Approval and Promulgation of Definition of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Oregon-Washington

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[OR-A-95-01a; FRL-5302-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Definition of Areas for Air Quality

Planning Purposes; Oregon-Washington

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Direct-Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approves the

separation of the Portland, Oregon-Vancouver, Washington interstate

carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment area into two distinct nonattainment

areas. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) has

submitted sufficient technical documentation to adequately assure EPA

that Vancouver and Portland are two separate CO airsheds. EPA believes

any future problems will be hotspot in nature and therefore, EPA

believes the CO national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) will be

protected in each state. This boundary correction will change the

boundary description published in the November 6, 1991 Federal Register

document.

DATES: This action will be effective on November 28, 1995 unless

adverse or critical comments are received by October 30, 1995. 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-A-95-01,

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, Environmental

Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 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 Oregon

Department of Environmental Quality, 811 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Portland,

Oregon 97204-1390.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christi Lee, Air and Radiation Branch

(AT-082), EPA, Seattle, Washington 98101, (206) 553-1814.

[[Page 50424]]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

I. Background

In the November 6, 1991 Federal Register notice, 56 FR 56847, the

Portland-Vancouver area was designated as a nonattainment area for CO.

The boundary for the Portland portion of the interstate nonattainment

area is the Portland Metro Service District Boundary which includes

Clackamas County (part), Multnomah County (part) and Washington County

(part). The boundary for the Vancouver portion of the interstate

nonattainment area is Clark County (part) Air Quality Maintenance Area

(AQMA). The Portland-Vancouver interstate CO nonattainment area is

classified as moderate less than or equal to 12.7 parts per million

(ppm).

Prior to the boundary being set, the 1990 Clean Air Act required

the Governor of each state to submit boundary descriptions for those

areas which were to be designated nonattainment. The Governor of Oregon

and the Governor of Washington each submitted a letter dated March 15,

1991, that listed and described the nonattainment area boundaries for

their respective states. For CO, Oregon listed the Portland

Metropolitan Area as nonattainment with the boundary being the

Metropolitan Service District (METRO) which surrounds the urban growth

boundaries of cities within the greater Portland Metropolitan Area

1. The Washington letter listed Vancouver as nonattainment with

the boundary being the Washington portion of the Portland-Vancouver

Interstate AQMA.

\1\ The Portland portion of the Air Quality Maintenance Area had

been designated as a CO nonattainment area prior to the 1990 Clean

Air Act Amendments, 43 FR 8962, (March 3, 1978), listed as Portland-

Vancouver (Oregon Portion).

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

In the November 6, 1991, notice EPA identified Portland-Vancouver

as an interstate nonattainment area with the Portland portion of the

nonattainment area boundary being METRO and the Vancouver portion of

the nonattainment boundary being the AQMA (Vancouver portion).

The ODEQ contends that the November 6, 1991, Federal Register

notice is in error. The ODEQ has written EPA that it never recommended

nor acknowledged an interstate CO nonattainment area or a contiguous

boundary with Vancouver, Washington.

EPA considered ODEQ's request, and finds that the designations were

properly promulagated. However, EPA acknowledges ODEQ's position in

that there are two distinct airsheds that should be separately

regulated. EPA requested a technical justification be submitted by the

state of Oregon to demonstrate that the Portland and Vancouver CO

airsheds are distinct and that there is an acceptably minimal CO

transport between the two cities.

On August 5, 1994, and January 3, 1995, the State of Oregon,

through the ODEQ, submitted technical justification which supports the

separation of the Portland-Vancouver CO interstate nonattainment area

into two distinct nonattainment areas (Portland, Oregon and Vancouver,

Washington).

Of significance in EPA's review is that both areas have been

successful in attaining the CO standard. Portland has been in

attainment of the CO standard since 1990, and Vancouver has been in

attainment since 1991. Both cities are currently in the process of

preparing CO maintenance plans for redesignation.

Technical Justification Conclusions

EPA requested ODEQ submit documentation which demonstrates that the

Portland and Vancouver airsheds are distinct, and that the CO NAAQS

which have been attained will be maintained despite any differences in

the prospective maintenance plans. EPA also requested ODEQ discuss the

potential CO impacts of the interstate commute.

