Clean Air Act Promulgation of Reclassification of PM-10 Nonattainment Areas in Idaho

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[ID-5-2-7075; FRL-5284-7]

Clean Air Act Promulgation of Reclassification of PM-10

Nonattainment Areas in Idaho

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action identifies those nonattainment areas in the State

of Idaho which have failed to attain the National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter

of less than or equal to ten micrometers (PM-10) by the applicable

attainment date. This action also proposes to grant a one-year

extension of the attainment date for the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10

nonattainment area and the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area in Idaho.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by

September 27, 1995.

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

SIP Manager, Environmental Protection Agency, Air and Radiation Branch

(AT-082), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle Washington, 98101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven K. Body, 206-553-0782, Air and

Radiation Branch (AT-082), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Sixth

Avenue, Seattle, Washington, 98101.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

A. CAA Requirements Concerning Designation and Classification

Areas meeting the requirements of section 107(d)(4)(B) of the Act

1 were designated nonattainment for PM-10 by operation of law and

classified ``moderate'' upon enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act

Amendments. See generally Section 107(d)(4)(B). These areas included

all former Group I PM-10 planning areas identified in 52 FR 29383

(August 7, 1987), as further clarified in 55 FR 45799 (October 31,

1990), and any other areas violating the National Ambient Air Quality

Standards (NAAQS) for PM-10 prior to January 1, 1989.2 A Federal

Register notice announcing the areas designated nonattainment for PM-10

upon enactment of the 1990 Amendments, known as ``initial'' PM-10

nonattainment areas, was published on March 15, 1991 (56 FR 11101), and

a subsequent Federal Register notice correcting the description of some

of those areas was published on August 8, 1991 (56 FR 37654). See 56 FR

56694 (November 6, 1991) and 40 CFR 81.313 (for codified air quality

designations and classifications in the State of Idaho). All initial

moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas have the same applicable attainment

date of December 31, 1994.

\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 (``Act'' or

``CAA''), which is codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

\2\ Many of these other areas were identified in footnote 4 of

the October 31, 1990 Federal Register notice.

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

States containing initial moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas were

required to develop and submit to EPA by November 15, 1991, a SIP

revision providing for, among other things, implementation of

reasonably available control measures (RACM), including reasonably

available control technology (RACT), and a demonstration either that

the plan would provide for attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS by December

31, 1994 or that attainment by that date was impracticable. See Section

189(a).

[[Page 44453]]

B. Attainment Determinations

All PM-10 areas designated nonattainment pursuant to section

107(d)(4)(B) of the Act were initially classified ``moderate'' by

operation of law upon enactment of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments.

See Section 188(a). Pursuant to sections 179(c) and 188(b)(2) of the

Act, EPA has the responsibility of determining within six months of the

December 31, 1994, attainment date whether PM-10 nonattainment areas

have attained the NAAQS. Determinations under section 179(c)(1) of the

Act are to be based upon an area's ``air quality as of the attainment

date.'' Section 188(b)(2) is consistent with this requirement.

Generally, EPA will determine whether an area's air quality is meeting

the PM-10 NAAQS for purposes of section 179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) based

upon data gathered at established State and Local Air Monitoring

Stations (SLAMS) in the nonattainment area and entered into the

Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). Data entered into the

AIRS has been determined by EPA to meet federal monitoring requirements

(see 40 CFR 50.6 and appendix J, 40 CFR part 53, 40 CFR part 58,

appendix A & B) and may be used to determine the attainment status of

areas. EPA will also consider air quality data from other air

monitoring stations in the nonattainment area provided that it meets

the federal monitoring requirements for SLAMS. All data will be

reviewed to determine the area's air quality status in accordance with

EPA guidance at 40 CFR part 50, appendix K.

Attainment of the annual PM-10 standard is achieved when the annual

arithmetic mean of four valid quarterly averages of the PM-10

concentration over a three-year period (1992, 1993 and 1994 for areas

with a December 31, 1994 attainment date) is equal to or less than 50

micrograms per cubic meter (g/m3). Attainment of the 24-

hour standard is determined by calculating the expected number of days

in a year with PM-10 concentrations greater than 150 g/

m3. The 24-hour standard is attained when the expected number of

days with levels above 150 g/m3 (averaged over a three-

year period) is less than or equal to one (1.0). Three consecutive

years of air quality data is generally necessary to show attainment of

the annual and 24-hour standard for PM-10. See 40 CFR part 50 and

appendix K.

