Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Idaho, 23155-23164 [E8-9269]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 83 (Tuesday, April 29, 2008)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 23155-23164]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-9269]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2008-0336; FRL-8559-3]


Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Idaho

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve revisions to Idaho's State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) relating to open burning and crop residue 
disposal requirements and visible emissions. The Director of the Idaho 
Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) submitted a draft SIP 
revision to the EPA on April 15, 2008. The EPA is proposing to approve 
this draft SIP revision at Idaho's request because, if adopted by the 
State in its current form, it would satisfy the requirements of the 
Clean Air Act (hereinafter the Act or CAA). The State has scheduled a 
public hearing on this draft revision for May 2, 2008.
    The Director of the IDEQ also submitted a SIP revision relating to 
open burning and crop residue disposal requirements on May 22, 2003, 
which the EPA approved on July 11, 2005 (70 FR 39658). A State public 
hearing for this revision was held on September 11, 2002. In a ruling 
issued on January 30, 2007, and amended on May 29, 2007, that approval 
was remanded and vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th 
Circuit in Safe Air for Everyone v. USEPA, 475 F.3d 1096, amended 488 
F.3d 1088 (9th Cir 2007) (SAFE decision). The EPA is re-proposing to 
approve the portion of the May 22, 2003, SIP revision that would not be 
changed by the draft SIP revision, if adopted, submitted on April 15, 
2008. We are proposing to approve this portion of the SIP revision 
because it satisfies the requirements of the Act and does not 
contravene the Court's SAFE decision.

[[Page 23156]]


DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 29, 2008.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2008-0336, by one of the following methods:
    A. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    B. Mail: Donna Deneen, EPA, Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics (AWT-
107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, Washington 98101
    C. Hand Delivery: EPA, Region 10 Mailroom, 9th Floor, 1200 Sixth 
Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. Attention: Donna Deneen, Office of 
Air Waste, and Toxics (AWT-107). Such deliveries are only accepted 
during normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be 
made for deliveries of boxed information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2008-
0336. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
https://www.regulations.gov, 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 https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site 
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means the 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 the EPA 
without going through https://www.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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment 
due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, 
the 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 electronic docket are listed in the 
https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the 
Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, 
Seattle, Washington 98101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Deneen, (206) 553-6706, or by e-
mail at R10-Public_Comments@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA. Information is organized 
as follows:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Proposed Action
    A. General Open Burning Rules at IDAPA 58.01.01.600 through 616
    B. Crop Residue Disposal Rules at IDAPA 58.01.01.617 through 
623, Provision Addressing Visible Emissions at IDAPA 58.01.01.625, 
and New Legislation
    1. Background
    2. Section 110(l) Requirements
    3. Section 193 Requirements
III. Scope of Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    The EPA is proposing to approve revisions to Idaho's SIP relating 
to open burning and crop residue disposal requirements and to a 
provision addressing visible emissions. This proposed approval 
encompasses a draft revision (IDAPA 58.01.01.600-603, 606, 617-623, and 
625), submitted by the IDEQ on April 15, 2008 (the 2008 draft SIP 
revision request) and a portion of a revision request (IDAPA 
58.01.01.604, 607-610, 612, 613, 615 and 616) submitted by the IDEQ on 
May 22, 2003. (We will refer to this portion of the May 22, 2003, SIP 
revision request as the ``2003 SIP revision request.'')
    Idaho has requested that the EPA ``parallel process'' the 2008 
draft SIP revision request. Parallel processing means that the EPA 
proposes rulemaking action on a state's rule revision before the state 
regulation is adopted in final form under state law. See 40 CFR part 
51, appendix V, section 2.3. Parallel processing generally saves total 
processing time and allows the SIP revision, if approved, to become 
effective sooner than under the traditional federal review process. 
Under the traditional process the EPA does not first propose to approve 
or disapprove a SIP revision request until it has been finally adopted 
under state law. Under parallel processing, the EPA may take final 
action to approve a SIP revision request if the final version of the 
adopted state submission remains substantially unchanged from the 
submission on which the proposed approval rulemaking was based. If 
there are significant changes in the State's final submission, the EPA 
would not take final action approving this proposal.
    The EPA is not parallel processing the portion of the 2003 SIP 
revision request that would not be changed by the 2008 draft SIP 
revision request, if adopted. This portion of the 2003 SIP revision 
request has already been through the state public process and adopted 
in its final form under state law, and remains officially submitted to 
the EPA. We expect that Idaho will make no further changes to these 
already adopted and submitted provisions. Therefore it is not necessary 
to parallel process the request to approve these revisions. Rather, in 
today's notice the EPA proposes to approve these provisions as 
currently adopted under State law, based on our expectation that they 
will not be changed in the State's adoption of its 2008 SIP revision 
request.

History of the 2003 and 2008 SIP Revision Requests

    On May 22, 2003, Idaho submitted to the EPA a requested revision to 
its SIP relating to open burning and crop residue disposal 
requirements. This 2003 SIP revision request contained a number of 
changes including editorial changes, the addition of a provision 
regarding the immediate abatement of open burning in emergencies, 
removal of a provision regarding discretionary approval of alternatives 
to open burning, and the addition of a provision to specify that crop 
residue burning was an allowable form of open burning.
    On July 11, 2005, the EPA approved Idaho's 2003 SIP revision 
request, explaining that we considered it to be a clarification of 
Idaho's prior SIP rather than a substantive amendment. 70 FR 39658 and 
70 FR 41963 (2005 SIP approval). A citizen's group filed a petition for 
judicial review of our 2005 SIP approval in the U.S. Court of Appeals 
for the 9th Circuit, claiming that the approval relaxed the existing 
SIP and that we were incorrect in viewing the 2003 SIP revision request 
as a clarification of the prior SIP. (Safe Air for Everyone v. USEPA, 
475 F.3d 1096, amended 488 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir 2007)). On January 30, 
2007 (as amended on May 29, 2007), the Court granted the

[[Page 23157]]

petition for review, vacated the 2005 SIP approval, and remanded the 
matter to the EPA.
    Subsequent to the remand, Idaho initiated a negotiated process to 
revise the challenged portions of the 2003 SIP revision request. As 
described in more detail below, this negotiated process included 
discussions with representatives of the State, the IDEQ, the Idaho 
State Department of Agriculture (ISDA), Safe Air For Everyone, (SAFE), 
numerous agricultural organizations, and farmers who burn crop residue. 
As a result of the negotiations, the State has revised its approach to 
the open burning of crop residue, enacted new legislation addressing 
the practice, and has developed draft rules for submission to the EPA.

