[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 3, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10342-10350]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-5201]



[[Page 10341]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part II





Environmental Protection Agency





_______________________________________________________________________



40 CFR Part 52



Findings of Significant Contribution and Rulemaking on Section 126; 
Petitions for Purposes of Reducing Interstate Ozone Transport, 
Technical Correction, and Notice of Availability of Additional 
Technical Documents; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 3, 1999 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 10342]]



ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[FRL-6305-9]


Findings of Significant Contribution and Rulemaking on Section 
126; Petitions for Purposes of Reducing Interstate Ozone Transport, 
Technical Correction, and Notice of Availability of Additional 
Technical Documents

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPR), technical 
correction, and notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 126 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA 
is proposing action on recent requests from Maine and New Hampshire 
which ask EPA to now make findings of significant contribution under 
the 8-hour ozone standard regarding sources named in their August 1997 
petitions. The EPA has previously proposed action on the petitions from 
these States with respect to the 1-hour ozone standard as part of a 
proposal on eight petitions that were submitted individually by eight 
Northeastern States (63 FR 52213, September 30, 1998; and 63 FR 56292, 
October 21, 1998). Today's action supplements that proposal.
    These 8-hour petitions specifically request that EPA make a finding 
that nitrogen oxides (NOX) emissions from certain stationary 
sources in other States significantly contribute to 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment problems in the petitioning State. If EPA makes such a 
finding of significant contribution, EPA is authorized to establish 
Federal emissions limits for the sources.
    In this SNPR, EPA is proposing to find that portions of the Maine 
and New Hampshire petitions are approvable with respect to the 8-hour 
standard based solely on technical considerations. The EPA is proposing 
that the technically approvable portions of the petitions be deemed 
granted or denied at certain later dates pending certain actions by the 
States and EPA regarding State submittals in response to the final 
NOX State implementation plan call (NOX SIP 
call). The control requirements that would apply to sources in source 
categories for which a final finding will ultimately be granted were 
proposed in the October 21, 1998 notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR). 
The EPA is also proposing to deny portions of the petitions with 
respect to the 8-hour standard.
    This SNPR also corrects inadvertent errors in Table II-1 and the 
part 52 regulatory text in the October 21, 1998 NPR.
    In addition, today's SNPR provides notice of the availability of 
additional technical documents that have recently been placed in the 
NOX SIP call docket.
    The transport of ozone and its precursors is important because 
ozone, which is a primary harmful component of urban smog, has long 
been recognized, in both clinical and epidemiological research, to 
adversely affect public health.

DATES: The comment period on this SNPR ends on April 11, 1999. Comments 
must be postmarked by the last day of the comment period and sent 
directly to the Docket Office listed in ADDRESSES (in duplicate form if 
possible). A public hearing will be held on March 12, 1999 in 
Washington, DC, if requested. Please refer to SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 
for additional information on the comment period and public hearing.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted to the Air and Radiation Docket 
and Information Center (6102), Attention: Docket No. A-97-43, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW, room M-1500, 
Washington, DC 20460, telephone (202) 260-7548. Comments and data may 
also be submitted electronically by following the instructions under 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION of this document. No confidential business 
information (CBI) should be submitted through e-mail.
    Documents relevant to this action are available for inspection at 
the Docket Office, at the above address, between 8:00 a.m. and 5:30 
p.m., Monday though Friday, excluding legal holidays. A reasonable 
copying fee may be charged for copying.
    The public hearing, if there is one, will be held at the EPA 
Auditorium at 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC, 20460.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions concerning today's SNPR 
should be addressed to Carla Oldham, Office of Air Quality Planning and 
Standards, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division, MD-15, 
Research Triangle Park, NC, 27711, telephone (919) 541-3347, email 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Hearing

    The EPA will conduct a public hearing on the section 126 SNPR on 
March 5, 1999 beginning at 11:00 a.m., if requested by March 1, 1999. 
The EPA will not hold a hearing if one is not requested. Please check 
EPA's webpage at http://www.epa.gov/airlinks on March 2, 1999 for the 
announcement of whether the hearing will be held. If there is a 
hearing, it will be held at the EPA Auditorium at 401 M Street SW, 
Washington, DC, 20460. The metro stop is Waterfront, which is on the 
green line. Persons planning to present oral testimony at the hearings 
should notify JoAnn Allman, Office of Air Quality Planning and 
Standards, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division, MD-15, 
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone (919) 541-1815, email 
[email protected] no later than March 1, 1999. Oral testimony will 
be limited to 5 minutes each. Any member of the public may file a 
written statement before, during, or by the close of the comment 
period. Written statements (duplicate copies preferred) should be 
submitted to Docket No. A-97-43 at the above address. The hearing 
schedule, including lists of speakers, will also be posted on EPA's 
webpage at http://www.epa.gov/airlinks prior to the hearing. A verbatim 
transcript of the hearing, if held, and written statements will be made 
available for copying during normal working hours at the Air and 
Radiation Docket and Information Center at the above address.

