Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Illinois

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[IL132-2-7237; FRL-5418-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Illinois

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is

approving Illinois' request to exempt the Chicago ozone nonattainment

area from the applicable oxides of nitrogen (NOX) transportation

conformity requirements. The Chicago ozone nonattainment area is

classified as severe nonattainment for ozone. The request is based on

the urban airshed modeling (UAM) conducted by the Lake Michigan Ozone

Control Program (LMOP) which shows that additional NOX reductions

in the Chicago area will not contribute to attainment of the ozone

standard. Approval of this NOX exemption for transportation

conformity will simplify the process of demonstrating that

transportation plans and projects will not contribute to violations of

the ozone standard. Comments received on the August 16, 1995, proposal

are addressed in this rulemaking. The continued approval of this

exemption is contingent on the results of subsequent modeling including

the final ozone attainment demonstration and plan for the Chicago

nonattainment area. This plan is expected to be submitted by mid-1997

and to incorporate the results of the Ozone Transport Assessment Group

(OTAG) process. The attainment plan will supersede the initial modeling

results as the basis for the waiver which USEPA is granting in this

notice. If the attainment plan relies on NOX controls on mobile

sources in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area to demonstrate

attainment, the NOX waiver for transportation conformity will be

reconsidered. To the extent the final plans achieve attainment of the

ozone standard without additional NOX reductions from mobile

sources, the NOX exemption would continue. USEPA's rulemaking

action to reconsider the initial NOX waiver may occur

simultaneously with rulemaking action on the attainment plans. This

NOX waiver approval does not change the transportation conformity

requirement for a NOX budget test unless the attainment SIP shows

that NOX emissions could grow without limit without threatening

attainment (as described in the November 14, 1995, amendment to the

conformity rule).

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action will be effective March 13, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are

available for inspection at the following address: U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Morris, Regulation

Development Section, Regulation Development Branch (AR-18J), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois, 60604. (312) 353-8656.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Clean Air Act section 176(c)(3)(A)(iii) requires, in order to

demonstrate conformity with the applicable State Implementation Plan

(SIP), that transportation plans and transportation improvement

programs (TIPs) contribute to emissions reductions in ozone

nonattainment areas during the period before control strategy SIPs are

approved by USEPA. This requirement is implemented in 40 CFR 51.436

through 51.440 (and 93.122 through 93.124), which establishes the so-

called ``build/no-build test.'' This test requires a demonstration that

the ``Action'' scenario (representing the implementation of the

proposed transportation plan/TIP) will result in lower motor vehicle

emissions than the ``Baseline'' scenario (representing the

implementation of the current transportation plan/TIP). In addition,

the ``Action'' scenario must result in emissions lower than 1990

levels.

The November 24, 1993, final transportation conformity rule does

not require the build/no-build test and less-than-1990 test for

NOX as an ozone precursor in ozone nonattainment areas where the

Administrator determines that additional reductions of NOX would

not contribute to attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality

Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. Clean Air Act section 176(c)(3)(A)(iii),

which is the conformity provision requiring contributions to emission

reductions before SIPs with emissions budgets can be approved,

specifically references Clean Air Act section 182(b)(1). That section

requires submission of State plans that, among other things, provide

for specific annual reductions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and

NOX emissions ``as necessary'' to attain the ozone standard by the

applicable attainment date. Section 182(b)(1) further states that its

requirements do not apply in the case of NOX for those ozone

nonattainment areas for which USEPA determines that additional

reductions of NOX would not contribute to ozone attainment.

As explained below, the USEPA thru an amendment to it's

transportation conformity rule, has changed the procedural mechanism

through which a NOX exemption from transportation conformity would

be granted. Instead of a petition under 182(f), transportation

conformity NOX exemptions for ozone nonattainment areas that are

subject to section 182(b)(1) need to be submitted as a SIP revision

request. The Chicago ozone nonattainment area is classified as severe

and, thus, is subject to section 182(b)(1).

