[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 70 (Thursday, April 11, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21547-21555]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08394]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[Docket : EPA-R10-OAR-2012-0193; FRL 9738-5]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Oregon: Eugene-Springfield PM10 Nonattainment Area Limited Maintenance 
Plan and Redesignation Request

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve the Limited 
Maintenance Plan (LMP) submitted by the State of Oregon on January 13, 
2012, for the Eugene-Springfield nonattainment area (Eugene-Springfield 
NAA) and the State's request to redesignate the area to attainment for 
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate 
matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 
micrometers (PM10). EPA is approving the State's request 
because it meets Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements for redesignation. 
EPA is approving the State's SIP revision as a direct final rule 
without prior proposal because EPA views this as a noncontroversial SIP 
revision and anticipates no adverse comments.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective June 10, 2013, without 
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comments by May 13, 2013. 
If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal 
of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public 
that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2012-0193, by any of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
     Email: [email protected]
     Mail: Kristin Hall, EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste 
and Toxics (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle WA, 98101
     Hand Delivery/Courier: EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, 
Suite 900, Seattle WA, 98101. Attention: Kristin Hall, 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-
2012-0193. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
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 email. The 
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which 
means EPA will not know your

[[Page 21548]]

identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without 
going through www.regulations.gov your email 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, 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 EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, 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 docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. 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. 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 WA, 98101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristin Hall at telephone number: 
(206) 553-6357, email address: [email protected], or the above EPA, 
Region 10 address.

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

Table of Contents

I. This Action
II. Background
    A. PM10 NAAQS
    B. Eugene-Springfield NAA and Planning Background
III. Public and Stakeholder Involvement in Rulemaking Process
IV. Requirements for Redesignation
    A. CAA Requirements for Redesignation of Nonattainment Areas
    B. The LMP Option for PM10 Nonattainment Areas
    C. Conformity Under the LMP Option
V. Review of the Oregon Submittal Addressing the Requirements for 
Redesignation and LMPs
    A. Has the Eugene-Springfield NAA attained the applicable NAAQS?
    B. Does the Eugene-Springfield NAA have a fully approved SIP 
under section 110(k) of the CAA?
    C. Has the State met all applicable requirements under section 
110 and part D of the CAA?
    D. Has the State demonstrated that the Air Quality Improvement 
is due to permanent and enforceable reductions?
    E. Does the area have a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant 
to section 175A of the CAA?
    F. Has the State demonstrated that the Eugene-Springfield NAA 
qualifies for the LMP Option?
    G. Does the State have an approved Attainment Emissions 
Inventory which can be used to demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS?
    H. Does the LMP include an assurance of continued operation of 
an appropriate EPA-approved Air Quality Monitoring Network, in 
accordance with 40 CFR part 58?
    I. Does the plan meet the Clean Air Act requirements for 
contingency provisions?
    J. Has the State met conformity requirements?
VI. Revisions to SIP Rules to Reflect Redesignation
VII. Final Action
VIII. Oregon Notice Provision
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. This Action

    EPA is taking direct final action to approve the LMP submitted by 
the State of Oregon on January 13, 2012, for the Eugene-Springfield 
nonattainment area (Eugene-Springfield NAA) and concurrently to 
redesignate the area to attainment for the PM10 NAAQS. EPA 
has reviewed air quality data for the area and determined that the 
Eugene-Springfield NAA attained the PM10 NAAQS by the 
required attainment date, and that monitoring data continue to show 
attainment. Also in this action, EPA is approving revisions to the 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) to reflect the redesignation.

II. Background

A. PM10 NAAQS

    ``Particulate matter,'' also known as particle pollution or PM, is 
a complex mixture of extremely small particles and liquid droplets. The 
size of particles is directly linked to their potential for causing 
health problems. EPA is concerned about particles that are 10 
micrometers in diameter or smaller because those are the particles that 
generally pass through the throat and nose and enter the lungs. Once 
inhaled, these particles can affect the heart and lungs and cause 
serious adverse health effects. People with heart or lung diseases, 
children and older adults are the most likely to be affected by 
particle pollution exposure. However, even healthy individuals may 
experience temporary symptoms from exposure to elevated levels of 
particle pollution.
    On July 1, 1987, EPA promulgated a NAAQS for PM10 (52 FR 
24634). EPA established a 24-hour standard of 150 [mu]g/m\3\ and an 
annual standard of 50 [mu]g/m\3\, expressed as an annual arithmetic 
mean. EPA also promulgated secondary PM10 standards that 
were identical to the primary standards. In a rulemaking action dated 
October 17, 2006, EPA retained the 24-hour PM10 standard but 
revoked the annual PM10 standard (71 FR 61144, effective 
December 18, 2006).

B. Eugene-Springfield NAA and Planning Background

    On August 7, 1987, EPA designated the Eugene-Springfield area as a 
PM10 nonattainment area due to measured violations of the 
24-hour PM10 standard (52 FR 29383). The notice announcing 
the designation, upon enactment of the 1990 CAA Amendments, was 
published on March 15, 1991, 56 FR 11101. On November 6, 1991, the 
Eugene-Springfield NAA was subsequently classified as moderate under 
sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) of the CAA (56 FR 56694).
    After the Eugene-Springfield NAA was designated nonattainment for 
PM10, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) 
and Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA) worked with the 
communities of Eugene and Springfield to develop a plan to bring the 
area into attainment no later than December 31, 1994. The State 
submitted the plan to EPA on November 15, 1991, as a moderate 
PM10 SIP under section 189(a) of the CAA. The primary 
control measure submitted by the State was a comprehensive wood burning 
curtailment program. EPA took final action to approve the State's 
moderate PM10 SIP on August 24, 1994, 59 FR 43483.
    On January 13, 2012, the State submitted to EPA for approval the 
Eugene-Springfield PM10 LMP and requested that EPA 
redesignate the Eugene-Springfield NAA to attainment for the 
PM10 NAAQS. Oregon also submitted revisions to rules in the 
State's Federally-approved SIP to reflect the redesignation.