Availability of Related Information

    The official record for this rulemaking, as well as the public 
version, has been established under docket number A-97-43 (including 
comments and data submitted electronically as described below). A 
public version of this record, including printed, paper versions of 
electronic comments, which does not include any information claimed as 
CBI, is available for inspection from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The official rulemaking 
record is located at the address in ADDRESSES at the beginning of this 
document. Electronic comments can be sent directly to EPA at: A-and-R-
D[email protected]. Electronic comments must be submitted as an 
ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of 
encryption. Comments and data will also be accepted on disks in 
WordPerfect in 5.1/6.1 file format or ASCII file format. All comments 
and data in electronic form must be identified by the docket number A-
97-43. Electronic comments on this SNPR may be filed online at many 
Federal Depository Libraries.
    The EPA has issued a separate rule on NOX transport 
entitled, ``Finding of Significant Contribution and Rulemaking for 
Certain States in the Ozone Transport Assessment Group

[[Page 10343]]

Region for Purposes of Reducing Regional Transport of Ozone'' (63 FR 
57357, October 27, 1998) (see notices included in the docket for this 
rulemaking). The rulemaking docket for that rule (Docket No. A-96-56), 
hereafter referred to as the NOX SIP call, contains 
information and analyses that are relied upon in the section 126 NPR 
and today's supplemental proposal on the Maine and New Hampshire 
petitions. Documents II-L-01 and II-L-02 in the docket for today's 
action describe which documents in the NOX SIP call docket 
are included by reference. Documents related to the NOX SIP 
call rulemaking are available for inspection in docket number A-96-56 
at the address and times given above. In addition, the proposed 
NOX SIP call and associated documents are located at http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/otagsip.html. Modeling and air quality assessment 
information can be obtained in electronic form at http://
www.epa.gov.scram001/regmodcenter/t28.htm. Information related to the 
budget development can be found at http://www.epa.gov/capi.
    Additional information relevant to this SNPR concerning the Ozone 
Transport Assessment Group (OTAG) is available on the web at http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/. If assistance is needed in accessing the system, call 
the help desk at (919) 541-5384 in Research Triangle Park, NC. 
Documents related to OTAG can be downloaded directly from OTAG's 
webpage at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/otag. The OTAG's technical data are 
located at http://www.iceis.mcnc.org/OTAGDC.

Outline

I. Background
    A. Summary of Petitions
    B. Rulemaking Schedule
II. Proposed Action on the 8-Hour Petitions
    A. Technical Determinations
    B. Action on Whether to Grant or Deny the 8-Hour Petitions
    1. Portion of the Petitions for Which EPA is Proposing an 
Affirmative Technical Determination
    2. Portion of the Petitions for Which EPA is Proposing a Denial
    C. Requirements for Sources for Which EPA Makes a Section 126(b) 
Finding
III. Corrections and Clarifications to October 21, 1998 NPR
IV. Notice of Availability of Additional Technical Documents
V. Administrative Requirements
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Impact Analysis
    B. Impact on Small Entities
    C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    D. Paperwork Reduction Act
    E. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    F. Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice
    G. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental 
Partnership
    H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

I. Background

A. Summary of Petitions

    In August 1997, New Hampshire, Maine, and six other Northeastern 
States filed petitions under section 126 seeking to mitigate what they 
described as significant transport of one of the main precursors of 
ground-level ozone, NOX, across State boundaries. All of the 
petitioning States directed their petitions at the 1-hour ozone 
standard. Three of the States, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and 
Vermont, also directed their petitions at the new 8-hour ozone 
standard. In notices dated September 30, 1998 (63 FR 52213) and October 
21, 1998 (63 FR 56292), EPA proposed action on the petitions. The 
October 21, 1998 NPR contains the longer, more detailed version of the 
proposal. Familiarity with that notice is assumed for purposes of 
today's SNPR. In the NPR, EPA proposed action under the 1-hour and/or 
the 8-hour standard as specifically requested in each State's petition. 
At that time, the Maine and New Hampshire petitions were only directed 
at the 1-hour standard. Therefore, EPA believed the Agency was not 
authorized to evaluate impacts of the emissions of the named upwind 
sources on 8-hour nonattainment problems in Maine and New Hampshire.
Maine 8-Hour Petition
    On November 30, 1998, Maine requested that EPA make findings of 
significant contribution under the 8-hour standard based on information 
in its 1997 section 126 petition. Maine did not request any other 
changes to its original petition. Therefore, the geographic scope of 
the petition and the named sources and source categories to be 
considered are the same for the 8-hour standard as the 1-hour standard.
    The Maine petition identifies ``electric utilities and steam-
generating units having a heat input capacity of 250 mmBtu/hr or 
greater'' that are located within 600 miles of Maine's ozone 
nonattainment areas as significantly contributing to nonattainment and 
maintenance problems in Maine. The geographic area covered by the Maine 
petition includes all or parts of Connecticut, Delaware, District of 
Columbia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, New Hampshire, 
North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, 
and West Virginia.
    The Maine petition requests that EPA establish an emissions 
limitation of 0.15 lb/mmBtu for electric utilities and establish the 
Ozone Transport Commission Memorandum of Understanding's (on 
NOX reductions) level of control for steam generating units, 
in a multistate cap-and-trade NOX market system.
New Hampshire Petition
    On November 30, 1998, New Hampshire submitted a request that EPA 
make findings of significant contribution with respect to the 8-hour 
ozone standard based on information in its 1997 petition. New Hampshire 
did not request any other changes in its original petition. Therefore, 
the geographic scope of the petition and the named sources and source 
categories to be considered are the same for the 8-hour standard as the 
1-hour standard.
    The New Hampshire section 126 petition identified ``fossil fuel-
fired indirect heat exchange combustion units and fossil fuel-fired 
electric generating facilities which emit ten tons of NOX or 
more per day'' that are located in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) 
States and OTAG Subregions 1-7 as significantly contributing to 
nonattainment in, or interfering with maintenance by, New Hampshire. 
The geographic area covered includes all or parts of Connecticut, 
Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, 
Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, New 
York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, 
Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin.
    The New Hampshire petition requests that EPA establish compliance 
schedules and emissions limitations no less stringent than: (1) Phase 
III of the Ozone Transport Commission Memorandum of Understanding on 
NOX reductions; and/or (2) 85 percent reductions from the 
projected 2007 baseline; and/or (3) an emission rate of 0.15 lb/mmBtu.