II. Proposed Action

    For the reasons discussed below, this action proposes to approve 
the State's draft revised open burning rules, including the revisions 
to allow the open burning of crop residue, and the provision addressing 
visible emissions. More specifically, we are proposing to approve the 
2008 draft SIP revision request (IDAPA 58.01.01.600-603, 606, 617-623, 
and 625) that includes both draft changes to the general open burning 
rules that were contained in the 2003 SIP revision request and draft 
changes to those rules that specifically relate to crop residue 
burning. We are also proposing to approve the portion of the 2003 SIP 
revision request (IDAPA 58.01.01.604, 607-610, 612, 613, 615 and 616) 
that would not be changed by the 2008 draft SIP revision request and 
that is currently not part of the federally approved Idaho SIP due to 
the Court's remand and vacatur of our 2005 SIP approval of the 2003 
submission. We are proposing to approve the draft 2008 revisions and 
the unchanged 2003 submission provisions because they meet the 
requirements of the Clean Air Act.
    For organizational ease, section A below provides a discussion of 
the changes submitted to IDAPA 58.01.01.600 through 616, which we will 
refer to as Idaho's general open burning rules. Section B below 
discusses IDAPA 58.01.01.617 through 623, which we will refer to as 
Idaho's crop residue burning rules. We will also discuss in Section B 
the provision addressing visible emissions at IDAPA 58.01.01.625.05 and 
a new statutory provision, Idaho House Bill 557, which authorizes the 
open burning of crop residue and the IDEQ's adoption of implementing 
rules.
    The EPA has also prepared a Technical Support Document (TSD) with 
more detailed information about the SIP revisions Idaho has asked us to 
approve. The TSD is available for review as part of the docket for this 
action.

A. General Open Burning Rules at IDAPA 58.01.01.600 through 616

    Due to the Court's remand and vacatur of our 2005 SIP approval of 
the 2003 SIP revision request, our most recent approval of the general 
open burning rules in Idaho's SIP that remains in effect was published 
on January 16, 2003 (68 FR 2217) (2003 SIP approval). That 2003 SIP 
approval was not challenged by any party. Since then, the IDEQ has made 
a number of changes to its general open burning rules. IDAPA 
58.01.01.600-616. These changes were submitted in both the 2003 SIP 
revision request and the 2008 draft SIP revision request, and include 
the following: Minor modifications of existing language, the addition 
of a provision related to emergency authority, and the deletion of a 
never-used provision relating to alternatives to open burning.
Minor Modifications to Existing Language
    The IDEQ made minor modifications to the language in IDAPA 
58.01.01.600-602, 606-610, 612-613, and 615-616. These modifications to 
existing language are either editorial revisions, clarifications of 
existing provisions, or process revisions. The TSD identifies each 
provision, indicates whether it was submitted in the 2003 or 2008 SIP 
revision requests, and describes how the modification compares to the 
existing federally approved SIP as reflected in the 2003 SIP approval. 
By the nature of these types of modifications, they have no substantive 
impact on rule requirements and, therefore, meet the requirements of 
the Act and are approvable.
Emergency Authority Provision
    The IDEQ also revised IDAPA 58.01.01.603.02 to provide that ``In 
accordance with Title 39, Chapter 1, Idaho Code, the Department [IDEQ] 
has the authority to require immediate abatement of open burning in 
cases of an emergency requiring immediate action to protect human 
health or safety.'' This provision, submitted as part of the 2003 SIP 
revision request, reiterates the existing authority provided in Title 
39, Chapter 1, Idaho Code (and approved in the unchallenged 2003 SIP 
approval) to require immediate abatement of air pollution in emergency 
cases and clarifies that the emergency authority may be used for open 
burning. Idaho Code section 39-112. Because the addition of this 
provision clarifies and does not change the IDEQ's emergency authority 
in the existing SIP to protect human health or safety, it is 
approvable.
Alternatives to Open Burning.
    In the 2003 SIP revision request, the IDEQ also deleted IDAPA 
58.01.01.604--Alternatives to Open Burning, from its rules. Under this 
provision, two years from the date an economical and reasonable 
alternative to a specific usage of open burning is approved by the 
Director of the IDEQ, that usage of open burning is no longer allowed. 
Under IDAPA section 58.01.01.604, the approval of alternatives is 
discretionary and to date has not been used. While the EPA continues to 
encourage alternatives to open burning, the removal of this provision 
has no substantive impact on existing federally-approved requirements 
that would have been affected had the IDEQ Director ever approved such 
an alternative. Therefore we propose to approve the removal of section 
58.01.01.604 from the Idaho SIP.
    In light of the nature of the revisions discussed above to IDAPA 
58.01.01.600-602, 606-610, 612-613, and 615-616 (editorial, process 
revisions, clarification of the emergency provision, and the deletion 
of a discretionary and never-used before provision), we are proposing 
to approve these revisions because they meet all of the requirements of 
the Clean Air Act. See the Technical Support Document for specific 
comparisons of these revisions to the existing federally approved SIP 
as reflected by the 2003 SIP approval.