III. Public and Stakeholder Involvement in Rulemaking Process

    Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA requires that each SIP revision be 
adopted after reasonable notice and public hearing. This must occur 
prior to the revision being submitted by a State to EPA. The State of 
Oregon provided notice and an opportunity for public comment from 
August 26, 2011 through September 26, 2011. A notice of public hearing 
was

[[Page 21549]]

published in The Eugene Register-Guard on August 26, 2011 and the 
Oregon Bulletin, Volume 50, No. 9 on September 1, 2011. The State held 
a public hearing on September 27, 2011, in Springfield, Oregon. This 
SIP revision became State effective on December 21, 2011, and was 
submitted by the Governor's designee to the EPA on January 13, 2012. 
EPA has evaluated the State's submittal and determined that the State 
met the requirements for reasonable notice and public hearing under 
section 110(a)(2) of the CAA.

IV. Requirements for Redesignation

A. CAA Requirements for Redesignation of Nonattainment Area

    Nonattainment areas can be redesignated to attainment after the 
area has measured air quality data showing it has attained the NAAQS 
and when certain planning requirements are met. Section 107(d)(3)(E) of 
the CAA, and the General Preamble to Title I provide the criteria for 
redesignation (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992). These criteria are further 
clarified in a policy and guidance memorandum from John Calcagni, 
Director, Air Quality Management Division, EPA Office of Air Quality 
Planning and Standards dated September 4, 1992, ``Procedures for 
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment'' (Calcagni 
memo). The criteria for redesignation are:
    1. The Administrator has determined that the area has attained the 
applicable NAAQS;
    2. The Administrator has fully approved the applicable SIP for the 
area under section 110(k) of the CAA;
    3. The state containing the area has met all requirements 
applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the CAA;
    4. The Administrator has determined that the improvement in air 
quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions; 
and
    5. The Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan for the 
area as meeting the requirements of section 175A of the CAA.

B. The LMP Option for PM10 Nonattainment Areas

    On August 9, 2001, EPA issued guidance on streamlined maintenance 
plan provisions for certain moderate PM10 nonattainment 
areas seeking redesignation to attainment (Memo from Lydia Wegman, 
Director, Air Quality Standards and Strategies Division, entitled 
``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate PM10 
Nonattainment Areas'' (LMP Option memo)). The LMP Option memo contains 
a statistical demonstration that areas meeting certain air quality 
criteria will, with a high degree of probability, maintain the standard 
10 years into the future. Thus, EPA has already provided the 
maintenance demonstration for areas meeting the criteria outlined in 
the LMP Option memo. It follows that future year emission inventories 
for these areas, and some of the standard analyses to determine 
transportation conformity with the SIP are no longer necessary.
    To qualify for the LMP Option, the area should have attained the 
PM10 NAAQS and, based upon the most recent 5 years of air 
quality data at all monitors in the area, the 24-hour design value 
should be at or below 98 [mu]g/m\3\. If an area cannot meet this test, 
it may still be able to qualify for the LMP Option if the average 
design value (ADV) for the site is less than the site-specific critical 
design value (CDV). In addition, the area should expect only limited 
growth in on-road motor vehicle PM10 emissions (including 
fugitive dust) and should have passed a motor vehicle regional 
emissions analysis test. The LMP Option memo also identifies core 
provisions that must be included the LMP. These provisions include an 
attainment year emissions inventory, assurance of continued operation 
of an EPA-approved air quality monitoring network, and contingency 
provisions.

C. Conformity Under the LMP Option

    The transportation conformity rule and the general conformity rule 
(40 CFR parts 51 and 93) apply to nonattainment areas and maintenance 
areas covered by an approved maintenance plan. Under either conformity 
rule, an acceptable method of demonstrating that a Federal action 
conforms to the applicable SIP is to demonstrate that expected 
emissions from the planned action are consistent with the emissions 
budget for the area.
    While EPA's LMP Option does not exempt an area from the need to 
affirm conformity, it explains that the area may demonstrate conformity 
without submitting an emissions budget. Under the LMP Option, emissions 
budgets are treated as essentially not constraining for the length of 
the maintenance period because it is unreasonable to expect that the 
qualifying areas would experience so much growth in that period that a 
violation of the PM10 NAAQS would result. For transportation 
conformity purposes, EPA would conclude that emissions in these areas 
need not be capped for the maintenance period and therefore a regional 
emissions analysis would not be required. Similarly, Federal actions 
subject to the general conformity rule could be considered to satisfy 
the ``budget test'' specified in 40 CFR 93.158 (a)(5)(i)(A) for the 
same reasons that the budgets are essentially considered to be 
unlimited.

