[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 206 (Wednesday, October 25, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54599-54604]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-26466]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[WA5-1-5539a; FRL-5309-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans: Washington
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approves a revision to
the State implementation plan (SIP) submitted by the State of
Washington for the purpose of bringing about the attainment of the
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter
with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10
micrometers (PM-10). The implementation plan was submitted by the State
to satisfy certain Federal requirements for an approvable moderate
nonattainment area PM-10 SIP for Tacoma, Washington. On October 12,
1994, EPA approved certain separable sections and conditionally
approved other sections of the Tacoma PM-10 SIP revision (59 FR 51506
(October 12, 1994)). In this action, EPA finds the State has fulfilled
the terms of the conditional approval and that the SIP submitted fully
satisfies the requirements of the Federal Clean Air Act.
DATES: This action is effective on December 26, 1995 unless adverse or
critical comments are received by November 24, 1995. If the effective
date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal
Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Montel Livingston,
SIP Manager, Air & Radiation Branch (AT-082), EPA, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Seattle, Washington 98101.
Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for
public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW., Washington,
DC 20460. Copies of material submitted to EPA may be examined during
normal business hours at the following locations: EPA, Region 10, Air &
Radiation Branch, 1200 Sixth Avenue (AT-082), Seattle, Washington
98101, and Washington State Department of Ecology, 4450 Third Avenue
SE., Lacey, Washington 98504.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Claire Hong, Air & Radiation Branch
(AT-082), EPA, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101, (206) 553-
1813.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Tacoma, Washington, area was designated nonattainment for PM-10
and classified as moderate under sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) of
the Clean Air Act (CAA), upon enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments
(CAAA) of 1990.\1\ See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991) (official
designation codified at 40 CFR 81.348). The air quality planning
requirements for moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas are set out in
subparts 1 and 4 of Part D, Title I of the Act.\2\ EPA has issued a
``General Preamble'' describing EPA's preliminary views on how EPA
intends to review SIPs and SIP revisions submitted under Title I of the
Act, including those State submittals containing moderate PM-10
nonattainment area SIP requirements (see generally 57 FR 13498 (April
16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992)). Because EPA is describing
its interpretations here only in broad terms, the reader should refer
to the General Preamble for a more detailed discussion of the
interpretations of Title I advanced in this document and the supporting
rationale. In this rulemaking action on the State of Washington's
moderate PM-10 SIP for the Tacoma nonattainment area (referred to as
Tacoma or the Tacoma Tideflats), EPA is applying its interpretations
taking into consideration the specific factual issues presented.
Additional information supporting EPA's action on this particular area
is available for inspection at the addresses indicated above. Those
States containing initial moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas (those
areas designated nonattainment under CAA section 107(d)(4)(B)) were
required to submit, among other things, the following provisions by
November 15, 1991:
\1\The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act made significant
changes to the Act. See Pub. L. No. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399.
References herein are to the Clean Air Act, as amended (``the
Act''). The Clean Air Act is codified, as amended, in the U.S. Code
at 42 U.S.C. sections 7401, et seq.
\2\Subpart 1 contains provisions applicable to nonattainment
areas generally and subpart 4 contains provisions specifically
applicable to PM-10 nonattainment areas. At times, subpart 1 and
subpart 4 overlap or conflict. EPA has attempted to clarify the
relationship among these provisions in the ``General Preamble'' and,
as appropriate, in today's notice and supporting information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Provisions to ensure that reasonably available control measures
(RACM) (including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in
the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of
reasonably available control technology (RACT)) shall be implemented no
later than December 10, 1993;
2. Either a demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the
plan will provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no
later than December 31, 1994, or a demonstration that attainment by
that date is impracticable;
3. Quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every three
years and which demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP) toward
attainment by December 31, 1994; and
4. Provisions to ensure that the control requirements applicable to
major stationary sources of PM-10 also apply to major stationary
sources of PM-10 precursors except where the Administrator determines
that such sources do not contribute significantly to PM-10 levels which
exceed the NAAQS in the area (see sections 172(c), 188, and 189 of the
Act).
