Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OR-16-1-5536a; OR-43-1-6523a; FRL-5025-8]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA approves the state implementation plan (SIP) revision

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 the Eugene-Springfield,

Oregon, PM-10 nonattainment area. In addition, EPA approves title 16 of

the Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority for inclusion into the Oregon

SIP. Title 16 establishes permanent rules prohibiting the use of

woodstoves and other solid-fuel space heating devices under certain

circumstances in Lane County and the cities of Eugene and Springfield,

Oregon.

DATES: This final rule will be effective on October 24, 1994 unless

adverse or critical comments are received by September 23, 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,

SIP Manager, Air & Radiation Branch (AT-082), EPA, Docket #OR-16-1-

5536, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101.

Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for

public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information

Center, EPA, 401 M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460. Copies of

material submitted to EPA may be examined during normal business hours

at the following locations: EPA, Region 10, Air & Radiation Branch,

1200 Sixth Avenue (AT-082), Seattle, Washington 98101, and the Oregon

Department of Environmental Quality, 811 SW. Sixth Avenue, Portland,

Oregon 97204-1390.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rindy Ramos, EPA, 1200 Sixth Avenue,

AT-082, Seattle, Washington, 98101, (206) 553-6510.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The area within the Eugene-Springfield, 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 81.339. 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 approval and the supporting

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

PM-10 SIP for the Eugene-Springfield nonattainment area, EPA is

approving 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 comments received

by the date indicated above.

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

\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. 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 this document 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 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 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.

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 must 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). Oregon has made

submittals in response to both of the above described requirements. EPA

intends to address that submittal containing the new source review

permit program in a separate document.

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 approving 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.

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 State of Oregon and Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority

(LRAPA) held a concurrent public hearing on the original Eugene-

Springfield PM-10 plan on January 30, 1990. On January 31, 1991, the

Oregon Environmental Quality Commission (OEQC), adopted the plan as

part of the Oregon SIP. The State and LRAPA subsequently held a

concurrent public hearing on an addendum to the plan on October 1,

1991, in Springfield, Oregon. This addendum, including appendix L, was

adopted by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) on

November 8, 1991. The original plan and the addendum were submitted to

EPA on November 15, 1991, as a revision to the SIP.

The SIP revision was reviewed by EPA to determine completeness

shortly after its submittal, in accordance with the completeness the

criteria set out at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. A letter dated May 7,

1992, was forwarded to the Director of ODEQ indicating the completeness

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

In this action EPA is approving the State of Oregon's PM-10 SIP

submittal for the Eugene-Springfield 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, current inventory of

actual emissions from all sources of relevant pollutants in the

nonattainment area. The emissions inventory should also include a

comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of allowable emissions

in the area. See, e.g., section 110(a)(2)(K) of the Act. 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 submission

(see 57 FR 13539).

The 1985 base year emission inventory developed for the Eugene-

Springfield UGB identified the major sources of PM-10 concentrations

during 24-hour worst case winter periods as residential wood combustion

(68%), industrial emissions (26%), fugitive dust (4%), and other

sources, including but not limited to, transportation, open and

prescribed burning (2%). Annual emissions for the same timeframe were

residential wood combustion (34%), industrial emissions (54%), fugitive

dust (6%), and other sources (5%).

EPA is approving the emissions inventory because it generally

appears to be 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 Clean Air Act.4

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

\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 Act. 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).

LRAPA performed a technical and cost analysis to evaluate available

control measures. This analysis is presented in appendix E and F to the

SIP. Using EPA modeling guidelines and protocols, the analysis showed

that with some exceptions, local industrial sources currently meet or

exceed RACT. Further, RACM (including RACT) does not require the

implementation of all available control measures where an area

demonstrates timely attainment and the implementation of additional

controls would not expedite attainment. 57 FR 13540-13544. Based on the

available control measures adopted (described below), the SIP

demonstrates that attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS will be achieved by

December 31, 1992 (two years prior to the CAA attainment date of

December 31, 1994). The SIP also demonstrates continued maintenance of

the NAAQS between December 1992 and the year 2000. PM-10 emissions from

industrial point sources (26%), primarily wood products industry, had

substantially less of an impact on the 24-hour standard than

residential wood combustion (68%). A cost benefit comparison of

alternate strategies showed that implementation of a woodsmoke

curtailment program would achieve expeditious air quality improvements

at a much lower cost than would additional point source control.