V. Review of the Oregon Submittal Addressing the Requirements for 
Redesignation and LMPs

A. Has the Eugene-Springfield NAA Attained the Applicable NAAQS?

    States must demonstrate that an area has attained the 
PM10 NAAQS through analysis of ambient air quality data from 
an ambient air monitoring network representing peak PM10 
concentrations. The data should be quality-assured and stored in the 
EPA Air Quality System database. EPA has reviewed air quality data for 
the area and has determined that the Eugene-Springfield NAA attained 
the PM10 NAAQS \1\ by the applicable attainment date of 
December 31, 1994, and continues to attain the PM10 NAAQS. 
EPA's analysis is described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Because the annual PM10 standard was revoked 
effective December 18, 2006, see 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006), 
this notice discusses only attainment of the 24-hour PM10 
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 24-hour PM10 NAAQS is 150 [mu]g/m\3\. An area has 
attained this 24-hour standard when the average number of expected 
exceedances per year is less than or equal to one, when averaged over a 
three-year period (40 CFR 50.6). To make this determination, three 
consecutive years of complete ambient air quality data must be 
collected in accordance with Federal requirements (40 CFR part 58 
including appendices).
    A comprehensive air quality monitoring plan, meeting the 
requirements of 40 CFR part 58, was submitted by Oregon to EPA on 
December 27, 1979 (40 CFR 52.1970), and approved by EPA on March 4, 
1981 (46 FR 15136). This monitoring plan has been subsequently updated, 
with the most recent submittal dated July 1, 2011, and approved by EPA 
on January 6, 2012 (Oregon Air Monitoring Plan Approval Letter, dated 
January 6, 2012). The monitoring plan describes the PM10 
monitoring network throughout the State, which includes site 
41-039-0058-81102-1 (commonly referred to as the ``Highway 99 
Site'' or ``Key Bank Site'' (Highway 99/Key Bank Site)) in the Eugene-
Springfield area. In the submittal, LRAPA states that the Highway 99/
Key Bank Site historically measures the highest PM10 
concentrations, and that a review of data from 2000 through 2008 shows 
that PM10 concentrations recorded at this site remain well 
below the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. In addition, LRAPA states that 
the Highway 99/Key Bank Site is

[[Page 21550]]

operated in compliance with EPA monitoring guidelines set forth in 40 
CFR part 58, Ambient Air Quality Surveillance.
    Data from the Highway 99/Key Bank Site has been quality assured by 
ODEQ and submitted to EPA's Air Quality System (AQS), accessible 
through EPA's AirData Web site at http://www.epa.gov/airdata/. Based on 
EPA's review of data in AQS, there have been no exceedances of the 24-
hour PM10 NAAQS in the Eugene-Springfield NAA since 1987. 
Accordingly, during the three-year period ending with the December 31, 
1994, attainment date, no exceedances occurred in the Eugene-
Springfield NAA, and the expected exceedance rate for the Eugene-
Springfield NAA for 1992-1994 is 0. Therefore, Eugene-Springfield NAA 
attained the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS by the required attainment 
date of December 31, 1994 (PM10 Design Value Report for Lane 
County, Oregon, dated April 30, 2012). EPA has also reviewed more 
recent ambient air quality data for the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS, 
and has determined that the Eugene-Springfield area continues to attain 
the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. A summary of EPA's data review and 
analysis can be found in the docket for this action (Eugene-Springfield 
PM10 NAAQS and LMP Determination Memo, dated July 23, 2012).

B. Does the Eugene-Springfield NAA have a fully approved SIP under 
section 110(k) of the CAA?

    In order to qualify for redesignation, the SIP for the area must be 
fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA, and must satisfy all 
requirements that apply to the area. As discussed in Section II. B. 
above, Oregon submitted a moderate PM10 SIP for the Eugene-
Springfield NAA on November 15, 1991. EPA took final action to fully 
approve the State's moderate PM10 SIP on August 24, 1994 (59 
FR 43483), as satisfying all requirements that apply to the area. Thus 
the area has a fully approved nonattainment area SIP under section 
110(k) of CAA.

