ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
40 CFR Part 81
Designations of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Amendments and Corrections
[Air Docket No. A-90-42; FRL-4060-9]
RIN NO. 2060-AC56
57 FR 56762
November 30, 1992
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The EPA is issuing amendments to the State-by-State designations and classifications for the status of ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), lead, and particulate matter nominally 10 microns and less in diameter (PM-10) areas. These are changes based on information identified by EPA after publication of the original rule which established the current designations and classifications or information that was brought to EPA's attention by comments on the rule.
EFFECTIVE DATE: December 30, 1992.
ADDRESSES: Materials relevant to this rulemaking are included in Air Docket A-90-42, located in Rm. M-1500, First Floor, Waterside Mall, 40l M St., SW., Washington, DC, and may be inspected at this location during the hours from 8:30 a.m. to 12 noon and from 1:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, except for legal holidays. A duplicate copy of the docket for each affected area is located in the EPA Regional Office of the Region in which the area is located.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions relating to specific areas, please contact the appropriate EPA Regional Office:
Regional Offices States Susan Studlien, Chief, State Air Programs Branch, EPA Region I, J.F.K. Federal Building, Boston, MA Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New 02203-2211, (617) 565-3245. Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont William S. Baker, Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region II, 26 Federal Plaza, New York, NY 10278, (212) New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, and 264-2517. Virgin Islands Marcia Spink, Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region III, 841 Chestnut Delaware, District of Columbia, Building, Philadelphia, PA 19107, (215) Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and 597-9075. West Virginia Tom Hanson, Acting Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region IV, 345 Courtland Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, St., NE., Atlanta, GA 30365, (404) Mississippi, North Carolina, South 347-2864. Carolina, and Tennessee Stephen H. Rothblatt, Chief, Regulation Development Branch, EPA Region V, 230 South Dearborn St., Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 353-2211 Illinois and Indiana Gary Gulezian, Chief, Air Toxics and Radiation Branch, EPA Region V, 230 South Dearborn St., Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 353-8559 Michigan and Wisconsin George Czerniak, Chief, Air Enforcement Branch, EPA Region V, 230 South Dearborn St., Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 353-2088 Ohio and Minnesota Gerald Fontenot, Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region VI, 1445 Ross Ave., Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Dallas, TX 75202-2733, (214) 655-7204 Oklahoma, and Texas Gale Wright, Chief, Air Branch, EPA Region VII, 726 Minnesota Ave., Kansas City, KS 66101, (913) 236-7020 Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska Douglas M. Skie, Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region VIII, 999 18th St., Denver Place - Suite 500, Denver, CO Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South 80202-2405, (303) 293-1750 Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming David L. Calkins, Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, and 744-1219 Nevada George Abel, Chief, Air Programs Branch, EPA Region X, 1200 Sixth Ave., Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 442-1275 Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington
Valerie Broadwell/Barry Gilbert, Ozone/CO Programs Branch, (919) 541-3310/5238.
Lead and SO2 Issues:
Laurie Ostrand SO2/Particulate Matter Programs Branch, (919) 541-3277.
Particulate Matter issues:
Larry Wallace, SO2/Particulate Matter Programs Branch, (919) 541-0906.
Issues of a general nature:
Hank Young, Regional Operations Branch, (919) 541-5534. Air Quality Management Division (MD-15), Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711.
TEXT: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Electronic Availability: This document is available as an electronic file on The Federal Bulletin Board at 9 a.m. the day of publication in the Federal Register. For the convenience of the reader, EPA has prepared an updated version of the individual State air designation listings that were amended in the Federal Register of November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694), merged into the 1992 Code of Federal Regulations and further amended by this document. The updated files are also available at 9 a.m. the day of publication. By modem dial 202-512-3187 or call 202-512-1530 for disks or paper copies. This file is available in Postscript, Wordperfect 5.1, and ASCII.