Additional provisions are due at a later date. States with initial
moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas were required to submit a permit
program for the construction and operation of new and modified major
stationary sources of PM-10 by June 30, 1992 (see CAA section 189(a)).
The Washington State Department of Ecology (WDOE) submitted the new
source review requirements for this area, which were approved by EPA on
August 29, 1994 (59 FR 44385).
Such States also were required to submit contingency measures by
November 15, 1993, which become effective without further action by the
State or EPA, upon a determination by EPA that the area has failed to
achieve RFP or to attain the PM-10 NAAQS by the applicable statutory
deadline (see CAA section 172(c)(9) and 57 FR 13510-13512 and 13543-
13544). EPA addresses the contingency measures the State has submitted
for Tacoma below.
II. This Action
In this action, EPA is granting full approval of the plan revisions
submitted to EPA for Tacoma, Washington on
[[Page 54600]]
November 15, 1991, June 30, 1994 and May 2, 1995 (hereafter generally
referred to as a single submittal). On October 12, 1994, EPA approved
certain separable sections and conditionally approved other sections of
the Tacoma PM-10 SIP revision (59 FR 51506 (October 12, 1994)). At that
time, EPA fully approved the separable exclusion from precursor
controls, the monitoring network, the procedures for consultation and
public notification, the provisions for revising the plan and the
adequacy of funding and authority. As such, those portions of the
submittal will not be discussed in this Federal Register. In that same
document, EPA granted conditional approval of other major portions of
the submission on the condition that Washington adopt and submit to EPA
specific industrial control orders with enforceable emission limits by
January 1, 1995 for the following facilities located in the Tacoma
nonattainment area: Simpson Tacoma Kraft Company (Simpson), Kaiser
Aluminum and Chemical Corporation (Kaiser), Buffelen Woodworking,
Continental Grain, Continental Lime, Domtar Gypsum, Puget Sound
Plywood, USG Interiors, US Oil & Refining, and Woodworth. In May 1995,
the State submitted a Supplement to the PM-10 State Implementation Plan
which included these enforceable emission limits, demonstrations of
attainment and maintenance and contingency measures, thus fulfilling
the conditions of the conditional approval. In this document, EPA finds
the SIP submittal meets the requirements established under the Clean
Air Act.
Analysis of State Submission
1. Procedural Background
Section 110(a)(2) of the Act provides that each implementation plan
submitted by a State must be adopted after reasonable notice and public
hearing.\3\ Section 110(l) of the Act similarly provides that each
revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under the Act
must be adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public
hearing. The EPA also must determine whether a submittal is complete
and therefore warrants further EPA review and action (see CAA section
110(k)(1) and 57 FR 13565). EPA's completeness criteria for SIP
submittals are set out at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V.
\3\Also Section 172(c)(7) of the Act requires that plan
provisions for nonattainment areas meet the applicable provisions of
section 110(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State of Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE) conducted a
public hearing to receive public comment on a supplement to the State
implementation plan revision for PM-10 in Tacoma on February 8, 1995.
WDOE adopted the implementation plan for the area and submitted it to
EPA on May 2, 1995. A letter dated May 11, 1995 was forwarded to the
WDOE indicating the completeness of the submittal.
2. PM-10 Emissions Inventory
Section 172(c)(3) of the Act requires that nonattainment plan
provisions include a comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of
actual emissions from all sources of relevant pollutants in the
nonattainment area. The emissions inventory should also include a
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of allowable emissions in
the area. See, e.g., CAA section 110(a)(2)(K). Because the submission
of such inventories is necessary to an area's attainment demonstration
(or demonstration that the area cannot practicably attain), the
emissions inventories must be received with the attainment/
nonattainment demonstration submission (see 57 FR 13539).
