Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OR-11-1-5527a; FRL-4891-9]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a revision

to the state implementation plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Oregon

for the purpose of bringing about the attainment of the national

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an

aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers

(PM-10). The implementation plan was submitted by the State to satisfy

certain Federal requirements for an approvable moderate nonattainment

area PM-10 SIP for La Grande, Oregon.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action will be effective on August 30, 1994 unless

adverse or critical comments are received by August 1, 1994. If the

effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the

Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Montel Livingston,

EPA, 1200 Sixth Avenue, AT-082, Seattle, WA 98101.

Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for

public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information

Center, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460. Copies of the State's

request and other information are available for inspection during

normal business hours at the following locations: EPA, 1200 Sixth

Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, and the State of Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality, 811 SW., Sixth Avenue, Portland, OR 97204-1390.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stephen Fry, Air and Radiation Branch

(AT-082), EPA, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101 (206) 553-2575.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. Background

The Union County, La Grande, Oregon, Urban Growth Boundary (UGB),

was designated nonattainment for PM-10 and classified as moderate under

sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), upon

enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990\1\ (see 56 FR

56694 (November 6, 1991) and 40 CFR Sec. 81.338). The air quality

planning requirements for moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas are set

out in subparts 1 and 4 of Title I of the Act.\2\ EPA has issued a

``General Preamble'' describing EPA's preliminary views on how EPA

intends to review SIP's and SIP revisions submitted under Title I of

the Act, including those State submittals containing moderate PM-10

nonattainment area SIP requirements (see generally 57 FR 13498 (April

16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992)). Because EPA is describing

its interpretations here only in broad terms, the reader should refer

to the General Preamble for a more detailed discussion of the

interpretations of Title I advanced in this proposal and the supporting

rationale. In this rulemaking action on the State of Oregon's moderate

PM-10 SIP for the La Grande nonattainment area, EPA is proposing to

apply its interpretations taking into consideration the specific

factual issues presented. Additional information supporting EPA's

action on this particular area is available for inspection at the

address indicated above. EPA will consider any timely submitted

comments before taking final action on this proposal.

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

\1\The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act made significant

changes to the Act. See Pub. L. No. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399.

References herein are to the Clean Air Act, as amended (``the

Act''). The Clean Air Act is codified, as amended, in the U.S. Code

at 42 U.S.C. sections 7401, et seq.

\2\Subpart 1 contains provisions applicable to nonattainment

areas generally and subpart 4 contains provisions specifically

applicable to PM-10 nonattainment areas. At times, subpart 1 and

subpart 4 overlap or conflict. EPA has attempted to clarify the

relationship among these provisions in the ``General Preamble'' and,

as appropriate, in today's notice and supporting information.

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

Those States containing initial moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas

(those areas designated nonattainment under section 107(d)(4)(B)) 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 three

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 PM-10 also apply to major stationary

sources of PM-10 precursors except where the Administrator determines

that such sources do not contribute significantly to PM-10 levels which

exceed the NAAQS in the area see sections 172(c), 188, and 189 of the

Act).

Additional provisions are due at a later date. States with initial

moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas were required to submit a permit

program for the construction and operation of new and modified major

stationary sources of PM-10 by June 30, 1992 (see section 189(a)). Such

States also were required to submit contingency measures by November

15, 1993, which become effective without further action by the State or

EPA, upon a determination by EPA that the area has failed to achieve

RFP or to attain the PM-10 NAAQS by the applicable statutory deadline

(see section 172(c)(9) and 57 FR 13543-13544).

II. This Action

Section 110(k) of the Act sets out provisions governing EPA's

review of SIP submittals (see 57 FR 13565-13566). In this action, EPA

is granting approval of the plan revision submitted to EPA on November

15, 1991. EPA has determined that the submittal meets all of the

applicable requirements of the Act due on November 15, 1991, with

respect to moderate area PM-10 submittals. In addition, as described in

Parts II.7 and II.5 below, EPA is approving the SIP revision submitted

on November 15, 1991, as meeting the requirement for contingency

measures for the La Grande, Oregon moderate PM-10 nonattainment area

and is granting the exclusion from PM-10 control requirements

authorized under section 189(e) of the Act.

