![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; State of Alaska; Fairbanks
Related Material
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: February 4, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 23)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 5064-5069]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04fe02-11]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[AK-01-004a; FRL-7133-1]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; State of
Alaska; Fairbanks
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Alaska.
This
[[Page 5065]]
revision provides for attainment of the carbon monoxide (CO) national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in the Fairbanks Nonattainment
Area. This action also approves the use of the ``CO Emissions Model''
for SIP development purposes in EPA Region 10.
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective on April 5, 2002,
without further notice, unless EPA receives relevant adverse comment by
March 6, 2002. If relevant adverse comments are received, EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal
Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect.
Please note that if EPA receives relevant adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph or section of this rule and if that provision may
be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of a relevant adverse
comment.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Connie Robinson,
EPA, Office of Air Quality (OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,
Washington 98101.
Copies of the State's requests, and other information relevant to
this action are available for inspection during normal business hours
at the following locations: EPA, Office of Air Quality (OAQ-107), 1200
Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101, and the Alaska Department of
Environmental Conservation, 410 Willoughby Avenue, Suite 303, Juneau,
Alaska 99801-1795.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Connie Robinson, Office of Air Quality
(OAQ-107), EPA, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101, (206)
553-1086.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
is organized as follows:
I. Background Information.
A. What National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) is
considered in today's action?
B. What is the history behind this action?
C. What Clean Air Act (CAA) statutory, regulatory, and policy
requirements must be met to approve this action?
II. EPA's Review of the Fairbanks CO Plan.
A. Does the Fairbanks CO Plan meet all the procedural
requirements as required by Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA?
B. Does the Fairbanks CO plan include a comprehensive, accurate,
current base year inventory from all sources as required in section
187(a)(1) and periodic revisions as required in section 187(a)(5) of
the CAA?
C. Does the Fairbanks CO plan meet the requirements of section
187(a)(7) of the CAA which require that serious CO areas submit an
Attainment Demonstration which includes annual emissions reductions
necessary for reaching attainment by the deadline?
D. Has the State adopted transportation control measures (TCMs)
for the purpose of reducing CO emissions as required by section
182(d)(1) and described in section 108(f) (1)(A) of the CAA?
E. Does the Fairbanks CO plan include a forecast of vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) for each year before the attainment year of
2001 as required by 187(a) (2) (A) of the CAA?
F. Does the Fairbanks CO plan include contingency measures
required by Section 187(a)(3) of the CAA?
G. What levels of CO are estimated for the base year and
projected for future years and does the Fairbanks CO plan provide
for reasonable further progress (RFP) as required by Section
172(c)(2) and Section 171(1) of the CAA?
H. Is the motor vehicle emission budget approvable as required
by Section 176(c)(2)(A) of the CAA and outlined in conformity rules,
40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)?
I. Does Fairbanks have an Inspection and Maintenance (I/M)
program in place that meets EPA requirements in section
182(a)(2)(B)of the CAA?
J. Are there controls on stationary sources of CO as required by
Section 172(c)(5) of the CAA?
III. Summary of EPA's Action.
IV. Administrative Requirements.
I. Background Information
A. What National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) Is Considered in
Today's Action?
CO is among the ambient air pollutants for which EPA has
established a health-based standard and is the pollutant that is the
subject of this action. CO is a colorless, odorless gas emitted in
combustion processes. CO enters the bloodstream through the lungs and
reduces oxygen delivery to the body's organs and tissues. Exposure to
elevated CO levels is associated with impairment of visual perception,
work capacity, manual dexterity, and learning ability, and with illness
and death for those who already suffer from cardiovascular disease,
particularly angina or peripheral vascular disease.
Under section 109(a)(1)(A) of the CAA, we have established primary,
health-related NAAQS for CO: 9 parts per million (ppm) averaged over an
8-hour period, and 35 ppm averaged over 1 hour. Fairbanks has never
exceeded the 1-hour NAAQS; therefore, the State Implementation Plan
revision (Fairbanks CO plan), and this action address only the 8-hour
CO NAAQS. Attainment of the 8-hour CO NAAQS is achieved if not more
than one non-overlapping 8-hour average in any consecutive 2-year
period per monitoring site exceeds 9 ppm (values below 9.5 are rounded
down to 9.0 and are not considered exceedances).