In the submissions previous to 1995, WDOE submitted an emissions
inventory that was based on estimated actual emissions for the base
year of 1987, the attainment year of 1994, and maintenance year of
1997. However, this emissions inventory reflected estimated actual
emissions, not allowable limits. As was discussed in the October 12,
1994 Federal Register document and the associated Technical Support
Document, the use of estimated actual rather than allowable emissions
means that these emission levels in the emissions inventory are not
enforceable, and thus the emissions inventory was not approvable (59 FR
51506).
The May 1995 submission included consent orders that established
allowable emission limits for major point sources in the Tacoma
Tideflats. The 1995 submission also included a revised emissions
inventory that based its 1994 and 1997 attainment and maintenance
demonstrations on the emission levels in these consent orders. Thus,
the emissions inventory evaluated here includes the 1987 base year
inventory (based on estimated actual emissions) included in the 1991
submission, and the revised 1994 attainment and 1997 maintenance
demonstrations (based on the new allowable emission limits) included
the 1995 submission. For sources within the nonattainment area, the
emissions inventory provides a comprehensive list of particulate
sources and utilizes appropriate factor and estimations that were
available at the time the SIP revision was prepared. The emissions
inventory cites industrial point sources and area sources as the
largest contributors of PM-10 in the area. The emissions inventory
shows no growth in industrial point or fugitive sources between 1994
and 1997 due to the new emission limits imposed on those sources.
Mobile source emissions are estimated to increase approximately eight
percent between 1994 and 1997. This increase is slightly offset by
reductions due to lower sulfur fuel content and implementation of an
inspection and maintenance program for diesel engines.
As discussed in the October 12, 1994 Federal Register document and
in the Technical Support Document accompanying that document, EPA found
that there is a substantial weight of evidence that residential wood
combustion imported into the nonattainment area is a significant
contributor to PM-10 in the Tacoma Tideflats. WDOE included an
increased estimate of imported residential wood combustion in its
attainment and maintenance demonstrations, although WDOE did not
specifically list it as a source category in the 1995 emissions
inventory. EPA has reviewed and approves the emissions inventory for
the Tacoma Tideflats.
3. RACM (Including RACT)
As noted, the initial moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas must
submit provisions to ensure that RACM (including RACT) are implemented
no later than December 10, 1993 (see CAA sections 172(c)(1) and
189(a)(1)(C)). The General Preamble contains a detailed discussion of
EPA's interpretation of the RACM (including RACT) requirement (see 57
FR 13539-45 and 13560-61).
In broad terms, the State should identify available control
measures evaluating them for their reasonableness in light of the
feasibility of the controls and the attainment needs of the area. A
State may reject available control measures if the measures are
technologically infeasible or the cost of the control is unreasonable.
In addition, RACM, does not require controls on emissions from sources
that are insignificant (i.e. de minimis) and RACM does not require the
implementation of all available control measures where an area
demonstrates timely attainment of the NAAQS and the implementation of
additional controls would not expedite attainment. 57 FR 13540-44.
Washington's control strategy for the Tacoma area provides for
attainment of the 24-hour standard based on control of industrial
emissions, fugitive industrial
[[Page 54601]]
emissions including resuspended road dust, and residential wood
combustion. The Tacoma PM-10 plan includes enforceable consent orders
that establish allowable emission limits for industrial point sources
as well as fugitive emissions.
a. Industrial Controls
At first glance, the emissions inventory shows an apparent increase
of 481 kg/day of PM-10 emissions from industrial point sources from
1987 to 1994. In reviewing these numbers, however, it should be
remembered that this apparent increase is based on a comparison of
unlike numbers: that is, the 1987 numbers are the estimated historical
``actual'' emission rates while the 1994 numbers are the current
``allowable'' emission limits as reflected in enforceable orders. Had
the emissions inventory compared 1987 allowable limits to 1994
allowable limits, there would have been a decrease in the allowable
emissions of several thousand kilograms of PM-10 per day. Therefore,
contrary to its initial appearance, the emissions inventory reflects a
decrease in allowable emissions. Additionally, two facilities,
Woodworth and Puget Sound Plywood, located in the Tideflats have
permanently ceased operation after the 1987 emissions were calculated
without banking any emission reduction credits, resulting in an
unquestionable decrease in these point source emissions. This issue of
``actuals'' versus ``allowables'' is discussed in the October 12, 1994
Federal Register document on the Tacoma Tideflats and its associated
Technical Support Document (59 FR 51506 (October 12, 1994)).
