[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 19, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11153-11162]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-6004]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[MT7-1-5487a; MT26-2-6874a; FRL-5438-9]
Clean Air Act Approval and Promulgation of PM10
Implementation Plan for Montana
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA approves the state implementation plan (SIP) for the
Kalispell, Montana nonattainment area, the Flathead County Air
Pollution Program, and a Board Order setting emission limits at nine
Kalispell area stationary sources, submitted with letters dated
November 25, 1991, January 11, 1994, August 26, 1994 and July 18, 1995,
to achieve 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 (PM10). The SIP was submitted
to satisfy certain federal Clean Air Act requirements for an approvable
moderate nonattainment area PM10 SIP for Kalispell. In addition,
EPA also approves the SIP revisions submitted by the State of Montana
on August 26, 1994, and July 18, 1995, to satisfy the Federal Clean Air
Act requirement to submit contingency measures for the Kalispell and
Columbia Falls moderate PM10 nonattainment areas. The Columbia
Falls submittal also incorporates minor revisions to the attainment and
maintenance demonstrations for the Columbia Falls moderate PM10
nonattainment area SIP into the Montana SIP. Since the SIP still
adequately demonstrates timely attainment and maintenance of the
PM10 standard, EPA approves these revisions.
EPA is also deleting an obsolete section of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) which applied to further requirements for the Butte
total suspended particulates (TSP) plan.
DATES: This action is effective on May 20, 1996 unless adverse comments
are received by April 18, 1996. If the effective date is delayed,
timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to: Richard R. Long, Director,
Air Program, EPA Region VIII, at the address listed below. Copies of
the State's submittal and other information are available for
inspection during normal business hours at the following locations: Air
Program, Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street,
Suite 500, Denver, Colorado
[[Page 11154]]
80202-2466; and Montana Department of Health and Environmental
Sciences, Air Quality Bureau, 826 Front Street, Helena, Montana 59620-
0901. The information may be inspected between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m., on
weekdays, except for legal holidays. A reasonable fee may be charged
for copying.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Callie Videtich, 8P2-A, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region VIII, 999 18th Street, Suite 500, Denver,
Colorado 80202-2466, (303) 312-6434.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Kalispell and Columbia Falls, Montana areas were designated
nonattainment for PM10 and classified as moderate under sections
107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) of the Clean Air Act, upon enactment of the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.\1\ See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991)
and 40 CFR 81.327 (specifying designation for Flathead County). The air
quality planning requirements for moderate PM10 nonattainment
areas are set out in Subparts 1 and 4 of Title I of the Act.\2\ (EPA
took action on the Columbia Falls PM10 SIP on April 14, 1994 (see
59 FR 17700)).
\1\ The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act made significant
changes to the Act. See Public Law 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 PM10 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 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 PM10 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
final action and the supporting rationale. In this rulemaking action on
the Montana moderate PM10 SIP, EPA is applying its interpretations
considering the specific factual issues presented.
Those States containing initial moderate PM10 nonattainment
areas were required to submit, among other things, the following
provisions by November 15, 1991:
1. Provisions to assure 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 3 years
and which demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP) toward
attainment by December 31, 1994; and
4. 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
determines that such sources do not contribute significantly to
PM10 levels which exceed the NAAQS in the area. See sections
172(c), 188, and 189 of the Act.
Some provisions were due at a later date. States with initial
moderate nonattainment areas were required to submit a permit program
for the construction and operation of new and modified major stationary
sources of PM10 by June 30, 1992, [see section 189(a)]. States
containing initial moderate PM10 nonattainment areas were also
required to submit contingency measures by November 15, 1993 (see 57 FR
13543). These measures must become effective, without further action by
the State or EPA, upon a determination by EPA that the area has failed
to achieve reasonable further progress (RFP) or to attain the PM10
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) by the applicable
statutory deadline. The contingency measures for Kalispell and Columbia
Falls, which are described in Section II.2.A and II.2.B of this
document, were submitted to fulfill this requirement. See Section
172(c)(9) and 57 FR 13510-13512 and 13543-13544.
II. This Action
EPA is taking five actions with this document. 1) Approval of the
Kalispell PM10 nonattainment area control plan including the
Flathead County Air Pollution Control Program. (EPA earlier took action
on certain portions of the Program with the approval of the Columbia
Falls PM10 SIP on April 14, 1994 (see 59 FR 17700). In this
action, EPA is approving the Program as re-submitted by the Governor on
August 26, 1994 with further modifications submitted on July 18, 1995).
2) Approval of the Kalispell PM10 Contingency Measure Plan. 3)
Approval of the Columbia Falls PM10 Contingency Measure Plan. 4)
Deletion of an obsolete section of the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) which applied to further requirements for the Butte total
suspended particulates (TSP) plan. 5) Approval of Montana's New Source
Review rules for Kalispell since precursors are determined to not
contribute significantly. Below is a description of each of these
actions.
1. Kalispell PM10 SIP. EPA is approving the Kalispell
PM10 nonattainment area control plan and rules of the Flathead
County Air Pollution Control Plan found in the Flathead County Air
Pollution Control Program originally submitted by the Governor on
November 25, 1991, with revisions submitted on January 11, 1994, August
26, 1994 and July 18, 1995. Flathead County contains two PM10
nonattainment areas for which SIPs were due in November 1991: Columbia
Falls and Kalispell. The Flathead County Air Pollution Control Program
regulations apply to both areas and were submitted with the attainment
demonstration for Kalispell on November 25, 1991. EPA initially took
final approval action on all aspects of the Flathead County Air
Pollution Control Program, except rules 501 through 506, with the
Columbia Falls SIP on April 14, 1994 (see 59 FR 17700). The August 26,
1994, submittal contained minor modifications to the Flathead county
Air Pollution Control Program regulations that had been adopted through
Board Order on May 20, 1994. Thus, EPA is taking action on the entire
Flathead County Air Pollution Control Program submitted on August 26,
1994, in order to assure that the most recent version of the rules is
approved into the SIP. The July 18, 1995 submittal contained revised
control effectiveness calculations.