Accordingly, EPA is approving the existing industrial controls as

meeting the RACM (including RACT) requirement.

A. Mandatory Woodburning Curtailment Program

A mandatory woodburning curtailment program became fully

implemented on November 1, 1991. Each of the three jurisdictions in the

nonattainment area enacted ordinances prohibiting the use of solid-fuel

space heating devices under certain conditions. Enforcement of the

ordinances have been delegated by Lane County, the City of Eugene, and

the City of Springfield to LRAPA. Prior to the mandatory program, a

voluntary program had been in place for five years. The following is a

brief discussion of the program's key elements. For a detailed analysis

and discussion, the reader is referred to the Technical Support

Document (TSD) that corresponds with this action.

During the 1992/1993 woodheating season, LRAPA used a combination

advertising campaign using radio and billboard advertising, press

releases and taped television public service announcements. In

addition, during the last 2\1/2\ years, there have been approximately

20 visits with local schools and several presentations to various local

groups, e.g. real estate, church. The purpose of these visits was to

discuss pertinent elements of the curtailment program, proper woodstove

operation and maintenance, and air pollution in general.

Woodburning advisories are made daily by 1 p.m. between the first

of November and the end of February via local television and radio

stations. An empirical formula (based on the previous 24-hour

nephelometer readings and the predicted afternoon ventilation index) is

used to predict the present day's PM-10 level. The predicted PM-10

level determines whether a green, yellow, stage I red, or stage II red

advisory is issued.

Woodburning curtailment advisories are issued at four levels; 1) a

green advisory is made when the ambient PM-10 concentration is expected

to be 74 g/m3 or less, 2) a yellow advisory is issued when the

ambient PM-10 concentration is expected to be greater than 75

g/m3 but less than 88 g/m3, 3) a Stage I Red advisory

is issued when the ambient concentration is expected to be greater than

88 g/m3 but less than 125 g/m3, 4) a State II Red

advisory is issued when the ambient concentration is expected to be

greater than 125 g/m3.

During a Stage I Red Advisory, any solid fuel space heating device

(e.g. certified woodstove, uncertified woodstove, or pellet stove) may

be operated provided it does not emit visible emissions. Exemptions to

complying with this advisory include sole source and low income.

During a State II Red Advisory, sole source and low income

exemptions are granted. Also, pellet stoves may be operated provided

they do not emit visible emissions. All other solid fuel space heating

devices are prohibited from operation.

As stated above, LRAPA can grant an exemption from complying with a

Stage I and Stage II Red Advisory provided that the solid fuel space

heating device is the sole source of heat for a specific residence.

Individual exemptions expire on July 1 of each year and must be renewed

annually. This exemption shall not be issued by LRAPA after June 30,

1996.

An exemption based on economic need can also be granted. Persons in

charge of property who satisfy criteria established under the Low

Income Energy Assistance Program as administered by the Lane County

Housing Authority and as established by the United States Department of

Energy are exempt from Stage I and Stage II Red Advisories. Individual

exemptions shall expire on July 1 of each year and must be renewed

annually.

The woodburning curtailment program has a surveillance and

enforcement element. A standard operating procedure and evaluation

measure has been developed for use during red advisories. During

surveillance and effectiveness evaluations, infra-red detectors are

used at night to detect 'hot' chimneys. During a red advisory, visible

emissions will be documented and a Notice of Violation, including those

with civil penalties, will be issued. Persons who receive the notice

may either pay the fine or appeal the civil penalty. Fines range from

$50.00 to $400.00.

LRAPA requests a 70% reduction credit for the curtailment program.

This requested credit is greater than the 50% generally suggested by

EPA for a mandatory curtailment program. However, the recommended 50%

credit is viewed by EPA as a ``starting point in assessing the

effectiveness of residential wood combustion control programs.'' Final

judgement of the amount of credit to be granted, is determined by EPA

regional offices, based on the program elements outlined in EPA's

Guidance Document for Residential Wood Combustion Emission Control

Measures, EPA-4450/2-89-015, September 1989.

Since implementation of the mandatory program in November 1991,

ambient PM-10 concentrations have not deteriorated to the point where

the issuance of a red advisory has been needed to protect the NAAQS.

