Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Washington

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[WA 13-6-6121; WA 55-7130; and WA 57-7132; FRL-5837-2]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation

of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Washington

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: EPA invites public comment on its proposed approval of parts

of three revisions to the State of Washington Implementation Plan

(SIP). These revisions were submitted by the Washington Department of

Ecology (Washington) to address the attainment of the National Ambient

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for carbon monoxide (CO) in the Spokane,

Washington urbanized area.

DATES: Comments must be received in writing and postmarked on or before

July 9, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to Montel Livingston,

SIP Manager, Office of Air Quality, M/S OAQ-107, EPA Region 10, Docket

#s WA 13-6-6121; WA 57-7132; and WA 55-7130, 1200 Sixth Avenue,

Seattle, Washington 98101. Copies of Washington's submittals are

available for public review during normal business hours at the

following locations: EPA, Region 10, Office of Air Quality, M/S OAQ-

107, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101; Washington

Department of Ecology, Attention: Tami Dahlgren, Olympia, Washington

98504-7600, telephone (360) 407-6830; and the Spokane County Air

Pollution Control Authority, West 1101 College, Suite 403, Spokane,

Washington 99201, telephone (509) 456-4727.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William M. Hedgebeth of the EPA Region

10 Office of Air Quality at (206) 553-7369.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On January 22, 1993, Washington submitted a SIP revision (Docket #

WA 13-6-6121) consisting of a plan for the attainment and subsequent

maintenance of the CO NAAQS for the Spokane area. This included a

demonstration of attainment of the CO NAAQS and provisions for

forecasting and tracking vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the Spokane

area, with contingency measures to be implemented if any estimate of

actual VMT in the nonattainment area, or any updated forecast of VMT

contained in an annual report for any year prior to attainment, exceeds

the number predicted in the most recent VMT forecast. Also included

were provisions which have been superseded by subsequent SIP revisions:

Reasonably Available Control Measures for residential wood combustion;

Reasonably Available Control Technology for point sources; New Source

Review; Vehicle Emission Inspection and Maintenance Program; oxygenated

fuels; and transportation conformity. On September 14, 1993, Washington

submitted a revision to the January 22, 1993, SIP submittal consisting

of the 1990 base year emissions inventory and the 1995 projected year

emissions inventory. Washington also submitted, on September 29, 1995,

a 1993 updated (periodic) emissions inventory for the Spokane area, to

meet the requirement of section 187(a)(5) of the CAA for periodic

inventories.

On April 30, 1996, Washington submitted a SIP revision (Docket # WA

57-7132) consisting of revisions to the previously submitted vehicle

emission estimates portion of the 1990 base year emissions inventory

and of the 1995 projected year inventory; the emissions budget; VMT

estimates and forecasts; and the attainment demonstration. This

revision also added a contingency measure (3.5% oxygenated fuel) for

failure to attain the NAAQS.

On April 30, 1996, Washington also submitted a SIP revision (Docket

# WA 55-7130) consisting of the removal of two transportation control

measures (TCMs) which had previously been approved by EPA on March 22,

1982, as part of the 1982 Spokane CO SIP.

The implementation plan revisions were submitted by Washington to

satisfy certain federal requirements for an approvable nonattainment

area CO SIP for the Spokane nonattainment area in the State of

Washington. EPA is proposing to approve parts of the submitted

revisions and deferring action on several other parts of those

revisions. Other parts are not being addressed in this action because

they have been superseded by subsequent revisions and were or will be

addressed in separate actions. The rationales for the approvals and

deferrals of action are set forth in this notice. Additional

information is available at the address indicated above.

II. Review of State Submittal

A. Emissions Inventories (Base Year and Periodic)

Under section 187(a)(1) of the CAA, for moderate CO nonattainment

areas, states are required to submit a base year CO inventory that

represents actual emissions in the CO season by November 15, 1992.

Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires that nonattainment plan

provisions include a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of

actual emissions from all sources of relevant pollutants in the

nonattainment area. The base year for the inventory is 1990. Stationary

point, stationary area, on-road mobile, and non-road mobile sources of

CO are included in the inventory. This inventory addresses actual CO

emissions for the area during the peak CO season, which reflects the

months when peak CO air quality concentrations occur. In Spokane, the

peak CO season is October through December. All required sources were

included in the inventory. Stationary sources with emissions of 50 tons

or greater per year were included in the point source category.

Stationary sources with emissions less than 50 tons per year were

included in the area source category. The following list presents a

summary of the 1990 CO peak season daily emissions estimates in tons

per winter day by source category: Point Sources: 76.98 tons per day;

Area Sources: 58.69 tons per day; Mobile On-Road Sources: 271.54 tons

per day; Mobile Non-Road Sources: 16.18 tons per day; Total Sources:

423.39 tons per day. Available guidance for preparing emission

inventories is provided in the General Preamble (57 FR 13498, April 16,

1992).

