[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 117 (Monday, June 19, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35161-35163]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-5510]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R10-OAR-2006-0050; FRL-8179-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; La 
Grande PM10 Maintenance Plan and Redesignation Request

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On March 22, 2006, EPA published a direct final rule to 
approve a PM10 State Implementation Plan (SIP) maintenance plan 
revision for the La Grande, Oregon nonattainment area and to 
redesignate the area from nonattainment to attainment for PM10. PM10 
air pollution is suspended particulate matter with a nominal diameter 
less than or equal to a nominal ten micrometers. We stated in the 
direct final rule that if EPA received adverse comment, we would 
publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule. We received 
adverse comment on the direct final rule, and, therefore, in a separate 
action, are withdrawing our direct final rule. In a parallel notice of 
proposed rulemaking, also published on March 22, 2006, we stated that 
if we received adverse comments we would address all public comments in 
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. This final action 
addresses the adverse comments we received and finalizes our approval 
of the SIP revision and redesignation request for the La Grande PM10 
nonattainment area.

DATES: This final rule is effective July 19, 2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
No. EPA-R10-OAR-2006-0050. All documents in the docket are listed on 
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, 
some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other 
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet 
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 
available docket materials are available either electronically through 
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA, Region 10, 
Office of Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle 
WA. EPA requests that, if at all possible, you contact the individual 
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your 
inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday 
through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Deneen, Office of Air, Waste and 
Toxics (AWT-107), EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101; 
telephone number: (206) 553-6706; fax number: (206) 553-0110; e-mail 
address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we'', 
``us'' or ``our'' are used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What Is the Background of This Rulemaking?
II. What Comments Did We Receive on the Proposed Action?
III. What Is Our Final Action?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is the Background of This Rulemaking?

    On October 25, 2005, the State of Oregon Department of 
Environmental Quality (DEQ or State) submitted a SIP revision and 
redesignation request for the La Grande, Oregon PM10 nonattainment 
area. On March 22, 2006, EPA published a direct final rule to approve 
this SIP revision and request on the basis that the State's submission 
adequately demonstrated that the control measures being implemented in 
the La Grande area result in maintenance of the PM10 National Ambient 
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and all other requirements of the Clean 
Air Act (the Act) for redesignation to attainment are met. 71 FR 14393. 
We stated in the direct final rule that if EPA received adverse 
comment, we would publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule. 
We received adverse comment on the direct final rule, and, therefore, 
in a separate action, are withdrawing our direct final rule. In a 
parallel notice of proposed rulemaking, also published on March 22, 
2006, we stated that if we received adverse comments we would address 
all public comments in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed 
rule. 71 FR 14438. This final action addresses the adverse comments we 
received and finalizes our approval of the State's SIP revision and 
redesignation request for the La Grande PM10 nonattainment area.

II. What Comments Did We Receive on the Proposed Action?

    We received one comment on the proposed rulemaking. This comment 
was from the Oregon Division of the Federal Highway Administration 
(FHWA). FHWA's comment and our response are summarized as follows:

[[Page 35162]]

    Comment: The commenter expressed concern that the language stating 
that ``the motor vehicle emissions budget is established for all 
years'' could be interpreted to mean that a budget for La Grande is 
created for each year, 2006 through 2017. The commenter added that 
since transportation conformity requires a demonstration of meeting 
budgets for every year a budget is established, requiring the 
Department of Transportation to demonstrate meeting a budget for each 
year through 2017 seems to be overly burdensome and return little 
value. The commenter concluded that demonstrating that the 2017 budget 
is met, as well as any required interim years, meets the purpose of the 
Clean Air Act and this SIP.
    Response: EPA's statement that the motor vehicle emissions budget 
is established for all years is in the preamble to our rulemaking at 71 
FR 14398 (March 22, 2006). Because this statement is based on 
information in the State's SIP submittal, we asked DEQ to clarify the 
period for which the motor vehicle emissions budget is established. In 
a letter to EPA, dated May 2, 2006, DEQ clarified that the motor 
vehicle emissions budget is established for the La Grande PM10 
nonattainment area for 2017 and that DEQ never intended to require a 
yearly transportation conformity analysis. DEQ added that analysis 
years are determined by the conformity rule and through interagency 
consultation and that DEQ does not believe that its language could be, 
or should be, interpreted to mean that an analysis must be conducted 
every year. The phrase ``for all years'' makes clear that if, as a 
result of conformity rules and interagency consultation, an intervening 
year conformity determination is required or needed, then the budget 
established for 2017 governs.
    Based on the comment from FHWA, the clarifying letter from DEQ, the 
SIP revision for the La Grande PM10 nonattainment area, and 40 CFR 
93.118(b)(2)(i), which sets the minimum years for which a regional 
emissions analyses must be conducted, we are clarifying that the motor 
vehicle emissions budget for La Grande is established for 2017. 
Accordingly, the motor vehicle emissions budget for La Grande is as 
follows:

         La Grande PM10 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget for 2017
                    [Pounds PM10/24-hour winter day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year.........................................................       2017
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget...............................       2750
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What Is Our Final Action?

    EPA is taking final action to approve a PM10 State Implementation 
Plan (SIP) maintenance plan revision for the La Grande, PM10 
nonattainment area and to redesignate the area from nonattattainment to 
attainment for PM10. EPA is approving the SIP revision and 
redesignation request because the State adequately demonstrates that 
the control measures being implemented in the La Grande area result in 
maintenance of the PM10 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and all 
other requirements of the Clean Air Act for redesignation to attainment 
are met.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule 
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not 
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. section 801 et seq., as 
added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency 
promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy 
of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller 
General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this 
rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House 
of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States 
prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule 
cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
section 804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 18, 2006. 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

[[Page 35163]]

enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 81

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

    Dated: May 23, 2006.
Richard B. Parkin,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

0
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as 
follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart MM--Oregon

0
2. Section 52.1970 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(146) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.1970  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (146) On October 25, 2005, the Oregon Department of Environmental 
Quality submitted a PM10 maintenance plan and requested redesignation 
of the La Grande PM10 nonattainment area to attainment for PM10. The 
State's maintenance plan and the redesignation request meet the 
requirements of the Clean Air Act.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) Oregon Administrative Rule 340-204-0030 and 0040, as effective 
September 9, 2005.

0
3. Section 52.1973 is amended by adding paragraph (e)(3) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.1973  Approval of plans.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) EPA approves as a revision to the Oregon State Implementation 
Plan, the La Grande PM10 maintenance plan adopted by the Oregon 
Environmental Quality Commission on August 11, 2005 and submitted to 
EPA on October 25, 2005.
* * * * *

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
4. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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


0
5. In Sec.  81.338, the table entitled ``Oregon PM-10'' is amended by 
revising the entry for ``La Grande (the Urban Growth Boundary Area)'' 
to read as follows:


Sec.  81.338  Oregon.

* * * * *

                                                  Oregon--PM-10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Designation                         Classification
           Designated area            --------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Date                  Type                 Date            Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
La Grande (the Urban Growth Boundary          7/19/06  Attainment.
 area).
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 06-5510 Filed 6-16-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P