Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Iowa

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[IA-6-1-6244; FRL-4848-1]

Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of

Iowa

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action, pursuant to section 107(d) of the

Clean Air Act (``the Act'') to redesignate part of Muscatine County,

Iowa, from attainment to nonattainment for sulfur dioxide (SO2).

The result of this action is that the state of Iowa must submit an

SO2 implementation plan for the Muscatine nonattainment area to

EPA, within 18 months after the effective date of this notice, that

meets the requirements of part D, Title I of the Act. (See section

191(a) of the Act.)

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule will become effective April 11, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are

available for public inspection during normal business hours at the:

Environmental Protection Agency, Region VII, Air Branch, 726 Minnesota

Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wayne A. Kaiser at (913) 551-7603.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: EPA is authorized to initiate the

redesignation of additional areas (or portions thereof) as

nonattainment for SO2, pursuant to section 107(d)(3) of the Act,

on the basis of air quality data, planning and control considerations,

or any other air quality related considerations the Administrator deems

appropriate. As explained in the notice proposing the redesignation (58

FR 44639), section 107(d)(3) outlines a procedure to be followed for

redesignations. EPA believes that the redesignation, promulgated with

this notice, is appropriate and necessary to ensuring timely attainment

and maintenance of the SO2 ambient air quality standard in the

Muscatine area. Violations of the SO2 standard occurred in both

1991 and 1992. EPA believes that the area redesignated as nonattainment

by this notice satisfies the applicable criteria.

Section 107(d)(1)(A) sets out definitions of nonattainment,

attainment, and unclassifiable. These definitions provide the

controlling legal standard for any designations or redesignations to

the relevant attainment status. A nonattainment area is defined as any

area that does not meet, or that significantly contributes to, ambient

air quality in a nearby area that does not meet the national primary or

secondary ambient air quality standard for the relevant pollutant. (See

section 107(d)(1)(A)(i).) EPA believes that reasonably reliable

techniques, including monitoring and/or modeling information, may be

used both in determining the designation appropriate for an area and in

establishing SO2 nonattainment boundaries that are consistent with

section 107(d)(1)(A)(i) of the Act. Thus, in determining the

appropriate boundaries for the nonattainment area, EPA has considered

using the appropriate monitoring data and modeling information not only

in the area where the violations of the SO2 National Ambient Air

Quality Standards (NAAQS) are occurring, but in nearby areas which may

significantly contribute to such violations.

On August 24, 1993, EPA published a notice in the Federal Register

(54 FR 44639) proposing that an area in Muscatine County, Iowa, be

redesignated to nonattainment for SO2. A minor correction to the

description of the proposed nonattainment area was published on

September 23, 1993 (54 FR 49467), and a notice reopening the comment

period until November 26, 1993, was published on November 5, 1993 (54

FR 58999). Additional information regarding the proposed action and

this final action is contained in the docket maintained at the EPA

Regional Office located at the address above.

Response to Comments

Comments were received from three affected sources located within

the proposed nonattainment area and from the Governor of Iowa. The

comments are addressed extensively in the Technical Support Document

(TSD) contained in the docket for this notice.

All commenters took issue with EPA's proposed action. The comments

centered around the validity of the monitoring data, the description of

the nonattainment area, and the need for the action given intentions by

the sources to reduce their SO2 emissions.

Two major source commenters questioned the validity of the

monitoring data at the Musser Park monitor, where the violations were

recorded, on the days of exceedances in 1991. A review of the

monitoring station information for those days revealed that the air

conditioner failed in the monitoring station on or before June 25,

1991. This resulted in higher than normal ambient temperatures in the

monitoring station on June 25 and part of June 26, 1991, when the air

conditioner was replaced. High temperatures may have affected the

performance of the monitor on June 26, 1991. Therefore, EPA has decided

to discount the exceedance which occurred on that date. Additional data

review, however, confirmed that the exceedances which occurred on June

27 and July 20, 1991, were valid, and thus there was one measured

violation of the SO2 NAAQS in 1991.

Two commenters stated the EPA's notice to the Governor, required

pursuant to section 107(d)(3) which was based on the 1991 violations

and sent to the Governor on November 29, 1991, is invalid because no

violations occurred in 1991. However, as stated above, at least one

violation did occur in 1991. Therefore, the basis for this comment is

incorrect. In addition, as explained in detail in the TSD, valid

measured data from 1992 show at least one violation in that year. Even

if the 1991 data had been shown to be invalid, EPA is not required to

restart the process with another letter to the Governor in order to

designate the area nonattainment.

One commenter questioned the siting of the Musser Park monitor. As

explained in detail in the TSD, EPA review confirmed that the siting of

the monitor is consistent with the EPA siting criteria specified in 40

CFR part 58, appendix E.

One commenter questioned using modeling to establish the boundaries

of the nonattainment area, stating that modeling subsequently performed

by the commenter did not validate the monitoring data on the days of

exceedances at the Musser Park monitor, and, thus, use of the model by

EPA to establish the nonattainment area is unjustified.