C. Has the State met all applicable requirements under Section 110 and 
Part D of the CAA?

    Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA requires that a state containing a 
nonattainment area must meet all applicable requirements under section 
110 and Part D of the CAA for an area to be redesignated to attainment. 
EPA interprets this to mean that the state must meet all requirements 
that applied to the area prior to, and at the time of, the submission 
of a complete redesignation request. The following is a summary of how 
Oregon meets these requirements.
1. Clean Air Act Section 110 Requirements
    Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA contains general requirements for 
nonattainment plans. These requirements include, but are not limited 
to, submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after 
reasonable notice and public hearing; provisions for establishment and 
operation of appropriate apparatus, methods, systems and procedures 
necessary to monitor ambient air quality; implementation of a permit 
program; provisions for Part C--Prevention of Significant Deterioration 
(PSD) and Part D--New Source Review (NSR) permit programs; criteria for 
stationary source emission control measures, monitoring and reporting, 
provisions for modeling; and provisions for public and local agency 
participation. See the General Preamble for further explanation of 
these requirements (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992). For purposes of 
redesignation of the Eugene-Springfield PM10 NAA, EPA has 
reviewed the Oregon SIP and finds that the State has satisfied all 
applicable requirements under CAA section 110(a)(2) for the 
PM10 NAAQS. EPA's approval of Oregon's SIP for attainment 
and maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS under CAA section 110 can 
be found at 40 CFR 52.1972.
2. Part D Requirements
    Part D of the CAA contains general requirements applicable to all 
areas designated nonattainment. The general requirements are followed 
by a series of subparts specific to each pollutant. All PM10 
nonattainment areas must meet the general provisions of Subpart 1 and 
the specific PM10 provisions in Subpart 4, ``Additional 
Provisions for Particulate Matter Nonattainment Areas.'' The following 
paragraphs discuss these requirements as they apply to the Eugene-
Springfield NAA.
(2)(a) Part D, section 172(c)(2)--Reasonable Further Progress
    Section 172(c) contains general requirements for nonattainment area 
plans. A thorough discussion of these requirements may be found in the 
General Preamble (57 FR 13538, April 16, 1992). CAA section 172(c)(2) 
requires nonattainment plans to provide for reasonable further progress 
(RFP). Section 171(1) of the CAA defines RFP as ``such annual 
incremental reductions in emissions of the relevant air pollutant as 
are required by this part (part D of title I) or may reasonably be 
required by the Administrator for the purpose of ensuring attainment of 
the applicable national ambient air quality standard by the applicable 
date.'' The requirements for reasonable further progress, 
identification of certain emissions increases and other measures needed 
for attainment were satisfied with the approved Eugene-Springfield 
PM10 SIP (59 FR 43483). In this action, EPA has determined 
that the Eugene-Springfield NAA attained the 24-hour PM10 
NAAQS by the December 31, 1994, attainment date. Therefore, EPA 
believes no further showing of RFP or quantitative milestones is 
necessary.
(2)(b) Part D, section 172(c)(3)--Emissions Inventory
    Section 172(c)(3) of CAA requires a comprehensive, accurate, 
current inventory of actual emissions from all sources in the Eugene-
Springfield PM10 NAA. Oregon included an emissions inventory 
for the Eugene-Springfield area for the year 2008 in the submittal. The 
inventory estimated annual and winter day emissions from point sources, 
residential wood combustion, road dust, and motor vehicle exhaust, 
brake and tire wear. The emissions inventory includes an inventory of 
point sources of PM10 greater than or equal to 10 tons/year 
to estimate emissions for 2008. Residential wood combustion emission 
estimates were developed from a 2009 survey of households in the 
Eugene-Springfield area, included in the State's submittal. Emissions 
estimates for road dust and motor vehicle exhaust, brake wear, and tire 
wear were developed using EPA-approved methods, and vehicle miles 
traveled estimates were obtained from the local metropolitan planning 
organization, Lane Council of Governments. EPA reviewed the inventory 
and associated calculations submitted by Oregon and believes that the 
2008 Eugene-Springfield emissions inventory is current, accurate and 
comprehensive and therefore meets the requirements of section 172(c)(3) 
of the CAA.
(2)(c) Part D, section 172(c)(5)--New Source Review (NSR)
    The CAA requires all nonattainment areas to meet several 
requirements regarding NSR. The State must have an approved major NSR 
program that meets the requirements of section 172(c)(5). EPA evaluated 
and initially approved the Oregon major NSR program on August 13, 1982 
(47 FR 35191), as being equivalent or more stringent than EPA's 
regulations on a program basis. EPA subsequently approved revisions to 
Oregon's major NSR program on January 22, 2003 (68 FR 2891), and most 
recently approved revisions to the major

[[Page 21551]]

NSR rules on December 27, 2011 (76 FR 80747). In the Eugene-Springfield 
NAA, the requirements of the Part D NSR program will be replaced by the 
State's Maintenance Area NSR requirements upon the effective date of 
redesignation.
(2)(d) Part D, section 172(c)(7)--Compliance With CAA section 
110(a)(2): Air Quality Monitoring Requirements
    Once an area is redesignated, the state must continue to operate an 
appropriate air monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 to 
verify attainment status of the area. Oregon submitted a comprehensive 
air quality monitoring plan, meeting the requirements of 40 CFR part 58 
to EPA on December 27, 1979 (40 CFR 52.1970), and EPA approved the plan 
on March 4, 1981 (46 FR 15136). This monitoring plan has been 
subsequently updated, with the most recent submittal dated July 1, 
2011, and approved by EPA on January 6, 2012 (Oregon Air Monitoring 
Plan Approval Letter, dated January 6, 2012). As stated in the 
submittal, ODEQ and LRAPA operate a PM10 monitoring network 
which includes site  41-039-0058-81102-1 (Highway 99/Key Bank 
Site) in the Eugene-Springfield area. The Highway 99/Key Bank Site is 
operated in compliance with EPA monitoring guidelines set forth in 40 
CFR part 58, Ambient Air Quality Surveillance. In addition, the 
submittal provides a commitment to continued operation of the 
PM10 monitoring network and the Highway 99/Key Bank Site in 
the Eugene-Springfield area.
(2)(e) Part D, section 172(c)(9)--Contingency Measures
    The CAA requires that contingency measures take effect if an area 
fails to meet RFP requirements or fails to attain the NAAQS by the 
applicable attainment date. Since, as part of this action, EPA has 
determined the Eugene-Springfield NAA attained the PM10 
NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of December 31, 1994, 
contingency measures are no longer required under section 172(c)(9) of 
the CAA. However, contingency provisions are required for maintenance 
plans under Section 175A. Please see section V. I. for a description of 
Oregon's maintenance plan contingency provisions.
(2)(f) Part D, section 189(a), (c) and (e)--Additional Provisions for 
Particulate Matter Nonattainment Areas
    Section 189(a), (c) and (e) requirements apply to moderate 
PM10 nonattainment areas. Any of these requirements which 
were applicable and due prior to the submission of the redesignation 
request must be fully approved into the SIP before redesignating the 
area to attainment. With respect to the Eugene-Springfield NAA, these 
requirements include:
    (a) Provisions to assure that reasonably available control measures 
were implemented by December 10, 1993 (section 189(a)(1)(C));
    (b) either a demonstration that the plan provided for attainment as 
expeditiously as practicable, but not later than December 31, 1994, or 
a demonstration that attainment by that date was impracticable (section 
189(a)(1)(B));
    (c) quantitative milestones which were achieved every 3 years and 
which demonstrate RFP toward attainment by December 31, 1994 (section 
189(c)(1)); and
    (d) provisions to assure that the control requirements applicable 
to major stationary sources of PM10 also apply to major 
stationary sources of PM10 precursors except where the 
Administrator determined that such sources do not contribute 
significantly to PM10 levels which exceed the NAAQS in the 
area (section 189(e)).
    Provisions for reasonably available control measures, attainment 
demonstration, and RFP milestones were fully approved into the SIP upon 
EPA approval of the moderate PM10 SIP for the Eugene-
Springfield NAA on August 24, 1994 (59 FR 43483). EPA most recently 
approved revisions to Oregon's major NSR rules on December 27, 2011 (76 
FR 80747). Oregon's major NSR rules include control requirements that 
apply to major stationary sources of PM10 and 
PM10 precursors in nonattainment areas, maintenance areas, 
and attainment/unclassifiable areas. For the Eugene-Springfield area, 
EPA determined that major stationary sources do not contribute 
significantly to PM10 levels in excess of the NAAQS. 
Therefore, in EPA's action to approve the moderate PM10 SIP 
for Eugene-Springfield, EPA granted the exclusion from control 
requirements authorized under section 189(e) for major stationary 
sources of PM10 precursors (59 FR 43483).