In the Federal Register of November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694), EPA issued a final rule promulgating or announcing the designations, boundaries, and classifications of virtually all ozone and CO areas, all PM-10 areas, and some lead areas. Under sections 107(d)(2)(B) and (d)(5), 172(a)(1)(B), 181(a)(3), 186(a)(2), and 188(a) of the amended Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA was not required to solicit public comment prior to these promulgations, and in view of the tight time frames imposed under the amended CAA for designations, classifications, and State implementation plan (SIP) submittals, EPA determined that a formal public comment period prior to the promulgations would not be appropriate. However, in the November 6 rule, EPA entertained public comments addressing the technical correctness of its determinations and significant new policy issues. The EPA indicated that the rule would take effect 60 days after the date of publication.
The designations and boundaries promulgated by the rule took effect on January 6, 1992. During the comment period, EPA received comments addressing typographical errors, 40 CFR part 81 table presentations, and technical errors. Independent of the comments, EPA identified errors in the 40 CFR part 81 tables. With this issuance, EPA is making corrections to some of the designations, boundaries, and classifications that were promulgated or announced in the rule. These corrections are made under section 110(k)(6) of the CAA which provides as follows:
Whenever the Administrator determines that the Administrator's action approving, disapproving, or promulgating any plan or plan revision (or part thereof), area designation, redesignation, classification, or reclassification was in error, the Administrator may in the same manner as the approval, disapproval, or promulgation revise such action as appropriate without requiring any further submission from the State. Such determination and the basis thereof shall be provided to the State and public.
The EPA interprets this provision to authorize the Agency to make corrections to a promulgated regulation when it is shown to EPA's satisfaction that (1) EPA clearly erred in failing to consider or inappropriately considered information made available to EPA at the time of the promulgation, or the information made available at the time of promulgation is subsequently demonstrated to have been clearly inadequate; and (2) other information persuasively supports a change in the regulation.
Following is a discussion of the corrections made to the November 6, 1991 final rule. All other comments submitted with respect to the rule are discussed in a Technical Support Document contained in Air Docket A-90-42.
Comments Relating to Typographical Errors and 40 CFR part 81 Table Presentation
The Air Pollution Control District of San Diego County commented that the boundary description for the San Diego CO nonattainment area is incorrect in the November 6, 1991 document. The Area's preenactment boundary and the boundary described by the State in a December 28, 1990 letter to EPA are identical. However, EPA incorrectly expanded the nonattainment area in the November 6, 1991 document. The EPA acknowledges this error. The correct boundary description for the San Diego area CO nonattainment area now appears in the tabular entry of this document.
The Commonwealth of Virginia questioned why the following areas that are part of the Air Quality Control Regions (AQCR) and are in attainment are separated out from their respective AQCR's in the November 6, 1991 rule: AQCR 047 (National Capital Interstate), AQCR 223 (Hampton Roads Intrastate), and AQCR 225 (State Capital Intrastate).
The explanation is that in the rule, EPA followed the same listing format as formerly described in 40 CFR 81.348. However, EPA will combine the areas under their respective AQCR's in a tabular entry of this document since the Commonwealth has requested this. The Commonwealth should be aware that doing so may affect the prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) baseline study area.
AQCR 223 Hampton Roads was incorrectly listed as "AQCR 223 Hampton Roads." The area is now listed correctly as "AQCR 223 Hampton Roads Intrastate" in the tabular entry of this document.
The townships "Goose Lake" and "Aux Sable" were incorrectly listed as "Gooselake" and "Auxsable" in the November 6, 1991 document. This error is corrected in this document.
The word "Bumcombe" was incorrectly listed as "uncombe" in the Designated Area column of the November 6, 1991 document. This error is corrected in this document.
The Commonwealth of Virginia commented that "Hampton Roads Area" is the preferred description for the area that EPA describes as the "Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport News Area." Although EPA's original description is consistent with how other areas are named, i.e., by using the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) name, EPA concurs with the Commonwealth's request and has revised the description to read "Norfolk-Virginia Beach-Newport News (Hampton Roads) Area."
The Richmond nonattainment area was listed incorrectly as the "Richmond-Petersburg Area." Since Petersburg is in attainment, the area is now described as the "Richmond Area" in the tabular entry of this document.