Section 110(k) of the Act sets out provisions governing EPA's
review of SIP submittals (see 57 FR 13565-13566). In today's action,
EPA is granting approval of those elements of the Kalispell PM10
plan that were due on November 15, 1991, and submitted by the State on
November 25, 1991, January 11, 1994, August 26, 1994, and July 18,
1995. EPA believes that the Kalispell plan meets the applicable
requirements of the Act.
[[Page 11155]]
A. Analysis of State Submission
1. Procedural Background. The Act requires States to observe certain
procedural requirements in developing implementation plans and plan
revisions for submission to EPA. 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 section 110(k)(1) and 57 FR 13565). The EPA's
completeness criteria for SIP submittals are set out at 40 CFR Part 51,
Appendix V. The EPA attempts to make completeness determinations within
60 days of receiving a submission. However, a submittal is deemed
complete by operation of law if a completeness determination is not
made by EPA six months after receipt of the submission.
\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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To entertain public comment on the PM10 implementation plan
for Kalispell, the State of Montana held a public hearing on November
15, 1991. The State supplied evidence that adequate public notice for
these hearings was provided. Following the public hearings, the Board
of Health and Environmental Sciences adopted the Flathead County Air
Pollution Control Program and the Kalispell PM10 Control Plan. The
submittal for the Flathead County Air Pollution Control Program and
Kalispell PM10 SIP were signed by the Governor on November 25,
1991. The final plan was received by EPA on December 4, 1991, as a
proposed revision to the SIP.
The SIP revision and subsequent submittals from the Governor were
reviewed by EPA to determine completeness in accordance with the
completeness criteria set out at 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix V. The
November 25, 1991 submittal was found to be complete and a letter,
dated April 29, 1992, was forwarded to the Governor indicating the
completeness of the submittal and the next steps to be taken in the
review process. The January 11, 1994 submittal was found complete by
default on July 11, 1994. The August 26, 1994 submittal was found
complete and a letter was forwarded to the Governor of that finding on
November 1, 1994. The July 18, 1995, submittal was found complete in a
letter forwarded to the Governor on July 18, 1995.
2. Accurate Emission Inventory. Section 172(c)(3) of the Act
requires that nonattainment plan provisions include a comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of
relevant pollutants in the nonattainment area. The emission inventory
also should include a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of
allowable emissions in the area. Because the submission of such
inventories is a necessary adjunct to an area's attainment
demonstration (or demonstration that the area cannot practicably
attain), the emission inventories must be received with the submission
(see 57 FR 13539).
Kalispell's base year emission inventory was developed for
September 1, 1986, through August 31, 1987. The results were segregated
into seasonal emissions (winter, spring, summer, fall.) Area sources
comprise over 90% of the PM10 emissions on an annual basis.
Annually, paved road dust accounts for 80.16% of the PM10
emissions, with unpaved road dust responsible for 7.45%. Industrial
sources and residential woodburning account for 5.54% and 4.69% of the
total emissions respectively. Re-entrained road dust is the primary
source of emissions in all four seasons.
EPA is approving the emission inventory because it is accurate and
comprehensive, and provides a sufficient basis for determining the
adequacy of the attainment demonstration for this area consistent with
the requirements of sections 172(c)(3) and 110(a)(2)(K) of the
Act.4 For further details see the Kalispell PM10 SIP TSD for
this action.
\4\ EPA issued guidance on PM-10 emissions inventories prior to
the enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments in the form of the
1987 PM-10 SIP Development Guideline. The guidance provided in this
document appears to be consistent with the revised Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. RACM (Including RACT). As noted, the initial moderate PM10
nonattainment areas must submit provisions to assure that RACM
(including RACT) are implemented no later than December 10, 1993, (see
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 13539-13545 and 13560-13561).
Five sources/source categories were identified as contributing to
the PM10 nonattainment problem in Kalispell. In the following
table, an outline is presented on these sources, their control measures
and associated emissions reduction credit, and effective dates.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source Control PM10 emissions reduction Effective
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\5\----
Re-entrained road dust................. Flathead County Rules:
501 Sanding & chip sealing 62% (credit taken only 5/20/94
standards and 505 Street for winter & spring.
Sweeping and Flushing.
502 Construction and (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
Demolition Activity.
503 Pavement of Roads Required (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
504 Pavement of Parking Lots (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
Required.
506 Clearing of land greater (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
than 1/4 acre in size
(requires measures to control
dust when clearing areas
larger than 1/4 acre).
Prescribed burning..................... Flathead County Rules:
201 (Open Burning) Definitions (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
202 Materials Prohibited...... (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
203 Minor Open Burning Source (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
Requirements.
204 Major Open Burning Source (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
Requirements.
205 Special Open Burning (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
Periods.
206 Fire Fighter Training..... (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
207 Conditional Air Quality (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
Open Burning Permits.
208 Emergency Open Burning (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
Permits.
209 Permit Fees............... (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
[[Page 11156]]
Residential wood combustion............ Flathead County Air Pollution (no credit taken)........ 5/20/94
Control Program, CHAPTER
VIII, Sub-chapter 3,
Voluntary Solid Fuel Burning
Device Curtailment Program
and Sub-chapter 4, Prohibited
Materials for Wood or Coal
Residential Stoves
Industry............................... Board Order, limiting (no credit taken)........ 9/17/93
allowable emissions, based
upon signed stipulations
between the following sources
and the State: A-1 Paving;
Equity Supply Company;
Flathead Road Dept. (two
stipulations issued);
Klingler Lumber Co.; McElroy
and Wilkins; Montana Mokko;
Pack and Company, Inc.; Pack
Concrete; and Plum Creek Inc.