B. Crop Residue Disposal Rules at IDAPA 58.01.01.617 through 623, 
Provision Addressing Visible Emissions at IDAPA 58.01.01.625 and New 
Legislation

    The crop residue disposal rules at IDAPA 58.01.01.617 through 623 
and the provision addressing visible emissions at IDAPA 58.01.01.625 
and accompanying materials supporting these rules are contained in the 
2008 draft SIP revision request. According to the 2008 draft SIP 
revision request, these rules were submitted as a result of the Ninth 
Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Safe Air for Everyone v. USEPA, 
475 F.3d 1096, amended 488 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir 2007) and of the 
subsequent efforts of stakeholders. The stakeholders negotiated an 
agreement after the Court's decision to ensure protection of the public 
health and the

[[Page 23158]]

environment and that allows growers to burn crop residue when certain 
conditions are met.
    Below is a history of the 2008 draft SIP revision request, the 
stakeholder agreement points, our analysis of the resulting statute and 
administrative rules, and the basis for our proposed approval of these 
provisions in the 2008 SIP revision request.
1. Background
    The open burning of agricultural fields is a historic agricultural 
practice in Idaho. As early as 1970, Idaho adopted open burning rules 
that specifically included agricultural burning as a category of 
allowable burning. The EPA approved these provisions into the Idaho SIP 
on May 31, 1972, and re-approved them on July 28, 1982. 37 FR 10861 and 
47 FR 32530.\1\ A series of events, including the Idaho Legislature's 
enactment of the 1985 Smoke Management Act (House Bill 246, 41st 
Legislature, 1985), which specifically acknowledged crop residue 
burning and prohibited the IDEQ from regulating it, led to the 
subsequent submission of a SIP revision in the early 1990s that no 
longer included crop residue burning as an allowable form of open 
burning. The EPA approved this revision to Idaho's SIP on July 23, 
1993. 58 FR 39445. (As further addressed below, it was this EPA SIP 
approval in 1993 that first rendered, albeit unintentionally, open 
burning of agricultural fields a prohibited act under the approved 
Idaho SIP, as interpreted by the 9th Circuit.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section 1153.08 of these rules specifically identifies 
agricultural burning as a category of allowable burning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1999, the Idaho Legislature repealed the 1985 Smoke Management 
Act and in its place enacted the Smoke Management and Crop Residue 
Disposal Act (House Bill 342, 55th legislature, 1999). This Act 
authorized ISDA to promulgate rules regarding crop residue disposal and 
removed the prohibition against the IDEQ from doing so. The IDEQ 
subsequently amended its rules to recognize the open burning of crop 
residue. This rule, IDAPA 58.01.01.617, was submitted in 2003 to the 
EPA as a SIP clarification and the EPA approved that rule in 2005. 70 
FR 39658 (July 11, 2005). SAFE filed a petition for judicial review, 
asserting that the SIP previously prohibited crop residue burning and 
now allowed it as a result of the EPA's 2005 approval of the 2003 SIP 
revision request. SAFE claimed that the EPA incorrectly viewed the 
previously approved SIP as already allowing open burning of 
agricultural fields. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with 
SAFE's arguments, granted the petition for review, vacated the EPA's 
2005 SIP approval of the 2003 SIP revision request, and remanded it 
back to the EPA to consider the amendment a change to the pre-existing 
SIP rather than a clarification. The Ninth Circuit determined that the 
pre-existing SIP did not allow the open burning of crop residue and 
that further analysis under Clean Air Act sections 110(l) and 193 by 
the EPA was required. The decision made clear that under the existing 
federally approved SIP, open burning of crop residue on state lands in 
Idaho was prohibited.
    Subsequent to the Ninth Circuit's decision, the parties to the 
lawsuit, and other key stakeholders, began discussions regarding the 
open burning of crop residue (crop residue burning) program and the SIP 
revision submittal components required to satisfy the Act. Central 
parties to these discussions included representatives from SAFE, IDEQ, 
ISDA, and numerous agricultural organizations and farmers who burn crop 
residue. EPA did not participate directly in the stakeholder 
discussions, but was kept informed of their progress. After several 
months of discussion, an independent mediator was hired by the State to 
assist in the negotiation of an agreement among the non-federal 
stakeholders.
    In December 2007, agreement points among the non-federal 
stakeholders were reached. The State summarizes the agreement in the 
2008 draft SIP revision request as an agreement (1) that DEQ would 
administer the crop residue burning program (in the past the ISDA 
administered the program), (2) to model the program after the Nez Perce 
Tribe crop residue burning program, specifically to protect air quality 
to 75% of the NAAQS, (3) to incorporate the transparency aspects of the 
Washington State Department of Ecology program, (4) to examine the 
adequacy of the existing monitoring network, (5) to build in 
cooperation with other smoke management regulators, (6) to conduct 
monitoring and exposure studies if grant money is available, and (7) to 
conduct an air quality analysis prior to authorizing the annual open 
burning of 20,000 acres or more of bluegrass.

Legislation

    Subsequent to the December 2007 agreement among the non-federal 
stakeholders, House Bill 557 was drafted to reflect the agreement 
points. The bill was passed by the Idaho Legislature, signed by the 
Governor and became effective on March 7, 2008.
    House Bill 557 adds a new section, section 38-114, to the 
Environmental Protection and Health Act. This section establishes a 
crop residue program within the IDEQ. It specifically provides that the 
open burning of crop residue to develop physiological conditions 
conducive to increase crop yields, or control diseases, insects, pests 
or weed infestations, shall be an allowable form of open burning, such 
that it is expressly authorized as referenced in Section 52-108 Idaho 
Code,\2\ so long as the open burning is conducted in accordance with 
the provisions of this section and the rules promulgated pursuant to 
this chapter. It also amends Idaho's Public Records Act to allow for 
the disclosure of information regarding property locations of fields to 
be burned, persons responsible for the burn, and acreage and crop type 
for crop residue to be burned.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Section 52-103 Idaho Code provides ``Nothing which is done 
or maintained under the express authority of a statute can be deemed 
a nuisance.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Importantly, the Bill also requires any person desiring to burn 
crop residue to obtain prior approval from the IDEQ, and, further, 
provides that the IDEQ is prohibited from approving a burn if it 
determines that ambient air quality levels: ``(a) [a]re exceeding, or 
are projected to exceed, seventy-five percent (75%) of the level of any 
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) on any day, and these 
levels are projected to continue or recur over at least the next 
twenty-four (24) hours; or (b) [h]ave reached, or are forecasted to 
reach and persist at, eighty percent (80%) of the one (1) hour action 
criteria for particulate matter pursuant to section 556 of IDAPA 
58.01.01, rules for the control of air pollution in Idaho.'' Idaho Code 
Section 39-114(3)(a).
    House Bill 557 also explains that IDEQ will make available to the 
public, prior to the burn, information regarding the date of the burn, 
location, acreage and crop type. Furthermore, the Bill requires the 
IDEQ to conduct additional air quality analysis if the agricultural 
community desires to burn more than 20,000 acres of bluegrass within 
the state. Additionally, the Bill requires a $2/acre fee be paid to 
IDEQ prior to burning.