Washington also submitted a 1995 Projected Year Emission Inventory.

This inventory incorporates growth factors for population, households,

and employments. For one of the point sources, the 1995 inventory used

the 1990 emission figure, although a decrease in emissions had been

estimated for 1995. For another of the point sources, emissions from

1991 were used, adjusted to 1995 using Bureau of Economic Analysis

industry growth rates. For residential wood combustion, a household

growth factor

[[Page 31395]]

was applied to the 1990 emissions. The primary change in estimating on-

road vehicle emissions for 1995 the use of EPA's newest MOBILE

emissions model, which estimated significantly increased CO emissions.

In addition, there was an adjustment for a change in the inspection and

maintenance area, which now includes the entire nonattainment area. The

following list presents a summary of the 1995 CO peak season daily

emissions estimates in tons per winter day by source category: Point

Sources: 77.41 tons per day; Area Sources: 60.83 tons per day; Mobile

On-Road Sources: 169.34 tons per day; Mobile Non-Road Sources: 17.87

tons per day; Total Sources: 325.45 tons per day.

Section 187(a)(5) of the CAA requires that states submit, for

moderate CO nonattainment areas, periodic inventories that represent

actual emissions; the first periodic inventory was due no later than

September 30, 1995, with subsequent periodic inventories submitted

every three years thereafter until the area is redesignated to

attainment. The first periodic inventory (1993) was submitted by

Washington on September 29, 1995.

The following chart compares CO season daily emissions for 1990 and

1995:

Daily Emissions

(Pounds Per Day)

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

Category Base Year 1990 1995

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

Point Sources........................... 153,954 (18%) 154,824 (24%)

Area Sources............................ 117,376 (14%) 121,651 (19%)

On-road Mobile Sources.................. 543,087 (64%) 338,680 (52%)

Non-road Mobile Sources................. 32,371 (4%) 35,749 (5%)

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

Total............................... 846,788 650,904

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

EPA is proposing to approve the 1990 Base Year emissions inventory

as meeting the requirements of section 187(a)(1) of the CAA. EPA is

also proposing to approve the 1993 periodic emissions inventory as

meeting the requirements of section 187(a)(5) of the CAA. Washington

has provided acceptable documentation of quality assurance and has

clearly identified the methodologies used in determining the emissions

for each source category. References from which emissions and growth

factors were derived were clearly identified. A more complete analysis

supporting EPA's approval of the 1990 and 1993 emissions inventories is

included in the Technical Support Document.

B. VMT/VMT Contingency Measures

Section 187(a)(2)(A) of the CAA 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 (57 FR 9549).

The section 187 guidance identifies the Federal Highway

Administration's Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) as the

foundation for VMT estimates and forecasts. HPMS was chosen as the best

method for estimating actual VMT since it is a count-based,

statistically-based, nationwide program with auditing procedures in

place, and because travel demand models would require resource

intensive annual updates of input data and annual validation against

traffic counts in order to be useful for estimating annual VMT. EPA

believes that these time and resource requirements generally make

travel demand models an unrealistic option for estimating actual annual

VMT with reasonable accuracy.

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. Moderate areas without a network model that is validated

according to the specifications described in the Section 187 Guidance

are offered the alternative of developing growth factors based on a

linear regression extrapolation of the past six years' HPMS VMT. In

both cases, the growth factors are applied to the HPMS VMT reported to

the Federal Highway Administration.

As specified in the Act, the contingency measure triggers serve to

address as early as possible any situation in which a trend towards

higher then expected VMT has been detected, since such a trend may

affect the forecasted attainment date.

When determining whether annual VMT or a VMT forecast has exceeded

the most recent prior forecast and, therefore, whether 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 Federal Highway Administration 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 exceeds by more than 5.0 percent the VMT forecast relied

upon in the area's attainment demonstration.

In practice, then, there are two ways in which an estimate of

actual VMT or an updated forecast can be found to exceed a prior

forecast. Individual yearly comparisons can result in an exceedance of

the forecast made 12 months earlier by more than the prescribed

percentage for that year, and exceedances can accumulate so that,

cumulatively, they exceed the 5.0

[[Page 31396]]

percent cap above the attainment demonstration forecast.

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 57 FR

13532-13533, April 16, 1992.)

The State of Washington has submitted a SIP revision to EPA in

order to satisfy the requirements of sections 187(a)(2)(A) and

187(a)(3). Washington's submittal provides for each of the following

mandatory elements: (1) A forecast of VMT in the nonattainment 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; and (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.