The USEPA published on August 29, 1995, an interim final rule (60

FR 44762) which amended the transportation conformity rule and changed

the statutory authority from 182(f) to 182(b)(1) of the Act for areas

that are subject to section 182(b)(1). The interim final rule was

effective immediately upon publication and provides the means for

exempting areas subject to 182(b)(1) from NOX provisions of the

transportation conformity rule. In conjunction with the interim rule,

USEPA published a proposal providing for further amendments to the

transportation conformity rule and describing how USEPA intended to

process section 182(b)(1) NOX waivers (60 FR 44790). On November

14, 1995, the USEPA published a final rule (60 FR 57179)

[[Page 5292]]

after completing notice-and-comment rulemaking, which includes the

provisions of the August 29, 1995, interim rule. The November 14, 1995,

rule also addresses the NOX budget requirement.

The June 20, 1995, SIP revision request from Illinois, has been

submitted to meet the requirements of section 182(b)(1). A public

hearing on this SIP revision request was held on July 17, 1995. The

USEPA proposed to approve the SIP revision request on August 16, 1995,

(60 FR 42491).

The Chicago severe ozone nonattainment area includes the Counties

of Cook, DuPage, Grundy (Aux Sable and Gooselake Townships), Kane,

Kendall (Oswego Township), Lake, McHenry, and Will. In evaluating the

SIP revision request, the USEPA considered whether additional NOX

reductions would contribute to attainment of the standard in the

Chicago area and also in the downwind areas of the LMOP modeling

domain.

As outlined in relevant USEPA guidance, the use of photochemical

grid modeling is the recommended approach for testing the contribution

of NOX emission reductions to attainment of the ozone standard.

A summary of the UAM modeling and USEPA's review of the modeling

and submittal are contained in the August 16, 1995, proposed rule (60

FR 42491). Review of the modeling results show a very definite

directional signal indicating that application of NOX controls in

the Chicago ozone nonattainment area would exacerbate peak ozone

concentrations not only in the Chicago area but also in the LMOP

modeling domain. The LMOP modeling domain includes northern Indiana,

western Michigan and eastern Wisconsin. The States and the Lake

Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCo) have completed the validation

process for the UAM modeling system to be used in the demonstration of

attainment for the LMOP modeling domain.

II. Response to Comments on the Proposal

Four sets of comments were received on the proposed approval of the

NOX waiver. The Illinois Department of Transportation commented

positively on the approval of the waiver. The comments opposed to the

approval of the waiver are summarized in this section.

Comment

The State of New York is concerned by the claim that VOC only

controls reduce both peak ozone and geographic extent of ozone

exposure. Modeling in the northeast shows a need for NOX

reductions as well as VOC to reduce regional ozone. The model

assumptions are questioned: whether the Federal motor vehicle control

program (FMVCP) is assumed in future year (1996 and 2007) emission

inventories; how the transport and boundary conditions were modeled;

and how modeling across the board reductions are adequate for a

specific source category exemption.

Response

Reductions from the FMVCP were assumed for the 1996 and 2007

emissions inventories for the UAM modeling.

Several modeling and data analyses were performed by Illinois and

the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) [the technical

representatives of the States in the LMOP] to examine the relative

benefits of VOC versus NOX emission controls. The modeling

analyses included emissions sensitivity tests for several different

basecase scenarios, including: (1) An original base period emissions

inventory; (2) increased VOC emissions in the base period inventory

(higher VOC/NOX ratios); (3) increased base period VOC/NOX

ratios through either increased VOC emissions or decreased NOX

emissions; and (4) differences in photochemistry photolysis rates as

applied in the Urban Airshed Model--Version IV (UAM-IV) (the

photochemical dispersion model generally accepted and supported by the

EPA) and in UAM-V (the photochemical dispersion model approved by the

EPA for use in the LMOP).

