Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Designation of Areas; Virginia; Redesignation of Hampton Roads Ozone Nonattainment Area, Maintenance Plan and Mobile Emissions Budget

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[VA-066-5024 and VA-068-5024; FRL-5846-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

Designation of Areas; Virginia; Redesignation of Hampton Roads Ozone

Nonattainment Area, Maintenance Plan and Mobile Emissions Budget

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a redesignation request and two state

implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the Commonwealth of

Virginia. On August 27, 1996, the Commonwealth of Virginia submitted a

request to redesignate the Hampton Roads marginal ozone nonattainment

area to attainment and a maintenance plan, as a SIP revision. This

request is based upon three years of complete, quality-assured ambient

air monitoring data for the area which demonstrate that the National

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone has been attained. On

August 29, 1996 Virginia submitted a second SIP revision establishing

the mobile emissions budget (also known as a motor vehicle emissions

budget) for the Hampton Roads ozone nonattainment area. The SIP

revisions establish a maintenance plan for Hampton Roads, including

contingency measures which provide for continued attainment of the

ozone NAAQS until the year 2008; and adjust the motor vehicle emissions

budget established in the maintenance plan for Hampton Roads to support

the area's transportation plans in the horizon years 2015 and beyond.

Under the Clean Air Act (the Act), nonattainment areas may be

redesignated to attainment if sufficient data are available to warrant

the redesignation and the area meets the Act's other redesignation

requirements. The intended effect of this action is to approve the

redesignation request, the maintenance plan, and the motor vehicle

emissions budget for Hampton Roads. This action is being taken under

sections 107 and 110 of the Act.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is effective on July 28, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are

available for public inspection during normal business hours at the

Air, Radiation, and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

19107; the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC

20460; and the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 629 East

Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristeen Gaffney, Ozone/Carbon

Monoxide and Mobile Sources Section (3AT21), USEPA--Region III, 841

Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107, or by telephone

at: (215) 566-2092. Questions may also be addressed via e-mail, at the

following address: Gaffney.K[email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On March 12, 1997, EPA published a direct final rule [62 FR 11337]

approving the Commonwealth of Virginia's request to redesignate the

Hampton Roads marginal ozone nonattainment area from nonattainment to

attainment and the 10 year maintenance plan and mobile emissions budget

submitted by the Commonwealth for the Hampton Roads area as revisions

to the Virginia SIP. As stated in the March 12, 1997 rulemaking

document, EPA's action to approve the redesignation was based upon its

review of the Commonwealth's submittal and its determination that all

five criteria for redesignation in section 107 of the Act have been met

by and for the Hampton Roads area. The ambient air quality data

monitored in the Hampton Roads area indicated that it had attained the

National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone for the years

1993-1995. Review of the data monitored in 1996 has indicated continued

attainment of the ambient standard. EPA also determined that the

Commonwealth had a fully approved Part D SIP for the Hampton Roads

area, was fully implementing that SIP, and that the air quality

improvement in the Hampton Roads area was due to permanent and

enforceable control measures. In the same rulemaking, EPA approved the

maintenance plan submitted by the Commonwealth of Virginia as a SIP

revision because it provides for maintenance of the ozone standard for

10 years and a mobile emissions budget for the Hampton Roads area.

In its March 12, 1997 rulemaking, EPA stated that if adverse

comments were received on the direct final rule within 30 days of its

publication, EPA would publish a document announcing the withdrawal of

its direct final rulemaking action. Because EPA received adverse

comments on the direct final rulemaking within the prescribed comment

period from the Allies in Defense of Cherry Point and U.S. Senator

Lauch Faircloth of North Carolina, EPA withdrew the March 12, 1997

final rulemaking action pertaining to the Hampton Roads nonattainment

area. This withdrawal document appeared in the Federal Register on

April 29, 1997 (62 FR 23139).