D. Has the State demonstrated that the Air Quality Improvement is due 
to permanent and enforceable reductions?

    Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA provides that a nonattainment 
area may not be redesignated unless EPA determines that the improvement 
in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in 
emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP. Therefore, a state 
must be able to reasonably attribute the improvement in air quality to 
permanent and enforceable emission reductions by demonstrating that air 
quality improvements are the result of actual enforceable emission 
reductions. This showing should consider emission rates, production 
capacities, and other related information. The analysis should assume 
that sources are operating at permitted levels (or historic peak 
levels) unless evidence is presented that such an assumption is 
unrealistic.
    Permanent and enforceable control measures in the Eugene-
Springfield moderate PM10 SIP include a mandatory home wood 
heating curtailment program, and existing controls on local industrial 
sources. These controls were approved by EPA into the Eugene-
Springfield PM10 SIP, and they are both permanent and 
Federally enforceable (59 FR 43483). As described in the submittal, the 
primary control measure relied on is the mandatory home wood heating 
curtailment program which was fully implemented on November 1, 1991. 
The program consists of a daily multi-stage advisory issued each winter 
from November through the end of February. The daily advisory, which is 
based upon forecast meteorology and air quality, provides a color-coded 
stage based on air quality conditions. During good air quality 
conditions, a Green advisory allowing residential wood combustion is 
issued. If air quality conditions are deteriorating, a Yellow advisory 
requesting voluntary curtailment of residential wood burning is issued. 
If PM10 levels are forecast to be near or exceeding the 
standard, a Red advisory prohibiting residential wood burning is issued 
(with an exemption for economic need). Each of the three jurisdictions 
in the Eugene-Springfield NAA--Lane County, the City of Eugene, and the 
City of Springfield--enacted ordinances that prohibit the use of solid-
fuel space heating devices based on the advisories. The enforcement of 
these ordinances has been delegated to LRAPA.
    EPA believes that areas that qualify for the LMP Option will meet 
the NAAQS, even under worst case meteorological conditions. Therefore, 
under the LMP Option, the maintenance demonstration is presumed to be 
satisfied if an area meets the qualifying criteria. A description of 
the LMP qualifying criteria and how the Eugene-Springfield area meets 
these criteria is provided below. By qualifying for the LMP Option, 
Oregon presumptively demonstrates that the air quality improvements in 
the Eugene-Springfield area are the result of permanent emission 
reductions and not a result of either economic trends or meteorology.

[[Page 21552]]

E. Does the area have a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant to 
Section 175A of the CAA?

    In this action, we are approving the LMP in accordance with the 
principles outlined in the LMP Option memo. Upon the effective date of 
this action, the area will have a fully approved maintenance plan.