C. Reclassification to Serious

A PM-10 nonattainment area may be reclassified from ``moderate'' to

``serious,'' which imposes new air quality planning obligations, in one

of two ways. First, EPA has general discretion to reclassify a moderate

PM-10 area to serious if at any time EPA determines the area cannot

practicably attain the PM-10 standard by the applicable attainment

date. See Section 188(b)(1). EPA bases its decisions to reclassify an

area as serious before the attainment date on special facts or

circumstances related to the affected nonattainment area which

demonstrate that the area cannot practicably attain the standard by the

applicable attainment date.

Second, under section 188(b)(2) of the Act, a moderate area will be

reclassified as serious by operation of law if EPA finds that the area

is not in attainment by the applicable attainment date. Pursuant to

section 188(b)(2)(B) of the Act, EPA must publish a Federal Register

notice within six months after the applicable attainment date

identifying those areas which have failed to attain the standard and

are reclassified to serious by operation of law. See Section 188(b)(2);

see also Section 179(c)(1).

D. Extension of the Attainment Date

The Act provides the Administrator with the discretion to grant a

one-year extension of the attainment date for a moderate PM-10

nonattainment area, provided certain criteria are met. See Section

188(d). If an area does not have the necessary number of consecutive

years of clean air quality data to show attainment of the NAAQS, a

State may apply for up to two one-year extensions of the attainment

date for that area. The statute sets forth two criteria a moderate

nonattainment area must satisfy in order to obtain an extension: (1)

The State has complied with all the requirements and commitments

pertaining to the area in the applicable implementation plan; and (2)

the area had no more than one exceedance of the 24-hour PM-10 standard

in the year preceding the extension year, and the annual mean

concentration of PM-10 in the area for the year preceding the extension

year is less than or equal to the standard. See Section 188(d).

The authority delegated to the Administrator to extend attainment

dates for moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas is discretionary: Section

188(d) of the Act provides that the Administrator ``may'' extend the

attainment date for areas that meet the minimum requirements specified

above. The provision does not dictate or compel that EPA grant

extensions to such areas even if these conditions are met.

In exercising this discretionary authority for PM-10 nonattainment

areas, EPA examines, in addition to the two statutory criteria

discussed above, the air quality planning progress made in the moderate

area. See November 14, 1994 Memorandum from Sally L. Shaver, Director,

Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division entitled ``Criteria for

Granting 1-Year Extensions of Moderate PM-10 Nonattainment Area

Attainment Dates, Making Attainment Determinations, and Reporting on

Quantitative Milestones.'' EPA is disinclined to grant an attainment

date extension unless a State has, in substantial part, addressed its

moderate PM-10 nonattainment area planning obligations. In order to

determine whether the State has substantially met these planning

requirements, EPA reviews the State's application for the attainment

date extension to determine whether the State has: (1) Adopted and

substantially implemented control measures that represent RACM/RACT in

the moderate nonattainment area; and (2) demonstrated that the area has

made emission reductions amounting to reasonable further progress (RFP)

toward attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS as defined in section 171(1) of

the Act. RFP for PM-10 nonattainment areas is defined in section 171(1)

of the Act as annual incremental emission reductions to ensure

attainment of the applicable NAAQS (PM-10) by the applicable attainment

date.

If the State does not have the requisite number of years of clean

air quality data to show attainment and does not apply or qualify for

an attainment date extension, the area will be reclassified to serious

by operation of law under section 188(b)(2) of the Act. If an extension

of the attainment date is granted, at the end of the extension year EPA

will again determine whether the area has attained the PM-10 NAAQS. If

the requisite three consecutive years of clean air quality data needed

to determine attainment are not met for the area, the State may apply

for a second one-year extension of the attainment date. In order to

qualify for the second one-year extension of the attainment date, the

State must satisfy the same requirements listed above for the first

extension. In addition, EPA will consider the State's PM-10 planning

progress for the area during the year for which the first extension was

granted. If a second extension is granted and the area does not have

the requisite three consecutive years of clean air quality data needed

to demonstrate attainment at the end of the second extension, no

further extensions of the attainment date can be granted and the area

will be

[[Page 44454]]

reclassified serious by operation of law. See Section 188(d).

II. Summary of EPA's Proposed Action

Today's action announces EPA's determination that the Power-Bannock

Counties PM-10 nonattainment area and the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment

area have each failed to attain the PM-10 NAAQS by the applicable

attainment date of December 31, 1994. This determination is based upon

air quality data which show there were violations of the PM-10 NAAQS

during the period from 1992 to 1994.