(Evergreen)..
Motor vehicle exhaust.................. Federal tailpipe standards.... (no credit taken)........ Ongoing due
to fleet
turnover.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Note that the effective date of most of the following regulations is past the RACM/RACT implementation date
of December 10, 1993. The majority of these regulations were effective in 1991. However, as indicated
elsewhere in this action, minor revisions were made to some of the regulations. The table lists the most
recent effective date of these regulations.
A more detailed discussion of the source/source category
contributions and their associated control measures (including
available control technology) can be found in the Kalispell PM10
SIP TSD for this action. EPA has reviewed the State's documentation and
concluded that it adequately justifies the control measures to be
implemented. The implementation of Montana's PM10 nonattainment
plan resulted in the attainment of the PM10 NAAQS by December 31,
1994. By this action EPA is approving the Kalispell PM10 plan's
RACM (including RACT) in its entirety.
4. Attainment and Maintenance Demonstrations. As noted, the initial
moderate PM10 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, or the State must show that attainment by December 31, 1994,
is impracticable (see section 189(a)(1)(B) of the Act). The 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS is 150 micrograms/cubic meter (g/m3), and
the standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar
year with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 g/m3
is equal to or less than one (see 40 CFR 50.6). The annual PM10
NAAQS is 50 g/m3, and the standard is attained when the
expected annual arithmetic mean concentration is less than or equal to
50 g/m3 (id.)
The Kalispell attainment and maintenance demonstrations are based
upon both CMB analysis with rollback for area sources and dispersion
modeling for stationary sources. The 1991 SIP submittal contained an
attainment and maintenance demonstration based upon CMB. However, at
the time of the CMB study, stationary sources were operating far below
their allowable emission rates, and meteorological (wind) conditions
did not allow for a reliable analysis of potential stationary source
impacts. To supplement the receptor modeling-based analysis, the State
agreed to evaluate industrial sources at their allowable emission rates
using dispersion modeling.
The industrial sources are removed, for the most part, from the
downtown area and are not believed to impact the monitors used for the
CMB analyses. Significant concentrations from industrial sources are
expected to occur only in the immediate area around the industrial
sources because of low stacks and fugitive type emissions. The intent
of the dispersion modeling was to see if violations of the standard
would occur in the immediate vicinity of the industrial sources.
Therefore, the Kalispell attainment and maintenance demonstrations are
based upon both CMB analysis for area sources and dispersion modeling
for industrial sources.
CMB: The attainment and maintenance demonstrations using CMB
analysis for Kalispell indicate that the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS would
be attained by December 31, 1994, at 137.2 g/m3, and it
would be maintained in future years. The demonstration indicated that
an annual concentration of 47.9 g/m3 would be achieved by
1995, 6 showing attainment of the annual PM10 NAAQS. The
annual NAAQS was also demonstrated to be maintained in future years. In
the July 18, 1995 submittal, the Governor provided a revised 24-hour
attainment demonstration which used a revised background concentration
number and higher credits for the re-entrained road dust program based
upon the expanded Kalispell Air Pollution Control District boundaries
outlined in the August 26, 1994 submittal. Through the implementation
of the controls in the expanded area, the attainment analysis indicated
that the 24-hour value attained in the year 1995 would be 124.3
g/m3 instead of the 137.2 g/m3 calculated
in the November 25, 1991 submittal.
\6\ The Clean Air Act calls for attainment by December 31, 1994.
Section 188(c)(1). EPA interprets the State's demonstration as
providing for attainment by January 1, 1995. EPA is approving the
State's demonstration on the basis of the de minimis differential
between the two dates. The State should promptly inform EPA if EPA
has in any manner misinterpreted the date by which the State has
demonstrated attainment in the Kalispell nonattainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As mentioned above, a maintenance demonstration was contained in
the November 25, 1991, submittal which showed maintenance of the 24-
hour standard through 1997. The July 18, 1995, submittal did not
contain a revised maintenance demonstration. However, based upon the
revised attainment year value of 124.3 g/m3 and the
projected 2.1% annual population growth rate, EPA has calculated the
maintenance demonstration to be 132.3 g/m3 in 1998.
Monitored values reported through 1994 have shown attainment. EPA
accepts this analysis for demonstrating attainment and maintenance of
the 24-hour standard.
The July 18, 1995, submittal did not revise the attainment and
maintenance calculations for the annual PM10 standard which were
contained in the original November 25, 1991, submittal. However, EPA
expects that since the July 1995 revised 24-hour values are
significantly lower than 1991 values, the annual values would show
similar reductions and that attainment and maintenance of the annual
PM10 standard would result. Monitored annual values reported
through 1994 have shown attainment. EPA accepts this analysis for
demonstrating attainment of the annual standard.
Dispersion Modeling: As pointed out earlier, because of its concern
that the majority of the stationary sources within
[[Page 11157]]
the Kalispell area were operating far below their allowable permit
limits during the CMB study and thus their potential impact on air
quality was not being properly calculated, EPA asked the State to
perform dispersion modeling to demonstrate attainment and maintenance
of the PM10 standard. The Montana Department of Health and
Environmental Services (MDHES) conducted dispersion modeling using
stationary source allowable emission rates to determine if violations
of the PM10 NAAQS would result in future years. Based upon the
results of the dispersion modeling, several stationary source permits
were revised to reduce allowable emission rates.
Dispersion modeling, using stationary source allowable emission
rates, was used to determine maximum concentrations related to
stationary source emissions. The results were used to demonstrate
attainment of the standard by December 31, 1994. The 24-hour PM10
NAAQS allows one expected exceedance of the standard per year. Thus, in
modeling five years of data, attainment is demonstrated when the sixth
highest predicted concentration is less than 150 g/m3.
