Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OR11-2-6854; FRL-5145-3]

Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action

to approve a revision to the state implementation plan (SIP) submitted

by the State of Oregon for the purpose of bringing about the attainment

of the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for particulate

matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10

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

to satisfy certain Federal requirements for an approvable moderate

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

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action will be effective on March 17, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State's request and information supporting

today's action are available for public inspection during normal

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

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

Quality, 811 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Portland, OR 97204-1390.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Montel Livingston, Air and Radiation

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

0180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

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

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

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

enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 19901 (see 56

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

planning requirements for moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas are set

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

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

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

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

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

16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992)).

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

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

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

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

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

\2\Subpart 1 contains provisions applicable to nonattainment

areas generally and subpart 4 contains provisions specifically

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

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

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

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

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

The State of Oregon was required to submit for the La Grande PM-10

nonattainment area, among other things, the following provisions by

November 15, 1991:

1. Provisions to assure that reasonably available control measures

(RACM) (including such reductions in emissions from existing sources in

the area as may be obtained through the adoption, at a minimum, of

reasonably available control technology (RACT)) shall be implemented no

later than December 10, 1993;

2. Either a demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the

plan will provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no

later than December 31, 1994, or a demonstration that attainment by

that date is impracticable;

3. Quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every three

years and which demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP) toward

attainment by December 31, 1994; and

4. Provisions to assure that the control requirements applicable to

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

sources of PM-10 precursors except where the Administrator determines

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

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

Act).

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

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

program for the construction and operation of new and modified major

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

States also were required to submit contingency measures by November

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

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

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

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

To address the CAAA of 1990, Oregon submitted a PM-10 nonattainment

area SIP for La Grande, Oregon, on November 15, 1991. EPA reviewed the

November 15, 1991, SIP revision according to its interpretation of

subpart 1 and 4 of Part D of Title I of the Act. EPA concluded from its

review that the SIP met the applicable requirements of the Act and EPA,

therefore, indicated that it was approving the plan to be effective on

August 30, 1994, unless adverse or critical comments were received by

August 1, 1994, (see 59 FR 33914, July 1, 1994).

On July 1, 1994, EPA also published an accompanying proposed rule

(see 59 FR 33941) explaining that if adverse comments were received on

the prospective final rule approval of the La Grande PM-10 SIP, then

the final rule would be withdrawn and all comments would be responded

to in relation to the proposal. The notice also indicated that anyone

wishing to comment should do so by August 1, 1994. [[Page 8564]]

EPA received an adverse comment on August 1, 1994, on its approval

of the SIP. The effective date of the rule was withdrawn on September

13, 1994, to allow time for EPA to review and respond to the comment.

See 59 FR 46929. EPA has thoroughly considered the comment in

determining the appropriate action on the La Grande PM-10 SIP. The

response to the comment is presented in the ``Response to Comments''

section below.

EPA is approving the La Grande PM-10 SIP as described in the July

1, 1994, Federal Register Notice at 59 FR 33914 and its accompanying

technical support document and proposed in the July 1, 1994, Federal

Register Notice at 59 FR 33941.

II. Response To Comments

A. Source Apportionment

The commenter questioned the validity of using Chemical Mass

Balance (CMB) for source apportionment of the various smoke sources in

the area. Commenter was concerned that CMB may not accurately

distinguish between residential wood combustion, industrial emissions,

field burning, and other open burning and therefore could lead to a

control strategy that is not going to work properly. The Commenter did

not provide specific evidence that the attainment demonstration is

actually flawed, but rather raised as a concern the possibility that

the source apportionment was inaccurate.

EPA has broad discretion in determining what modeling is

appropriate for moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas. The CAA only

requires that an attainment demonstration include ``Air Quality

Modeling'' and does not describe a particular analysis. CAA

Sec. 181(B)(i). In contrast, CAA Sec. 182(c)(2)(A) specifies that

attainment demonstrations for serious ozone nonattainment areas must be

based on photochemical grid modeling or an alternate analytical model

that EPA determines to be at least as effective. See also, Central

Arizona Water Conservation Dist. v. EPA, 990 F.2d 1531, (9th cir.),

cert. denied 1114 Sup. Ct. 94, (1993).

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

developed a supplemental attainment demonstration policy for initial

PM-10 nonattainment areas such as La Grande, Oregon. An earlier April

2, 1991, memorandum titled, ``PM-10 Moderate Area SIP Guidance: Final

Staff Work Product'' contained ``Attachment 5'' describing the same

policy. The policy sets out specific criteria for attainment

demonstrations based on proportional rollback analysis and explains

that such analysis may be appropriate in cases where ``time

constraints, inadequate resources, inadequate data bases, lack of a

model for some unique situations, and other unavoidable circumstances

would leave an area unable to submit an attainment demonstration'' by

November 15, 1991. The policy further explains that its application is

reserved for those initial PM-10 nonattainment areas that have

``completed the technical analysis * * * and made a good-faith effort

to submit a final SIP by their November 15, 1991, due date.'' The CAA

gave states containing initial moderate PM-10 areas only a limited

time--1 year from designation--to develop comprehensive control

strategies and attainment demonstrations. CAA 189(A)(2)(a).