The State of Idaho has requested a one-year extension of the PM-10

attainment date for both the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment

area and the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area. EPA has reviewed the

extension requests and is, with this notice, proposing to grant a one-

year extension of the attainment date for each area. This determination

is based upon available air quality data and a review of the State's

progress in implementing the planning requirements that apply to

moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas.

A. Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 Nonattainment Area

The Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area is comprised of

State lands within portions of both Power and Bannock Counties and both

trust and fee lands within a portion of the exterior boundaries of the

Fort Hall Indian Reservation. The State of Idaho operates four PM-10

SLAMS monitoring sites in the nonattainment area, all of which are on

State lands. Data from these State sites have been deemed valid by EPA

and have been submitted by the State of Idaho for inclusion in the AIRS

network.

1. Air Quality Data

Whether an area has attained the PM-10 NAAQS is based exclusively

upon measured air quality levels over the most recent and complete

three calendar year period. See 40 CFR part 50 and appendix K. For

areas with an attainment date of December 31, 1994, this three-year

period covers calendar years 1992, 1993 and 1994. Data from calendar

year 1994 is also used in determining whether an area with a December

31, 1994 attainment date meets the air quality criteria for granting a

one-year extension to the attainment date under section 188(d).

A review of the data reported for the SLAMS sites in the Power-

Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area for the calendar years 1992,

1993 and 1994 shows no violations of the annual PM-10 standard at any

of the sites. Measured PM-10 concentrations above the level of the 24-

hour NAAQS were recorded at two SLAMS monitoring sites on January 7,

1993. As a result of the State's sampling frequency of one in every six

day, the expected number of exceedances for the 1993 calendar year at

the SLAMS sites is 6.0 at one site and 6.2 at the second (calculated in

accordance with appendix K). No measured values above the level of the

24-hour NAAQS were reported in 1992 or 1994. Therefore, the three-year

average (1992, 1993 and 1994) expected exceedance rate of the 24-hour

standard at the SLAMS sites is 2.0 and 2.3 respectively, (calculated in

accordance with appendix K).

Private industry in the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment

area funded and operated a seven-station monitoring network in and near

a portion of the nonattainment area known as the ``industrial complex''

for one year, from October 1, 1993 through September 30, 1994 (referred

to as the ``EMF network''). EPA has determined the data from this

network are valid. There were no reported 24-hour concentrations above

the level of the 24-hour NAAQS during the year the network was in

operation. EMF Site #2, which is located at the site in the

nonattainment area predicted to have the maximum industrial air quality

impact, is located immediately adjacent to the industrial complex on

State lands, adjacent to the Reservation boundary. EMF Site #2 reported

an annual concentration greater than the 50 g/m3 level of

the annual PM-10 standard for the one-year period the network was in

operation. EMF Site #2 also reported several 24 hour PM-10

concentrations at or near the level of the 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS.

2. Attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS

The Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area does not attain

the 24-hour PM-10 NAAQS. The PM-10 concentrations reported at two SLAMS

monitoring stations on January 7, 1993, exceeded the level of the

NAAQS. Because of the sampling frequency (one in every six days), the

expected exceedance rate for the three-year period from 1992 through

1994 at two sites is greater than one (1.0) which represents a

violation of the 24-hour NAAQS.

3. Extension of Attainment Date

EPA is action proposing to grant the State's request for a one-year

extension of the attainment date, from December 31, 1994 to December

31, 1995, for the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area.

a. Compliance with Applicable SIP. Based on information available

to EPA, EPA believes that the State of Idaho is in compliance with all

requirements and commitments in the applicable implementation plan that

pertain to the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area. EPA

provides oversight of the Idaho air program, including implementation

of the Idaho State Implementation Plan (SIP). EPA conducts annual

oversight inspections of sources throughout the State of Idaho. Results

from these inspections indicate that the State is meeting the

requirements and commitments of the statewide SIP. Although the State

has submitted its moderate PM-10 nonattainment plan for the Power-

Bannock Counties nonattainment area as a SIP revision, EPA has not yet

taken action on that plan. Therefore, this plan is not yet an

``applicable implementation plan'' for the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10

nonattainment area. For further discussion of the State's compliance

with the applicable SIP, please refer to the Technical Support

Document.

b. Air Quality Data. As discussed above, there were no measured

levels above the 24-hour NAAQS at any of the SLAMS monitoring sites or

any of the EMF monitoring sites during calendar year 1994. In addition,

the annual mean concentration of PM-10 at each of the SLAMS monitoring

sites during calendar year 1994 was below the level of the annual

NAAQS.

