[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 166 (Monday, August 28, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44452-44457]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-21277]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 81
[ID-5-2-7075; FRL-5284-7]
Clean Air Act Promulgation of Reclassification of PM-10
Nonattainment Areas in Idaho
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action identifies those nonattainment areas in the State
of Idaho which have failed to attain the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter
of less than or equal to ten micrometers (PM-10) by the applicable
attainment date. This action also proposes to grant a one-year
extension of the attainment date for the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10
nonattainment area and the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area in Idaho.
DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by
September 27, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Montel Livingston,
SIP Manager, Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Branch
(AT-082), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle Washington, 98101.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven K. Body, 206-553-0782, Air and
Radiation Branch (AT-082), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Seattle, Washington, 98101.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. CAA Requirements Concerning Designation and Classification
Areas meeting the requirements of section 107(d)(4)(B) of the Act
1 were designated nonattainment for PM-10 by operation of law and
classified ``moderate'' upon enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments. See generally Section 107(d)(4)(B). These areas included
all former Group I PM-10 planning areas identified in 52 FR 29383
(August 7, 1987), as further clarified in 55 FR 45799 (October 31,
1990), and any other areas violating the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for PM-10 prior to January 1, 1989.2 A Federal
Register notice announcing the areas designated nonattainment for PM-10
upon enactment of the 1990 Amendments, known as ``initial'' PM-10
nonattainment areas, was published on March 15, 1991 (56 FR 11101), and
a subsequent Federal Register notice correcting the description of some
of those areas was published on August 8, 1991 (56 FR 37654). See 56 FR
56694 (November 6, 1991) and 40 CFR 81.313 (for codified air quality
designations and classifications in the State of Idaho). All initial
moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas have the same applicable attainment
date of December 31, 1994.
\1\ The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act made significant
changes to the Act. See Public Law No. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399.
References herein are to the Clean Air Act as amended (``Act'' or
``CAA''), which is codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
\2\ Many of these other areas were identified in footnote 4 of
the October 31, 1990 Federal Register notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
States containing initial moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas were
required to develop and submit to EPA by November 15, 1991, a SIP
revision providing for, among other things, implementation of
reasonably available control measures (RACM), including reasonably
available control technology (RACT), and a demonstration either that
the plan would provide for attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS by December
31, 1994 or that attainment by that date was impracticable. See Section
189(a).
[[Page 44453]]
B. Attainment Determinations
All PM-10 areas designated nonattainment pursuant to section
107(d)(4)(B) of the Act were initially classified ``moderate'' by
operation of law upon enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments.
See Section 188(a). Pursuant to sections 179(c) and 188(b)(2) of the
Act, EPA has the responsibility of determining within six months of the
December 31, 1994, attainment date whether PM-10 nonattainment areas
have attained the NAAQS. Determinations under section 179(c)(1) of the
Act are to be based upon an area's ``air quality as of the attainment
date.'' Section 188(b)(2) is consistent with this requirement.
Generally, EPA will determine whether an area's air quality is meeting
the PM-10 NAAQS for purposes of section 179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) based
upon data gathered at established State and Local Air Monitoring
Stations (SLAMS) in the nonattainment area and entered into the
Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). Data entered into the
AIRS has been determined by EPA to meet federal monitoring requirements
(see 40 CFR 50.6 and appendix J, 40 CFR part 53, 40 CFR part 58,
appendix A & B) and may be used to determine the attainment status of
areas. EPA will also consider air quality data from other air
monitoring stations in the nonattainment area provided that it meets
the federal monitoring requirements for SLAMS. All data will be
reviewed to determine the area's air quality status in accordance with
EPA guidance at 40 CFR part 50, appendix K.
Attainment of the annual PM-10 standard is achieved when the annual
arithmetic mean of four valid quarterly averages of the PM-10
concentration over a three-year period (1992, 1993 and 1994 for areas
with a December 31, 1994 attainment date) is equal to or less than 50
micrograms per cubic meter (g/m3). Attainment of the 24-
hour standard is determined by calculating the expected number of days
in a year with PM-10 concentrations greater than 150 g/
m3. The 24-hour standard is attained when the expected number of
days with levels above 150 g/m3 (averaged over a three-
year period) is less than or equal to one (1.0). Three consecutive
years of air quality data is generally necessary to show attainment of
the annual and 24-hour standard for PM-10. See 40 CFR part 50 and
appendix K.