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.

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

\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).

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

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). EPA's completeness criteria for SIP submittals are

set out at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. 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.

The City of La Grande held public hearings on the La Grande PM-10

plan on July 17 and August 1, 1991 and adopted the plan on August 7,

1991. The State of Oregon subsequently held public hearings on the La

Grande PM-10 SIP on October 1, 1991 in La Grande and Portland, Oregon,

and after the plan was modified in response to public comments, the

control strategy was adopted November 8, 1991. The modified plan was

submitted to EPA on November 15, 1991 as a proposed revision to the

SIP.

The SIP revision was reviewed by EPA to determine completeness

shortly after its submittal, in accordance with the completeness

criteria set out at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. A letter dated April

27, 1992 was forwarded to the Director of the Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality (ODEQ) indicating the completeness of the

submittal and the next steps to be taken in the review process. In this

action EPA approves the State of Oregon's PM-10 SIP submittal for the

La Grande PM-10 nonattainment area and invites public comment on the

action.

2. Accurate Emissions Inventory

Section 172(c)(3) of the Act requires that nonattainment plan

provisions include a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of

actual emissions from all sources of relevant pollutants in the

nonattainment area. The emissions inventory should also include a

comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of allowable emissions

in the area. Because the submission of such inventories are necessary

to an area's attainment demonstration (or demonstration that the area

cannot practicably attain), the emissions inventories must be received

with the attainment/nonattainment demonstration submission (see 57 FR

13539).

The base year emission inventory (1986) developed for the La Grande

UGB identified the major sources of PM-10 concentrations during 24-hour

worst case winter periods as residential wood combustion (60%),

fugitive dust (31%), industrial emissions (5%) and other sources,

including but not limited to, transportation, and commercial space

heating (4%). Annual emissions for 1986 were residential wood

combustion (48%), fugitive dust (36%), industrial emissions (10%),

transportation (5%) and other sources (1%).

EPA is approving the emissions inventory because it generally

appears to be accurate, comprehensive and current, 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 Clean Air Act.4 For

further details see the Technical Support Document (TSD).

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

\4\The 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 amended Act; therefore,

EPA may continue to rely on this guidance. See section 193 of the

Act.

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

3. RACM (Including RACT)

As noted, the initial moderate PM-10 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).

Attainment of the 24-hour and annual standards is based on five

main control strategies designed to reduce woodsmoke, fugitive dust and

industrial point source emissions. The available control measures to be

implemented in the La Grande nonattainment area include the following:

a. Voluntary Wood Combustion Curtailment Program

The City of La Grande administers the voluntary wood combustion

curtailment program. The City Planning Department makes the daily

advisory calls, conducts compliance surveys, and the La Grande Air

Quality Advisory Committee (LGAQAC) operates an extensive public

education program in conjunction with the ODEQ.

The voluntary curtailment program for the La Grande nonattainment

area includes a public education program that describes the need for

the public's cooperation, the health, safety, energy, economic benefits

to individuals and the community, and steps individuals can take to

help reduce emissions.

Key elements of the voluntary curtailment program and public

information program include: home weatherization, firewood seasoning,

cleaner burning practices, proper stove installation and sizing,

maintenance of woodburning systems and curtailment of woodburning

during poor ventilation episodes.

Woodburning advisories are made and issued daily by 10:15 a.m. from

November 1 through March 1. An empirical formula (based on the previous

12-hour ODEQ nephelometer readings and the last 3 hours of

meteorological conditions) is used to predict the present day's PM-10

level. The predicted PM-10 level determines the green/yellow/red

advisory day status (described below). The advisory is provided daily

on a telephone answering machine. The advisory is also printed in the

local daily newspaper, and aired by the local radio stations and cable

television channel. Also, in many cases, the advisory is made part of

the weather forecast on the local news.

Woodburning curtailment advisories are issued at three levels: (1)

A green advisory is made when the ambient concentration is expected to

be 50 g/m3 or less, (2) a yellow advisory is made when

the concentration is expected to be greater than 50 g/m3

but less than or equal to 95 g/m3, (3) a red advisory is

made when the ambient concentration is expected to be greater than 95

g/m3.

