96-12888. Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Idaho  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 105 (Thursday, May 30, 1996)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 27019-27023]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-12888]
    
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 52
    
    [ID-1-1-5528a; FRL-5449-2]
    
    
    Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Idaho
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
    
    ACTION: Direct final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approves the State 
    Implementation Plan submitted by the State of Idaho 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
    
    [[Page 27020]]
    
    to a nominal 10 micrometers (PM10) in the Northern Ada County 
    PM10 nonattainment area.
    
    DATES: This action is effective on July 29, 1996 unless adverse or 
    critical comments are received by July 1, 1996. If the effective date 
    is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
    
    ADDRESSES: Copies of the State's request and other information 
    supporting this action are available for inspection during normal 
    business hours at the following locations: EPA, Region 10, Office of 
    Air Quality (OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101, 
    and State of Idaho Division of Environmental Quality, 1410 N. Hilton, 
    Boise, ID 83720.
        Written comments should be addressed to: Montel Livingston, EPA, 
    Region 10, Office of Air Quality, 1200 Sixth Avenue, OAQ-107, Seattle, 
    Washington, 98101.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Doug Cole, EPA, Region 10, Idaho 
    Operations Office, 1435 North Orchard, Boise, Idaho 83706, (208) 334-
    9555.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    I. Background
    
        On September 22, 1994, EPA issued a proposed rulemaking action on 
    the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Northern Ada County 
    PM10 nonattainment area. See 59 FR 48582, Sept. 22, 1994. The plan 
    was submitted for the purpose of satisfying the moderate area planning 
    requirements for PM10 nonattainment areas, as set forth in 
    subparts 1 and 4 of Title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). In that 
    proposed rulemaking, EPA proposed to grant full approval of the 
    emissions inventory and PM10 precursor exclusion elements, limited 
    approval of the control measures submitted by the State for the limited 
    purpose of making them Federally enforceable, and disapproval of the 
    control measures, attainment demonstration and quantitative milestones, 
    and reasonable further progress elements of the SIP. Disapproval of 
    these elements was based on the State's failure to adopt into the SIP 
    and submit to EPA the wood smoke control ordinances for the cities of 
    Garden City, Meridian, and Eagle, and for unincorporated Ada County, 
    which the State had relied on to implement the residential wood burning 
    program identified in the SIP. In addition, the State had failed to 
    adequately address in the SIP the enforceability of its control 
    measures. EPA received no comments on its proposal.
        On December 30, 1994, the State of Idaho, Department of Health and 
    Welfare, Division of Environmental Quality (IDEQ or State) submitted to 
    EPA additional information which included the wood smoke control 
    ordinances for these areas; an explanation of the enforcement 
    procedures, responsibilities, and sources of funding for each of the 
    adopted ordinances; and the State's assurance of responsibility for 
    adequate implementation of the local control measures. As described in 
    more detail below, EPA believes the Northern Ada County PM10 SIP 
    is now fully approvable and therefore fully approves the State's plan.
    
    II. Analysis of State Submission
    
        A detailed analysis of the SIP is contained in the September 22, 
    1994, Federal Register document proposing action on the Northern Ada 
    County PM10 SIP. (59 FR 48582) That analysis evaluated each of the 
    SIP elements, and concluded that certain elements were approvable and 
    that certain elements had deficiencies requiring resolution. A summary 
    of the analysis, and additional analysis of information contained in 
    the December 30, 1994, submittal follows.
    
    1. Procedural Background
    
        IDEQ conducted public hearings and adopted the SIP consistent with 
    Section 110 of Clean Air Act. The initial public hearing was held on 
    October 11, 1990, and a second public hearing was held on November 14, 
    1991, on a plan modification. The additional information submitted on 
    December 30, 1994, included four implementing ordinances that had each 
    been adopted by the responsible agency after having gone through the 
    public hearing process required by State and local law. EPA has 
    determined that notice and public hearing, meeting the requirements of 
    40 CFR 51.102, is not required for the December 30, 1994, submittal 
    because the ordinances and other information submitted by the State do 
    not differ materially from the control measures outlined in the SIP 
    that went through notice and public hearing.
    
