[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 126 (Friday, July 1, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-16000]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: July 1, 1994]


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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[OR-11-1-5527a; FRL-4891-9]

 

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a revision 
to the state implementation plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Oregon 
for the purpose of bringing about the attainment of the national 
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an 
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers 
(PM-10). The implementation plan was submitted by the State to satisfy 
certain Federal requirements for an approvable moderate nonattainment 
area PM-10 SIP for La Grande, Oregon.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action will be effective on August 30, 1994 unless 
adverse or critical comments are received by August 1, 1994. If the 
effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the 
Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Montel Livingston, 
EPA, 1200 Sixth Avenue, AT-082, Seattle, WA 98101.
    Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for 
public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information 
Center, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. Copies of the State's 
request and other information are available for inspection during 
normal business hours at the following locations: EPA, 1200 Sixth 
Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, and the State of Oregon Department of 
Environmental Quality, 811 SW., Sixth Avenue, Portland, OR 97204-1390.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Fry, Air and Radiation Branch 
(AT-082), EPA, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 553-2575.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Background

    The Union County, La Grande, Oregon, Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), 
was designated nonattainment for PM-10 and classified as moderate under 
sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), upon 
enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990\1\ (see 56 FR 
56694 (November 6, 1991) and 40 CFR Sec. 81.338). The air quality 
planning requirements for moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas are set 
out in subparts 1 and 4 of Title I of the Act.\2\ EPA has issued a 
``General Preamble'' describing EPA's preliminary views on how EPA 
intends to review SIP's and SIP revisions submitted under Title I of 
the Act, including those State submittals containing moderate PM-10 
nonattainment area SIP requirements (see generally 57 FR 13498 (April 
16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992)). Because EPA is describing 
its interpretations here only in broad terms, the reader should refer 
to the General Preamble for a more detailed discussion of the 
interpretations of Title I advanced in this proposal and the supporting 
rationale. In this rulemaking action on the State of Oregon's moderate 
PM-10 SIP for the La Grande nonattainment area, EPA is proposing to 
apply its interpretations taking into consideration the specific 
factual issues presented. Additional information supporting EPA's 
action on this particular area is available for inspection at the 
address indicated above. EPA will consider any timely submitted 
comments before taking final action on this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act made significant 
changes to the Act. See Pub. L. No. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399. 
References herein are to the Clean Air Act, as amended (``the 
Act''). The Clean Air Act is codified, as amended, in the U.S. Code 
at 42 U.S.C. sections 7401, et seq.
    \2\Subpart 1 contains provisions applicable to nonattainment 
areas generally and subpart 4 contains provisions specifically 
applicable to PM-10 nonattainment areas. At times, subpart 1 and 
subpart 4 overlap or conflict. EPA has attempted to clarify the 
relationship among these provisions in the ``General Preamble'' and, 
as appropriate, in today's notice and supporting information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Those States containing initial moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas 
(those areas designated nonattainment under section 107(d)(4)(B)) were 
required to submit, among other things, the following provisions by 
November 15, 1991:
    1. Provisions to assure that reasonably available control measures 
(RACM) (including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in 
the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of 
reasonably available control technology (RACT)) shall be implemented no 
later than December 10, 1993;
    2. Either a demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the 
plan will provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no 
later than December 31, 1994, or a demonstration that attainment by 
that date is impracticable;
    3. Quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every three 
years and which demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP) toward 
attainment by December 31, 1994; and
    4. Provisions to assure that the control requirements applicable to 
major stationary sources of PM-10 also apply to major stationary 
sources of PM-10 precursors except where the Administrator determines 
that such sources do not contribute significantly to PM-10 levels which 
exceed the NAAQS in the area see sections 172(c), 188, and 189 of the 
Act).
    Additional provisions are due at a later date. States with initial 
moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas were required to submit a permit 
program for the construction and operation of new and modified major 
stationary sources of PM-10 by June 30, 1992 (see section 189(a)). Such 
States also were required to submit contingency measures by November 
15, 1993, which become effective without further action by the State or 
EPA, upon a determination by EPA that the area has failed to achieve 
RFP or to attain the PM-10 NAAQS by the applicable statutory deadline 
(see section 172(c)(9) and 57 FR 13543-13544).

II. This Action

    Section 110(k) of the Act sets out provisions governing EPA's 
review of SIP submittals (see 57 FR 13565-13566). In this action, EPA 
is granting approval of the plan revision submitted to EPA on November 
15, 1991. EPA has determined that the submittal meets all of the 
applicable requirements of the Act due on November 15, 1991, with 
respect to moderate area PM-10 submittals. In addition, as described in 
Parts II.7 and II.5 below, EPA is approving the SIP revision submitted 
on November 15, 1991, as meeting the requirement for contingency 
measures for the La Grande, Oregon moderate PM-10 nonattainment area 
and is granting the exclusion from PM-10 control requirements 
authorized under section 189(e) of the Act.