A green advisory allows for wood burning in stoves and fireplaces,

but these fires should be fueled with dry, well-seasoned wood. It is

also requested that citizens build small, hot fires and do not damper

down their stoves during a green advisory. During a yellow advisory all

residents, except those persons using wood as a sole source of heat,

wood pellet stoves and ODEQ or EPA certified woodstoves, are asked to

curtail wood burning for the next 24 hours and outdoor burning is

banned. During a red advisory all residents, except those using wood as

a sole source of heat or those using pellet stoves, are asked to

curtail wood burning for the next 24 hours and outdoor burning is

banned.

Compliance with the advisories is determined through day and

nighttime surveys of woodburning activity during green, yellow and red

curtailment periods. Green days are surveyed to determine a base from

which to judge compliance with a curtailment call. Data from the

surveys are used to direct the public education program, evaluate

progress toward achieving program goals and evaluate trends in PM-10

concentrations.

ODEQ requests a 30 percent emission reduction credit for its

voluntary curtailment program in the La Grande UGB during 24-hour worst

case periods. The 30 percent credit is greater than the 10 percent

generally suggested by EPA. The recommended 10 percent credit is viewed

by EPA as a ``starting point in assessing the effectiveness of

residential wood combustion control programs''. However, final judgment

of the amount of credit to be granted is determined by EPA's regional

offices based on the program features outlined in EPA's Guidance

Document for Residential Wood Combustion Emission Control Measures.

When data are available, credit higher than 10 percent may be granted

based on the program's effectiveness.

During the 1992/1993 wood heating season, La Grande conducted

compliance surveys in the voluntary curtailment area during green,

yellow and red advisories. The results of these surveys indicate that 7

percent and 54 percent of the woodburners comply on yellow and red

advisory days, respectively. The observed 54 percent compliance rate on

red advisory days easily exceeds the 30 percent compliance rate that

the ODEQ is claiming for La Grande. Based on these results and EPA's

review of the remaining curtailment program elements, also considering

public education and La Grande's and ODEQ's experience in managing

curtailment programs, EPA accepts the 30 percent credit claimed for

this control measure. Further description of this program and

justification for this action is set out in the TSD.

b. Woodstove Certification

In 1983, the Oregon Legislature directed ODEQ to require that all

new woodstoves sold in the state be certified through laboratory

testing. As a result, stoves sold after July 1986 were required to emit

particles at a rate of 50 percent less than conventional woodstoves.

After July 1988, new woodstoves were required to emit 70 percent less

than conventional woodstoves.

The Oregon Environmental Quality Commission adopted on March 2,

1990, and submitted to EPA on March 15, 1990, revisions to Oregon's

Woodstove Certification Program making it consistent with EPA's New

Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Residential Wood Heaters, in 40

CFR part 60, subpart AAA. Currently, all woodstoves sold in the State

of Oregon must be both ODEQ and EPA certified. This SIP revision was

approved by EPA as part of the Oregon SIP on June 8, 1992 (57 FR

24373).

ODEQ estimates that the woodstove certification program will

provide a 24 percent credit against baseline 1986 woodstove emissions

by 1994.5 Oregon has historically pursued an aggressive woodstove

certification program. Oregon was the first state in the nation to

adopt, implement and enforce a program of this type (1984). EPA

promulgated the NSPS on February 26, 1988, modeled, in significant

part, after Oregon's program.

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

\5\This estimate uses a 1986 baseline inventory and assumes or

relies on: (1) a 1% annual growth in firewood consumed by

woodstoves, (2) a 2% annual decline in firewood consumed by

fireplaces, (3) a useful stove life of 20 years, and (4) the fact

that the typical certified woodstove and pelletstove emits 50% and

90% less, respectively, than a conventional stove. EPA believes this

is an accurate portrayal of the situation in La Grande.

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

The projected emission reductions, in conjunction with a statewide

ban (OAR 340-34-010) on the sale of used uncertified stoves, a ban on

the installation of used uncertified stoves, and Oregon's model

woodstove certification program supports EPA's acceptance of Oregon's

woodstove certification credit claim.

c. Woodstove Replacement and Weatherization Programs

ODEQ requests a 2 percent credit on a 24-hour basis for the

$325,000 woodstove replacement and weatherization program. This State

of Oregon Community Block Grant was available to low and moderate

income residents.

