[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 179 (Friday, September 15, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47907-47911]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-22958]



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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CT26-1-7198; A-1-FRL-5296-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Approval of the Carbon Monoxide Implementation Plan Submitted by the 
State of Connecticut Pursuant to Sections 186-187 and 211(m)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes approval of the State implementation plans 
(SIP) submitted by the State of Connecticut for the purpose of bringing 
about the attainment of the national ambient air quality standard 
(NAAQS) for carbon monoxide (CO). The implementation plans were 
submitted by the State to satisfy the requirements of Sections 
187(a)(2)(A), 187(a)(3), 187(a)(7) and 211(m) of the Clean Air Act for 
an approvable nonattainment area CO SIP for Connecticut's portion of 
the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut CO nonattainment area. This action 
is being taken under Section 110 of the Act. The rationale for the 
approval is set in this document, additional information is available 
at the address indicated below.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by 
October 16, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Susan S. Studlien, Director, Air, 
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region I, JFK Federal Bldg. (AAA), Boston, MA 02203. 
Copies of the state's submittal and EPA's technical support document 
are available for inspection during normal business hours, by 
appointment at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Jerry 
Kurtzweg, ANR-443, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460; the Air, 
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region I, One Congress Street, 10th floor, Boston, 
MA 02203; and the Bureau of Air Management, Department of Environmental 
Protection, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Damien F. Houlihan, (617) 565-3266, of 
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Boston, MA.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 12, 1993, January 14, 1993, April 
7, 1994, and August 1, 1995, the Connecticut Department of 
Environmental Protection (DEP) submitted a revision to its State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality. The revision is designed to 
satisfy the requirements of Sections 187(a)(2)(A), 187(a)(3), 187(a)(7) 
and 211(m) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA).

I. Background

    The air quality planning requirements for moderate CO nonattainment 
areas are set out in Sections 186-187 and Section 211(m) of the Clean 
Air Act (Act) Amendments of 1990 (CAAA). These requirements pertain to 
the classification of CO nonattainment areas and to the submission 
requirements of the SIP's for these areas, respectively. The EPA has 
issued a ``General Preamble'' describing EPA's preliminary views on how 
EPA intends to review SIP's and SIP revisions submitted under Title I 
of the Act. See generally 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070 
(April 28, 1992). Because EPA is describing its interpretations here 
only in broad terms, the reader should refer to the General Preamble 
for a more detailed discussion of the interpretations of Title I 
advanced in today's proposal and the supporting rationale. In today's 
rulemaking action on the Connecticut CO SIP, EPA is proposing to apply 
its interpretations taking into consideration the specific factual 
issues presented. Thus, EPA will consider any timely submitted comments 
before taking final action on today's proposal.
    Those States containing CO nonattainment areas with design values 
greater than 12.7 parts per million (ppm) were required to submit, 
among other things, a State Implementation Plan revision, by November 
15, 1992, that contains a forecast of VMT in the nonattainment area for 
each year before the year in which the SIP projects the NAAQS for CO to 
be attained and an attainment demonstration such that the plan will 
provide for attainment by December 31, 1995 for moderate CO 
nonattainment areas. The SIP revision is also required to provide for 
annual 

