implementation of the

Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP).

[[Page 28544]]

D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Meeting the

Requirements of Section 175A

Section 175A of the CAA defines requirements for maintenance plans.

The maintenance plan is a SIP revision which provides for maintenance

of the relevant NAAQS in the area for at least 10 years after

redesignation. There are five core provisions which the maintenance

plan should address: the attainment inventory, maintenance

demonstration, monitoring network, verification of continued

attainment, and a contingency plan. The attainment inventory should

identify the level of emissions in the area which is sufficient to

attain the ozone NAAQS and should include the emissions during the time

period associated with the monitoring data showing attainment.

Maintenance is demonstrated by showing that future emissions will not

exceed the level of the attainment inventory. The maintenance plan must

also provide for continued operation of an appropriate air quality

monitoring network to verify attainment status of the area. The plan

must indicate how the State will track the progress of the maintenance

plan. Finally, the maintenance plan must include contingency measures

which would promptly correct any violation of the ozone NAAQS that

occurs after redesignation of the area to attainment.

Attainment Inventory. The Walworth County submittal contained

inventories of 1990 actual VOC and NOX emissions from stationary,

area, and mobile sources. This is the most accurate, comprehensive

emission inventory available for the area. The 1990 emission inventory

was projected to 1993 to provide an emissions inventory representative

of attainment conditions based upon the lack of a monitored ozone

violation for the years 1992-1994.

Maintenance Demonstration. The Walworth County submittal shows

projected VOC and NOX emissions from the 1993 attainment inventory

to 2007. The projections show that the level of emissions established

for the attainment year inventory will not be exceeded over the 10-year

maintenance period. The following tables list the VOC, and NOX

emissions for the base year, interim year and the final year.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sector 1993 attain 1996 proj. 2007 proj.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary of VOC Emissions (tons/

day):

Area......................... 7.62 7.37 7.37

Point........................ 1.55 1.60 1.79

Mobile....................... 9.59 9.39 8.00

--------------------------------------

Totals................... 18.77 18.36 17.16

======================================

% Change from 1993........... ........... -2.18 -8.58

Summary of NOX Emissions (tons/

day):

Area......................... 0.73 0.73 0.66

Point........................ 0.55 0.57 0.64

Mobile....................... 11.60 11.39 10.19

--------------------------------------

Totals................... 12.88 12.68 11.48

======================================

% Change from 1993........... ........... -1.60 -10.87

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Emission Projections. All emission projections were made from

emissions calculated for WDNR's 1990 base year inventory. The 1990 base

year inventory reflects tons per typical summer day emissions as well

as an 80 percent rule effectiveness assumption. Projections were

generally based on the following equation: Proj. Emissions = 1990

Emissions*Proj. Factor*(1-(Cont. Efficiency)*(RE)*(RP)) where RE = rule

effectiveness (default = 80 percent) and RP = rule penetration.

Projections of stationary source emissions through the year 2007

were developed based primarily on economic growth projection factors.

The annual growth factors were derived from this data and those growth

factors were used to determine future year inventories. The area source

emissions were projected using a variety of growth factors such as

population growth, gasoline market, vehicle miles traveled, farmland,

etc. To project future year mobile VOC emissions, a VMT growth rate of

2.7 percent was used for the period between 1988 and 1999. The VMT

growth rate for 2000 to 2007 drops to 2.2 percent. These estimates were

provided by the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission.

The MOBILE5a model was run to produce emission factors for the years

1988, 1990, 1993, 1996, and 2007.

Monitoring Network. There is currently one monitor measuring ozone

in Walworth County. The WDNR has committed to continue operating and

maintaining its ozone monitor in Walworth County for the 10 year

maintenance period to verify the attainment status of the area.

Contingency Plan. The contingency plan for Walworth County contains

three major components: attainment tracking, contingency measures, and

a mechanism that triggers the implementation of the contingency

measures. In a SIP revision submittal dated April 12, 1996, the State

revised the section of the redesignation request pertaining to the

triggering and implementation of the contingency plan. As discussed

below, the revisions incorporate EPA review and approval, and public

review and comment procedures into the contingency plan methodology.