C. Reclassification to Serious
A PM-10 nonattainment area may be reclassified from ``moderate'' to
``serious,'' which imposes new air quality planning obligations, in one
of two ways. First, EPA has general discretion to reclassify a moderate
PM-10 area to serious if at any time EPA determines the area cannot
practicably attain the PM-10 standard by the applicable attainment
date. See Section 188(b)(1). EPA bases its decisions to reclassify an
area as serious before the attainment date on special facts or
circumstances related to the affected nonattainment area which
demonstrate that the area cannot practicably attain the standard by the
applicable attainment date.
Second, under section 188(b)(2) of the Act, a moderate area will be
reclassified as serious by operation of law if EPA finds that the area
is not in attainment by the applicable attainment date. Pursuant to
section 188(b)(2)(B) of the Act, EPA must publish a Federal Register
notice within six months after the applicable attainment date
identifying those areas which have failed to attain the standard and
are reclassified to serious by operation of law. See Section 188(b)(2);
see also Section 179(c)(1).
D. Extension of the Attainment Date
The Act provides the Administrator with the discretion to grant a
one-year extension of the attainment date for a moderate PM-10
nonattainment area, provided certain criteria are met. See Section
188(d). If an area does not have the necessary number of consecutive
years of clean air quality data to show attainment of the NAAQS, a
State may apply for up to two one-year extensions of the attainment
date for that area. The statute sets forth two criteria a moderate
nonattainment area must satisfy in order to obtain an extension: (1)
The State has complied with all the requirements and commitments
pertaining to the area in the applicable implementation plan; and (2)
the area had no more than one exceedance of the 24-hour PM-10 standard
in the year preceding the extension year, and the annual mean
concentration of PM-10 in the area for the year preceding the extension
year is less than or equal to the standard. See Section 188(d).
The authority delegated to the Administrator to extend attainment
dates for moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas is discretionary: Section
188(d) of the Act provides that the Administrator ``may'' extend the
attainment date for areas that meet the minimum requirements specified
above. The provision does not dictate or compel that EPA grant
extensions to such areas even if these conditions are met.
In exercising this discretionary authority for PM-10 nonattainment
areas, EPA examines, in addition to the two statutory criteria
discussed above, the air quality planning progress made in the moderate
area. See November 14, 1994 Memorandum from Sally L. Shaver, Director,
Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division entitled ``Criteria for
Granting 1-Year Extensions of Moderate PM-10 Nonattainment Area
Attainment Dates, Making Attainment Determinations, and Reporting on
Quantitative Milestones.'' EPA is disinclined to grant an attainment
date extension unless a State has, in substantial part, addressed its
moderate PM-10 nonattainment area planning obligations. In order to
determine whether the State has substantially met these planning
requirements, EPA reviews the State's application for the attainment
date extension to determine whether the State has: (1) Adopted and
substantially implemented control measures that represent RACM/RACT in
the moderate nonattainment area; and (2) demonstrated that the area has
made emission reductions amounting to reasonable further progress (RFP)
toward attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS as defined in section 171(1) of
the Act. RFP for PM-10 nonattainment areas is defined in section 171(1)
of the Act as annual incremental emission reductions to ensure
attainment of the applicable NAAQS (PM-10) by the applicable attainment
date.
If the State does not have the requisite number of years of clean
air quality data to show attainment and does not apply or qualify for
an attainment date extension, the area will be reclassified to serious
by operation of law under section 188(b)(2) of the Act. If an extension
of the attainment date is granted, at the end of the extension year EPA
will again determine whether the area has attained the PM-10 NAAQS. If
the requisite three consecutive years of clean air quality data needed
to determine attainment are not met for the area, the State may apply
for a second one-year extension of the attainment date. In order to
qualify for the second one-year extension of the attainment date, the
State must satisfy the same requirements listed above for the first
extension. In addition, EPA will consider the State's PM-10 planning
progress for the area during the year for which the first extension was
granted. If a second extension is granted and the area does not have
the requisite three consecutive years of clean air quality data needed
to demonstrate attainment at the end of the second extension, no
further extensions of the attainment date can be granted and the area
will be
[[Page 44454]]
reclassified serious by operation of law. See Section 188(d).
II. Summary of EPA's Proposed Action
Today's action announces EPA's determination that the Power-Bannock
Counties PM-10 nonattainment area and the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment
area have each failed to attain the PM-10 NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date of December 31, 1994. This determination is based upon
air quality data which show there were violations of the PM-10 NAAQS
during the period from 1992 to 1994.