Therefore, LRAPA has not conducted a compliance survey during a red

advisory. However; during the 1991/1992 and the 1992/1993 woodheating

seasons, LRAPA did conduct several surveys during green and yellow

advisories. These surveys indicate that between 52% and 78% of the

dwellings equipped with woodstoves were not using wood as a source of

home heat.

Even though results from the above surveys are somewhat

inconclusive since the surveys were conducted during green and yellow

advisories, the results do indicate that LRAPA's public education/

awareness program is quite effective. Additionally, preliminary results

from a 1992 wood user's survey indicates that between the 1985 base

year and 1992, annual PM-10 emissions from home heating have declined

by approximately 60%. This corresponds to a 40% reduction in cord wood

consumption.

Considering the above program elements, survey results, and the

phasing out of the sole source exemptions, EPA believes that the 70%

credit is achievable and is being achieved and therefore proposes to

accept the credit claimed. EPA has also considered that fact that the

area has not violated the 24-hour standard since January, 1987 (first

year of a voluntary curtailment program), and has never violated the

annual standard. Accordingly, EPA has determined that the mandatory

curtailment program is sufficient to meet RACM.

Additionally, even though the area is not in violation of the

annual standard, the expected emission reductions to be achieved by

this strategy will help insure continued compliance with the annual

standard.

B. Other Sources

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

problem in the area, EPA's policy is that it would be unreasonable to

require the sources to implement potentially available control measures

and, therefore, the RACM requirement does not dictate the

implementation of such controls. (57 FR 13540).

LRAPA determined through its analysis of the nonattainment area

that emissions from fugitive dust sources and emissions from prescribed

and open burning activities were not significant sources of PM-10

emissions. On an annual basis, fugitive dust accounts for 6% of the PM-

10 emission inventory. Emissions from prescribed and open burning added

together account for less than 1% of the nonattainment area's PM-10

emissions on an annual basis. Further, as indicated above, the control

measures contained in the SIP provide for expeditious attainment of the

PM-10 NAAQS. Therefore, the attainment plan does not include additional

control measures for these sources.

EPA has reviewed ODEQ's submittals and associated documentation and

concluded that they adequately justify the control measures to be

implemented. Implementation of the Eugene-Springfield 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 document, EPA is approving ODEQ's control

strategy as satisfying the RACM (including RACT) requirement.

4. Demonstration

As noted, the initial moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas must

submit a demonstration (including air quality modeling) showing that

the plan will provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable

but no later than December 31, 1994 (see section 189(a)(1)(B) of the

Act). The General Preamble sets out EPA's guidance on the use of

modeling for moderate area attainment demonstrations (57 FR 13539).

Alternatively, the State must show attainment by December 31, 1994, or

that attainment is impracticable. The 24-hour PM-10 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 PM-10 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.).

LRAPA conducted an attainment demonstration based on dispersion

modeling; which, according to EPA's PM-10 SIP Development Guideline

(June 1987), is an acceptable method. In order to select the

appropriate model, LRAPA followed EPA's ``Protocol for Determining the

Best Performing Model'' (September 1987) in LRAPA's evaluation of the

Oregon GRID, WYNDvalley, and ISCST dispersion models. Based on its

analysis, Oregon GRID performed within EPA's approved limits of

accuracy and was determined to be the best performing model.

The time period selected for the 24-hour modeling analysis was from

December 11, 1985 through December 28, 1985. This was a period of

extensive poor ventilation with no precipitation, cold temperatures

(average daily temperatures near zero degrees centigrade) and light

winds (average daily wind speed of 1 to 2 meters per second). In

addition, 12 of the 15 exceedances of the 24-hour standard occurred

during December 1985. Since the area is in attainment with the annual

standard, LRAPA only modeled for attainment purposes the 24-hour

standard.

The uncontrolled 1992 modeled design value was determined to be 333

g/m3. Based on the modeling analysis, in order to attain the

24-hour standard throughout the airshed, a 65% reduction in PM-10

emissions at an unmonitored site (referred to in the study as the

Scenic site) is needed. The modeling exercise also determined that

approximately 97% of the local impact at this site (Scenic site) is

from home wood heating. After applying the 70% reduction in wood smoke

emissions due to the curtailment program, the modeling exercise

demonstrates that attainment of the 24-hour standard can be achieved at

this site and throughout the airshed. The demonstration predicted that

the 24-hour design concentration in the attainment year of 1992 will be

below 150 g/m3, thus demonstrating attainment of the 24-hour

PM-10 NAAQS. The SIP also demonstrates maintenance of the NAAQS through

the year 2000. Ambient data show that the area has never approached an

exceedance of the annual standard. Since no violations of the annual

NAAQS have been noted and the attainment demonstration shows attainment

of the 24-hour NAAQS, no violations of the annual NAAQS are likely.