A companion proposed rulemaking was published in the Proposed Rules

section of the March 12, 1997 Federal Register for the Hampton Roads

redesignation (62 FR 11405). In the proposed notice, EPA also stated

that if adverse comments were received on the direct final action

within 30 days of its publication, it would withdraw the direct final

rule. In their letter submitting adverse comments, the Allies in

Defense of Cherry Point also indicated that they intended to submit

additional adverse comments and requested that the comment period on

the proposed rulemaking be extended. However, because the 30 day public

comment period EPA provided on the proposed rule was due to close two

days after receipt of their request, there was insufficient time for

EPA to publish a document extending the comment period. In order,

therefore, to provide additional time to the Allies in Defense of

Cherry Point to review EPA's rulemaking decision and provide additional

comment, EPA reopened the public comment period on the proposed rule

for a period of two weeks. This notice was published on April 29, 1997

in the Federal Register at 62 FR 23196. The second public comment

period closed on May 13, 1997.

II. Response to Comments

EPA received two letters of adverse comment and numerous letters of

support for EPA's action to redesignate the Hampton Roads area. Letters

of support for EPA's rulemaking decision were received from: all the

local governments in the nonattainment area, the Hampton Roads Planning

District Commission, the United States Navy, the Office of the Attorney

General for the Commonwealth of Virginia; U.S. Senators John Warner and

Charles Robb from Virginia and U.S. Congressman Owen Pickett from

Virginia, among

[[Page 34409]]

others. These parties provided positive comments and are supportive of

EPA's approval of the redesignation of the Hampton Roads area to

attainment.

Letters providing adverse comments on EPA's rulemaking were

received from Senator Lauch Faircloth of North Carolina and the Allies

in Defense of Cherry Point, North Carolina (the Allies). The following

discussion summarizes and responds to the adverse comments received.

Comment 1: Both the Allies and Senator Faircloth stated that, as

part of a Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) decision, the U.S. Navy

is assessing the potential environmental impact, including the increase

in ozone precursor emissions, of a realignment of fighter jet squadrons

from Florida to the Oceana Naval Air Station in the Hampton Roads area.

The commenters believe that EPA's decision on the redesignation should

be deferred until the draft environmental impact statement and

conformity analysis of the Navy's BRAC decision is complete and

available for public review.

Response: EPA does not agree with this comment. The Clean Air Act

Amendments of 1990 established five criteria which must be met for

areas to be redesignated to attainment. These criteria are found in

section 107 and are listed as follows: (1) The area must have attained

the applicable NAAQS; (2) the area must meet all applicable

requirements under section 110 and part D of the Act; (3) the area must

have a fully approved SIP under section 110(k) of the Act; (4) the air

quality improvement must be due to permanent and enforceable measures;

and, (5) the area must have a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant

to section 175A of the Act. Review of environmental impact statements

regarding the construction of federal projects within an attainment or

nonattainment area are not a consideration during the determination of

designations of areas. EPA's review of the Navy's BRAC Draft

Environmental Impact Statement and Conformity Analysis determinations

are not part of the criteria used for determining whether the Hampton

Roads area should be redesignated to attainment. EPA's decision to

redesignate the Hampton Roads area to attainment is based solely on the

fact that the Hampton Roads area has satisfied all five criteria of the

Act.

The Act did make provisions for assuring that future federal

actions and transportation projects conform to the state implementation

plan emission budgets. All projects funded with federal monies proposed

in both air quality nonattainment areas and maintenance areas are

subject to the conformity requirements of section 176 of the Act.

Regardless of whether Hampton Roads is redesignated to attainment of

the ozone standard, the Navy will still be required to make a

conformity determination and show that the relocation of the fighter

squadrons remains within the emission budgets developed in the Hampton

Roads maintenance plan as incorporated into the SIP.

Comment 2: The Allies alleged that Virginia has not adequately

addressed the potential air quality impacts of the possible BRAC

realignment in the maintenance plan. They claim that Virginia should

have accounted for the projected increase in mobile source emissions of

nitrogen oxides (NOX) associated with the BRAC move and the

addition of 5,300 military personnel and their dependents. They also

contend that the maintenance plan is inaccurate because it projects

zero population growth in federal military personnel for the entire

maintenance period and a decrease in federal civilian personnel after

the year 2000.

Response: EPA does not agree with this comment. Maintenance plans

are required to project some reasonable level of growth in the area

during the 10-year time span and to demonstrate how increased emissions

associated with growth will be offset. The maintenance plan for the

Hampton Roads area does project growth in population, economic activity

and mobile sources between 1993 and 2008, using standard acceptable

methodology. In addition, the Navy's decision regarding the BRAC

redeployment to Oceana Naval Air Station in Hampton Roads is not final,

and hence remains speculative. The Commonwealth is not required to

include potential projects which may or may not happen at some future

date in the maintenance plan for the area. As discussed above, the air

quality impacts of individual projects are considered during the

conformity analysis process. Projects must be able to demonstrate that

their potential emissions will remain below the levels established in

the emission budgets for the area set in the maintenance plan.

