[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 212 (Friday, November 1, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66555-66561]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-27833]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[Docket  WA-01-006; FRL-7267-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
State of Washington; Yakima Carbon Monoxide Redesignation to Attainment 
and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On September 26, 2001, the State of Washington requested EPA 
to redesignate the Yakima ``not classified'' carbon monoxide (CO) 
nonattainment area to attainment for the CO National Ambient Air 
Quality Standard (NAAQS) and submitted a CO maintenance plan for 
Yakima. In this action, EPA is approving the maintenance plan and 
redesignating the Yakima CO nonattainment area to attainment.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective December 31, 2002, 
unless EPA receives adverse comments by December 2, 2002. If relevant 
adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of 
the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that 
the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be mailed to: Steve Body, State and 
Tribal Programs Unit, Office of Air Quality, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth 
Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.
    Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available for 
public inspection during normal business hours at the United States 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of Air Quality, 1200 
Sixth Avenue, Seattle WA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Body, State and Tribal Programs 
Unit, Office of Air Quality, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle 
WA, Telephone number: (206) 553-0782.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What Is the Purpose of This action?
II. What Is the State's Process To Submit These Materials to EPA?
III. EPA's Evaluation of the Redesignation Request and Maintenance 
Plan
    a. The Area Must Have Attained the Carbon Monoxide NAAQS
    b. The Area Must Have Met All Applicable Requirements Under 
Section 110 and Part D
    1. CAA Section 110 Requirements
    2. Part D Requirements
    A. Section 172(c)(3)--Emissions Inventory

[[Page 66556]]

    B. Section 172(c)(5)--New Source Review (NSR)
    C. Section 172(c)(7)--Compliance With CAA section 110(a)(2): Air 
Quality Monitoring
    c. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) 
of the CAA
    d. The Area Must Show the Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to 
Permenant and Enforceable Emission Reductions.
    e. The Area Must Have A Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Under 
CAA Section 175A
    1. Emissions Inventory--Attainment Year
    2. Demonstration of maintenance
    3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
    4. Contingency Plan
IV. Conformity
V. Final Action

I. What Is the Purpose of This Action?

    EPA is redesignating the Yakima ``not classified'' CO nonattainment 
area from nonattainment to attainment and approving the maintenance 
plan that will keep the area in attainment for the next 10 years.
    EPA originally designated the Yakima area as nonattainment for CO 
under the provisions of the 1977 Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments (see 43 
FR 8962, March 3, 1978). On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act 
Amendments of 1990 were enacted (Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, 
codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q). Under section 107(d)(1)(C) of the 
CAA, the Yakima area was designated nonattainment for CO by operation 
of law because the area had been designated as nonattainment before 
November 15, 1990. The Yakima area is classified as an unclassified, or 
``not classified'' CO nonattainment area.
    Nonattainment areas can be redesignated to attainment after the 
area has measured air quality data showing it has attained the NAAQS 
and when certain planning requirements are met. Section 107(d)(3)(E) of 
the CAA provides the requirements for redesignation. These are:
    (i) The Administrator determines that the area has attained the 
national ambient air quality standard;
    (ii) The Administrator has fully approved the applicable 
implementation plan for the area under section 110(k) of the Act;
    (iii) The Administrator determines that the improvement in air 
quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions 
resulting from implementation of the applicable implementation plan, 
applicable Federal air pollution control regulations, and other 
permanent and enforceable reductions;
    (iv) The Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan for 
the area as meeting the requirements of CAA section 175A; and,
    (v) The State containing the area has met all requirements 
applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
    Before an area can be redesignated to attainment, all applicable 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) elements must be fully approved.

II. What Is the State's Process To Submit These materials to EPA?

    The CAA requires States to follow certain procedural requirements 
for submitting SIP revisions to EPA. Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA 
requires that each SIP revision be adopted by the State after 
reasonable notice and public hearing. The State then submits the SIP 
revision to EPA for approval.
    The Yakima Regional Clean Air Authority (YRCAA), which has 
regulatory authority for sources of air pollution in the Yakima CO 
nonattainment area, developed the CO maintenance plan. They released 
the draft maintenance plan for public review on August 21, 2000. On 
February 14, 2001, the Board of Directors for the YRCAA adopted the 
Yakima Carbon Monoxide Nonattainment Area Limited Maintenance Plan and 
Redesignation Request. On July 11, 2001, the State of Washington held a 
public hearing on the plan. On October 3, 2001, the State of Washington 
adopted the plan. On September 26, 2001, the State submitted the SIP to 
EPA. EPA has evaluated the State's submittal and determined that the 
State met the requirements for reasonable notice and public hearing 
under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA.