[[Page 47908]]
updates of the VMT forecasts along with annual reports regarding the 
extent to which the forecasts proved to be accurate. In addition, these 
annual reports must contain estimates of actual VMT in each year for 
which a forecast was required. The attainment demonstration must 
include a SIP control strategy, which is also due by November 15, 1992. 
The SIP control strategy for a given nonattainment area must be 
designed to ensure that the area meets the specific annual emissions 
reductions necessary for reaching attainment by the deadline. In 
addition, section 187(a)(3) requires these areas to implement 
contingency measures if any estimate of actual vehicle miles travelled 
(VMT) or any updated VMT forecast for the area contained in an annual 
report for any year prior to attainment exceeds the number predicted in 
the most recent VMT forecast. Contingency measures are also triggered 
by failure to attain the NAAQS for CO by the attainment deadline. 
Contingency measures must be submitted with the CO SIP by November 15, 
1992. In addition, Section 211(m) of the Act requires a SIP revision 
containing a provision to require that after November 1, 1992, any 
gasoline sold, or dispensed, to the ultimate consumer in the CO 
nonattainment area be blended to contain not less than 2.7 percent 
oxygen by weight during the portion of the year in which the area is 
prone to high ambient CO levels.
    Section 187(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 
required EPA, in consultation with the U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT), to develop guidance for states to use in 
complying with the VMT forecasting and tracking provisions of Section 
187. A Notice of Availability for the resulting Section 187 VMT 
Forecasting and Tracking Guidance was published in the Federal Register 
on March 19, 1992.
    The Section 187 Guidance identifies the Federal Highway 
Administration's Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) as the 
foundation for VMT estimates and forecasts. To develop growth factors 
for forecasting VMT, the Section 187 Guidance offers as one alternative 
the use of network-based travel demand models. If these models are 
properly updated and validated, and if they use an equilibrium approach 
to allocating trips, they are considered to be the best predictor of 
growth factors for VMT forecasts.
    When determining that actual annual VMT or a VMT forecast has 
exceeded the most recent prior forecast and, therefore, that 
contingency measures should be implemented, EPA believes that it is 
appropriate to take into account the statistical variability in the 
estimates of VMT generated through HPMS. Consequently, EPA has 
identified a margin of error to be applied when making VMT comparisons. 
With the expectation that HPMS sampling procedures will improve over 
the next few years in response to recent FHWA guidance, the margin of 
error starts at 5.0 percent for VMT comparisons made in 1994, becomes 
4.0 percent for VMT comparisons made in 1995, and is reduced to 3.0 
percent for VMT comparisons made in 1996 and thereafter. However, since 
each revised VMT forecast becomes the VMT baseline for triggering 
contingency measures, the application of a margin of error every year 
could allow the forecasts to increase without bound, without ever 
triggering contingencies. To prevent this occurrence, EPA believes it 
is appropriate to allow the application of the margin of error only as 
long as, cumulatively, neither an estimate of actual VMT nor a VMT 
forecast ever exceed by more than 5.0 percent the VMT forecast relied 
upon in the area's attainment demonstration.
    EPA interprets the requirement for contingency measures to ``take 
effect without further action by the State or the Administrator'' to 
mean that no further rulemaking activities by the State or EPA would be 
needed to implement the measures. The General Preamble for the 
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 
published in the Federal Register on April 16, 1992, offers guidance on 
the type and size of contingencies to be included in the SIP revision. 
This guidance is advisory in nature and is non-binding. (See the 
Federal Register, April 16, 1992, Volume 57, Number 74, pages 13532 and 
13533.)
    Section 110(k) of the Act sets out provisions governing EPA's 
review of SIP submittals (see 57 FR 13565-66). The State of Connecticut 
submitted SIP revisions to EPA on January 12, 1993, January 14, 1993, 
April 7, 1994, and August 1, 1995 in order to satisfy the requirements 
of Sections 186-187 and 211(m) of the Act. In order to gain approval, 
the State submittals must provide for each of the following mandatory 
elements: (1) a forecast of VMT in the non-attainment area for each 
year prior to the attainment year; (2) a provision for annual updates 
of the forecasts along with a provision for annual reports describing 
the extent to which the forecasts proved to be accurate; these reports 
shall provide estimates of actual VMT in each year for which a forecast 
was required; (3) adopted and enforceable contingency measures to be 
implemented without further action by the State or the Administrator if 
actual annual VMT or an updated forecast exceeds the most recent prior 
forecast or if the area fails to attain the CO NAAQS by the attainment 
date; (4) Attainment Demonstration with Control Strategies and (5) a 
provision to require that any gasoline sold, or dispensed, to the 
ultimate consumer in the CO nonattainment area be blended to contain 
not less than 2.7 percent oxygen by weight during the portion of the 
year in which the area is prone to high ambient CO levels.

II. Analysis

    In today's action EPA proposes to approve Connecticut's CO SIP 
submittal for the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT CO nonattainment 
area and invites public comment on the action. The following items are 
the basis for approval of the SIP revision. Connecticut has met the 
requirements of Section 186-187 and 211(m) of the Act by submitting SIP 
revisions that implement all required elements as discussed below. The 
state implementation plans submitted by Connecticut on January 12, 
1993, January 14, 1993, April 7, 1994, and August 1, 1995, collectively 
meet the requirements for those particular revisions to the SIP for the 
Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT Moderate (greater than 12.7 ppm) CO 
nonattainment area as set forth in Sections 187(a)(2)(A), 187(a)(3), 
187(a)(7) and 211(m) of the Act.