Negotiated Rulemaking

    After House Bill 557 was passed, the Idaho Department of 
Environmental Quality Board adopted rules implementing House Bill 557 
and reflecting the December 2007 agreement relating to crop residue 
disposal. At the same time, a provision addressing visible emissions 
was added at IDAPA

[[Page 23159]]

58.01.01.625.05 providing that the visible emissions requirements in 
IDAPA 58.01.01.625 shall not apply to the open burning of crop residue. 
These crop residue disposal rules and the new provision addressing 
visible emissions were developed through Idaho's negotiated rulemaking 
process.\3\ This process was open to the public and included 
representatives from the negotiation team. The rules and visible 
emissions provision became effective on April 2, 2008. A state public 
hearing is scheduled for May 2, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Idaho's negotiated rulemaking process is an informal process 
open to the public and intended to improve the substances of 
proposed rules by drawing upon shared information, expertise and 
technical abilities possessed by the affected persons; to arrive at 
a consensus on the content of the rule; to expedite formal rule-
making; and to lessen the likelihood that affected persons will 
resist enforcement or challenge the rules in court. See Section 67-
5220, Idaho Code and IDAPA 04.11.01.810 through 819.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In summary, the negotiated rules provide for the open burning of 
crop residue through a Permit by Rule program at IDAPA 58.01.01.617 
through 623 and address visible emissions requirements at IDAPA 
58.01.01.625.05. These rule changes are discussed below.

Description of the Crop Residue (Permit by Rule) Burning Program

    IDAPA 58.01.01.617 provides that the open burning of crop residue 
on fields where the crops were grown is an allowable form of open 
burning if conducted in accordance with provisions contained in IDAPA 
58.01.01.618 through 623. Under these rules, no person shall conduct an 
open burn of crop residue without obtaining the applicable permit by 
rule. IDAPA 58.01.01.618 contains the general requirements for 
obtaining a permit by rule, IDAPA 58.01.01.619 and 620 contain the 
registration and fee requirements for obtaining a permit by rule, IDAPA 
58.01.01.621 contains burn determination criteria and a Web site 
notification process, IDAPA 58.01.01.622 provides general provisions 
(covering such items as training requirements, reporting requirements, 
and certain limitations on burning), and IDAPA 58.01.01.623 provides 
requirements for public notification. In brief, under these 
requirements, a person desiring to burn crop residue must register at 
least thirty days in advance of the date of the proposed burn, pay a 
fee at least seven days prior to the burn, contact DEQ for initial 
approval at least 12 hours prior to the burn, obtain final approval 
from the IDEQ the morning of the burn, and submit a post-burn report to 
the IDEQ. In addition, all persons intending to dispose of crop residue 
through burning must abide by all of the general provisions in IDAPA 
58.01.01.622.
    The burn criteria for the IDEQ to approve a request to burn are 
described in IDAPA 58.01.01.621. Importantly, before approving a 
permittee's request to burn, the IDEQ must determine that ambient air 
quality levels do not exceed seventy five percent of the level of any 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) on any day and are not 
projected to exceed such level over the next 24 hours. In addition, the 
IDEQ must determine that ambient air quality levels have not reached, 
and are not forecasted to reach and persist at, eighty percent of the 
one hour action criteria for particulate matter under IDAPA 
58.01.01.556.\4\ Thus, IDEQ will not approve a burn if these levels are 
expected to be exceeded as a result of the burn. In determining whether 
to approve the burn, DEQ must consider the expected emissions from the 
proposed burn, the proximity of the proposed burn to other burns, the 
moisture content of the fuels, the acreage, crop type and other fuel 
characteristics, existing and expected meteorological conditions, the 
proximity of the proposed burn to institutions with sensitive 
populations, public roadways, and airports, and other relevant factors. 
IDAPA 58.01.01.621.01. The IDEQ must also notify the public as provided 
in IDAPA 58.01.01.623.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The current on hour action criteria under IDAPA 58.01.01.556 
is an average of 80 [uacute]g/m3 for PM2.5 and 
an average of 385 [uacute]g/m3 for PM10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The new rules include a number of general provisions that apply to 
all persons intending to dispose of crop residue through burning. For 
example, the rules allow burning to be conducted only on designated 
burn days, and provide that burning shall not be conducted on weekends, 
holidays or after sunset or before sunrise. Additionally, the person 
conducting the burn must have a portable communication device, like a 
cellular phone; must attend crop residue burning training; and must 
submit a post burn report to IDEQ. IDAPA 58.01.01.622.01.
    An Operating Guide to be developed by IDEQ will serve as the main 
crop residue burning Smoke Management Program implementation tool. The 
Operating Guide will incorporate the applicable agreement points in the 
December 2007 agreement, air quality rule requirements, elements of the 
Nez Perce smoke management program, elements of the Washington smoke 
management program, and elements specific to Idaho's program including 
specific meteorological, air quality, and burn parameters required for 
burn approval. More information about the Operating Guide can be found 
in Section 6.1.6 of the 2008 draft SIP revision request.
    The IDEQ has not submitted this Operating Guide as part of its 2008 
SIP revision request, and the EPA is not relying on it, or its details, 
for purposes of proposing approval of the SIP. Further, the Operating 
Guide may not be read, or be changed, in a way that substantively 
modifies the terms that are approved into the SIP. Only by formally 
adopting under State law and submitting revised statutory and/or 
regulatory requirements to the EPA, may a State seek to revise its 
federally approved and enforceable SIP, and EPA approval of such 
submission is required before a SIP's enforceable requirements may be 
modified. Therefore, the EPA considers Idaho's Operating Guide, once it 
is developed, to not have any potential effect on the SIP requirements 
we are proposing to approve today.