The Commonwealth also commented that the title for AQCR 207 is incorrect. The ozone table is corrected by changing this title to "AQCR 207 Eastern Tennessee - SW Virginia Interstate."
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide
The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality commented that the Salem area was listed in the November 6, 1991 notice as the "City of Salem" for both ozone and CO. However, in an earlier letter to EPA (March 15, 1991), Governor Roberts recommended that these ozone and CO nonattainment boundaries be reaffirmed as the "Salem Area Transportation Study (SATS)."
Accordingly, the subheading "City of Salem" is replaced with "Salem Area Transportation Study (SATS)" as requested.
Also, in her March 15, 1991 letter to EPA, the Governor recommended that the carbon monoxide nonattainment boundary for Medford be established as the "Medford Urban Growth Boundary." The rule incorrectly designated the "Medford-Ashland Urban Growth Boundary." There is no such geographical entity; therefore, the description is corrected in the tabular entry of this document to read "Medford Urban Growth Boundary."
Since Nansemond County is no longer a governmental entity, the County is removed from the tabular entries of this document. Nansemond County has been annexed by Suffolk City.
EPA-Discovered Errors in 40 CFR part 81 Tables
The EPA inadvertently erred in crafting the PM-10 tables included in the November 6, 1991 final rule. The PM-10 tables appropriately identified those areas currently designated as nonattainment for PM-10 pursuant to section 107(d)(4)(B) of the CAA. However, all of the areas in a State not designated nonattainment for PM-10 were designated unclassifiable under section 107(d)(4)(B)(iii) of the CAA (see 56 FR 56705). The PM-10 tables published in the November 6, 1991 document omitted the "Unclassifiable" designation for the "Rest of State" areas not otherwise designated nonattainment. (If the State currently has no PM-10 nonattainment areas, then it follows that the entire State is designated unclassifiable for PM-10.) [See section 107(d)(4)(B)(iii).] For administrative efficiency reasons, EPA is not codifying in 40 CFR part 81 these State-wide unclassifiable designations.) The 40 CFR part 81 tables appearing in this document correct the oversight. The PM-10 table headings are also modified by removing the word "initial."
It is important to reiterate that total suspended particulates (TSP) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) designations will remain in effect for the purpose of implementing the maximum allowable increases (increments) in concentrations of particulate matter, measured in terms of TSP, pursuant to section 163(b) of the CAA, until EPA determines that the TSP designations are no longer necessary for that purpose (see section 107(d)(4) and 56 FR 56706 and 56709; November 6, 1991).
A typographical error involving the New Haven-Meriden-Waterbury entry is corrected. The tabular listing incorrectly included the classification description in the designation column. The error is corrected in this document.
The tabular listing for AQCR 082 incorrectly omitted "South Bend" in its title. The correct entry "AQCR 082 South Bend-Elkhart-Benton Harbor Interstate" is included in this document.
In the November 6, 1991 rule, portions of three Minnesota Counties (Benton, Sherburne, and Stearns) that make up the City of St. Cloud were listed as "Unclassifiable/Attainment." However, the table should have included a footnote explaining that the area is in the process of being redesignated to attainment for CO, and until such time as the redesignation approval is finalized the listing will have no force or effect (see the footnote added to the Minnesota -- Carbon Monoxide table for clarification).
A footnote explaining the attainment status of Brooke and Hancock Counties was accidentally left out of the November 6, 1991 final rule. The footnote is included in the tabular section of this document.
Comments Relating to Technical Errors
The Georgia Environmental Protection Division (on behalf of the State of Georgia) submitted comments requesting a revision to the lead nonattainment boundary for Muscogee County. The State proposed to change the boundary of the lead nonattainment area from the entire County to a circle with a radius of 2.3 kilometers, with the GNB, Inc., lead smelting and battery production facility in the center. Georgia submitted dispersion modeling demonstrating that this boundary is more appropriate than the entire county.
