Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Washington, 24542-24544 [2010-10644]
Download as PDF
24542
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 5, 2010 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R10–OAR–2007–0112; FRL–9144–9]
Approval and Promulgation of State
Implementation Plans: Washington
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to
approve State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revisions submitted by the State of
Washington, Department of Ecology
(Ecology). These revisions pertain to the
maintenance plan prepared by the State
of Washington to maintain the 8-hour
national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS) for ozone in the Vancouver
portion of the Portland/Vancouver Air
Quality Maintenance Area (Pdx/Van
AQMA). The 110(a)(1) maintenance
plan for this area meets Clean Air Act
(CAA) requirements and demonstrates
that the Vancouver portion of the Pdx/
Van AQMA will be able to remain in
attainment for 1997 and 2008 ozone
NAAQS through 2015. EPA is proposing
full approval of the maintenance plan
and supporting rules.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before June 4, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10–
OAR–2007–0112, by one of the
following methods:
A. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. Mail: Krishna Viswanathan, 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: Krishna Viswanathan, 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–2007–
0112. 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 May 04, 2010
Jkt 220001
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected through
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
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 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:
Krishna Viswanathan, (206) 553–2684,
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. Summary of SIP Revision
III. Proposed Action
IV. Washington Notice Provision
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires,
in part, that states submit to EPA plans
to maintain any NAAQS promulgated
by EPA. Areas that were maintenance
areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS but
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
are required to submit a plan to
demonstrate the continued maintenance
of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA
established June 15, 2007, three years
after the effective date of the initial 8hour ozone designations, as the
deadline for submission of plans for
these areas.
On May 20, 2005, EPA issued
guidance for States in preparing
maintenance plans under section
110(a)(1) of the CAA for areas that are
required to do so under 40 CFR
51.905(c) and (d). At a minimum, the
maintenance plan should include the
following five components:
1. An attainment inventory, which is
based on actual typical summer day
emissions of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) from a base year chosen
by the State;
2. A maintenance demonstration
which shows how the area will remain
in compliance with the 8-hour ozone
standard for 10 years after the effective
date of the designation;
3. A commitment to continue to
operate ambient air quality monitors to
verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
standard;
4. A contingency plan that will ensure
that any violation of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS will be promptly corrected; and
5. An explanation of how the State
will verify continued attainment of the
standard under the maintenance plan.
On January 17, 2007, EPA received a
request from Ecology to approve under
section 110 of the CAA, a SIP revision
pertaining to the maintenance plan for
the Vancouver portion of the Pdx/Van
AQMA. On May 22, 2007, EPA received
a request from the Oregon Department
of Environmental Quality, to approve a
SIP revision pertaining to the
maintenance plan for the Portland
portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA and the
Salem Keizer Area Transportation Study
Air Quality Area under section 110 of
the CAA. As both these submissions
from the States of Washington and
Oregon pertain to the Pdx/Van AQMA,
EPA is taking action on these
submissions concurrently. However this
action addresses only the Vancouver
portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA.
The EPA has prepared a Technical
Support Document (TSD) with more
detailed information about the SIP
revisions Ecology has submitted for
approval. The TSD is available for
review as part of the docket for this
action.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
Ecology’s 8-hour ozone maintenance
plan addresses all five components of
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 5, 2010 / Proposed Rules
the 8-hour ozone maintenance plan as
outlined in EPA’s May 20, 2005
guidance. Ecology has submitted the 8hour ozone maintenance plan for
Vancouver for approval, as well as
implementing regulations that support
the maintenance plan, for incorporation
into the federally enforceable SIP and
EPA proposes to approve these changes
to the SIP.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
1. Attainment Inventory
An emissions inventory is an itemized
list of emission estimates for sources of
air pollution in a given area for a
specified time period. Ecology provided
a comprehensive and current emissions
inventory for NOX and VOCs. Ecology
has chosen to use 2002 as the base year
from which it will project emissions.
