[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 217 (Thursday, November 10, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-27876]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: November 10, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[Region II Docket No. 131, NJ 15-1-6341; FRL-5104-8]

 

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Carbon 
Monoxide State Implementation Plan Revision, State of New Jersey

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve portions of a request from New 
Jersey to revise its State Implementation Plan (SIP) related to the 
control of carbon monoxide and disapprove remaining portions. EPA is 
proposing approval of New Jersey's vehicle miles travelled forecast, 
carbon monoxide emission inventory, oxygenated fuels rule, and multi-
state coordination. EPA is also proposing approval of the employee 
commute option and transportation control measures as contingency 
measures. In addition, EPA is proposing a limited approval and a 
limited disapproval of New Jersey's new source review regulation which 
covers all nonattainment pollutants. EPA proposes to disapprove New 
Jersey's November 15, 1993, proposal for an enhanced inspection and 
maintenance program. In addition, the attainment demonstration is also 
being disapproved since it relies on the enhanced inspection and 
maintenance program as a control measure. These revisions have been 
submitted in response to requirements established in the Clean Air Act 
as amended in 1990.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 12, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to:

William J. Muszynski, P.E., Deputy Regional Administrator, 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region II Office, 26 Federal Plaza, 
New York, New York 10278 Attention: William S. Baker.

    Copies of the State submittal are available at the following 
addresses for inspection during normal business hours:

Environmental Protection Agency, Region II Office, Library, 26 Federal 
Plaza, Room 402, New York, New York 10278.
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Office of Energy, 
Bureau of Air Quality Planning, 401 East State Street, CN027, Trenton, 
New Jersey 08625.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William S. Baker, Chief, Air Programs 
Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, 26 Federal Plaza, room 1034A, 
New York, New York 10278, (212) 264-2517.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Clean Air Act (Act), as amended in 1990, sets forth a number of 
requirements that states designated as moderate nonattainment for 
carbon monoxide had to submit as revisions to their State 
Implementation Plans (SIPs) by November 15, 1992. These requirements 
are: an attainment demonstration, an enhanced vehicle inspection and 
maintenance program, an oxygenated fuels rule, a vehicle miles 
travelled forecast, contingency measures, a carbon monoxide emission 
inventory, a revised New Source Review program, and multi-state 
coordination. In addition, a conformity plan is required to be 
submitted by November 25, 1994.
    On November 15, 1992, New Jersey submitted to the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) proposed revisions to its carbon monoxide SIP 
that addressed each of the above requirements for its two moderate 
carbon monoxide nonattainment areas. In addition, in a submittal dated 
October 4, 1993, New Jersey submitted to EPA information on TCMs which 
New Jersey will use as a contingency measure.
    The New Jersey portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long 
Island carbon monoxide nonattainment area is classified as a moderate 2 
area (an area that has a design value of 12.8-16.4 ppm.), while the 
other area, Camden County, is classified as a moderate 1 area (an area 
with a design value of 9.1-12.7 ppm). The New York-Northern New Jersey-
Long Island carbon monoxide nonattainment area is part of the New York-
Northern New Jersey-Long Island Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical 
Area and includes the Counties of Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Union, and 
parts of Passaic. The nonattainment area in Passaic County includes the 
Cities of Clifton, Paterson, and Passaic. The remainder of the State is 
either in attainment or is not classified.
    EPA has issued a ``General Preamble'' describing its preliminary 
views on how it intends to review SIPs and SIP revisions submitted in 
order to meet title I requirements (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 title I 
requirements and what EPA views as necessary to adequately comply with 
title I provisions. The following summarizes EPA's evaluation of New 
Jersey's SIP submittals and EPA's proposed actions. The details of 
EPA's review of New Jersey's submittals are contained in the Technical 
Support Document available at EPA's Region II office.

Attainment Demonstration

    Section 187(a)(7) of the Act requires each state that contains all 
or part of a moderate 2 area to submit to the Administrator an 
attainment demonstration by November 15, 1992. This attainment 
demonstration should document how the State will attain the 8-hour 
carbon monoxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) of 9 ppm 
by December 31, 1995.
    New Jersey, using emissions from the EPA-approved MOBILE4.1 model, 
demonstrated attainment of the carbon monoxide standard with the EPA-
approved CAL3QHC air quality dispersion model. New Jersey took emission 
reductions credit from an enhanced inspection and maintenance program, 
oxygenated fuels, and the federal motor vehicle control program 
(vehicle turnover) as control measures to attain the standard. The 
following is a summary of the methods and modeling techniques New 
Jersey used in its attainment demonstration. A more detailed 
explanation of this modeling is contained in the Technical Support 
Document.
    To begin the modeling process, New Jersey first selected then 
ranked the ``worst case'' intersections that the New Jersey Department 
of Transportation, working in conjunction with the county and local 
governments, had identified. Next, New Jersey chose a background 
concentration and an ambient temperature for use in the CAL3QHC 
intersection model. Once all the parameters were selected, the modeling 
was performed and maximum future carbon monoxide concentrations were 
predicted.
    New Jersey ranked the ``worst case'' intersections with a technique 
other than that prescribed by the EPA guidance, ``Guideline for 
Modeling Carbon Monoxide from Roadway Intersections.'' This guidance 
specifies that such rankings use Level Of Service (LOS) calculations 
which measure the operating conditions in the intersection and how 
those conditions affect traffic flow and delay. As such, LOS is a 
measure of the combined traffic volume, signal timing, and related 
congestion and delay. New Jersey did not have LOS data in its database, 
and the time and cost of collecting this data prohibited the use of 
this method. Instead, New Jersey used traffic volume information and a 
survey conducted by the New Jersey Department of Transportation which 
examined the geometry of various intersections. Since this traffic 
volume information is closely related to delay, it is a valid 
alternative method for ranking.
    New Jersey then used the EPA default background carbon monoxide 
value of 3.5 ppm for a central business district from the ``Guideline 
for Modeling Carbon Monoxide from Roadway Intersections.'' This 
background was used in place of EPA's Urban Airshed Model (UAM) or RAM 
model. Given the lack of reliable gridded traffic information, the UAM 
or RAM model would have no advantage over the default value in this 
instance. Further, the default value was shown to be conservative when 
compared with background values for the entire New York-Northern New 
Jersey-Long Island carbon monoxide nonattainment area.
    New Jersey, using the above parameters along with additional 
traffic and air quality data inputs required by the CAL3QHC 
intersection model, then performed an air quality modeling analysis on 
the 25 ``worst case'' intersections. This analysis demonstrated that 
all of the modeled intersections will attain the 8-hour carbon monoxide 
standard of 9 ppm. The highest value obtained was 8.0 ppm, which is 11% 
below the 8-hour carbon monoxide standard. Since air quality at the 
most congested intersections was determined to be below the standard, 
New Jersey has demonstrated that the entire area will be in attainment 
for carbon monoxide by December 31, 1995.
    New Jersey used appropriate modeling techniques and modeling inputs 
in this demonstration, however one of the control measures used to 
demonstrate attainment, the enhanced inspection and maintenance 
program, submitted on November 15, 1993 has not been fully adopted in 
accordance with State requirements. In addition, New Jersey has 
publicly declared its intention to make a revised submittal at a later 
date. Therefore, EPA is proposing to disapprove the attainment 
demonstration because it is dependent on an unadopted program.

Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance Program

    Section 187(a)(6) of the Act requires implementation of enhanced 
inspection and maintenance programs in moderate 2 carbon monoxide 
nonattainment areas which includes provisions as required under section 
182(c)(3) concerning serious ozone nonattainment areas. Such provisions 
require implementation of an enhanced inspection and maintenance 
program in urbanized areas with a population greater than 200,000.
    On November 15, 1993 New Jersey submitted proposed regulations and 
other information pertaining to the enhanced inspection and maintenance 
program. Since New Jersey did not submit a fully adopted enhanced 
inspection and maintenance program, on February 2, 1994 EPA notified 
the State that this submittal was incomplete and a sanctions process 
was begun. Because these regulations were not adopted at the time of 
their submittal (or since), EPA is proposing the disapproval of the 
enhanced inspection and maintenance program as submitted.

Oxygenated Fuels Rule--Subchapter 25

    Section 211(m) of the Act requires that states submit revisions to 
their SIPs to require an oxygenated gasoline program by no later than 
November 1, 1992. This requirement applies to all states with moderate 
carbon monoxide nonattainment areas having a design value of 9.1 ppm or 
greater based generally on 1988 and 1989 air quality data. Each state's 
oxygenated gasoline program must require gasoline for the specified 
control area(s) to contain not less than 2.7% oxygen by weight during 
that portion of the year in which the areas are prone to high ambient 
concentrations of carbon monoxide. Under section 211(m)(2), the 
oxygenated gasoline requirements generally are to cover all gasoline 
sold or dispensed in the larger of either the Consolidated Metropolitan 
Statistical Area or the Metropolitan Statistical Area in which the 
nonattainment area is located. Under section 211(m)(2), the length of 
the control period, to be established by the EPA Administrator, shall 
not be less than four months unless a state can demonstrate that, 
because of meteorological conditions, a reduced control period will 
assure that there will be no carbon monoxide exceedances outside of 
such reduced period. EPA announced guidance on the establishment of 
control periods by area in the Federal Register on October 20, 1992 (57 
FR 47849).
    In this guidance, EPA also announced the availability of an 
oxygenated gasoline credit program. Under a credit program, marketable 
oxygen credits may be generated from the sale of gasoline with a higher 
oxygen content than is required (i.e. an oxygen content greater than 
2.7% by weight). These oxygen credits may be used to offset the sale of 
gasoline with a lower oxygen content than is required. Where a credit 
program has been adopted, EPA's guidelines provide that no gallon of 
gasoline should contain less than 2.0% oxygen by weight. EPA also 
issued labeling regulations under section 211(m)(4) of the Act, which 
were published in the Federal Register on October 20, 1992.
    New Jersey was required to submit a revised SIP by November 15, 
1992 under section 110 and part D of title I of the Act and which was 
to include an oxygenated gasoline program for the New Jersey portions 
of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island Consolidated 
Metropolitan Statistical Area and the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton 
Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area.
    As part of the November 15, 1992, submittal, the New Jersey 
Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) submitted adopted 
amendments and new rule Subchapter 25, ``Control and Prohibition of Air 
Pollution by Vehicular Fuels,'' of Chapter 27, Title 7 of the New 
Jersey Administrative Code. Subchapter 25 contains the requirements for 
New Jersey's oxygenated gasoline program, which was adopted by New 
Jersey on September 1, 1992.
    A more detailed analysis of the submittal is contained in the 
Technical Support Document. The following is EPA's review of the major 
elements of the State's submittal.
Type of Program and Oxygen Content Requirement
    New Jersey has elected to adopt a regulation requiring 2.7% oxygen 
content for each gallon of gasoline sold in a control area. The 
regulation also contains a variance that allows, upon individual 
facility request and subsequent State approval, the establishment of a 
2.0% minimum oxygen content. Under EPA's credit program guidelines, all 
gasoline sold or dispensed during the control period by each control 
area responsible party (CAR or Blender CAR) must contain an average 
oxygen content of not less than 2.7% by weight. New Jersey has adopted 
an oxygen content requirement, though it also provides for variances 
from this requirement.
Applicability and Program Scope
    Section 211(m)(2) requires oxygenated gasoline to be sold during a 
control period established by the EPA Administrator based on air 
quality monitoring data. New Jersey has established control periods 
consistent with the EPA guidance.
    Subchapter 25 has an ``averaging period'' scheme which provides 
that all gasoline sold or dispensed within the control areas during a 
one month averaging period must comply with the 2.7% average oxygen 
content standard.
    Subchapter 25 requires oxygenated gasoline to be sold statewide and 
divides New Jersey into a northern and southern area. The two areas 
differ only in the relative length of their control periods: seven 
months (October 1 to April 30) in the northern area and four months 
(November 1 to the last day of February) in the southern area. The 
length of each control period is consistent with the requirements of 
section 211(m)(2) of the Act.
Registration and Reporting Requirements
    EPA's credit program guidelines specify that all parties intending 
to sell or dispense gasoline obtained from a Control Area Terminal 
should register with the state at least 30 days in advance of each 
control season. At the time of registration, every CAR will be required 
to declare its intention to comply with the regulation. Upon 
acceptance, CAR identification numbers should be issued by the state. 
EPA guidelines specify that no party should be allowed to generate, 
trade, buy or sell credits without a CAR identification number.
    Subchapter 25 provides CAR identification numbers. However, if the 
applicant fails to provide all information requested by the NJDEP, the 
application may be denied.
    EPA has also specified that records should be retained by all 
parties in the gasoline distribution system. EPA's guidelines impose 
responsibilities on various parties in the gasoline industry. Persons 
who produce or import gasoline are responsible for assuring that the 
gasoline is tested and that the accompanying documentation accurately 
reflects oxygen content. Persons who transport, store, or sell gasoline 
have various responsibilities associated with assuring that only 
oxygenated gasoline is sold or dispensed for use in control areas. 
Terminal owners and operators are responsible for assuring that the 
oxygen content of the gasoline they receive, handle, or dispense is 
accurate. Retailers and wholesale purchaser-consumers are responsible 
for assuring that gasoline intended for sale during the control period 
contains at least 2.0% oxygen by weight if they are participating in 
the averaging program.
    New Jersey requires all parties in the gasoline distribution 
network who are located or do business within a control area, and whose 
product is eventually sold into the control area for ultimate use, to 
keep records concerning certain day-to-day activities.
    New Jersey's regulation requires any terminal or facility that is 
granted a variance to submit to the NJDEP, on a monthly basis during 
the applicable averaging period, a report that states the 
contemporaneous average of the oxygen content of the gasoline 
transferred to or from that terminal or facility during that month.
    With respect to the implementation of an averaging program, EPA 
guidelines also require that CARs commission an annual attest 
engagement (a report detailing relevant activities), performed by 
either an internal auditor or independent Certified Public Accountant. 
Since New Jersey does not provide for the use of oxygenate credits in 
their averaging program, there is no need for a requirement to conduct 
a review or audit for averaging purposes.
Prohibited Activities
    EPA's credit program guidelines contain provisions designed to 
ensure that gasoline that fails to meet the minimum oxygen content 
requirement is not available for use within a control area. Generally, 
CARs or blender CARs may not transfer gasoline for use in a control 
area that contains less than the minimum percentage of oxygen by weight 
to parties who are not themselves registered as CARs or blender CARs. 
EPA's guidelines further recommend that records be maintained. New 
Jersey's program addresses these requirements.
Transfer Documents
    EPA's credit program guidelines specify that transfer documents 
should include the following information: date of the transfer, name 
and address of the transferor, name and address of the transferee, the 
volume of gasoline which is being transferred, the proper 
identification of the gasoline as oxygenated or nonoxygenated, the 
location of the gasoline at the time of the transfer, the type of 
oxygenate, and the oxygen content of the gasoline (for transfers 
upstream of the control area terminal and for transfers between CARs, 
include the oxygenate volume of the gasoline). Records are to be kept 
in a location where they are available for state review.
    Subchapter 25 requires that facilities and terminals keep such 
records available, upon request, for review by the NJDEP.
    Subchapter 25 includes requirements related to transfer 
documentation in its regulation. These transfer document requirements 
will enhance the enforcement of the oxygenated gasoline regulation by 
providing a paper trail for each gasoline sample taken by State 
enforcement personnel.
Enforcement and Penalty Schedules
    State oxygenated gasoline regulations must be enforceable by the 
state oversight agency. EPA recommends that states visit at least 20% 
of the regulated parties during a given control period. Inspections 
should consist of product sampling and record review. In addition, EPA 
guidelines recommend that each state should devise a comprehensive 
penalty schedule. Penalties should reflect the severity of a party's 
violation, the compliance history of the party, as well as the 
potential environmental harm associated with the violation. New 
Jersey's regulation contains a comprehensive penalty schedule in 
accordance with EPA guidance. New Jersey, in addition to having 
authority to assess a civil administrative penalty, reserves its 
authority to revoke a violator's operating certificate or variance.
Test Methods and Laboratory Review
    EPA's sampling procedures are detailed in Appendix D of 40 Code of 
Federal Regulation part 80. EPA has recommended, in its credit program 
guidelines, that states adopt these sampling procedures. New Jersey has 
adopted EPA sampling procedures, which include established federal 
testing procedures and tolerances.
Labeling
    EPA requires the labeling of gasoline pumps and has strongly 
recommended that states adopt their own labeling regulations, 
consistent with the federal regulation. New Jersey has adopted labeling 
regulations consistent with the federal regulation.
    EPA's review of subchapter 25 and supporting materials indicates 
that New Jersey has adopted an oxygenated gasoline regulation that 
meets the requirements of the Act. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 
approve New Jersey's Subchapter 25 oxygenated fuels program.