1. VMT Forecasts

    Section 187(a)(2)(A) requires that the State include in its SIP 
submittal a forecast of VMT in the nonattainment area for each year 
before the year in which the SIP projects the National Ambient Air 
Quality Standard for CO to be attained. The forecasts are to be based 
on guidance developed by EPA in consultation with DOT, i.e., the 
Section 187 VMT Forecasting and Tracking Guidance. Connecticut has 
satisfied this requirement with their January 12, 1993 and April 7, 
1994 SIP submittals which include VMT forecasts beginning with the year 
1993 and including all subsequent years up to the year of attainment 
(1995). The forecasts were projected using an annual growth factor of 
two percent as determined from Connecticut's network-based travel 
demand model. This model is properly updated and validated and uses an 
equilibrium approach to allocating trips, therefore, it is considered 
to be the best 

[[Page 47909]]
predictor of growth factors for VMT forecasts in Connecticut and was 
used appropriately as set forth in the Section 187 VMT Forecasting and 
Tracking Guidance.
2. Annual VMT Updates/Reports

    Section 187(a)(2)(A) specifies that the SIP revision provide for 
annual updates of the VMT forecasts and annual reports that describe 
the accuracy of the forecasts and that provide estimates of actual VMT 
in each year for which a forecast was required. The Section 187 VMT 
Forecasting and Tracking Guidance specifies that annual reports should 
be submitted to EPA by September 30 of the year following the year for 
which the VMT estimate is made. Connecticut satisfied this requirement 
with their January 12, 1993 and April 7, 1994 SIP submittals.

3. Contingency Measures

    Section 187(a)(3) specifies that the State, in its SIP revision, 
adopt specific, enforceable contingency measures to be implemented if 
the annual estimate of actual VMT or a subsequent VMT forecast exceeds 
the most recent prior forecast of VMT or if the area fails to attain 
the CO NAAQS by the attainment date. Implementation of the identified 
contingency measures must not require further rulemaking activities by 
the State or EPA. Certain actions, such as notification of sources, 
would probably be needed before a measure could be implemented 
effectively. Connecticut has satisfied this requirement with their 
January 12, 1993 and April 7, 1994 SIP submittals which include 
contingency measures to be implemented if the annual estimate of actual 
VMT or a subsequent VMT forecast exceeds the most recent prior forecast 
of VMT or if the area fails to attain the CO NAAQS by the attainment 
date. Connecticut has demonstrated that expanded implementation of an 
enhanced inspection and maintenance program, beyond what is required in 
57 CFR 52950, will provide CO emission reductions to counteract the 
effect of one years growth in VMT.
    Although implementation of an enhanced I/M program is required in 
the urbanized area of Connecticut's portion of the NY-NJ-CT CO 
nonattainment area, Connecticut has demonstrated that requiring 
vehicles traveling within the nonattainment area, but originating 
outside the urbanized area, to meet the CO performance standard of the 
enhanced I/M program, will result in CO emission reductions which 
offset the CO emissions attributable to a two percent growth (one years 
growth) of the projected 1995 VMT in the area. The legal authority for 
the implementation of the enhanced I/M program was passed by the 
General Assembly of the State of Connecticut in Public Act 90-312 which 
took effect on July 1, 1993. Connecticut further demonstrated that if 
the area does not attain the CO standard by the December 31, 1995 
attainment date, the state is committed to implementing the Employee 
Commute Option in the nonattainment area, which will provide reductions 
in VMT to offset the anticipated growth in VMT from 1994 to the 
attainment year of 1995. The Connecticut Legislature has effectively 
authorized implementation of the ECO program through the promulgation 
Public Act 93-334 which has been codified it into the Connecticut 
General Statutes.