Despite differences in the absolute and relative amounts of VOC and

NOX emissions in the sensitivity analyses, the analyses found that

the modeled domain-wide peak ozone concentration, the coverage of

modeled ozone concentrations exceeding 120 parts per billion (ppb), and

the number of hours with modeled ozone concentrations exceeding 120

ppb, decreased in response to VOC emission reductions and increased in

response to NOX emission reductions (up to more than 60 percent

controls for some episode analysis days) for all modeled episodes.

VOC and NOX emission reductions were found to produce

different impacts spatially. In and downwind of major urban areas,

within the ozone nonattainment areas, VOC reductions were effective in

lowering peak ozone concentrations, while NOX emission reductions

resulted in increased peak ozone concentrations. Farther downwind,

within attainment areas, VOC emissions reductions became less effective

for reducing ozone concentrations, while NOX emission reductions

were effective in lowering ozone concentrations. It must be noted,

however, that the magnitude of ozone decreases farther downwind due to

NOX emission reductions was less than the magnitude of ozone

increases in the ozone nonattainment areas as a result of the same

NOX emission reductions.

Analyses of ambient data by LMOP contractors provided results which

corroborated the modeling results. These analyses identified areas of

VOC- and NOX-limited conditions (VOC-limited conditions would

imply a greater sensitivity of ozone concentrations to changes in VOC

emissions. The reverse would be true for NOX-limited conditions)

and tracked the ozone and ozone precursor concentrations in the urban

plumes as they moved downwind. The analyses indicated VOC-limited

conditions in the Chicago/Northwest Indiana and Milwaukee areas and

NOX-limited conditions further downwind. These results imply that

VOC controls in the Chicago/Northwest Indiana and Milwaukee areas would

be more effective at reducing peak ozone concentrations within the

severe ozone nonattainment areas.

The consistency between the modeling results and the ambient data

analysis results for all episodes with joint data supports the view

that the UAM-V modeling system developed in the LMOP may be used to

investigate the relative merits of VOC versus NOX emission

controls. The UAM-V results for all modeled episodes point to the

benefits of VOC controls versus NOX controls in reducing the

modeled domain peak ozone concentrations.

Comment

There have been monitored violations of the ozone standard in the

Chicago nonattainment area within the past year. Therefore, a NOX

exemption for the Chicago area would seem to conflict with the intent

of the 1990 amendments to the Act.

Response

This NOX exemption is based on the UAM submittals which

demonstrate that NOX reductions will not contribute to reaching

attainment of the ozone standard by the 2007 attainment date as

required by the Act. In such circumstances, the Act explicitly provides

that the relevant area may be granted a waiver from the requirement to

adopt and implement NOX control measures.

[[Page 5293]]

Comment

NYSDEC requested additional time to better review the technical

details of the modeling performed for the Chicago area and that all

waivers be delayed until the review is complete.

Response

The LADCo modeling has been available to any interested parties

since the modeling was initiated. Further, the docket records contain

the submittal summarizing the results of the model runs conducted to

support the NOX waiver petition. These modeling results have been

available to the public since July 13, 1994, when LADCo originally

submitted the request for the USEPA to approve the NOX waiver

under section 182(f) for RACT, NSR and conformity. On March 6, 1995,

the USEPA proposed to approve the section 182(f) NOX waiver for

the Lake Michigan area. The modeling has been available as part of the

docket file for this proposed approval. Therefore, USEPA does not

believe it is appropriate to delay action on the waiver request.

Comment

NYSDEC disagrees that the NOX waiver rule should be a Table 3

action for signature by the Regional Administrator and because of the

national implications of the NOX exemption believes it should be a

Table 1 action.

Response

The NOX waiver for transportation conformity is a SIP revision

request submitted by the State of Illinois. SIP revisions have been

delegated to the Regional Administrator for signature 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. This NOX

waiver is applicable only for the purpose of relieving the need to meet

the interim transportation conformity test for the Chicago area. In

addition, the policy related to processing the NOX waivers for

transportation conformity has been coordinated at the national level.