Provision Addressing Visible Emissions at IDAPA 58.01.01.625

    IDAPA 58.01.01.625.05 contains a general 20% opacity visible 
emission limitation and provides that EPA Method 9 at 40 CFR Part 60 is 
generally the appropriate test method. In 2008, as part of the 
negotiated rulemaking, IDEQ added a new provision to IDAPA 58.01.01.625 
to specify that section 625 ``shall not apply to the open burning of 
crop residue.'' Section 6.1.3 of the 2008 SIP revision request explains 
that, as in the Nez Perce Tribal Federal Implementation Plan, 40 CFR 
49.124(c), and the previous Idaho Smoke Management and Crop Residue 
Disposal Act, the stakeholders also agreed in the negotiated rulemaking 
that the opacity standard in IDAPA 58.01.01.625 shall not apply to the 
open burning of crop residue.
2. Section 110(l) Requirements
    Under section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act, the Administrator may 
not approve a SIP revision ``if the revision would interfere with any 
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further 
progress, or any other applicable requirement of [the Act].''
    To address this requirement, the EPA reviewed and analyzed air 
monitoring data from Federal Reference Method (FRM) and Federal 
Equivalent Method (FEM) monitors in Idaho's EPA-approved monitoring 
network and compared the data to the National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards

[[Page 23160]]

(NAAQS) for all pollutants.\5\ Idaho's network, as it was most recently 
approved by the EPA on November 21, 2007, includes 25 FEM and FRM 
monitors throughout the state. Idaho also operates about a dozen other 
monitors that are not FEM or FRM monitors that support IDEQ's air 
quality forecasting and smoke management programs. More than half of 
the total monitors are PM2.5 monitors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The NAAQS pollutants are carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen 
dioxide, particulate matter, ozone, and sulfur dioxide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Open burning of crop residue has been a common practice in many 
parts of Idaho for decades and continued through 2006, notwithstanding 
the fact of the Ninth Circuit's 2007 ruling that the EPA-approved SIP 
prohibited such burning. Consequently, the air quality monitoring data 
obtained in Idaho prior to 2007 would include the actual air quality 
impacts associated with crop residue burning that are detectable by 
Idaho's monitors.\6\ Therefore, review and analysis of the monitoring 
data also reflects analysis of any impacts detected by the monitors 
resulting from crop residue burning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Following the 9th Circuit's ruling, crop residue burning did 
not occur in Idaho in 2007 on fields under state jurisdiction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, our review focused on air quality data collected by 
Idaho's EPA-approved monitoring network and entered into the EPA's Air 
Quality System (AQS) over the past 10 years (1997 to 2007). This ten 
year timeframe is consistent with the period the EPA uses for criteria 
air pollutant summary reports that are extracted routinely from AQS 
(e.g., AirData reports), and it is also the period specified for 
certain air quality planning requirements under the Clean Air Act. See 
section 175A of the Act.
    Based on our review of these monitoring data, there is no evidence 
from the monitors of a violation of the NAAQS as a result of the open 
burning of crop residue. We considered all of the NAAQS pollutants and 
reviewed the monitoring data for the entire state. The most relevant 
pollutants for this discussion are PM2.5, PM10, 
and ozone. PM2.5 and ozone are relevant because the EPA's 
recent review of the NAAQS for these pollutants resulted in more 
stringent standards (71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006) and 73 FR 16426 
(March 27, 2008)) and monitoring data indicate that these new standards 
may be exceeded in some areas in Idaho. PM10 is relevant 
because the only existing nonattainment areas in Idaho are for 
PM10. There are no nonattainment areas for carbon monoxide, 
sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide or lead. AQS data show the levels of 
these pollutants are well below the standards.

PM2.5

    There are two areas in Idaho with design values \7\ above the NAAQS 
for PM2.5.\8\ These areas are the Pinehurst area and the 
Franklin County area. In December 2007, both areas were recommended by 
Idaho as PM2.5 nonattainment areas for the 24 hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ A design value is a statistic that describes the air quality 
status of a given area relative to the level of the National Ambient 
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
    \8\ PM2.5 refers to particles with a nominal mean 
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers. The 
annual standard is 15 micrograms per cubic meter, based on the 3-
year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. The 24-
hour standard is 35 micrograms per cubic meter, based on the 3-year 
average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Pinehurst area historically experiences wintertime (November 
through February) stagnation events. Consistently, data show that past 
exceedances have occurred almost exclusively during the wintertime and 
not when the open burning of crop residue typically occurs (March and 
April for the spring crop burning season and mid-July through the end 
of October for the fall crop burning season). According to Idaho's 
December 2007 recommendation letter, the main emission sources 
contributing to PM2.5 in the Pinehurst area are residential 
wood heating, vehicles, open burning of yard debris, and slash burning. 
Idaho attributed none of the exceedances of PM2.5 to the 
burning of crop residue.
    The Franklin County area also experiences wintertime stagnation 
events, and the data show that past PM2.5 exceedances have 
occurred in the wintertime; not when the open burning of crop residue 
typically occurs. Idaho's December 2007 recommendation letter 
identifies the main emission sources contributing to PM2.5 
in Franklin County as vehicle, residential wood heating, and 
agriculture (feedlot and dairy ammonia). Like for Pinehurst, Idaho 
attributed none of the PM2.5 exceedances in Franklin County 
to the burning of crop residue.