Furthermore, the maintenance plan submitted by the Commonwealth

contains contingency provisions should the area exceed the levels

established in the emissions budgets for the area. In the SIP, the

Commonwealth has committed to track levels of emissions and to

implement contingency measures to reduce emissions of VOCs should

actual emissions in future years rise above the levels established in

the maintenance plan.

Despite the fact that the Commonwealth is not required to account

for speculative emissions associated with potential growth scenarios in

the maintenance plan, the Commonwealth of Virginia went beyond the

requirements and did account for potential increased emissions

associated with the BRAC relocation in the point source projection year

inventory of the maintenance plan for the Hampton Roads area. To make

room in the inventory for these potential future emissions, source

specific emission caps were placed on two existing large sources of

emissions in the Hampton Roads area to offset the anticipated increase

in emissions associated with the increase in flight squadrons and

related activities of the BRAC relocation. In effect, Virginia has

provided a cushion in the budget with 200 tons/year of VOC and 800

tons/year of NOX reductions in anticipation of the potential

increased emissions associated with the relocation, and can still

demonstrate that it remains within the levels of the attainment year

inventory in the maintenance plan.

Comment 3: The Allies commented that they believe the maintenance

plan substantially underestimates the growth in vehicle miles traveled

(VMT) and emissions from automobiles. They also stated population

growth was also underestimated in the maintenance plan in their view,

and that VMT growth should be higher than population growth. The Allies

claim it is unrealistic to project a consistently declining growth rate

in population in a rapidly growing area. The commenter further

questions why VMT growth is predicted to drop off dramatically in the

2000-2008 period, compared to the 1988-1993 period.

Response: EPA does not agree with these statements made by the

commenter. EPA policy on maintenance demonstrations requires states to

develop projection year inventories that consider future growth,

including population, mobile sources and industry, and to demonstrate

that these projections are consistent with the attainment inventory and

EPA guidance on inventory development.1 EPA's guidance

document on projecting emissions inventories 2 recommends

using U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) growth factors or growth

[[Page 34410]]

projections from local metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) for

projecting growth in point and area source inventories. The traditional

data source for economic indicators used in projecting stationary

source growth is the BEA growth factors. BEA has published state,

regional and metropolitan statistical area growth factors in ``BEA

Regional Projections to 2040''. Following EPA guidance, Virginia

properly relied on population growth estimates supplied by BEA in the

Hampton Roads maintenance plan. For point source growth, Virginia

utilized EPA's developed and approved Economic Growth Analysis System

(E-GAS). E-GAS is an economic and activity forecast model that

translates the user's assumptions regarding regional economic policies

and resource prices into industry growth factors.

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

\1\ ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to

Attainment'', September 4, 1992, memorandum from John Calcagni,

Director, Air Quality Management Division.

\2\ ``Procedures for Preparing Emissions Projections'', July

1991, EPA-450/4-91-019.

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

The EPA guidance document entitled ``Procedures for Preparing

Emissions Projections'' states that the preferred method for performing

VMT projections for on-road mobile sources is to use a validated travel

demand model. According to EPA's guidance document for preparing

emission projections from mobile sources,3 both EPA and the

U.S. Department of Transportation have endorsed the Department of

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

appropriate source of VMT estimates in SIP development. In response to

the comments received on VMT projections, the Virginia Department of

Environmental Quality (VADEQ) submitted additional documentation

regarding the source of VMT estimates that has been added to the

docket. The VMT estimates in the maintenance plan were obtained from

the Hampton Roads Planning District commission and the Virginia

Department of Transportation (VDOT) and were developed for the official

conformity analysis performed annually for the area. VDOT determines

VMT estimates using HPMS protocol. The officially recognized MINUTP

transportation demand model was used to estimate VMT and related

traffic data in the conformity analysis process. The VMT and population

growth estimates in the maintenance plan can be verified by comparing

the maintenance plan to the conformity documentation for the

nonattainment area. Both the VMT and population growth estimates are

consistent in the Hampton Roads maintenance plan and approved

conformity documents. Furthermore, the predicted population growth in

Hampton Roads contained in the maintenance plan and conformity analysis

are also consistent with the BEA projections for the same period.