The State of Idaho has requested a one-year extension of the PM-10
attainment date for both the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment
area and the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area. EPA has reviewed the
extension requests and is, with this notice, proposing to grant a one-
year extension of the attainment date for each area. This determination
is based upon available air quality data and a review of the State's
progress in implementing the planning requirements that apply to
moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas.
A. Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 Nonattainment Area
The Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area is comprised of
State lands within portions of both Power and Bannock Counties and both
trust and fee lands within a portion of the exterior boundaries of the
Fort Hall Indian Reservation. The State of Idaho operates four PM-10
SLAMS monitoring sites in the nonattainment area, all of which are on
State lands. Data from these State sites have been deemed valid by EPA
and have been submitted by the State of Idaho for inclusion in the AIRS
network.
1. Air Quality Data
Whether an area has attained the PM-10 NAAQS is based exclusively
upon measured air quality levels over the most recent and complete
three calendar year period. See 40 CFR part 50 and appendix K. For
areas with an attainment date of December 31, 1994, this three-year
period covers calendar years 1992, 1993 and 1994. Data from calendar
year 1994 is also used in determining whether an area with a December
31, 1994 attainment date meets the air quality criteria for granting a
one-year extension to the attainment date under section 188(d).
A review of the data reported for the SLAMS sites in the Power-
Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area for the calendar years 1992,
1993 and 1994 shows no violations of the annual PM-10 standard at any
of the sites. Measured PM-10 concentrations above the level of the 24-
hour NAAQS were recorded at two SLAMS monitoring sites on January 7,
1993. As a result of the State's sampling frequency of one in every six
day, the expected number of exceedances for the 1993 calendar year at
the SLAMS sites is 6.0 at one site and 6.2 at the second (calculated in
accordance with appendix K). No measured values above the level of the
24-hour NAAQS were reported in 1992 or 1994. Therefore, the three-year
average (1992, 1993 and 1994) expected exceedance rate of the 24-hour
standard at the SLAMS sites is 2.0 and 2.3 respectively, (calculated in
accordance with appendix K).
Private industry in the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment
area funded and operated a seven-station monitoring network in and near
a portion of the nonattainment area known as the ``industrial complex''
for one year, from October 1, 1993 through September 30, 1994 (referred
to as the ``EMF network''). EPA has determined the data from this
network are valid. There were no reported 24-hour concentrations above
the level of the 24-hour NAAQS during the year the network was in
operation. EMF Site #2, which is located at the site in the
nonattainment area predicted to have the maximum industrial air quality
impact, is located immediately adjacent to the industrial complex on
State lands, adjacent to the Reservation boundary. EMF Site #2 reported
an annual concentration greater than the 50 g/m3 level of
the annual PM-10 standard for the one-year period the network was in
operation. EMF Site #2 also reported several 24 hour PM-10
concentrations at or near the level of the 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS.
2. Attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS
The Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area does not attain
the 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS. The PM-10 concentrations reported at two SLAMS
monitoring stations on January 7, 1993, exceeded the level of the
NAAQS. Because of the sampling frequency (one in every six days), the
expected exceedance rate for the three-year period from 1992 through
1994 at two sites is greater than one (1.0) which represents a
violation of the 24-hour NAAQS.
3. Extension of Attainment Date
EPA is action proposing to grant the State's request for a one-year
extension of the attainment date, from December 31, 1994 to December
31, 1995, for the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area.
a. Compliance with Applicable SIP. Based on information available
to EPA, EPA believes that the State of Idaho is in compliance with all
requirements and commitments in the applicable implementation plan that
pertain to the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area. EPA
provides oversight of the Idaho air program, including implementation
of the Idaho State Implementation Plan (SIP). EPA conducts annual
oversight inspections of sources throughout the State of Idaho. Results
from these inspections indicate that the State is meeting the
requirements and commitments of the statewide SIP. Although the State
has submitted its moderate PM-10 nonattainment plan for the Power-
Bannock Counties nonattainment area as a SIP revision, EPA has not yet
taken action on that plan. Therefore, this plan is not yet an
``applicable implementation plan'' for the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10
nonattainment area. For further discussion of the State's compliance
with the applicable SIP, please refer to the Technical Support
Document.
b. Air Quality Data. As discussed above, there were no measured
levels above the 24-hour NAAQS at any of the SLAMS monitoring sites or
any of the EMF monitoring sites during calendar year 1994. In addition,
the annual mean concentration of PM-10 at each of the SLAMS monitoring
sites during calendar year 1994 was below the level of the annual
NAAQS.