As discussed in the July 1, 1994, Federal Register and the

technical support document for that notice, the Oregon Department of

Environmental Quality (ODEQ) conducted an attainment demonstration

based upon receptor modeling (Chemical Mass Balance version 7.0) and

proportional emission inventory roll-back analysis. The results of the

emission inventory and CMB analysis were consistent between themselves

in identifying woodsmoke and soil dust as the major sources of PM-10 on

exceedance days (e.g. local woodsmoke = 61 percent and 60 percent and

soil dust = 38 percent and 32 percent for CMB and rollback methods,

respectively). Control strategies for the area were developed based on

this analysis. The CMB modeling was conducted according to EPA

guidance. It was used in lieu of dispersion modeling because at the

time the attainment plan was being developed, valid historical

meteorological data was not available. It would not have been possible

for the state to use dispersion modeling and still submit the SIP by

November 15, 1991.

Therefore, because ODEQ followed EPA guidance, used the approved

EPA CMB model, and because the CMB results were verified by the

emission inventory, EPA is satisfied that the source apportionment

provided by ODEQ in the La Grande PM-10 SIP is adequate. EPA has also

considered the fact that, since implementation of the control

strategies in 1991, the area has not exceeded the PM-10 NAAQS. The last

measured 24-hour PM-10 exceedance occurred on January 28, 1991,

indicating that the selected measures, are likely to be sufficient to

attain the NAAQS and protect public health.

B. Potential Impact From Point Source Located Outside Nonattainment

The commenter questioned why the emissions from a large industrial

source located ``within close proximity to the PM-10 nonattainment

area'' was not accounted for in the SIP. The comment did not contain

any specific data showing the sources' impact on the nonattainment area

and did not provide any technical support for the general concern.

The source in question is Boise Cascade's Island City facility.

This major source is located approximately five kilometers northeast of

the La Grande PM-10 monitor and three kilometers from the nonattainment

area border. The Island City facility is about fifty-five feet lower in

elevation and is down valley from the PM-10 monitor.

It is the State's contention that the results from both the CMB

modeling and wintertime PM-10 saturation surveys,3 indicate that

this point source is not a significant contributor to the nonattainment

problem. The CMB modeling, based on the analysis of 43 PM-10 samples

(seven of which exceeded the 24-hour NAAQS), showed La Grande

industrial source category emissions to be insignificant. The emission

inventory showed industrial emissions to be less than five percent on a

worst case day basis. Wintertime PM-10 saturation surveys conducted in

1985, 1989, and 1990, do not indicate a significant impact from the

source. For these reasons, EPA thinks the State's contention is

reasonable and it is EPA's position that the implemented control

measures will bring the area into attainment of the NAAQS by the

December 31, 1994, attainment date. See 59 FR 33918 and its

accompanying support documents for a description of the control

measures. Also, as previously stated, the area has not exceeded the

NAAQS since 1991, indicating that the implemented control measures are

sufficient to attain the NAAQS.

\3\Short term intensive ambient monitoring studies in which

portable PM-10 samplers are distributed throughout a small

geographical study area to better characterize PM-10 concentrations.

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

To further address the adequacy of the attainment demonstration and

the point source issue, EPA reviewed the effectiveness of the control

measures. Because the control strategies are achieving greater emission

reductions than anticipated and accounted for in the SIP, EPA's

analysis indicates that even if the Island City facility had a

significant impact on the nonattainment area or influenced the

background concentration, the area will still attain [[Page 8565]] the

24-hour NAAQS. Information supporting this analysis is contained in the

docket supporting this notice.

C. Open Burning, Field and Forestry Slash Burning

Finally, the commenter expressed concern ``about when open burning

is allowed and that field and forestry slash burning be allowed to

increase without good monitoring.'' Again the comment was only a

general concern and did not provide any specific information to support

it.

As discussed in the July 1, 1994, Federal Register, 59 FR 33914 and

further explained in its technical support document, open, field and

forestry slash burning activities either do not occur, are adequately

controlled or are not allowed during the time period when exceedances

of the 24-hour NAAQS typically occur.

IV. Significance of Today's Action

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

Grande nonattainment area. Among other things, ODEQ has demonstrated

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

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

approval of the contingency measures for the La Grande nonattainment

area which take effect without further action by the State or EPA, upon

a determination by EPA that the area has failed to make reasonable

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

statutory deadline.

V. 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 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 April 17, 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 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Particulate matter.

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: January 17, 1995.

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) (107) to read

as follows:

Sec. 52.1970 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

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

nonattainment area SIP for La Grande, Oregon.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

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

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

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

Grande, Oregon Nonattainment Area, as adopted by the Environmental

Quality Commission on November 8, 1991.

[FR Doc. 95-3679 Filed 2-14-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P