Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Wallula, Washington PM10, 5085-5093 [05-1867]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 20 (Tuesday, February 1, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5085-5093]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1867]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[R10-OAR-2004-WA-0001; FRL-7866-6]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Wallula, 
Washington PM10 Nonattainment Area; Serious Area Plan for 
Attainment of the Annual and 24-Hour PM10 Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve Washington's State Implementation 
Plan for the Wallula, Washington serious nonattainment area for 
particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a 
nominal 10 micrometers (PM10). Initially Wallula was 
classified as a moderate nonattainment area for PM10 
pursuant to the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. In 2001, it was 
reclassified as a serious nonattainment area for PM10. As a 
result, Washington was required to submit a serious area plan for 
bringing the area into attainment. This action

[[Page 5086]]

proposes to approve the Wallula serious area plan dated November 15, 
2004 and submitted to EPA on November 30, 2004.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 3, 2005.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. R10-OAR-
2004-WA-0001, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    2. Agency Web Site: https://www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA's 
electronic public docket and comment system, is EPA's preferred method 
for receiving comments. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting 
comments.
    3. E-mail: r10.aircom@epa.gov.
    4. Mail: Office of Air Quality, Attn: Environmental Protection 
Agency, Attn: Donna Deneen, Mailcode: OAQ-107, 1200 Sixth Avenue, 
Seattle, WA 98101.
    5. Hand Delivery: Environmental Protection Agency Region 10, Attn: 
Donna Deneen (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Ave., Seattle, WA 98101, 9th floor. 
Such deliveries are only accepted during EPA's normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. R10-OAR-2004-
WA-0001. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in 
the public docket without change, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov or e-
mail. The EPA EDOCKET and the Federal regulations.gov Web site are an 
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through EDOCKET or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the EDOCKET index 
at https://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed in the index, some 
information may not be publicly available, such as CBI or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other 
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet 
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 
available docket materials are available either electronically in 
EDOCKET or in hard copy at EPA Region 10, Office of Air Quality, 1200 
Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington, from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday 
through Friday, excluding legal holidays. Please contact the individual 
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your 
inspection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Deneen, Office of Air Quality, 
Region 10, AWT-107, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Sixth Ave., 
Seattle, WA 98101; phone: (206) 553-6706; fax number: (206) 553-0110; 
e-mail address: deneen.donna@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. What Action Are We Taking?
II. What Is the Background for This Action?
    A. Description of the Wallula PM10 Serious 
Nonattainment Area
    B. Nonattainment History of Wallula
    C. Wallula Monitoring Network
    D. Monitored PM10 Air Quality in the Wallula 
Nonattainment Area
III. What Are the Clean Air Act's Planning Requirements for Serious 
Nonattainment Areas?
    A. Moderate Area Requirements Under Section 189(a)
    B. Serious Area Requirements Under Section 189(b)
IV. How Does the Wallula Serious Area Plan Meet Clean Air Act 
Planning Requirements?
    A. Plan Overview
    B. Emissions Inventory
    C. Implementation of Best Available Control Measures
    D. Major Source Definition
    E. Attainment Demonstration
    F. Implementation of Best Available Control Measures on Major 
Stationary Sources of PM10 Precursors
    G. Contingency Measures
    H. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) and Quantitative Milestones
    I. Transportation Conformity

I. What Action Are We Taking?

    On November 30, 2004, the State of Washington, Department of 
Ecology (Ecology) submitted a State Implementation Plan revision 
entitled ``A Plan for Attaining Particulate Matter (PM10) 
Ambient Air Quality Standards in the Wallula Serious Nonattainment 
Area'' (Wallula serious area plan or Plan). This plan was submitted to 
meet Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) planning requirements for a 
PM10 serious nonattainment area. We have completed a review 
of the technical and administrative adequacy of this plan and presented 
the results in a Technical Support Document (TSD). The TSD provides the 
basis for our approval of the plan and discusses in more detail the air 
quality planning requirements for serious and moderate PM10 
nonattainment areas in subparts 1 and 4 of title I of the CAA. We are 
proposing to approve the Wallula serious area plan based on a 
determination that the plan complies with the CAA requirements for 
serious PM10 nonattainment area plans.
    This preamble describes our proposed action on the Wallula serious 
area plan and provides a summary of our evaluation of the Plan.

II. What Is the Background for This Action?

A. Description of the Wallula PM10 Serious Nonattainment 
Area

    The Wallula nonattainment area lies in eastern Washington just 
north of the Oregon border in the southern portion of the Columbia 
Plateau. The nonattainment area includes parts of Walla Walla and 
Benton Counties and a small portion of Sacajawea State Park in Franklin 
County.
    The Wallula area is located in the lowest and driest section of 
eastern Washington, receiving as little as seven to nine inches of 
precipitation each year. Summer precipitation is usually associated 
with thunderstorms and it is not unusual for four to six weeks to pass 
without measurable rainfall in the summer. The Columbia Plateau is also 
known for prolonged periods of strong winds which carry dust particles 
for hundreds of miles downwind. Wind erosion is a particular problem in 
the area because of the natural dustiness of the region due to its dry 
environments, scant vegetation, unpredictable high winds, and soils 
which contain substantial quantities of PM10. See ``Farming 
with the Wind: Best Management practices for Controlling Wind Erosion 
and Air Quality on Columbia Plateau Croplands'' (1998).
    The Wallula nonattainment area is generally rural and agricultural. 
Prominent land uses include dryland and irrigated cropland, industrial 
sites and natural vegetation. There is only one major stationary source 
in the

[[Page 5087]]

nonattainment area, a large pulp and paper mill and its associated 
compost facility and landfill. There is also a large beef cattle 
feedlot, a beef processing plant, a natural gas compressor station, 
grain storage silos and a few other minor sources. The population of 
the area is approximately 4800. Two-thirds of the population live in 
the northwest portion of the nonattainment area in the unincorporated 
town of Burbank.