B. Rulemaking Schedule

    Section 126(b) generally requires EPA to make the requested finding 
or deny the petition within 60 days of receipt. It also requires EPA to 
provide the opportunity for a public hearing for the petition. In 
addition, EPA's action under section 126 is subject to the procedural 
requirements of section 307(d) of the CAA. One of these requirements is 
notice-and-comment rulemaking and

[[Page 10344]]

providing an opportunity for public hearing.
    As discussed in Section I.E. of the NPR, on February 25, 1998, the 
eight petitioning States filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court 
for the Southern District of New York to compel EPA to take action on 
the States' section 126 petitions that were submitted in August 1997 
(State of Connecticut v. Browner, No. 98-1376). The EPA and the eight 
States filed a proposed consent decree to establish the rulemaking 
schedule. The court accepted a modified version of the consent decree 
on October 26, 1998.
    The schedule in the consent decree requires EPA to take final 
action on at least the technical merits of the August 1997 petitions by 
April 30, 1999. The consent decree further permits EPA to structure the 
final action it would take by April 30, 1999 so as to defer the 
granting or denial of the petitions to certain later dates extending to 
as late as May 1, 2000, pending certain actions by EPA and the States 
in response to the NOX SIP call. In the NPR, EPA proposed to 
take this form of alternative final action.
    The consent decree does not apply to the later November 30, 1998 8-
hour petitions. However, for the sake of efficiency and certainty, EPA 
intends to take final action on these new petitions along with the 
final action on the rest of the petitions. Further, EPA is proposing to 
structure the final action on the Maine and New Hampshire 8-hour 
petitions according to the same terms and schedule as was proposed for 
the other petitions (see Section II.A.2.c and II.F.2 of the NPR).

II. Proposed Action on the 8-Hour Petitions

    In evaluating the Maine and New Hampshire petitions under the 8-
hour standard, EPA is applying the analytical approach proposed in the 
section 126 NPR as the applicable test under section 126 (see Section 
II of the NPR). The approach relies on conclusions drawn in the final 
NOX SIP call.
    The EPA's proposed action consists of three components: (1) 
technical determinations of whether upwind sources or source categories 
named in the petitions significantly contribute to nonattainment or 
interfere with maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard in the relevant 
petitioning State; (2) for those sources for which EPA is proposing an 
affirmative technical determination, action specifying when a finding 
that such sources emit or would emit in violation of the section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prohibition will be deemed made or not made (or made 
but subsequently withdrawn) and, thus, when a petition will be deemed 
granted or denied (or granted but subsequently denied) for purposes of 
section 126(b); and (3) the specific emissions-reduction requirements 
that will apply when such a finding is deemed made. Each of these 
proposed actions is described below.

A. Technical Determinations

    Using the NPR approach for making determinations on the technical 
merits of the petitions, EPA first looked to see which States named in 
the petitions contribute significantly to 8-hour nonattainment or 
maintenance problems in the petitioning State. These linkages were 
established in the NOX SIP call and are summarized in Table 
1 below.

 Table 1.--Named Upwind States Which Contain Sources that Significantly
         Contribute to 8-Hour Nonattainment in Petitioning State
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Named upwind states that
           Petitioning state                 significantly contribute
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maine..................................  CT, DE, DC, MD, MA, NJ, NY, NC,
                                          PA, RI, VA
New Hampshire..........................  CT, DE, DC, MD, MA, NJ, NY, OH
                                          PA, RI
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the next step, EPA determined which of the named major 
stationary NOX sources or source categories in the linked 
States may emit in violation of the prohibition in section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i) because they emit in amounts that contribute 
significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, 
the petitioning State. For this, EPA proposed in the NPR to use its 
analysis of highly cost-effective measures from the NOX SIP 
call. Thus, if EPA identified highly cost-effective measures for a 
particular source category in the NOX SIP call, then EPA 
proposed to make an affirmative ``technical determination'' for that 
category. The highly cost-effective control measures are discussed in 
Section II.C of the NPR and are summarized in Table 2 below.

    Table 2.--Summary of Feasible, Highly Cost-Effective NOx Control
                                Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Subcategory                       Control measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Large EGUsa.......................  State-by-State ozone season
                                     emissions level (in tons) based on
                                     applying a NOx emission rate of
                                     0.15 lb/mmBtu on all applicable
                                     sources
Large Non-EGUsa...................  State-by-State ozone season
                                     emissions level (in tons) based on
                                     applying a 60 percent reduction
                                     from uncontrolled emissions on all
                                     applicable sources
Large Process Heaters.............  No additional controls highly cost
                                     effective
Small Sources.....................  No additional controls highly cost
                                     effective
------------------------------------------------------------------------
a The definitions of ``large EGUs'' and ``large non-EGUs'' for purposes
  of this rulemaking are given in the applicability section of the
  proposed part 97 regulation in the NPR and clarified in a December 24,
  1998 Federal Register notice (63 FR 71220), and a January 13, 1999
  Federal Register notice (64 FR 2418).