B. What Is the History Behind This Action?
Upon enactment of the 1990 CAA Amendments, areas meeting the
requirements of section 107(d) of the CAA were designated nonattainment
for CO by operation of law. Under section 186(a) of the CAA, each CO
nonattainment area was also classified by operation of law as either
moderate or serious depending on the severity of the area's air quality
problems. Fairbanks was classified as a moderate CO nonattainment area.
Moderate CO nonattainment areas were expected to attain the CO NAAQS as
expeditiously as practicable but no later than December 31, 1995. If a
moderate CO nonattainment area was unable to attain the CO NAAQS by
December 31, 1995, the area was reclassified as a serious CO
nonattainment area by operation of law. Fairbanks was unable to meet
the CO NAAQS by December 31, 1995, and was reclassified as a serious
nonattainment area effective March 30, 1998. As a result of the
reclassification, the State had 18 months or until October 1, 1999, to
submit a new Fairbanks CO plan demonstrating attainment of the CO NAAQS
as expeditiously as practicable but no later than December 31, 2000,
the CAA attainment date for all serious CO areas.
The required Fairbanks CO plan was not submitted by October 1,
1999, and we made a finding of failure to submit the required plan (See
65 FR 17444, April 3, 2000) which triggered the 18-month time clock for
mandatory application of sanctions and a year time clock for additional
sanctions and the requirement for a Federal Implementation Plan under
the CAA. A complete Fairbanks CO plan was due by October 3, 2001, to
stop the clocks.
On August 30, 2001, the Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation (ADEC) submitted the Fairbanks CO plan as a revision to
the Alaska SIP. We determined this submittal to be complete and stopped
the sanctions' clocks effective September 24, 2001.
Fairbanks did not have the two years of clean data required to
attain the standard by December 31, 2000, the required attainment date
for CO serious areas, and under section 186(a)(4) of the CAA, Alaska
requested and EPA granted a one year extension of the attainment date
deadline to December 31, 2001 (66 FR 28836, May 25, 2001).
[[Page 5066]]
C. What Clean Air Act (CAA) Statutory, Regulatory, and Policy
Requirements Must Be Met To Approve This Action?
Section 172 of the CAA contains general requirements applicable to
SIP revisions for nonattainment areas. Sections 186 and 187 of the CAA
set out additional air quality planning requirements for CO
nonattainment areas.
EPA has issued a ``General Preamble'' describing the agency's
preliminary views on how EPA intends to review SIP revisions submitted
under Title I of the CAA. See generally 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992)
and 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992). The reader should refer to the
General Preamble for a more detailed discussion of the interpretations
of Title I requirements. In this direct final rulemaking action, we are
applying these policies to the Fairbanks CO plan, taking into
consideration specific factual issues presented.
II. EPA's Review of the Fairbanks CO Plan
A. Does the Fairbanks CO Plan Meet All the Procedural Requirements as
Required by Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA?
The CAA requires States to observe certain procedural requirements
in developing implementation plans and revisions for submission to EPA.
Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA provides that each implementation plan
submitted by a State must be adopted after reasonable notice and public
hearing. Public noticing for a public meeting held on July 17, 2001,
occurred through advertisements in the Fairbanks Daily News Miner and
the Internet. The SIP submittal includes a description of the public
meeting where the public had the opportunity to comment on the issues
addressed in the plan. Also included are the comments received from the
public and the response developed by the ADEC staff. Following the
required public participation, the State adopted the Fairbanks CO plan
on July 27, 2001. The Fairbanks CO Plan demonstrates it has met the
procedural requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA.
B. Does the Fairbanks CO Plan Include a Comprehensive, Accurate,
Current Base Year Inventory From All Sources as Required in Section
187(a)(1) and Periodic Revisions as Required in Section 187(a)(5) of
the CAA?
Yes. Fairbanks submitted a base year inventory for 1995 based on
EPA guidance that determined that an inventory for 1995 would satisfy
the requirement for a base year inventory. A periodic inventory for
1998 was also submitted. The inventories contain point, area, on-road
and non-road mobile source data, and documentation. The inventories
were prepared for a typical winter day for each of the years. Emissions
for these groupings are presented in the following table.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Daily emissions (tons/
day)
Emission category -------------------------
Base year Periodic
1995 year 1998
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Sources................................. 4.14 4.20
Area Sources.................................. 1.53 1.34
Non-road mobile sources....................... 4.00 3.72
On-road mobile sources........................ 21.69 17.74
-------------------------
Total..................................... 31.36 27.01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total average daily, CO season emissions associated with the
Fairbanks nonattainment area for the 1995 base year are 31.36 tons per
day. The methodologies used to prepare the base year emissions
inventory, as described in the Fairbanks CO plan, are acceptable.