As discussed above, however, EMF Site #2 recorded an annual average

above the annual standard for the one-year period from October 1, 1993

to September 30, 1994. EPA believes that the recorded PM-10 levels at

several of the monitoring sites in the EMF network, particularly EMF

Site #2, indicate that air quality problems continue in the Power-

Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area and that additional controls

will likely be necessary to bring the area into attainment. EPA does

not believe, however, that the data recorded at EMF Site #2 precludes

EPA from granting the State's request for a one-year extension of the

attainment date under section 188(d) of the Act. The EMF monitoring

network did not collect a year's worth of data in calendar year 1994.

Appendix K of 40 CFR part 50 specifies the data requirements that apply

in determining an area's attainment status and provides methods for

filling gaps in data. EPA believes that these same data requirements

should be applied in determining the annual mean

[[Page 44455]]

concentration of PM-10 in connection with an extension request under

section 188(d) of the Act. Even after applying the appendix K ``gap-

filling'' techniques for the reported data from EMF Site #2 for the

missing quarter of data in 1994, the question of whether the annual

mean concentration is above the level of the annual standard during

1994 remains ambiguous. In other words, the data does not conclusively

show a violation of the annual standard during calendar year 1994.

Accordingly, EPA does not believe that the PM-10 concentrations

recorded at EMF Site #2 preclude EPA from exercising its discretion to

grant the State's request for a one-year extension of the attainment

date. Please refer to the Technical Support Document for further

analysis of the EMF data.

c. Substantial Implementation of Control Measures. The State of

Idaho, along with several local agencies, has developed and implemented

several significant control measures on sources located on State lands

within the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area. The State

submitted these control measures to EPA as a SIP revision in May 1993

and in supplemental submittals since that time. These measures consist

of a comprehensive residential wood combustion program, including a

mandatory woodstove curtailment program; stringent controls on fugitive

road dust, including controls on winter road sanding and a limited

unpaved road paving program; and operating permits that represent RACT

for J.R. Simplot's facility in the industrial complex and Ashgrove

Cement's facility near Inkom, the only two major stationary sources of

PM-10 on State lands in the nonattainment area. EPA has conducted a

preliminary review of these measures and believes that they

substantially meet EPA's guidance for RACM, including RACT, for sources

of primary particulate for purposes of an extension under section

188(d).

After the State submitted its moderate area SIP in May 1993, the

State learned that PM-10 precursors contribute significantly to

wintertime violations of the PM-10 standard in the area. In cooperation

with the Tribes and EPA, the State developed a work plan for developing

an emission inventory of sources of PM-10 precursors in the

nonattainment area and controls for such sources. The State is moving

forward on this precursor plan and expects to have controls in place on

major stationary sources of PM-10 precursors by March 1997. EPA

believes that the State's schedule for addressing the contribution of

precursors is expeditious and that the State is making progress on the

workplan. Because the contribution of precursors came to light only

late in the planning process, EPA does not believe that the State's

failure to have actually adopted or implemented controls on sources of

PM-10 precursors on State lands within the nonattainment area is

grounds, in and of itself, for denying the State's request for a one-

year extension.

With respect to PM-10 sources located on Tribal lands within the

nonattainment area, a gap in planning responsibilities for these

sources currently exists. In developing its control strategy, the State

did not seek to impose controls on any sources located within the

Reservation portion of the nonattainment area or attempt to demonstrate

to EPA that it had the authority to issue and enforce such controls on

Reservation sources. As EPA has previously stated, EPA does not believe

a Clean Air Act program submitted by a State should be disapproved

because it fails to address air resources within the exterior

boundaries of an Indian Reservation. See 59 FR 43956, 43982 (August 25,

1994) (proposed rule implementing section 301(d)).

Nor does EPA currently have the authority to recognize as federally

enforceable controls that the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes have imposed or

could impose on PM-10 sources located on Reservation lands within the

nonattainment area. Although the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990

greatly expanded the role of Indian Tribes in implementing the

provisions of the Clean Air Act on Reservation lands, EPA has not yet

issued the final rules necessary for EPA to recognize Tribal air

programs as federally enforceable. See Section 301(d); 59 FR 43956.