    2. Accurate Emissions Inventory
    
        The September 22, 1994 Federal Register document discussed the 
    emissions inventory contained in the November 15, 1991, SIP and 
    concluded it was consistent with the requirements of Sections 172(c)(3) 
    and 110(a)(2)(K) of the Act. The additional information submitted on 
    December 30, 1994, did not change the emissions inventory. Thus, for 
    the reasons set forth in the September 22, 1994 Federal Register 
    document, EPA is fully approving the emission inventory.
    
    3. Control Measures
    
        In the September 22, 1994 Federal Register document, EPA determined 
    that the November 14, 1991, SIP did not provide for the timely 
    implementation of reasonably available control measures (RACM), 
    including reasonably available control technology (RACT). To achieve 
    required emission reductions, the SIP relied upon a residential wood 
    burning program, which consisted of four elements: an episodic wood 
    burning curtailment program, a wood smoke public education/awareness 
    program, a wood stove certification program, and a wood stove change-
    out program. The principal element of the residential wood burning 
    program was the episodic wood burning curtailment program. The SIP 
    stated that this program would be implemented at the local level 
    through the adoption of local ordinances by Ada County, and by the 
    cities of Boise, Garden City, Eagle, and Meridian. However, as noted in 
    the September 22, 1994, Federal Register document, the State had not 
    adopted and submitted all of these ordinances as part of the SIP 
    submittal and the SIP therefore did not satisfy the RACM/RACT 
    requirement.
        The additional information submitted to EPA on December 30, 1994, 
    included the required ordinances for Ada County, and for the cities of 
    Garden City, Eagle, and Meridian. Each ordinance describes the 
    procedures for instituting a wood stove curtailment program, including 
    the monitored level at which an ``alert'' is called (100 g/m 
    \3\), and provisions for exemptions from the program. The additional 
    information also included a description of the procedures by which each 
    local agency in the nonattainment area which has passed a wood smoke 
    control ordinance will issue wood stove permits, determine exemptions 
    from the curtailment program, enforce the program, and fund 
    implementation.
        EPA believes that the State's December 30, 1994, submittal 
    addresses the deficiencies identified in the September 22, 1994, 
    Federal Register document, with one exception which does not bar full 
    approval of the State's control measures as meeting the RACM/RACT 
    requirement. The State's initial SIP submittal stated that all cities 
    in the nonattainment area and the unincorporated areas of Ada County 
    had ordinances prohibiting the sale and installation of uncertified 
    wood stoves. The initial SIP submittal, however, only included the 
    ordinance for the City of Boise, and EPA proposed limited approval of 
    that control measure. As stated above, the additional information
    
    [[Page 27021]]
    