The 6th highest modeled concentration in the 1998 maintenance run was
139 g/m3. Total concentrations would be lower in 1995
owing to lower emissions from nearby background sources. This shows
attainment of the 24-hour standard of 150 g/m3. In
addition, the Kalispell dispersion modeling results indicated
attainment of the annual PM10 standard. The predicted
concentration in the maintenance year (1998) is 50.0 g/
m3. Because emissions from nearby background sources would be
lower in 1995 than in 1998, predicted 1995 concentrations would be less
than 50 g/m3.
5. PM10 Precursors. The control requirements that are
applicable to major stationary sources of PM10 also apply to major
stationary sources of PM10 precursors, unless EPA determines such
sources do not contribute significantly to PM10 levels over the
NAAQS in that area (see section 189(e) of the Act). An analysis of air
quality and emissions data for the Kalispell nonattainment area
indicates that exceedances of the NAAQS are attributable chiefly to
direct particulate emissions from re-entrained road dust, with a small
contribution from stationary sources and residential wood burning. The
emission inventory for Kalispell revealed that industrial processes
contributed 5.54% to the annual PM10 emissions. However, the
inventory did not differentiate between PM10 or precursor
emissions. Based upon the types of sources in the area, EPA believes
that the overall contribution of PM10 precursors is insignificant.
Therefore, EPA is making the determination that PM10 precursors do
not contribute significantly to PM10 levels that exceed the
standard in Kalispell. The consequences of this determination is to
exclude these sources from the applicability of PM10 nonattainment
area control requirements.
On July 18, 1995, EPA partially approved the State's nonattainment
new source review (NSR) permitting regulations for the Kalispell
moderate PM10 nonattainment area because the State did not submit
NSR permitting regulations for sources of PM10 precursors in
Kalispell and because EPA had not yet found that such sources did not
contribute significantly to PM10 exceedances in Kalispell (see 60
FR 36715-36722). The consequence of this determination that PM10
precursors are insignificant is to exclude major stationary sources of
PM10 precursors in Kalispell from the applicability of PM10
nonattainment area control requirements, including nonattainment NSR
permitting. Thus, based on this determination, the State's
nonattainment NSR regulations for Kalispell are considered fully
approved.
Further discussion of the analyses and supporting rationale for
EPA's finding are contained in the TSD accompanying this action. Note
that while EPA is making a general finding for this area, this finding
is based on the current character of the area including, for example,
the existing mix of sources in the area. It is possible, therefore,
that future growth could change the significance of precursors in the
area. The EPA intends to issue future guidance addressing such
potential changes in the significance of precursor emissions in an
area.
6. Quantitative Milestones and Reasonable Further Progress. The
PM10 nonattainment area plan revisions demonstrating attainment
must contain quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every 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). The State of Montana's PM10
SIP indicates that the MDHES and the Flathead County Health Department
(FCHD) will submit to EPA a reasonable further progress/milestone
report consistent with federal guidelines by December 31, 1994.7
\7\ Technically the first milestone would fall on November 15,
1994--three years after the deadline for submittal of this SIP.
However, the de minimis timing differential between the first
milestone submittal date and the attainment date (December 31, 1994)
make it administratively impracticable to require separate
submittals. See generally 57 FR 13539. Using December 31, 1994 as
the first milestone, EPA has identified March 31, 1995 as the actual
deadline for the submittal of the milestone report (per section
189(c)(2) of the Act). The State of Montana submitted the milestone
report on April 12, 1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, FCHD will prepare less detailed annual progress
reports for the prior year by August 1st each year. These annual
progress reports shall provide information on the effectiveness of the
control strategies.
To monitor the progress of the road dust control rules, a report
will be completed on the type and amount of de-icing and sanding
material applied, the number of applications of de-icing and sanding
materials, the dates of application of each material, and where and
when the street sweeping and flushing occurred during the winter
season. The sanding material test results for the percent silt and
durability also will be submitted.
All exceedances of the PM10 standard will be evaluated and a
determination made as to the source of the exceedance. Changes in the
air quality program to prevent further exceedances and a timetable for
implementation will be developed. Any other EPA requirements for RFP
reports will be incorporated as necessary.
7. Contingency Measures. See Section II.2. below for requirements.
8. Enforceability Issues. All measures and other elements in the
SIP must be enforceable by the State and EPA (see sections 172(c)(6)
and 110(a)(2)(A) of the Act and 57 FR 13556). The EPA criteria
addressing the enforceability of SIPs 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 also must contain a
program to provide for enforcement of control measures and other
elements in the SIP (see section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act).
The specific control measures contained in the SIP are addressed
above in Section 3, ``RACM (including RACT).'' The Flathead County Air
Pollution Control regulations, as included in the SIP, are legally
enforceable by FCHD. Any person who violates any provision or rule,
with the exception of the voluntary solid-fuel burning device rule, or
order under this program shall be subject to a civil penalty not to
exceed $500.00.
The Flathead County Air Pollution Control Program and the
associated
[[Page 11158]]
local regulations are also enforceable by the MDHES, if the FCHD fails
to administer the program. Since the program has been approved by the
Montana Board of Health and Environmental Sciences (MBHES) in
accordance with section 75-2-301 of the Montana Code Annotated and
effectuated by a MBHES Order, and since the MDHES can enforce MBHES
Orders, the MDHES has independent enforcement powers. Enforcement
provisions are found in the Clean Air Act of Montana, sections 75-2-401
through 75-2-429, Montana Code Annotated.
The allowable emission limits for the stationary sources being
regulated under this plan are enforceable by the MDHES through the
issuance of a Board Order. MDHES and the Kalispell sources agreed to
emission limitations in stipulations which were enforceable upon
approval and adoption by the MBHES through the issuance of a Board
Order on September 17, 1993. The stipulations contained emission
limitations for the following nine sources: A-1 Paving; Equity Supply
Company; Flathead Road Dept. (two stipulations issued); Klingler Lumber
Co.; McElroy and Wilkins; Montana Mokko; Pack and Company, Inc.; Pack
Concrete; and Plum Creek Inc. (Evergreen).