Therefore, EPA has determined that ODEQ has adequately demonstrated

that the annual standard has been attained in the Eugene-Springfield

nonattainment area. More detailed description of the attainment

demonstration is contained in the TSD.

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).

As previously discussed, LRAPA's technical analysis of candidate

control measures indicated that emissions from industrial point sources

had substantially less of an impact on the 24-hour standard than

residential wood combustion. Previous violations of the 24-hour

standard occurred during periods of extensive poor ventilation

(stagnation conditions) and cold temperatures. This further supports

the dispersion modeling exercise which indicated that approximately 97%

of the local impact at the highest modeled site in the UGB was from

woodsmoke emissions and that implementation of the woodsmoke

curtailment program would expeditiously demonstrate attainment with the

PM-10 NAAQS. Therefore, EPA believes that sources of PM-10 precursors

do not contribute significantly to PM-10 levels in excess of the NAAQS

and hereby grants the exclusion from control requirements authorized

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

Note that while EPA is making a general finding for this area about

precursor contribution to PM-10 NAAQS exceedances, 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.

6. Quantitative Milestones and Reasonable Further Progress

The PM-10 nonattainment area plan revisions demonstrating

attainment must contain quantitative milestones which are to be

achieved every three years until the area is redesignated attainment

and which demonstrates RFP, as defined in section 171(1), toward

attainment by December 31, 1994 (see section 189(c) of the CAA).

While section 189(c) plainly provides that quantitative milestones

are to be achieved until an area is redesignated attainment, it is

silent in indicating the starting point for counting the first 3-year

period or how many milestones must be initially addressed. In the

General Preamble, EPA addressed the statutory gap in the starting point

for counting the 3-year milestone, indicating that it would begin from

the due date for the applicable implementation plan revision containing

the control measures for the area (i.e., November 15, 1991 for initial

moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas) (see 57 FR 13539).

As to the number of milestones, EPA believes that at least two

milestones must be initially addressed. Thus, submittal to address the

SIP revisions due on November 15, 1991, for the initial moderate PM-10

nonattainment areas must demonstrate that two milestones will be

achieved (First milestone: November 15, 1991, through November 15,

1994; Second milestone: November 15, 1994, through November 15, 1997).

For the initial PM-10 nonattainment areas that demonstrate

attainment, the emissions reduction progress made between the SIP

submittal (due date of November 15, 1991) and the attainment date of

December 31, 1994 (46 days beyond the November 15, 1994 milestone date)

will satisfy the first quantitative milestone (see 57 FR 13539). For

areas that demonstrate timely attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS, the

milestones beyond the attainment achievement date should, at a minimum,

provide for continued maintenance of the standards.5

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

\5\Section 189(c) of the Act provides that quantitative

milestones are to be achieved ``until the area is redesignated

attainment.'' However, this endpoint for quantitative milestones is

speculative because redesignation of an area as attainment is

contingent upon several factors and future events. Therefore, EPA

believes it is reasonable for States to initially address at least

the first two milestones. Addressing two milestones will ensure that

the State continues to maintain the NAAQS beyond the attainment date

for at least some period during which an area could be redesignated

attainment. However, in all instances, additional milestones must be

addressed if an area is not redesignated attainment.

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

This SIP demonstrates attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS by December 31,

1992, and maintenance of the NAAQS through the year 2000, satisfying

three milestones. Therefore, EPA is approving the submittal as meeting

the quantitative milestone requirement currently due. Finally, once a

milestone has passed, the State will have to demonstrate that the

milestone was, in fact, achieved for the Eugene-Springfield area as

provided in section 189(c)(2) of the Act.

7. Enforceability Issues

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

LRAPA, 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 woodsmoke curtailment program contained in the SIP was

addressed above under the section headed ``RACM (including RACT).'' The

SIP provides that this control strategy applies throughout the entire

nonattainment area.