In the preamble to the November 6, 1991 rule, EPA described its policy for determining the boundary of a lead nonattainment area. The EPA indicated that the definition of nonattainment area in section 107(d)(1)(A)(i) of the CAA is the controlling legal standard. The EPA noted that generally it had recommended that the lead nonattainment boundary be defined by the county perimeter for the county in which the ambient lead monitor(s) recording the violation of the lead NAAQS and/or lead source is located. The EPA also noted that there may be situations when a boundary other than the county perimeter may be appropriate:
States may seek to alternatively define the lead nonattainment or unclassifiable boundary by using one, or a combination, of the following techniques: (1) Qualitative analysis, (2) spatial interpolation of air monitoring data, or (3) air quality simulation by dispersion modeling. The techniques are described in more detail in "Procedures for Estimating Probability of Nonattainment of a PM-10 NAAQS Using Total Suspended Particulate or PM-10 Data," EPA-450/4-86-017, December 1986. If a State seeks to alternatively define a lead nonattainment area, EPA recommends that it submit a reasoned and documented justification for the boundary identified (56 FR 56707).
Also in the preamble to the November 6, 1991 rulemaking, EPA indicated that it would entertain comments on the technical corrections of its determinations and significant new policy issues (56 FR 56694). The dispersion modeling and associated documents submitted by Georgia reflect a reasoned and documented justification for defining the nonattainment boundary to include only the area within a 2.3-kilometer radius of the GNB facility. The State has demonstrated that the 2.3-kilometer boundary includes both the portion of the county that does not meet the lead NAAQS and the source of the nonattainment problem [see section 107(d)(1)(A)(i) of the CAA]. Further, Georgia's submittal called into question the technical correctness of the earlier boundary determination for this area. For these reasons, relying on its authority under section 110(k)(6) of the CAA, EPA is modifying the lead nonattainment boundary for Muscogee County, Georgia, from the entire county to that part of the county which includes a circle with a radius of 2.3-kilometers with the GNB lead smelting and battery production facility in the center.
As provided in section 191(a), the Part D SIP for that portion of the County remaining nonattainment for lead will be due 18 months from the effective date of the nonattainment designation for that area (i.e., 18 months from January 6, 1992, the effective date of the November 6, 1991 rule).
As described in the November 6, 1991 final rule, EPA generally relied on the years 1987-1989 for ozone designations and classifications. However, in some cases, EPA used complete 1988-1990 data if they were quality assured and publicly available in the Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS) by February 13, 1991, and the State requested a lower classification for the nonattainment area. In the November 6, 1991 final rule, EPA announced the classification of Muskegon County, Michigan, as serious based on 1987-1989 data. Based on correspondence with the State and upon reviewing the record, EPA has determined that the 1988-1990 ozone concentrations data for Muskegon County, Michigan, were submitted before February 13, 1991, and justify a moderate classification based on the design value. In addition, the State of Michigan requested that EPA classify the area as moderate. Thus, Muskegon meets EPA's criteria for classification as a moderate area.
In a letter from Governor Booth Gardner to the Administrator, dated December 18, 1991, Washington State presented a case that the Puget Sound Region "experiences unique geographic and urbanization patterns and climatological conditions" and that a rigorous evaluation to establish more appropriate boundaries than those proposed is warranted. The State submitted a specific boundary recommendation on January 17, 1992, in a letter from the Assistant Director of the Washington Department of Ecology to the Regional Administrator of Region X. This letter contains the technical details and justification for the State's boundary recommendation.