PM10

    For PM10, we reviewed air quality data for the only two 
nonattainment areas in Idaho under Idaho jurisdiction.\9\ These are 
Pinehurst and Sandpoint, both of which are designated nonattainment 
areas for the PM10 NAAQS.\10\ Both have been meeting the 
PM10 NAAQS for more than 10 years and have PM10 
design values well below the NAAQS.\11\

Ozone
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ One other area, the Fort Hall nonattainment area (located on 
the Fort Hall Reservation), is also designated nonattainment for 
PM10. Recent data show that PM10 air 
monitoring values for this area are also well below the NAAQS. Since 
the shutdown of the FMC facility in the Fort Hall nonattainment area 
in December 2001, PM10 levels have been well below the 
standard, except for a few days when there were also high winds.
    \10\ The 24 hour PM10 NAAQS is 150 [uacute]g/m\3\.
    \11\ Over the past 10 years, Sandpoint has had no exceedances of 
the PM10 NAAQS and Pinehurst has had only one, on 
February 19, 1998. However, the Pinehurst exceedance did not result 
in a violation and was not likely the result of the open burning of 
crop residue because such burning does not typically occur during 
that time of year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although AQS data show that all areas in Idaho are meeting the 
existing 8 hour NAAQS for ozone, the EPA recently revised and lowered 
the standard, effective May 27, 2008.\12\ At the new level, our initial 
review of AQS data shows that the design value for one area, the Boise, 
Idaho area, may be above the new NAAQS based on 2005-2007 data. Further 
review shows that the highest values have been measured typically in 
the hottest summer months of July and August. Since crop residue 
burning has occurred historically in August, we can not rule out the 
possibility of precursors to ozone \13\ from crop residue burning 
contributing to high ozone days. But as discussed below, the new crop 
residue disposal rules have safeguards that address the possibility of 
such contributions, and that would preclude crop residue burning on 
days when a NAAQS exceedance might occur.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The 8-hour ozone standard was lowered from 0.08 parts per 
million to 0.075 parts per million. States must make recommendations 
to EPA no later than March 2009 for areas to be designated 
attainment, nonattainment and unclassifiable.
    \13\ Products of incomplete combustion include volatile organic 
compounds and nitrogen oxides, both of which are precursors to 
ozone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In sum, the past ten years of air quality data show no monitored 
evidence that the burning of crop residue has led to a violation of the 
NAAQS. To the extent that the burning of crop residue may contribute to 
exceedances of the revised NAAQS for ozone and PM2.5, the 
provisions in IDAPA 58.01.01.617 through 623 of Idaho's new crop 
residue burning program adequately addresses those concerns by 
preventing crop residue burning on days when a NAAQS exceedance may 
occur. Specifically, IDAPA 58.01.01.621 prohibits burn approval if 
ambient air quality levels exceed seventy-five percent of the level of 
any NAAQS on any day or if those levels are projected to exceed such 
level over the next twenty-four hours. In

[[Page 23161]]

addition, the rules specifically prohibit burn approval if the ambient 
air quality levels have reached or are forecasted to reach and persist 
at, eighty percent of the one hour action criteria for particulate 
matter. Thus, under these provisions, the burning of crop residue would 
simply not occur if air quality levels exceed the NAAQS or if burning 
could result in a NAAQS exceedance.
    In addition, pursuant to IDAPA 58.01.01.621.01 a. through i., the 
IDEQ may also consider a number of additional factors, in deciding 
whether to approve a particular burn request. The factors include 
consideration of the expected emissions from all burns proposed for the 
same date; the proximity of other burns as well as potential emission 
sources within the area to be affected by the proposed burn; the 
moisture content of the material to be burned, the acreage, crop type, 
and fuel characteristics, meteorological conditions, proximity to 
institutions with sensitive populations such as schools, hospitals and 
residential health care facilities;\14\ proximity to public roadways or 
airports; and other factors relevant to preventing exceedances of the 
air quality concentrations in the IDAPA 58.01.01.621. Consideration of 
these factors will help ensure that the crop residue burning will not 
interfere with the NAAQS or any other applicable requirement of the 
Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The rule explicitly provides that the Department shall NOT 
authorize a burn if conditions are such that institutions with 
sensitive populations will be adversely impacted or when the plume 
is expected to impact such institutions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Idaho Code 39-108 provides DEQ with investigation, inspection, and 
enforcement authority over violations of Idaho Code 39-114 (the air 
quality rules) and a Permit by Rule issued pursuant to the Air Quality 
Rules. A notice of violation with a penalty of up to $19,000 per day 
per violation may be assessed. Idaho Code 39-108(30) and (5). Civil and 
criminal enforcement actions may be taken for violations pursuant to 
Idaho Code 39-109.

