[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