As discussed above, however, EMF Site #2 recorded an annual average
above the annual standard for the one-year period from October 1, 1993
to September 30, 1994. EPA believes that the recorded PM-10 levels at
several of the monitoring sites in the EMF network, particularly EMF
Site #2, indicate that air quality problems continue in the Power-
Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area and that additional controls
will likely be necessary to bring the area into attainment. EPA does
not believe, however, that the data recorded at EMF Site #2 precludes
EPA from granting the State's request for a one-year extension of the
attainment date under section 188(d) of the Act. The EMF monitoring
network did not collect a year's worth of data in calendar year 1994.
Appendix K of 40 CFR part 50 specifies the data requirements that apply
in determining an area's attainment status and provides methods for
filling gaps in data. EPA believes that these same data requirements
should be applied in determining the annual mean
[[Page 44455]]
concentration of PM-10 in connection with an extension request under
section 188(d) of the Act. Even after applying the appendix K ``gap-
filling'' techniques for the reported data from EMF Site #2 for the
missing quarter of data in 1994, the question of whether the annual
mean concentration is above the level of the annual standard during
1994 remains ambiguous. In other words, the data does not conclusively
show a violation of the annual standard during calendar year 1994.
Accordingly, EPA does not believe that the PM-10 concentrations
recorded at EMF Site #2 preclude EPA from exercising its discretion to
grant the State's request for a one-year extension of the attainment
date. Please refer to the Technical Support Document for further
analysis of the EMF data.
c. Substantial Implementation of Control Measures. The State of
Idaho, along with several local agencies, has developed and implemented
several significant control measures on sources located on State lands
within the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area. The State
submitted these control measures to EPA as a SIP revision in May 1993
and in supplemental submittals since that time. These measures consist
of a comprehensive residential wood combustion program, including a
mandatory woodstove curtailment program; stringent controls on fugitive
road dust, including controls on winter road sanding and a limited
unpaved road paving program; and operating permits that represent RACT
for J.R. Simplot's facility in the industrial complex and Ashgrove
Cement's facility near Inkom, the only two major stationary sources of
PM-10 on State lands in the nonattainment area. EPA has conducted a
preliminary review of these measures and believes that they
substantially meet EPA's guidance for RACM, including RACT, for sources
of primary particulate for purposes of an extension under section
188(d).
After the State submitted its moderate area SIP in May 1993, the
State learned that PM-10 precursors contribute significantly to
wintertime violations of the PM-10 standard in the area. In cooperation
with the Tribes and EPA, the State developed a work plan for developing
an emission inventory of sources of PM-10 precursors in the
nonattainment area and controls for such sources. The State is moving
forward on this precursor plan and expects to have controls in place on
major stationary sources of PM-10 precursors by March 1997. EPA
believes that the State's schedule for addressing the contribution of
precursors is expeditious and that the State is making progress on the
workplan. Because the contribution of precursors came to light only
late in the planning process, EPA does not believe that the State's
failure to have actually adopted or implemented controls on sources of
PM-10 precursors on State lands within the nonattainment area is
grounds, in and of itself, for denying the State's request for a one-
year extension.
With respect to PM-10 sources located on Tribal lands within the
nonattainment area, a gap in planning responsibilities for these
sources currently exists. In developing its control strategy, the State
did not seek to impose controls on any sources located within the
Reservation portion of the nonattainment area or attempt to demonstrate
to EPA that it had the authority to issue and enforce such controls on
Reservation sources. As EPA has previously stated, EPA does not believe
a Clean Air Act program submitted by a State should be disapproved
because it fails to address air resources within the exterior
boundaries of an Indian Reservation. See 59 FR 43956, 43982 (August 25,
1994) (proposed rule implementing section 301(d)).
Nor does EPA currently have the authority to recognize as federally
enforceable controls that the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes have imposed or
could impose on PM-10 sources located on Reservation lands within the
nonattainment area. Although the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990
greatly expanded the role of Indian Tribes in implementing the
provisions of the Clean Air Act on Reservation lands, EPA has not yet
issued the final rules necessary for EPA to recognize Tribal air
programs as federally enforceable. See Section 301(d); 59 FR 43956.