Supporting Materials in the 2008 Draft SIP Revision

    In the 2008 draft SIP revision request, the IDEQ submitted 
additional documentation and analysis showing that past smoke 
management practices in Idaho did not contribute to NAAQS violations. 
The draft SIP revision request includes additional technical analysis, 
including analysis of air quality, meteorology, emissions inventory, 
and non-regulatory modeling to show that the crop residue burning 
activity in the State of Idaho is not causing nor significantly 
contributing to a violation of the NAAQS. The IDEQ also provided its 
rationale for the provision added at IDAPA 58.01.01.625.05 addressing 
visible emissions. It explains that, as in the FIP for the Nez Perce 
Reservation, 40 CFR 49.124(c), and the previous Smoke Management and 
Crop Residue Disposal Act, the stakeholders also agreed in the 
negotiated rulemaking that the opacity standard in IDAPA 58.01.01.625 
shall not apply to the open burning of crop residue (IDAPA 
58.01.01.625.05).
    We acknowledge that the Federal Air Rules for Reservations (FARR) 
exclude open burning from the visible emissions requirements. 70 FR 
18074 (April 8, 2005). The FARR established the basic air quality rules 
for all of the Indian Reservations in Idaho, Oregon and Washington. 
Thus, these requirements apply not only to the Nez Perce Indian 
Reservation, but to all Indian Reservations in Idaho, Oregon, and 
Washington. Therefore, open burning on any of these reservations is not 
subject to the visible emission standards on any of these reservations.
    When promulgating the FARR, the EPA stated that ``EPA is also 
proposing specific exemptions to the rule in a manner similar to the 
State and local agency rules in the docket. These exemptions include 
sources or activities for which compliance with the opacity rule would 
not be feasible or would impose unreasonable costs (e.g., open burning, 
agricultural activities, residential space heating, public roads, sweat 
lodges, non-commercial smoke houses).'' (Technical Support Document for 
the FARR, Docket ID No. OAR-2004-0067, page 18.) Recognizing we have 
promulgated an exemption from the visible emissions standard for open 
burning in the past ``in a manner similar to the State and local agency 
rules,'' the EPA determines that the State's new provision regarding 
visible emissions is reasonable.
    In sum, based on our review of past air quality monitoring data for 
Idaho, the supporting material provided by the IDEQ, and the crop 
burning provisions at IDAPA 58.01.01.617 through 623, we conclude that 
the open burning revisions related to crop residue burning (IDAPA 
58.01.01.617 through 623) and the provision addressing visible 
emissions at IDAPA 58.01.01.625.05, would not interfere with any 
applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further 
progress or any other applicable requirement of the Act.
3. Section 193 Requirements
    Section 193 of the Act provides that no control requirement in 
effect, or required to be adopted by an order, settlement agreement, or 
plan in effect before the date of the enactment of the Clean Air Act 
Amendments of 1990 in any area which is a nonattainment area for any 
air pollutant, may be modified after such enactment in any manner 
unless the modification insures equivalent or greater emission 
reductions of such air pollutant.
    The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were enacted on November 15, 
1990. Therefore, the question is whether the open burning revisions and 
the provision addressing visible emissions in the 2008 draft SIP 
revision request insure equivalent or greater emission reductions 
compared with the open burning requirements for crop residue disposal 
and the provisions addressing visible emissions in nonattainment areas 
reflected in the approved Idaho SIP before November 15, 1990.
    According to information from IDEQ, the burning of crop residue 
does not occur within the boundaries of either of Idaho's two 
nonattainment areas (Pinehurst and Sandpoint). Because section 193 
applies only to requirements in effect as of November 15, 1990, in 
nonattainment areas and no burning of crop residue occurs in any of 
Idaho's nonattainment areas, we conclude that the requirements in 
section 193 are met. Within Idaho's nonattainment areas, exempting crop 
residue burning from the visible emissions standard has no effect on 
the emissions reductions achieved by the visible emissions 
requirements. Therefore, the SIP modification insures equivalent 
emissions reductions in those nonattainment areas.
    Moreover, specifically regarding allowing crop residue disposal 
burning as a lawful form of open burning, based on our review of the 
SIP in effect before November 15, 1990, and the 2008 draft SIP revision 
request, we have determined that the 2008 draft SIP revision insures 
equivalent or greater emission reductions than the pre-November 15, 
1990, Idaho SIP. The SIP in effect in Idaho before November 15, 1990, 
allowed the open burning of crop residue. Specifically, Title 1, 
Chapter 1 of Idaho's Rules and Regulations for the Control of Air 
Pollution in Idaho Manual provided ``[t]he open burning of plant life 
grown on the premises in the course of any agricultural, forestry, or 
land clearing operation may be permitted when it can be shown that such 
burning is necessary and that no fire or traffic hazard will occur...'' 
\15\ The

[[Page 23162]]

EPA approved these provisions on May 31, 1972, and re-approved them on 
July 28, 1982. 37 FR 10861 and 47 FR 32530. This SIP applied statewide 
and allowed open burning of crop residue if minimal conditions were 
met. Although the SIP provisions included conditions intended to 
minimize the effects of burning, the conditions were vague. For 
instance they required that the burning be necessary and that ``no fire 
or traffic hazard will occur'' (at section 1153.08) and to ``make every 
reasonable effort to burn only when weather conditions are conducive to 
a good smoke dissipation.'' (at section 1153.08(a)). These provisions 
were in effect in Idaho's federally-approved SIP as of November 15, 
1990. The rule provisions that the Ninth Circuit determined prohibit 
the burning of crop residue were not approved into the federally-
approved SIP until July 23, 1993. 58 FR 39445.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ This language is found in section 1153.08 and reads in 
full: ``The open burning of plant life grown on the premises in the 
course of any agricultural, forestry, or land clearing operation may 
be permitted when it can be shown that such burning is necessary and 
that no fire or traffic hazard will occur. Convenience of disposal 
is not of itself a valid necessity for burning. 1. It shall be the 
responsibility of any person conducting such burning to make every 
reasonable effort to burn only when weather conditions are conducive 
to a good smoke dissipation and only when an economical and 
reasonable alternate method of disposal is not available. 2. When 
such alternate method is made available, it shall be put into use 
within a reasonable time. 3. Any person conducting an agricultural, 
forestry, or land clearing burning operation similar to an operation 
carried out by a governmental agency shall follow the rules and 
procedures of the agency with regard to minimizing air pollution. 4. 
When such burning creates air pollution or a public nuisance, 
additional restrictions may be imposed to minimize the effect upon 
the environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In contrast, the 2008 draft SIP revision request is more specific 
and contains numerous and explicit procedures and measures to limit 
emissions associated with crop residue burning. For example, prior to 
conducting a burn, a person must obtain a permit by rule as defined in 
IDAPA 58.01.01.618. Any person applying to burn crop residue must 
register annually and provide detailed and specific information to the 
IDEQ regarding a proposed burn. Additionally, prior to conducting the 
burn, a person must receive a specific approval from the IDEQ to 
conduct the burn and must confirm the approval on the morning of the 
burn. As discussed above, the IDEQ's approval of burn requests is tied 
to specific air quality levels below the NAAQS and burning is 
completely prohibited on certain days and at certain times. Other 
conditions require that special consideration be made for sensitive 
populations and are designed to ensure the public is notified and has 
ready access to burn call information. In light of these more specific 
and more stringent provisions, the EPA concludes that the approval of 
the 2008 draft SIP revision request will insure equivalent or greater 
emission reductions than did the Idaho SIP in effect on November 15, 
1990.
    The IDEQ also provides discussion of whether the 2008 draft SIP 
revision request insures equivalent or greater emission reductions 
compared to Idaho's pre-November 15, 1990, federally-approved SIP. It 
points out that the SIP in place before 1990 required no air quality 
impact analysis and applied not only to crop residue grown in the field 
generated but to any plant life grown on any agricultural operation. It 
also points out that prior to 1990, Idaho's SIP authorized the broad 
practice of agricultural burning. It stated: ``The open burning of 
plant life grown on the premises in the course of any agricultural, 
forestry or land clearing operating may be permitted when it can be 
shown that such burning is necessary and no fire or traffic hazard will 
occur. Convenience of disposal is not of itself a valid necessity for 
burning.'' 37 FR 10842, 10861 (May 13, 1972).
    The IDEQ also explains that the crop residue burning program 
provided in the 2008 draft SIP revision request creates a stronger, 
more protective program than that in place prior to 1990. Moreover, it 
adds, the only two nonattainment areas in the state, Sandpoint and 
Pinehurst, in which crop residue disposal burning does not occur, 
experience high concentrations of particulate matter in winter months, 
not in the early fall months when crop residue burning mainly occurs in 
other areas. The IDEQ points to these considerations and the required 
implementation of other control measures for these areas, and concludes 
that the SIP revision will not in any way relax any other control 
requirement in effect in the Pinehurst or Sandpoint nonattainment 
areas.