The maintenance plan also includes an
explanation of the methodology used for
determining the anthropogenic (area
and mobile sources) emissions. The
inventory is based on emissions from a
‘‘typical summer day.’’ The term ‘‘typical
summer day’’ refers to a typical weekday
during the months when ozone
concentrations are typically the highest.
2. Maintenance Demonstration
With regard to demonstrating
continued maintenance of the 8-hour
ozone standard, Ecology projects that
the total emissions of ozone precursors
from Vancouver will decrease during
the 10-year maintenance period.
Ecology has projected emissions for
2015, which is more than 10 years from
the effective date of initial designations,
as suggested in the EPA guidance for
section 110(a)(1) maintenance plans. In
2002, the total anthropogenic emissions
in Vancouver were 154,692 lbs/day for
VOCs and 81,436 lb/day for NOX. The
projected 2015 anthropogenic emissions
from Vancouver are expected to be
136,323 lb/day for VOCs and 59,381 lbs/
day for NOX. As such, the plan
demonstrates that emissions are
projected to decrease. This demonstrates
that the net VOC emissions are expected
to be about 13% lower, and NOX
emissions about 37% lower in 2015
compared to 2002 levels.
The formation of ozone is dependent
on a number of variables which cannot
be estimated through emissions growth
and reduction calculations. A few of
these variables include weather and the
transport of ozone precursors from
outside the maintenance area. In order
to demonstrate continued maintenance
of the standards, a State may utilize
more sophisticated tools such as air
quality modeling to support their
analysis; Ecology used air quality
modeling to assess the comprehensive
impacts of growth through 2015 on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 May 04, 2010
Jkt 220001
ozone levels in the area. Results of
modeling conducted by Ecology and
submitted to EPA demonstrate that the
highest predicted design value for
Vancouver is 0.072 parts per million,
which is below the 1997 and the 2008
ozone NAAQS, and is therefore in
compliance with both the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
EPA’s Evaluation of CAA 110(l)
Considerations
The maintenance demonstration
discussed in the preceding section also
meets the section 110(l) requirements of
the CAA which states, ‘‘Each revision to
an implementation plan submitted by a
State under this chapter shall be
adopted by such State after reasonable
notice and public hearing. The
Administrator shall not approve a
revision of a plan if the revision would
interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress (as defined
in section 7501 of this title), or any
other applicable requirement of this
chapter.’’ Ecology has submitted
evidence to EPA that the State provided
a reasonable notice and public hearing
process prior to State adoption and
submission of this plan to EPA.
The proposed plan demonstrates
maintenance of all applicable ozone
NAAQS, namely the 2008 and 1997 8hour standards. The Vancouver,
Washington area is within the
compliance levels for the remaining
criteria pollutants 1 based on historical
monitoring.
Based on the VOC, NOX, and carbon
monoxide emissions information
submitted with this plan, EPA
concludes that approval of the changes
in this proposed plan will not cause an
increase of direct or precursor emissions
that will interfere with the Portland
area’s maintenance of any criteria
pollutant NAAQS. Therefore, an
approval of this plan revision will not
interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment or
maintenance of any NAAQS.
3. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
With regard to the ambient air
monitoring component of the
maintenance plan, Ecology commits to
continue operating air quality
monitoring stations in accordance with
40 CFR part 58 throughout the
maintenance period to verify
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
standard, and will submit qualityassured ozone data to EPA through the
Air Quality System. EPA finds this to
1 EPA’s AirData Database—https://www.epa.gov/
oar/data/reports.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24543
satisfy the requirements of CAA section
110(a).
4. Contingency Measures
Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires
the State to develop a contingency plan
that will ensure that any violation of a
NAAQS is promptly corrected. The
purpose of the contingency measures,
such as those included in the State’s
submitted maintenance plan, is to
provide a range of response actions that
may be selected for implementation in
the event of any violation of the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS.
5. Verification of Continued Attainment
Ecology will continue to monitor
ambient air quality ozone levels in the
Portland-Vancouver AQMA as
described in Contingency Plan. Ecology
will update countywide emission
inventories every three years as required
by the Consolidated Emission and
Reporting Rule (CERR) to update the
National Emissions Inventory. If
ambient ozone levels increase, Ecology
will compare CERR updates with the
2002 and 2015 emissions inventories
and evaluate the assumptions used in
the 2015 emissions projections to
determine whether emissions are
increasing at a rate not anticipated in
the maintenance plan.