If a State relies on a local government for the implementation of
any plan provision, then, according to section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii) of the
Act, the State must provide necessary assurances that the State has
responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of such plan
provision. A State would have responsibility to ensure adequate
implementation when, for example, the State has the authority and
resources to implement the provision, and the local entity has failed
to do so.
The Flathead County Air Pollution Control Program was established
in accordance with the requirements of section 75-2-301 of the Montana
Code Annotated, as amended (1991). On November 15, 1991, the MBHES
issued a Board Order approving the local program and regulations. A
stipulation between the MDHES and the Flathead County Air Pollution
Control Board that delineates responsibilities and authorities between
the MDHES and the local authorities was signed November 15, 1991. The
regulations, Board Order, and stipulation were submitted to EPA as a
revision to the Montana SIP.
The State also submitted a state Attorney General's opinion
interpreting the authority of the MDHES to enforce any state and local
air quality provisions if a local air quality program fails to do so.
In practice, the MBHES issues a Board Order when it approves a local
program or amendments to a program. Since the Montana Clean Air Act
authorizes the MDHES to enforce Board Orders issued by the MBHES, the
MDHES has the authority to assume jurisdiction over, and implement, a
local program so approved. However, the Montana Clean Air Act also
requires a hearing before the MBHES before such an assumption of
jurisdiction and authority can be taken.
The Flathead County rules are in effect now, as is the Board Order
for the nine stationary sources. The State of Montana has a program
that will ensure that the measures contained in the Kalispell PM10
SIP are adequately enforced. EPA believes that the State's and
Kalispell's existing air enforcement program will be adequate. The TSD
for the Kalispell PM10 plan contains further information on
enforceability requirements, responsibilities, and a discussion of the
personnel and funding intended to support effective implementation of
the control measures.
2. Contingency Measures. The Clean Air Act requires states
containing PM10 nonattainment areas to adopt contingency measures
that will take effect without further action by the State or EPA upon a
determination by EPA that an area failed to make reasonable further
progress or to timely attain the applicable NAAQS, as described in
section 172(c)(9). See generally 57 FR 13510-13512 and 13543-13544.
Pursuant to section 172(b), the Administrator has established a
schedule providing that states containing initial moderate PM10
nonattainment areas shall submit SIP revisions containing contingency
measures no later than November 15, 1993. (See 57 FR 13543, n. 3.)
The General Preamble further explains that contingency measures for
PM10 should consist of other available control measures, beyond
those necessary to meet the core moderate area control requirement to
implement reasonably available control measures (see Clean Air Act
sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C)). Based on the statutory structure,
EPA believes that contingency measures must, at a minimum, provide for
continued progress toward the attainment goal during the interim period
between the determination that the SIP has failed to achieve RFP/
provide for timely attainment of the NAAQS and the additional formal
air quality planning following the determination (57 FR 13511).
Section 172(c)(9) of the Act specifies that contingency measures
shall ``take effect * * * without further action by the State or the
[EPA] Administrator.'' EPA has interpreted this requirement (in the
General Preamble at 57 FR 13512) to mean that no further rulemaking
activities by the State or EPA would be needed to implement the
contingency measures. In general, EPA expects all actions needed to
effect full implementation of the measures to occur within 60 days
after EPA notifies the State of its failure to attain the standard or
make RFP.
EPA recognizes that certain actions, such as notification of
sources, modification of permits, etc., may be needed before some
measures could be implemented. However, States must show that their
contingency measures can be implemented with minimal further
administrative action on their part and with no additional rulemaking
action such as public hearing or legislative review.
A. Kalispell PM10 Contingency Measures
The State failed to submit the contingency measures by the November
15, 1993, due date. On January 19, 1994, EPA made a finding that the
State failed to submit the contingency measures. Based upon that
finding, the 18 month sanctions and 24 month FIP clocks were activated.
In response to this finding, the Governor of Montana submitted
revisions to the SIP for Kalispell with letters dated August 26, 1994,
and July 18, 1995. The revisions address contingency measures for the
Kalispell moderate PM10 nonattainment area SIP.
1. Procedural Background (see Section II.1.A.1). The PM10
contingency measures for Kalispell were developed by the FCHD and the
MDHES. On October 18, 1993, after a local public hearing on October 4,
1993, the Kalispell City Council adopted the measures. On October 12,
1993, the Flathead County Commissioners held a public hearing and
adopted the contingency measures (Resolution 867A). This county
resolution also had included expanding the Columbia Falls area of
sanding and sweeping. Subsequent to further discussion, the County
Commissioners held another public hearing on April 4, 1994, at which
time they removed mention of this expanded area (Resolution 867B).
After the May 20, 1994, MBHES public hearing, the Board adopted the
local rules which constitute the contingency measures. The Governor
submitted the contingency measure rule 507 to EPA with a letter dated
August 26, 1994. However, that submittal did not contain the necessary
technical analysis and related information.
On July 10, 1995, the Montana Department of Environmental Quality
[[Page 11159]]
(MDEQ, formerly MDHES) held a properly noticed public hearing for the
purpose of adopting the local rules and technical analysis information
into the Montana SIP. The Governor subsequently submitted the
outstanding portions of the Kalispell PM10 contingency measure SIP
revision to EPA with a letter dated July 18, 1995. After reviewing the
submittal for conformance with the completeness criteria in 40 CFR 51,
Appendix V, EPA determined the submittal to be administratively and
technically complete and notified the Governor of such determination in
a letter dated July 18, 1995.
2. Contingency Measures. The PM10 contingency measure plan for
Kalispell was submitted by the Governor to EPA with letters dated
August 26, 1994, and July 18, 1995. The contingency measure requires
mandatory use of liquid de-icer instead of sand, except under special
circumstances.
a. Re-entrained Road Dust Contingency Measure. On April 4, 1994,
the Flathead County Board of County Commissioners passed Resolution No.