As of September 1993, 53 uncertified woodstoves have been removed

from residential dwellings due to the program. These uncertified

woodstoves were replaced with 37 natural gas furnaces, 12 phase II

certified woodstoves and 4 pellet stoves. According to EPA

calculations, the elimination of these 53 uncertified woodstoves equals

a 2 percent credit (when compared against the 2,270 homes utilizing

uncertified woodstoves in base year 1986; and using 99 percent, 90

percent and 70 percent emission reduction credits for replacing

uncertified woodstoves with natural gas furnaces, pellet stoves and

phase II certified woodstoves, respectively). Therefore, even without

the home weatherization that also was done, the 2 percent credit

achieved equals the 2 percent credit claimed by ODEQ for the program.

Because of the demonstrated success of this program, EPA accepts the 2

percent credit requested by the ODEQ. Further description of the

program and justification for EPA's action is set out in the TSD.

d. Industrial Controls

On November 8, 1991, the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission

adopted changes to its Industrial Rules (OAR 340-30-200 to 230) for La

Grande. EPA published a Final Rulemaking on February 23, 1993 (58 FR

10972) with an April 26, 1993 effective date, which detailed its

approval of these regulations. These industrial rules impose new

emission limits for existing wood-waste boilers (heating-input capacity

of greater than 35 million BTU/Hr), wood particle dryers at

particleboard plants, air conveying systems and fugitive emissions (for

any large sawmill, plywood mill, veneer manufacturing plant,

particleboard plant, hardboard plant or charcoal manufacturing plant

that is located in the La Grande Urban Growth Area). Because of the

current PM-10 source mix in the area, only the wood-waste boiler and

fugitive control plan requirements are presently being implemented in

the La Grande PM-10 nonattainment area.

The overall reduction in area-wide industrial PM-10 emissions, due

to the implementation of the new industrial rules and replacement of 11

wood-waste boilers with three significantly cleaner natural gas-fired

boilers, between 1986 and 1994 is conservatively projected to be 30

percent.

Based on EPA's interpretation of the RACT requirement, as set out

in the General Preamble and the April 2, 1991, memorandum entitled

``PM-10 Moderate Area SIP Guidance: Final Staff Work Product,'' EPA has

determined that the industrial source control measures satisfy the RACT

requirement for stationary sources in the La Grande moderate PM-10

nonattainment area.

EPA believes that the emission limits imposed on the board products

industries, supported by their enforceability, will achieve the

estimated industrial source emission reductions of 30 percent.

Therefore, EPA accepts the 30 percent credit requested by ODEQ. For

further details the reader is referred to the Technical Support

Document (TSD) corresponding with this action, which is available at

the address indicated above.

e. Winter Road Sanding Control Program

Winter road sanding has been shown to adversely affect PM-10 levels

throughout the western United States, including La Grande, in areas

that experience measurable snowfall. The silt-laden, friable sand is

placed on roads by local and state highway departments to provide

vehicles with better traction on snow and ice. However, once the snow

has melted and the roads have dried out, the remaining dry, silty road

sand is easily resuspended by moving vehicular traffic.

The La Grande emission inventory identifies road sanding dust as a

14 percent contributor to worst case day PM-10 levels in both base year

1986 and attainment year 1994, without control strategies. To address

the winter road sanding problem the City of La Grande obtained a

written commitment, in a letter dated October 28, 1991, from the Oregon

Department of Transportation (ODOT) to reduce sanding application rates

and to cleanup sanding materials from roadways as soon as practically

possible.

ODOT and ODEQ project a 30 percent (436 lbs/day) reduction in PM-10

will be accomplished on worst case days in 1994, due to the winter road

sanding control program. This emission reduction value was determined

from ODOT's projection that the new application rates and cleanup

policies alone will reduce the amount of fugitive dust from sanding by

36 percent. ODEQ then determined that 84 percent of the PM-10 produced

as the result of road sanding was created on ODOT roads. Therefore, 84

percent of 36 percent is the 30 percent emission reduction value

credited to the winter road sanding program.