Analysis of State Submission

1. Procedural Background

    The Act requires States to observe certain procedural requirements 
in developing implementation plans and plan revisions for submission to 
EPA. Section 110(a)(2) of the Act provides that each implementation 
plan submitted by a State must be adopted after reasonable notice and 
public hearing.3 Section 110(l) of the Act similarly provides that 
each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under the 
Act must be adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public 
hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\Also Section 172(c)(7) of the Act requires that plan 
provisions for nonattainment areas meet the applicable provisions of 
section 110(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA also must determine whether a submittal is complete and 
therefore warrants further EPA review and action (see section 110(k)(1) 
and 57 FR 13565). EPA's completeness criteria for SIP submittals are 
set out at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. EPA attempts to make 
completeness determinations within 60 days of receiving a submission. 
However, a submittal is deemed complete by operation of law if a 
completeness determination is not made by EPA six months after receipt 
of the submission.
    The City of La Grande held public hearings on the La Grande PM-10 
plan on July 17 and August 1, 1991 and adopted the plan on August 7, 
1991. The State of Oregon subsequently held public hearings on the La 
Grande PM-10 SIP on October 1, 1991 in La Grande and Portland, Oregon, 
and after the plan was modified in response to public comments, the 
control strategy was adopted November 8, 1991. The modified plan was 
submitted to EPA on November 15, 1991 as a proposed revision to the 
SIP.
    The SIP revision was reviewed by EPA to determine completeness 
shortly after its submittal, in accordance with the completeness 
criteria set out at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. A letter dated April 
27, 1992 was forwarded to the Director of the Oregon Department of 
Environmental Quality (ODEQ) indicating the completeness of the 
submittal and the next steps to be taken in the review process. In this 
action EPA approves the State of Oregon's PM-10 SIP submittal for the 
La Grande PM-10 nonattainment area and invites public comment on the 
action.



2. Accurate Emissions Inventory

    Section 172(c)(3) of the Act requires that nonattainment plan 
provisions include a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of 
actual emissions from all sources of relevant pollutants in the 
nonattainment area. The emissions inventory should also include a 
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of allowable emissions 
in the area. Because the submission of such inventories are necessary 
to an area's attainment demonstration (or demonstration that the area 
cannot practicably attain), the emissions inventories must be received 
with the attainment/nonattainment demonstration submission (see 57 FR 
13539).
    The base year emission inventory (1986) developed for the La Grande 
UGB identified the major sources of PM-10 concentrations during 24-hour 
worst case winter periods as residential wood combustion (60%), 
fugitive dust (31%), industrial emissions (5%) and other sources, 
including but not limited to, transportation, and commercial space 
heating (4%). Annual emissions for 1986 were residential wood 
combustion (48%), fugitive dust (36%), industrial emissions (10%), 
transportation (5%) and other sources (1%).
    EPA is approving the emissions inventory because it generally 
appears to be accurate, comprehensive and current, and provides a 
sufficient basis for determining the adequacy of the attainment 
demonstration for this area consistent with the requirements of 
sections 172(c)(3) and 110(a)(2)(K) of the Clean Air Act.4 For 
further details see the Technical Support Document (TSD).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\The EPA issued guidance on PM-10 emissions inventories prior 
to the enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments in the form of the 
1987 PM-10 SIP Development Guideline. The guidance provided in this 
document appears to be consistent with the amended Act; therefore, 
EPA may continue to rely on this guidance. See section 193 of the 
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. RACM (Including RACT)