    submitted on December 30, 1994, included wood smoke control ordinances 
    for Garden City, Eagle, Meridian, and unincorporated Ada County. Only 
    the Garden City and Ada County ordinances, however, have prohibitions 
    on the sale and installation of non-certified wood stoves. EPA does not 
    believe that the failure of the Cities of Meridian and Eagle to 
    prohibit the sale and installation of uncertified wood stoves poses a 
    bar to full approval of the control measures identified in the SIP as 
    meeting the RACM/RACT requirement. As stated in the September 22, 1994, 
    Federal Register document, the State did not take any emission 
    reduction credit for the wood stove certification program. See 59 FR 
    48585. RACM/RACT does not require the implementation of all available 
    control measures where an area demonstrates timely attainment of the 
    NAAQS and implementation of additional control measures would not 
    expedite attainment. See 57 FR 13498, 13540-13544 (April 10, 1992).
        The September 22, 1994 document discussed whether, assuming the 
    implementation of control measures on wood smoke as identified in the 
    SIP, RACM/RACT required the imposition of controls on emissions of 
    other sources of PM10 in the nonattainment area, such as road 
    dust, prescribed silvicultural and agricultural burning, and stationary 
    sources. See 59 FR 48585. EPA preliminarily concluded that additional 
    controls on these sources would not be necessary, assuming 
    implementation of the proposed wood smoke controls, either because 
    emissions from such sources were insignificant or because additional 
    controls on such sources were not necessary for and would not expedite 
    attainment. Now that the State has fully implemented the wood smoke 
    controls discussed in the SIP and demonstrated that such controls 
    result in timely attainment of the PM10 standard, EPA concludes 
    that RACM/RACT does not require additional controls on sources other 
    than wood smoke.1 Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the 
    September 22, 1994, Federal Register document and the reasons set forth 
    herein, EPA is approving the State's control measures as meeting the 
    RACM/RACT requirement.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \1\ As discussed in Section II.6 below, the State has recently 
    identified in the nonattainment area two major sources of NOX, 
    which is a precursor to particulate formation under certain 
    meteorological conditions. Whether RACM requires the implementation 
    of additional controls on these major sources of NOX is 
    discussed in Section II.6 below.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    4. Attainment Demonstration
    
        As discussed in the September 22, 1994, Federal Register document, 
    IDEQ conducted modeling which demonstrated the nonattainment area will 
    be in attainment of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS during the period of 
    1993 through 2000. However, because IDEQ had not demonstrated to EPA 
    that it had adopted the wood smoke control measures necessary to 
    achieve the emission reductions identified in the SIP, EPA proposed to 
    disapprove the attainment demonstration. See 59 FR 48586. Now that IDEQ 
    has demonstrated that the necessary control measures have been adopted 
    and implemented and EPA is approving those measures as meeting the 
    RACM/RACT requirement, EPA is giving full approval to the State's 
    attainment demonstration.
        A review of monitored data in the Northern Ada County NAA indicates 
    that no exceedences of the standard have occurred since January 7, 
    1991. Over time, the expected exceedence rate for the 24-hour standard 
    has been steadily decreasing, from a high of 4.5 during the three-year 
    period 1986-1988 to 0.0 for the period 1992-1994. Based on the 
    monitored data, it appears the nonattainment area has attained the 24-
    hour PM10 standard.
    
    5. Quantitative Milestones and Reasonable Further Progress
    
        The State's initial SIP submittal also met the requirements for 
    quantitative milestones and Reasonable Further Progress (RFP). In the 
    September 22, 1994, Federal Register document, however, EPA proposed 
    disapproving these requirements because attainment and maintenance of 
    the standard was predicated on control measures that had not been 
    incorporated into the SIP. See 59 FR 48586-48587. Now that this 
    deficiency has been corrected by the December 31, 1994, submittal, EPA 
    is fully approving State's plan as meeting the quantitative milestones 
    and RFP requirements.
    
    6. PM10 Precursors
    
        The September 22, 1994, Federal Register document proposed to grant 
    the exclusion from controls authorized under Section 189(e) of the Act 
    for major stationary sources of PM10 precursors in the 
    nonattainment area. See 59 FR 48587. EPA proposed a finding that major 
    stationary sources of PM10 precursors did not contribute 
    significantly to PM10 levels in excess of the NAAQS in the 
    nonattainment area. IDEQ has subsequently submitted information 
    identifying in the nonattainment area two major stationary sources of 
    NOx, a PM10 precursor under certain meteorological 
    conditions. Northwest Pipeline has a potential to emit 314 tons of 
    NOx per year and St. Alphonsus Hospital has the potential to emit 
    116 tons of NOx per year. The SIP provides an adequate 
    demonstration that implementation of RACT will be sufficient to attain 
    the PM10 by the applicable attainment date. In addition, EPA 
    reviewed the ambient air quality data from 1992, 1993, and 1994 and 
    determined that the area attained the NAAQS by December 31, 1994. Thus, 
    although there are two major stationary sources of PM10 precursors 
    in the nonattainment area, EPA believes these sources do not contribute 
    significantly to PM10 levels in excess of the NAAQS in the 
    nonattainment area. Therefore, Section 189(e) of the Clean Air Act does 
    not require the imposition of control requirements on major stationary 
    sources of PM10 precursors in the nonattainment area.
    