867B which amended the Flathead County Air Pollution Control Program.
The amendments include Rule 507 which is a contingency plan that
implements the mandatory use of liquid de-icer on all roads, with the
exception of priority routes with extraordinary circumstances, within
the Kalispell Air Pollution Control District. Rule 507 provides that
within 60 days of notification by EPA that the SIP for the Kalispell
moderate PM10 nonattainment area failed to timely attain the
PM10 NAAQS or make reasonable further progress the following will
occur:
Within the Kalispell Air Pollution Control District, only liquid
de-icer shall be placed on any road or parking lot with the exception
of priority routes with extraordinary circumstances existing. During
extraordinary circumstances, priority routes must use sanding material
which has a durability (as defined by the Montana Modified L.A.
Abrasion test) of less than or equal to seven or other testing method
which the Control Board deems suitable, and has a content of material
less than 200 mesh, as determined by standard wet sieving methods,
which is less than three percent oven dry weight.
b. Effectiveness of the Contingency Measure. If the re-entrained
road dust contingency measure is implemented, the control efficiency of
the re-entrained road dust measures will be 81% in the 24-hour
attainment demonstration. This calculation takes into account the use
of liquid de-icer, the current requirements for use of washed sand, and
the existing street sweeping measures (see the TSD for the Kalispell
PM10 SIP for further details on the existing re-entrained road
dust strategies). Total reduction from the contingency measure is
calculated to be 10632 more pounds of PM10 reduced per day than
without the contingency measure.
EPA believes this contingency measure is approvable. The control
measures implemented in the PM10 SIP are projected to achieve more
emissions reductions than needed to demonstrate attainment of the
PM10 NAAQS, as indicated by the State's predicted 24-hour
attainment concentration of 124.3 g/m3. Furthermore, the
predicted 24-hour ambient concentration resulting if the contingency
measure is implemented is 94.0 g/m3. Since the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS is 150 g/m3, this established safety
margin further supports the reasonableness of this contingency measure.
3. Enforceability Issues. The Flathead County Air Pollution Control
Program was established in accordance with the requirements of Section
75-2-301 of the Montana Clean Air Act, as amended (1991). A stipulation
between the MDHES, the Flathead County Commission, and the Kalispell
and Columbia Falls City Councils was signed on November 15, 1991, to
delineate responsibilities and authorities between the MDHES and the
local authorities. On November 15, 1991, the MBHES issued a Board Order
effectuating the program. On May 20, 1994, the MBHES issued a Board
Order approving the Kalispell PM10 contingency measures. The
related regulation, and the May 20, 1994, Board Order were submitted to
EPA in the August 26, 1994, submittal as a revision to the Montana SIP.
The Flathead County regulation is in effect now. The State of Montana
has a program that will ensure that the contingency measures contained
in the Kalispell PM10 SIP are adequately enforced. EPA believes
that the State's and Kalispells' existing air enforcement program will
be adequate. The Kalispell Contingency Measure SIP TSD contains further
information on enforceability requirements, responsibilities, and a
discussion of the personnel and funding intended to support effective
implementation of the control measures.
B. Columbia Falls PM10 Contingency Measures, Control Strategy and
Attainment Demonstration Revisions
The State failed to submit the contingency measures by the November
15, 1993, due date. On January 19, 1994, EPA made a finding that the
State failed to submit the contingency measures. Based upon that
finding, the 18 month sanctions and 24 month FIP clocks were activated.
In response to this finding, the Governor of Montana submitted
revisions to the SIP for Columbia Falls with a letters dated August 26,
1994. The revision addressed contingency measures for the Columbia
Falls moderate PM10 nonattainment area SIP.
1. Procedural Background (see Section II.1.A.1)
The PM10 contingency measures for Columbia Falls were
developed by the FCHD and the Montana (MDHES). After a local public
hearing on October 4, 1993, the Columbia Falls' City Council adopted
the measures. On October 12, 1993, the Flathead County Commissioners
held a public hearing and adopted the contingency measures (Resolution
867A). This county resolution also had included expanding the Columbia
Falls area of sanding and sweeping. Subsequent to further discussion,
the County Commissioners held another public hearing on April 4, 1994,
at which time they removed mention of this expanded area (Resolution
867B). After the May 20, 1994, MBHES public hearing, the Board adopted
the local rules which constitute the contingency measures and minor
revisions to the attainment and maintenance demonstration for the SIP.
The Governor submitted the contingency measure rule 607 to EPA with a
letter dated August 26, 1994. After reviewing the submittal for
conformance with the completeness criteria in 40 CFR 51, Appendix V,
EPA determined the submittal to be administratively and technically
complete and notified the Governor of such determination in a letter
dated November 1, 1994.
The Governor of Montana submitted revisions to the SIP for Columbia
Falls with a letter dated August 26, 1994. The revisions address
contingency measures and incorporate minor modifications to the
attainment and maintenance demonstrations into the State SIP for the
Columbia Falls moderate PM10 nonattainment area.
2. Control Strategy (see Section II.1.A.3 for general requirements)
On April 14, 1994 (59 FR 17700), EPA approved the control measures
in the Columbia Falls moderate PM10 nonattainment area SIP as
satisfying the requirement to provide for the implementation of RACM,
including RACT. The measures targeted re-entrained road dust,
residential wood burning, prescribed burning, industry, and motor
vehicle exhaust. Please see
[[Page 11160]]
that final rule and associated Technical Support Document (TSD) for
further details on the specific control measures in the approved SIP.