F. Has the state demonstrated that the Eugene-Springfield NAA Qualifies 
for the LMP Option?

    The LMP Option memo outlines the requirements for an area to 
qualify for the LMP Option. First, the area should be attaining the 
NAAQS. In this action, EPA has determined that the Eugene-Springfield 
NAA attained the PM10 NAAQS by the required attainment date, 
and continues to be in attainment with the PM10 NAAQS. 
Please see section V. A. for a detailed discussion.
    Second, the average design value (ADV) for the past 5 years of 
monitoring data must be at or below the critical design value (CDV). 
The CDV is a margin of safety value and is the value at which an area 
has been determined to have a 1 in 10 probability of exceeding the 
NAAQS. The LMP Option memo provides two methods for review of 
monitoring data for the purpose of qualifying for the LMP Option. The 
first method is a comparison of a site's ADV with the CDV of 98 
[micro]g/m\3\ for the 24 hour PM10 NAAQS and 40 [micro]g/
m\3\ for the annual PM10 NAAQS. A second method that applies 
to the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS is the calculation of a site-
specific CDV and a comparison of the site-specific CDV with the ADV for 
the past 5 years of monitoring data. The State's submittal provides a 
comparison of 5-year ADVs compared to the 24-hour and annual CDVs, as 
described in the first method for review of monitoring data to qualify 
for the LMP Option. Oregon's analysis demonstrates that the Eugene-
Springfield NAA meets the LMP design value criteria for the period 
2004-2008. Using EPA-recommended methodology, Oregon calculated the 24-
hour ADV for the area to be 66 [micro]g/m\3\, which is well below the 
CDV of 98 [micro]g/m\3\. Oregon calculated the annual ADV to be 17 
[micro]g/m \3\, which is well below the CDV of 40 [micro]g/m\3\. EPA 
has reviewed the Oregon calculations and concurs with the State's 
findings. EPA also calculated average design values using more recent 
data and found that the Eugene-Springfield area meets the LMP design 
value criteria for the period 2007-2011. EPA's design value 
calculations and analysis can be found in the docket for this action 
(Eugene-Springfield PM10 NAAQS and LMP Determination Memo, 
dated July 23, 2012). Therefore, EPA finds that Eugene-Springfield 
meets the design value criteria outlined in the LMP Option memo.
    Third, the area must meet the motor vehicle regional emissions 
analysis test in attachment B of the LMP Option memo. Using the 
methodology outlined in attachment B, Oregon submitted an analysis of 
whether increased emissions from on-road mobile sources would increase 
PM10 concentrations in the Eugene-Springfield NAA to levels 
that would threaten the assumption of maintenance that underlies the 
LMP policy. Based on monitoring data for the period 2004-2008, Oregon 
has determined that the Eugene-Springfield NAA passes the motor vehicle 
regional emissions analysis test. EPA has reviewed the calculations in 
the State's submittal and concurs with this conclusion.
    As described above, the Eugene-Springfield NAA meets the 
qualification criteria set forth in the LMP Option memo and therefore 
qualifies for the LMP Option. The LMP Option memo also indicates that 
once a state selects the LMP Option and it is in effect, the state will 
be expected to determine, on an annual basis, that the LMP criteria are 
still being met. If the state determines that the LMP criteria are not 
being met, it should take action to reduce PM10 
concentrations enough to requalify for the LMP Option. One possible 
approach the state could take is to implement contingency provisions. 
Please see Section V. I. for a description of contingency provisions 
submitted as part of the State's submittal.
    As a result of the above analysis, EPA is approving the LMP for the 
Eugene-Springfield area and the State's request to redesignate the 
Eugene-Springfield NAA to attainment for PM10.

G. Does the State have an approved attainment emissions inventory which 
can be used to demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS?

    Pursuant to the LMP Option memo, the state's approved attainment 
plan should include an emissions inventory which can be used to 
demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS. The inventory should represent 
emissions during the same five-year period associated with air quality 
data used to determine whether the area meets the applicability 
requirements of the LMP Option. The state should review its inventory 
every three years to ensure emissions growth is incorporated in the 
inventory if necessary.
    Oregon's submittal includes an emissions inventory for the year 
2008. After reviewing the 2008 emissions inventory and determining that 
it is current, accurate and complete, as well as reviewing monitoring 
data for the years 2004-2008, EPA has determined that the 2008 
emissions inventory is representative of the attainment year inventory 
since the NAAQS was not violated during 2008. In addition, the year 
2008 is representative of the level of emissions during the time period 
used to calculate the average design value since 2008 is one of the 
years during the five year period used to calculate the design value 
(2004-2008). The submittal meets EPA guidance, as described above, for 
purposes of an attainment emissions inventory.

H. Does the LMP include an assurance of continued operation of an 
appropriate EPA-approved air quality monitoring network, in accordance 
with 40 CFR part 58?

    PM10 monitoring was established in the Eugene-
Springfield area in 1984. LRAPA currently maintains a PM10 
monitoring network which includes the Highway 99/Key Bank Site within 
the Eugene-Springfield area. Oregon and LRAPA's monitoring network was 
developed and has been maintained in accordance with Federal siting and 
design criteria in 40 CFR part 58 and in consultation with EPA Region 
10. EPA most recently approved Oregon's air monitoring plan, on January 
6, 2012 (Oregon Air Monitoring Plan Approval Letter, dated January 6, 
2012). In the submittal, LRAPA states that it will continue to monitor 
for PM10 in the Eugene-Springfield NAA.

I. Does the plan meet the clean air act requirements for contingency 
provisions?

    CAA section 175A states that a maintenance plan must include 
contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct any violation 
of the NAAQS which may occur after redesignation of the area to 
attainment. As explained in the LMP Option memo and Calcagni memo, 
these contingency provisions are considered to be an enforceable part 
of the SIP. The plan should clearly identify the provisions to be 
adopted, a schedule and procedures for adoption and implementation, and 
a specific time limit for action by the state. The maintenance plan 
should identify the events that would ``trigger'' the adoption and 
implementation of a contingency provision, the contingency provision 
that would be adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the 
time frame by which the state would adopt and implement the provision. 
The LMP Option memo and Calcagni memo state that EPA will