In light of this information, EPA is correcting the Seattle ozone nonattainment area boundary under section 110(k)(6) of the CAA as amended. In amending the nonattainment boundary, the State relied on a variety of information, including air quality data, point source information, land use patterns and projections, climatic and meteorological data, ozone generation and transport dynamics, and population density data. The State obtained population density information from the Puget Sound Regional Council and compiled it into zones which are nearly identical to U.S. Census tracts. The population in each tract was ranked by density and then accumulated and mapped by percentages of total population. The population data were mapped into a band which represents 95 percent of the population in the three-county area. This information was compiled for 1990 as well as projection years of 2010 and 2020. The map encompassing 95 percent of the three-county population for each was the preliminary step in establishing the boundary. The State then compared the map with the other criteria. Land uses such as major industrial sites, cities, and transportation corridors were reviewed, and boundaries were expanded as necessary to assure inclusion. Finally, the boundary was expanded further to account for ozone transport. Meteorological conditions and a limited amount of special study ozone data were considered in this final adjustment. The final boundary recommendation by the State covers all the urbanized area as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. The boundary covers all of Pierce County, nearly all of King County, and the urbanized portion of Snohomish County. The boundary contains greater than 95 percent of the current and projected population, virtually all of the sources of oxides of nitrogen and volatile organic compounds in the three-county region, the monitoring sites, and areas that are likely to receive transported ozone. In this document, EPA is correcting the boundaries to conform to the State's recommendation.
As described in the November 6, 1991 final rule, EPA generally relied on the years 1987-1989 for ozone designations and classifications. However, in some cases, EPA used complete 1988-1990 data if they were quality assured and publicly available in AIRS by February 13, 1991 and the State requested a lower classification for the nonattainment area. In the November 6, 1991 final rule, EPA announced the classification of Sheboygan County as serious based on 1987-1989 data. Based on correspondence with the State, and upon reviewing the record, EPA has determined that the 1988-1990 ozone concentration data for Sheboygan County were submitted before February 13, 1991 and justify a moderate classification based on the design value.
In addition, the State of Wisconsin requested that EPA classify the area as moderate. Therefore, Sheboygan County meets EPA's criteria for classification as a moderate area. In this document, EPA is correcting the classification to moderate.
Several commenters questioned the use of 1986 data to classify the Boston nonattainment area as Moderate, and argued that the area should be treated as attainment on the basis of 1988-1989 data. EPA is continuing to review these comments. As a result, EPA is not, in this notice, revising the designation or classification of the Boston area, and EPA intends to respond to the commenters in a future action.
Upon enactment of the CAA Amendments of 1990, the existing nonattainment areas, including the New York-New Jersey-Long Island Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (NYC CMSA), were reaffirmed as nonattainment for ozone by operation of law. In addition, on November 15, 1990, the NYC CMSA was classified as a severe ozone area with 17 years to attain the standard based on its calculated ozone design value of 0.201 part per million. Section 107(d)(4)(A)(iv)-(v) of the CAA requires that the boundary for a serious, severe, or extreme area become the entire CMSA unless the Governor of the respective State notifies EPA that more time is needed to study the boundaries. A finding concluding that a smaller boundary is more appropriate had to be completed and EPA had to concur in the finding by January 15, 1992, or the New York City nonattainment area would automatically become the entire CMSA. On December 28, 1990, New York State formally requested additional time to study the appropriate boundary for the NYC CMSA as it relates to the air quality designations for the Counties of Orange and Putnam. In a March 21, 1991 letter and in a June 4, 1991 letter, New York State again requested additional time to evaluate the boundaries of Orange and Putnam Counties. On January 15, 1992, New York State's Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) formally submitted a study (NYSDEC had previously submitted drafts of the study) to the EPA Region II Administrator discussing the designations and classifications of Orange and Putnam Counties. New York State made the following boundary recommendations in the study based on population densities, population growth, and air quality in the area:
Orange County -- Towns of Blooming Grove, Chester, Highlands, Monroe, Tuxedo, Warwick, and Woodbury remain with the New York City nonattainment area and are classified as severe-17.
Orange County -- Other 16 towns and cities are designated as attainment.
Putnam County -- Entire County is designated as nonattainment and classified as marginal.
The primary reason for excluding portions of Orange County and all of Putnam County from the NYC CMSA was that the excluded areas do not contribute significantly to ozone violations in the NYC CMSA. The State reviewed population growth in Orange and Putnam Counties for the last 10 years and found that the seven Orange County towns listed above experienced high population growth rates of nearly 30 percent. These seven towns are located in the southeastern portion of the County immediately north of Rockland County along the Hudson Valley, and they are closest to the rest of the CMSA. By way of contrast, population grew much slower in the remaining portions of Orange County and in all of Putnam County. The towns in Putnam County experienced only a 3-percent population growth.