3. Revisions to Attainment and Maintenance Demonstrations (see Section
II.1.A.4 for General Requirements)
CMB receptor modelling in combination with rollback was chosen as
the best tool for the attainment and maintenance demonstrations of the
24-hour standard. EPA approved Montana's attainment and maintenance
demonstrations for the Columbia Falls moderate PM 10 nonattainment
area on April 14, 1994 (59 FR 17700). The 24-hour attainment value
(i.e., the ambient PM10 air quality level expected to be achieved
by 1995 8) was 136.28 g/m \3\, and the annual attainment
value was 31.1 g/m \3\. The maintenance values (i.e., ambient
PM10 air quality levels maintained through January 1, 1998) are
equal to the attainment values.
\8\ The Clean Air Act calls for attainment by December 31, 1994.
Section 188(c)(1). EPA interprets the State's demonstration as
providing for attainment of the PM10 NAAQS by January 1, 1995.
EPA approved the State's demonstration on the basis of the de
minimis differential between the two dates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As was discussed in the TSD accompanying EPA's approval action for
the Columbia Falls SIP, technical corrections to the attainment
demonstration were made subsequent to the Governor's submittal. With
the August 26, 1994, contingency measure SIP submittal, the Governor is
also incorporating the revised attainment demonstration (contained in
the technical corrections noted above) into the SIP narrative. There is
a minor additional revision to the street sweeping & sanding control
calculation. The revised control credit calculation separates the
background particulate emissions prior to applying reductions due to
the street sweeping program. The revised calculation yields a minor
increase of 32 lbs per day PM10 emissions over the original
demonstration, an amount approximately equal to 1% of the uncontrolled
daily emissions from paved road dust re-entrainment. EPA has evaluated
and approves the revised control efficiency calculations. The final
attainment demonstration being incorporated and approved by this action
predicts a 24-hour attainment value of 136.9 g/m \3\, and an
annual attainment value of 31.1 g/m \3\, both well below the
respective NAAQS. The SIP continues to adequately demonstrate timely
attainment and maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS in Columbia Falls and
satisfies the requirement to provide for the implementation of RACM
(including RACT). For further detail concerning the calculations, see
the TSD for this action.
4. Contingency Measures
The PM10 contingency measure plan for Columbia Falls was
submitted by the Governor to EPA with a letter dated August 26, 1994.
The contingency measure requires mandatory use of liquid de-icer
instead of sand, except under special circumstances.
a. Re-entrained Road Dust Contingency Measure. On April 4, 1994,
the Flathead County Board of County Commissioners passed Resolution No.
867B which amended the Flathead County Air Pollution Control Program.
The amendments include Rule 607 which is a contingency plan that
implements the mandatory use of liquid de-icer on all roads, with the
exception of priority routes with extraordinary circumstances, within
the Columbia Falls Air Pollution Control District. Rule 607 provides
that within 60 days of notification by EPA that the SIP for the
Columbia Falls moderate PM10 nonattainment area failed to timely
attain the PM10 NAAQS or make reasonable further progress the
following will occur:
Within the Columbia Falls Air Pollution Control District, only
liquid de-icer shall be placed on any road or parking lot with the
exception of priority routes with extraordinary circumstances existing.
During extraordinary events, priority routes must use sanding material
which has a durability, as defined by the Montana Modified L.A.
Abrasion test, of less than or equal to 7, or other testing method
which the Control Board deems suitable, and has a content of material
less than 200 mesh, as determined by standard wet sieving methods,
which is less than 3.0% oven dry weight.
b. Effectiveness of the Contingency Measure. If the re-entrained
road dust contingency measure is implemented, the control efficiency of
the re-entrained road dust measures will be 58% in the 24-hour
attainment demonstration (an increase of 28% over the control
efficiency of the re-entrained road dust measures in the original SIP
attainment demonstration). This calculation takes into account the use
of the liquid de-icer, the current requirements for use of washed sand,
and the existing street sweeping measures (see the TSD accompanying
EPA's approval, 59 FR 17700, of the Columbia Falls PM10 SIP,
available at the EPA address at the beginning of this document, for
further details on the existing re-entrained road dust strategies).
Total reduction from the contingency measure is calculated to be 605
more pounds of PM10 reduced per day than without the contingency
measure.
EPA believes that this contingency measure is approvable. The
control measures implemented in the PM10 SIP are projected to
achieve more emissions reductions than needed to demonstrate attainment
of the PM10 NAAQS, as indicated by the State's predicted 24-hour
attainment concentration of 135.9 g/m3 (see Section
II.A.2. above and the TSD). Furthermore, the predicted 24-hour ambient
concentration resulting if the contingency measure is implemented is
122.5 g/m3. Since the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS is 150
g/m3, this established safety margin further supports the
reasonableness of these contingency measures.
5. Enforceability Issues
The Flathead County Air Pollution Control Program was established
in accordance with the requirements of Section 75-2-301 of the Montana
Clean Air Act, as amended (1991). A stipulation between the MDHES, the
Flathead County Commission, and the Kalispell and Columbia Falls City
Councils was signed on November 15, 1991 to delineate responsibilities
and authorities between the MDHES and the local authorities. On
November 15, 1991, the MBHES issued a Board Order effectuating the
program. On January 24, 1992, the MBHES approved the Columbia Falls
PM10 plan and local program. The stipulation, Board Order, and
resolution were incorporated into the SIP on April 14, 1994 (59 FR
17700).
On May 20, 1994, the MBHES issued a Board Order approving the
Columbia Falls PM10 contingency measures. The related regulation,
and the May 20, 1994, Board Order were submitted to EPA in the August
26, 1994 submittal as a revision to the Montana SIP.
The Flathead County Program is in effect now. The State of Montana
has a program that will ensure that the contingency measures contained
in the Columbia Falls PM10 SIP are adequately enforced. EPA
believes that the State's and Columbia Falls' existing air enforcement
program will be adequate. The TSD for this action contains further
information on enforceability requirements, responsibilities, and a
discussion of the personnel and funding intended to support effective
implementation of the control measures.