Comment

Both Connecticut and the NYSDEC are concerned that the waiver for

Chicago will create economic hardship and a need for increased emission

reductions in the northeast.

Response

The USEPA has taken steps to assure that downwind areas will not be

negatively impacted by NOX exemptions. The USEPA intends to use

its authority under section 110(a)(2)(D) to require a State to reduce

NOX emissions from stationary and/or mobile sources where there is

evidence, such as photochemical grid modeling, showing that the

NOX emissions could contribute significantly to nonattainment in,

or interfere with maintenance by, any other State or in another

nonattainment area within the same State. This action would be

independent of any action taken by USEPA on a NOX exemption

request under section 182(f) or 182(b)(1). That is, USEPA action to

grant or deny a NOX exemption request under section 182(f) or

182(b)(1) for any area would not shield that area from USEPA action to

require NOX emission reductions, if necessary, under section

110(a)(2)(D).

Significant new modeling analyses are being conducted by LADCO,

USEPA and other agencies as part of the Ozone Transport Assessment

Group (OTAG) process. The OTAG is a consultative process among the

eastern States and USEPA. The OTAG process, which ends at the close of

1996, assesses national and regional control strategies, using improved

modeling techniques. The goal of the OTAG process is for USEPA and the

affected States to reach consensus on the additional regional and

national emissions reductions that are needed for attainment of the

ozone standard. Based on the results of the OTAG process, States are

expected to submit by mid-1997 attainment plans which show attainment

through local, regional, and national controls.

The OTAG plans to complete additional modeling between now and

September 1996 using emissions data and strategies currently being

developed among OTAG workgroups. These new analyses will improve the

information available on NOX and VOC impacts on ozone

concentrations both in the LADCO area and over the eastern half of the

United States. These analyses will for example, provide more accurate

boundary conditions for the LADCO area analyses; this provides greater

accuracy in both the attainment plan and in the decision regarding

NOX reductions contribution to attainment.

In light of the modeling completed thus far and considering the

importance of the OTAG and attainment plan modeling efforts, USEPA

grants this waiver on a contingent basis. As the OTAG modeling results

and control recommendations are completed in 1996, this information

will be incorporated into the attainment plans being developed by the

LADCO States. When these attainment plans are submitted to USEPA in

mid-1997, these new modeling analyses will be reviewed to determine if

the NOX waiver should be continued, altered or removed.

The attainment plans will supersede the initial modeling results

which are the basis for the waiver which the USEPA grants in this

notice. To the extent the attainment plans include NOX controls on

certain major stationary sources or mobile sources in the LADCO

nonattainment areas, USEPA will remove the NOX waiver for those

sources. To the extent that plans achieve attainment without additional

NOX reductions from certain sources, the NOX reductions would

be considered excess reductions and, thus, the exemption would continue

for those sources. USEPA's rulemaking action to reconsider this initial

NOX waiver may occur simultaneously with rulemaking action on the

attainment plans.

Comment

The State of Connecticut is concerned that the LADCo modeling does

not look at the larger regional issues. The USEPA Regional Oxidant

Model showed that NOX controls were necessary for large portions

of the United States to reach attainment.

Response

Direct comparisons of ROM and UAM-V results must be conducted with

caution and may produce conflicting results even though both modeling

systems are performing adequately. The UAM-V modeling system is

theoretically more complete and incorporates improved scientific

principles and more area-specific input data. ROM, on the other hand,

is a simpler modeling system with lower spatial resolution, more

uncertain emission estimates, and no special treatment of

meteorological phenomena, such as lake-breeze effects (critical factors

in the Lake Michigan area), and individual source plumes for large

sources. These differences in model formulation and data input

resolution as well as differences in output resolution may preclude

direct comparisons of the two models.

The significant new modeling analyses being conducted by LADCO,

USEPA and other agencies as part of the OTAG process will address the

issues of regional and local transport, as stated above.