4. Attainment Demonstration

    As noted, CO nonattainment areas with design values greater than 
12.7 parts per million (ppm) were required to submit a demonstration by 
November 15, 1992; the plan must provide for attainment by December 31, 
1995 for moderate CO nonattainment areas and December 31, 2000 for 
serious CO nonattainment areas.
    To demonstrate attainment, the 1-hour and 8-hour and National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for CO are not to be exceeded 
more than once per year. The 1-hour CO NAAQS is 35 ppm (40 mg/m \3\) 
and the 8-hour CO NAAQS is 9 ppm (10 mg/m \3\). Connecticut has 
satisfied this requirement with its April 7, 1994 SIP submittal in 
which Connecticut conducted an attainment demonstration using 
intersection modeling for a representative set of the most congested 
intersections with high traffic volumes and the greatest potential to 
generate high CO concentrations in the Connecticut portion of the NY-
NJ-CT CO nonattainment area. This analysis also demonstrated that the 
two CO monitors in downtown Bridgeport and downtown Stamford are in 
fact sited where the local conditions result in the highest CO levels 
in Connecticut's portion of the nonattainment area. The design value 
for the entire NY-NJ-CT CO nonattainment area was 13.5 ppm in 1988, 
based on monitoring data from site in Manhattan, New York. 
Connecticut's SIP revision indicated that based solely on the two 
monitors located in the Connecticut portion of the nonattainment area, 
the design value for the Connecticut portion of the area would have 
been 6.9 ppm, and these CO monitors have not monitored a violation of 
the NAAQS since 1984. Therefore, Connecticut demonstrates that the 
existing CO levels in the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT 
nonattainment area are in attainment of the NAAQS and CO emissions will 
continue to decrease throughout the attainment year of 1995 
demonstrating continued attainment through the December 31, 1995 
attainment date.
    The Act requires that the CO nonattainment area plan revisions 
demonstrating attainment must contain measures which demonstrate 
reasonable further progress through specific annual emission reductions 
as are necessary to attain the standard by December 1995. EPA has 
reviewed the attainment demonstration and control strategy for the area 
to determine whether annual incremental reductions different from those 
provided in the SIP should be required in order to ensure attainment of 
the CO NAAQS by the applicable attainment date (see section 171(1)). 
Connecticut has demonstrated that the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-
CT nonattainment area is currently in attainment and although further 
reduction in CO emissions will result from the implementation of 
oxygenated fuels, enhanced inspection and maintenance and the Federal 
Motor Vehicle Control Program, specific emission reductions are not 
necessary to attain the standard by the attainment date. EPA believes 
the implementation of these measures will assure that the area CO 
emissions continue to decrease and therefore ensuring attainment of the 
area in December 1995.

5. Oxygenated Fuels Program

    Motor vehicles are significant contributors of CO emissions. An 
important measure toward reducing these emissions is the use of 
cleaner-burning oxygenated gasoline. Extra oxygen, contained within the 
fuel, enhances fuel combustion and helps to offset fuel-rich operating 
conditions, particularly during vehicle starting. Section 211(m) of the 
CAAA requires that States with CO nonattainment areas classified as 
moderate or above, submit state implementation plan revisions to 
implement oxygenated gasoline programs by no later than November 1, 
1992. The oxygenated gasoline program must require gasoline sold or 
dispensed in the specified control area to contain not less than 2.7 
percent oxygen by weight during that portion of the year in which the 
area is prone to high ambient concentrations of CO (the control 
period). EPA announced guidance on the establishment of control 
periods, by area, in the Federal Register on October 20, 1992 which 
also announced the availability of oxygenated gasoline credit program 
guidelines. Under a credit program, marketable oxygen 