B. Nonattainment History of Wallula

    The Wallula area was designated nonattainment for PM10 
and classified as moderate under sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) of 
the CAA upon enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.\1\ See 
40 CFR 81.348 (PM10 Initial Nonattainment Areas); see also 
56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). Under subsections 188(a) and (c)(1) of 
the CAA, all initial moderate PM10 nonattainment areas had 
the same applicable attainment date of December 31, 1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The 1990 Amendments to the CAA made significant changes. See 
Public Law No. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399. References herein are to the 
CAA as amended in 1990. The Clean Air Act is codified, as amended, 
in the United States Code at 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    States containing initial moderate PM10 nonattainment 
areas were required to develop and submit to EPA by November 15, 1991, 
a state implementation plan (SIP) revision providing for, among other 
things, implementation of reasonably available control measures (RACM), 
including reasonably available control technology (RACT), and a 
demonstration of attainment of the PM10 NAAQS by December 
31, 1994. See section 189(a) of the CAA.\2\ In response to this 
submission requirement, Ecology submitted a SIP revision for Wallula on 
November 15, 1991. Subsequently, Ecology submitted additional 
information indicating that nonanthropogenic sources may be significant 
in the Wallula nonattainment area during windblown dust events. Based 
on our review of the State's submissions, we deferred action on several 
elements in the Wallula SIP, approved the control measures in the SIP 
as meeting RACM/RACT, and, under section 188(f) of the CAA, granted a 
temporary waiver to extend the attainment date for Wallula to December 
31, 1997. See 60 FR 63109 (December 6, 1995)(proposed action); 62 FR 
3800 (January 27, 1997) (final action). The temporary waiver was 
intended to provide Ecology time to evaluate further the Wallula 
nonattainment area and to determine the significance of the 
anthropogenic and nonanthropogenic sources impacting the area. Once 
these activities were complete or the temporary waiver expired, EPA was 
to make a decision on whether the area was eligible for a permanent 
waiver under section 188(f) of the CAA or whether the area had attained 
the standard by the extended attainment date. See 62 FR at 3802.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The moderate area SIP requirements are set forth in section 
189(a) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On February 9, 2001, EPA published a Federal Register notice making 
a final determination that the Wallula area had not attained the 
PM10 standard by the attainment date of December 31, 1997. 
See 66 FR 9663 (February 9, 2001) (final action); (65 FR 69275 
(November 16, 2000) (proposed action). EPA made this determination 
based on air quality data for calendar years 1995, 1996, and 1997. As a 
result of that finding, the Wallula PM10 nonattainment area 
was reclassified by operation of law as a serious PM10 
nonattainment area effective March 12, 2001 with an attainment date of 
December 31, 2001. See 188(b)(2)(A) and 188(c)(2). On October 22, 2002, 
EPA found that the Wallula nonattainment area attained the NAAQS for 
PM10 as of December 31, 2001. EPA's finding was based on 
EPA's review of monitored air quality data reported for the years 1999 
through 2001. EPA's finding included a determination that exceedances 
that occurred in the area on June 21, 1997, July 10, 1998, June 23, 
1999, and August 10, 2000 were due to high winds and, consistent with 
EPA policy, not considered in determining the area's air quality 
status. See Memorandum from EPA's Assistant Administrator for Air and 
Radiation to EPA Regional Air Directors entitled ``Areas Affected by 
Natural Events,'' dated May 30, 1996 (EPA's Natural Events Policy). EPA 
has stated that it will treat ambient PM10 exceedances 
caused by dust raised by unusually high winds as due to uncontrollable 
natural events (and thus excludable from attainment determinations) if 
either (1) the dust originated from nonanthropogenic sources or (2) the 
dust originated from anthropogenic sources controlled with best 
available control measures (BACM). See EPA's Natural Events Policy, pp. 
4-5.
    After EPA made its finding of attainment, Ecology continued to 
investigate the one remaining exceedance on July 3, 1997 that led to 
the area's reclassification to serious. Meteorological information 
indicated that this exceedance was not due to high winds. Ecology 
concluded that the exceedance was likely attributable to a one time 
non-recurring activity involving the transportation of 130 truckloads 
of finished compost near the monitor on July 1-3, 1997. Although this 
activity was non recurring and EPA subsequently determined that the 
area attained the standards as of December 31, 2001, the Wallula area 
remains classified as a serious nonattainment area. As a result, a 
second nonattainment serious SIP revision--in addition to the moderate 
area SIP revision required under section 189(a)-- is required under 
section 189(b).