[[Page 21553]]

review what constitutes a contingency plan on a case-by-case basis. At 
a minimum, it must require that the State will implement all measures 
contained in the Part D nonattainment plan for the area prior to 
redesignation.
    In the submittal, ODEQ and LRAPA have included maintenance plan 
contingency provisions to ensure the area continues to meet the 
PM10 NAAQS. Specifically, ODEQ and LRAPA submitted revised 
local home wood heating curtailment program requirements for the three 
jurisdictions in the area, specifically, Eugene, Springfield and Lane 
County. The local ordinances implementing the program have been 
strengthened to include a requirement prohibiting solid fuel space 
heating devices from burning plastics, petroleum by-products, petroleum 
treated materials, rubber products, animal remains, animal or vegetable 
matter resulting from the handling, preparation, cooking or service of 
food, or of any other material which normally emits dense smoke or 
noxious odors. In addition, during a Green or Yellow advisory, the 
discharge of emissions from a solid fuel space heating device is now 
limited to a maximum opacity of 40%, with a 10 minute exemption during 
every 4-hour period for the building of a new fire. These revised 
ordinances have been adopted by the local jurisdictions and are 
currently being implemented in the Eugene-Springfield area. The 
ordinances each specify ``triggers'' for implementing provisions, based 
on forecasted PM10 levels. In addition to the local home 
wood heating curtailment program, the LMP references the Oregon ``Heat 
Smart'' law. This law has been adopted state-wide and requires the 
removal and decommissioning of any uncertified woodstove or fireplace 
insert from a home when it is sold.
    The contingency provisions submitted by ODEQ and LRAPA have been 
adopted by the local jurisdictions, are currently being implemented in 
the Eugene-Springfield area, and contain triggers based on forecasted 
PM10 levels for implementing specific provisions to reduce 
particulate matter emissions from home wood heating. Therefore, EPA 
believes the contingency provisions are adequate to meet CAA Section 
175A requirements.

J. Has the State met conformity requirements?

1. Transportation Conformity
    Under the LMP Option, emissions budgets are treated as essentially 
not constraining for the maintenance period because it is unreasonable 
to expect that qualifying areas would experience so much growth in that 
period that a NAAQS violation would result. While areas with 
maintenance plans approved under the LMP Option are not subject to the 
budget test, the areas remain subject to other transportation 
conformity requirements of 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. Thus, the 
metropolitan planning organization (MPO) in the area or the state must 
document and ensure that:
    a. Transportation plans and projects provide for timely 
implementation of SIP transportation control measures (TCMs) in 
accordance with 40 CFR 93.113;
    b. Transportation plans and projects comply with the fiscal 
constraint element per 40 CFR 93.108;
    c. The MPO's interagency consultation procedures meet applicable 
requirements of 40 CFR 93.105;
    d. Conformity of transportation plans is determined no less 
frequently than every three years, and conformity of plan amendments 
and transportation projects is demonstrated in accordance with the 
timing requirements specified in 40 CFR 93.104;
    e. The latest planning assumptions and emissions model are used as 
set forth in 40 CFR 93.110 and 40 CFR 93.111;
    f. Projects do not cause or contribute to any new localized carbon 
monoxide or particulate matter violations, in accordance with 
procedures specified in 40 CFR 93.123; and
    g. Project sponsors and/or operators provide written commitments as 
specified in 40 CFR 93.125.
    In a letter to LRAPA dated October 3, 1994, EPA determined that the 
Eugene-Springfield area met the criteria to be exempted from regional 
emissions analysis for PM10 (Conformity Letter, dated 
October 3, 1994). However, project level conformity requirements would 
continue to apply to the area. With EPA's approval of the LMP, the area 
continues to be exempt from performing a regional emissions analysis, 
but must meet project-level conformity analyses as well as the 
transportation conformity criteria mentioned above.
2. General Conformity
    For Federal actions which are required to address the specific 
requirements of the general conformity rule, one set of requirements 
applies particularly to ensuring that emissions from the action will 
not cause or contribute to new violations of the NAAQS, exacerbate 
current violations, or delay timely attainment. One way that this 
requirement can be met is to demonstrate that ``the total of direct and 
indirect emissions from the action (or portion thereof) is determined 
and documented by the State agency primarily responsible for the 
applicable SIP to result in a level of emissions which, together with 
all other emissions in the nonattainment area, would not exceed the 
emissions budgets specified in the applicable SIP'' (40 CFR 
93.158(a)(5)(i)(A)).
    The decision about whether to include specific allocations of 
allowable emissions increases to sources is one made by the state and 
local air quality agencies. These emissions budgets are different than 
those used in transportation conformity. Emissions budgets in 
transportation conformity are required to limit and restrain emissions. 
Emissions budgets in general conformity allow increases in emissions up 
to specified levels. Oregon has not chosen to include specific 
emissions allocations for Federal projects that would be subject to the 
provisions of general conformity.

VI. Revisions to SIP Rules To Reflect Redesignation

    In the submittal, Oregon included revisions to Oregon 
Administrative Rules (OAR) and LRAPA rules in the SIP to reflect the 
redesignation of the Eugene-Springfield area. In this action, EPA is 
approving changes to OAR Chapter 340, Division 204 Designation of Air 
Quality Areas, Rule 0030 Designation of Nonattainment Areas and Rule 
0040 Designation of Maintenance Areas to remove Eugene-Springfield from 
the list of PM10 nonattainment areas and add the area to the 
list of PM10 maintenance areas. In addition, EPA is 
approving minor editorial changes to OAR Chapter 340, Division 204 
Designation of Air Quality Areas, Rule 0010 Definitions to consistently 
refer to the Eugene-Springfield ``Urban Growth Boundary'' rather than 
the Eugene-Springfield ``Urban Growth Area.'' EPA is taking no action 
on OAR Chapter 340, Division 200 General Air Pollution Procedures and 
Definitions, Rule 0040 State of Oregon Clean Air Act Implementation 
Plan because this rule describes the State's procedures for adopting 
its SIP and incorporates by reference all of the revisions adopted by 
the Environmental Quality Council for approval into the Oregon SIP (as 
a matter of state law). This is not what is actually approved by EPA as 
the Federally-enforceable SIP for Oregon, so we are therefore taking no 
action on it.
    EPA is also approving changes to LRAPA Title 29 Designation of Air 
Quality Areas, Section 29-0030 Designation of Nonattainment Areas and 
Section 29-0040 Designation of