    As noted, the initial moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas must 
submit provisions to assure that RACM (including RACT) are implemented 
no later than December 10, 1993 (see sections 172(c)(1) and 
189(a)(1)(C)). The General Preamble contains a detailed discussion of 
EPA's interpretation of the RACM (including RACT) requirement (see 57 
FR 13539-13545 and 13560-13561).
    Attainment of the 24-hour and annual standards is based on five 
main control strategies designed to reduce woodsmoke, fugitive dust and 
industrial point source emissions. The available control measures to be 
implemented in the La Grande nonattainment area include the following:
 a. Voluntary Wood Combustion Curtailment Program
    The City of La Grande administers the voluntary wood combustion 
curtailment program. The City Planning Department makes the daily 
advisory calls, conducts compliance surveys, and the La Grande Air 
Quality Advisory Committee (LGAQAC) operates an extensive public 
education program in conjunction with the ODEQ.
    The voluntary curtailment program for the La Grande nonattainment 
area includes a public education program that describes the need for 
the public's cooperation, the health, safety, energy, economic benefits 
to individuals and the community, and steps individuals can take to 
help reduce emissions.
    Key elements of the voluntary curtailment program and public 
information program include: home weatherization, firewood seasoning, 
cleaner burning practices, proper stove installation and sizing, 
maintenance of woodburning systems and curtailment of woodburning 
during poor ventilation episodes.
    Woodburning advisories are made and issued daily by 10:15 a.m. from 
November 1 through March 1. An empirical formula (based on the previous 
12-hour ODEQ nephelometer readings and the last 3 hours of 
meteorological conditions) is used to predict the present day's PM-10 
level. The predicted PM-10 level determines the green/yellow/red 
advisory day status (described below). The advisory is provided daily 
on a telephone answering machine. The advisory is also printed in the 
local daily newspaper, and aired by the local radio stations and cable 
television channel. Also, in many cases, the advisory is made part of 
the weather forecast on the local news.
    Woodburning curtailment advisories are issued at three levels: (1) 
A green advisory is made when the ambient concentration is expected to 
be 50 g/m3 or less, (2) a yellow advisory is made when 
the concentration is expected to be greater than 50 g/m3 
but less than or equal to 95 g/m3, (3) a red advisory is 
made when the ambient concentration is expected to be greater than 95 
g/m3.
    A green advisory allows for wood burning in stoves and fireplaces, 
but these fires should be fueled with dry, well-seasoned wood. It is 
also requested that citizens build small, hot fires and do not damper 
down their stoves during a green advisory. During a yellow advisory all 
residents, except those persons using wood as a sole source of heat, 
wood pellet stoves and ODEQ or EPA certified woodstoves, are asked to 
curtail wood burning for the next 24 hours and outdoor burning is 
banned. During a red advisory all residents, except those using wood as 
a sole source of heat or those using pellet stoves, are asked to 
curtail wood burning for the next 24 hours and outdoor burning is 
banned.
    Compliance with the advisories is determined through day and 
nighttime surveys of woodburning activity during green, yellow and red 
curtailment periods. Green days are surveyed to determine a base from 
which to judge compliance with a curtailment call. Data from the 
surveys are used to direct the public education program, evaluate 
progress toward achieving program goals and evaluate trends in PM-10 
concentrations.
    ODEQ requests a 30 percent emission reduction credit for its 
voluntary curtailment program in the La Grande UGB during 24-hour worst 
case periods. The 30 percent credit is greater than the 10 percent 
generally suggested by EPA. The recommended 10 percent credit is viewed 
by EPA as a ``starting point in assessing the effectiveness of 
residential wood combustion control programs''. However, final judgment 
of the amount of credit to be granted is determined by EPA's regional 
offices based on the program features outlined in EPA's Guidance 
Document for Residential Wood Combustion Emission Control Measures. 
When data are available, credit higher than 10 percent may be granted 
based on the program's effectiveness.
    During the 1992/1993 wood heating season, La Grande conducted 
compliance surveys in the voluntary curtailment area during green, 
yellow and red advisories. The results of these surveys indicate that 7 
percent and 54 percent of the woodburners comply on yellow and red 
advisory days, respectively. The observed 54 percent compliance rate on 
red advisory days easily exceeds the 30 percent compliance rate that 
the ODEQ is claiming for La Grande. Based on these results and EPA's 
review of the remaining curtailment program elements, also considering 
public education and La Grande's and ODEQ's experience in managing 
curtailment programs, EPA accepts the 30 percent credit claimed for 
this control measure. Further description of this program and 
justification for this action is set out in the TSD.
 b. Woodstove Certification
    In 1983, the Oregon Legislature directed ODEQ to require that all 
new woodstoves sold in the state be certified through laboratory 
testing. As a result, stoves sold after July 1986 were required to emit 
particles at a rate of 50 percent less than conventional woodstoves. 
After July 1988, new woodstoves were required to emit 70 percent less 