EPA is currently working on a proposed rule imposing controls on

sources of PM-10 on the Tribal portion of the nonattainment area. EPA

believes it would be unfair to burden the State and the Pocatello area

with new serious nonattainment area planning requirements because of

the gap in the planning process and the resulting lack of federally-

enforceable controls on Tribal sources at this time. Accordingly, EPA

believes that the State has adequately demonstrated, for purposes of an

extension under section 188(d) of the Act, that it has adopted and

substantially implemented control measures representing RACT/RACM in

the nonattainment area.

d. Emission Reduction Progress. On March 30, 1995, the State of

Idaho submitted to EPA the milestone report as required by section

189(c)(2) of the Act to demonstrate annual incremental emission

reductions and reasonable further progress. In that report, the State

discusses implementation of the control measures adopted as part of the

control strategy in the SIP and the emission reductions that have been

achieved as a result of the State's control strategy. Implementation of

these control measures represents a reduction in annual allowable

emissions in the nonattainment area of 1439.63 tons per year from point

sources.

The effect of the area source control measures on air quality is

reflected in the reported ambient measurements at the SLAMS monitoring

sites, most of which have been operating for more than seven years.

Data from these sites show no violations of the 24-hour standard

attributable to primary particulate since 1992 and that the expected

exceedance rate has decreased at all sites, with the exception of the

January 1993 violations which are attributable to secondary aerosol.

The annual average concentrations have likewise shown a downward trend

from a maximum of 51 ug/m\3\ at the STP site in 1990 to 34.5 ug/m\3\ at

the STP site in 1994. This trend is further evidence that the State's

implementation of control measures on sources of primary particulate on

State lands has resulted in emission reductions amounting to reasonable

further progress in the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment

area.

In summary, EPA proposes to grant the State's request for a one-

year extension of the attainment date, from December 31, 1994 to

December 31, 1995, for the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment

area. In doing so, EPA emphasizes that the authority to grant an

extension of the attainment date under section 188(d) is discretionary

and that EPA might, under other circumstances, be disinclined to grant

an extension for an area with similar air quality data. In particular,

EPA notes that the data collected from certain monitors in the EMF

network indicate that air quality problems remain and must still be

addressed in the Power-Bannock Counties PM-10 nonattainment area. EPA

believes, however, that the high 24-hour and annual PM-10 levels

recorded at some of the EMF monitors are primarily attributable to the

gap in planning responsibility for the Tribal portion of the

nonattainment area. Because of the unique jurisdictional issues related

to this particular nonattainment area, the fact that the area

technically meets the data requirements for an extension and the fact

that the State has demonstrated that it has adopted and substantially

[[Page 44456]]

implemented control measures on sources of primary particulate on State

lands resulting in emission reductions amounting to reasonable further

progress, EPA proposes to exercise its discretion to grant the Power-

Bannock Counties nonattainment area a one-year extension of the

attainment date.

B. Sandpoint PM-10 Nonattainment Area

The Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area includes the Cities of

Sandpoint, Kootenai and Ponderay and is located in the northern part of

the Idaho panhandle.

1. Air Quality Data

The Sandpoint nonattainment area has one PM-10 monitoring site at

the Post Office building in downtown Sandpoint. This SLAMS site was

established in 1986. Sampling frequencies vary seasonally, with one

sample every other day during the winter (October 1 through March 31),

and one sample every six days during the rest of the year. Data from

this site has been deemed valid by EPA and submitted by the State of

Idaho for inclusion in the AIRS system.

A review of the data for calendar years 1992, 1993 and 1994 shows

no violations of the annual PM-10 standard in the Sandpoint PM-10

nonattainment area. During this same three-year period, there were

three reported measurements above the level of the 24-hour NAAQS. In

calendar year 1992 there was one level above the NAAQS in the first

quarter (during every other day sampling) and one in the third quarter

(during one in every six day sampling). There were no measured levels

above the 24-hour NAAQS in calendar year 1993. In calendar year 1994,

there was one measurement above the 24-hour NAAQS in the first quarter

during every other day sampling.

2. Attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS

The Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area does not attain the 24-hour

PM-10 NAAQS. PM-10 concentrations reported from the SLAMS monitoring

station at the Post Office exceeded the level of the NAAQS three times

from 1992 to 1994. Because of the sampling frequency, the expected

exceedance rate for this three-year period is 3.5 (calculated in

accordance with appendix K), which represents a violation of the 24-

hour standard.