C. Wallula Monitoring Network

    For most of the period since 1986, Ecology's monitoring network for 
the Wallula nonattainment area has consisted of a single monitoring 
site. This site is referred to in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) 
database as the Nedrow Farm/Wallula Junction monitoring site (site id 
no: 53-071-1001). This monitoring site was discontinued pursuant to an 
agreement with the landowner to stop using the monitoring location by 
October 31, 2003.
    In anticipation of the closure of the Nedrow Farm/Wallula Junction 
monitoring site, Ecology provided EPA Region 10 with an analysis of the 
two potential replacement sites and a recommendation of Burbank for the 
replacement site on the grounds that the monitor at the Burbank site 
measured the same air mass as the Wallula monitoring site. Based on 
EPA's determination that there was a strong correlation in data 
measured at the two sites, EPA agreed that the Burbank monitor was an 
appropriate replacement site to the original Wallula monitoring site. 
Ecology discontinued the Wallula Port monitoring site in April 2004. 
The Burbank monitor is now the sole PM10 monitoring location 
in the nonattainment area, with a sampling frequency of once every 
three days.

D. Monitored PM10 Air Quality in the Wallula Nonattainment Area

    There are two separate NAAQS for PM10: an annual 
standard of 50 ug/m3 and a 24-hour standard of 150 ug/m3. The area has 
never violated the annual PM10 NAAQS but it has violated the 
24-hour PM10 NAAQS. Currently the area is in compliance with 
both PM10 NAAQS. A thorough discussion of the area's 
compliance with the 24-hour PM10 standard as of December 31, 
2001 is contained in EPA's attainment determination. See 67 FR at 
64816. In short, the area had one exceedance that resulted in a 
violation of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS in 1997. All other 
exceedances that occurred from 1995 through 2001 were determined to be 
due

[[Page 5088]]

to uncontrollable high wind natural events and, consistent with EPA's 
Natural Events Policy, not considered in determining the air quality 
status of the area.
    Since December 31, 2001, additional exceedances of the 24-hour 
standard have occurred on September 29, 2002, October 30, 2003, 
November 11, 2003, and April 27, 2004. All were flagged by Ecology as 
due to high wind events under EPA's Natural Events Policy. Based on the 
information provided by Ecology about these events, other information 
provided by Ecology regarding control measures being implemented at the 
time of the events, and the area's soil and climate characteristics, we 
conclude that the exceedances that occurred on September 29, 2002, 
October 30, 2003, November 11, 2003, and April 27, 2004 were due to 
high wind natural events and that, on those dates, anthropogenic 
sources contributing to the exceedances were controlled with Best 
Available Control Measures. Therefore, EPA proposes to exclude the 
exceedances on all four dates from consideration in determining whether 
the Wallula PM10 nonattainment area is currently attaining 
the standards. Excluding these exceedances, the Wallula PM10 
nonattainment area is attaining both the 24-hour and annual average 
PM10 NAAQS.

III. What are the Clean Air Act's Planning Requirements for Serious 
Nonattainment Areas?

    Wallula is a PM10 nonattainment area that was 
reclassified to serious because it failed to attain the 24-hour 
PM10 NAAQS by the moderate area attainment date of December 
31, 1997. Such an area must submit revisions to its implementation plan 
that address requirements for serious PM10 nonattainment 
areas under CAA section 189(b). In addition, the area must satisfy 
requirements for initial moderate PM10 nonattainment areas 
under section 189(a).

A. Moderate Area Requirements Under Section 189(a)

    Under section 189(b)(1) of the CAA, the Wallula serious area plan 
must meet requirements for a moderate area plan in addition to 
requirements for a serious area plan. EPA approved some but not all of 
the SIP revision Ecology submitted initially on November 15, 1991 to 
meet these moderate area planning requirements. See 62 FR 3800 (January 
27, 1997). The approved elements included those pertaining to RACM, the 
monitoring network, consultation and public notification, provisions 
for revising the plan, prohibiting sources from impacting other states, 
adequacy of personnel, funding and authority, enforceability of control 
measures, and the control of precursors. In addition, EPA approved a 
permitting program for the permitting of new major sources in 
nonattainment areas. See 60 FR 28726 (June 2, 1995). EPA has not 
previously approved the emissions inventory, the attainment 
demonstration, contingency measures, and quantitative milestones. These 
remaining requirements must be met for both an approvable moderate and 
serious area plan. EPA believes all of the remaining requirements for a 
moderate area plan are covered by the serious area plan requirements, 
which are discussed more fully below.