than conventional woodstoves.
    The Oregon Environmental Quality Commission adopted on March 2, 
1990, and submitted to EPA on March 15, 1990, revisions to Oregon's 
Woodstove Certification Program making it consistent with EPA's New 
Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Residential Wood Heaters, in 40 
CFR part 60, subpart AAA. Currently, all woodstoves sold in the State 
of Oregon must be both ODEQ and EPA certified. This SIP revision was 
approved by EPA as part of the Oregon SIP on June 8, 1992 (57 FR 
24373).
    ODEQ estimates that the woodstove certification program will 
provide a 24 percent credit against baseline 1986 woodstove emissions 
by 1994.5 Oregon has historically pursued an aggressive woodstove 
certification program. Oregon was the first state in the nation to 
adopt, implement and enforce a program of this type (1984). EPA 
promulgated the NSPS on February 26, 1988, modeled, in significant 
part, after Oregon's program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\This estimate uses a 1986 baseline inventory and assumes or 
relies on: (1) a 1% annual growth in firewood consumed by 
woodstoves, (2) a 2% annual decline in firewood consumed by 
fireplaces, (3) a useful stove life of 20 years, and (4) the fact 
that the typical certified woodstove and pelletstove emits 50% and 
90% less, respectively, than a conventional stove. EPA believes this 
is an accurate portrayal of the situation in La Grande.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The projected emission reductions, in conjunction with a statewide 
ban (OAR 340-34-010) on the sale of used uncertified stoves, a ban on 
the installation of used uncertified stoves, and Oregon's model 
woodstove certification program supports EPA's acceptance of Oregon's 
woodstove certification credit claim.
 c. Woodstove Replacement and Weatherization Programs
    ODEQ requests a 2 percent credit on a 24-hour basis for the 
$325,000 woodstove replacement and weatherization program. This State 
of Oregon Community Block Grant was available to low and moderate 
income residents.
    As of September 1993, 53 uncertified woodstoves have been removed 
from residential dwellings due to the program. These uncertified 
woodstoves were replaced with 37 natural gas furnaces, 12 phase II 
certified woodstoves and 4 pellet stoves. According to EPA 
calculations, the elimination of these 53 uncertified woodstoves equals 
a 2 percent credit (when compared against the 2,270 homes utilizing 
uncertified woodstoves in base year 1986; and using 99 percent, 90 
percent and 70 percent emission reduction credits for replacing 
uncertified woodstoves with natural gas furnaces, pellet stoves and 
phase II certified woodstoves, respectively). Therefore, even without 
the home weatherization that also was done, the 2 percent credit 
achieved equals the 2 percent credit claimed by ODEQ for the program. 
Because of the demonstrated success of this program, EPA accepts the 2 
percent credit requested by the ODEQ. Further description of the 
program and justification for EPA's action is set out in the TSD.
 d. Industrial Controls
    On November 8, 1991, the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission 
adopted changes to its Industrial Rules (OAR 340-30-200 to 230) for La 
Grande. EPA published a Final Rulemaking on February 23, 1993 (58 FR 
10972) with an April 26, 1993 effective date, which detailed its 
approval of these regulations. These industrial rules impose new 
emission limits for existing wood-waste boilers (heating-input capacity 
of greater than 35 million BTU/Hr), wood particle dryers at 
particleboard plants, air conveying systems and fugitive emissions (for 
any large sawmill, plywood mill, veneer manufacturing plant, 
particleboard plant, hardboard plant or charcoal manufacturing plant 
that is located in the La Grande Urban Growth Area). Because of the 
current PM-10 source mix in the area, only the wood-waste boiler and 
fugitive control plan requirements are presently being implemented in 
the La Grande PM-10 nonattainment area.
    The overall reduction in area-wide industrial PM-10 emissions, due 
to the implementation of the new industrial rules and replacement of 11 
wood-waste boilers with three significantly cleaner natural gas-fired 
boilers, between 1986 and 1994 is conservatively projected to be 30 
percent.
    Based on EPA's interpretation of the RACT requirement, as set out 
in the General Preamble and the April 2, 1991, memorandum entitled 
``PM-10 Moderate Area SIP Guidance: Final Staff Work Product,'' EPA has 
determined that the industrial source control measures satisfy the RACT 
requirement for stationary sources in the La Grande moderate PM-10 
nonattainment area.
    EPA believes that the emission limits imposed on the board products 
industries, supported by their enforceability, will achieve the 
estimated industrial source emission reductions of 30 percent. 
Therefore, EPA accepts the 30 percent credit requested by ODEQ. For 
further details the reader is referred to the Technical Support 
Document (TSD) corresponding with this action, which is available at 
the address indicated above.
 e. Winter Road Sanding Control Program
    Winter road sanding has been shown to adversely affect PM-10 levels 
throughout the western United States, including La Grande, in areas 
that experience measurable snowfall. The silt-laden, friable sand is 
placed on roads by local and state highway departments to provide 
vehicles with better traction on snow and ice. However, once the snow 
has melted and the roads have dried out, the remaining dry, silty road 
sand is easily resuspended by moving vehicular traffic.
    The La Grande emission inventory identifies road sanding dust as a 