To address EPAs technical concerns, ODEQ completed a monitoring

data analysis which compared Portland and Vancouver CO data, taking

into consideration meteorological impacts (wind direction and wind

speed) for pollutant transport. The results of this analysis

demonstrated that elevated CO concentrations in either city were not

influenced by meteorological transport of the pollutant between the two

airsheds.

To further support this conclusion, ODEQ also conducted a

statistical analysis which compared Portland and Vancouver CO monitored

data to investigate whether a correlation existed between measured

concentrations at the Portland and Vancouver monitoring sites. The

analysis demonstrated no correlation in measured CO concentrations

between the two cities.

In addition, special studies were performed in both Portland

(September 1991, the 1994 report is in development) and Vancouver (May

1994) that demonstrated that CO impacts in each area are limited to

intersections with steep gradients of decreasing CO concentration away

from the intersections.

To address EPA's interstate commuting concerns, ODEQ conducted a CO

impact analysis of the interstate commute traffic focusing on high

volume intersections. Since vehicles registered in both nonattainment

areas are subjected to essentially identical control strategies

(oxygenated fuel, basic I/M), the impact of either the Portland or

Vancouver vehicles on the contiguous CO nonattainment areas

concentrations is insignificant.

The ODEQ has written EPA of its commitment to providing long-term

maintenance of the CO national ambient air quality standard not only in

it's own jurisdiction but in other contiguous areas. Any future change

in the CO control strategies for either Portland or Vancouver will be

addressed in their future CO redesignation/maintenance plans which have

to be evaluated and approved by EPA.

The technical justification submitted to EPA contains an adequate

demonstration that Vancouver's and Portland's airsheds are distinct,

relative to CO, and that Oregon and Washington are firmly committed to

air quality maintenance in both Portland and Vancouver despite

potential differences in the prospective maintenance plans.

II. This Action

With this action EPA is approving the technical correction to the

CO nonattainment boundary description for Portland-Vancouver under

section 110(k)(6). EPA believes that any future problems will be

hotspot in nature and therefore EPA believes that the CO NAAQS will be

protected in each state. This action will separate the Portland-

Vancouver Interstate CO nonattainment area into two separate

nonattainment areas; Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington.

In separating the Portland-Vancouver nonattainment area, the METRO

boundary will be recognized as the CO nonattainment boundary for

Portland, and the Vancouver portion of the AQMA will remain Vancouver's

CO nonattainment boundary. Both areas will remain classified as

moderate nonattainment (less than or equal to 12.7 ppm) for CO.

Vancouver's design value will remain at 10.0 ppm and Portland's design

value has been determined to be 9.8 ppm.

The separated Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington CO

nonattainment designations are listed under ``Designated Area'' in the

table at the end of this rulemaking action. The additional language is

highlighted for easy reference.

III. 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

[[Page 50425]]

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 adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be

effective November 28, 1995 unless, within 30 days of its publication,

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 action will be effective November 28, 1995.

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.

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 November 28, 1995. 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 81

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

Dated: September 22, 1995.

Carol M. Browner,

U.S. EPA Administrator.

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

amended as follows:

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

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

2. Section 81.338 is amended by removing the entry for ``Portland-

Vancouver Area'' and adding the entry for ``Portland Area'' in

``Oregon-Carbon Monoxide'' table to read as follows:

Sec. 81.338 Oregon.

* * * * *

Oregon--Carbon Monoxide

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

Designation Classification

Designated area --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type

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

* * * * * *

*

Portland Area:

Portland Metro Service

District Boundary

Clackamas County .................... Nonattainment....... .................... Moderate

(part). 12.7ppm.

Multnomah County .................... Nonattainment....... .................... Moderate

(part). 12.7ppm.

Washington County .................... Nonattainment....... .................... Moderate

(part). 12.7ppm.

* * * * * *

*

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

\1\ This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *

3. Section 81.348 is amended by removing the entry for ``Portland-

Vancouver Area'' and adding an entry for ``Vancouver Area'' in the

``Washington-Carbon Monoxide'' table to read as follows:

Sec. 81.348 Washington.

* * * * *

Washington--Carbon Monoxide

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

Designation Classification

Designated area --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type

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

* * * * * *

*

Vancouver Area

[[Page 50426]]

Clark County (part) .................... Nonattainment....... .................... Moderate 12.7ppm.

Maintenance Area.

* * * * * *

*

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

\1\ This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95-24041 Filed 9-28-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P