B. Serious Area Requirements Under Section 189(b)

    The Wallula nonattainment areas is required to meet the following 
requirements that apply to serious PM10 nonattainment areas:
     A comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual 
emissions from all sources of PM10 (CAA section 172(c)(3)).
     A demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the 
plan will provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable by no 
later than December 31, 2001 or, where the State is seeking an 
extension of the attainment date under section 188(e), a demonstration 
that attainment by December 31, 2001 is impracticable and that the plan 
provides for attainment by the most expeditious alternative date 
practicable (CAA sections 188(c)(2) and 189(b)(1)(A)).
     Assurances that the BACM, including best available control 
technology (BACT) for stationary sources, for the control of 
PM10 shall be implemented no later than 4 years after the 
area is reclassified (CAA section 189(b)(1)(B)).
     A requirement, under section 189(b)(3) , that the terms 
``major source'' and ``major stationary source,'' used in implementing 
a new source permitting program under section 173 and control of 
PM10 precursors under section 189(e), include any stationary 
source or group of stationary sources located within a contiguous area 
and under common control that emits, or has the potential to emit, at 
least 70 tons per year of PM10.
     Assurances that BACT on major stationary sources of 
PM10 precursors shall be implemented no later than 4 years 
after the area is reclassified except where EPA has determined that 
such sources do not contribute significantly to exceedences of the 
PM10 standards (CAA section 189(e)).
     Quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every 3 
years and which demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP) toward 
attainment by the applicable attainment date (CAA sections 172(c)(2) 
and 189(c)).
     Contingency measures to be implemented if the area fails 
to make RFP or attain by its attainment deadline. These contingency 
measures are to take effect without further action by the State or EPA. 
CAA section 172(c)(9).
    Furthermore, PM10 serious area plans must meet the 
general requirements applicable to all SIPs including reasonable notice 
and public hearing under section 110(l), necessary assurances that the 
implementing agencies have adequate personnel, funding and authority 
under section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and 40 CFR 51.280, and a description of 
enforcement methods as required by 40 CFR 51.111.
    We have issued a General Preamble \3\ and Addendum to the General 
Preamble \4\ describing our preliminary views on how EPA intends to 
review SIPs submitted to meet the CAA's requirements for 
PM10 plans. The General Preamble mainly addresses the 
requirements for moderate areas and the Addendum, the requirements for 
serious areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the 
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,'' 
57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992).
    \4\ ``State Implementation Plans for Serious PM10 
Nonattanment Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for PM10 
Nonattainment Areas Generally; Addendum to the General Preamble for 
the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 
1990,'' 59 FR 41998 (August 16, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. How Does the Wallula Serious Area Plan Meet Clean Air Act Planning 
Requirements?

A. Plan Overview

    The Wallula serious area plan describes the efforts to determine 
the cause of PM10 exceedances in Wallula and concludes that 
all of the PM10 exceedances have been due to fugitive dust. 
Analysis of the filters from the PM10 monitors, on high and 
low wind days and when high and low levels of PM10 are 
recorded, reveals that dust is the primary material on the monitors. 
The emissions inventory identifies agricultural dust as the predominant 
source of PM10 emissions in the area.
    Ecology has presented information showing that all but one of the 
exceedances since January 1, 1995 were caused by dust due to unusually 
high winds and that, to the extent the dust was attributable to 
anthropogenic (man-made) sources, such sources are

[[Page 5089]]

controlled with best available control measures. As discussed above, 
EPA agrees with the information presented by Ecology with respect to 
these exceedances and therefore believes such exceedances are 
appropriately excluded in determining whether the area is attaining the 
PM10 standards.
    As also discussed above, meteorological information indicated that 
the exceedance that occurred on July 3, 1997 was not due to high winds. 
In its investigation Ecology determined that dust was the predominant 
material found on the monitor that day. After analyzing the 
PM10 filter, the meteorology, the results of dispersion 
modeling, the emissions inventory, and chemical mass balance modeling 
for that day, as well as for other days, Ecology concluded that the 
most likely primary cause of the exceedance was dust raised by the 
transport of 130 truck loads of compost on unpaved roads from the 
compost facility to a nearby fiber farm from July 1-3, 1997, an unusual 
and nonrecurring activity.
    The Wallula serious area plan demonstrates attainment with the 
PM10 standards by showing that agricultural activities in 
the area are employing best management practices to reduce 
PM10 emissions, and that the feedlot, compost facility and 
other sources of fugitive PM10 emissions are employing best 
available control measures. This includes measures to ensure the 
fugitive dust impacts of unusual or extraordinary activities are 
considered and minimized so as to prevent a recurrence of the type of 
exceedance that occurred on July 3, 1997.
    The following sections present a discussion of how the Wallula 
serious area plan meets the CAA requirements for serious 
PM10 nonattainment areas.

B. Emissions Inventory

    CAA section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires that nonattainment area 
plans include a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of 
actual emissions from all sources in the nonattainment area in the 
designated base year and a future attainment year. Ecology chose 1997 
as the base year because the area's redesignation to serious was based 
on a recorded exceedance of the 24-hour PM10 standard that 
occurred in 1997. The inventory focused on emissions for a typical day 
during the summer, the time of year when PM10 emissions tend 
to be highest. Ecology excluded emissions associated with the recorded 
exceedance on July 3, 1997 (involving the one-time transport of 130 
truckloads of finished compost near the monitor) because those 
emissions were the result of a nonrecurring activity and therefore not 
appropriately included in a baseline inventory. It also excluded 
anthropogenic and nonanthropogenic emissions associated with high wind 
days because the exceedances associated with such events are addressed 
under EPA's Natural Events Policy and Ecology's Natural Events Action 
Plan. The 1997 baseline emissions inventory represents not only 
baseline emissions but current emissions as well. This is because the 
nature of the emissions and the small number of sources in this rural, 
agricultural nonattainment area have changed little since 1997.
    Based on our review of the Wallula serious area plan, we believe 
that the emissions estimates for all of the identified sources and 
source categories are based on emissions factors and methodologies 
recommended by EPA, or are derived from a specific study or data 
collected from a source category in the area (e.g., vacant lots). We 
therefore propose to find that the methodologies and calculations used 
by Ecology to develop the emissions inventory rely upon reasonable 
assumptions and provide a sufficient basis upon which to assess the 
impact of control measures on future PM10 emissions in the 
Wallula area. EPA is therefore proposing to approve the emissions 
inventory in the Wallula serious area plan as meeting the requirements 
of CAA section 172(c)(3).