The study also examined the attainment status of these and surrounding areas. Although there is no permanent ozone monitoring station in either Orange or Putnam County, a properly sited, temporary EPA monitoring station in West Point, Orange County, measured ozone concentrations in the severe classification. These violations are believed to be the result of transported ozone from the NYC CMSA. Based on the high population growth rate in the southern part of Orange County, its proximity to the rest of the NYC CMSA severe nonattainment area, and the measured violations at the West Point monitor, New York State recommended that the southern seven towns of Orange County be designated nonattainment and classified as severe, thus being part of the NYC CMSA nonattainment area.
Similarly, based on the small population growth in the northern portion of Orange County, New York State recommended that the northern portion of Orange County be excluded from the NYC CMSA and designated attainment. The State recommended that Putnam County be grouped with Dutchess County and classified as a marginal nonattainment area. The State concluded that the Putnam County classification should be marginal, based on the fact that the County will be surrounded by nonattainment areas, most of which are classified severe, and that the population density of Putnam County (362 people per square mile) is comparable to Dutchess County (321 people per square mile), a county immediately to the north of Putnam County which is classified as a marginal nonattainment area.
It should be noted that New York is located entirely within the Northeast Ozone Transport Region, and all areas of the State are subject to certain controls regardless of their attainment status. On January 15, 1992, the Administrator agreed with the State's finding that northern Orange County and Putnam County do not significantly contribute to ozone violations in the NYC CMSA nonattainment area. In a January 15, 1992, letter to the NYSDEC Commissioner, the Administrator approved the State's request to exclude portions of the NYC CMSA.
By letter to the U.S. EPA Administrator dated May 21, 1992, a commenter objected to the exclusion from the NYC CSMA nonattainment area of the northeastern portion of Orange County on grounds that the total population, population density, prior population growth, commuting patterns, and growth projections indicate that sources in this area do contribute to the nonattainment problem. By letter to the U.S. EPA General Counsel dated July 23, 1992, this commenter extended its objection to the exclusion from the NYC CSMA nonattainment area of all of Orange County as well as Putnam County.
Due to the facts that these comments were submitted recently, and that EPA must coordinate its analysis with the State, EPA has not, to date, been able to complete its evaluation of these comments. Accordingly, EPA plans to proceed with the designation and classification of Orange and Putnam Counties as described above; however, EPA will continue to review the comments received to date, and will entertain any additional comments on this action that are received by December 30, 1992, for the purpose of correcting errors in the determination that the northern portion of Orange County and all of Putnam County should be excluded from the NYC CMSA nonattainment area. Following this period, EPA, in consultation with the State, will come to closure on the boundaries issue, and will provided the appropriate notification.
Florida and Ohio
As of November 6, 1991, the EPA and the States of Florida and Ohio were still discussing expanding the ozone boundaries of the Tampa, Florida, MSA and the Parkersburg, West Virginia - Marietta, Ohio, MSA to include, respectively, Pasco County, Florida, and Washington County, Ohio (see 56 FR 56701). At enactment of the CAA Amendments of 1990, both counties were designated unclassifiable/attainment by operation of law. The EPA and these States were reviewing these designations under the process set out in section 107(d)(4)(A) of the CAA to determine whether these designations should be confirmed or reversed. The EPA has completed its review and concurs with the States of Florida and Ohio that Pasco County and Washington County, respectively, remain attainment.
The November 6, 1991 notice reaffirmed the designation of the City of Provo as nonattainment for CO (56 FR 56846). However, the listed designation of Unclassifiable/Attainment for the remainder of Utah County did not reflect EPA action under section 107(d)(4)(A). At that time, the State and EPA were reviewing whether to confirm or revise that designation, and EPA committed to publish a subsequent Federal Register document to that effect. During the designation process, EPA received numerous comments both in support of expanding the existing boundary and in opposition to expansion. The nature of this issue, coupled with the many comments received from the public, made it apparent to EPA that more information was needed in order to adequately define the boundaries. With receipt of the Governor's commitments to carry out a comprehensive analysis in developing the SIP (due in November 1992), EPA agrees with the State that the SIP development process is the appropriate vehicle in which to obtain this additional information.