In addition to the aforementioned commitments, the ODOT began

utilizing road sand with a lower silt content in November 1991; thus,

this road material is less likely to become airborne as PM-10. However,

the ODEQ did not take emission reduction credit for this measure.

Therefore, EPA approves the utilization of this cleaner sanding

material as a SIP strengthening measure.

There are a number of fugitive dust control measures that the City

of La Grande and State of Oregon require in the La Grande PM-10

nonattainment area. The measures include: paving/stabilizing access

streets to industrial or commercial sites; cleaning and securing

construction vehicle loads to prevent trackout; requiring haul trucks

to be covered; utilization of dust suppressants to control PM-10

emissions from haul roads greater than 50 feet in length; paving or

chemically stabilizing unpaved roads; paving all off-street parking

areas, including driveways and truck loading areas; stabilizing

material storage piles through use of dust palliatives, water,

compacting or other methods; and prohibiting the disturbance or removal

of soil cover from any area larger than 5,000 sq. ft. (unless a dust

control plan has been approved by the City). Nonetheless ODEQ declined

to take credit for these fugitive dust control measures because the

emissions were difficult to inventory and these reductions were also

unnecessary to demonstrate attainment of the PM-10 standard. Instead

these measures strengthen the SIP and help further assure that these

fugitive dust sources will not contribute to a future exceedance of the

PM-10 NAAQS.

EPA has determined that the existing ordinances, programs, and

regulations either submitted with the La Grande PM-10 SIP submission or

else currently contained in the federally approved Oregon SIP meet the

RACM requirement. EPA also accepts ODEQ's projection that the road

sanding measures will reduce PM-10 emissions from winter road sanding

by 30 percent. The lower silt content sand, in conjunction with the

other fugitive dust control measures, will also help ensure that

sanding and other fugitive dust sources will be adequately controlled.

While the SIP is not relying on these strategies to attain the PM-10

standard, EPA is approving these measures as strengthening the SIP.

f. Other Sources

Where sources of PM-10 contribute insignificantly to the PM-10

problem in the area, EPA's policy is that RACM does not require the

implementation of potentially available control measures (57 FR 13540).

ODEQ has determined through its analysis of the nonattainment area

emissions data that prescribed burning, open burning and transportation

were not significant sources of PM-10 emissions (less than 4 percent on

a worst case days). Nevertheless, control measures addressing sources

of prescribed and open burning are currently required by ODEQ, Union

County, and the City of La Grande. While the implementation of all

available prescribed and open burning measures would not significantly

expedite attainment in the area, these measures as currently required

should help to ensure on-going maintenance of the PM-10 NAAQS in the

area and EPA is therefore approving them as strengthening the SIP. The

following is a list of adopted control measures regulating open burning

and prescribed burning contained in the plan:

(1) A mandatory field burning smoke management program was adopted

on June 5, 1991, by Union County (Ordinance 1991-6) in response to the

Class I area visibility protection provisions of the Clean Air Act

(Section 169A), and was implemented during the summer of 1991. The

ordinance requires that agricultural burning be prohibited when smoke

can impact either the Eagle Cap Wilderness or the La Grande PM-10

nonattainment area. The ordinance is enforced by Union County.

(2) The city of La Grande's Air Quality Program (Resolution 4122,

Series 1991) includes a prohibition on open burning and the use of burn

barrels on ``Yellow'' or ``Red'' woodburning curtailment days. Open

burning is prohibited at all times other than during the months of

April, May, October and November under Section 8 of the City's Uniform

Fire Code.

EPA has reviewed ODEQ's submittals and associated documentation and

has concluded that they adequately justify the control measures to be

implemented. EPA believes that implementation of the La Grande PM-10

nonattainment plan control strategy will result in the attainment of

the PM-10 NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable and no later than

December 31, 1994. By this notice, EPA is approving ODEQ's control

strategy as satisfying the RACM (including RACT) requirement.