III. EPA's Evaluation of the Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan

    EPA has reviewed the State's maintenance plan and redesignation 
request and is approving the maintenance plan and redesignating the 
area to attainment consistent with the requirements of CAA section 
107(d)(3)(E). The following is a summary of EPAs evaluation and a 
description of how each requirement is met.

(a) The Area Must Have Attained the Carbon Monoxide NAAQS

    Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) requires that the Administrator determine 
that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS. The primary NAAQS for 
CO is 9 parts per million (10 milligrams per cubic meter) for an 8-hour 
average, not to be exceeded more than once per year. CO in the ambient 
air is measured by a reference method based on 40 CFR part 50, Appendix 
C. EPA considers an area as attaining the CO NAAQS when all of the CO 
monitors in the area have one or less exceedance of the CO standard 
each calendar year over a two calendar year period. (See 40 CFR 50.8 
and 40 CFR part 50, Appendix C.) EPA's interpretation of this 
requirement is that an area seeking redesignation to attainment must 
show attainment of the CO NAAQS for at least two consecutive calendar 
years (September 4, 1992, John Calcagni policy memorandum ``Procedures 
for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment'' 
(``Calcagni Memorandum'')). In addition, the area must continue to show 
attainment through the date that EPA promulgates redesignation to 
attainment.
    Washington's CO redesignation request for the Yakima area is based 
on valid ambient air quality data. Ambient air quality monitoring data 
for calendar years 1988 through 2001 show a measured exceedance rate of 
the CO NAAQS of 1.0 or less per year at all monitoring sites. These 
data were collected and analyzed as required by EPA (see 40 CFR 50.8 
and 40 CFR part 50, Appendix C) and have been stored in EPA's 
Aerometric Information and Retrieval System (AIRS). These data have met 
minimum quality assurance requirements and have been certified by the 
State as being valid before being included in AIRS. Further information 
on CO monitoring is presented in Section 2.3 and 2.4 of the Yakima 
maintenance plan. EPA has analyzed the ambient air quality data and 
determined that the Yakima area has not violated the CO standard since 
January 1988 and continues to attain through 2001.

(b) The Area Must Have Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 
110 and Part D

    Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) requires that an area must meet all 
applicable requirements under section 110 and part D of the CAA. EPA 
interprets this requirement to mean the State must meet all 
requirements that applied to the area prior to, or at the time of, the 
submission of a complete redesignation request.
1. CAA Section 110 Requirements
    On May 31, 1972, EPA approved the original Washington SIP as 
meeting the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA (see 37 FR 
10900). Although section 110 of the CAA was amended in 1990, the 
changes to the implementation plan requirements of section 110(a)(2) 
were not substantial. Thus, EPA has determined that the SIP revisions

[[Page 66557]]