    In short, EPA is proposing today to make affirmative technical 
determinations of significant contribution (or interference) for those 
large electricity generating units (EGUs) and non-EGUs for which highly 
cost-effective controls are available (as shown in Table 2), to the 
extent those sources are located in one of the linked States named in 
the relevant petition (as shown in Table 1).
    For all named sources that are located in States that are not 
linked to New Hampshire or Maine and for sources that are located in 
linked States but for which highly cost- effective controls are not 
available, EPA is proposing to deny the petitions. For States not 
linked to New Hampshire or Maine, EPA's basis for this denial is (i) 
for certain States, based on a proposed negative technical 
determination because EPA determined in the NOx SIP call 
that the States are not linked to New Hampshire or Maine; and (ii) for 
other States, based on EPA's inability to make an affirmative technical 
determination due to inadequate information.
    More specifically, in addition to those listed in Table 1 above 
(and those noted below), the New Hampshire 8-hour petition identifies 
all or parts of the following States: Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, 
Michigan, Missouri, North

[[Page 10345]]

Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. The EPA is proposing 
a negative technical determination with respect to sources in these 
States for the New Hampshire 8-hour petition because in the 
NOx SIP call, EPA determined that these States should not be 
linked to New Hampshire. Therefore, EPA is proposing to deny this part 
of the New Hampshire petition.
    Similarly, in addition to those listed in Table 1 above (and those 
noted below), the Maine 8-hour petition identifies all or parts of the 
following States: Ohio and West Virginia. The EPA is proposing a 
negative technical determination with respect to sources in these 
States for the Maine 8-hour petition because in the NOx SIP 
call, EPA determined that these States should not be linked to Maine. 
Therefore, EPA is proposing to deny this part of the Maine petition.
    The New Hampshire 8-hour petition also identifies all or parts of 
the following States, in addition to those noted above: Iowa, Maine, 
and Vermont. The Maine 8-hour petition also identifies all or parts of 
the following States, in addition to those noted above: New Hampshire 
and Vermont. In the NOx SIP call rule, EPA stated that it 
did not have adequate modeling information to make a final 
determination as to whether these States met the ``significant 
contribution'' standard under section 110(a)(2)(D) (63 FR 57398, 
October 27, 1998). In the section 126 NPR, EPA indicated that it 
intended to conduct further modeling for New Hampshire, Vermont, and 
Maine prior to taking final action on the section 126 rule (63 FR 
56304, 56308, October 21, 1998). As discussed below, EPA is in the 
process of informing Iowa, Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont (among 
others) that the Agency does not intend to do additional modeling prior 
to completion of this rulemaking by the required date of April 30, 
1999. Accordingly, for the present, EPA is obliged to deny, on grounds 
of inadequate information, the portions of the New Hampshire and Maine 
section 126 petitions that request an affirmative finding for those 
four States.
    The regulatory text accompanying today's SNPR sets forth each of 
the proposed findings and affirmative technical determinations for 
sources named in the Maine and New Hampshire 8-hour petitions.
    All the source categories in named States for which EPA is 
proposing an affirmative technical determination in today's SNPR have 
already received a proposed affirmative technical determination of 
significant contribution in the section 126 NPR with respect to the New 
Hampshire and Maine 1-hour petitions and/or one or more of the other 
petitions. Appendix A to proposed part 97 in the October 21, 1998 NPR 
lists all existing sources for which EPA proposed to make an 
affirmative technical determination with respect to at least one 
petitioning State.

B. Action on Whether to Grant or Deny the 8-Hour Petitions

1. Portion of the Petitions for Which EPA Is Proposing an Affirmative 
Technical Determination
    For the portions of the Maine and New Hampshire petitions for which 
EPA is proposing an affirmative technical determination, EPA proposes 
to issue the type of final action described in Section II.A.2.c. of the 
NPR for the reasons given in that section. Under that approach, the 
portions of the petitions for which EPA makes an affirmative technical 
determination would be granted or denied at certain later dates pending 
certain actions by the States and EPA regarding State submittals in 
response to the final NOx SIP call. The schedule allows 
States the opportunity to develop and submit plans to reduce 
NOx transport before EPA would make any final findings under 
section 126. The schedule and conditions under which the applicable 
final findings on the petitions would be triggered are discussed in 
Section II.F.2 of the NPR.
2. Portion of the Petitions for Which EPA Is Proposing a Denial
    Consistent with the overall approach, EPA is proposing that the 
sources for which EPA makes a negative technical determination (as 
described above) do not or would not emit in violation of the section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prohibition. As a result, EPA proposes to deny the 
portions of the Maine and New Hampshire petitions relating to such 
sources. In addition, EPA is proposing to deny the portions of the 
Maine petition relating to sources located in New Hampshire and 
Vermont, as well as the New Hampshire petition relating to sources 
located in Iowa, Maine, and Vermont, due to the insufficiency of the 
data as to whether emissions from such sources emit in violation of the 
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prohibition.

C. Requirements for Sources for Which EPA Makes a Section 126(b) 
Finding

    In the NPR, EPA proposed the requirements that would apply to any 
new or existing major source or group of stationary sources for which a 
section 126(b) finding is ultimately made. The emissions control 
program is discussed in detail in Section III of the NPR and was 
proposed as a new part 97 in title 40 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations.

III. Corrections and Clarifications to October 21, 1998 NPR

Clarification to List of States Whose Sources Do Not Make a Significant 
Contribution to Nonattainment in, or Interfere with Maintenance by, the 
Petitioning States

    In the NPR (63 FR 56303-04), EPA identified 11 States as containing 
sources that do not make a significant contribution to nonattainment 
in, or interfere with maintenance by, any of the petitioning States 
under the 1- hour and/or the 8-hour ozone standards. The EPA listed 
these States as Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, 
Mississippi, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Wisconsin, and Vermont. The 
EPA added that it does not have the same information available for the 
States of Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont; that EPA intended to 
conduct further analysis with respect to those States; and that if such 
further analyses indicated that sources in any of those States 
contributed significantly to a relevant petitioning State, EPA would 
issue a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking based on the new 
information (63 FR 56304, 56308).
    These statements are clarified as follows: Based on determinations 
made in the NOx SIP call, the States of Georgia, South 
Carolina, and Wisconsin should be treated as containing sources that do 
not make a significant contribution to nonattainment in, or interfere 
with maintenance by, any of the petitioning States under the 1- hour 
and/or 8-hour ozone standards. As further indicated in the 
NOx SIP call, for the remaining eight States of Arkansas, 
Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Hampshire, and 
Vermont, EPA does not, at this time, have sufficient information--that 
is, adequate air quality modeling studies--to make a determination as 
to whether or not those States make a significant contribution to, or 
interfere with maintenance by, any of the petitioning States under the 
two ozone standards. Moreover, EPA is in the process of informing those 
eight States (along with other States in the midwest and south), that 
EPA does not expect to conduct those modeling studies prior to taking 
final action on the petitions by April 30, 1999. Accordingly, the NPR 
is clarified to propose a denial for the portions of the section 126 
petitions under either ozone standard that pertain to those eight 
States on grounds of inadequate