The following items are the basis for approval of the portions of

the SIP revisions addressing VMT:

1. VMT Forecasts

In Spokane, the Federal Aid Urban Area is identical to the CO

nonattainment area and is the VMT forecast area. The Spokane Regional

Council (SRC) developed daily VMT forecasts for the area using a

network-based travel demand modeling process methodology. Washington

has met the requirements of sections 187(a)(2)(A) by submitting a SIP

revision that implements all required elements.

Below is a table showing the forecasted VMT for Spokane:

Annual VMT Forecasts for Spokane

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

Spokane Co.

nonattainment

VMT forecast year area (miles

traveled)

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

1990 Actual........................................... 2,085,203,390

1993.................................................. 2,286,713,685

1994.................................................. 2,317,581,370

1995.................................................. 2,376,606,980

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

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.

Washington has submitted a SIP revision to EPA which satisfies the

requirements of section 187(a)(2)(A) in that it provides for the

submittal of annual updates of the VMT forecasts along with a provision

for annual reports describing the extent to which the forecasts proved

to be accurate.

3. VMT Contingency Measures

Section 187(a)(3) specifies that Washington, 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

Washington or EPA. Washington meets this requirement by submitting two

contingency measures. Those measures used by Washington to satisfy the

VMT contingency measure requirement are: (1) Commute Trip Reduction

programs, as put forth in SSHB 1671, Washington State's Transportation

Demand Management Act; and (2) A campaign for voluntary reductions in

vehicle operation during periods of poor air quality.

At this time, EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision

submitted by Washington for the purpose of forecasting and tracking VMT

in the Spokane area. This approval would include the revisions to the

VMT estimates and forecasts provided in the April 30, 1996, SIP

submittal, and would also include the VMT contingency measures.

C. Contingency Measures (3.5 Percent Oxygenated Fuel)

States containing CO nonattainment areas with design values of

greater than 12.7 ppm were required to submit, among other things,

contingency measures to satisfy the provisions under section 172(c)(9).

These provisions require contingency measures to be implemented in the

event that an area fails to reach attainment by the applicable

attainment date, December 31, 1995. Contingency measures were to be

submitted to EPA by November 31, 1992, pursuant to section 172(b) of

the CAA.

Contingency measures must be implemented within 12 months after the

finding of failure to attain the CO NAAQS. Once triggered, they must

take effect without further action by the state or EPA. Therefore, all

contingency measures must be adopted and enforceable prior to submittal

to EPA.

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) do not specify how many

contingency measures are needed or the magnitude of emission reductions

they must provide if an area fails to attain the CO NAAQS. Because

section 186(b)(2) requires EPA to reclassify a moderate CO

nonattainment area as a serious nonattainment area if the area does not

attain the NAAQS for CO by December 31, 1995, EPA believes that one

appropriate choice of contingency measures would be to provide for the

implementation of sufficient VMT reductions or emissions reductions to

counteract the effect of one year's growth in VMT while the state

revises its SIP to incorporate all of the new requirements of a serious

CO area.

The State of Washington has submitted a SIP revision to EPA in

order to satisfy the requirements of section 172(c)(9) of the CAA. The

contingency measure consists of revising the oxygenate requirement for

the Spokane area to 3.5 percent oxygen for future control periods in

the case of failure to attain or maintain NAAQS for CO. The control

period is defined as September 1 through the last day of February.

Because it has not been determined that the Spokane CO

nonattainment area attained the CO NAAQS by December 31, 1995, the

Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority (SCAPCA) implemented the

3.5 percent oxygen contingency measure for the 1996-1997 winter control

period, commencing on September 1, 1996. It is important to note that

EPA has proposed to determine that the Spokane CO nonattainment area

did not attain the CO NAAQS by December 31, 1995, as required, and to

reclassify the Spokane

[[Page 31397]]

CO nonattainment area as a ``serious'' nonattainment area. See 61 FR

33879, July 1, 1996.

At this time, EPA is proposing to approve the contingency measure

as satisfying the requirements of section 172(c)(9), and as consistent

with EPA guidance.

D. Transportation Control Measures (TCM) Deletions

EPA approved two TCMs as part of a SIP revision on March 22, 1982.

One of the TCMs consisted of widening Rowan Avenue in Spokane to 44

feet from Alberta to Wall Streets, a total distance of 1.27 miles; the

TCM also included the installation of traffic lights along Rowan

Avenue. The second TCM consisted of constructing North River Drive in

Spokane from Maple to Hamilton, a distance of 1.91 miles.

EPA, in its November 24, 1993, Final Rule on Transportation

Conformity, stated that ``if obstacles to TCM implementation are not

being overcome because it is impossible to do so, if State and local

agencies are not giving maximum priority to TCMs which are behind

schedule, or if the original sponsor or the cooperative planning

process decides not to implement the TCM or decides to replace it with

another TCM, a SIP revision which removes the TCM will be necessary

before plans and TIPS may be found in conformity. In order to be

approved by EPA, such a SIP revision must include substitute measures

that achieve emissions reductions sufficient to meet all applicable

requirements of the Clean Air Act, including section 110(l).'' See 58

FR 62198, November 24, 1993.