[[Page 47910]]
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 
percent by weight). These oxygen credits may be used to offset the sale 
of gasoline with a lower oxygen content than is required. As an 
alternate to the credit program, the State may elect a program in which 
a minimum of 2.7 percent by weight oxygen must be present in every 
gallon of gasoline sold. The EPA also issued labeling regulations under 
section 211(m)(4) of the CAA. These labeling regulations were also 
published in the Federal Register on October 20, 1992.
    Connecticut has satisfied the requirements of Section 211(m) with 
their January 14, 1993, April 7, 1994, and August 1, 1995 SIP 
submittals which contain adopted amendments and revisions to the 
Regulation of Connecticut State Agencies (RCSA), to add Section 22a-
174-28, which establishes an Oxygenated Fuel Program. EPA is approving, 
in a separate direct final rulemaking notice, the oxygenated fuel 
program, except as it applies to the Southwestern Control Area, as 
defined in 22a-174-28. In this notice, EPA is proposing approval of the 
definition for the Southwestern Control Area and that portion of the 
definition of ``control period'' that applies to the Southwestern 
Control Area. The program is one in which all oxygenated gasoline must 
contain a minimum oxygen content of 2.7 percent by weight of oxygen. 
Connecticut has adopted labeling regulations, enforcement procedures, 
and oxygenate test methods in accordance with Section 211(m) of the 
Act.
    On August 1, 1995, the State of Connecticut submitted a revision to 
the control period for the Connecticut portion of the New Jersey/New 
York/Connecticut CO nonattainment area changing the oxygenated fuels 
control period to November 1 through the last day of February of each 
year. Previously, the control period had been October 1 through April 
30 of each year. Under Section 211(m) of the CAA, a control period must 
be that portion of the year in which the control area is prone to high 
ambient concentrations of CO, but no less than four months in length.
    Section 211(m)(2) requires this control period to be based on air 
quality monitoring data and established by the EPA Administrator. EPA 
is proposing to approve Connecticut's four-month control period for the 
Southwestern Control Area because it is consistent with section 
211(m)(2) and the EPA 1992 guidance.
    EPA is publishing concurrently with this notice a Notice of 
Proposed Rulemaking to approve New York's oxygenated gasoline SIP 
submission. That notice proposes to establish a four-month control 
period for the New York portion of the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut 
CO nonattainment area. Connecticut's establishment of a four-month 
control period will be consistent with New York's four-month control 
period.
    The setting of a four-month control period for the nonattainment 
area is consistent with established Agency guidance (announced for 
availability at 57 FR 47853, October 20, 1992) regarding oxygenated 
gasoline control periods to determine the proper control period length 
for the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut CO nonattainment area. As part 
of the 1992 guidance document, based on air quality data from 1990 and 
1991, EPA suggested that the proper control period for the New York-New 
Jersey-Connecticut CO nonattainment area was October 1 through April 
30. However, the 1992 guidance does not establish a binding norm 
regarding control periods and provides that the determination of the 
control period will be an issue to be finally decided by EPA as part of 
the review of individual state SIP revisions for oxygenated gasoline 
programs. EPA has set forth the reasons for its proposed approval of 
the four-month control period for the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut 
CO nonattainment area in the above-mentioned notice regarding New 
York's oxygenated gasoline SIP revision published concurrently with 
this notice. In that notice, EPA explains the rationale for determining 
that the appropriate control period is from November 1 through the last 
day of February for the entire nonattainment area. EPA believes sale of 
gasoline oxygenated to 2.7 percent by weight during the months of 
October, March and April is no longer necessary for adequate carbon 
monoxide control in the entire nonattainment area. EPA will not repeat 
the rationale provided in that notice, but rather incorporates by 
reference the same rationale into this notice.

Proposed Action

    The EPA is proposing to approve collectively the plan revisions 
submitted to EPA for the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT CO 
nonattainment area on January 12, 1993, January 14, 1993, April 7, 
1994, and August 1, 1995. Among other things, Connecticut has 
demonstrated that the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT CO 
nonattainment area will continue to attain the CO NAAQS through 
December 31, 1995, the applicable attainment date.
    This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature 
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the 
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a 
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for 
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
exempted this regulatory action from review under Executive Order 
12866.
    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et. seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604. 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, 
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
50,000.
    The CAA does not create any new requirements, but simply approve 
requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the 
federal SIP-approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify 
that it does not have a significant impact on any small entities 
affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the federal-state relationship 
under the CAA, preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would 
constitute federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state 
action. The CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such 
grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 
1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410 (a)(2).
    As noted, additional submittals for the CO nonattainment areas are 
required under Section 186 and 187 of the Act. The EPA will determine 
the adequacy of any such submittal as appropriate. Nothing in this 
action should be construed as permitting or allowing or establishing a 
precedent for any future request for revision to any State 
implementation plan. Each request for revision to the State 
implementation plan shall be considered separately in light of specific 
technical, economic, and environmental factors and in relation to 
relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
    The Administrator's decision to approve or disapprove the SIP 
revision will be based on whether it meets the requirements of Section 
110(a)(2)(A)-(K) and 110(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act, as amended, and 
EPA regulations in 40 CFR Part 51. 

[[Page 47911]]


Unfunded Mandates

    Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 25, 
1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed 
or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in 
estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to 
State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
    Through submission of this state implementation plan or plan 
revision, the State and any affected local or tribal governments have 
elected to adopt the program provided for under section 175A and 
section 187(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act. The rules and commitments 
approved in this action may bind State, local and tribal governments to 
perform certain actions and also may ultimately lead to the private 
sector being required to certain duties. To the extent that the 
imposition of any mandate upon the State, local or tribal governments 
either as the owner or operator of a source or as mandate upon the 
private sector, EPA's action will impose no new requirements under 
State law; such sources are already subject to these requirements under 
State law. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal 
governments, or to the private sector, results from this action. EPA 
has also determined that this final action does not include a mandate 
that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to State, 
local, or tribal governments in the aggregate or to the private sector.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and record keeping requirements.

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

    Dated: August 31, 1995.
John P. DeVillars,
Regional Administrator, EPA-New England.
[FR Doc. 95-22958 Filed 9-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P