    7. Enforceability of Control Measures
    
        In the September 22, 1994, Federal Register document, EPA reserved 
    judgment on the enforceability of the identified control measures 
    because several of the control measures relied on by the State in its 
    SIP submittal had not been submitted to EPA. See 59 FR 48587. As 
    discussed in Section II.3 above, IDEQ has now submitted those control 
    measures to EPA, and EPA has determined the control measures meet the 
    RACM/RACT requirement. The December 31, 1994, submittal includes a 
    description of each implementing ordinance, the agency responsible for 
    enforcement, enforcement procedures and penalties, and the steps the 
    State of Idaho would take should an agency fail to implement or enforce 
    its respective ordinance, as required by Section 110(a)(2)(E) of the 
    Clean Air Act. Specifically, IDEQ has committed to impose Tier II 
    operating permits on all owners and operators of wood stoves within the 
    nonattainment area should a local agency fail to implement its 
    ordinance, and IDEQ has demonstrated its authority to do so. In 
    summary, EPA believes that IDEQ has satisfied the enforceability 
    requirements of Title I of the Act, including the requirements of 
    Section 110(a)(2)(E), and is therefore fully approving the State's SIP 
    as meeting these requirement.
    
    8. Contingency Measures
    
        Section 172(c)(9) of the Act requires that contingency measures be 
    included in each moderate area PM10 nonattainment plan. These 
    measures must take effect without further action by the State or EPA 
    upon a
    
    [[Page 27022]]
    
    determination that the area has failed to make Reasonable Further 
    Progress (RFP) or attain the PM10 NAAQS by the applicable 
    statutory deadline, and should result in emission reductions 
    approximately equal to the emissions reductions necessary to 
    demonstrate RFP. See generally 57 FR 13510-13512 and 13543-13544. For a 
    moderate PM10 nonattainment area, such as Northern Ada County, 
    with a three to four year period between SIP development and the 
    attainment date, this would mean that contingency measures should 
    result in emission reductions equal to at least 25 percent of the 
    emission reductions in the total control strategy. 57 FR 13544. A State 
    may rely on ``over control'' as a contingency measure, that is, rely on 
    control measures that are part of the core control strategy in the SIP, 
    if such control measures result in emission reductions greater than 
    those required to achieve the 24-hour NAAQS standard of 150 g/
    m3.
        On July 13, 1995, IDEQ submitted contingency measures to EPA for 
    approval which were a combination of over control from the wood smoke 
    control measures and new controls on fugitive road dust. Modeling of 
    the core control measures in the SIP for the Northern Ada County 
    nonattainment area indicates a 17 g/m\3\ reduction in the 24-
    hour standard (from 164 g/m\3\ to 147 g/m\3\). This 
    means that the core control measures in the SIP result in over control 
    of 18 percent (ratio of the difference between 147 g/m\3\ and 
    150 g/m\3\ to 17 g/m\3\). To obtain the additional 7 
    percent of emission reductions needed for 25 percent reduction of 
    emissions through contingency measures, the State has adopted a program 
    for the reduction of fugitive road dust. The State's submittal includes 
    a signed agreement between the Idaho Transportation Department, Ada 
    County Highway District, and IDEQ, which details a road sweeping 
    program designed to reduce particulate emissions by prioritizing road 
    sanding such that streets with the highest potential to emit PM10, 
    in the form of re-entrained dust, are swept first, and more frequently. 
    IDEQ retains the authority to review and approve any changes to the 
    plan. The State anticipates that this road dust program will result in 
    an additional 9 percent reduction in PM10 emissions. Together with 
    the 18 percent in emission reductions achieved through over control, 
    the State's contingency measures are predicted to result in more than 
    25 percent of the total reductions necessary for attainment. EPA 
    therefore approves the contingency measures submitted by the State on 
    July 13, 1995.
    