C. Implementation of Best Available Control Measures

    CAA section 189(b)(1)(B) requires that a PM10 serious 
area plan provide for the implementation of BACM within four years of 
reclassification to serious. The CAA does not define what level of 
control constitutes a BACM-level of control. In guidance, we have 
defined it to be, among other things, the maximum degree of emission 
reduction achievable from a source or source category which is 
determined on a case-by-case basis, considering energy, economic and 
environmental impacts. Addendum at 42010.
    Under our applicable guidance, BACM is applied to each significant 
(i.e., non-de minimis) source category. EPA has established a 
presumption that a ``significant'' source category is one that 
contributes 5 ug/m\3\ or more of PM10 to a location of 24-
hour violation and 1 ug/m\3\ or more for the annual standard. Addendum 
at 42011. EPA follows a four-step process for evaluating BACM in 
PM10 serious area plans. Addendum at 42010-42014. The steps 
are:
    1. Develop a detailed emissions inventory of PM10 
sources and source categories;
    2. Model to evaluate the impact on PM10 concentrations 
over the standards of the various sources and source categories to 
determine which are significant;
    3. Identify potential BACM for significant source categories and 
evaluate their reasonableness, considering technological feasibility, 
costs, and energy and environmental impacts; and
    4. Provide for the implementation of the BACM or provide a reasoned 
justification for rejecting any potential BACM.
    When the process is complete, the individual measures should then 
be converted into a legally enforceable vehicle (e.g., a regulation or 
permit process). CAA sections 172(6) and 110(a)(2)(A). Also, the 
regulations or other measures should meet EPA's criteria regarding the 
enforceability of SIPs and SIP revisions. General Preamble at 13541.
    The development of the emissions inventory is discussed in the 
preceding section. EPA believes that the base-year emissions inventory 
contains a sufficient level of detail to enable appropriate evaluation 
of the control measures for BACM purposes in the Wallula serious area 
plan. Using a combination of chemical analysis, source apportionment, 
and its base emissions inventory, the plan identifies the following 
source categories as being significant contributors to violations of 
the 24-hour PM10 standard in the Wallula area: \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Wallula serious area plan does not identify significant 
source contributors to violations of the PM10 annual 
standard because, as discussed above, the area has never violated 
the annual standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Agricultural tilling.
    2. Boise Paper Solutions--Composting Facility and Landfill.
    3. Unpaved road dust.
    4. Tyson Fresh Meats (formerly IBP, Inc.), a beef processing 
facility.
    5. Simplot Feeders Limited Partnership, a beef cattle feedlot 
(Simplot feedlot).
    Based on EPA's review of the modeling and other analyses described 
in the plan, we believe Ecology appropriately evaluated the impact of 
various PM10 sources and source categories on 
PM10 levels in the area and derived a comprehensive list of 
significant sources and source categories for the area. Ecology 
included sources of fugitive emissions, and not sources of combustion, 
in its list of source categories to be evaluated because no significant 
contribution from combustion products was detected on sampling filters. 
The following

[[Page 5090]]