The consent orders included in the May 1995 submission and in
previous submissions establish enforceable emission limits for the
major point sources in the Tideflats. Emission units regulated by these
orders include baghouses, dryers, oil burners and major ducts and
vents. In addition to specifying emission limits, these orders also
establish test methods for compliance.
b. Industrial Fugitive and Resuspended Road Dust
The Tacoma emission inventory identified industrial fugitive
emissions and resuspended road dust as significant contributors of
particulate matter to the airshed. The Puget Sound Air Pollution
Control Agency (PSAPCA) is a local air pollution control agency that
has jurisdiction over four counties in Washington State; PSAPCA's
jurisdiction includes the Tacoma Tideflats. PSAPCA's fugitive dust
regulation (Regulation I, section 9.15) was designed to reduce fugitive
dust from commercial and industrial activities and also to reduce dust
emissions from paved and unpaved roads and parking lots.
PSAPCA requires ``Best Available Control Technology (BACT)'' under
section 9.15 for all fugitive emissions from all incinerators, boilers,
manufacturing equipment and air pollution control equipment. For the
reasons described in the October 12, 1994 Federal Register and
accompanying Technical Support Document, EPA finds that these area
controls are reasonable and appropriate (59 FR 51508).
c. Residential Wood Combustion
There is a substantial body of evidence indicating that imported
residential wood combustion is a large source of Tacoma's PM-10 (See 59
FR 51506 and the accompanying Technical Support Document for further
discussion of imported residential wood combustion). In the May 1995
submission, WDOE modified its demonstrations of attainment and
maintenance to account for the significant influx of residential wood
combustion. WDOE also claimed a 70 percent reduction credit for
imposition of a mandatory residential woodstove ban in PSAPCA's four-
county jurisdiction. (See 59 FR 51509 and the accompanying Technical
Support Document for a description of the specifics of the mandatory
woodstove curtailment program). In the October 12, 1994 conditional
approval, EPA evaluated and accepted the 70 percent emission reduction
credit associated with the woodstove curtailment program.
The Tacoma SIP identifies industrial point sources, industrial
fugitives, residential wood combustion and re-entrained road dust as
significant sources of PM-10 in the airshed. The SIP then provides
emissions limits for the industrial sources, and cites regulatory
programs with a broad array of controls to address area sources.
In the Tacoma situation, EPA believes the significant sources, as
well as several less significant sources, of PM-10 in the area have
been reasonably controlled. EPA believes implementation of additional
controls in this area would not expedite attainment.
4. Demonstration
As noted, the initial moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas must
submit a demonstration (including air quality modeling) showing that
the plan will provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable
but no later than December 31, 1994 (see section 189(a)(1)(B) of the
Act). The General Preamble sets out EPA's guidance on the use of
modeling for moderate area attainment demonstrations (57 FR 13539).
Alternatively, if the State does not submit a demonstration of
attainment, the State must show that attainment by December 31, 1994,
is impracticable (CAA section 189(a)(1)(B)(ii)).
The May 1995 submission included revised demonstrations of
attainment and maintenance. WDOE's demonstrations used rollback, a
modified demonstration of attainment or maintenance. The guidelines for
using rollback are outlined in EPA guidance (Attachment 5 of ``PM-10
Moderate Area SIP Guidance: Final Staff Work Product,'' April 2, 1990).
As discussed in the Technical Support Document associated with the
October 12, 1994 action, Tacoma's SIP meets the criteria for using
rollback. This action reviews the adequacy of the rollback analysis
included in the 1995 submission.