Comment

The American Lung Association (ALA) and Citizens Commission for

Clean Air in the Lake Michigan Basin (CCCALMB) comment that

transportation conformity exemptions under section 182(b)(1) waive only

the

[[Page 5294]]

section 176(c)(3)(A)(iii) requirement to contribute to specific annual

reductions of NOX. NOX emissions must still be accounted for

in the modeling and thus Illinois should submit NOX emissions

budgets along with the VOC budgets in the attainment and 15 percent

plan submittals.

Response

The USEPA published a final rule amending the transportation

conformity rule on November 14, 1995, (60 FR 57179) which addresses the

issue of conformity to NOX budgets in control strategy SIPs when a

NOX waiver for transportation conformity has been approved. The

final rule is based on the August 29, 1995, (60 FR 44790) proposed rule

and comments which were received on that proposal. The final rule

requires consistency with NOX motor vehicle emissions budgets in

control strategy SIPs regardless of whether a NOX waiver has been

granted. However, the need to comply with the NOX build/no-build

test and less than 1990 tests for NOX no longer apply to ozone

nonattainment areas receiving a NOX waiver. Furthermore, some

flexibility is possible for areas that have been issued a NOX

waiver based upon air quality modeling data. This flexibility is

described in the notice (60 FR 57183). The NOX budget provisions

will be effective 90 days from November 14, 1995. The Illinois NOX

exemption SIP revision request was submitted pursuant to section

182(b)(1) as provided for by the amended transportation conformity

rule.

As noted previously, in light of the modeling completed thus far

and considering the importance of the OTAG and attainment plan modeling

efforts, USEPA is granting this waiver on a contingent basis. As the

OTAG modeling results and control recommendations are completed in

1996, this information will be incorporated into the attainment plans

being developed by the LADCO States, including Illinois. When these

attainment plans are submitted to USEPA in mid-1997, these new modeling

analyses will be reviewed to determine if the NOX waiver should be

continued, altered or removed.

In this action, USEPA is exempting the Chicago nonattainment area

from the transportation conformity requirement to achieve further

reductions of NOX. The 15 percent plan which is the current

control strategy SIP for the area does not establish a NOX budget

for motor vehicles. Future modeling for the attainment demonstration

will set future NOX emissions budgets or demonstrate that NOX

emissions may grow without affecting attainment.

Comment

The ALA and CCCALMB notes that NOX contributes to decreased

visibility, acidic deposition, fine particulates and nitrate loading in

the Great Lakes.

Response

The focus of the NOX waiver test relied on by Illlinois is on

whether NOX reductions contribute to attainment of the ozone NAAQS

in the Chicago nonattainment area and, by its terms, does not require

consideration of overall NOX reduction benefits. Other air

pollution problems are being dealt with as part of separate regulatory

activities such as the acid rain program and FMVPC. None of the

NOX reduction programs in place or under development to address

other air quality objectives are deleted or diminished by issuance of

this waiver

Comment

The ALA and CCCALMB comment that a ``super-regional'' NOX

strategy should be adopted before USEPA permanently grants NOX

exemptions. Although the Ozone Transport Assessment Group (OTAG) is

working on a strategy, there is no guarantee that the work will be

completed.

Response

As discussed previously, in light of the modeling completed thus

far and considering the importance of the OTAG and attainment plan

modeling efforts, USEPA grants this waiver on a contingent basis. As

the OTAG modeling results and control recommendations are completed in

1996, this information will be incorporated into the attainment plans

being developed by the LADCO States. When these attainment plans are

submitted to USEPA in mid-1997, these new modeling analyses will be

reviewed to determine if the NOX waiver should be continued,

altered or removed.

The Chicago attainment plan will supersede the initial waiver which

USEPA grants in this notice. If the attainment plan relies on NOX

controls on mobile sources in the Chicago nonattainment area to

demonstrate attainment, USEPA will remove the NOX waiver for those

sources. To the extent the plans achieve attainment without additional

NOX reductions in the Chicago area, the NOX exemption would

continue for those sources. USEPA's rulemaking actions to reconsider

the initial NOX waiver may occur simultaneously with rulemaking

action on the attainment plans.