EPA is currently working on a proposed rule imposing controls on
sources of PM-10 on the Tribal portion of the nonattainment area. EPA
believes it would be unfair to burden the State and the Pocatello area
with new serious nonattainment area planning requirements because of
the gap in the planning process and the resulting lack of federally-
enforceable controls on Tribal sources at this time. Accordingly, EPA
believes that the State has adequately demonstrated, for purposes of an
extension under section 188(d) of the Act, that it has adopted and
substantially implemented control measures representing RACT/RACM in
the nonattainment area.
d. Emission Reduction Progress. On March 30, 1995, the State of
Idaho submitted to EPA the milestone report as required by section
189(c)(2) of the Act to demonstrate annual incremental emission
reductions and reasonable further progress. In that report, the State
discusses implementation of the control measures adopted as part of the
control strategy in the SIP and the emission reductions that have been
achieved as a result of the State's control strategy. Implementation of
these control measures represents a reduction in annual allowable
emissions in the nonattainment area of 1439.63 tons per year from point
sources.
The effect of the area source control measures on air quality is
reflected in the reported ambient measurements at the SLAMS monitoring
sites, most of which have been operating for more than seven years.
Data from these sites show no violations of the 24-hour standard
attributable to primary particulate since 1992 and that the expected
exceedance rate has decreased at all sites, with the exception of the
January 1993 violations which are attributable to secondary aerosol.
The annual average concentrations have likewise shown a downward trend
from a maximum of 51 ug/m\3\ at the STP site in 1990 to 34.5 ug/m\3\ at
the STP site in 1994. This trend is further evidence that the State's
implementation of control measures on sources of primary particulate on
State lands has resulted in emission reductions amounting to reasonable
further progress in the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment
area.
In summary, EPA proposes to grant the State's request for a one-
year extension of the attainment date, from December 31, 1994 to
December 31, 1995, for the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment
area. In doing so, EPA emphasizes that the authority to grant an
extension of the attainment date under section 188(d) is discretionary
and that EPA might, under other circumstances, be disinclined to grant
an extension for an area with similar air quality data. In particular,
EPA notes that the data collected from certain monitors in the EMF
network indicate that air quality problems remain and must still be
addressed in the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area. EPA
believes, however, that the high 24-hour and annual PM-10 levels
recorded at some of the EMF monitors are primarily attributable to the
gap in planning responsibility for the Tribal portion of the
nonattainment area. Because of the unique jurisdictional issues related
to this particular nonattainment area, the fact that the area
technically meets the data requirements for an extension and the fact
that the State has demonstrated that it has adopted and substantially
[[Page 44456]]
implemented control measures on sources of primary particulate on State
lands resulting in emission reductions amounting to reasonable further
progress, EPA proposes to exercise its discretion to grant the Power-
Bannock Counties nonattainment area a one-year extension of the
attainment date.
B. Sandpoint PM-10 Nonattainment Area
The Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area includes the Cities of
Sandpoint, Kootenai and Ponderay and is located in the northern part of
the Idaho panhandle.
1. Air Quality Data
The Sandpoint nonattainment area has one PM-10 monitoring site at
the Post Office building in downtown Sandpoint. This SLAMS site was
established in 1986. Sampling frequencies vary seasonally, with one
sample every other day during the winter (October 1 through March 31),
and one sample every six days during the rest of the year. Data from
this site has been deemed valid by EPA and submitted by the State of
Idaho for inclusion in the AIRS system.
A review of the data for calendar years 1992, 1993 and 1994 shows
no violations of the annual PM-10 standard in the Sandpoint PM-10
nonattainment area. During this same three-year period, there were
three reported measurements above the level of the 24-hour NAAQS. In
calendar year 1992 there was one level above the NAAQS in the first
quarter (during every other day sampling) and one in the third quarter
(during one in every six day sampling). There were no measured levels
above the 24-hour NAAQS in calendar year 1993. In calendar year 1994,
there was one measurement above the 24-hour NAAQS in the first quarter
during every other day sampling.
2. Attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS
The Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area does not attain the 24-hour
PM-10 NAAQS. PM-10 concentrations reported from the SLAMS monitoring
station at the Post Office exceeded the level of the NAAQS three times
from 1992 to 1994. Because of the sampling frequency, the expected
exceedance rate for this three-year period is 3.5 (calculated in
accordance with appendix K), which represents a violation of the 24-
hour standard.