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

\3\ ``Procedures for Emission Inventory Preparation, Volume IV:

Mobile Sources'', EPA-450/4-81-026d (revised), 1992.

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

The commenter is incorrect in his statement that the VMT growth

rate is smaller than the growth rate assumed for population in the

Hampton Roads area. The average annual growth rate from 1993 to 2008 in

the maintenance plan for VMT is 1.1692%, while the annual growth rate

in population is .834%. It can be seen that VMT is growing annually at

a rate that is 40% higher than the annual predicted population growth.

In response to the question ``what accounts for the dramatic

decrease in VMT growth rate over historical patterns [after 1993]'',

the VADEQ has submitted the following discussion for inclusion in the

public record.

The VMT spike between 1988 and 1993 is due to the opening of a

second major water crossing (the I-664 Monitor Merrimac Bridge/

Tunnel) in 1992. This provided a new link between the Peninsula and

Southside portions of Hampton Roads. This new crossing also provided

another way to Virginia Beach and the outer banks of North Carolina

which is highly used in the summer months due to the congestion at

the I-64 bridge/tunnel crossing. This also opened up a new door for

more travel between these two areas by people who normally did not

do so before due to traffic congestion and limited travel choices.

As can be seen from the VMT estimates after 1993, the level of

increase has reverted back to a level consistent with population

growth. As with any region of this type which is separated by a

large body of water with limited crossings, a new crossing of this

size will have a major impact on VMT. Once the impact was initially

felt in the early 1990's, the region has been growing at a more

normal rate.

Virginia has utilized recognized sources of growth factor

surrogates in projecting growth in VMT and population, such as BEA data

or local data from the MPOs. EPA has no reason to doubt the credibility

of these growth projections.

Comment 4: The Allies argued that Virginia's VMT estimates differ

sharply from (and are substantially lower than) EPA's own estimates for

the Hampton Roads area.

Response: The commenter is referring to data compiled in 1993 by

EPA to create the annual national air quality trends reports. EPA

utilizes VMT data from the HPMS database administered by the U.S.

Department of Transportation. There are several complexities associated

with using HPMS data to estimate VMT for this inventory. The county is

the basic geographic unit in EPA's emissions trends inventory. To the

contrary, all data in HPMS are divided into rural, small urban, and

individualized urban geographic areas. For the purposes of the trends

reports and estimating highways emissions levels on a national basis,

EPA uses apportioning schemes to distribute the data and develops

county-level VMT estimates. These schemes are estimation tools which

allow different areas of the country to be compared based on similar

parameters. The methodology EPA uses to apportion these county-level

VMT estimates can be found in Section 4 of EPA's ``National Air

Pollutant Emission Trends Procedures Document for 1900-1993'', page 4-

81. The same schemes were not used to develop the VMT growth estimates

in the Hampton Roads maintenance plan. Therefore, it is reasonable to

expect that even though both methods of determining VMT are valid, they

are for two separate applications. The VMT growth in the Hampton Roads

area estimated by Virginia using approved EPA methods in SIP planning,

as discussed in the response to the previous comment, may vary from the

VMT growth in that same area obtained using the different schemes to

determine trends. EPA does not advise that EPA's VMT information from

the trends database be used by states in SIP planning. Furthermore, the

VMT projections in the EPA trends database for the years 2000 and 2008,

quoted by the commenter, are four years old and based on 1993 data. The

maintenance plan SIP for the Hampton Roads area relies on more up-to-

date and precise information regarding VMT supplied by the Virginia

Department of Transportation and the Hampton Roads local metropolitan

planning organization.

Comment 5: The Allies commented that the three-year attainment

period selected by Virginia may not be representative of historical

weather conditions in the Hampton Roads area that are conducive to

ozone formation. They question whether 1994 and 1995 ozone seasons

deviate from the historical weather patterns in Hampton Roads in that

they were unusually cool.