In the October 12, 1994 action granting conditional approval to the
Tacoma PM-10 SIP, EPA noted that WDOE had not adequately addressed the
evidence indicating that residential wood combustion was a significant
source of particulate matter in the Tideflats (59 FR 51510). Therefore,
in the 1995 submission, WDOE relied on a rollback demonstration to
account for the impact of imported residential wood combustion. WDOE
estimates that approximately 40 percent of the PM-10 in the Tacoma
Tideflats on the design day is attributable to imported residential
wood combustion. As mentioned above, EPA has found that the mandatory
residential wood combustion curtailment program, implemented by PSAPCA
throughout a four county area, is approximately 70 percent effective
(See 59 FR 51509 and the accompanying Technical Support Document for
further discussion). Therefore, granting an emission reduction credit
for a residential woodstove curtailment program is appropriate since
the curtailment program applies to the Tideflats and all contiguous and
surrounding areas. After accounting for the reduction in particulate
matter due to the efficiency of the curtailment program, the rollback
analysis presented in the 1995 submission shows that the limits in the
emissions inventory for 1994 would be sufficient to attain the PM-10
NAAQS in 1994 and to maintain the standard in 1997. Further, there has
been no
[[Page 54602]]
measured exceedance of the PM-10 NAAQS for nearly five years. EPA
approves the demonstrations of attainment and maintenance submitted in
the Tacoma PM-10 SIP.
5. Quantitative Milestones and Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)
The PM-10 nonattainment area plan revisions demonstrating
attainment must contain quantitative milestones which are to be
achieved every three (3) years until the area is redesignated
attainment and which demonstrate RFP, as defined in section 171(1),
toward attainment by December 31, 1994 (see section 189(c) of the Act).
Reasonable further progress is defined in CAA section 171(1) as such
annual incremental reductions in emissions of the relevant air
pollutant as are required by Part D of the Act or may reasonably be
required by the Administrator for the purpose of ensuring attainment of
the applicable NAAQS by the applicable date.
While section 189(c) plainly provides that quantitative milestones
are to be achieved until an area is redesignated attainment, it is
silent in indicating the starting point for counting the first 3-year
period or how many milestones must be initially addressed. In the
General Preamble, EPA addressed the statutory gap in the starting point
for counting the 3-year milestones, indicating that it would begin from
the due date for the applicable implementation plan revision containing
the control measures for the area (i.e., November 15, 1991 for initial
moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas). See 57 FR 13539. As to the number
of milestones, EPA believes that at least two milestones must be
initially addressed. Thus, submittals to address the SIP revisions due
on November 15, 1991 for the initial moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas
must demonstrate timely attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS, the second
milestone should, at a minimum, provide for continued maintenance of
the standards.4
\4\Section 189(c) provides that quantitative milestones are to
be achieved ``until the area is redesignated attainment.'' However,
this endpoint for quantitative milestones is speculative because
redesignation of an area as attainment is contingent upon several
factors and future events.
EPA believes it is unreasonable to require planning for each
nonattainment area to cover quantitative milestones years into the
future because of the possibility that such time may elapse before
an area is in fact redesignated attainment. On the other hand, EPA
believes it is reasonable for States initially to submit a
sufficient number of milestones to ensure that there is continuing
air quality protection beyond the attainment deadline. Addressing
two milestones will ensure that the State continues to maintain the
NAAQS beyond the attainment date for at least some period during
which an area could be redesignated attainment. However, in all
instances, additional milestones must be addressed if an area is not
redesignated attainment within the time period covered by the
initial milestones.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In implementing RFP for this initial moderate area, EPA has
reviewed the attainment demonstration and control strategy for the area
to assess whether the initial milestones have been satisfied and to
determine whether annual incremental reductions, different from those
provided in the SIP, should be required in order to ensure attainment
of the PM-10 NAAQS by December 31, 1994 (see CAA section 171(1)). As
indicated, the State of Washington's PM-10 SIP for Tacoma demonstrates
attainment in 1994 and maintenance through 1997, and therefore
satisfies RFP and initial quantitative milestones (see 57 FR 13539).