EPA is basing its nonattainment designation on ambient monitoring

data, its description of the nonattainment area on monitoring data,

and, to a lesser extent, modeling data. The contention by the commenter

that modeling data are not consistent with monitoring data at the

Musser Park location does not negate EPA's use of modeling data to help

define the boundaries of the nonattainment area. EPA policy permits

wide discretion in determining the boundaries of nonattainment areas,

including the use of political boundaries. In this case, EPA used

modeling data to narrow the nonattainment area to an area that

encompassed both monitored and modeled nonattainment areas and major

SO2 sources.

The three major source SO2 commenters, as well as the Governor

of Iowa, stated that redesignation to nonattainment was unnecessary

since the major SO2 sources were working with the state to reduce

emissions. EPA is aware of the ongoing efforts in this regard, but

notes it has been over two years since the first monitored violation of

the NAAQS and over one year since the second violation, yet there have

been no federally enforceable emission limitations established to

reduce SO2 emissions in the Muscatine area. Furthermore,

administrative orders recently issued by the state to the three major

SO2 sources in the Muscatine area have been appealed.

EPA has a responsibility to not only ensure that air quality

problems are addressed thoroughly and expeditiously, but to require

contingency measures and maintenance plans to ensure continued

attainment of the NAAQS. The nonattainment designation promulgated

today will lead to development of these necessary requirements to

protect air quality in the Muscatine area.

The final comment was that a nonattainment designation would result

in economic hardship on the sources and the community. This is a factor

that may be considered by the state in developing and implementing a

control strategy, but is not a factor to be considered by EPA in its

nonattainment designation decision. EPA does not believe that it is

appropriate to consider such factors in light of the criteria for

redesignations pursuant to section 107(d)(3) of the Act, which relates

to air quality considerations.

In summary, EPA believes that a nonattainment designation, for the

area described in the corrected Federal Register notice of September

23, 1993, pursuant to section 107 of the Act, is appropriate and

necessary to ensure timely attainment and maintenance of the air

quality standards in the Muscatine area.

Areas designated nonattainment are subject to the provisions of

sections 107, 176(c), and part D of the Act. From the effective date of

this notice, the state will have 18 months to submit a revised State

Implementation Plan (SIP) which contains measures that provide for

attainment of the area within five years.

Within 12 months of this nonattainment designation, the state must

submit a revision to the SIP which addresses the requirements of the

general conformity rule (58 FR 63214). The general conformity

requirements established by 40 CFR parts 51 and 91 apply to the

nonattainment area until the state's general conformity SIP revision is

approved by EPA.

EPA Action

EPA is designating part of Muscatine County, Iowa, as nonattainment

for SO2 in accordance with the section 107(d)(3) redesignation

process described above. The nonattainment area is described as

follows: T 77 N, R 2 W, Sections 26, 27, 34, 35; and T 76 N, R 2 W,

Sections 2, 3, 10, 11, 14, 15, 22, 27, 28, 33, 34, Muscatine County,

Iowa. 40 CFR 81.316 is being revised accordingly.

Redesignation of an area to nonattainment under section

107(d)(3)(E) of the Act does not impose any new requirements on small

entities. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a

geographical area and does not impose any regulatory requirements on

sources. To the extent that the state must adopt new regulations, based

on an area's nonattainment status, EPA will review the effect of those

actions on small entities at the time the state submits those

regulations. Thus, EPA certifies that this redesignation will not

affect a substantial number of small entities.

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). A revision to the SIP processing

review tables was approved by the Acting Assistant Administrator for

Office of Air and Radiation on October 4, 1993 (Michael Shapiro's

memorandum to Regional Administrators). A future notice will inform the

general public of these tables. Under the revised tables this action

remains classified as a table 2. On January 6, 1989, the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) waived table 2 and table 3 SIP revisions

(54 FR 2222) from the requirement of section 3 of Executive Order 12291

for two years. EPA has submitted a request for a permanent waiver for

table 2 and table 3 SIP revisions. OMB has agreed to continue the

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

continues in effect under Executive Order 12866 which superseded

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 section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review

of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for

the appropriate circuit by May 9, 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).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

Dated: March 1, 1994.

Dennis Grams,

Regional Administrator.

Part 81, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is

amended as follows:

PART 81--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

2. Section 81.316 is amended by revising the ``Iowa--SO2''

table to read as follows:

Sec. 81.316 Iowa.

* * * * *

Iowa--SO2

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

Does not

Does not meet Cannot be Better than

Designated area meet primary secondary classified national

standards standards standards

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

Muscatine County:

Area within T 77 N, R 2 W, sections 26, 27, 34, 35:

and T 76 N, R 2 W, sections 2, 3, 10, 11, 14, 15,

22, 27, 28, 33, 34................................. x

Remainder of county................................. x

Remainder of state...................................... x

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

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 94-5626 Filed 3-9-94; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P