discussion contains a summary of the results of the BACM analysis for 
Wallula and the control measures adopted by Ecology.
    1. Agricultural tilling. In finding that the Wallula area attained 
the 24-hour PM10 standards by the applicable attainment date 
of December 31, 2001, EPA determined that sources of agricultural 
windblown dust in the Wallula area were implementing BACM. See 67 FR 
64815 (October 22, 2002). The BACM demonstration for the area relied on 
best management practices (BMPs) identified in ``Farming with the Wind: 
Best Management Practices for Controlling Wind Erosion and Air Quality 
on Columbia Plateau Croplands,'' (1998), the Columbia Plateau Natural 
Events Action Plan (1998) (Columbia Plateau NEAP), and data collected 
by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). In the same 
action, we noted that identification and application of BACM for 
agricultural lands is evolving and that we expect Ecology to continue 
efforts in identifying and implementing BACM on sources of agricultural 
windblown dust in the Wallula area in order for future exceedances 
caused by high winds to be characterized as ``natural events'' and 
excluded in attainment determinations.
    Since our attainment determination, both ``Farming with the Wind'' 
and the Columbia Plateau NEAP have been revised to include updated 
information on the best management practices, their effectiveness, and 
special projects being implemented in the area to reduce emissions from 
agricultural sources. In its 2003 Columbia Plateau NEAP, Ecology 
defines BACM for agricultural fields to be conservation programs and 
practices that reduce or minimize wind erosion, and specifically, USDA 
Conservation Title Programs supplemented by incentive-based 
implementation of wind-erosion conservation practices or best 
management practices (BMPs). 2003 Columbia Plateau NEAP, pgs. 18 and 
19. In its 2003 annual status report on agricultural BACM 
implementation, Ecology reports that BMP use has increased in the 
Columbia Plateau. The document also identifies several ongoing projects 
specific to the Wallula area to reduce agricultural dust emissions in 
the Wallula area. This increase in BMPs in the Columbia Plateau, in 
combination with the ongoing emission reduction projects specific to 
the Wallula area, indicate an overall upward trend in the widespread 
use of BMPs in the Wallula area.
    In light of the progress in identifying new BMPs and refining 
existing ones, better information about their associated effectiveness, 
a continued upward trend in the widespread use of BMPs, Ecology's 
commitment in its 2003 Columbia Plateau NEAP to continue activities 
supporting the increased use of BMPs, and the area's soil and climate 
characteristics, EPA concludes that the BACM requirement for 
agricultural sources is being met. Note, however, that identification 
and application of BACM for agricultural lands is still evolving and we 
expect Ecology to continue efforts in identifying and implementing BACM 
on sources of agricultural windblown dust and to revise periodically 
its Columbia Plateau NEAP, which covers the Wallula area.
    2. Boise Paper Solution--Composting Facility and Landfill. This 
source category includes emissions from vehicular traffic, windrow 
turning, materials handling and conveyance, and wind associated with 
the Boise Paper Solutions composting and landfill. Ecology has issued a 
title V Air Operating Permit (No. 000369-7) containing a fugitive dust 
control plan incorporating the measures that were determined as BACM 
for this facility. The plan requires road watering, rubber drapes on 
the windrow turning machine, compost row watering, no windrow turning 
on high wind days, minimization of active face of the landfill, and a 
prohibition on the placement of materials in the landfill during high 
wind days. In light of Ecology's evaluation of BACM and its issuance of 
an Air Operating Permit containing a dust control plan for the 
facility, EPA concludes that the BACM requirement for this facility is 
being met.
    3. Unpaved roads: Although emissions from unpaved roads contributed 
only 2.2% to the baseline inventory, quantitative analyses found that 
dust on the Wallula filters could be attributed to unpaved roads or 
agricultural fields. Analysis was unable to distinguish between the two 
sources. Therefore, both unpaved roads and agricultural fields were 
evaluated for BACM in the Wallula serious area plan. Based on criteria 
in EPA's Fugitive Dust Background Document and Technical Information 
Document for Best Available Control Measures (1992), unpaved roads with 
a length less than 0.5 mile or with less than 20 vehicle trips per day 
did not receive further consideration for BACM and were not included in 
the inventory. Ecology put most focus on unpaved roads near the 
monitor. The focus on these roads recognizes that the truck transport 
activity associated with the exceedance on July 3, 1997, which led to a 
violation, took place near the monitor.
    Normal traffic on these roads has consisted of staff traveling to 
service the monitoring site and meteorological station and Ecology 
staff visiting the monitoring site. The owner of land surrounding these 
roads has taken steps to limit access to these roads, and the 
monitoring site has been moved to a site in Burbank, both reducing the 
amount of travel on the roads. Ecology concluded that no additional 
controls to reduce PM10 on unpaved roads in the Wallula 
nonattainment area are required. Based on Ecology's evaluation and in 
light of the nature and limited use of unpaved roads in the area, EPA 
believes that no further controls on unpaved roads are needed to meet 
BACM requirements.
    4. Tyson Fresh Meats (formerly IBP, Inc.). On December 6, 2002, 
Ecology issued Administrative Order No. 02AQER-5074 to reduce IBP, 
Inc.'s potential to emit below the 70 tons per year threshold for major 
sources in serious PM10 nonattainment areas. The permit 
includes hourly and annual limits on throughput and hours of operation 
to achieve this reduction. In the Order, Ecology determined that the 
control equipment at IBP constitutes BACT. Based on Ecology's 
evaluation of BACM/BACT at the facility and the Order limiting the 
facility's potential to emit, EPA concludes that the BACM/BACT 
requirement for this facility is being met.
    5. Simplot feedlot. WAC 173-400-040 requires air pollution sources 
to take ``reasonable precautions'' to prevent the release of fugitive 
emissions. To clarify what constitutes ``reasonable precautions'' for 
fugitive dust emissions from feedlots, Ecology developed a guidelines 
document entitled ``Fugitive Dust Control Guidelines for Beef Cattle 
Feedlots and Best Management Practices'' (Feedlot Guideline Document). 
These guidelines are intended to be used in conjunction with WAC 173-
400-040 and are implemented through flexible, site-specific fugitive 
dust control plans developed by each feedlot and approved by Ecology or 
the appropriate local air authority. Simplot submitted a revised 
Feedlot Dust Control Plan to Ecology in December 2003. The revised plan 
reflects the outcome of Ecology's BACM evaluation, which looked at 
control measures such as increased water application, valve adjustment, 
addition of sprinklers to improve coverage, irrigation scheduling 
changes, water trucks to control roadway dust and manure management as 
potential emissions reduction methods. Ecology

[[Page 5091]]

approved Simplot's Feedlot Dust Control Plan on December 18, 2003, 
finding that the plan meets the requirements in the Feedlot Guideline 
Document and constitutes BACM for this source. Based on Ecology's 
evaluation of BACM, the Feedlot Guideline Document, the provisions in 
WAC 173-400-040, and Ecology's approval of Simplot's Feedlot Dust 
Control Plan, EPA concludes that the BACM requirement for this facility 
is being met.
    Based on the demonstration of BACM submitted by Ecology for sources 
in the Wallula area and our discussion above, EPA believes the serious 
area plan provides for implementation of both RACM and BACM for all 
source categories that contribute significantly to PM10 
standard violations in the Wallula nonattainment area. EPA therefore 
proposes to approve the plan as meeting the RACM and BACM requirements.