[[Page 21554]]

Maintenance Areas to remove Eugene-Springfield from the list of 
PM10 nonattainment areas and add the area to the list of 
PM10 maintenance areas. In addition, EPA is approving minor 
editorial changes to LRAPA Title 29, Designation of Air Quality Areas, 
Section 29-0010 Definitions to refer to the Eugene-Springfield ``Urban 
Growth Boundary'' rather than the Eugene-Springfield ``Urban Growth 
Area.''
    Finally, EPA is approving changes to LRAPA Title 32 Emission 
Standards, Section 32-060 Air Conveying Systems and Section 32-065 
Sulfur Content of Fuels to ensure the requirements of these rules 
continue to apply to the Eugene-Springfield area after redesignation.

VII. Final Action

    EPA is taking direct final action to approve the LMP submitted by 
the State of Oregon for the Eugene-Springfield NAA and concurrently 
redesignate the area to attainment for the PM10 NAAQS. EPA 
has reviewed air quality data for the area and determined that the 
Eugene-Springfield NAA attained the PM10 NAAQS by the 
required attainment date, and that air monitoring data continue to show 
attainment. Also in this action, EPA is approving revisions to rules in 
the State's Federally-approved SIP to reflect the redesignation. EPA is 
approving this revision to the SIP because it meets the CAA 
requirements for redesignation.
    EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no 
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this 
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document 
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should 
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective June 10, 2013 
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by 
May 13, 2013.
    If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a timely 
withdrawal of the direct final rule informing the public that the rule 
will not take effect. All public comments received will then be 
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The 
EPA will not institute a second comment period on this rule. Any 
parties interested in commenting on this rule should do so at this 
time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this 
rule will be effective on June 10, 2013 and no further action will be 
taken on the proposed rule.

VIII. Oregon Notice Provision

    Oregon Revised Statute 468.126 prohibits ODEQ from imposing a 
penalty for violation of an air, water or solid waste permit unless the 
source has been provided five days' advanced written notice of the 
violation and has not come into compliance or submitted a compliance 
schedule within that five day period. By its terms, the statute does 
not apply to Oregon's Title V program or to any program if application 
of the notice provision would disqualify the program from Federal 
delegation. Oregon has previously confirmed that, because application 
of the notice provision would preclude EPA approval of the Oregon SIP, 
no advance notice is required for violation of SIP requirements.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, 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, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
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 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 it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal 
governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 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 action 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. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by June 10, 2013. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action 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)).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

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

[[Page 21555]]

40 CFR Part 81

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

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

    Dated: September 24, 2012.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    Note:  This document was received by the Office of the Federal 
Register on April 5, 2013.

    40 CFR part 52 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)(155) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.1970  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (155) On January 13, 2012, the Oregon Department of Environmental 
Quality submitted the Eugene-Springfield PM10 Limited 
Maintenance Plan and requested redesignation of the Eugene-Springfield 
nonattainment area to attainment for the PM10 National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards. The State also submitted revisions to 
rules in the Federally-approved SIP to reflect the requested 
redesignation. The State's Limited Maintenance Plan, redesignation 
request, and rule revisions meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) The following revised sections of the Oregon Administrative 
Rules (OAR) Chapter 340, effective December 21, 2011: Division 204, 
Designation of Air Quality Areas: Rule 0010 Definitions; Rule 0030 
Designation of Nonattainment Areas; and Rule 0040 Designation of 
Maintenance Areas.
    (B) Letter from Merlyn Hough, dated January 8, 2013, certifying 
that Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA) adopted LRAPA 
provisions from Titles 29 and 32 on September 26, 2011 as described in 
the LRAPA Board meeting minutes.
    (C) Lane Regional Air Protection Agency (LRAPA) Board meeting 
minutes, dated September 26, 2011.
    (D) The following revised sections of the Lane Regional Air 
Protection Agency (LRAPA) Rules, Title 29 Designation of Air Quality 
Areas, adopted September 26, 2011: Section 29-0010 Definitions (except 
paragraphs 1 through 5, and 7 through 14); Section 29-0030 Designation 
of Nonattainment Areas; and Section 29-0040 Designation of Maintenance 
Areas.
    (E) The following revised sections of the Lane Regional Air 
Protection Agency (LRAPA) Rules Title 32 Emission Standards, adopted 
September 26, 2011: Section 32-060 Air Conveying Systems; and Section 
32-065 Sulfur Content of Fuels (except paragraphs 1 and 2).


0
3. Section 52.1973 is amended by adding paragraph (e)(6) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.1973  Approval of plans.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (6) EPA approves as a revision to the Oregon State Implementation 
Plan, the Eugene-Springfield PM10 Limited Maintenance Plan 
adopted by the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission on December 15, 
2011 and submitted to EPA on January 13, 2012.
* * * * *

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

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 ``Eugene/Springfield (the Urban Growth Boundary 
area)'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.338  Oregon.

* * * * *

                                                  Oregon--PM-10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Designation                           Classification
          Designated area          -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Date                Type               Date                Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Eugene/Springfield (the Urban              6/10/13  Attainment...........  ..............  .....................
 Growth Boundary area).
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-08394 Filed 4-10-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P