CAA section 110(k)(4).
6. Enforceability Issues
All measures and other elements in the SIP must be enforceable by
WDOE and EPA (see CAA sections 172(c)(6), 110(a)(2)(A) and 57 FR
13556). EPA criteria addressing the enforceability of SIP's and SIP
revisions were stated in a September 23, 1987, memorandum (with
attachments) from J. Craig Potter, Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, et al. (see 57 FR 13541). Nonattainment area plan provisions
must also contain a program that provides for enforcement of the
control measures and other elements in the SIP (see CAA section
110(a)(2)(C)).
WDOE's control measures and regulations for control of particulate
matter, which are contained in the SIP, are addressed above under the
section headed ``RACM (including RACT).'' These control measures apply
to the types of activities identified in that discussion including, for
example, point source emissions; fugitive emissions from point sources;
vehicle resuspended road dust; and residential wood combustion. The SIP
provides that the affected activities will be controlled throughout the
entire nonattainment area. For measures controlling area source
emissions, the control measures apply in the entire nonattainment area
as well as in the four-county jurisdiction of PSAPCA, as in the case of
the residential woodstove curtailment program.
The Technical Support Document accompanying the October 12, 1994
Federal Register document provides a description of the rules contained
in the SIP and the source types subject to them; test methods and
compliance schedules; malfunction provisions; excess emission
provisions; correctly cited references of incorporated methods/rules;
and reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Both WDOE and PSAPCA have responsibilities in the implementation
and enforcement of control measures in the Tacoma nonattainment area.
PSAPCA retains authority over all area sources and all but the two
stationary sources in Tacoma that are regulated by WDOE. EPA considers
PSAPCA's staffing level adequate to ensure that the Tacoma attainment
plan is fully implemented. As a necessary adjunct of its enforcement
program, PSAPCA also has broad powers to adopt rules and regulations,
issue orders, assess penalties, require access to records and
information, and receive and disburse funds. WDOE has adequate
authority to implement and enforce the plan in the event PSAPCA fails
to make a good faith effort to implement and/or enforce the
regulations.
The two point sources in the Tacoma nonattainment area not under
PSAPCA's jurisdiction are the Simpson Tacoma Kraft Company and Kaiser
Aluminum and Chemical Corporation. These sources are regulated by WDOE.
WDOE's legal authorities, personnel and funding sources are discussed
in the Technical Support Document that accompanies the October 12, 1994
Federal Register. EPA finds these authorities and funding mechanisms
adequate to ensure that the State will be able to enforce the control
measures in the Tacoma nonattainment area.
7. Contingency Measures
As provided in section 172(c)(9) of the Act, all moderate
nonattainment area SIP's that demonstrate attainment must include
contingency measures (see generally 57 FR 13510-13512 & 13543-44).
These measures must be submitted by November 15, 1993, for the initial
moderate nonattainment areas. Contingency measures should consist of
other available measures that are not part of the area's core control
strategy. These measures must take effect without further action by the
State or EPA, upon a determination by EPA that the area has failed to
make RFP or attain the PM-10 NAAQS by the applicable statutory
deadline.
The May 1995 submission of the Tacoma PM-10 SIP changed the
contingency measures submitted to EPA for inclusion in the SIP.
Previous submissions included two contingency measures related to
mobile sources: a sulfur reduction in fuels program and the inspection
and maintenance program for diesel engines as the contingency measures
for the Tacoma Tideflats. These contingency measures
[[Page 54603]]
were not fully approved because their adequacy could not be fully
evaluated in the absence of an approved attainment demonstration.
Therefore, EPA conditionally approved these measures based on the
WDOE's commitment to submit enforceable emission limits for the
stationary sources in the nonattainment area and to demonstrate
attainment without relying on the reductions to be achieved from the
implementation of the contingency measures (59 FR 51513).