Lane County, and the cities of Eugene and Springfield have enacted

ordinances prohibiting the use of solid-fuel space heating devices

under certain conditions (air stagnation episodes).

Lane County enacted Ordinance Number 9-90 (Lane Code (``LC'')

9.120-9.160). Eugene enacted Ordinance Number 19731 (Eugene Code

(``EC'') 6.250-6.270) and Springfield enacted Ordinance Number 5546

(Springfield Code (``SC'') 4-8-4). Each municipality also either

delegated enforcement of the ordinances to LRAPA (L.C. Sec. 9.145;

Springfield Code Sec. 4-8-4(4)), or authorized the City Manager to

delegate enforcement to LRAPA (Eugene Code Sec. 6.265). By

Administrative Order No. 44-92-10, the Eugene City Manager has

delegated authority to LRAPA to administer the ordinance. Thus, each

jurisdiction has authorized LRAPA to enforce the solid-fuel space

heating device ordinances. In addition, each jurisdiction has

authorized LRAPA to use its own regulations and procedures to enforce

the ordinances and to impose penalties.

The LRAPA Board of Directors adopted title 16, Home Wood Heating

Curtailment Program Enforcement, on July 13, 1993. This rule is the

mechanism LRAPA will employ in implementing the above ordinances. It

contains, among other things, a civil penalty schedule, a notice of

violation procedure, and the procedure to appeal a civil penalty. EPA

is approving the above ordinances and title 16 as part of the SIP.

The Eugene-Springfield SIP does not contain additional point source

controls to attain the standard, however, existing and federally

approved point source emission limitations are relied upon to maintain

and demonstrate attainment with the PM-10 NAAQS. EPA determined that

because the five-day advance notice provision required by ORS.126(1)

(1991) bars civil penalties from being imposed for certain permit

violations, ORS 468 fails to provide the adequate enforcement authority

that a state must demonstrate to obtain SIP approval, as specified in

Section 110 of the Clean Air Act and 40 CFR 51.230. Accordingly, the

requirement to provide such notice would preclude Federal approval of a

PM-10 nonattainment area SIP revision.

EPA notified Oregon of the deficiency. To correct the problem, the

Governor of Oregon signed into law new legislation amending ORS 468.126

on September 3, 1993. This amendment added paragraph 468.126(2)(e)

which provides that the five-day advance notice required by ORS

468.126(1) does not apply if the notice requirement will disqualify a

state program from Federal approval or delegation. ODEQ responded to

EPA's understanding of the application of 468.126(2)(e) and agreed that

if Federal statutory requirements preclude the use of the five-day

advance notice provision, no advance notice will be required for

violations of SIP requirements contained in permits.

ODEQ's submittal and TSD contain further information on

enforceability requirements. In addition, the TSD contains a discussion

of the personnel and funding intended to support effective

implementation of the control strategy.

8. Contingency Measures

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

nonattainment area SIP's that demonstrate attainment must include

contingency measures. See generally 57 FR 13543-13544. These measures

must be submitted by November 15, 1993 for the initial moderate

nonattainment areas. Contingency measures should consist of other

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

These measures must take effect without further action by the State or

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

or attain the PM-10 NAAQS by the applicable statutory deadline. The

Eugene-Springfield nonattainment area SIP contains the following

contingency measures:

a. Uncertified woodstove removal: the 1991 Oregon Legislature

authorized by statute the removal and destruction of uncertified

woodstoves upon sale of a home within any area that fails to meet the

PM-10 SIP attainment date of December 31, 1994. EPA approved these

rules (OAR 340-34-200 through 215) as part of the Oregon SIP on June 9,

1992 (57 FR 24373).

b. Fugitive Dust: to reduce track out onto public roads,

construction sites for commercial, industrial or residential

subdivisions within the Eugene-Springfield nonattainment area are

required to provide paved track out strips or mud cleaning stations on

site. This rule is found in title 39, section 39-055 of LRAPA's

contingency measure regulations.