Vehicle Miles Travelled Forecast

    Section 187(a)(2)(A) of the Act requires moderate carbon monoxide 
nonattainment areas, such as that portion of New Jersey included in the 
New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island nonattainment area, to submit 
a SIP revision that forecasts vehicle miles travelled (VMT) through the 
year 1995. In addition, annual reports and annual updates are required 
by the state, the first of these is required by September 30, 1994.
    The VMT forecast must meet two requirements. First, it must 
estimate the VMT from 1990 through 1995 using a method acceptable to 
EPA, and must be conducted in the appropriate geographic area. Second, 
there must be proper coordination between the state agencies involved 
in developing the VMT forecast.
    Contingency measures are to be implemented in a case where the 
actual annual VMT or the updated forecast exceeds the most recent prior 
VMT forecast by 5.0 percent in 1994, 4.0 percent in 1995, and 3.0 
percent thereafter. In addition, if these annual exceedances are less 
than these maximum percentages but cumulatively exceed 5 percent, then 
contingency measures are also triggered.
    The estimated VMT for 1990 and 1991 are 94.9 and 97.4 million miles 
per day, respectively. In addition, the future forecasts are (in 
million miles per day) 99.8 for 1992, 102.2 for 1993, 104.6 for 1994, 
and 107.1 for 1995.
    EPA proposes to find that New Jersey has submitted documentation 
satisfying these requirements, and therefore proposes approval of its 
VMT forecast SIP revision.