EPA’s Evaluation of Supporting Rules
Ecology submitted several rules that
would create control programs to
support the emissions reductions and
the maintenance demonstration
proposed in the submission. Ecology
also submitted several sections of the
Washington Administrative code (WAC)
173–422 pertaining to the Motor Vehicle
Emission Inspection Program for
approval by EPA. These proposed
changes do not interfere with the
maintenance demonstration for this SIP
and merely reflect the changes in the
program as a result of technology
upgrades in automobiles. After a review
of these regulatory provisions, EPA
proposes to approve the changes to
WAC 173–422 and to incorporate them
into the federally enforceable SIP.
Additionally, EPA is proposing to
approve the new industrial growth
allowances that have been used in the
maintenance demonstration for this
submission and is relying on the current
Southwest Clean Air Agency SIP
approved rules, 400–030, 400–101,
400–111 and 400–113 (62 FR 27204;
Effective 6/18/97) to support this
maintenance plan demonstration.
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
24544
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 5, 2010 / Proposed Rules
1-Hour NAAQS Obligations That No
Longer Apply in This Area
Two additional amendments to
Ecology’s existing 1-hour maintenance
plan have also been submitted for
approval pursuant to 40 CFR
51.905(e)(1). In this submission, Ecology
has submitted a maintenance SIP for the
8 hour NAAQS for this area that meets
the requirements of CAA section 110(l)
and section 193 of the CAA. Therefore,
EPA proposes to approve these two
amendments to the existing 1-hour
ozone maintenance plan:
1. Removal of the obligation to submit
a maintenance plan for the 1-hour
NAAQS eight years after approval of the
initial 1-hour maintenance plan; and
2. Removal of the State’s obligation to
implement contingency measures upon
a violation of the 1-hour NAAQS.
Washington’s SIP submittal meets the
CAA requirements for SIP submittals
with respect to these two changes.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance
plan, including its correlating
implementing regulations, for
Vancouver, Washington, submitted on
January 17, 2007, as revisions to the
federally enforceable Washington SIP.
EPA is proposing to approve the
maintenance plan and supporting rules
for the Vancouver portion of the
Portland-Vancouver AQMA because
they meet the requirements of section
110(a)(1) and section 110(l) of the CAA.
EPA is soliciting public comments on
this proposed approval. EPA will
consider these comments and address
them before taking final action.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
IV. Washington Notice Provision
Washington’s Regulatory Reform Act
of 1995, codified at Chapter 43.05
Revised Code of Washington (RCW),
precludes ‘‘regulatory agencies’’, as
defined in RCW 43.05.010, from
assessing civil penalties under certain
circumstances. EPA has determined that
Chapter 43.05 of the RCW, often referred
to as ‘‘House Bill 1010,’’ conflicts with
the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(A) and (C) and 40 CFR
51.230(b) and (e). Based on this
determination, Ecology has determined
that Chapter 43.05 RCW does not apply
to the requirements of Chapter 173–422
WAC. See 66 FR 35115, 35120 (July 3,
2001). The restriction on the issuance of
civil penalties in Chapter 43.05 RCW
does not apply to local air pollution
control authorities in Washington
because local air pollution control
authorities are not ‘‘regulatory agencies’’
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:17 May 04, 2010
Jkt 220001
within the meaning of that statute. See
66 FR 35115, 35120 (July 3, 2001).
In addition, EPA is relying on the
State’s interpretation of another
technical assistance law, RCW
43.21A.085 and .087, to conclude that
the law does not impinge on the State’s
authority to administer Federal Clean
Air Act programs. The Washington
Attorney Generals’ Office has concluded
that RCW 43.21A.085 and .087 do not
conflict with Federal authorization
requirements because these provisions
implement a discretionary program.