    9. New Source Review
    
        States with initial moderate PM10 nonattainment areas were 
    required to submit a permit program for the construction and operation 
    of new and modified stationary sources of PM10 by June 30, 1992. 
    See Section 189(a) of the Clean Air Act. This permit program element, 
    known as the New Source Review (NSR) program, was submitted by the 
    State of Idaho on May 17, 1994. EPA notified the State on June 10, 
    1994, that its NSR program submittal was complete. EPA is currently 
    reviewing Idaho's NSR program submittal to determine if the program 
    meets the requirements of the Act. EPA intends to take action on 
    Idaho's NSR program in another rulemaking after EPA has completed its 
    review.
    
    III. This Action
    
        EPA is granting full approval to the November 14, 1991, Northern 
    Ada County PM10 SIP, as supplemented by additional information 
    which IDEQ has submitted since that time. IDEQ has demonstrated that 
    the SIP meets the applicable requirements of the Act.
    
    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 process 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, 
    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 affected 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 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.
        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, EPA Assistant 
    Administrator for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and 
    Budget has exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 
    review.
        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 filed. This action will be 
    effective July 29, 1996
    
    [[Page 27023]]
    
    unless, by July 1, 1996 adverse or critical comments are received.
        If 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. 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 July 29, 1996.
        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 July 29, 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 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, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter.
    
        Note: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for 
    the State of Idaho was approved by the Director of the Office of 
    Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
    
        Dated: March 20, 1996.
    Chuck Clarke,
    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 N--Idaho
    
        2. Section 52.670 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(31) to read as 
    follows:
    
    
    Sec. 52.670  Identification of plan.
    
    * * * * *
        (c) * * *
        (31) On November 14, 1991, and on December 30, 1994, the Idaho 
    Department of Health and Welfare (IDHW) submitted revisions to the 
    Idaho State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Northern Ada County/Boise 
    Particulate (PM10) Air Quality Improvement Plan.
        (i) Incorporation by reference.
        (A) November 14, 1991, letter from the IDHW Administrator to the 
    EPA Region 10 Regional Administrator submitting a revision to the Idaho 
    SIP for the Northern Ada County/Boise Particulate Air Quality 
    Improvement Plan; The Northern Ada County Boise Particulate (PM10) 
    Air Quality Improvement Plan adopted on November 14, 1991.
        (B) December 30, 1994, letter from the IDHW Administrator to the 
    EPA Region 10 Regional Administrator including a revision to the Idaho 
    SIP for the Northern Ada County/Boise PM10 Air Quality Improvement 
    Plan; Appendix C-1, Supplemental Control Strategy Documentation, 
    Northern Ada County/Boise PM10 Air Quality Improvement Plan, 
    adopted December 30, 1994, with the following attachments: Garden City 
    Ordinances #514 (May 14, 1987), #533 (January 10, 1989) and #624 
    (September 13, 1994); Meridian Ordinance #667 (August 16, 1994); Eagle 
    Ordinance #245 (April 26, 1994); Ada County Ordinance #254 (November 3, 
    1992); and Table Ordinance-1 (December 30, 1994).
    [FR Doc. 96-12888 Filed 5-29-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
7/29/1996
Published:
05/30/1996
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Direct final rule.
Document Number:
96-12888
Dates:
This action is effective on July 29, 1996 unless adverse or critical comments are received by July 1, 1996. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
Pages:
27019-27023 (5 pages)
Docket Numbers:
ID-1-1-5528a, FRL-5449-2
PDF File:
96-12888.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 52.670