approved in 1972 along with subsequent revisions that were previously 
approved, continue to satisfy the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of 
the CAA. EPA has analyzed the SIP elements that are being approved as 
part of this action and has determined they comply with the 
requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA and that the area meets 
all applicable requirements under section 110 of the CAA.
2. Part D Requirements
    The Yakima area was originally designated as nonattainment for CO 
on March 3, 1978 (see 43 FR 8962). On May 20, 1983, (48 FR 22716) EPA 
approved an extension of the attainment date to December 31, 1982. 
Washington's original CAA Part D plan for the Yakima CO nonattainment 
area was submitted and approved by EPA on June 5, 1980.
    Prior to the 1990 CAA Amendments, EPA had begun development of its 
post-1987 policy for carbon monoxide; however, EPA did not finalize the 
post-1987 policy for CO because the Clean Air Act (CAA) was amended on 
November 15, 1990. Under section 107(d)(1)(C) of the CAA, the Yakima 
area was by operation of law designated nonattainment for CO because 
the area had been previously designated nonattainment before November 
15, 1990. In the November 6, 1991, Federal Register, (56 FR 56694) the 
Yakima area was classified as a ``not classified'' CO nonattainment 
area as the area had not violated the CO NAAQS in 1988 or 1989.
    Before the Yakima ``not classified'' CO nonattainment area may be 
redesignated to attainment, the State must have fulfilled the 
applicable requirements of part D. Under part D, an area's 
classification indicates the requirements to which it will be subject. 
Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the basic nonattainment requirements 
applicable to all nonattainment areas, whether classified or 
nonclassifiable.
    The relevant Subpart 1 requirements are contained in sections 
172(c) and 176. The April 16, 1992, General Preamble for the 
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (see 
57 FR 13498) (``General Preamble of April 16, 1992'') provides EPAs 
interpretation of the CAA requirements for not classified CO areas (see 
specifically 57 FR 13535). The General Preamble reads, ``Although it 
seems clear that the CO-specific requirements of subpart 3 of part D do 
not apply to CO ``not classified'' areas, the 1990 CAAA are silent as 
to how the requirements of subpart 1 of part D, which contains general 
SIP planning requirements for all designated nonattainment areas, 
should be interpreted for such CO areas. Nevertheless, because these 
areas are designated nonattainment, some aspects of subpart 1 
necessarily apply.''
    Under section 172(b), the applicable section 172(c) requirements, 
as determined by the Administrator, were due no later than three years 
after an area was designated as nonattainment under section 107(d) of 
the amended CAA (see 56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991). In the case of the 
Yakima area, the due date was November 15, 1993. Since the Yakima CO 
redesignation request and maintenance plan were not submitted by 
Washington until September 26, 2001, the General Preamble of April 16, 
1992, provides that the applicable requirements of CAA section 172 are: 
172(c)(3) (emissions inventory), 172(c)(5)(new source review permitting 
program), and 172(c)(7)(the section 110(a)(2) air quality monitoring 
requirements)). See 57 FR 13535, April 16, 1992.
    EPA has determined that the Part D requirements for Reasonably 
Available Control Measures (RACM), an attainment demonstration, 
reasonable further progress (RFP), and contingency measures (CAA 
section 172(c)(9)) are not applicable to ``not classified'' CO 
nonattainment areas. See 57 FR 13535, April 16, 1992. EPA has also 
interpreted the requirements of sections 172(c)(1) (reasonably 
available control measures--RACM), 172(c)(2) (reasonable further 
progress--RFP), 172(c)(6) (other measures), and 172(c)(9) (contingency 
measures) as being irrelevant to a redesignation request because they 
only have meaning for an area that is not attaining the standard. See 
the General Preamble of April 16, 1992, and the Calcagni Memorandum. 
Finally, the State has not sought to exercise the options that would 
trigger sections 172(c)(4) (identification of certain emissions 
increases) and 172(c)(8) (equivalent techniques). Thus, these 
provisions are also not relevant to this redesignation request.
    Section 176 of the CAA contains requirements related to conformity. 
Although federal regulations (see 40 CFR 51.396) require that states 
adopt transportation conformity provisions in their SIPs for areas 
designated nonattainment or that are subject to a federally approved 
maintenance plan, EPA has decided that a transportation conformity SIP 
is not an applicable requirement for purposes of evaluating a 
redesignation request under section 107(d) of the CAA. This decision is 
reflected in the 1996 approval of the Boston carbon monoxide 
redesignation. (See 61 FR 2918, January 30, 1996.)
    The remaining applicable requirements of CAA section 172 are 
discussed below.