Contingency Measures

    Section 187(a)(3) of the Act requires that states adopt contingency 
measures to take effect without further action by the Administrator or 
the state if the state fails to attain the NAAQS by the required date 
or if the VMT forecast is exceeded beyond the allowable limit as 
discussed in the VMT forecast section. New Jersey submitted three 
contingency measures, the Employee Commute Option (ECO) program, an 
enhanced inspection and maintenance program (benefit from emission 
reductions outside of the carbon monoxide nonattainment area), and 
Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) to fulfill this requirement. The 
ECO program will act as a contingency measure for failure to attain the 
carbon monoxide standard while the state-wide enhanced inspection and 
maintenance program and the TCMs will be used as measures for exceeding 
the VMT forecast.
    1. ECO Program New Jersey is required by section 182(d)(1) of the 
Act to submit its ECO program as part of its ozone nonattainment SIP. 
New Jersey's program will apply to employers with 100 or more employees 
who arrive at the workplace between the hours of 6 and 10 a.m. The goal 
of this program is to increase the average passenger occupancies (APO) 
by 25% above the average for vehicles arriving at the workplace. This 
would decrease the amount of automobiles arriving at the workplace, and 
therefore, decrease the VMT.
    New Jersey submitted a SIP revision on November 15, 1993 that 
contained an adopted ECO program. EPA is proposing to approve the 
State's ECO program as a carbon monoxide contingency measure since it 
is an adopted measure which will serve to reduce VMT. However, EPA will 
be taking action on the ECO program submittal as a requirement of the 
ozone SIP in a separate Federal Register notice since there are 
specific requirements an ECO program must meet for an ozone SIP but not 
for a carbon monoxide SIP.
    2. Statewide Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance Program New Jersey 
also submitted this program as a revision for its ozone SIP, and it is 
identical to that required by section 187(a)(6) of the Act (see section 
on enhanced inspection and maintenance program earlier in this notice). 
Since the program is being established on a state-wide basis, carbon 
monoxide reductions derived from outside of the Northeastern New Jersey 
nonattainment area will have a benefit in the carbon monoxide 
nonattainment areas and could be used for contingency purposes. Once 
adopted, the enhanced inspection and maintenance program will act as an 
additional contingency measure should the VMT forecast be exceeded.
    3. TCMs The Act requires states in carbon monoxide non-attainment 
areas to develop VMT forecasts. In addition, states must develop TCMs 
that will be used as contingency measures in the event that the VMT 
forecast included in the 1992 carbon monoxide SIP is exceeded.
    New Jersey's SIP submittal includes TCMs as contingency measures. 
These TCMs are incorporated into three major program areas, which 
includes traffic flow improvements, park & ride lots, and increased 
ridesharing. EPA proposes to approve these TCMs as viable contingency 
measures to offset excess growth in VMT.
    EPA proposes to approve the ECO program as an adequate contingency 
measure for failure to attain the carbon monoxide standard. While New 
Jersey identified two contingency measures should the VMT forecast be 
exceeded, only one measure was adopted. EPA proposes to approve the 
TCMs as an adequate contingency measure for exceeding the VMT forecast. 
Once the enhanced inspection and maintenance program is adopted, it 
will act as an additional contingency measure should further carbon 
monoxide reductions be necessary.

Carbon Monoxide Emission Inventory

    New Jersey submitted a comprehensive carbon monoxide emission 
inventory on November 15, 1992 as required by section 187(a)(1) and as 
described in section 172(c)(3) of the Act. Additional inventory 
information was submitted on January 12, 1993.
    The emission inventory represents a comprehensive, actual inventory 
of all carbon monoxide emission sources in the nonattainment areas. It 
includes emissions from point, area, and mobile sources (see 1990 base 
year carbon monoxide emissions summary in Tables 1 and 2).
    The inventory was developed according to EPA guidance and has been 
quality assured. Sources that emit in excess of 100 tons per year of 
carbon monoxide are defined as point sources. Stationary sources that 
emit below this threshold are too small to be considered point sources 
and are, therefore, considered to be area sources. The area and off-
highway mobile sources include such categories as stationary source 
fuel combustion, aircraft, marine vessels, and railroads. Highway 
mobile source emissions were calculated using EPA's MOBILE 4.1 model. 
Input parameters to this model included VMT, speed, temperature, and 
registration distribution.
    EPA proposes to approve New Jersey's 1990 base year emission 
inventory for carbon monoxide.
    In addition, it should be noted that New Jersey may be undertaking 
a revised analysis of its attainment demonstration and emissions budget 
based on more recent traffic information now being developed. EPA would 
evaluate, in a future Federal Register notice, any additional 
information provided by New Jersey.

 Table 1.--Summary of 1990 Base Year Carbon Monoxide Emissions by Source
Category for New Jersey Portion of the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long
                Island Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment Area               
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   CO   
                                                               emissions
                       Source category                           (tons/ 
                                                                  day)  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point........................................................      36.43
Area.........................................................      31.98
Non-Road Mobile..............................................     228.40
On-Road Mobile...............................................    1613.56
                                                              ----------
      Total..................................................    1910.37
------------------------------------------------------------------------


 Table 2.--Summary of 1990 Base Year Carbon Monoxide Emissions by Source
      Category for Camden County Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment Area     
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   CO   
                                                               emissions
                       Source category                           (tons/ 
                                                                  day)  
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point........................................................       1.12
Area.........................................................      11.78
Non-Road Mobile..............................................      33.47
On-Road Mobile...............................................     576.39
                                                              ----------
      Total..................................................     622.76
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Multi-State Coordination

    Section 187(e) of the Act establishes the requirements for ``multi-
state carbon monoxide nonattainment areas,'' which are defined as 
single carbon monoxide nonattainment areas that cover more than one 
state. To satisfy this requirement, states must develop and submit to 
EPA a joint workplan to demonstrate early cooperation and integration. 
This workplan can be in the form of a letter co-signed by all states in 
the nonattainment area, or EPA has decided, it can consist of signed 
individual letters from each of the states. New Jersey submitted its 
letter, containing a detailed schedule of milestones and a commitment 
to coordinate with EPA and each of the states involved, on October 27, 
1992.
    Therefore, EPA proposes to find that New Jersey has fulfilled this 
requirement and proposes approval of this SIP revision.