EPA understands from the State’s
interpretation that technical assistance
visits conducted by the State will not be
conducted under the authority of RCW
43.21A.085 and .087. See 66 FR 16, 20
(January 2, 2001); 59 FR 42552, 42555
(August 18, 1994).
V. 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
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);
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• 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,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: March 3, 2010.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2010–10644 Filed 5–4–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2010–0218; FRL–9135–4]
Revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan, Placer County
Air Pollution Control District,
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District, San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control
District, and South Coast Air Quality
Management District
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the Placer County Air
Pollution Control District (PCAPCD),
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality
Management District (SMAQMD), San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution
Control District (SJVUAPCD), and South
Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD) portions of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). These
revisions concern volatile organic
E:\FR\FM\05MYP1.SGM
05MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 5, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24542-24544]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-10644]
[[Page 24542]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R10-OAR-2007-0112; FRL-9144-9]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans:
Washington
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Washington, Department of
Ecology (Ecology). These revisions pertain to the maintenance plan
prepared by the State of Washington to maintain the 8-hour national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone in the Vancouver portion
of the Portland/Vancouver Air Quality Maintenance Area (Pdx/Van AQMA).
The 110(a)(1) maintenance plan for this area meets Clean Air Act (CAA)
requirements and demonstrates that the Vancouver portion of the Pdx/Van
AQMA will be able to remain in attainment for 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS
through 2015. EPA is proposing full approval of the maintenance plan
and supporting rules.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 4, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2007-0112, by one of the following methods:
A. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. Mail: Krishna Viswanathan, 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: Krishna Viswanathan,
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-
2007-0112. 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
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
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 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: Krishna Viswanathan, (206) 553-2684,
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. Summary of SIP Revision
III. Proposed Action
IV. Washington Notice Provision
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires, in part, that states submit
to EPA plans to maintain any NAAQS promulgated by EPA. Areas that were
maintenance areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS but attainment for the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS are required to submit a plan to demonstrate the
continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA established June
15, 2007, three years after the effective date of the initial 8-hour
ozone designations, as the deadline for submission of plans for these
areas.
On May 20, 2005, EPA issued guidance for States in preparing
maintenance plans under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA for areas that are
required to do so under 40 CFR 51.905(c) and (d). At a minimum, the
maintenance plan should include the following five components:
1. An attainment inventory, which is based on actual typical summer
day emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) from a base year chosen by the State;
2. A maintenance demonstration which shows how the area will remain
in compliance with the 8-hour ozone standard for 10 years after the
effective date of the designation;
3. A commitment to continue to operate ambient air quality monitors
to verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard;
4. A contingency plan that will ensure that any violation of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS will be promptly corrected; and
5. An explanation of how the State will verify continued attainment
of the standard under the maintenance plan.
On January 17, 2007, EPA received a request from Ecology to approve
under section 110 of the CAA, a SIP revision pertaining to the
maintenance plan for the Vancouver portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA. On May
22, 2007, EPA received a request from the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality, to approve a SIP revision pertaining to the
maintenance plan for the Portland portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA and the
Salem Keizer Area Transportation Study Air Quality Area under section
110 of the CAA. As both these submissions from the States of Washington
and Oregon pertain to the Pdx/Van AQMA, EPA is taking action on these
submissions concurrently. However this action addresses only the
Vancouver portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA.
The EPA has prepared a Technical Support Document (TSD) with more
detailed information about the SIP revisions Ecology has submitted for
approval. The TSD is available for review as part of the docket for
this action.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
Ecology's 8-hour ozone maintenance plan addresses all five
components of
[[Page 24543]]
the 8-hour ozone maintenance plan as outlined in EPA's May 20, 2005
guidance. Ecology has submitted the 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for
Vancouver for approval, as well as implementing regulations that
support the maintenance plan, for incorporation into the federally
enforceable SIP and EPA proposes to approve these changes to the SIP.