The WDNR will the track the progress of the maintenance plan for

Walworth County by generating VOC and NOX emissions inventories for

point, area, and mobile sources for the years 1996, 1999, 2002, 2005,

and 2007.

The contingency measures to be considered for implementation are

Stage II vapor recovery and non-CTG RACT measures. Selection of the

contingency measures will take place in the event the ozone NAAQS is

violated and if an EPA approved analysis shows that emission sources

within Walworth County caused the violation. This analysis is being

conducted because the State has maintained that the level of ozone in

Walworth County is due to ozone and ozone precursors being transported

from upwind urbanized areas such as the greater Chicago area. Both the

sudy protocol and the completed analysis will be submitted to EPA for

approval. The completed analysis will be subject to public comment. If

the analysis shows the violation not to be attributable to

[[Page 28545]]

transport from other areas, contingency measures will be implemented

according to the following schedule:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Activity Completion time

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Violation of the ozone NAAQS:

Verify violation and submit plan to 60 days after violation

analyze violation to EPA for approval. measurement.

Submit completed analysis, public 14 months after violation

notice and comment material to EPA measurement.

for approval.

Implement Stage II vapor recovery..... 24 months after violation.

Non-CTG RACT measures................. 24 months after violation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Walworth County submittal adequately addresses the five basic

components which comprise a maintenance plan (attainment inventory,

maintenance demonstration, monitoring network, verification of

continued attainment, and a contingency plan) and, therefore, satisfies

the maintenance plan requirement in Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv).

E. The Area Must Have Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110

and Part D

Section 110 and Part D requirements were discussed under section II

B, above.

III. Proposed Action

The EPA is proposing to approve WDNR's December 15, 1995, request

for redesignation to attainment for ozone and Section 175A maintenance

plan for Walworth County.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing

or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any

SIP. The EPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP in

light of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

Ozone SIPs are designed to satisfy the requirements of Part D of

the Act and to provide for attainment and maintenance of the ozone

NAAQS. This proposed redesignation should not be interpreted as

authorizing the State to delete, alter, or rescind any of the VOC or

NOX emission limitations and restrictions contained in the

approved ozone SIP. Changes to ozone SIP VOC regulations rendering them

less stringent than those contained in the EPA approved plan cannot be

made unless a revised plan for attainment and maintenance is submitted

to and approved by EPA. Unauthorized relaxations, deletions, and

changes could result in both a finding on nonimplementation [Section

173(b) of the Clean Air Act] and in a SIP deficiency call made pursuant

to Section 110(a)(2)(H) of the Clean Air Act.

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.

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.

Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``Unfunded

Mandates Act''), 2 U.S.C. 1532, requires that the EPA prepare a

budgetary impact statement before promulgating a rule that includes a

Federal mandate that may result in expenditure by State, local, and

tribal governments, in aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100

million or more in any 1 year. Section 203, 2 U.S.C. 1533, requires the

EPA to establish a plan for obtaining input from and informing,

educating, and advising any small governments that may be significantly

or uniquely affected by the rule.

Under Section 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Act, 2 U.S.C. 1535, the

EPA must identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory

alternatives before promulgating a rule for which a budgetary impact

statement must be prepared. The EPA must select from those alternatives

the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome alternative

that achieves the objectives of the rule, unless the EPA explains why

this alternative is not selected or the selection of this alternative

is inconsistent with law.

Because this proposed rule is estimated to result in the

expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments or the private

sector of less then $100 million in any 1 year, the EPA has not

prepared a budgetary impact statement or specifically addressed the

selection of the least costly, most cost-effective, or least burdensome

alternative. Because small governments will not be significantly or

uniquely affected by this rule, the EPA is not required to develop a

plan with regard to small governments.

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 any 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 the State action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to

base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v.

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (1976).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Motor vehicle pollution, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic

compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Dated: May 13, 1996.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96-14118 Filed 6-4-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P