Response: EPA disagrees with this comment. EPA recognizes that the

accumulation of ozone may be dependent upon weather conditions,

particularly high temperatures and stagnant air flows. To offset the

variability of weather in the production of ozone, EPA requires the use

of a three-year period to demonstrate compliance with the ozone

standard. EPA relies on a three-year period for determining designation

status of an area in part for the reasons being questioned by the

commenter: to reduce

[[Page 34411]]

the potential for unrepresentative weather patterns. EPA can see no

basis for disregarding quality assured data under the statuate and 40

CFR part 50.9 and Appendix H.

The Hampton Roads area has four years of data which demonstrate

compliance with the ozone standard--or two consecutive three year

periods, 1993-1995 and 1994-1996, which qualifies the area for

redesignation. EPA believes that four years of data present an even

stronger case demonstrating that the Hampton Roads area has achieved

the ozone standard. It is unlikely that exceptionally good weather

conditions could exist for a continuous four year period. More

importantly, the commenter has neglected to recognize that several

national and state VOC control measures, such as the Federal Motor

Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP) and reformulated gasoline, were

implemented in the Hampton Roads area during the period between 1991

and 1996, which reduced the amount of ozone precursor emissions. It is

important to recognize that these and other emission reduction measures

were responsible for bringing the area into attainment of the ozone

standard, not favorable weather conditions.

Comment 6: Both the Allies and Senator Faircloth commented that

Virginia has not adopted conformity regulations as required by section

176 of the Clean Air Act. They contend that EPA should not approve the

redesignation unless Virginia has met all requirements of the Clean Air

Act for the Hampton Roads area.

Response: EPA does not agree with this comment. The Commonwealth of

Virginia has adopted both general and transportation conformity rules

pursuant to section 176 of the Act in 1996 and submitted these rules to

EPA for inclusion into the SIP in the early part of 1997. EPA is

presently reviewing both of these submittals and will take rulemaking

action on them at a future date.

EPA addressed the conformity requirements for the Hampton Roads

area in the March 12, 1997 direct final rulemaking. As noted in the

original rulemaking, EPA interprets the conformity requirements of

section 176 of the Act as being inapplicable for the purposes of

evaluating redesignation requests under section 107(d) of the Act. The

rationale for this is twofold. First, the conformity provisions of the

Act continue to apply to areas after they have been redesignated to

attainment. EPA's conformity rules require states to adopt both

transportation and general conformity provisions in their SIPs for

areas designated nonattainment or subject to a maintenance plan.

Therefore, the Commonwealth is obliged to adopt, submit, and implement

conformity regulations in the Hampton Roads maintenance area. Second,

EPA's general conformity rules require the performance of conformity

analyses in the absence of state adopted rules. Until EPA completes

rulemaking action on Virginia's conformity SIP submittals, the

Commonwealth is required to implement the federal conformity

regulations.

Because areas are subject to conformity requirements regardless of

whether they are redesignated to attainment and must implement the

federal conformity rules until appropriate state rules are approved

into the SIP, it has been EPA's policy to redesignate areas to

attainment that meet the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the

Act, even where EPA has not yet approved a state's transportation and

general conformity rules. EPA has used this policy many times in the

past to redesignate other nonattainment areas to attainment when EPA

has not yet approved state conformity regulations. See the discussions

in 61 FR 31835-31836 (Grand Rapids, MI redesignation, June 21, 1996);

60 FR 52748 (Tampa, FL redesignation, December 7, 1995); and 61 FR

20458 (Cleveland-Akron-Lorraine, OH redesignation, May 7, 1996).

Comment 7: The Allies commented that the maintenance demonstration

shows a slight increase in NOX emissions by the year 2008.

They further maintain that Virginia should be required to support,

through required photochemical modeling, that excess VOC reductions can

be used to offset the increase in NOX emissions. They also

stated that ``[w]e seriously question EPA's authority to waive the

fundamental `no net increase' requirement for approval of a maintenance

plan.''

Response: EPA does not agree with the comment. The commenter has

misread the information provided in EPA's technical support document

(TSD) developed for this rulemaking. While EPA does mention on page 34

of the TSD that NOX emissions are projected to increase

between the 1999 and 2008, the NOX emissions in 2008 will

still not exceed the NOX levels of the attainment year

inventory. No net increase refers to no net increase above the total

level of emissions set in the attainment year inventory for a specific

pollutant. The 1993 attainment year level of NOX emissions

is 230.079 tons/day. The level of NOX is projected to

decrease by 1999 to 228.882 tons/day due to control measures, such as

FMVCP. Virginia projects that by the year 2008, NOX

emissions will increase again slightly to 229.221 tons/day, a figure

attributed to normal growth within the region. However, even

considering this slight increase, the level of NOX emissions

in 2008 continues to remain below the 1993 attainment year level.