1. Attainment Inventory
An emissions inventory is an itemized list of emission estimates
for sources of air pollution in a given area for a specified time
period. Ecology provided a comprehensive and current emissions
inventory for NOX and VOCs. Ecology has chosen to use 2002 as the base
year from which it will project emissions. The maintenance plan also
includes an explanation of the methodology used for determining the
anthropogenic (area and mobile sources) emissions. The inventory is
based on emissions from a ``typical summer day.'' The term ``typical
summer day'' refers to a typical weekday during the months when ozone
concentrations are typically the highest.
2. Maintenance Demonstration
With regard to demonstrating continued maintenance of the 8-hour
ozone standard, Ecology projects that the total emissions of ozone
precursors from Vancouver will decrease during the 10-year maintenance
period. Ecology has projected emissions for 2015, which is more than 10
years from the effective date of initial designations, as suggested in
the EPA guidance for section 110(a)(1) maintenance plans. In 2002, the
total anthropogenic emissions in Vancouver were 154,692 lbs/day for
VOCs and 81,436 lb/day for NOX. The projected 2015 anthropogenic
emissions from Vancouver are expected to be 136,323 lb/day for VOCs and
59,381 lbs/day for NOX. As such, the plan demonstrates that emissions
are projected to decrease. This demonstrates that the net VOC emissions
are expected to be about 13% lower, and NOX emissions about 37% lower
in 2015 compared to 2002 levels.
The formation of ozone is dependent on a number of variables which
cannot be estimated through emissions growth and reduction
calculations. A few of these variables include weather and the
transport of ozone precursors from outside the maintenance area. In
order to demonstrate continued maintenance of the standards, a State
may utilize more sophisticated tools such as air quality modeling to
support their analysis; Ecology used air quality modeling to assess the
comprehensive impacts of growth through 2015 on ozone levels in the
area. Results of modeling conducted by Ecology and submitted to EPA
demonstrate that the highest predicted design value for Vancouver is
0.072 parts per million, which is below the 1997 and the 2008 ozone
NAAQS, and is therefore in compliance with both the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
EPA's Evaluation of CAA 110(l) Considerations
The maintenance demonstration discussed in the preceding section
also meets the section 110(l) requirements of the CAA which states,
``Each revision to an implementation plan submitted by a State under
this chapter shall be adopted by such State after reasonable notice and
public hearing. The Administrator shall not approve a revision of a
plan if the revision would interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in
section 7501 of this title), or any other applicable requirement of
this chapter.'' Ecology has submitted evidence to EPA that the State
provided a reasonable notice and public hearing process prior to State
adoption and submission of this plan to EPA.
The proposed plan demonstrates maintenance of all applicable ozone
NAAQS, namely the 2008 and 1997 8-hour standards. The Vancouver,
Washington area is within the compliance levels for the remaining
criteria pollutants \1\ based on historical monitoring.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA's AirData Database--https://www.epa.gov/oar/data/reports.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the VOC, NOX, and carbon monoxide emissions information
submitted with this plan, EPA concludes that approval of the changes in
this proposed plan will not cause an increase of direct or precursor
emissions that will interfere with the Portland area's maintenance of
any criteria pollutant NAAQS. Therefore, an approval of this plan
revision will not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning
attainment or maintenance of any NAAQS.
3. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
With regard to the ambient air monitoring component of the
maintenance plan, Ecology commits to continue operating air quality
monitoring stations in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 throughout the
maintenance period to verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard,
and will submit quality-assured ozone data to EPA through the Air
Quality System. EPA finds this to satisfy the requirements of CAA
section 110(a).
4. Contingency Measures
Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires the State to develop a
contingency plan that will ensure that any violation of a NAAQS is
promptly corrected. The purpose of the contingency measures, such as
those included in the State's submitted maintenance plan, is to provide
a range of response actions that may be selected for implementation in
the event of any violation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
5. Verification of Continued Attainment
Ecology will continue to monitor ambient air quality ozone levels
in the Portland-Vancouver AQMA as described in Contingency Plan.
Ecology will update countywide emission inventories every three years
as required by the Consolidated Emission and Reporting Rule (CERR) to
update the National Emissions Inventory. If ambient ozone levels
increase, Ecology will compare CERR updates with the 2002 and 2015
emissions inventories and evaluate the assumptions used in the 2015
emissions projections to determine whether emissions are increasing at
a rate not anticipated in the maintenance plan.