3. Extension of Attainment Date

EPA is by this action proposing to grant the State's request for a

one-year extension of the attainment date, from December 31, 1994 to

December 31, 1995, for the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area.

a. Compliance with Applicable SIP. Based on information available

to EPA, EPA believes the State of Idaho is in compliance with all

requirements and commitments in the applicable implementation plan that

pertains to the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area. As discussed above,

EPA believes that the State is meeting the requirements and commitments

of the statewide SIP. Although the State has submitted its moderate PM-

10 nonattainment area plan as a SIP revision, EPA has not yet taken

action on that plan. Therefore, the submitted plan is not yet an

``applicable implementation plan'' for the Sandpoint PM-10

nonattainment area.

b. Air Quality Data. As discussed above, there was one measured

level above the 24-hour NAAQS during calendar year 1994. The annual

mean concentration of PM-10 was 37 g/m3 during 1994, well

below the standard. Therefore, the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area

meets the extension criteria of no more than one exceedance of the 24-

hour NAAQS and an annual mean concentration less than or equal to the

standard for the year preceding the extension year.

c. Substantial Implementation of Control Measures. The State of

Idaho, along with several local agencies, has developed and implemented

several significant control measures on sources within the Sandpoint

PM-10 nonattainment area. The State submitted these control measures to

EPA as a SIP revision on May 18, 1993, and in supplemental submissions

since that time. These measures consist of a comprehensive residential

wood combustion program, including a mandatory woodstove curtailment

program; stringent controls on fugitive road dust, including controls

on winter road sanding and a limited unpaved road paving program; and

new or revised operating permits for the four major point sources in

the nonattainment area, Lake Pre-Mix, L.D. McFarland Co., Interstate

Concrete and Asphalt, and Louisiana-Pacific Corporation. EPA has

conducted a preliminary review of these measures and believes that they

substantially meet EPA's guidance for RACM, including RACT for purposes

of granting an extension under section 188(d) of the Act.

d. Emission Reduction Progress. On March 30, 1995, the State of

Idaho submitted to EPA the milestone report required by section

189(c)(2) of the Act to demonstrate annual incremental emission

reductions and reasonable further progress in the Sandpoint area. In

that report, the State discusses implementation of the control measures

adopted as part of the control strategy in the SIP and the emission

reductions that have been achieved as a result of the State's control

strategy. EPA believes that the reductions in allowable emissions for

the industrial sources demonstrates reasonable further progress in the

Sandpoint nonattainment area.

In summary, for the reasons discussed above, EPA proposes to grant

the State's request for a one-year extension of the attainment date for

the Sandpoint PM-10 nonattainment area from December 31, 1994 to

December 31, 1995.

III. Requests for Public Comments

EPA is requesting comments on all aspects of today's proposal. As

indicated at the outset of this notice, EPA will consider any comments

received by September 27, 1995.

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.

Under E.O. 12866, 58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993), EPA is required to

determine whether regulatory actions are significant and therefore

should be subject to OMB review, economic analysis, and the

requirements of the Executive Order. The Executive Order defines a

``significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a

rule that may meet at least one of the four criteria identified in

section 3(f), including, under paragraph (1), that the rule may ``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.''

The Agency has determined that the determinations of nonattainment

and attainment date extensions proposed today would result in none of

the effects identified in section 3(f). Under section 188(b)(2),

findings of nonattainment are based upon air quality considerations and

must occur by operation of law in light of certain air quality

conditions. They do not, in and of themselves,

[[Page 44457]]

impose any new requirements on any sectors of the economy. In addition,

because the statutory requirements are clearly defined with respect to

the differently classified areas, and because those requirements are

automatically triggered by classifications that, in turn, are triggered

by air quality values, the nonattainment determinations and

reclassification cannot be said to impose a materially adverse impact

on State, local, or tribal governments or communities. In addition,

attainment date extensions under section 188(d) of the CAA do not

impose any new requirements on any sectors of the economy; nor do they

result in a materially adverse impact on State, local, or tribal

governments or communities.

Determinations of nonattainment areas under section 188(b)(2) of

the CAA and extensions under section 188(d) of the CAA do not create

any new requirements. Therefore, because these actions do not impose

any new requirements, I certify that it does not have a significant

impact on small entities.

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or

final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated

costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to

the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, EPA

must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative

that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan

for informing and advising any small governments that may be

significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not

include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100

million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-

existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new

Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local,

or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this

action.

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 3 action for signature

by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the

Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a

July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for

Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has

exempted this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Particulate

matter, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: April 10, 1995.

Charles Findley,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95-21277 Filed 8-25-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P