4. Demonstration

Moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas must submit a demonstration

(including air quality modeling) showing that the plan will provide for

attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no later than December

31, 1994 (see section 189(a)(1)(B) of the Act). The General Preamble

sets out EPA's guidance on the use of modeling for moderate area

attainment demonstrations (57 FR 13539). Alternatively, the state must

show attainment by December 31, 1994, is impracticable. The 24-hour PM-

10 NAAQS is 150 micrograms/cubic meter (g/m\3\), and the

standard is attained when the expected number of days per calendar year

with a 24-hour average concentration above 150 g/m\3\ is equal

to or less than one (see 40 CFR section 50.6). The annual PM-10 NAAQS

is 50 g/m\3\, and the standard is attained when the expected

annual arithmetic mean concentration is less than or equal to 50

g/m\3\ (id.).

As indicated in the General Preamble, 57 FR at 13539, EPA has

developed a supplemental attainment demonstration policy for initial

PM-10 nonattainment areas. This supplemental policy provides additional

flexibility in meeting the PM-10 attainment demonstration requirements.

An earlier April 2, 1991, memorandum titled, ``PM-10 Moderate Area SIP

Guidance: Final Staff Work Product'' contained ``Attachment 5'' which

described the same policy.

ODEQ conducted an attainment demonstration based upon receptor

modeling (Chemical Mass Balance (CMB) version 7.0) and proportional

emission inventory roll-back analysis in the La Grande nonattainment

area. Both approaches were in close agreement in identifying the major

sources of PM-10 on exceedance days (local woodsmoke = 61 percent and

60 percent, and soil dust = 38 percent and 32 percent for CMB and roll-

back methods, respectively).

This demonstration indicates that La Grande will attain both the

24-hour and annual PM-10 NAAQS, with the maximum 24-hour concentration

predicted to be 148 g/m\3\ and an annual arithmetic average

concentration projected to be 47 g/m\3\ in 1994. The

demonstration also showed that the PM-10 NAAQS will be maintained in

future years by predicting a 24-hour worst day design concentration of

139 g/m\3\ for the year 2000, and projecting an annual average

for the year 2000 of 48 g/m\3\. The control strategy used to

achieve these design concentrations is summarized in the section titled

``RACM (including RACT).'' A more detailed description of the

attainment demonstration is contained in the TSD accompanying this

notice.

5. PM-10 Precursors

The control requirements which are applicable to major stationary

sources of PM-10, also apply to major stationary sources of PM-10

precursors unless EPA determines such sources do not contribute

significantly to PM-10 levels in excess of the NAAQS in that area (see

section 189(e) of the Act). The General Preamble contains guidance

addressing how EPA intends to implement section 189(e) (see 57 FR

13539-13540 and 13541-13542).

The filter analyses (chemical mass balance) indicated that on

average, only 1 percent and 4 percent of the PM-10 mass was comprised

of secondary particulate on high concentration days and annually,

respectively. EPA believes that this is an insignificant portion and,

therefore, is granting the exclusion from control requirements

authorized under section 189(e) for major stationary sources of PM-10

precursors.

Note that while EPA has made 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. EPA intends to issue future guidance addressing

such potential changes in the significance of precursor emissions in an

area.

6. Enforceability Issues

All measures and other elements in the SIP must be enforceable by

ODEQ and EPA (See sections 172(c)(6), 110(a)(2)(A) and 57 FR 13556).

EPA criteria addressing the enforceability of SIP's and SIP revisions

were stated in a September 23, 1987, memorandum (with attachments) from

J. Craig Potter, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, et. al.

(see 57 FR 13541). Nonattainment area plan provisions must also contain

a program that provides for enforcement of the control measures and

other elements in the SIP (see section 110(a)(2)(C)).

The particular control measures contained in the SIP are addressed

above under the section headed ``RACM (including RACT).'' These control

measures apply to the types of activities identified in that discussion

including, for example, existing large, wood-fired boilers with a heat

input capacity greater than 35 million BTU/Hr, and woodstoves and other

wood burning activities. The SIP provides that the control measures for

the affected activities apply throughout the entire nonattainment area.

During its review, EPA determined that the Oregon Revised Statute

Chapter 468, as amended in 1991, failed to provide sufficient authority

to ensure that the industrial source control measures contained in the

La Grande PM-10 SIP could be adequately enforced. Specifically, ORS

468.126(1) provided that penalties could not be assessed against a

source for permit violations unless the state first provided notice of

the violation to the source, and further, if within five days, the

source came into compliance or provided an adequate schedule to come

into compliance in the future, no penalties could be assessed. EPA

informed the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality that this

provision was unacceptable to the extent it applied to permit limits

which were relied on to attain, maintain or demonstrate attainment with

a NAAQS.