[[Page 10346]]

information to demonstrate whether or not sources in those States do 
contribute significantly to, or interfere with maintenance by, any of 
the petitioning States.

Correction to Table II-1 of the NPR \1\

    When EPA published Table II-1 in the NPR, EPA inadvertently left 
off Ohio as being a significant contributor to New Hampshire under the 
1-hour standard. In addition, asterisks were inadvertently left off of 
Michigan and North Carolina where the States were listed as significant 
contributors to Connecticut. These errors are corrected in the version 
of the table shown below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See discussion below, in ``Additional Notice to Reopen 
Comment Period.''

 Table II-1.--[from the NPR]. Named Upwind States which Contain Sources
   that Contribute Significantly to 1-Hr Nonattainment in Petitioning
                                 States.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Petitioning State (Nonattainment Area)        Named Upwind States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New York...............................  DE, DC, IN, KY, MD, MI, NC, NJ,
                                          OH, PA, VA, WV
Connecticut............................  DE, DC, IN*, KY*, MD, MI*, NC*,
                                          NJ, NY, OH, PA, VA, WV
Pennsylvania...........................  NC, OH, VA, WV
Massachusetts..........................  OH, WV
Rhode Island...........................  OH, WV
Maine..................................  CT, DE, DC, MD, MA, NJ, NY, PA,
                                          RI
New Hampshire..........................  CT, DE*, DC*, MA, MD*, NJ, NY,
                                          OH*, PA, RI, VA*
Vermont................................  None
Total..................................  CT, DE, DC, IN, KY, MA, MD, MI,
                                          NC, NJ, NY, OH, PA, RI, VA, WV
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Upwind States marked with an asterisk are included in the table because
  they contribute to an interstate nonattainment area that includes part
  of the petitioning State. Part of New Hampshire is included in the
  Boston/Portsmouth nonattainment area; part of Connecticut is included
  in the New York City nonattainment area.

Correction to Part 52 Regulatory Text 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See discussion immediately below, in ``Additional Notice to 
Reopen Comment Period.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Part 52 regulatory text in the NPR is corrected to list Ohio as 
a significant contributor to New Hampshire under the 1-hour standard.

Additional Notice to Reopen Comment Period

    The EPA is publishing, in the Federal Register, a separate notice 
to reopen the comment period on the NPR to allow comment concerning the 
effect of EPA's proposed determinations that the 1-hour ozone standard 
no longer applies to certain areas in States that have submitted 
section 126 petitions (63 FR 69598, December 17, 1998). If EPA 
finalizes these determinations, EPA may then deny at least portions of 
the section 126 petitions of those States. Under these circumstances, 
EPA would revise Table II-1, above, and the accompanying regulatory 
text, accordingly.

Drafting Revisions to Proposed Part 52 Regulatory Text

    The proposed part 52 regulatory text language that EPA included in 
the NPR contained provisions identifying EPA's proposed determinations 
for both affirmative technical determinations and negative technical 
determinations (63 FR 56327-32, October 21, 1998). Upon further 
consideration, EPA believes that, purely as a matter of drafting, it is 
not necessary to include regulatory text identifying negative technical 
determinations or denials. The regulatory text is revised accordingly.

IV. Notice of Availability of Additional Technical Documents

    In the section 126 NPR, EPA stated that all documents in the docket 
for the NOx SIP call (Docket No. A-96-56) should be 
considered as part of the docket for the section 126 rulemaking (Docket 
No. A-97-43). The EPA has recently included in the NOx SIP 
call docket various technical documents, including air quality and 
economic modeling analyses, that had been inadvertently omitted from 
that docket. These documents may be found in Sections VI-D and VI-F of 
the NOx SIP call docket. A list of the documents is attached 
as Appendix A to this notice. These documents have been incorporated by 
reference into the docket for the section 126 rulemaking.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Impact Analysis

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the 
Agency must determine whether a regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and therefore subject to Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review 
and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines 
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a 
rule that may:
    (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or 
adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or 
communities;
    (2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
    (4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the Executive Order.
    The EPA considers today's SNPR to be one piece of its overall 
proposal on the eight section 126 petitions. As discussed in the 
October 21, 1998 NPR, the EPA believes that its action on the section 
126 petitions is a ``significant regulatory action'' because it raises 
novel legal and policy issues arising from the Agency's obligation to 
respond to the petitions, and because the action could have an annual 
effect on the economy of more than $100 million. As a result, the NPR 
was submitted to OMB for review, and EPA prepared a regulatory impact 
analysis (RIA) titled ``Regulatory Impact Analysis for the 
NOx SIP Call, FIP, and Section 126 Petitions.'' This RIA 
assesses the costs, benefits, and economic impacts associated with 
federally-imposed requirements to mitigate NOx emissions 
from sources contributing to downwind nonattainment of the ozone 
national ambient air quality standards. Any written comments from OMB 
to EPA and any written EPA response to those comments are included in 
the docket. The docket is available for public inspection at the EPA's 
Air Docket Section, which is listed in the ADDRESSES section of this 
preamble. The RIA is available in hard copy by contacting the EPA 
Library at the address under ``Availability of Related Information'' 
and in electronic form as discussed above in that same section. All of 
the sources covered under the Maine and New Hampshire petitions with 
respect to the 8-hour standard are also covered with respect to the 
Maine and New Hampshire 1-hour petitions and/or one or more of the 
other petitions and, therefore, were considered in the RIA analyses for 
the NPR. This SNPR does not create any additional impacts beyond what 
were proposed in the NPR, therefore, no additional RIA is needed.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended by the Small 
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA), provides that 
whenever an agency is required to publish a general notice of proposed 
rulemaking, it must