Therefore, EPA reaffirms the existing designation of Unclassifiable/Attainment for the portion of Utah County outside of the Provo City limits, fulfilling EPA's responsibility under section 107(d)(4)(A).
All comments and official correspondence between the State of Utah and EPA on the subject of the Provo nonattainment boundaries for CO are available for public review in EPA Air Docket A-90-42.
Effective Date of Designations, Classifications, and Boundaries for Ozone and CO Nonattainment Areas
For ozone and CO areas, corrections and other revisions made by this document will take effect December 30, 1992. As explained in more detail in the Technical Support Document, the effective date of the designations, classifications, and boundaries of ozone and CO areas established in the tables in the regulatory text, as may be corrected or revised by this document, may differ, depending on the area and the particular requirement. More specifically, for the portions of ozone and CO nonattainment areas that were designated nonattainment prior to the date of enactment of the amended CAA, the relevant effective date is November 15, 1990 (the date of enactment).
For areas that were designated attainment preenactment but are part of a larger area which contains preenactment nonattainment portions, the effective date of the designation to nonattainment is November 15, 1990, for the following purposes only: (1) the 5-percent classification adjustment under section 181(a)(4) (ozone) or section 186(a)(3) (CO); (2) the C/MSA boundary adjustment under section 107(d)(4)(A)(iv)-(v); and (3) determining the scope of a "covered area" under section 211(k)(10)(d) and opt-in under section 211(k)(6) for the reformulated gasoline requirement. For all other purposes the effective designation date is January 6, 1992 (except for a nonattainment portion of Orange County, NY, and for Putnam County, NY, for which the effective date is January 15, 1992). These other purposes include the applicability of new source review provisions and other substantive State or Federal pollution control requirements.
For current nonattainment areas designated attainment preenactment and not containing any preenactment nonattainment portions, the effective date for all purposes is January 6, 1992.
Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.
Dated: November 17, 1992.
William K. Reilly, Administrator.
PART 81 -- [AMENDED]
Therefore, 40 CFR part 81 is amended as follows:
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7407, 7501-7515, 7601.
2. In @ 81.300, by adding new paragraph (d) to read as follows:
@ 81.300 Scope.
* * * * *
(d) For ozone and carbon monoxide (CO) areas the effective date(s) of air quality area designations and classifications are described as follows:
(1) For the portions of ozone and CO nonattainment areas that were designated nonattainment prior to the date of enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (preenactment), the effective date is November 15, 1990.
(2) For the portions of nonattainment areas that were designated attainment prior to November 15, 1990, and included as part of an area designated nonattainment prior to November 15, 1990, the effective date of the designation to nonattainment is November 15, 1990 for:
(i) Purposes of determining whether the portion of the nonattainment area is eligible for the 5-percent classification adjustment under section 181(a)(4) (ozone) or section 186(a)(3) (CO);
(ii) Triggering the process for determining the C/MSA boundary adjustment under section 107(d)(4)(A)(iv)-(v);
(iii) Determining the scope of a "covered area" under section 211(k)(10)(D) and opt-in under section 211(k)(6) for the reformulated gasoline requirement.
For all other purposes the effective designation date is January 6, 1992 (except for the nonattainment portion of Orange Co., NY, and for Putnam County, NY, for which the effective date is January 15, 1992).
(3) For nonattainment areas designated attainment preenactment, and not included as part of any nonattainment area that was designated nonattainment preenactment, the effective date for all purposes is the date of the designation.
3. Section 81.302 is amended in the table for "Alaska-PM-10" by removing the word "initial" from the heading of the table and by adding an entry at the end of the table, to read as follows:
@ 81.302 Alaska.
* * * * *