The plan must also revise the inventory every three years until the
area reaches attainment. The methodologies used to prepare the periodic
year emissions inventory, as described in the Fairbanks CO plan, are
acceptable. A discussion of how these inventories meet the requirements
needed for approval is in the technical support document (TSD) for this
action. Detailed inventory data is contained in the docket maintained
by EPA.
C. Does the Fairbanks CO Plan Meet the Requirements of Section
187(a)(7) of the CAA Which Require That Serious CO Areas Submit an
Attainment Demonstration Which Includes Annual Emissions Reductions
Necessary for Reaching Attainment by the Deadline?
The Fairbanks CO Plan contains an attainment demonstration using
rollback modeling to show that emission reductions resulting from
implementation of control measures are sufficient to ``roll back'' the
design value to a concentration at or below the NAAQS for CO of 9 ppm.
Alaska showed that the 8-hour design value concentration of 9.0
predicted for 2001, the attainment year, documents attainment of the 8-
hour CO NAAQS.
D. Has the State Adopted Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) for the
Purpose of Reducing CO Emissions as Required by Section 182(d)(1) and
Described in Section 108(f) (1)(A) of the CAA?
Section 187(b)(2) of the CAA requires States with serious CO
nonattainment areas to submit a SIP revision that includes
transportation control strategies and measures to offset any growth in
emissions due to growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) or vehicle
trips. In developing such strategies, a State must consider measures
specified in section 108(f) of the CAA and choose and implement such
measures as are necessary to demonstrate attainment with the NAAQS.
TCMs are designed to reduce mobile pollutant emissions by either
improving transportation efficiency or reducing single-occupant vehicle
trips. The EPA has reviewed the TCMs in the Fairbanks CO plan and
approves them. Our full review of the TCMs is included in the TSD for
this action. Following is a brief description of the TCMs included in
the plan.
Engine Preheater Control Measure
A control measure included in the plan to reduce motor vehicle cold
start emissions was passed by the Fairbanks North Star Borough (the
Borough) on April 12, 2001. The local ordinance requires employers with
275 or more parking spaces to provide power to electrical outlets at
temperatures of +20 deg. F or lower. In addition, provisions were
included to require new or enlarged parking lots of 275 spaces or more
to install electrical outlets for parking spaces intended to be used by
motorists for more than two hours and to provide power. Provisions were
also included for recordkeeping, maintaining existing plug-ins in an
operable condition, and penalties for failure to comply. This mandatory
component of the plug-in program will help insure that emission
reductions are being achieved through plugging-in at temperatures of
20 deg. F and colder when thermal inversions often occur.
Other Control Measures
Engine preheaters are used extensively throughout Fairbanks to
ensure vehicles can be easily started under extremely cold conditions.
Vehicle emission testing in Alaska has confirmed that preheating
vehicles, a practice commonly referred to as ``plugging-in,'' provides
a substantial reduction in motor vehicle idling time and cold start
emissions as described in section 108(f)(1)(A)(xi)and (xii).
Recognizing the many benefits of
[[Page 5067]]
plugging-in, the Borough has a long-standing practice of expanding the
number of parking spaces with electrical outlets. A recent survey
showed that more than 90% of employee parking areas with more than 100
spaces are currently equipped with electrical outlets. The Borough also
conducted public awareness campaigns to encourage the use of plug-ins
at home and at parking spaces with electrical outlets.
Transit system improvements include expanded service and free
wintertime service. The Borough also ran a public awareness campaign to
boost transit ridership. These measures have resulted in a 72% increase
in ridership during the CO season.
In addition, a total of 11 separate highway improvement projects
focusing on intersection and signal improvements have been completed in
the nonattainment area during the past 5 years. These projects have a
small regional effect on emissions.
E. Does the Fairbanks CO Plan Include a Forecast of Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) for Each Year Before the Attainment Year of 2001 as
Required by 187(a)(2)(A) of the CAA?
Yes. Estimates of average winter weekday VMT were supplied by
Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities (ADOT&PF).
VMT was projected to grow at a rate of 1.2% per year from 1995 to 2001.
Fairbanks has committed to preparing annual VMT estimates and
forecasts and to submitting these reports (``VMT tracking reports'') to
EPA. Under section 187(a)(3) of the Act, annual VMT tracking reports
provide a potential basis for triggering implementation of contingency
measures in the event that estimates of actual VMT exceed the forecasts
contained in the prior annual VMT tracking report.