III. Scope of Proposed Action

    Idaho has not demonstrated authority to implement and enforce IDAPA 
Chapter 58 within ''Indian Country'' as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151.\16\ 
Therefore, the EPA proposes that this SIP approval not extend to 
''Indian Country'' in Idaho. See CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A) (SIP shall 
include enforceable emission limits), 110(a)(2)(E)(i) (State must have 
adequate authority under State law to carry out SIP), and 172(c)(6) 
(nonattainment SIPs shall include enforceable emission limits). This is 
consistent with the EPA's previous approval of Idaho's PSD program, in 
which the EPA specifically disapproved the program for sources within 
Indian Reservations in Idaho because the State had not shown it had 
authority to regulate such sources. See 40 CFR 52.683(b). It is also 
consistent with the EPA's approval of Idaho's title V air operating 
permits program. See 61 FR 64622, 64623 (December 6, 1996) (interim 
approval does not extend to Indian Country); 66 FR 50574, 50575 
(October 4, 2001) (full approval does not extend to Indian 
Country).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ ``Indian country'' is defined under 18 U.S.C. 1151 as: (1) 
All land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the 
jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the 
issuance of any patent, and including rights-of-way running through 
the reservation, (2) all dependent Indian communities within the 
borders of the United States, whether within the original or 
subsequently acquired territory thereof, and whether within or 
without the limits of a State, and (3) all Indian allotments, the 
Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, including rights-
of-way running through the same. Under this definition, EPA treats 
as reservations trust lands validly set aside for the use of a Tribe 
even if the trust lands have not been formally designated as a 
reservation. In Idaho, Indian country includes, but is not limited 
to, the Coeur d'Alene Reservation, the Duck Valley Reservation, the 
Reservation of the Kootenai Tribe, the Fort Hall Indian Reservation, 
and the Nez Perce Reservation as described in the 1863 Nez Perce 
Treaty.
    \17\ Since the CAA was amended in 1990, EPA has been clear in 
its approvals of State programs that the approved State program does 
not extend into Indian country. It is EPA's position that, absent an 
explicit finding of jurisdiction and approval in Indian country, 
State and local governments lack authority under the CAA over air 
pollution sources, and the owners or operators of air pollution 
sources, throughout Indian country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and 
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting 
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond 
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities

[[Page 23163]]

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     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);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 21, 2008.
Elin D. Miller,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.

    40 CFR part 52 is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart N--Idaho

    2. In Sec.  52.670, the table in paragraph (c) is amended as 
follows:
    a. By revising entries 600 through 603.
    b. By revising entries 606 through 610.
    c. By revising entries 612 and 613.
    d. By revising entries 615 though 617.
    e. By adding in numerical order entries 618 though 623.
    f. By revising entry 625.


Sec.  52.670  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                         EPA--Approved Idaho Regulations
    [Idaho Administrative Procedures Act (IDAPA) Chapter 58, Rules for the Control of Air Pollution in Idaho,
                             Previously Codified at IDAPA Chapter 39 (Appendix A.3)]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            State
          State citation               Title/subject      effective     EPA approval date       Explanations
                                                             date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            58.01.01--Rules for the Control of Air Pollution in Idaho
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
600..............................  Rules for Control of      4/02/08  4/29/08.............  Previous EPA
                                    Open Burning.                     [Insert page number    Approval Date of 7/
                                                                       where the document    11/05 removed in
                                                                       begins].              response to 9th
                                                                                             Circuit remand.
601..............................  Fire Permits,             4/02/08  4/29/08.............  Previous EPA
                                    Hazardous Materials               [Insert page number    Approval Date of 7/
                                    and Liability.                     where the document    11/05 removed in
                                                                       begins].              response to 9th
                                                                                             Circuit remand.
602..............................  Nonpreemption of          4/02/08  4/29/08.............  Previous EPA
                                    Other Jurisdictions.              [Insert page number    Approval Date of 7/
                                                                       where the document    11/05 removed in
                                                                       begins].              response to 9th
                                                                                             Circuit remand.
603..............................  General Restrictions      4/02/08  4/29/08.............  Previous EPA
                                                             3/21/03  [Insert page number    Approval Date of 7/
                                                              5/1/94   where the document    11/05 removed in
                                                                       begins].              response to 9th
                                                                                             Circuit remand.
606..............................  Categories of             4/02/08  4/29/08.............  Previous EPA
                                    Allowable Burning.                [Insert page number    Approval Date of 7/
                                                                       where the document    11/05 removed in
                                                                       begins].              response to 9th
                                                                                             Circuit remand.
607..............................  Recreational and          3/21/03  4/29/08.............  Previous EPA
                                    Warming Fires.                    [Insert page number    Approval Date of 7/
                                                                       where the document    11/05 removed in
                                                                       begins].              response to 9th
                                                                                             Circuit remand.
608..............................  Weed Control Fires..       5/1/94  4/29/08.............  Previous EPA
                                                                      [Insert page number    Approval Date of 7/
                                                                       where the document    11