D. Major Source Definition

    CAA section 189(b)(3) requires that the terms ``major source'' and 
``major stationary source'' used in implementing the major new source 
permitting program in serious PM10 nonattainment areas under 
section 173 and for the control of PM10 precursors under 
section 189(e) must include any stationary source or group of 
stationary sources located within a contiguous area and under common 
control that emits, or has the potential to emit, at least 70 tons per 
year of PM10. To meet this requirement, Ecology revised the 
definition of ``major stationary source'' in WAC 173-400-112. 
Specifically WAC 173-400-112(1)(b)(i)(A) lowers the PM10 
threshold in nonattainment areas from 100 to 70 tons per year. EPA is 
proposing to approve this change because it meets the requirements of 
CAA section 189(b)(3).

E. Attainment Demonstration

    CAA section 189(b)(1)(A) requires a demonstration that the area 
will attain the NAAQS by December 31, 2001. As discussed above, EPA has 
already determined that the Wallula nonattainment area attained the 
PM10 NAAQS by December 31, 2001 (67 FR 64815, November 22, 
2002). As discussed below, the Wallula serious area plan provides 
further documentation in support of that finding.
    To demonstrate attainment, Ecology focused on the 24-hour 
PM10 exceedance of 210 ug/m3 that occurred at the 
Nedrow Farm/Wallula Junction monitor on July 3, 1997. Although there 
have been other exceedances recorded in Wallula after July 3, 1997, EPA 
concluded in 2002 that all subsequent exceedances through December 31, 
2001, qualified as natural events under EPA's Natural Events Policy. As 
discussed above and in our finding of attainment, these natural event 
exceedances are not considered in determining the area's air quality 
status. Since December 31, 2001, there have been four additional 
exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 standard. As also discussed 
above, however, we are proposing in this notice that these exceedances 
should also qualify as natural events under EPA's Natural Events 
Policy. Hence, it is reasonable for Ecology to focus on July 3, 1997 
since it is the last time an exceedance not attributed to a natural 
event has occurred in the area and it is this exceedance that led to 
the area's reclassification to serious.
1. Investigation of the July 3, 1997 Exceedance
    To determine the cause of the exceedance on July 3, 1997, Ecology 
relied on a combination of filter analyses, chemical mass balance 
modeling, dispersion modeling, and analysis of meteorological and air 
quality monitoring data. After Ecology's initial analysis, it was not 
immediately apparent what caused the exceedance. Therefore, Ecology 
conducted an investigation into whether there were any unusual 
activities in the area on July 3, 1997, that could have contributed 
significantly to the measured concentration. This effort led to 
information that 130 truckloads of finished compost had been 
transported over unpaved roads near the monitor from July 1-3, 1997. 
The trucks were loaded at the Boise Paper Solutions-Wallula Mill 
composting facility and the material was transported over unpaved roads 
to a fiber farm for use in enhancing cottonwood production. Based on 
the results of this investigation, Ecology determined that this was an 
unusual and nonrecurring activity and that it would have resulted in 
additional PM10 emissions in the area. This determination, 
combined with the results of technical analyses, led Ecology to 
conclude that unpaved road dust caused by truck transport was the 
primary cause of the July 3, 1997 exceedance. A summary of evidence 
supporting this conclusion is presented in the TSD.
2. Prevention of Future Exceedances
    The transport of finished compost from the compost facility to the 
fiber farm was a unique event that has not been repeated. The expected 
benefit for cottonwood production did not materialize and Boise Paper 
Solutions-Wallula Mill is now putting all finished compost in the 
compost cell of the landfill at the facility. To ensure that similar 
events do not occur in the future, Boise Paper Solutions--Wallula Mill 
developed a dust control plan that is part of its title V air operation 
permit. The plan covers normal and customary composting operation and 
also contains a provision specifying that dust effects must be 
considered in the event of any extraordinary activities outside of 
normal operations. This provision would have applied to the truck 
transport of finished compost to the fiber farm on July 1-3, 1997.
3. Attainment Demonstration
    Based on the information provided by Ecology, EPA believes that 
Ecology has thoroughly investigated the exceedance on July 3, 1997. EPA 
further believes that based on the results of the investigation, which 
included filter analysis, chemical mass balance and dispersion 
modeling, it is reasonable to conclude that the truck transport of 
compost on unpaved roads near the monitor caused the exceedance on July 
3, 1997. The truck transport activity was a one-time event that is not 
expected to recur. Other control measures are now in place to prevent 
both customary and unusual activities from causing a similar exceedance 
in the future.
    In light of the results of Ecology's investigation, the control 
measures addressing the July 3, 1997 exceedance, the control measures 
discussed in section IV.B. above that address air quality in Wallula 
generally, the application of EPA's Natural Event Policy, including 
implementation of BACM on agricultural sources to minimize the impacts 
of windblown dust during natural event exceedances, the attainment 
determination already made for the area through January 31, 2001, and 
more recent monitoring data showing continuing attainment, EPA proposes 
to approve the submitted attainment demonstration for the Wallula 
serious nonattainment area.