In this action, EPA is approving in its entirety title 39 entitled

Contingency for PM-10 Sources in Eugene-Springfield Non-Attainment

Area. (Sections 39-001, 39-005, 39-010, 39-015, 39-020, 39-025, 39-030,

39-035, 39-040, 39-050, 39-055, and 39-060 (November 1991)).

c. Open Burning: all open burning would be banned within the

nonattainment area. This rule is found in section 39-060 of title 39.

d. Industrial Controls: a contingency plan was developed to reduce

industrial emissions should the area fail to attain by the CAA

deadline. The regulations requiring controls more stringent than those

currently required on significant industrial sources of PM-10 are

contained in title 39. Industrial sources addressed in the plan include

wood-waste boilers, veneer plants and dryers, particleboard plants and

dryers, air conveying systems and kraft pulp mills.

The industrial contingency limits for the most part reflect ODEQ's

industrial source rules for the Medford-Ashland non-attainment area

(OAR 340-30-005 through 230). The one exception is the contingency

standard for pulp mills. Should the area fail to attain the NAAQS,

kraft pulp mills would be required to meet EPA's New Source Performance

Standards (NSPS). These control measures would become effective upon a

determination by EPA that the area has failed to make reasonable

further progress (RFP) or to attain the PM-10 NAAQS and, they would be

implemented over a period of two years.

LRAPA estimates that implementation of the contingency measures

would reduce wood heating emissions by an additional .5 ton per day and

industrial emissions would be reduced by 6.2 tons per day resulting in

additional reductions of 45% on a daily basis. On an annual basis, wood

heating emissions would be reduced by 53 tons per year and industrial

emissions by 1,800 tons per year resulting in additional reductions of

over 2000%.

The SIP provides that each of these measures can take affect

without further action by the State or EPA, should EPA determine that

the Eugene-Springfield nonattainment area has failed to achieve RFP or

to attain the PM-10 standard by the statutory attainment date of

December 31, 1994.

EPA is approving the Eugene-Springfield nonattainment area

contingency measures.

III. Implications of This Action

EPA is approving the plan revision and addendum submitted to EPA

for the Eugene-Springfield nonattainment area on November 15, 1991.

Among other things, LRAPA has demonstrated that the Eugene-Springfield

moderate PM-10 nonattainment area will attain the PM-10 NAAQS by

December 31, 1992. Note that EPA's action includes approval of the

contingency measures for the Eugene-Springfield nonattainment area. In

addition, EPA approves title 16 of the Lane Regional Air Pollution

Authority. Title 16 establishes permanent rules prohibiting the use of

woodstoves and other solid-fuel space heating devices under certain

circumstances in Lane County and the cities of Eugene and Springfield,

Oregon.

IV. Administrative Review

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA

must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of

any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.

Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small

entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,

and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than

50,000.

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

do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements

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

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

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

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

preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute

federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The

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

Union Electric Co. v. U.S.E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42

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

The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because

the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates

no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal

Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision

should no adverse or critical comments be filed. This final rule will

be effective October 24, 1994 unless, by September 23, 1994, adverse or

critical comments are received.

If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn

before the effective date by publishing a subsequent notice that will

withdraw the final action. All public comments received will be

addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on

this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should

do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is

advised that this final rule will be effective October 24, 1994.

The EPA has reviewed this request for revision of the federally-

approved SIP for conformance with the provisions of the 1990 Clean Air

Act Amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The EPA has determined

that this action conforms with those requirements.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or

allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for

revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific technical, economic and

environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

This action has been classified as a Table 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. The OMB has exempted this regulatory action from

E.O. 12866 review.

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 October 24, 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.

7607(b)(2).

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,

Volatile organic compounds.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for

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

Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: July 11, 1994.

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 MM--Oregon

2. Section 52.1970 is amended by adding paragraph (c) (108) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.1970 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(108) On November 15, 1991 the Director of ODEQ submitted

amendments to Oregon's SIP to include a PM-10 control strategy for

Eugene-Springfield and LRAPA title 39.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) November 15, 1991 letter from the Director of ODEQ to EPA

Region 10 submitting amendments to the Oregon SIP.

(B) The PM-10 control strategy for Eugene-Springfield, adopted by

the OEQC on January 31, 1991, and LRAPA title 39 (Contingency for PM-10

sources in the Eugene-Springfield nonattainment area), adopted by the

OEQC on November 8, 1991.

(C) April 13, 1994 letter from the Director of ODEQ to EPA Region

10 submitting amendments to the Oregon SIP.

(D) Amendments to Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority Rules as a

revision to the Oregon SIP (title 16), adopted by the OEQC on March 11,

1994.

[FR Doc. 94-20738 Filed 8-23-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P