[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 5, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24542-24544]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-10644]



[[Page 24542]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2007-0112; FRL-9144-9]


Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: 
Washington

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Washington, Department of 
Ecology (Ecology). These revisions pertain to the maintenance plan 
prepared by the State of Washington to maintain the 8-hour national 
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone in the Vancouver portion 
of the Portland/Vancouver Air Quality Maintenance Area (Pdx/Van AQMA). 
The 110(a)(1) maintenance plan for this area meets Clean Air Act (CAA) 
requirements and demonstrates that the Vancouver portion of the Pdx/Van 
AQMA will be able to remain in attainment for 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS 
through 2015. EPA is proposing full approval of the maintenance plan 
and supporting rules.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 4, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2007-0112, by one of the following methods:
    A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    B. Mail: Krishna Viswanathan, EPA, Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics 
(AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, Washington 98101
    C. Hand Delivery: EPA, Region 10 Mailroom, 9th Floor, 1200 Sixth 
Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. Attention: Krishna Viswanathan, 
Office of Air Waste, and Toxics (AWT-107). Such deliveries are only 
accepted during normal hours of operation, and special arrangements 
should be made for deliveries of boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-
2007-0112. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be 
included in the public docket without change and may be made available 
online at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal 
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed 
to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information 
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through 
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site 
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means the EPA will not know 
your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body 
of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to the EPA 
without going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address 
will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that 
is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If 
you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include 
your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and 
with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment 
due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, 
the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files 
should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and 
be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 in www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Office of Air, Waste 
and Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 
98101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Krishna Viswanathan, (206) 553-2684, 
or by e-mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA. Information is organized 
as follows:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Summary of SIP Revision
III. Proposed Action
IV. Washington Notice Provision
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires, in part, that states submit 
to EPA plans to maintain any NAAQS promulgated by EPA. Areas that were 
maintenance areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS but attainment for the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS are required to submit a plan to demonstrate the 
continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA established June 
15, 2007, three years after the effective date of the initial 8-hour 
ozone designations, as the deadline for submission of plans for these 
areas.
    On May 20, 2005, EPA issued guidance for States in preparing 
maintenance plans under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA for areas that are 
required to do so under 40 CFR 51.905(c) and (d). At a minimum, the 
maintenance plan should include the following five components:
    1. An attainment inventory, which is based on actual typical summer 
day emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of 
nitrogen (NOX) from a base year chosen by the State;
    2. A maintenance demonstration which shows how the area will remain 
in compliance with the 8-hour ozone standard for 10 years after the 
effective date of the designation;
    3. A commitment to continue to operate ambient air quality monitors 
to verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard;
    4. A contingency plan that will ensure that any violation of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS will be promptly corrected; and
    5. An explanation of how the State will verify continued attainment 
of the standard under the maintenance plan.
    On January 17, 2007, EPA received a request from Ecology to approve 
under section 110 of the CAA, a SIP revision pertaining to the 
maintenance plan for the Vancouver portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA. On May 
22, 2007, EPA received a request from the Oregon Department of 
Environmental Quality, to approve a SIP revision pertaining to the 
maintenance plan for the Portland portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA and the 
Salem Keizer Area Transportation Study Air Quality Area under section 
110 of the CAA. As both these submissions from the States of Washington 
and Oregon pertain to the Pdx/Van AQMA, EPA is taking action on these 
submissions concurrently. However this action addresses only the 
Vancouver portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA.
    The EPA has prepared a Technical Support Document (TSD) with more 
detailed information about the SIP revisions Ecology has submitted for 
approval. The TSD is available for review as part of the docket for 
this action.

II. Summary of SIP Revision

    Ecology's 8-hour ozone maintenance plan addresses all five 
components of

[[Page 24543]]

the 8-hour ozone maintenance plan as outlined in EPA's May 20, 2005 
guidance. Ecology has submitted the 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for 
Vancouver for approval, as well as implementing regulations that 
support the maintenance plan, for incorporation into the federally 
enforceable SIP and EPA proposes to approve these changes to the SIP.