As a marginal ozone nonattainment area, Hampton Roads is not

required to submit photochemical modeling to demonstrate maintenance of

the ozone standard. EPA policy allows states to demonstrate maintenance

of the ozone standard by showing that future emissions of ozone

precursors will not exceed the level of the attainment year inventory.

Virginia has met this requirement to demonstrate that the level of both

VOC and NOX emissions will remain below the levels set in

the 1993 attainment year inventory.

III. Final Action

The EPA has evaluated the Commonwealth's redesignation request for

Hampton Roads for consistency with the Act, EPA regulations, and EPA

policy. The EPA has determined that the redesignation request and

monitoring data demonstrate that this area has attained the ozone

standard. In addition, EPA has determined that the redesignation

request meets the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) and the policy

set forth in the General Preamble and policy memorandum for area

redesignations, and today is approving Virginia's redesignation request

for Hampton Roads submitted on August 27, 1996. Furthermore, EPA is

approving into the Virginia SIP, the required maintenance plan because

it meets the requirements of section 175A of the Act and the motor

vehicle emissions budget for the Hampton Roads area. Other specific

requirements of redesignations and maintenance plans and the rationale

for EPA's approval action were explained in the March 12, 1997 direct

final rulemaking and will not be restated here.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or

allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for

revision to any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to

the state implementation plan shall be considered separately in light

of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

[[Page 34412]]

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

This action has been delegated to the Regional Administrator for

signature. 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.

Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E)

of the CAA does not impose any new requirements on small entities.

Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical

area and does not impose any regulatory requirements on sources. EPA

certifies that the approval of the redesignation request will not

affect a substantial number of small entities.

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

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 promulgated 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 approves pre-

existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new

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

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

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 Clean Air Act, petitions for

judicial review of EPA's approval of the Hampton Roads redesignation

request, maintenance plan and mobile emissions budget must be filed in

the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by

August 25, 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, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen

dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirement.

40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

Dated: June 17, 1997.

W. Michael McCabe,

Regional Administrator, Region III.

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 VV--Virginia

2. Section 52.2420 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(117) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.2420 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(117) The ten year ozone maintenance plan for Hampton Roads,

Virginia ozone nonattainment area submitted by the Virginia Department

of Environmental Quality on August 27, 1996:

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Letter of August 27, 1996 from the Virginia Department of

Environmental Quality transmitting the 10 year ozone maintenance plan

for the Hampton Roads marginal ozone nonattainment area.

(B) The ten year ozone maintenance plan including emission

projections, control measures to maintain attainment and contingency

measures for the Hampton Roads ozone nonattainment area adopted on

August 27, 1996.

(ii) Additional material.

(A) Remainder of August 27, 1996 Commonwealth submittal pertaining

to the redesignation request and maintenance plan referenced in

paragraph (c)(117)(i) of this section.

3. Section 52.2424 is added to read as follows:

Sec. 52.2424 Motor vehicle emissions budgets.

Motor vehicle emissions budget for the Hampton Roads maintenance

area adjusting the mobile emissions budget contained in the maintenance

plan for the horizon years 2015 and beyond adopted on August 29, 1996

and submitted by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality on

August 29, 1996.

PART 81--[AMENDED]

4. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations

4. In Sec. 81.347 the ``Virginia--Ozone'' table is amended by

revising the entry for ``Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport News (Hampton

Roads) Area'' to read as follows:

Sec. 81.347 Virginia.

* * * * *

[[Page 34413]]

Virginia--Ozone

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

Designation Classification

Designated area ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type

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

Norfolk-Virginia-Beach Newport July 28, 1997.................... Attainment...................

News (Hampton Roads) Area.

Chesapeake

Hampton

James City County

Newport News

Norfolk

Poquoson

Portsmouth

Suffolk

Virginia Beach

Williamsburg

York County

* * * * * * *

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

\1\ This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 97-16651 Filed 6-25-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P