3. Extension of Attainment Date
EPA is by this action proposing to grant the State's request for a
one-year extension of the attainment date, from December 31, 1994 to
December 31, 1995, for the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area.
a. Compliance with Applicable SIP. Based on information available
to EPA, EPA believes the State of Idaho is in compliance with all
requirements and commitments in the applicable implementation plan that
pertains to the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area. As discussed above,
EPA believes that the State is meeting the requirements and commitments
of the statewide SIP. Although the State has submitted its moderate PM-
10 nonattainment area plan as a SIP revision, EPA has not yet taken
action on that plan. Therefore, the submitted plan is not yet an
``applicable implementation plan'' for the Sandpoint PM-10
nonattainment area.
b. Air Quality Data. As discussed above, there was one measured
level above the 24-hour NAAQS during calendar year 1994. The annual
mean concentration of PM-10 was 37 g/m3 during 1994, well
below the standard. Therefore, the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area
meets the extension criteria of no more than one exceedance of the 24-
hour NAAQS and an annual mean concentration less than or equal to the
standard for the year preceding the extension year.
c. Substantial Implementation of Control Measures. The State of
Idaho, along with several local agencies, has developed and implemented
several significant control measures on sources within the Sandpoint
PM-10 nonattainment area. The State submitted these control measures to
EPA as a SIP revision on May 18, 1993, and in supplemental submissions
since that time. These measures consist of a comprehensive residential
wood combustion program, including a mandatory woodstove curtailment
program; stringent controls on fugitive road dust, including controls
on winter road sanding and a limited unpaved road paving program; and
new or revised operating permits for the four major point sources in
the nonattainment area, Lake Pre-Mix, L.D. McFarland Co., Interstate
Concrete and Asphalt, and Louisiana-Pacific Corporation. EPA has
conducted a preliminary review of these measures and believes that they
substantially meet EPA's guidance for RACM, including RACT for purposes
of granting an extension under section 188(d) of the Act.
d. Emission Reduction Progress. On March 30, 1995, the State of
Idaho submitted to EPA the milestone report required by section
189(c)(2) of the Act to demonstrate annual incremental emission
reductions and reasonable further progress in the Sandpoint area. In
that report, the State discusses implementation of the control measures
adopted as part of the control strategy in the SIP and the emission
reductions that have been achieved as a result of the State's control
strategy. EPA believes that the reductions in allowable emissions for
the industrial sources demonstrates reasonable further progress in the
Sandpoint nonattainment area.
In summary, for the reasons discussed above, EPA proposes to grant
the State's request for a one-year extension of the attainment date for
the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area from December 31, 1994 to
December 31, 1995.
III. Requests for Public Comments
EPA is requesting comments on all aspects of today's proposal. As
indicated at the outset of this notice, EPA will consider any comments
received by September 27, 1995.
IV. Administrative Review
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et. seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
Under E.O. 12866, 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993), EPA is required to
determine whether regulatory actions are significant and therefore
should be subject to OMB review, economic analysis, and the
requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines a
``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a
rule that may meet at least one of the four criteria identified in
section 3(f), including, under paragraph (1), that the rule may ``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.''
The Agency has determined that the determinations of nonattainment
and attainment date extensions proposed today would result in none of
the effects identified in section 3(f). Under section 188(b)(2),
findings of nonattainment are based upon air quality considerations and
must occur by operation of law in light of certain air quality
conditions. They do not, in and of themselves,
[[Page 44457]]
impose any new requirements on any sectors of the economy. In addition,
because the statutory requirements are clearly defined with respect to
the differently classified areas, and because those requirements are
automatically triggered by classifications that, in turn, are triggered
by air quality values, the nonattainment determinations and
reclassification cannot be said to impose a materially adverse impact
on State, local, or tribal governments or communities. In addition,
attainment date extensions under section 188(d) of the CAA do not
impose any new requirements on any sectors of the economy; nor do they
result in a materially adverse impact on State, local, or tribal
governments or communities.
Determinations of nonattainment areas under section 188(b)(2) of
the CAA and extensions under section 188(d) of the CAA do not create
any new requirements. Therefore, because these actions do not impose
any new requirements, I certify that it does not have a significant
impact on small entities.
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new
Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local,
or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this
action.
The EPA has reviewed this request for revision of the federally-
approved SIP for conformance with the provisions of the 1990 Clean Air
Act Amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The EPA has determined
that this action conforms with those requirements.
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.
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Particulate
matter, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: April 10, 1995.
Charles Findley,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-21277 Filed 8-25-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P