On September 3, 1993, the Governor of Oregon signed into law new

legislation correcting this deficiency. The new law provides that the

five-day advance notice provision required by ORS 468.126(1) does not

apply if the notice requirement will disqualify a state program from

federal approval or delegation (see Oregon Senate Bill 86, 1993

Session, Sec. 3 (1993) to be codified at ORS 468.126(2)(e)). Because

the notice provision bars civil penalties from being imposed for

certain permit violations, application of 468.126(1) fails to provide

the adequate enforcement authority that a state must demonstrate to

obtain SIP approval (see, e.g., sections 110 and 172(c) of the Clean

Air Act and 40 CFR 51.230). Accordingly, the notice requirement would

disqualify this PM-10 program from federal approval. Thus, the state

has acknowledged, by a letter dated November 5, 1993, that, pursuant to

ORS 468.126(2)(e), the notice provision in ORS 468.126(1) will not

apply to violations of SIP requirements contained in permits, including

permits containing industrial source control requirements, relied upon

to attain, maintain or demonstrate attainment with a NAAQS.

In regards to a separate enforceability issue, the following is a

summary of the city and county ordinances which EPA approves as part of

the SIP as either a required control measure or SIP strengthening

measure. The content of the two ordinances and their relationship to

the SIP control strategies are discussed in more detail in the TSD.

a. City of La Grande Air Quality Improvement Resolution 4122,

Series 1991, August 7, 1991. This ordinance delineates the City of La

Grande's control of smoke and fugitive dust (control measure).

b. Union County Ordinance No. 1991-6. This ordinance controls and

manages field burning in Union County, Oregon and creates a Union

County smoke management program (SIP strengthening measure).

The SIP requires that all affected activities must be in full

compliance with the applicable SIP provisions by December 10, 1993. In

addition to the applicable control measures, this includes the

applicable recordkeeping requirements which are addressed in the

supporting technical information.

ODEQ's submittals and the TSD contain further information on

enforceable requirements including enforceable emission limitations; a

description of the rules contained in the SIP and the source types

subject to them; test methods and compliance schedules; averaging times

for compliance test methods; correctly cited references of incorporated

methods/rules; and reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

ODEQ also has a program that will ensure that the control measures

contained in the La Grande PM-10 SIP are adequately enforced. The TSD

contains a discussion of the personnel and funding intended to support

effective implementation of the control measures.

7. Contingency Measures

As provided in section 172(c)(9) of the Act, all moderate PM-10

nonattainment area SIP's that demonstrate attainment must include

contingency measures (see generally 57 FR 13543-13544). These measures

must have been submitted by November 15, 1993 for the initial moderate

nonattainment areas. Contingency measures should consist of other

available measures that are not part of the area's attainment control

strategy. These measures must take effect without further action by the

State or EPA, upon a determination by EPA that the area has failed to

make reasonable further progress (RFP) or attain the PM-10 NAAQS by the

applicable statutory deadline. The La Grande nonattainment area SIP

contains the following contingency measures:

a. A mandatory woodsmoke curtailment program that is to take effect

if the EPA determines that the area fails to attain the NAAQS by

December 31, 1994. ODEQ has the authority to implement and enforce a

mandatory curtailment program, upon notification by EPA that the area

has failed to attain the NAAQS, should the City of La Grande or the

County of Union fail to implement one. EPA approved these rules (OAR

340-34-150 through 175) as part of the Oregon SIP on June 9, 1992 (57

FR 24373).

b. Removal of uncertified woodstoves upon home sale for any area

that fails to meet the PM-10 SIP attainment date of December 31, 1994.

These stoves would have to be removed and destroyed prior to sale of

the home. EPA approved these rules (OAR 340-34-200 through 215) as part

of the Oregon SIP on June 9, 1992 (57 FR 24373).

c. The continuation of the woodstove certification program (after

December 31, 1994) will provide a net reduction in residential wood

burning emissions between the years 1994 and 2000, and on into the

future.

d. The application of BACT emission controls to industrial sources

in La Grande will result in further reductions of PM-10 emissions.