[[Page 10347]]

prepare and make available an initial regulatory flexibility analysis, 
unless it certifies that the proposed rule, if promulgated, will not 
have ``a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.''
    In the process of developing the NPR, EPA worked with the Small 
Business Administration (SBA) and OMB and obtained input from small 
businesses, small governmental jurisdictions, and small organizations. 
On June 23, 1998, EPA's Small Business Advocacy Chairperson convened a 
Small Business Advocacy Review Panel under section 609(b) of the RFA as 
amended by SBREFA. In addition to its chairperson, the panel consists 
of EPA's Director of the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 
within the Office of Air and Radiation, the Administrator of the Office 
of Information and Regulatory Affairs within OMB, and the Chief Counsel 
for Advocacy of the SBA.
    As described in the NPR, this panel conducted an outreach effort 
and completed a report on the section 126 proposal. The report provides 
background information on the proposed rule being developed and the 
types of small entities that would be subject to the proposed rule, 
describes efforts to obtain the advice and recommendations of 
representatives of those small entities, summarizes the comments that 
have been received to date from those representatives, and presents the 
findings and recommendations of the panel. The completed report, 
comments of the small entity representatives, and other information are 
contained in the docket for this rulemaking.
    It is important to note that the panel's findings and discussion 
are based on the information available at the time this report was 
drafted. The EPA is continuing to conduct analyses relevant to the 
proposed rule, and additional information may be developed or obtained 
during the remainder of the rule development process. This SNPR does 
not affect any additional sources or source categories beyond those 
that are affected by the NPR. All of the sources covered by this SNPR 
are already being considered in the SBREFA process that was initiated 
for the NPR and, therefore, no separate SBREFA analysis is needed for 
today's SNPR.

C. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Pub.L. 
104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, 2 
U.S.C. 1532, EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including 
a cost-benefit analysis, for any proposed or final rule that ``includes 
any Federal mandate that may result in the expenditure by State, local, 
and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of 
$100,000,000 or more * * * in any one year.'' A ``Federal mandate'' is 
defined under section 421(6), 2 U.S.C. 658(6), to include a ``Federal 
intergovernmental mandate'' and a ``Federal private sector mandate.'' A 
``Federal intergovernmental mandate,'' in turn, is defined to include a 
regulation that ``would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, 
or tribal governments,'' section 421(5)(A)(i), 2 U.S.C. 658(5)(A)(i), 
except for, among other things, a duty that is ``a condition of Federal 
assistance,'' section 421(5)(A)(i)(I). A ``Federal private sector 
mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose an enforceable duty 
upon the private sector,'' with certain exceptions, section 421(7)(A), 
2 U.S.C. 658(7)(A).
    As discussed in the NPR, the EPA is taking the position that the 
requirements of UMRA apply because EPA's action on the section 126 
petitions could result in the establishment of enforceable mandates 
directly applicable to sources (including sources owned by State and 
local governments) that would result in costs greater than $100 million 
in any 1 year. The UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider 
a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least-
costly, most cost-effective or least-burdensome alternative that 
achieves the objectives of the rule. The EPA's UMRA analysis, 
``Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Analysis For the Proposed Section 126 
Petitions Under the Clean Air Act Amendments Title I,'' is contained in 
the docket for this action and is summarized in the NPR. Because this 
SNPR does not create any additional mandates beyond what were proposed 
in the NPR, no additional UMRA analysis is needed for today's SNPR.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The control requirements that would apply to any sources for which 
a final section 126 finding is made were proposed in the October 21, 
1998 NPR. This SNPR does not propose any additional control 
requirements. The information collection requirements related to the 
NPR control measures were submitted for approval to the OMB under the 
Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An Information 
Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by EPA (ICR No. 
1889.01), and a copy may be obtained from Sandy Farmer, OPPE Regulatory 
Information Division, US Environmental Protection Agency (2137), 401 M 
St., SW, Washington, DC 20460 or by calling (202) 260-2740. See Section 
V.D. of the NPR for a discussion of the ICR document.

E. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    Executive Order 13045 applies to any rule that EPA determines (1) 
``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866, 
and (2) the environmental health or safety risk addressed by the rule 
has a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action 
meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health 
or safety effects of the planned rule on children; and explain why the 
planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and 
reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. This 
proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045, entitled 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it does not involve 
decisions on environmental health risks or safety risks that may 
disproportionately affect children.
    In accordance with section 5(501), the Agency has evaluated the 
environmental health or safety effects of the rule on children and 
found that the rule does not separately address any age groups. 
However, in conjunction with the final NOx SIP call 
rulemaking, the Agency has conducted a general analysis of the 
potential changes in ozone and PM levels experienced by children as a 
result of the NOx SIP call; these findings are presented in 
the RIA. The findings include population-weighted exposure 
characterizations for projected 2007 ozone and PM concentrations. The 
population data includes a census-derived subdivision for the under 18 
group. This analysis generally applies to the section 126 proposal 
because the section 126 action is a subset of the NOx SIP 
call.