A. Section 172(c)(3)--Emissions Inventory

    Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires a comprehensive, accurate, 
current inventory of all actual emissions from all sources in the 
Yakima CO nonattainment area. The emission inventory requirement for 
``not classified'' CO nonattainment areas is detailed in the General 
Preamble of April 16, 1992. EPA has determined that an emissions 
inventory is required by CAA section 172(c)(3) regardless of air 
quality levels. An emissions inventory must be included as a revision 
to the SIP and was due three years from the time of the area's 
designation. For ``not classified'' CO areas, this date is November 15, 
1993. To address the section 172(c)(3) requirement for a ``current'' 
inventory, EPA interpreted ``current'' to mean calendar year 1990 (see 
57 FR 13502, April 16, 1992).
    On March 4, 1994, Washington submitted a 1992 emission inventory 
for the Yakima CO nonattainment area. EPA deferred action on that 
inventory pending submittal of a maintenance plan. A 1996 emission 
inventory was prepared by YRCAA but it was never submitted to EPA. A 
new 1999 emission inventory was prepared for the CO maintenance plan. 
EPA believes this 1999 inventory meets the emission inventory 
obligation. EPA has reviewed the emission inventory and determined it 
is current, accurate, and comprehensive at the time and it continues to 
represent emissions in the area that provide for attainment with a 
1998-1999 design value of 5.1 ppm CO.

B. Section 172(c)(5)--New Source Review (NSR)

    The CAA requires all nonattainment areas to meet several 
requirements regarding NSR. The State must have an approved NSR program 
that meets the requirements of section 172(c)(5) of the Act. The State 
of Washington has an approved NSR program (see 60 FR 28726, June 2, 
1995) that is applicable in Yakima CO nonattainment area. The 
requirements of the Part D, NSR program will be replaced by the 
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program upon the 
effective date of this redesignation. The Federal PSD regulations found 
at 40 CFR 52.21 are the PSD rules in effect in Washington.

[[Page 66558]]

C. Section 172(c)(7)--Compliance With CAA Section 110(a)(2): Air 
Quality Monitoring Requirements

    According to the General Preamble of April 16, 1992, ``not 
classified'' CO nonattainment areas should meet the ``applicable'' air 
quality monitoring requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. The 
State of Washington has operated a CO monitor in the Yakima area since 
the early 1970's. EPA previously approved the SIP for monitoring on 
April 15, 1981 (46 FR 21994). This SIP revision does not change that 
monitoring provision and it remains approved and in effect.

(c) The Area Must Have A Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of the 
CAA

    Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the CAA states that for an area to be 
redesignated to attainment, it must be determined that the 
Administrator has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for 
the area under section 110(k).
    Based on the approval into the SIP of provisions under the pre-1990 
CAA, EPA's prior approval of a SIP revision required under the 1990 
amendments to the CAA, and it's approval of the State's commitment to 
maintain an adequate monitoring network, EPA has determined that, as of 
the date of this action, Washington has a fully approved CO SIP under 
section 110(k) for the Yakima CO nonattainment area.

(d) The Area Must Show the Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to 
Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions

    Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA provides that for an area to 
be redesignated to attainment, the Administrator must determine that 
the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable 
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable 
implementation plan, implementation of applicable Federal air pollutant 
control regulations, and other permanent and enforceable reductions.
    The CO emissions reductions for the Yakima area were achieved 
through a number of control measures. The primary emission reductions 
are the result of the Federal Motor Vehicle Emission Standards and 
fleet turnover. These reductions will continue into the maintenance 
period for the Yakima area. In addition, there is a State requirement 
for commute trip reduction within the city of Yakima. The Yakima CO 
nonattainment area is a geographic area contained within the City 
boundary. This measure covers six employers in the nonattainment area 
and six additional employers within the City of Yakima, but outside the 
nonattainment area. And lastly there are three local measures that 
reduce CO emissions in the area: control of outdoor and agricultural 
burning, prohibition of installation of uncertified wood stoves, and 
wood stove curtailment program. While these local control measures are 
aimed at controlling particulate matter emissions, they concurrently 
reduce CO emissions especially during wintertime inversion conditions 
that are conducive to both PM and CO pollutant build-up. These local 
control measures have previously been approved by EPA in the PM-10 SIP 
for Yakima.
    EPA has evaluated the various State and Federal control measures, 
and the 1999 emission inventory, and have concluded that the 
improvement in air quality in the Yakima nonattainment area has 
resulted from emission reductions that are permanent and enforceable.