EPA's Evaluation of Supporting Rules
Ecology submitted several rules that would create control programs
to support the emissions reductions and the maintenance demonstration
proposed in the submission. Ecology also submitted several sections of
the Washington Administrative code (WAC) 173-422 pertaining to the
Motor Vehicle Emission Inspection Program for approval by EPA. These
proposed changes do not interfere with the maintenance demonstration
for this SIP and merely reflect the changes in the program as a result
of technology upgrades in automobiles. After a review of these
regulatory provisions, EPA proposes to approve the changes to WAC 173-
422 and to incorporate them into the federally enforceable SIP.
Additionally, EPA is proposing to approve the new industrial growth
allowances that have been used in the maintenance demonstration for
this submission and is relying on the current Southwest Clean Air
Agency SIP approved rules, 400-030, 400-101, 400-111 and 400-113 (62 FR
27204; Effective 6/18/97) to support this maintenance plan
demonstration.
[[Page 24544]]
1-Hour NAAQS Obligations That No Longer Apply in This Area
Two additional amendments to Ecology's existing 1-hour maintenance
plan have also been submitted for approval pursuant to 40 CFR
51.905(e)(1). In this submission, Ecology has submitted a maintenance
SIP for the 8 hour NAAQS for this area that meets the requirements of
CAA section 110(l) and section 193 of the CAA. Therefore, EPA proposes
to approve these two amendments to the existing 1-hour ozone
maintenance plan:
1. Removal of the obligation to submit a maintenance plan for the
1-hour NAAQS eight years after approval of the initial 1-hour
maintenance plan; and
2. Removal of the State's obligation to implement contingency
measures upon a violation of the 1-hour NAAQS.
Washington's SIP submittal meets the CAA requirements for SIP
submittals with respect to these two changes.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the section 110(a)(1) ozone maintenance
plan, including its correlating implementing regulations, for
Vancouver, Washington, submitted on January 17, 2007, as revisions to
the federally enforceable Washington SIP. EPA is proposing to approve
the maintenance plan and supporting rules for the Vancouver portion of
the Portland-Vancouver AQMA because they meet the requirements of
section 110(a)(1) and section 110(l) of the CAA. EPA is soliciting
public comments on this proposed approval. EPA will consider these
comments and address them before taking final action.
IV. Washington Notice Provision
Washington's Regulatory Reform Act of 1995, codified at Chapter
43.05 Revised Code of Washington (RCW), precludes ``regulatory
agencies'', as defined in RCW 43.05.010, from assessing civil penalties
under certain circumstances. EPA has determined that Chapter 43.05 of
the RCW, often referred to as ``House Bill 1010,'' conflicts with the
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(A) and (C) and 40 CFR 51.230(b)
and (e). Based on this determination, Ecology has determined that
Chapter 43.05 RCW does not apply to the requirements of Chapter 173-422
WAC. See 66 FR 35115, 35120 (July 3, 2001). The restriction on the
issuance of civil penalties in Chapter 43.05 RCW does not apply to
local air pollution control authorities in Washington because local air
pollution control authorities are not ``regulatory agencies'' within
the meaning of that statute. See 66 FR 35115, 35120 (July 3, 2001).
In addition, EPA is relying on the State's interpretation of
another technical assistance law, RCW 43.21A.085 and .087, to conclude
that the law does not impinge on the State's authority to administer
Federal Clean Air Act programs. The Washington Attorney Generals'
Office has concluded that RCW 43.21A.085 and .087 do not conflict with
Federal authorization requirements because these provisions implement a
discretionary program. EPA understands from the State's interpretation
that technical assistance visits conducted by the State will not be
conducted under the authority of RCW 43.21A.085 and .087. See 66 FR 16,
20 (January 2, 2001); 59 FR 42552, 42555 (August 18, 1994).
V. 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 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,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: March 3, 2010.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2010-10644 Filed 5-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P