In the May 1995 submission, WDOE acknowledged that the
establishment of an inspection and maintenance program and the
reduction in sulfur content of on-highway diesel fuel were already in
place. Therefore, WDOE used the emission reduction credits associated
with these measures as part of their attainment and maintenance
demonstrations, and submitted a new contingency measure, a geographic
ban on uncertified woodstoves.
The new contingency measure is the implementation of a year-round
prohibition on the use of uncertified woodstoves in an area to be
defined by PSAPCA. This ban on uncertified woodstoves is authorized by
the Washington Clean Air Act, 70.94.473 and PSAPCA's Regulation I
section 13.07. Pursuant to those authorities, if EPA makes written
findings that an area has failed to attain or maintain the national
ambient air quality standard and, in consultation with WDOE, finds that
the emissions from solid fuel burning devices are a contributing factor
to such failure to attain or maintain the standard, then the use of
woodstoves not meeting the standards set forth in RCW 70.94.457 shall
be prohibited within the area that PSAPCA has determined contributed to
the violation.
The SIP states that the contingency measure would be ``activated''
one year after the EPA makes its findings that the standard has been
violated and that woodstoves are a contributing factor. EPA recognizes
that this language would seem to contradict the requirement that the
contingency measure be implemented immediately. However, EPA believes
this to be a semantic difference. In order for the ban to be in place
and fully operational within one year, PSAPCA would initiate
implementation of the ban immediately. In light of the severity and
extent of this ban, a one year phase-in period is reasonable.
This contingency measure is authorized by both the State and
PSAPCA's regulations and will take effect immediately upon EPA finding
that the standard has been violated and that woodstoves are a
contributing factor. EPA approves the contingency measure.
III. Implications of this Action
EPA fully approves the plan revisions submitted to EPA for the
Tacoma, Washington, PM-10 nonattainment area on November 15, 1991, June
30, 1994, and May 1995. In a previous Federal Register document, EPA
approved the separable exclusion from precursor controls; the
monitoring network; the procedures for consultation and public
notification; the provisions for revising the plan and the adequacy of
funding and authority. 59 FR 51506 (October 12, 1994) In this action,
EPA fully approves the control measures for industrial sources,
residential wood combustion and industrial and road fugitives; the
emissions inventory; the attainment demonstration; the maintenance
demonstration; the enforceability of control measures; the contingency
measures and the quantitative milestones and reasonable further
progress provisions.
IV. Administrative Review
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the CAA
do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements
that the state is already imposing. Therefore, because the federal SIP-
approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it does
not have a significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover,
due to the nature of the federal-state relationship under the CAA,
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute
federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.
Union Electric Co. v. U.S.E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new
Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local,
or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this
action.
The EPA has reviewed this request for revision of the federally-
approved SIP for conformance with the provisions of the 1990 Clean Air
Act Amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The EPA has determined
that this action conforms with those requirements.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic and
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.
The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates
no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal
Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision
should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be
effective December 26, 1995 unless, by November 24, 1995 adverse or
critical comments are received.
[[Page 54604]]
If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn
before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a
proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on
this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should
do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is
advised that this action will be effective December 26, 1995.
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 December 26, 1995. 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 enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2), 42 U.S.C.
7607(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Note: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for
the State of Washington was approved by the Director of the Office
of Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
Dated: September 22, 1995.
Charles Findley,
Acting Regional Administrator.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart WW--Washington
2. Section 52.2470 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(57) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.2470 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(57) On May 2, 1995, WDOE submitted to EPA revisions to the
Washington SIP addressing the conditional approval of the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for particulate matter (PM10) in the Tacoma
TIdeflats PM10 Nonattainment Area.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) May 2, 1995 letter from WDOE to EPA Region submitting the SIP
revision for Particulate Matter in the Tacoma Tideflats, A Plan for
Attaining and Maintaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for
PM10, Supplement May 1995, adopted on May 4, 1995.
[FR Doc. 95-26466 Filed 10-24-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