1. Attainment Inventory

    An emissions inventory is an itemized list of emission estimates 
for sources of air pollution in a given area for a specified time 
period. Ecology provided a comprehensive and current emissions 
inventory for NOX and VOCs. Ecology has chosen to use 2002 as the base 
year from which it will project emissions. The maintenance plan also 
includes an explanation of the methodology used for determining the 
anthropogenic (area and mobile sources) emissions. The inventory is 
based on emissions from a ``typical summer day.'' The term ``typical 
summer day'' refers to a typical weekday during the months when ozone 
concentrations are typically the highest.

2. Maintenance Demonstration

    With regard to demonstrating continued maintenance of the 8-hour 
ozone standard, Ecology projects that the total emissions of ozone 
precursors from Vancouver will decrease during the 10-year maintenance 
period. Ecology has projected emissions for 2015, which is more than 10 
years from the effective date of initial designations, as suggested in 
the EPA guidance for section 110(a)(1) maintenance plans. In 2002, the 
total anthropogenic emissions in Vancouver were 154,692 lbs/day for 
VOCs and 81,436 lb/day for NOX. The projected 2015 anthropogenic 
emissions from Vancouver are expected to be 136,323 lb/day for VOCs and 
59,381 lbs/day for NOX. As such, the plan demonstrates that emissions 
are projected to decrease. This demonstrates that the net VOC emissions 
are expected to be about 13% lower, and NOX emissions about 37% lower 
in 2015 compared to 2002 levels.
    The formation of ozone is dependent on a number of variables which 
cannot be estimated through emissions growth and reduction 
calculations. A few of these variables include weather and the 
transport of ozone precursors from outside the maintenance area. In 
order to demonstrate continued maintenance of the standards, a State 
may utilize more sophisticated tools such as air quality modeling to 
support their analysis; Ecology used air quality modeling to assess the 
comprehensive impacts of growth through 2015 on ozone levels in the 
area. Results of modeling conducted by Ecology and submitted to EPA 
demonstrate that the highest predicted design value for Vancouver is 
0.072 parts per million, which is below the 1997 and the 2008 ozone 
NAAQS, and is therefore in compliance with both the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
EPA's Evaluation of CAA 110(l) Considerations
    The maintenance demonstration discussed in the preceding section 
also meets the section 110(l) requirements of the CAA which states, 
``Each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under 
this chapter shall be adopted by such State after reasonable notice and 
public hearing. The Administrator shall not approve a revision of a 
plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement 
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in 
section 7501 of this title), or any other applicable requirement of 
this chapter.'' Ecology has submitted evidence to EPA that the State 
provided a reasonable notice and public hearing process prior to State 
adoption and submission of this plan to EPA.
    The proposed plan demonstrates maintenance of all applicable ozone 
NAAQS, namely the 2008 and 1997 8-hour standards. The Vancouver, 
Washington area is within the compliance levels for the remaining 
criteria pollutants \1\ based on historical monitoring.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA's AirData Database--http://www.epa.gov/oar/data/reports.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the VOC, NOX, and carbon monoxide emissions information 
submitted with this plan, EPA concludes that approval of the changes in 
this proposed plan will not cause an increase of direct or precursor 
emissions that will interfere with the Portland area's maintenance of 
any criteria pollutant NAAQS. Therefore, an approval of this plan 
revision will not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning 
attainment or maintenance of any NAAQS.

3. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring

    With regard to the ambient air monitoring component of the 
maintenance plan, Ecology commits to continue operating air quality 
monitoring stations in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 throughout the 
maintenance period to verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard, 
and will submit quality-assured ozone data to EPA through the Air 
Quality System. EPA finds this to satisfy the requirements of CAA 
section 110(a).

4. Contingency Measures

    Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires the State to develop a 
contingency plan that will ensure that any violation of a NAAQS is 
promptly corrected. The purpose of the contingency measures, such as 
those included in the State's submitted maintenance plan, is to provide 
a range of response actions that may be selected for implementation in 
the event of any violation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