14 percent contributor to worst case day PM-10 levels in both base year 
1986 and attainment year 1994, without control strategies. To address 
the winter road sanding problem the City of La Grande obtained a 
written commitment, in a letter dated October 28, 1991, from the Oregon 
Department of Transportation (ODOT) to reduce sanding application rates 
and to cleanup sanding materials from roadways as soon as practically 
possible.
    ODOT and ODEQ project a 30 percent (436 lbs/day) reduction in PM-10 
will be accomplished on worst case days in 1994, due to the winter road 
sanding control program. This emission reduction value was determined 
from ODOT's projection that the new application rates and cleanup 
policies alone will reduce the amount of fugitive dust from sanding by 
36 percent. ODEQ then determined that 84 percent of the PM-10 produced 
as the result of road sanding was created on ODOT roads. Therefore, 84 
percent of 36 percent is the 30 percent emission reduction value 
credited to the winter road sanding program.
    In addition to the aforementioned commitments, the ODOT began 
utilizing road sand with a lower silt content in November 1991; thus, 
this road material is less likely to become airborne as PM-10. However, 
the ODEQ did not take emission reduction credit for this measure. 
Therefore, EPA approves the utilization of this cleaner sanding 
material as a SIP strengthening measure.
    There are a number of fugitive dust control measures that the City 
of La Grande and State of Oregon require in the La Grande PM-10 
nonattainment area. The measures include: paving/stabilizing access 
streets to industrial or commercial sites; cleaning and securing 
construction vehicle loads to prevent trackout; requiring haul trucks 
to be covered; utilization of dust suppressants to control PM-10 
emissions from haul roads greater than 50 feet in length; paving or 
chemically stabilizing unpaved roads; paving all off-street parking 
areas, including driveways and truck loading areas; stabilizing 
material storage piles through use of dust palliatives, water, 
compacting or other methods; and prohibiting the disturbance or removal 
of soil cover from any area larger than 5,000 sq. ft. (unless a dust 
control plan has been approved by the City). Nonetheless ODEQ declined 
to take credit for these fugitive dust control measures because the 
emissions were difficult to inventory and these reductions were also 
unnecessary to demonstrate attainment of the PM-10 standard. Instead 
these measures strengthen the SIP and help further assure that these 
fugitive dust sources will not contribute to a future exceedance of the 
PM-10 NAAQS.
    EPA has determined that the existing ordinances, programs, and 
regulations either submitted with the La Grande PM-10 SIP submission or 
else currently contained in the federally approved Oregon SIP meet the 
RACM requirement. EPA also accepts ODEQ's projection that the road 
sanding measures will reduce PM-10 emissions from winter road sanding 
by 30 percent. The lower silt content sand, in conjunction with the 
other fugitive dust control measures, will also help ensure that 
sanding and other fugitive dust sources will be adequately controlled. 
While the SIP is not relying on these strategies to attain the PM-10 
standard, EPA is approving these measures as strengthening the SIP.
f. Other Sources
    Where sources of PM-10 contribute insignificantly to the PM-10 
problem in the area, EPA's policy is that RACM does not require the 
implementation of potentially available control measures (57 FR 13540).
    ODEQ has determined through its analysis of the nonattainment area 
emissions data that prescribed burning, open burning and transportation 
were not significant sources of PM-10 emissions (less than 4 percent on 
a worst case days). Nevertheless, control measures addressing sources 
of prescribed and open burning are currently required by ODEQ, Union 
County, and the City of La Grande. While the implementation of all 
available prescribed and open burning measures would not significantly 
expedite attainment in the area, these measures as currently required 
should help to ensure on-going maintenance of the PM-10 NAAQS in the 
area and EPA is therefore approving them as strengthening the SIP. The 
following is a list of adopted control measures regulating open burning 
and prescribed burning contained in the plan:
    (1) A mandatory field burning smoke management program was adopted 
on June 5, 1991, by Union County (Ordinance 1991-6) in response to the 
Class I area visibility protection provisions of the Clean Air Act 
(Section 169A), and was implemented during the summer of 1991. The 
ordinance requires that agricultural burning be prohibited when smoke 
can impact either the Eagle Cap Wilderness or the La Grande PM-10 
nonattainment area. The ordinance is enforced by Union County.
    (2) The city of La Grande's Air Quality Program (Resolution 4122, 
Series 1991) includes a prohibition on open burning and the use of burn 
barrels on ``Yellow'' or ``Red'' woodburning curtailment days. Open 
burning is prohibited at all times other than during the months of 
April, May, October and November under Section 8 of the City's Uniform 
Fire Code.
    EPA has reviewed ODEQ's submittals and associated documentation and 
has concluded that they adequately justify the control measures to be 
implemented. EPA believes that implementation of the La Grande PM-10 
nonattainment plan control strategy will result in the attainment of 
the PM-10 NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable and no later than 
December 31, 1994. By this notice, EPA is approving ODEQ's control 
strategy as satisfying the RACM (including RACT) requirement.

