[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 206 (Monday, October 26, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57086-57089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-28620]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[ID23-7003; FRL-6179-5]


Determination That Pre-existing National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards for PM-10 No Longer Apply to Ada County/Boise State of Idaho

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this action, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is 
proposing to determine that the national ambient air quality standards 
(NAAQS) for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 
or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM10) that existed before 
September 16, 1997, no longer apply to the Northern Ada County/Boise, 
Idaho area and to revoke the nonattainment designation associated with 
those standards. The State of Idaho has satisfied the requirements of 
the Clean Air Act (CAA) as well as EPA's regulations (40 CFR

[[Page 57087]]

50.6(d)) and Guidance for Implementing the 1-Hour Ozone and Pre-
Existing PM-10 NAAQS dated December 29, 1997.

DATES: Comments must be postmarked on or before November 25, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Montel Livingston, 
SIP Manager, Office of Air Quality (OAQ-107), EPA, 1200 Sixth Avenue, 
Seattle, Washington 98101.
    Copies of the State's request and other information supporting this 
proposed action are available for inspection during normal business 
hours at the following locations: EPA, Region 10, Office of Air 
Quality, 1200 Sixth Avenue (OAQ-107), Seattle, Washington 98101, and 
State of Idaho Division of Environmental Quality, 1410 N. Hilton, 
Boise, Idaho 83720.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rindy Ramos, Office of Air Quality 
(OAQ-107), EPA, Seattle, Washington 98101, (206) 553-6510.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On July 18, 1997, EPA revised the primary and secondary NAAQS for 
particulate matter (PM) by establishing annual and 24-hour particulate 
matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 
micrometers (PM2.5) standards and by changing the form of the existing 
24-hour PM10 standard. The existing annual PM10 standard was retained; 
however, for the revised PM NAAQS, the requirement to correct the 
pressure and temperature of measured concentrations to standard 
reference conditions was removed. As noted in the preamble to the final 
rule promulgating the revised PM NAAQS, those revisions may potentially 
affect the effective stringency of the annual standard. These new 
standards became effective September 16, 1997. See 61 FR 65638 and 62 
FR 38652.
    EPA has developed guidance to ensure that momentum is maintained by 
States in their current air programs while moving toward developing 
their plans for implementing the new NAAQS. This document entitled 
Guidance for Implementing the 1-Hour Ozone and Pre-Existing PM10 NAAQS, 
dated December 29, 1997, also reflects a July 16, 1997, Presidential 
Directive issued to Administrator Browner on implementation of the new 
standards. An additional document entitled Re-Issue of the Early 
Planning Guidance for the Revised Ozone and Particulate Matter (PM) 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) dated June 16, 1998, 
outlines a process for States to review their existing CAA section 110 
state implementation plans (SIPs).
    To provide for an effective transition from the existing to the 
revised PM NAAQS, the effective date of the revocation of the PM10 
NAAQS in effect before September 16, 1997, was delayed so that the 
existing standards and associated provisions would continue to apply 
for an interim period. See 62 FR 38701. EPA, therefore, promulgated 
regulatory provisions that provide for the continued applicability of 
the pre-existing PM10 NAAQS until certain criteria are met. 40 CFR 
50.6(d). Among other things, these provisions state that the pre-
existing PM10 NAAQS will no longer apply to an area that as of 
September 16, 1997, is attaining those standards once (1) a SIP 
applicable to the area containing all PM10 control measures adopted and 
implemented by September 16, 1997 (i.e., the control measures that 
allowed the area to attain), has been approved by EPA and (2) a 
certification by the State that it has adequate authority and resources 
to implement the revised PM standards. In its December 29, 1997, 
guidance, EPA further stated that when the Agency had made a 
determination that the criteria set forth in 40 CFR 50.6(d) had been 
met for an area and, therefore, that the pre-existing PM10 standards no 
longer apply, ``the section 107 designation for PM10 for that area will 
also be revoked.'' This is because at that time the PM10 standards to 
which the current section 107 PM10 designation for the area relate 
would no longer exist.
    On July 24, 1998, the State of Idaho submitted a request that EPA 
make a determination that the pre-existing PM10 NAAQS no longer apply 
to the Northern Ada County/Boise nonattainment area. Based on air 
quality data for the years 1994-1996, it is the State's position that 
the area has met the PM10 standards that were in effect prior to 
September 16, 1997. Idaho also requested that the CAA section 107 
nonattainment area designation for the Northern Ada County/Boise area 
be revoked.

II. Analysis of Determination

Why Is EPA Determining That the PM10 Standards in Effect Before 
September 16, 1997 No Longer Apply to the Northern Ada County/Boise 
Nonattainment Area?

    Northern Ada County/Boise has met the following requirements of 40 
CFR 50.6(d): (1) The State has submitted air quality data for 1994-1996 
which demonstrates that the area met the PM10 standards that were in 
effect before September 16, 1997. The area has not monitored a 
exceedance or violated the PM10 NAAQS during that time period. (2) The 
State has an approved PM10 State Implementation Plan (SIP) in place 
(see 59 FR 48582 and 61 FR 27019) that includes all control measures 
adopted and implemented at the State-level to meet the standards in 
effect before September 16, 1997. (3) In Idaho's July 24, 1998 request, 
the State has certified to EPA that it has adequate legal authority and 
resources to implement the revised PM NAAQS.