Washington has submitted documentation that a Spokane Regional

Transportation Council analysis showed that, at the present time, the

Rowan Avenue TCM would have, at best, neutral air-quality impacts and

that the North River Drive TCM would have definite negative impacts. In

addition, neither TCM will be used to demonstrate attainment.

Therefore, no substitute measures are required.

At this time, EPA is proposing to approve the deletion of the two

transportation control measures discussed herein.

E. Attainment Demonstration

The air quality planning requirements for moderate CO nonattainment

areas set out in sections 186 and 187 of the CAAA include, for moderate

areas with a design value greater than 12.7 ppm at the time of

classification, a requirement for states to submit a SIP revision to

provide for attainment of the CO NAAQS by the applicable attainment

date and which includes a demonstration that the plan as revised will

provide for such attainment. Washington submitted an Attainment

Demonstration as part of its January 22, 1993, SIP revision, and

revised the Attainment Demonstration in a submittal dated April 30,

1996. EPA proposed, on July 1, 1996 (61 FR 33879), to find that the

Spokane, Washington, CO nonattainment area did not attain the CO NAAQS

by the CAA mandated attainment date for moderate nonattainment areas,

December 31, 1995, to reclassify the Spokane CO nonattainment area as a

serious nonattainment area. EPA has not made a final determination as

to this reclassification and is deferring action on approval of the

attainment demonstration pending this decision.

F. Emissions Budget

For federal transportation conformity purposes, Washington

submitted, as part of its April 30, 1996, SIP revision, an emission

budget, the projected mobile source inventory (1995) used in the

attainment demonstration. Because attainment has not been demonstrated

(see discussion in (E) above), EPA is deferring action on the emission

budget.

G. Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM)/Reasonably Available

Control Technology (RACT)

The January 22, 1993, SIP revision relating to RACM in Spokane was

superseded by a revision submitted on December 9, 1994. This revision

was approved by EPA on January 27, 1997. See 62 FR 3800. Satisfaction

of the RACT requirements was acknowledged by EPA in 62 FR 3800, as well

as having been approved earlier in the redesignation to attainment of

the Puget Sound and Vancouver CO nonattainment areas. See 61 FR 53323,

October 11, 1996, and 61 FR 54560. October 21, 1996.

H. New Source Review

The January 22, 1993, SIP revision relating to New Source Review

was superseded by a revision submitted on March 8, 1994. This revision

was approved by EPA on June 2, 1995. See 60 FR 28726.

I. Vehicle Emission Inspection and Maintenance Program

The January 22, 1993, SIP revision relating to the Vehicle Emission

Inspection and Maintenance Program was superseded by a revision

submitted on August 21, 1995. This revision was approved by EPA on

September 25, 1996. See 61 FR 50235.

J. Oxygenated Fuels

The January 22, 1993, SIP revision relating to oxygenated fuels was

approved by EPA on January 20, 1994. See 59 FR 2994.

K. Transportation Conformity

The January 22, 1993, SIP revision relating to transportation

conformity was superseded by a revision submitted on May 10, 1994,

which was further revised by a submittal dated November 30, 1995. EPA

will act on this submittal separately from this action.

III. This Action

EPA is soliciting comments on its proposed approval of portions of

the aforementioned revisions to the State of Washington Implementation

Plan. Interested parties are invited to comment on all aspects of this

proposed approval. Comments should be submitted to the address listed

in the front of this Notice. Comments postmarked on or before July 9,

1997 will be considered in the final rulemaking action taken by EPA.

IV. Administrative Review

A. Executive Order 12866

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 E.O. 12866 review.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

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.

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, the

Administrator certifies that it does not have a significant impact on

any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the

[[Page 31398]]

nature of the federal-state relationship under the CAA, preparation of

a 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.

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

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

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, EPA

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 EPA to establish a plan

for informing and advising any small governments that may be

significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval action proposed for

promulgation 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 proposes to approve pre-existing requirements under

state or local law, and does not propose to impose new federal

requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to state, local, or

tribal governments, or to the private sector, would result from this

action, if approved.

D. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

Under 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), as added by the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, EPA submitted a report

containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate,

the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the

General Accounting Office prior to publication of the rule in today's

Federal Register. This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

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

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

the appropriate circuit by August 8, 1997. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect

the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review 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).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,

Ozone.

40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

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

Dated: May 27, 1997.

Chuck Clarke,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97-14853 Filed 6-6-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P