4. Demonstration

    Moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas must submit a demonstration 
(including air quality modeling) showing that the plan will provide for 
attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no later than December 
31, 1994 (see section 189(a)(1)(B) of the Act). The General Preamble 
sets out EPA's guidance on the use of modeling for moderate area 
attainment demonstrations (57 FR 13539). Alternatively, the state must 
show attainment by December 31, 1994, is impracticable. The 24-hour PM-
10 NAAQS is 150 micrograms/cubic meter (g/m\3\), and the 
standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year 
with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 g/m\3\ is equal 
to or less than one (see 40 CFR section 50.6). The annual PM-10 NAAQS 
is 50 g/m\3\, and the standard is attained when the expected 
annual arithmetic mean concentration is less than or equal to 50 
g/m\3\ (id.).
    As indicated in the General Preamble, 57 FR at 13539, EPA has 
developed a supplemental attainment demonstration policy for initial 
PM-10 nonattainment areas. This supplemental policy provides additional 
flexibility in meeting the PM-10 attainment demonstration requirements. 
An earlier April 2, 1991, memorandum titled, ``PM-10 Moderate Area SIP 
Guidance: Final Staff Work Product'' contained ``Attachment 5'' which 
described the same policy.
    ODEQ conducted an attainment demonstration based upon receptor 
modeling (Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) version 7.0) and proportional 
emission inventory roll-back analysis in the La Grande nonattainment 
area. Both approaches were in close agreement in identifying the major 
sources of PM-10 on exceedance days (local woodsmoke = 61 percent and 
60 percent, and soil dust = 38 percent and 32 percent for CMB and roll-
back methods, respectively).
    This demonstration indicates that La Grande will attain both the 
24-hour and annual PM-10 NAAQS, with the maximum 24-hour concentration 
predicted to be 148 g/m\3\ and an annual arithmetic average 
concentration projected to be 47 g/m\3\ in 1994. The 
demonstration also showed that the PM-10 NAAQS will be maintained in 
future years by predicting a 24-hour worst day design concentration of 
139 g/m\3\ for the year 2000, and projecting an annual average 
for the year 2000 of 48 g/m\3\. The control strategy used to 
achieve these design concentrations is summarized in the section titled 
``RACM (including RACT).'' A more detailed description of the 
attainment demonstration is contained in the TSD accompanying this 
notice.

5. PM-10 Precursors

    The control requirements which are applicable to major stationary 
sources of PM-10, also apply to major stationary sources of PM-10 
precursors unless EPA determines such sources do not contribute 
significantly to PM-10 levels in excess of the NAAQS in that area (see 
section 189(e) of the Act). The General Preamble contains guidance 
addressing how EPA intends to implement section 189(e) (see 57 FR 
13539-13540 and 13541-13542).
    The filter analyses (chemical mass balance) indicated that on 
average, only 1 percent and 4 percent of the PM-10 mass was comprised 
of secondary particulate on high concentration days and annually, 
respectively. EPA believes that this is an insignificant portion and, 
therefore, is granting the exclusion from control requirements 
authorized under section 189(e) for major stationary sources of PM-10 
precursors.
    Note that while EPA has made a general finding for this area, this 
finding is based on the current character of the area including, for 
example, the existing mix of sources in the area. It is possible, 
therefore, that future growth could change the significance of 
precursors in the area. EPA intends to issue future guidance addressing 
such potential changes in the significance of precursor emissions in an 
area.