Conformity Plan

    Section 176(c) of the Act requires states to revise their SIPs to 
establish criteria and procedures to ensure that federal actions, 
before they are taken, conform to the air quality planning goals in the 
applicable state SIP. The requirement to determine conformity applies 
to transportation plans, programs and projects developed, funded or 
approved under title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act 
(``transportation conformity''), as well as to all other federal 
actions (``general conformity''). Section 176 further provides that the 
conformity revisions to be submitted by states must be consistent with 
federal conformity regulations that the Act required EPA to promulgate. 
Congress provided for the state revisions to be submitted one year 
after the date for promulgation of final EPA conformity regulations. 
When that date passed without such promulgation, EPA's General Preamble 
for the Implementation of title I informed states that its conformity 
regulations would establish a submittal date (see 57 FR 13498 (April 
16, 1992)).
    The USEPA promulgated final transportation conformity regulations 
on November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188) and general conformity regulations 
on November 30, 1993 (58 FR 63214). These conformity rules require that 
states adopt both transportation and general conformity provisions in 
the SIP for areas designated nonattainment or subject to a maintenance 
plan approved under section 175A of the Act. Pursuant to Sec. 51.396 of 
the transportation conformity rule, the State of New Jersey is required 
to submit a SIP revision containing transportation conformity criteria 
and procedures consistent with those established in the federal rule by 
November 25, 1994. Similarly, New Jersey is required to submit a SIP 
revision containing general conformity criteria and procedures 
consistent with those established in the federal rule by November 30, 
1994, pursuant to Sec. 51.851 of the general conformity rule. Those 
deadlines have not yet come due.
    The State of New Jersey has committed to develop and submit a SIP 
revision containing conformity procedures that are consistent with the 
final federal conformity rules. EPA will evaluate and take action at a 
later time on any such submittal. Until EPA approves a conformity SIP 
revision for New Jersey, EPA's general conformity and transportation 
conformity rules, along with the provisions of section 176(c), will 
govern conformity determinations.
    According to EPA's transportation conformity regulation, 40 CFR 
93.128, the conformity status of the transportation plan and TIP shall 
lapse 120 days following the date of final disapproval of the control 
strategy implementation plan revision, and no new project-level 
conformity determinations may be made. No new transportation plans, 
TIPs, or projects may be found to conform until another control 
strategy implementation plan revision is submitted and conformity is 
demonstrated according to transitional period criteria and procedures. 
Therefore, should EPA's proposed disapproval be finalized, the 
conformity status of the North Jersey Transportation Planning 
Authority's transportation plan and TIP will lapse 120 days later.

New Source Review Regulation--Subchapter 18

    Section 173 of the Act requires states to submit New Source Review 
(NSR) revisions that, among other things, incorporate new offset ratios 
and applicability limits in new source review permitting regulations by 
November 15, 1992.

I. Background

    EPA is currently developing a proposed rule to implement all 
changes required by the 1990 Amendments in the new source review 
provisions in parts C and D of title I of the Act. EPA will refer to 
the proposed rule as the most authoritative guidance available 
regarding the approvability of the submittals. When final federal 
regulations are promulgated, EPA will review those NSR SIP submittals 
on which it may have taken final action to determine whether additional 
SIP revisions are necessary.
    In this proposed rulemaking on New Jersey's nonattainment NSR SIP, 
Subchapter 18 ``Control and Prohibition of Air Pollution from New and 
Altered Sources Affecting Ambient Air Quality,'' EPA is applying its 
current view of the Act's requirements. New Jersey addressed all 
pollutants in its revision to Subchapter 18 and therefore, EPA is 
taking action on the NSR program as it relates to all criteria 
pollutants.