F. Executive Order 12898: Environmental Justice

    Executive Order 12898 requires that each Federal agency make 
achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and 
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human 
health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and 
activities on minorities and low-income populations. In conjunction 
with the final NOx SIP call

[[Page 10348]]

rulemaking, the Agency has conducted a general analysis of the 
potential changes in ozone and PM levels that may be experienced by 
minority and low-income populations as a result of the NOx 
SIP call; these findings are presented in the RIA. The findings include 
population-weighted exposure characterizations for projected ozone 
concentrations and PM concentrations. The population data includes 
census-derived subdivisions for whites and non-whites, and for low-
income groups. These findings generally apply to the section 126 
proposal because the section 126 action is a subset of the 
NOx SIP call.

G. Executive Order 12875: Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership

    Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local 
or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds 
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those 
governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If the mandate is 
unfunded, EPA must provide OMB a description of the extent of EPA's 
prior consultation with representatives of affected State, local and 
tribal governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written 
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the 
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875 
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected 
officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal 
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development 
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
    The EPA has concluded that the rulemaking on the eight section 126 
petitions may create a mandate on State and local governments, and that 
the Federal government will not provide the funds necessary to pay the 
direct costs incurred by the State and local governments in complying 
with the mandate. In order to provide meaningful and timely input in 
the development of this regulatory action, EPA sent letters to five 
national associations whose members include elected officials. The 
letters provided background information, requested the associations to 
notify their membership of the proposed rulemaking, and encouraged 
interested parties to comment on the proposed actions by sending 
comments during the public comment period and presenting testimony at 
the public hearing on the proposal. Any comments will be taken into 
consideration as the action moves toward final rulemaking.
    Furthermore, for the section 126 rulemaking, EPA published an 
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that served to provide notice of 
the Agency's intention to propose emissions limits and to solicit early 
input on the proposal. This process helped to ensure that small 
governments had an opportunity to give timely input and obtain 
information on compliance.
    This SNPR does not affect any additional sources or source 
categories beyond those that are affected by the NPR. Therefore, all of 
the sources covered by this SNPR were already considered in the 
consultation process with State, local, and tribal governments that was 
conducted for the NPR, and no separate consultation process is needed 
for today's SNPR.

H. Executive Order 13084: Consultation and Coordination with Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is 
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the 
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial 
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the government 
provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs 
incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA 
must provide to OMB, in a separately identified section of the preamble 
to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation 
with representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the 
nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue 
the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to 
develop an effective process permitting elected and other 
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful 
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters 
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
    Today's SNPR does not significantly or uniquely affect the 
communities of Indian tribal governments and, in any event, will not 
impose substantial direct compliance costs on such communities. The EPA 
is not aware of sources located on tribal lands that could be subject 
to the requirements EPA is proposing in this notice. Accordingly, the 
requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), Pub L. No. 104-113, directs EPA to use voluntary 
consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to do so would 
be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary 
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials 
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business 
practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through 
OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and 
applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    The control requirements that would apply to any sources for which 
a final section 126 finding is made with respect to today's action were 
proposed in the October 21, 1998 NPR. This SNPR does not propose any 
additional control requirements. As discussed in Section V.I of the 
NPR, the control requirements incorporate a number of voluntary 
consensus standards.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Emissions trading, 
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone transport, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Dated: February 25, 1999.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

Appendix A to the Preamble--Availability of Additional Technical 
Documents

    The following tables list the documents that have recently been 
placed in Sections VI-D and VI-F of the NOX SIP call docket 
(Docket No. A-96-56).

       Table A-1.--Additions to Section VI-D of Docket No. A-96-56
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Commenter, Addressee, Title or
          Document Number                        Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI-D-05...........................  Draft--Summary of Revised 2007 Base
                                     and Budget Seasonal NOX Emissions
VI-D-06...........................  Technical Support Document on
                                     Development of Modeling Inventory
                                     and Budgets for the Ozone Transport
                                     SIP Call

[[Page 10349]]

 
VI-D-07...........................  Draft Appendices for Revised Budget
                                     Calculations for Electric
                                     Generation Sources
VI-D-08...........................  Explanation of Revised Budget
                                     Calculations
VI-D-09...........................  Draft Appendices for Revised Budget
                                     Calculations for Non-Electric
                                     Generation Point Sources
VI-D-10...........................  Revised Draft Utilization
                                     Information for Electricity
                                     Generators Used in Budget
                                     Calculations for the Proposed SIP
                                     Call
VI-D-11...........................  Road Map to IPM Run Files for the
                                     Proposed Ozone Transport Rulemaking
VI-D-12...........................  Data Used to Determine State-
                                     Specific Electricity Generator
                                     Growth Used in the Ozone Transport
                                     Rulemaking
VI-D-13...........................  Summary of State-Specific 1996-2007
                                     Growth Factors for Electricity
                                     Generating Units in the SIP Call
                                     Region
VI-D-14...........................  Segments of five IPM runs used to
                                     prepare the electric power industry
                                     emissions reduction and cost
                                     analysis in the Supplemental Ozone
                                     Transport Rulemaking Regulatory
                                     Analysis
VI-D-15...........................  Estimates of Annual Incremental
                                     Costs of Combustion Control on Coal-
                                     Fired Units that are Part of EPA's
                                     Estimates of Compliance Costs for
                                     the SNPR
VI-D-16...........................  Initial Base Case--Winter 1998
                                     Electricity Demand Forecast, SIPJ
VI-D-17...........................  0.15 Trading--Winter 1998
                                     Electricity Demand Forecast, SIP2
VI-D-18...........................  Final Base Case--Winter 1998
                                     Electricity Demand Forecast, SIP5--
                                     2
VI-D-19...........................  Initial Base Case--Summer 1996
                                     Electricity Demand Forecast, SIP3
VI-D-20...........................  0.15 Trading--Summer 1996
                                     Electricity Demand Forecast, SIP14
VI-D-21...........................  Incremental Cost Analyses
VI-D-22...........................  Four additional sets of IPM run
                                     files which provide results of
                                     analysis of five cap-and-trade
                                     options
VI-D-23...........................  EPA Utility/Non-Utility Zero-out
                                     Model Runs: emissions inputs and
                                     ozone predictions in electronic
                                     form and tabular summaries of ozone
                                     metrics in hard copy form
VI-D-24...........................  EPA UAM-V Zero-out Model runs:
                                     emissions inputs and ozone
                                     predictions in electronic form
VI-D-25...........................  EPA UAM-V Base Case and Strategy
                                     Model Runs: emissions inputs and
                                     ozone predictions in electronic
                                     form
VI-D-26...........................  EPA CAMX Base Case and Source
                                     Apportionment Model Runs: emissions
                                     inputs and ozone predictions in
                                     electronic form
------------------------------------------------------------------------