How Will the Determination by EPA That the PM10 Standards in Effect 
Before September 16, 1997 No Longer Apply Affect the Northern Ada 
County/Boise Nonattainment Area's Conformity and New Source Review 
Requirements?

    As noted earlier, at the time that a determination by EPA that the 
pre-existing PM10 standards no longer apply for the area becomes 
effective, the section 107 PM10 designation will also be revoked. The 
termination of the applicability of the PM10 standards in effect before 
September 16, 1997, and the simultaneous revocation of the Northern Ada 
County/Boise area's current PM10 nonattainment designation, will also 
affect requirements that currently apply in the area due to the 
existence of those standards and designation. Specifically, the 
detailed provisions of subpart 4 of part D of title 1 of the CAA, which 
govern implementation of the pre-existing PM10 standards (PM10 
standards in effect prior to July 18, 1997 when the revised PM NAAQS 
were promulgated) in areas designated nonattainment for those 
standards, will no longer apply once EPA makes the determination that 
the pre-existing PM10 standards no longer apply and the revocation of 
the section 107 designation become effective.
    The conformity provisions of section 176(c) of the Act apply to 
areas that are designated nonattainment or that are subject to the 
requirement to submit a maintenance plan for any applicable standards 
under the Act. Because Northern Ada County/Boise is designated 
nonattainment for the pre-existing PM10 standards, it is subject to the 
requirements of general and transportation conformity. Consequently, 
once the current PM10 nonattainment designation is revoked for the 
area, these requirements will no longer be applicable.
    Like conformity, the part D PM10 nonattainment new source review 
(NSR) requirements will no longer apply for the Northern Ada County/
Boise area when the determination that the pre-existing PM10 standards 
no longer apply and the revocation of the nonattainment designation 
become

[[Page 57088]]

effective. Instead, the preconstruction review permit requirements for 
prevention of significant deterioration of air quality (PSD) will apply 
to major stationary sources seeking to construct or modify in that 
area. Under the PSD program, a major source which proposes to construct 
or modify must apply for a PSD permit if it locates in an area 
designated attainment or unclassifiable for any criteria pollutant, and 
it emits a regulated pollutant in significant amounts. The PSD 
requirements will apply in the Northern Ada County/Boise area, even 
after the pre-existing PM10 standards and the PM10 nonattainment 
designation are removed, because the area is currently designated 
attainment or unclassifiable for other criteria pollutants and because 
PM10 is still a regulated pollutant.

III. Summary of Action

    The Northern Ada County/Boise area meets the requirements of 40 CFR 
50.6(d). Accordingly, EPA is proposing to determine that the pre-
existing PM10 standards no longer apply, and is proposing to revoke the 
nonattainment designation associated with those standards. 
Additionally, the State shall take steps to ensure that the measures to 
protect the PM NAAQS that were in place before September 16, 1997, 
shall stay in place and the State shall follow through in implementing 
its approved section 110 SIP to protect the new PM NAAQS effective 
after September 16, 1997, for this area.
    In addition, EPA will be reformatting Idaho's 40 CFR 81.313 PM10 
designation table. The table will be restructured to more accurately 
reflect the designation status of the area within each of Idaho's Air 
Quality Control Regions. However, because EPA proposes to revoke the 
PM10 nonattainment area designation only for the Northern Ada County/
Boise nonattainment area, the designation status for all other areas 
within the State will remain unchanged. Restructuring of the table will 
not affect their status.
    EPA is soliciting public comment on its proposed action. Interested 
parties are invited to comment on all aspects of this proposed action. 
Comments should be submitted to the address listed in the front of this 
document. Public comments postmarked by November 25, 1998, will be 
considered in the final rulemaking action taken by EPA.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this 
regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled 
``Regulatory Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Order 12875

    Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not 
required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or 
tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds 
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those 
governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by 
consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office 
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior 
consultation with representatives of affected state, local, and tribal 
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of written 
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the 
need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 12875 requires EPA to 
develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other 
representatives of state, local, and tribal governments ``to provide 
meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals 
containing significant unfunded mandates.''
    Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal 
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these 
entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875 
do not apply to this rule.

C. Executive Order 13045

    Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is 
determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O. 
12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA 
has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. 
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate 
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on 
children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other 
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered 
by the Agency.
    This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it is not 
economically significant as defined under E.O. 12866, and because it 
does not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or 
safety risks.

D. Executive Order 13084

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

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies 
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 small governmental 
jurisdictions. This action will affect the regulatory status of a 
geographical area and will not impose any new regulatory requirements 
on sources. For this reason, the Administrator certifies that this 
action has no significant impact on any small entities, nor will it 
affect a substantial number of small entities.

F. Unfunded Mandates

    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 
annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; 
or to private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA 
must select the most cost-effective

[[Page 57089]]

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 proposed action does not include a 
Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs of $100 
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the 
aggregate, or to the private sector. Because EPA is not imposing new 
Federal requirements, neither State, local, or tribal governments, nor 
the private sector should incur costs from this action.

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

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Particulate 
matter.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, 
Wilderness areas, Air quality control regions.

    Dated: October 19, 1998.
Chuck Clarke,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 98-28620 Filed 10-23-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U