F. Does the Fairbanks CO Plan Include Contingency Measures Required by
Section 187(a)(3) of the CAA?
Section 187(a)(3) of the Act requires serious CO nonattainment
areas, such as Fairbanks, to submit a plan revision that provides for
contingency measures. The CAA specifies that such measures are to be
implemented if any estimate of VMT submitted in an annual VMT tracking
report exceeds the VMT predicted in the most recent prior forecast or
if the area fails to attain the NAAQS by the attainment date. As a
general rule, contingency measures must be structured to take effect
without further action by the State or EPA upon the occurrence of
certain triggering events.
The Fairbanks Plan includes contingency measures that meet the
requirements of section 187(a)(3) of the CAA. In the event that
Fairbanks exceeds the ambient CO standard, a number of contingency
measures have been established to provide additional emission
reductions. Measures are focused on expanded transit operations,
increasing the number of parking spaces equipped with electrical plug-
in units, and road system improvements. Fairbanks will be implementing
these measures whether or not they have a violation which automatically
triggers contingency measures.
G. What Levels of CO Are Estimated for the Base Year and Projected for
Future Years and Does the Fairbanks CO Plan Provide for Reasonable
Further Progress (RFP) as Required by Section 172(c)(2) and Section
171(1) of the CAA?
Under the CAA, states have the responsibility to inventory
emissions contributing to NAAQS nonattainment, to track these emissions
over time, and to ensure that control strategies are being implemented
that reduce emissions and move areas toward attainment. Section
172(c)(1) of the CAA requires all nonattainment plans to contain
provisions to provide for ``the implementation of all reasonably
available control measures as expeditiously as practicable'' and to
provide for the attainment of the applicable national ambient standard.
Further, section 172(c)(2) states that such plan provisions shall
require RFP.
Fairbanks has made considerable progress in reducing carbon
monoxide emissions over the past three decades. CO concentrations have
decreased from a second-high eight-hour average of 19.0 ppm and 45
violations in 1983, to a second-high eight-hour average of 8.9 ppm and
zero violations in calendar year 2000. The implementation of local
control programs contributed to those reductions. These programs in
combination with state and federal programs such as the clean vehicles
standard and activity changes have produced a 25.4% reduction in total
emissions in the nonattainment area between 1995 and 2001. Based on
these considerations, EPA finds that RFP has been demonstrated.
H. Is the Motor Vehicle Emission Budget Approvable as Required by
Section 176(c)(2)(A) of the CAA and Outlined in Conformity Rules, 40
CFR 93.118(e)(4)?
Section 176(c)(2)(A) of the CAA requires regional transportation
plans to be consistent with the motor vehicle emissions budget
contained in the applicable air quality plans for the Fairbanks area.
The motor vehicle emissions budget that is established for the 2001
attainment year is approved for Fairbanks. It is as follows:
FNSB Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO emissions
Source category for 2001 (tons/
day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-Road Sources--Initial Idle........................... 6.49
On-Road Sources--Traveling.............................. 7.91
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget (total on-road source 14.40
emissions).............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The TSD summarizes how the CO motor vehicle emissions budget meets
the criteria contained in the conformity rule (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)) and
is approved for conformity. The initial idle emissions are based on
actual vehicle testing and the traveling emissions are based on an
emissions model.
This action also approves the use of the ``CO Emissions Model'' for
SIP development purposes. The CO Emissions Model is an on-road motor
vehicle emission factor model that was specifically developed for cases
like the Fairbanks CO attainment SIP. In August of 1999, EPA reviewed
and preliminarily approved the use of the CO Emissions Model for CO SIP
development purposes, due to the unique CO issues involved in Alaska
and the absence of a more recent update to the MOBILE model at that
time. Today's document formalizes that approval of the use of the CO
Emissions Model for SIP development for a limited number of CO areas in
EPA Region 10 in low altitude regions.
The CO Emissions Model is considered an interim update to MOBILE5b
developed to take advantage of the best information currently available
on CO emissions, particularly for cold climates, such as Alaska. As
such, the CO Emissions Model is not required to be used for SIP
development in any area, however, it was approved for use on a
voluntary basis for SIP development prior to the official release of
MOBILE6, EPA's next motor vehicle emission factor model. MOBILE6 was
not available at the time that the Fairbanks attainment SIP was being
developed to meet FNSB's regulatory time constraints. However, since
EPA is expected to approve MOBILE6 early this year, MOBILE6 should be
used for the next control strategy SIP for Fairbanks.