6. Enforceability Issues

    All measures and other elements in the SIP must be enforceable by 
ODEQ and EPA (See sections 172(c)(6), 110(a)(2)(A) and 57 FR 13556). 
EPA criteria addressing the enforceability of SIP's and SIP revisions 
were stated in a September 23, 1987, memorandum (with attachments) from 
J. Craig Potter, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, et. al. 
(see 57 FR 13541). Nonattainment area plan provisions must also contain 
a program that provides for enforcement of the control measures and 
other elements in the SIP (see section 110(a)(2)(C)).
    The particular control measures contained in the SIP are addressed 
above under the section headed ``RACM (including RACT).'' These control 
measures apply to the types of activities identified in that discussion 
including, for example, existing large, wood-fired boilers with a heat 
input capacity greater than 35 million BTU/Hr, and woodstoves and other 
wood burning activities. The SIP provides that the control measures for 
the affected activities apply throughout the entire nonattainment area.
    During its review, EPA determined that the Oregon Revised Statute 
Chapter 468, as amended in 1991, failed to provide sufficient authority 
to ensure that the industrial source control measures contained in the 
La Grande PM-10 SIP could be adequately enforced. Specifically, ORS 
468.126(1) provided that penalties could not be assessed against a 
source for permit violations unless the state first provided notice of 
the violation to the source, and further, if within five days, the 
source came into compliance or provided an adequate schedule to come 
into compliance in the future, no penalties could be assessed. EPA 
informed the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality that this 
provision was unacceptable to the extent it applied to permit limits 
which were relied on to attain, maintain or demonstrate attainment with 
a NAAQS.
    On September 3, 1993, the Governor of Oregon signed into law new 
legislation correcting this deficiency. The new law provides that the 
five-day advance notice provision required by ORS 468.126(1) does not 
apply if the notice requirement will disqualify a state program from 
federal approval or delegation (see Oregon Senate Bill 86, 1993 
Session, Sec. 3 (1993) to be codified at ORS 468.126(2)(e)). Because 
the notice provision bars civil penalties from being imposed for 
certain permit violations, application of 468.126(1) fails to provide 
the adequate enforcement authority that a state must demonstrate to 
obtain SIP approval (see, e.g., sections 110 and 172(c) of the Clean 
Air Act and 40 CFR 51.230). Accordingly, the notice requirement would 
disqualify this PM-10 program from federal approval. Thus, the state 
has acknowledged, by a letter dated November 5, 1993, that, pursuant to 
ORS 468.126(2)(e), the notice provision in ORS 468.126(1) will not 
apply to violations of SIP requirements contained in permits, including 
permits containing industrial source control requirements, relied upon 
to attain, maintain or demonstrate attainment with a NAAQS.
    In regards to a separate enforceability issue, the following is a 
summary of the city and county ordinances which EPA approves as part of 
the SIP as either a required control measure or SIP strengthening 
measure. The content of the two ordinances and their relationship to 
the SIP control strategies are discussed in more detail in the TSD.
    a. City of La Grande Air Quality Improvement Resolution 4122, 
Series 1991, August 7, 1991. This ordinance delineates the City of La 
Grande's control of smoke and fugitive dust (control measure).
    b. Union County Ordinance No. 1991-6. This ordinance controls and 
manages field burning in Union County, Oregon and creates a Union 
County smoke management program (SIP strengthening measure).
    The SIP requires that all affected activities must be in full 
compliance with the applicable SIP provisions by December 10, 1993. In 
addition to the applicable control measures, this includes the 
applicable recordkeeping requirements which are addressed in the 
supporting technical information.
    ODEQ's submittals and the TSD contain further information on 
enforceable requirements including enforceable emission limitations; a 
description of the rules contained in the SIP and the source types 
subject to them; test methods and compliance schedules; averaging times 
for compliance test methods; correctly cited references of incorporated 
methods/rules; and reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
    ODEQ also has a program that will ensure that the control measures 
contained in the La Grande PM-10 SIP are adequately enforced. The TSD 
contains a discussion of the personnel and funding intended to support 
effective implementation of the control measures.