(e) The Area Must Have A Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Under CAA 
Section 175A

    Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the CAA provides that for an area to be 
redesignated to attainment, the Administrator must have fully approved 
a maintenance plan for the area meeting the requirements of section 
175A of the CAA.
    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance 
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. 
For areas such as Yakima that are utilizing EPA's limited maintenance 
plan approach, as detailed in the EPA guidance memorandum, ``Limited 
Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas'' 
from Joseph Paisie, Group Leader, Integrated Policy and Strategies 
Group, Office of Air Quality and Planning Standards, dated October 6, 
1995 (``Paisie Memorandum''), the maintenance plan demonstration 
requirement is considered to be satisfied for ``not classified'' areas 
if the monitoring data show the design value is at or below 7.65 ppm, 
or 85% of the level of the 8 hour CO NAAQS. The design value must be 
based on the 8 consecutive quarters of data. There is no requirement to 
project emissions or air quality over the maintenance period. EPA 
believes if the area begins the maintenance period at, or below, 85 
percent of the level of the CO 8 hour NAAQS, the applicability of PSD 
requirements, the control measures already in the SIP, and Federal 
measures, should provide adequate assurance of maintenance over the 
initial 10-year maintenance period. In addition, the design value for 
the area must continue to be at or below 7.65 ppm until the time of 
final EPA action on the redesignation. The method for calculating the 
design value is presented in the June 18, 1990, EPA guidance memorandum 
entitled ``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations'', from 
William G. Laxton, Director of the OAQPS Technical Support Division, to 
Regional Air Directors (hereafter referred to as the ``Laxton 
Memorandum''.)
    In the case of a ``not classified'' area applying for a limited 
maintenance plan, all the monitors must have a separate design value 
calculated and the highest design value must be at or below 7.65 ppm. 
Should the design value for the area exceed 7.65 ppm prior to final EPA 
action on the redesignation, then the area no longer qualifies for the 
limited maintenance plan and must instead submit a full maintenance 
plan as described in the Calcagni Memorandum.
    Eight years after redesignation to attainment, the State must 
submit a revised maintenance plan that demonstrates continued 
maintenance of the CO NAAQS for an additional 10 years following the 
initial ten-year maintenance period. To address the possibility of 
future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain contingency 
measures, with a schedule for adoption and implementation, that are 
adequate to assure prompt correction of a violation. In this direct 
final rulemaking action, EPA is approving the limited maintenance plan 
for the Yakima nonattainment area because EPA has determined, as 
detailed below, that the State's maintenance plan submittal meets the 
requirements of section 175A of the CAA.
    The analysis of the pertinent maintenance plan requirements 
follows:
1. Emissions Inventory--Attainment Year
    The plan must contain an attainment year emissions inventory to 
identify the level of emissions in the area which is sufficient to 
attain the CO NAAQS. This inventory is to be consistent with EPA's most 
recent guidance on emissions inventories for nonattainment areas 
available at the time \1\ and should

[[Page 66559]]

represent emissions during the time period associated with the 
monitoring data showing attainment. The Yakima CO maintenance plan 
contains an accurate, current, and comprehensive emission inventory for 
calendar year 1999 which coincides with the year that the design value 
of 5.1 ppm CO was calculated. Therefore the Yakima maintenance plan 
meets the emission inventory requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The October 6, 1995, limited maintenance plan guidance 
memorandum states that current guidance on the preparation of 
emissions inventories for CO areas is contained in the following 
documents: ``Procedures for the Preparation of Emission Inventories 
for Carbon Monoxide and Precursors of Ozone: Volume I'' (EPA-450/4-
91-016), and ``Procedures for Emission Inventory Preparation: Volume 
IV, Mobile Sources'' (EPA-450/4-81-026d revised).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Demonstration of Maintenance
    As described in the October 6, 1995, limited maintenance plan 
guidance memorandum (Paisie Memorandum), the maintenance plan 
demonstration requirement is considered to be satisfied for ``not 
classified'' CO areas if the design value for the area is equal to, or 
less than 7.65 ppm. The CO design value for 1998-1999 period for the 
Yakima area is 5.1 ppm, which is below the limited maintenance plan 
requirement of 7.65 ppm. Therefore, the Yakima area has adequately 
demonstrated that it will maintain the CO NAAQS into the future.
3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
    Continued ambient monitoring of an area is required over the 
maintenance period. Sections 5.3 and 5.4 of the Yakima CO maintenance 
plan provide for continued ambient monitoring in the area.
4. Contingency Plan
    Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include 
contingency provisions. As discussed above, this requirement is not 
relevant to the redesignation request, but a contingency measure has 
been included in the plan. The plan contains a measure that requires 
the City of Yakima to change the timing of intersection stop lights in 
the downtown core to increase the speed of traffic on the heavily 
traveled streets. The change in speed is estimated to be from an 
average of 14 mph to 16 mph resulting in a 17% reduction in CO 
emissions. The City will adjust the stop light timing to achieve the 
reductions when CO levels reach 7.1 ppm and levels continue to 
increase.