III. Final Action

The USEPA is approving a waiver under section 182(b)(1) of the

NOX transportation conformity requirements for a build/no-build

and less than-1990 interim test for the Chicago ozone nonattainment

area as requested by the State of Illinois. In light of the modeling

completed thus far and considering the importance of the OTAG process

and attainment plan modeling efforts, USEPA grants this NOX waiver

on a contingent basis. As the OTAG modeling results and control

recommendations are completed in 1996, this information will be

incorporated into attainment plans being developed by the LADCO States.

When these attainment plans are submitted to USEPA in mid-1997, these

new modeling analyses will be reviewed to determine if the NOX

waiver should be continued, altered, or removed. USEPA's rulemaking

action to reconsider the initial NOX waiver may occur

simultaneously with rulemaking action on the attainment plans.

The USEPA also reserves the right to require NOX emission

controls for transportation sources under section 110(a)(2)(D) of the

Act if future ozone modeling demonstrates that such controls are needed

to achieve the ozone standard in downwind areas.

This action will become effective on March 13, 1996.

IV. Miscellaneous

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.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing

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

SIP. The USEPA 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.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., USEPA

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, USEPA may certify that the rule will not have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

[[Page 5295]]

Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and government entities with jurisdiction over populations

of less than 50,000.

This approval does not create any new requirements. Therefore, I

certify that this action does not have a significant impact on any

small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-

State relationship under the Act, preparation of the regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of the State action. The Act forbids USEPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. USEPA,

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

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the

USEPA must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any

proposed or final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result

in estimated costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under

Section 205, the USEPA must select the most cost-effective and least

burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule and is

consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 requires the USEPA

to establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments

that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.

The USEPA has determined that the approval action promulgated today

does not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs

of $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments

in the aggregate, or to the private sector.

This Federal action will relieve requirements otherwise imposed

under the Act, and hence does not impose any federal intergovernmental

mandate, as defined in section 101 of the Unfunded Mandates Act.

Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or the private sector, result from this action.

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review

of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for

the appropriate circuit by April 12, 1996. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect

the finality of this rule for the purpose of judicial rule, nor does it

extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be

filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.

This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its

requirements (see section 307(b)(2) of the Act).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Conformity, Oxides

of nitrogen, Ozone, Transportation conformity.

Dated: January 23, 1996.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator.

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 O--Illinois

2. Section 52.726 is amended by adding paragraph (l) to read as

follows:

Sec. 52.726 Control Strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *

(l) Approval--The United States Environmental Protection Agency is

approving under section 182(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act the exemption of

the Chicago severe, ozone nonattainment area from the build/no-build

and less than-1990 interim transportation conformity oxides of nitrogen

requirements as requested by the State of Illinois in a June 20, 1995

submittal. In light of the modeling completed thus far and considering

the importance of the OTAG process and attainment plan modeling

efforts, USEPA grants this NOX waiver on a contingent basis. As

the OTAG modeling results and control recommendations are completed in

1996, this information will be incorporated into attainment plans being

developed by the LADCO States. When these attainment plans are

submitted to USEPA in mid-1997, these new modeling analyses will be

reviewed to determine if the NOX waiver should be continued,

altered, or removed. USEPA's rulemaking action to reconsider the

initial NOX waiver may occur simultaneously with rulemaking action

on the attainment plans. The USEPA also reserves the right to require

NOX emission controls for transportation sources under section

110(a)(2)(D) of the Act if future ozone modeling demonstrates that such

controls are needed to achieve the ozone standard in downwind areas.

The Chicago severe ozone nonattainment area includes the Counties of

Cook, DuPage, Grundy (Aux Sable and Gooselake Townships), Kane, Kendall

(Oswego Township), Lake, McHenry, and Will.

[FR Doc. 96-2966 Filed 2-9-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P