Oregon state regulations (OAR 340-21-200 through 245) also contain

additional industrial contingency measures that would apply to Oregon's

PM-10 nonattainment areas should an area not attain the standard by the

applicable CAA deadline. These rules were approved by EPA as part of

the Oregon SIP on August 19, 1992 (57 FR 37468). The rules became

effective on October 19, 1992.

The expected emission reductions to be achieved by implementation

of the contingency measures after the December 31, 1994 attainment

date, is estimated to be at least 90 tons per year. This represents at

least a 58 percent reduction when compared with the 156 tons per year

emission reduction in the attainment plan, which is greater than the 25

percent reduction value suggested in the General Preamble (57 FR 13543-

13544).

The SIP provides that the mandatory woodsmoke curtailment program,

removal of uncertified woodstoves and application of BACT emission

controls to industrial sources in La Grande can take affect without

further action by the state or EPA, should EPA determine that the La

Grande nonattainment area has failed to achieve RFP or attain the PM-10

standard by the statutory attainment date of December 31, 1994. The net

reduction in woodstove emissions due to the continuation of the

woodstove certification program will occur regardless of whether or not

the PM-10 standard is attained by December 31, 1994.

EPA is approving the La Grande nonattainment area contingency

measures.

III. Implications of This Action

EPA is approving this plan revision submitted to EPA for the La

Grande nonattainment area. Among other things, ODEQ has demonstrated

that the La Grande moderate PM-10 nonattainment area will attain the

PM-10 NAAQS by December 31, 1994. Note that this action includes

approval of the contingency measures for the La Grande nonattainment

area.

IV. Administrative Review

This action has been classified as a Table 2 action by the Regional

Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on

January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by an October 4, 1993

memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for

Air and Radiation. A future notice will inform the general public of

these tables. On January 6, 1989 the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) waived Table 2 and Table 3 SIP revisions (54 FR 2222) from the

requirements of Section 3 of Executive Order 12291 for two years. The

EPA submitted a request for a permanent waiver for Table 2 and Table 3

SIP revisions. The OMB has agreed to continue the temporary waiver

until such time as it rules on EPA's request. This request continued in

effect under Executive Order 12866 which revoked Executive Order 12291

on September 30, 1993.

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.

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.

SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the CAA

do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements

that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the federal SIP-

approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it does

not have a significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover,

due to the nature of the federal-state relationship under the CAA,

preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute

federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The

CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976);

42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

Because EPA considers this action noncontroversial and routine, we

are approving it without prior proposal. The action will become

effective on August 30, 1994 unless adverse comments are received by

August 1, 1994. If the EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final

rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be

addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule (please

see short informational document published, simultaneously, in the

proposal section of this Federal Register).

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 August 30, 1994. 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. section

7607(b)(2).

Under Executive Order 12866 [58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993)], the

Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant''

and therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the

Executive Order. The Order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as

one that is likely to result in a rule that may:

(1) have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or

adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the

economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public

health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or

communities;

(2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an

action taken or planned by another agency;

(3) materially alter the budgetary impact or entitlements, grants,

user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients

thereof; or

(4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal

mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in

the Executive Order.

It has been determined that this rule is not a ``significant

regulatory action'' under the terms of Executive Order 12866 and is

therefore not subject to OMB review.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Particulate matter.

Dated: May 25, 1994.

Chuck Clarke,

Regional Administrator.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for

the State of Oregon was approved by the Director of the Office of

the Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is

amended as follows:

1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart MM--Oregon

2. Section 52.1970 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(107) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.1970 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(107) On November 15, 1991, the ODEQ submitted a PM-10

nonattainment area SIP for La Grande, Oregon.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) November 15, 1991 letter from ODEQ to EPA Region 10 submitting

the PM-10 nonattainment area SIP for La Grande, Oregon.

(B) PM-10 Control Strategy for Particulate Matter, October 1991, La

Grande, Oregon Nonattainment Area, as adopted by the Environmental

Quality Commission on November 8, 1991.

[FR Doc. 94-16000 Filed 6-30-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P