3. Deletion of Butte TSP Requirement. 40 CFR 52.1380 contains a
conditional approval of a total suspended particulate (TSP) plan for
Butte. The condition required that the State submit,
[[Page 11161]]
by February 15, 1981, a revised airborne particulate regulation as
specified in its October 4, 1979, submittal to EPA. Since the time that
this requirement was put in place, EPA has revised the particulate
matter standard to be based on PM10 rather than TSP. Furthermore,
Montana has submitted and EPA approved a SIP revision providing for
attainment and maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS for the Butte
moderate PM10 nonattainment area (March 11, 1994, 59 FR 11550).
Thus, since TSP is no longer the regulated form of particulate matter
and has been replaced by PM10, and since Montana has a federally
approved SIP meeting all requirements of the CAA for the Butte
PM10 nonattainment area, EPA finds 40 CFR 52.1380 obsolete and is
deleting the section.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving Montana's Kalispell SIP revision submitted on
November 25, 1991 with additional submittals, critical to the Kalispell
SIP, made on January 11, 1994, August 26, 1994, and July 18, 1995.
These submittals address PM10 requirements which were due on
November 15, 1991. Among other things, the State of Montana has
demonstrated that the Kalispell moderate PM10 nonattainment area
will attain the PM10 NAAQS by December 31, 1994. EPA is also
approving the Flathead County Air Pollution Control Program submitted
on November 25, 1991 and resubmitted on August 26, 1994. In addition,
EPA is approving Montana's SIP revisions for Kalispell and Columbia
Falls which address PM10 contingency measure plans, which were due
on November 15, 1993. The plan for the Kalispell PM10
nonattainment area was submitted by the Governor with a letter dated
August 26, 1994 with additional materials submitted on July 18, 1995.
The plan for the Columbia Falls PM10 nonattainment area was
submitted by the Governor with a letter dated August 26, 1994. This
submittal also included minor revisions to the attainment and
maintenance demonstrations for Columbia Falls.
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, EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision
should adverse or critical comments be submitted. Under the procedures
established in the May 10, 1994 Federal Register (59 FR 24054), this
action will be effective May 20, 1996 unless, within 30 days of its
publication, adverse or critical comments are received.
If such comments are received, 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 then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a
proposed rule. 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 on May 20, 1996.
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 a SIP shall be
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
IV. Regulatory Flexibility
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 economic 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.
Approvals of SIP submittals under section 110 and subchapter I,
part D of the Clean Air Act 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
small entities. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-state
relationship under the Clean Air Act, preparation of a regulatory
flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic
reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air Act 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 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
V. Petition Language
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 May 20, 1996. 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 must 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)).
VI. Executive Order (EO) 12866
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.
VII. Unfunded Mandates
Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22,
1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed
or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to
State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
Through submission of this state implementation plan or plan
revision, the State and any affected local or tribal governments have
elected to adopt the program provided for under Section 110 and
subchapter I, part D, of the Clean Air Act. These rules may bind State,
local and tribal governments to perform certain actions and also
require the private sector to perform certain duties. The rules being
approved by this action will impose no new requirements; such sources
are already subject to these regulations under State law. Accordingly,
no additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the
private sector, result from this action. EPA has also determined that
this final action does not include a mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to State, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate or to the private sector.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur dioxide, and Volatile organic compounds.
[[Page 11162]]
Dated: September 29, 1995.
Jack W. McGraw,
Acting Regional Administrator.
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 BB--Montana
2. Section 52.1370 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(40) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1370 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(40) The Governor of Montana submitted a PM10 plan for
Kalispell, Montana in a letter dated November 25, 1991. The Governor of
Montana later submitted additional materials in letters dated January
11, 1994, August 26, 1994, and July 18, 1995. The August 26, 1994, and
July 18, 1995 submittals also contain the Kalispell Contingency Measure
Plan. The August 26, 1994, submittal also contains the Columbia Falls
PM10 contingency measures and minor revisions to the attainment
and maintenance demonstrations for the moderate PM10 nonattainment
area SIP for Columbia Falls. Finally, the August 26, 1994, submittal
contains revisions to the Flathead County Air Pollution Control Program
regulations.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Stipulations signed September 15, 1993 between the Montana
Department of Health and Environmental Sciences and the following
industries: A-1 Paving; Equity Supply Company; Flathead Road Dept. (two
stipulations issued); Klingler Lumber Co.; McElroy and Wilkins; and
Montana Mokko.
(B) Stipulations signed September 17, 1993 between the Montana
Department of Health and Environmental Sciences and the following
industries: Pack and Company, Inc.; Pack Concrete; and Plum Creek Inc.
(Evergreen).
(C) Board Order issued on September 17, 1993, by the Montana Board
of Health and Environmental Sciences enforcing emissions limitations
specified by stipulations signed by both the Montana Department of
Health and Environmental Services and participating facilities. The
participating facilities included: A-1 Paving; Equity Supply Company;
Flathead Road Dept. (two stipulations issued); Klingler Lumber Co.;
McElroy and Wilkins; Montana Mokko; Pack and Company, Inc.; Pack
Concrete; and Plum Creek Inc. (Evergreen).
(D) Flathead County Board of Commissioners Resolution No. 867B,
dated April 4, 1994, adopting the Flathead County Air Pollution Control
Program.
(E) Board Order issued May 20, 1994, by the Montana Board of Health
and Environmental Sciences approving the Flathead County Air Pollution
Control Program.
(F) Flathead County Air Pollution Control Program, including all
regulations found in Chapter VIII, Sub-Chapters 1-6, effective May 20,
1994.
(ii) Additional material.
(A) Montana Smoke Management Plan, effective April 28, 1988, which
addresses prescribed burning requirements.
(B) Federal tailpipe standards, which provide an ongoing benefit
due to fleet turnover.
Sec. 52.1380 [Removed and reserved]
3. Section 52.1380 is removed and reserved.
[FR Doc. 96-6004 Filed 3-18-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