When EPA's approval for the current Fairbanks CO attainment SIP is
effective, all future transportation conformity determinations for CO
in
[[Page 5068]]
Fairbanks must be based on the CO Emissions Model until MOBILE6 is
officially released. When MOBILE6 is released, Fairbanks must rely upon
either the CO Emissions Model or MOBILE6 for new conformity analyses
that begin prior to the end of the grace period for use of MOBILE6,
which EPA intends to establish as two years after MOBILE6's official
release. After the end of the MOBILE6 conformity grace period which EPA
intends to establish under 40 CFR 93.111 when it officially releases
the model, all new conformity analyses must be based on MOBILE6.
Fairbanks is currently the only area that has used the CO Emissions
Model in its SIP which EPA has formally acted upon. Therefore, no other
area should be using the CO Emissions Model for transportation
conformity purposes at this time. However, the above Fairbanks policy
would apply to any other areas that have completed significant SIP work
with the CO Emissions Model prior to MOBILE6's release. At this time,
EPA anticipates that Medford, Oregon, and Anchorage, Alaska, are the
only other areas that have developed CO SIPs with the CO Emissions
Model. EPA will expect future SIP submissions in these areas to be
based on Mobile6. Areas that have questions about using the CO
Emissions Model should consult the EPA Region 10 Office on whether this
is appropriate.
I. Does Fairbanks Have an Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program in
Place That Meets EPA Requirements in Section 182(a)(2)(B) of the CAA?
Yes. Fairbanks primary CO control measure is their I/M program
initially implemented in 1985. Since then, Fairbanks has continued to
improve its performance. Improved program elements include: test
equipment and procedures, quality assurance and quality control
procedures, vehicle repair requirements and enforcement. The Fairbanks
I/M program, improvements and amendments, have been adopted through
previous SIP revisions (51 FR 8203, September 15, 1986; 54 FR 31522,
July 31, 1989; 60 FR 17232, April 5, 1995; 64 FR 72940, December 29,
1999) or are being acted on in other Federal Register documents (67 FR
822, January 8, 2002 and 67 FR 849, January 8, 2002).
J. Are There Controls on Stationary Sources of CO as Required by
Section 172(c)(5) of the CAA?
Yes. Section 172(c)(5) of the CAA requires States with
nonattainment areas to include in their SIPs a permit program for the
construction and operation of new or modified major stationary sources
in nonattainment areas. In a separate, prior action, we approved the
new source review permit program for Alaska. (See 60 FR 8943, February
16, 1995.)
III. Summary of EPA's Actions
We are approving the following elements of the Fairbanks CO
Attainment Plan, as submitted on August 30, 2001:
A. Procedural requirements, under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA;
B. Baseline and projected emission inventories, under sections
172(c)(3) and 187(a)(1) of the CAA;
C. Attainment demonstration, under section 187(a)(7) of the CAA;
D. The TCM program under 182(d)(1) and 108(f)(A) of the CAA
E. VMT forecasts under section 187(a)(2)(A) of the CAA;
F. Contingency measures under section 187(a)(3) of the CAA.
G. RFP demonstration, under sections 171(1), 172(c)(2), and
187(a)(7) of the CAA;
H. The conformity budget under section 176(c)(2)(A) of the CAA and
section 93.118 of the transportation conformity rule (40 CAR part 93,
subpart A); and
IV. Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically
significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit 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 United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of
[[Page 5069]]
this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by April 5, 2002. 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 in 40 CFR Parts 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: January 16, 2002.
Randall F. Smith,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.
Part 52, Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart C--Alaska
2. Section 52.70 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(32) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.70 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(32) On August 30, 2001 the Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation submitted revisions to the Carbon Monoxide State
Implementation Plan for Fairbanks, Alaska.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Air Quality Control Regulations, 18 AAC 50.030, as adopted 7/
27/01, effective 9/21/01.
(B) Assembly Ordinance 2001-17 mandating a Fairbanks North Star
Borough motor vehicle plug-in program, as adopted 4/12/2001, effective
4/13/01.
(ii) Additional Material.
Volume II, Section III.C of the State Air Quality Control Plan
adopted 7/27/01, effective 9/21/01; Volume III.C3, III.C.5, C.11, and
C.12 of the Appendices; adopted 7/27/01, effective 9/21/01.
[FR Doc. 02-2505 Filed 2-1-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P