       Table A-2.--Additions to Section VI-F of Docket No. A-96-56
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Commenter, Addressee, Title or
          Document Number                        Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI-F-01...........................  0.12/0.15/0.20 3-zone trading
                                     beginning in 2003 (output from the
                                     IPM model)
VI-F-02...........................  0.1 5/0.20 2-zone trading beginning
                                     in 2003 (output from the IPM model)
VI-F-03...........................  Sensitivity Analysis of a 7-week
                                     outage period for SCR Hook-up (SIP
                                     47)
VI-F-04...........................  Sensitivity Analysis of a 9-week
                                     outage period for SCR Hook-up (SIP
                                     48)
VI-F-05...........................  Final .15 with interstate trading
                                     beginning in 2003 (SIP 80)
VI-F-06...........................  Corrected .15 with intrastate
                                     trading beginning in 2003 (SIP 83)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, part 52 of chapter 1 of 
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended 
as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

    1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A--General Provisions [Amended]

    2. Section 52.34 as proposed at 63 FR 56292 on October 21, 1998, is 
amended by removing paragraphs (b)(3) and (4); by revising paragraphs 
(c)(3) and (4); by removing paragraphs (d)(3), (4), (7), and (8) and 
redesignating paragraphs (d)(5) and (6) as paragraphs (d)(3) and (4) 
respectively; by revising paragraphs (e)(3) and (4); by adding 
paragraph (e)(2)(xi); by removing paragraphs (f)(3) and (4); by 
removing paragraphs (g)(3), (4), (7), and (8) and redesignating 
paragraphs (g)(5) and (6) as paragraphs (g)(3) and (4) respectively; by 
removing paragraphs (h)(3) and (4); and by removing paragraphs (i)(3), 
(4), (7), and (8) and redesignating paragraphs (i)(5) and (6) as 
paragraphs (i)(3) and (4) respectively; to read as follows:


Sec. 52.34  Action on petitions submitted under section 126 relating to 
emissions of nitrogen oxides.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (3) Affirmative Technical Determinations with Respect to the 8-Hour 
Ozone Standard in Maine. The Administrator of EPA finds that any 
existing or new major source or group of stationary sources emits or 
would emit NOX in amounts that contribute significantly to 
nonattainment in the State of Maine, with respect to the 8-hour NAAQS 
for ozone if it is or will be:
    (i) In a category of sources described in 40 CFR 97.4;
    (ii) Located in one of the States (or portions thereof) listed in 
paragraph (c)(6) of this section; and
    (iii) Within one of the ``Named Source Categories'' listed in the 
portion of Table F-1 of appendix F of this part describing the sources 
covered by the petition of the State of Maine.
    (4) States or Portions of States that Contain Sources for which EPA 
is Making an Affirmative Technical Determination with Respect to the 8-
Hour Ozone Standard in Maine. The States, or portions of States, that 
contain sources for which EPA is making an affirmative technical 
determination are:
    (i) Connecticut.
    (ii) Delaware.
    (iii) District of Columbia.
    (iv) Maryland.
    (v) Massachusetts.
    (vi) New Jersey.
    (vii) New York.
    (viii) North Carolina.
    (ix) Pennsylvania.
    (x) Rhode Island.
    (xi) Virginia.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (2) * * *
    (xi) Ohio
* * * * *
    (3) Affirmative Technical Determinations with Respect to the 8-Hour 
Ozone Standard in New Hampshire. The Administrator of EPA finds that 
any existing or new major source or group of stationary sources emits 
or would emit NOX in amounts

[[Page 10350]]

that contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with 
maintenance by, the State of New Hampshire, with respect to the 8-hour 
NAAQS for ozone if it is or will be:
    (i) In a category of sources described in 40 CFR 97.4;
    (ii) Located in one of the States (or portions thereof) listed in 
paragraph (e)(6) of this section; and
    (iii) Within one of the ``Named Source Categories'' listed in the 
portion of Table F-1 of appendix F of this part describing the sources 
covered by the petition of the State of New Hampshire.
    (4) States or Portions of States that Contain Sources for which EPA 
is Making an Affirmative Technical Determination with Respect to the 8-
Hour Ozone Standard in New Hampshire. The States, or portions of 
States, that contain sources for which EPA is making an affirmative 
technical determination are:
    (i) Connecticut.
    (ii) Delaware.
    (iii) District of Columbia.
    (iv) Maryland.
    (v) Massachusetts.
    (vi) New Jersey.
    (vii) New York.
    (viii) Pennsylvania.
    (ix) Rhode Island.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-5201 Filed 3-2-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P