7. Contingency Measures

    As provided in section 172(c)(9) of the Act, all moderate PM-10 
nonattainment area SIP's that demonstrate attainment must include 
contingency measures (see generally 57 FR 13543-13544). These measures 
must have been submitted by November 15, 1993 for the initial moderate 
nonattainment areas. Contingency measures should consist of other 
available measures that are not part of the area's attainment control 
strategy. These measures must take effect without further action by the 
State or EPA, upon a determination by EPA that the area has failed to 
make reasonable further progress (RFP) or attain the PM-10 NAAQS by the 
applicable statutory deadline. The La Grande nonattainment area SIP 
contains the following contingency measures:
    a. A mandatory woodsmoke curtailment program that is to take effect 
if the EPA determines that the area fails to attain the NAAQS by 
December 31, 1994. ODEQ has the authority to implement and enforce a 
mandatory curtailment program, upon notification by EPA that the area 
has failed to attain the NAAQS, should the City of La Grande or the 
County of Union fail to implement one. EPA approved these rules (OAR 
340-34-150 through 175) as part of the Oregon SIP on June 9, 1992 (57 
FR 24373).
    b. Removal of uncertified woodstoves upon home sale for any area 
that fails to meet the PM-10 SIP attainment date of December 31, 1994. 
These stoves would have to be removed and destroyed prior to sale of 
the home. EPA approved these rules (OAR 340-34-200 through 215) as part 
of the Oregon SIP on June 9, 1992 (57 FR 24373).
    c. The continuation of the woodstove certification program (after 
December 31, 1994) will provide a net reduction in residential wood 
burning emissions between the years 1994 and 2000, and on into the 
future.
    d. The application of BACT emission controls to industrial sources 
in La Grande will result in further reductions of PM-10 emissions. 
Oregon state regulations (OAR 340-21-200 through 245) also contain 
additional industrial contingency measures that would apply to Oregon's 
PM-10 nonattainment areas should an area not attain the standard by the 
applicable CAA deadline. These rules were approved by EPA as part of 
the Oregon SIP on August 19, 1992 (57 FR 37468). The rules became 
effective on October 19, 1992.
    The expected emission reductions to be achieved by implementation 
of the contingency measures after the December 31, 1994 attainment 
date, is estimated to be at least 90 tons per year. This represents at 
least a 58 percent reduction when compared with the 156 tons per year 
emission reduction in the attainment plan, which is greater than the 25 
percent reduction value suggested in the General Preamble (57 FR 13543-
13544).
    The SIP provides that the mandatory woodsmoke curtailment program, 
removal of uncertified woodstoves and application of BACT emission 
controls to industrial sources in La Grande can take affect without 
further action by the state or EPA, should EPA determine that the La 
Grande nonattainment area has failed to achieve RFP or attain the PM-10 
standard by the statutory attainment date of December 31, 1994. The net 
reduction in woodstove emissions due to the continuation of the 
woodstove certification program will occur regardless of whether or not 
the PM-10 standard is attained by December 31, 1994.
    EPA is approving the La Grande nonattainment area contingency 
measures.

III. Implications of This Action

    EPA is approving this plan revision submitted to EPA for the La 
Grande nonattainment area. Among other things, ODEQ has demonstrated 
that the La Grande moderate PM-10 nonattainment area will attain the 
PM-10 NAAQS by December 31, 1994. Note that this action includes 
approval of the contingency measures for the La Grande nonattainment 
area.

IV. Administrative Review

    This action has been classified as a Table 2 action by the Regional 
Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on 
January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by an October 4, 1993 
memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for 
Air and Radiation. A future notice will inform the general public of 
these tables. On January 6, 1989 the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) waived Table 2 and Table 3 SIP revisions (54 FR 2222) from the 
requirements of Section 3 of Executive Order 12291 for two years. The 
EPA submitted a request for a permanent waiver for Table 2 and Table 3 
SIP revisions. The OMB has agreed to continue the temporary waiver 
until such time as it rules on EPA's request. This request continued in 
effect under Executive Order 12866 which revoked Executive Order 12291 
on September 30, 1993.
    Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be 
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic and 
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and 
regulatory requirements.
    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et. seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C 603 and 604. 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit 
enterprises, and government entities with jurisdiction over populations 
of less than 50,000.
    SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the CAA 
do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements 
that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the federal SIP-
approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it does 
not have a significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover, 
due to the nature of the federal-state relationship under the CAA, 
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute 
federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. 
Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
    Because EPA considers this action noncontroversial and routine, we 
are approving it without prior proposal. The action will become 
effective on August 30, 1994 unless adverse comments are received by 
August 1, 1994. If the EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final 
rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be 
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule (please 
see short informational document published, simultaneously, in the 
proposal section of this Federal Register).
    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 August 30, 1994. 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), 42 U.S.C. section 
7607(b)(2).
    Under Executive Order 12866 [58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)], the 
Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' 
and therefore subject to 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 or 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.
    It has been determined that this rule is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is 
therefore not subject to OMB review.

 List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Particulate matter.

    Dated: May 25, 1994.
Chuck Clarke,
Regional Administrator.
    Note: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for 
the State of Oregon was approved by the Director of the Office of 
the Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

    Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:
    1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart MM--Oregon

    2. Section 52.1970 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(107) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.1970  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (107) On November 15, 1991, the ODEQ submitted a PM-10 
nonattainment area SIP for La Grande, Oregon.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) November 15, 1991 letter from ODEQ to EPA Region 10 submitting 
the PM-10 nonattainment area SIP for La Grande, Oregon.
    (B) PM-10 Control Strategy for Particulate Matter, October 1991, La 
Grande, Oregon Nonattainment Area, as adopted by the Environmental 
Quality Commission on November 8, 1991.

[FR Doc. 94-16000 Filed 6-30-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P