II. Evaluation of State Program

    The following summarizes EPA's evaluation of New Jersey's revised 
NSR rule and EPA's proposed action. The State of New Jersey held a 
public hearing on November 5, 1992 to entertain public comment on its 
revised NSR implementation plan. Subchapter 18 was adopted on February 
19, 1993, and submitted to EPA on the same date as part its proposed 
revision to its ozone SIP. EPA found the submittal to be complete on 
April 29, 1993.
General Nonattainment NSR Requirements
    The statutory requirements for nonattainment NSR review permitting 
SIPs are found at sections 172, 173 and 182-189 of the Act. It is on 
this basis that EPA is making its decision today. The Act requires all 
states to have submitted the following nonattainment NSR requirements 
to EPA by November 15, 1992:
    1. Provisions to ensure that the construction bans imposed by EPA 
may be lifted by states. New Jersey had no such bans because it had an 
approved nonattainment NSR regulation in place. This provision, 
therefore, does not apply to New Jersey.
    2. Provisions to assure that calculation of emissions offsets, as 
required by section 173(a)(1)(A) of the Act, are based on the same 
emissions baseline used in the demonstration of reasonable further 
progress. New Jersey's emissions baseline for offsets calculation is an 
inventory based on actual 1990 emissions. This provision meets federal 
requirements and is, therefore, approvable.
    3. Provisions, in accordance with section 173(c)(1) of the Act, to 
allow offsets to be obtained in another nonattainment area, if the area 
has an equal or higher nonattainment classification and emissions from 
the other nonattainment area contribute to a NAAQS violation in the 
area in which the source would construct. New Jersey has chosen not to 
allow offsets from other nonattainment areas. This approach is more 
restrictive than the federal requirement and is, therefore, approvable.
    4. Provisions, in accordance with section 173(c)(1) of the Act, to 
assure that any emissions offsets obtained in conjunction with the 
issuance of a permit to a new or modified source must be in effect and 
enforceable by the time the new or modified source commences operation. 
New Jersey has included a provision requiring such a demonstration from 
all permit applicants. However subchapter 18 does not contain 
definitions of ``initiation of construction or operation.'' In addition 
New Jersey's rule does not specify that changes to existing permits 
from sources which are to provide offsets must be in place by the time 
of permit issuance to the new or altered source. New Jersey's rule must 
be clarified accordingly. Therefore, these deficiencies are a basis for 
disapproval.
    5. Provisions to assure that emissions increases from new or 
modified major stationary sources are offset by real reductions in 
actual emissions as required by section 173(c)(1) of the Act. New 
Jersey has defined reductions to be used as offsets as actual 
reductions in emissions that must be federally enforceable. This 
definition also applies to the use of banked emission reductions. This 
definition meets federal requirements and is, therefore, approvable.
    6. Provisions, in accordance with section 173(c)(2) of the Act, to 
prevent emissions reductions otherwise required by the Act from being 
credited for purposes of satisfying the part D offset requirements. New 
Jersey has defined reductions used as offsets as reductions not 
otherwise required pursuant to any federal or state law, rule, order, 
permit, or other legal document. In addition, its definition states 
that emission reductions to be used as offsets cannot have been relied 
upon to demonstrate attainment, maintenance of reasonable further 
progress or of a NAAQS. This definition satisfies the requirements of 
the Act and is, therefore, approvable.
    7. Provisions, in accordance with sections 172(c)(4) and 
173(a)(1)(B) of the Act, that reflect changes in the use of growth 
allowances. Though New Jersey has no growth allowance program in place, 
it does have a program for banking emissions reductions to be used as 
offsets. This program incorporates pre-1990 reductions which have been 
incorporated into the emission inventory as future growth. This 
approach is consistent with the requirements for the achievement of 
reasonable further progress. This provision meets the requirement of 
section 172(c)(4) of the Act and is, therefore, approvable.
    8. Provisions, in accordance with section 173(a)(5) of the Act, 
that require as a prerequisite to the issuance of any part D permit, an 
analysis of alternative sites, sizes, production processes, and 
environmental control techniques for proposed sources that demonstrates 
that the benefits of the proposed source significantly outweigh the 
environmental and social costs imposed as a result of its location, 
construction, or modification. New Jersey has included this analysis as 
part of its permit requirements. This provision is, therefore, 
approvable.
    9. Provisions, in accordance with section 173(d) of the Act, for 
supplying information from nonattainment NSR permits to EPA's control 
technology clearinghouse. New Jersey has not included this provision in 
its revised NSR nonattainment rule. New Jersey must revise its rule to 
incorporate this provision. Therefore, EPA finds this as a basis for 
disapproval.
    10. Provisions, in accordance with section 173(e) of the Act, that 
allow any existing or modified source that tests rocket engines or 
motors to use alternative or innovative means to offset emissions 
increases from firing and related cleaning if certain conditions are 
met, or impose a fee on such source. New Jersey's NSR nonattainment 
rule does not include provisions which allow for these alternative 
means of meeting offset requirements. While the Act requires this 
provision, since New Jersey has no sources which fall into this 
category, we are not proposing to disapprove on this basis.
    11. Provisions, in accordance with section 819 of the Act, that 
effectively exempt activities related to stripper wells from the new 
NSR requirements of new subparts 2, 3, and 4 for PM-10, ozone, or 
carbon monoxide nonattainment areas classified as serious or less, and 
having a population of less than 350,000. New Jersey's NSR 
nonattainment rule does not include provisions which allow for these 
exemptions. However, since states are allowed under the Act to 
implement NSR provisions that are more stringent than the Act 
requirements, New Jersey's approach is acceptable.
    12. Provisions, in accordance with section 328 of the Act, to 
assure that sources located on the outer continental shelf are subject 
to the same requirements applicable if the source were located in the 
corresponding onshore area. New Jersey's NSR nonattainment rule does 
not include provisions which address this requirement. It is EPA's 
understanding that New Jersey has no sources to which this requirement 
would apply.
    13. A definition, in accordance with sections 302(z) and 111(a)(3) 
of the Act, of ``stationary source'' reflecting Congressional intent 
that certain internal combustion engines be subject to control under 
state programs, but excluding the newly defined category of ``nonroad 
engines.'' New Jersey's NSR nonattainment rule does not include 
provisions which address this requirement. New Jersey must revise its 
definition of ``stationary source'' to exclude this category. EPA, 
therefore, finds this as a basis for disapproval. EPA will be proposing 
a definition of ``nonroad engines'' in its rulemaking package to 
implement provisions of part D of the Act.
    14. Exemptions, in accordance with section 415(b)(2) of the Act, 
from nonattainment NSR provisions for installation, operation, 
cessation, or removal of a temporary clean coal technology 
demonstration project. New Jersey's NSR nonattainment rule does not 
include provisions which allow for these exemptions. However, since 
states are allowed under the Act to implement NSR provisions that are 
more stringent than the Act requirements, New Jersey's approach is 
acceptable.
    15. Provisions in accordance with section 173(a)(3) of the Act, 
that owners or operators of each proposed new or modified major 
stationary source demonstrate the compliance of all other major 
stationary sources under the same ownership in the state. New Jersey's 
revised rule requires this demonstration from all permit applicants. 
This provision is approvable.
    16. For new major stationary sources, Lowest Achievable Emission 
Rate (LAER) is to apply to each nonattainment pollutant which the 
source has the potential-to-emit in major amounts. New Jersey's 
definition of LAER incorporates all necessary requirements. New 
Jersey's regulations specify that LAER applies to sources which have 
the potential to emit regulated pollutants above threshold levels. 
Application of LAER to the equipment constructed or altered is a 
requirement for permit issuance. These provisions meet the federal 
requirements and are approvable.
NSR Requirements for Ozone
    The statutory permit requirements for ozone nonattainment areas are 
generally contained in sections 172 and 173, and in subpart 2 of part D 
of the Act. For all classifications of ozone nonattainment areas and 
for ozone transport regions, states must adopt the appropriate major 
source thresholds and offset ratios, and provisions to ensure that any 
new or modified major stationary source of nitrogen oxides (NOX) 
satisfies the requirements applicable to any major source of volatile 
organic compounds (VOC), unless a special NOX exemption is granted 
by the Administrator under the provision of section 182(f) of the Act. 
For serious and severe ozone nonattainment areas, state plans must 
implement the requirements of sections 182(c) (6), (7) and (8) with 
regard to modifications.
    Though New Jersey contains marginal, moderate and severe ozone 
nonattainment areas, it has elected to treat the entire State as a 
severe nonattainment areas for purposes of nonattainment review. 
Consequently, it has adopted uniform major source threshold, offset 
ratio, and NOX provisions for the entire State.
    These are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Minimum                      
Area classification      Major source       offset      NOX provisions  
                          threshold         ratio                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Severe.............  25 tons/year.......    1.3:1.0  LAER/Emission      
                                                      offsets equivalent
                                                      to VOC            
                                                      requirements.     
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These provisions meet the requirements for severe nonattainment 
areas at sections 182(d) and (d)(2) of the Act. In addition, New Jersey 
has adopted offset ratios for all pollutants, except lead, which 