IV. Conformity

    Because Yakima submitted a limited maintenance plan, special 
conformity provisions apply. The transportation conformity rule (58 FR 
62188; November 24, 1993) and the general conformity rule (58 FR 63214; 
November 30, 1993) apply to nonattainment areas and maintenance areas 
operating under maintenance plans. Under either rule, one means of 
demonstrating conformity of Federal actions is to indicate that 
expected emissions from planned actions are consistent with the 
emissions budget for the area. Emissions budgets in limited maintenance 
plan areas may be treated as essentially not constraining for the 
length of the initial maintenance period because there is no reason to 
expect that such an area will experience so much growth in that period 
that a violation of the CO NAAQS would result. In other words, 
emissions need not be capped for the maintenance period. Therefore, in 
areas with approved limited maintenance plans, Federal actions 
requiring conformity determination under the transportation conformity 
rule could be considered to satisfy the ``budget test'' required in 
sections 93.118, 93.119, and 93.120 of the rule. Similarly, in these 
areas, Federal actions subject to the general conformity rule could be 
considered to satisfy the ``budget test'' specified in section 
93.158(a)(5)(i)(A) of the rule.''

V. Final Action

    EPA approves the maintenance plan and request to redesignate the 
Yakima CO nonattainment area to attainment.
    EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no 
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this 
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document 
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should 
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective December 31, 
2002 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments 
by December 2, 2002.
    If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a timely 
withdrawal of the direct final rule informing the public that the rule 
will not take effect. All public comments received will then be 
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The 
EPA will not institute a second comment period on this rule. Any 
parties interested in commenting on this rule should do so at this 
time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this 
rule will be effective on December 31, 2002 and no further action will 
be taken on the proposed rule.

Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule 
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority

[[Page 66560]]

to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not 
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 31, 2002. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon Monoxide, 
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

    Dated: August 13, 2002.
Ronald A. Kreizenbeck,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    Parts 52 and 81, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations are amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart WW-Washington

    2. Subpart WW is amended by adding Sec.  52.2475 to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.2475  Approval of plans.

    (a) Carbon Monoxide.
    (1) Yakima.
    (i) EPA approves as a revision to the Washington State 
Implementation Plan, the Yakima Carbon Monoxide maintenance plan 
submitted by the State on August 31, 2001.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (2) Spokane. [Reserved]
    (b) Lead. [Reserved]
    (c) Nitrogen Dioxide. [Reserved]
    (d) Ozone. [Reserved]
    (e) Particulate Matter. [Reserved]
    (f) Sulfur dioxide. [Reserved]

PART 81--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    2. In Sec.  81.348, the table entitled ``Washington-Carbon 
Monoxide'' is amended by revising the entry for ``Yakima Area'' to read 
as follows:


Sec.  81.348  Washington.

* * * * *

                                                               Washington--Carbon Monoxide
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Designation                                           Classification
             Designated area             ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Date1                        Type                       Date1                        Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Yakima Area:
    Yakima County (part)................   12-31-2002  [Attainment].............................
        Portion of the Central Business
         District Street intersections:
         S. 16th Ave. & W Mead Ave, S.
         16th Ave & Hathaway Ave., E
         ``I'' St. & N 1st St., N 1st St
         & E ``G'' St., E ``G'' St & N
         8th St., N 8th St. & Pitcher
         St., Pitcher St. & I-82
         Interchange, Nob Hill Blvd & I-
         82 Interchange, Rudkin Rd & I-
         82 Interchange, S 1st St. & Old
         Town Rd., Old Town Rd & Main
         St., W Washington & S 1st St.,
         E Mead Ave & S 1st St., S 16th
         Ave & W Mead Ave.
 
                                                                     * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.


[[Page 66561]]

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 02-27833 Filed 10-31-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P