F. Implementation of Best Available Control Measures on Major 
Stationary Sources of PM10 Precursors

    CAA section 189(e) requires BACT to be applied to major stationary 
sources of PM10 precursors if these sources contribute 
significantly to PM10 exceedances in the area. Analysis of 
the PM10 filters on two days with exceedances, two days with 
elevated concentrations, and two days with low concentrations revealed 
that dust was the primary material on the PM10 filters.

[[Page 5092]]

Based on this information, EPA does not believe major stationary 
sources of PM10 precursors contribute significantly to 
PM10 levels in excess of the NAAQS in the nonattainment 
area.

G. Contingency Measures

    Section 172(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act requires that implementation 
plans provide for the implementation of specific measures to be 
undertaken if the area fails to make RFP or attain by its attainment 
deadline. These contingency measures are to take effect without further 
action by the State or EPA. 67 FR at 64816.
    The contingency measures in the serious area plan focus on 
mitigation of the impacts of windblown dust. The focus is on windblown 
dust rather than on the circumstances of the July 3, 1997 exceedance 
because, as discussed above, the circumstances of the July 3, 1997 
exceedance were determined to be unusual and unlikely to recur. In 
contrast, windblown dust events occur regularly in the Columbia Plateau 
and are the most likely cause of future exceedances. Because of the 
likelihood of future wind blown exceedances, the plan does not include 
a PM10 trigger level for implementing the contingency 
measures. Rather, the measures are to be implemented on a regular basis 
regardless of the PM10 levels measured.
    The plan's contingency measures include improvements to Ecology's 
process for identifying source contributors when high wind events are 
occurring, certain PM10 reduction projects included in 
Ecology's 2003 NEAP, and Ecology's BACM demonstration and our 
accompanying review every time a windblown dust exceedance occurs. In 
light of these measures to mitigate the impacts of high wind events and 
increase BMP implementation, along with regular evaluation of these 
measures during review of natural event claims and during attainment 
determinations, we believe the plan meets the contingency requirements 
of section 172(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act.

H. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) and Quantitative Milestones

    CAA section 172(c)(2) requires nonattainment plans to provide for 
reasonable further progress (RFP). Section 171(1) of the CAA defines 
RFP as ``such annual incremental reductions in emissions of the 
relevant air pollutant as are required by this part (part D of title I) 
or may reasonably be required by the Administrator for the purpose of 
ensuring attainment of the applicable national ambient air quality 
standard by the applicable date.'' CAA section 189(c) also requires 
PM10 plans demonstrating attainment to contain quantitative 
milestones which are to be achieved every 3 years until the area is 
redesignated attainment and which demonstrate RFP. These quantitative 
milestones should consist of elements that allow progress to be 
quantified or measured. Addendum at 42016.
    As discussed above, in 2002, EPA determined that Wallula 
nonattainment area was meeting the 24-hour and annual PM10 
standards as of December 31, 2001. Since then, monitoring data show 
that Wallula is continuing to meet the standards. Because the area is 
already in attainment of the standards, the emissions inventory is 
believed to have changed little since 1997, and control measures are 
being implemented as a part of the Wallula serious area plan to ensure 
the Wallula area maintains the standards, EPA believes no further 
showing of RFP or quantitative milestones are necessary. For these 
reasons, we propose to find that the plan meets the RFP and milestone 
requirement in CAA section 189(c)(1).

I. Transportation Conformity

    CAA section 176(c) requires that federally-funded or approved 
transportation plans, programs, and projects in nonattainment areas 
``conform'' to the area's air quality implementation plans. Conformity 
ensures that federal transportation actions do not worsen an area's air 
quality or interfere with its meeting the air quality standards. We 
have issued a conformity rule that establishes the criteria and 
procedures for determining whether or not transportation plans, 
programs, and projects conform to a SIP. See 40 CFR part 93, subpart A.
    One of the primary tests for conformity is to show transportation 
plans and improvement programs will not cause motor vehicle emissions 
higher than the levels needed to make progress toward and meet the air 
quality standards. The motor vehicle emissions levels needed to make 
progress toward and meet the air quality standards are set in an area's 
attainment and/or RFP plans and are known as the ``motor vehicle 
emissions budget.'' Emissions budgets are established for specific 
years and specific pollutants. See 40 CFR 93.118(a).
    Ecology's analysis shows that mobile sources are an insignificant 
source of PM10 emissions in the Wallula nonattainment area. 
As a result, a motor vehicle emissions budget is not required as part 
of the Wallula serious area plan and transportation conformity does not 
apply in this area. See 40 CFR 93.109(k).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and 
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive 
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This 
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that 
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any 
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does 
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect 
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 
1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because 
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian 
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian 
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive 
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not 
have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial 
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified 
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action 
merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal 
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of 
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This 
proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the

[[Page 5093]]

absence of a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary 
consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP 
submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be inconsistent with 
applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in 
place of a SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 
the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) do not apply. This proposed rule does not impose an information 
collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Particulate matter, and Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Dated: January 21, 2005.
Ronald A. Kreizenbeck,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10.
[FR Doc. 05-1867 Filed 1-31-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P