increase with distance from the source. Since this approach is stricter 
than that required under the Act, these offset ratios are approvable.
    New Jersey's rule submittal does not include the additional 
modification provisions for serious and severe areas required by 
sections 182(c) (6), (7) and (8) of the Act. First, the amended Act 
establishes a de minimis emissions threshold of 25 tons for both VOC 
and (where applicable) NOX. Second, it requires an aggregation of 
past net increases over a 5-year period, even when the proposed 
increase itself is below the de minimis level. The Act establishes 
different requirements if the modification occurs at sources emitting 
less than 100 tons per year (TPY) of VOC or emitting 100 TPY or more of 
VOC. New Jersey must revise its rule to conform to these requirements. 
Therefore, EPA finds this as a basis for disapproval.
NSR Requirements for Carbon Monoxide
    The general statutory permit requirements for carbon monoxide 
nonattainment areas are contained in revised section 173, and in 
subpart 3 of part D of the Act. States must adopt the appropriate major 
source threshold and offset ratio.
    New Jersey contains areas classified as moderate nonattainment for 
carbon monoxide. New Jersey has established a major source threshold of 
100 TPY and an offset ratio that equals or exceeds 1.0:1.0 for these 
areas. These provisions meet the federal requirements and are, 
therefore, approvable.
NSR Requirements for PM-10
    The general statutory permit requirements for PM-10 nonattainment 
areas are contained in section 173 and in subpart 4 of part D of the 
Act. For both classifications of PM-10 nonattainment areas, moderate 
and severe, states must adopt the appropriate major source threshold, 
offset ratio, significance level for modifications, and provisions for 
PM-10 precursors.
    New Jersey has no areas classified as PM-10 nonattainment areas. 
New Jersey has established a major source threshold of 25 TPY, a 
minimum offset ratio which equals or exceeds 1.0:1.0, and a 
modification significance level of 15 TPY. These provisions exceed the 
minimum federal requirements and are, therefore, approvable. If any 
area is subsequently reclassified as nonattainment for PM-10, New 
Jersey will be required to amend its SIP and include the requirements 
for PM-10 precursors and the applicable threshold, offset and 
significance level requirements for that area classification.
NSR Requirements for Sulfur Dioxide
    The general statutory permit requirements for SO2 
nonattainment areas are contained in section 173, and in subpart 5 of 
part D of the Act. For SO2 nonattainment areas, states must adopt 
the appropriate major source threshold, offset ratio, and significance 
level for modifications.
    New Jersey has one SO2 nonattainment area. New Jersey has 
established a major source threshold of 100 TPY, a minimum offset ratio 
which equals or exceeds 1.0:1.0, and a modification significance level 
of 40 TPY. These provisions meet the federal requirements and are, 
therefore, approvable.
NSR Requirements for Lead
    The general statutory permit requirements for lead nonattainment 
areas are generally contained in section 173, and in subpart 5 of part 
D of the Act. For lead nonattainment areas, states must adopt the 
appropriate major source threshold, offset ratio, and significance 
level for modifications.
    New Jersey has no lead nonattainment areas. New Jersey has 
established a major source threshold of 10 TPY, an offset ratio of 
1.0:1.0, and a modification significance level of 0.6 TPY. These 
provisions meet the federal requirements for offset ratio and 
significance level, and exceed the requirements for major threshold 
level and are, therefore, approvable.
NSR Requirements for Nitrogen Dioxide
    The statutory permit requirements for nitrogen dioxide 
nonattainment areas are contained in section 173, and in subpart 5 of 
part D of the Act. For nitrogen dioxide nonattainment areas, states 
must adopt the appropriate major source threshold, offset ratio, and 
significance level for modifications. New Jersey did not address this 
requirement since there are no nitrogen dioxide nonattainment areas in 
the State.
General Savings Clause
    Section 193 of the Act states that no control requirement, in 
effect before November 15, 1990, in any area which is a nonattainment 
area for any air pollutant, may be modified after November 15, 1990 
unless the modification ensures equivalent or greater emission 
reductions of that air pollutant. New Jersey's revised NSR rule 
contains three modifications to control requirements. First, the 
revised regulations relax the NOX emission offset ratio from 
2.0:1.0 to 1.3:1.0. Second, the revised regulations relax the VOC 
offset ratio from 2.0:1.0 to 1.3:1.0. Third, the revised regulations 
relax the carbon monoxide applicability threshold from 50 to 100 TPY. 
In all three instances, New Jersey has demonstrated that the revised 
rule, taken as a whole, provides equivalent or greater emission 
reductions than the current rule. It thus complies with section 193, 
the General Savings Clause.
EPA Policy Issues
    EPA has identified the following provisions of New Jersey's NSR 
rule which do not adhere to current EPA guidance.
    1. Net Air Quality Benefit. Current EPA guidance (1989 SO2 
Guidance EPA-450/2-89-019) states that a net air quality benefit 
analysis must be demonstrated for sources that do not satisfy the 
location requirements for emission offsets as specified in 40 CFR part 
51, appendix S. According to that guidance, the net air quality benefit 
is made with a modeling analysis that predicts that the LAER and 
emission offsets proposed will result in a net concentration change 
that is less than zero at an agreed upon number of receptors within the 
nonattainment area of the emission increase.
    As in the Act prior to 1990, section 173(a) specifies that emission 
increases from a proposed major source or major modification must 
achieve LAER and sufficient offsetting emission reductions in order to 
represent, when considered together with other provisions of the SIP, 
reasonable further progress towards attainment of the NAAQS.
    Section 173(c)(1), which was added in the 1990 amendments, 
specifies conditions on the location of emission reductions that may 
qualify as offsets. EPA intends to continue to require the net air 
quality benefit test consistent with prior practice, so that it can be 
assured that the area affected by the source progresses toward 
attainment on balance. It need not be interpreted as requiring an air 
quality improvement at every location affected by the new source (44 FR 
3279, (January 16, 1979)), but rather assuring progress toward 
attainment for the area where the new source is locating. Also, as 
explained in the Offset Rule, the reviewing authority should consider 
atmospheric simulation modeling for SO2, particulates, and carbon 
monoxide sources. Also, EPA's view in the Offset Rule continues to 
apply that in most cases the permitting authority may assume that 
offsets obtained from an existing source on the same premises or in the 
immediate vicinity of the new source and from the same effective stack 
height satisfy the net air quality benefit test.
    EPA believes that it is prudent for states to reserve the right in 
their regulations to reject emission reductions proposed to satisfy 
offset requirements which do not provide a net air quality benefit in 
the nonattainment area where the proposed emission increase will occur. 
EPA does not believe that a new source should be permitted which will 
inhibit progress toward attainment due to the fact that the offsets are 
obtained from an inappropriate location.
    New Jersey's approach toward a net air quality benefit analysis is 
inadequate. This is because the Air Quality Impact Analysis Section 
does not specifically require a dispersion modeling analysis which 
demonstrates a net decrease in ambient impacts on balance in the 
nonattainment area where the net emission increase is proposed. This 
test is required for major new or modified sources whose emission 
decrease (offset) does not meet the location requirements specified in 
40 CFR part 51, appendix S. This test need not be performed at every 
location but rather on balance in the nonattainment area of the 
proposed emission increase (refer to Technical Support Document). EPA 
requires that the NJDEP modify subchapter 18, 7:27-18.4 to 18.5 to 
include a net air quality benefit test. Therefore, EPA finds this as a 
basis for disapproval.
    2. Calculation of ``Net Emission Increase''. EPA has identified a 
problem with the provision which requires the calculation of ``Net 
Emission Increase.'' As part of EPA's review of New Jersey's revised 
nonattainment NSR rule, EPA evaluated whether the formula used to 
determine whether a source is subject to this rule follows EPA guidance 
for determining applicability. New Jersey's rule determines a ``net 
emission increase'' by using a modified ``potential to potential'' 
test. However, 40 CFR 51.165 requires that an ``actual to potential'' 
test be performed. Consequently, EPA cannot approve this methodology 
and New Jersey must correct this deficiency in its rule. Therefore, EPA 
finds this as a basis for disapproval.
    3. Definition of ``Contemporaneous''. New Jersey defines 
``contemporaneous,'' in reference to the construction of new or altered 
equipment as ``* * * occurring within a time period which includes: 1. 
The five years prior to the initiation of the construction; and 2. The 
period between the initiation of construction and the initiation of 
operation of that new or altered equipment.'' However, New Jersey has 
not specifically defined the terms ``initiation of construction'' and 
``initiation of operation.'' Consequently, EPA cannot approve this 
definition of ``contemporaneous'' and New Jersey must correct this 
deficiency in its rule. Therefore, EPA finds this as a basis for 
disapproval.
NSR Conclusion
    The EPA is proposing to grant a limited approval and limited 
disapproval to New Jersey's rule for NSR in nonattainment areas (NJAC 
7:27-18). EPA cannot grant full approval under section 110(k)(3) of the 
Act because the rule does not fully meet the requirements of part D of 
the Act.
    In addition, because the provisions are not composed of separable 
parts, EPA cannot grant partial approval as provided under section 
110(k)(3). However, the rule does contain the major new requirements 
under the Act for new offset requirements, lower emission thresholds, 
and new provisions for NOX in ozone nonattainment areas. 
Consequently, this rule strengthens New Jersey's SIP. In light of EPA's 
rulemaking authority under section 301(a), EPA is granting a limited 
approval of the rule in order to further progress in air quality in the 
state.
    At the same time, EPA is also proposing a limited disapproval of 
New Jersey's nonattainment NSR rule because the rule lacks provisions 
that will:

1. Revise offset provisions such that permit changes in existing 
permits providing offsets must be in effect by the time of permit 
issuance.
2. Supply information from nonattainment NSR permits to EPA's control 
technology clearinghouse;
3. Revise the definition of ``stationary source'' to exclude the new 
category of ``nonroad engines;''
4. Add provisions for modifications in serious and severe ozone 
nonattainment areas required under sections 182(c)(6), (7) and (8);
5. Provide a net air quality benefit test; and
6. Provide a methodology for calculating net emissions increase that 
adheres to EPA guidance and policy.
7. Provide definitions for ``initiation of construction'' and 
``initiation of operation.''

    If finalized, this disapproval would constitute a disapproval under 
section 179(a)(2) of the Act (see generally 57 FR 13566-13567). It 
should be noted that EPA's limited disapproval does not prevent EPA and 
the State of New Jersey from enforcing the NSR rule.

Summary

    EPA is proposing approval of New Jersey's vehicle miles travelled 
forecast, emission inventory, Subchapter 25--oxygenated fuels rule, and 
the employee commute option and transportation control measures as 
contingency measures, and the multi-state coordination as revisions to 
its carbon monoxide SIP. EPA is also proposing a limited approval and a 
limited disapproval of New Jersey's Subchapter 18--new source review 
regulation. EPA is proposing a disapproval of New Jersey's enhanced 
inspection and maintenance program since it has not been adopted. In 
addition, since the attainment demonstration relies on the enhanced 
inspection and maintenance program, the attainment demonstration is 
also being proposed for disapproval.
    For those elements for which EPA is proposing disapproval, under 
section 179(a) of the Act, the State of New Jersey would have up to 18 
months after final disapproval to correct the deficiencies responsible 
for the disapproval before EPA would be required to impose sanctions. 
Section 179(b) describes the sanctions available to the Administrator. 
Any final disapproval also would trigger the section 110(c)(1) Federal 
Implementation Plan provision of the Act. To obtain full approval of 
this carbon monoxide SIP, New Jersey must correct the identified 
deficiencies in the new source review regulation, and an enhanced 
inspection and maintenance program must be submitted and approved.
    Nothing in this rulemaking should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to any SIP shall be 
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and 
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and 
regulatory requirements.
    This proposed rule has been classified as a Table 2 action by the 
Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal 
Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by an 
October 4, 1993 memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant 
Administrator for Air and Radiation. A future document will inform the 
general public of these tables. On January 6, 1989, the Office of 
Management and Budget waived Table 2 and 3 SIP revisions (54 FR 2222) 
from the requirements of section 3 of Executive Order 12291 for two 
years. The EPA has submitted a request for a permanent waiver for Table 
2 and 3 SIP revisions. The Office of Management and Budget has agreed 
to continue the temporary wavier until such time as it rules on EPA's 
request. This request continues in effect under Executive Order 12866 
which superseded Executive Order 12291 on September 30, 1993.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Administrator certifies that SIP 
approvals under sections 107, 110 and 172 will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. SIP 
approvals do not create any new requirements but simply approve 
requirements that are already state law. SIP approvals, therefore, do 
not add any additional requirements for small entities. Moreover, due 
to the nature of the federal-state relationship under the Act, 
preparation of a flexibility analysis for a SIP approval would 
constitute federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of the 
state actions. The Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs 
on such grounds.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Hydrocarbons, 
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide, Volatile 
organic compounds.

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

    Dated: October 3, 1994.
William J. Muszynski,
Deputy Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 94-27876; Filed 11-9-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P