5. Verification of Continued Attainment

    Ecology will continue to monitor ambient air quality ozone levels 
in the Portland-Vancouver AQMA as described in Contingency Plan. 
Ecology will update countywide emission inventories every three years 
as required by the Consolidated Emission and Reporting Rule (CERR) to 
update the National Emissions Inventory. If ambient ozone levels 
increase, Ecology will compare CERR updates with the 2002 and 2015 
emissions inventories and evaluate the assumptions used in the 2015 
emissions projections to determine whether emissions are increasing at 
a rate not anticipated in the maintenance plan.
EPA's Evaluation of Supporting Rules
    Ecology submitted several rules that would create control programs 
to support the emissions reductions and the maintenance demonstration 
proposed in the submission. Ecology also submitted several sections of 
the Washington Administrative code (WAC) 173-422 pertaining to the 
Motor Vehicle Emission Inspection Program for approval by EPA. These 
proposed changes do not interfere with the maintenance demonstration 
for this SIP and merely reflect the changes in the program as a result 
of technology upgrades in automobiles. After a review of these 
regulatory provisions, EPA proposes to approve the changes to WAC 173-
422 and to incorporate them into the federally enforceable SIP.
    Additionally, EPA is proposing to approve the new industrial growth 
allowances that have been used in the maintenance demonstration for 
this submission and is relying on the current Southwest Clean Air 
Agency SIP approved rules, 400-030, 400-101, 400-111 and 400-113 (62 FR 
27204; Effective 6/18/97) to support this maintenance plan 
demonstration.

[[Page 24544]]

1-Hour NAAQS Obligations That No Longer Apply in This Area
    Two additional amendments to Ecology's existing 1-hour maintenance 
plan have also been submitted for approval pursuant to 40 CFR 
51.905(e)(1). In this submission, Ecology has submitted a maintenance 
SIP for the 8 hour NAAQS for this area that meets the requirements of 
CAA section 110(l) and section 193 of the CAA. Therefore, EPA proposes 
to approve these two amendments to the existing 1-hour ozone 
maintenance plan:
    1. Removal of the obligation to submit a maintenance plan for the 
1-hour NAAQS eight years after approval of the initial 1-hour 
maintenance plan; and
    2. Removal of the State's obligation to implement contingency 
measures upon a violation of the 1-hour NAAQS.

Washington's SIP submittal meets the CAA requirements for SIP 
submittals with respect to these two changes.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance 
plan, including its correlating implementing regulations, for 
Vancouver, Washington, submitted on January 17, 2007, as revisions to 
the federally enforceable Washington SIP. EPA is proposing to approve 
the maintenance plan and supporting rules for the Vancouver portion of 
the Portland-Vancouver AQMA because they meet the requirements of 
section 110(a)(1) and section 110(l) of the CAA. EPA is soliciting 
public comments on this proposed approval. EPA will consider these 
comments and address them before taking final action.

IV. Washington Notice Provision

    Washington's Regulatory Reform Act of 1995, codified at Chapter 
43.05 Revised Code of Washington (RCW), precludes ``regulatory 
agencies'', as defined in RCW 43.05.010, from assessing civil penalties 
under certain circumstances. EPA has determined that Chapter 43.05 of 
the RCW, often referred to as ``House Bill 1010,'' conflicts with the 
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) and (C) and 40 CFR 51.230(b) 
and (e). Based on this determination, Ecology has determined that 
Chapter 43.05 RCW does not apply to the requirements of Chapter 173-422 
WAC. See 66 FR 35115, 35120 (July 3, 2001). The restriction on the 
issuance of civil penalties in Chapter 43.05 RCW does not apply to 
local air pollution control authorities in Washington because local air 
pollution control authorities are not ``regulatory agencies'' within 
the meaning of that statute. See 66 FR 35115, 35120 (July 3, 2001).
    In addition, EPA is relying on the State's interpretation of 
another technical assistance law, RCW 43.21A.085 and .087, to conclude 
that the law does not impinge on the State's authority to administer 
Federal Clean Air Act programs. The Washington Attorney Generals' 
Office has concluded that RCW 43.21A.085 and .087 do not conflict with 
Federal authorization requirements because these provisions implement a 
discretionary program. EPA understands from the State's interpretation 
that technical assistance visits conducted by the State will not be 
conducted under the authority of RCW 43.21A.085 and .087. See 66 FR 16, 
20 (January 2, 2001); 59 FR 42552, 42555 (August 18, 1994).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and 
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting 
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond 
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     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);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, 
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: March 3, 2010.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2010-10644 Filed 5-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P