Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon, 24844-24848 [2010-10652]
Download as PDF
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
24844
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 87 / Thursday, May 6, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Guideline for Isolation Precautions:
Preventing Transmission of Infectious Agents
in Healthcare Settings. Page 46. (https://
www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dhqp/pdf/
isolation2007.pdf).
24 Gershon RR, et al. Compliance with
universal precautions among health care at
three regional hospitals. Am J Infect Control.
1995. 23:225–236.
25 Gershon RR, et al. Compliance with
universal precautions in correctional health
care facilities. J Occup Environ Med. 1999.
41:181–9.
26 Gershon RR, et al. Hospital safety
climate and its relationship with safe work
practices and workplace exposure incidents.
Am J Infect Control. 2000. 28:211–221.
27 DeJoy DM, Murphy LR, Gershon RM.
The influence of employee, job/task, and
organizational factors on adherence to
universal precautions among nurses. Int J Ind
Ergonomics. 1995. 16:43–55.
28 Kretzer EK, Larson E. Behavioral
intentions to improve infection control
practices. Am J Infect Control. 1998. 26:245–
253.
29 McGovern PM, et al. Factors affecting
universal precautions compliance. J Business
Psychol. 2000. 15:149–161.
30 Rivers D, et al. Predictors of nurses’
acceptance of an intravenous catheter safety
device. Nurs Res. 2003. 52:249–255.
31 Nichol K, et al. The individual,
environmental, and organizational factors
that influence nurses’ use of facial protection
to prevent occupational transmission of
communicable respiratory illness in acute
care hospitals. Am J Infect Control. 2008.
36:481–487.
32 Ford J, Fisher S. The transfer of safety
training in work organizations: a systems
perspective to continuous learning. J Occup
Med. 1994. 9:241–259.
33 Goldstein I. Training in work
organizations. In: Dunnette M, Hough L,
editors. Handbook of Industrial and
Organizational Psychology. 1991. pp. 506–
619. Consulting Psychologists Press. Palo
Alto, CA.
34 IOM (Institute of Medicine). 2009.
Respiratory protection for healthcare workers
in the workplace against novel H1N1
influenza A: A letter report. Page 19.
Washington, DC: The National Academies
Press. (https://www.nap.edu/catalog/
12748.html).
35 IOM (Institute of Medicine). 1999. To Err
is Human: Building a Safer Health System.
Washington, DC: The National Academies
Press. (https://www.nap.edu/books/
0309068371/html).
36 Siegel JD, Rhinehart E, Jackson M,
Chiarello L, and the Healthcare Infection
Control Practices Advisory Committee, 2007
Guideline for Isolation Precautions:
Preventing Transmission of Infectious Agents
in Healthcare Settings. (https://www.cdc.gov/
ncidod/dhqp/pdf/isolation2007.pdf).
37 Pittet D. Infection control and quality
health care in the new millennium. Am J
Infect Control. 2005. 33:258–267.
38 Allegranzi B, Pittet D. Role of hand
hygiene in healthcare-associated infection
prevention. J Hosp Infect. 2009. 73:305–315.
39 HHS Action Plan to prevent Healthcare
Associated Infections. Background on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:10 May 05, 2010
Jkt 220001
Healthcare-Associated Infections (https://
www.hhs.gov/ophs/initiatives/hai/
exsummary.html).
40 Siegel JD, Rhinehart E, Jackson M,
Chiarello L, and the Healthcare Infection
Control Practices Advisory Committee, 2007
Guideline for Isolation Precautions:
Preventing Transmission of Infectious Agents
in Healthcare Settings. (https://www.cdc.gov/
ncidod/dhqp/pdf/isolation2007.pdf).
41 Albrich W, Harbarth S. Health care
worker: source, vector or victim of MRSA,
The Lancet Infect Dis. 2008. 8:289–301.
42 Lessa F, et al. Healthcare transmission of
a newly emergent adenovirus serotype in
health care personnel at a military hospital
in Texas, 2007. J Infect Dis. 2009. 200:1759–
1765.
43 Henquell C, et al. Fatal adenovirus
infection in a neonate and transmission to
healthcare worker. J Clin Virol. 2009. 45:345–
348.
44 Lacy M, Horn K. Nosocomial
transmission of invasive Group A
Streptococcus from patient to health care
worker. Clin Infect Dis. 2009. 49:354–357.
45 Hell M et al. Clostridium difficle
infection in a health care worker. Clin Infect
Dis. 2009. 48:1329.
46 Johnston CP, et al. Outbreak
management and implications of a
nosocomial norovirus outbreak. Clin Infect
Dis. 2007. 45:1585–1595.
47 Pearson ML, Bridges CB, Harper SA;
Healthcare Infection Control Practices
Advisory Committee (HICPAC); Advisory
Committee on Immunization Practices
(ACIP). Influenza vaccination of health-care
personnel: recommendations of the
Healthcare Infection Control Practices
Advisory Committee (HICPAC) and the
Advisory Committee on Immunization
Practices (ACIP). MMWR Recomm Rep. 2006.
55(RR–2):1–16.
48 Ofner-Agostini M, et al. Investigation of
the second wave (phase 2) of severe
respiratory syndrome (SARS) in Toronto,
Canada: What happened? Can Commun Dis
Rep. 2008. 34:1–11.
49 NIOSH Statement: Risk of Serious Illness
among Healthcare Personnel Associated with
2009 H1N1 Influenza: What is NIOSH
Learning? NIOSH Safety and Health Topic:
Occupational Health Issues Associated with
H1N1 Influenza Virus (Swine Flu). October
16, 2009. (https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/
H1N1flu/healthcare-risk.html).
50 Mahoney FJ, et al. Progress toward the
elimination of Hepatitis B virus transmission
among health care workers in the United
States. Arch Intern Med. 1997. 157:2601–
2605.
51 OSHA. Occupational Exposure to
Tuberculosis; Proposed Rule; Termination of
Rulemaking—(FR 68:75767–75775, December
31, 2003). (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR2003-12-31/pdf/03-31845.pdf).
52 OSHA. Directive CPL 02–00–106—CPL
2.106—Enforcement Procedures and
Scheduling for Occupational Exposure to
Tuberculosis. (https://www.osha.gov/pls/
oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?
p_table=FEDERAL_REGISTER&p_id=18050).
53 California Code of Regulations, Title 8,
Section 5199. Aerosol Transmissible
Diseases. (https://www.dir.ca.gov/Title8/
5199.html).
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
54 Institute of Medicine (IOM). 2009.
Respiratory Protection for Healthcare
Workers in the Workplace Against Novel
H1N1 Influenza A: A Letter Report.
Washington, DC: The National Academies
Press. (https://www.nap.edu/catalog/
12748.html).
55 Oberg MS and Brosseau LM. Surgical
mask filter and fit performance. Am J Infect
Control. 2008. 36:276–282.
[FR Doc. 2010–10694 Filed 5–5–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–26–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R10–OAR–2008–0155; FRL–9144–8 ]
Approval and Promulgation of State
Implementation Plans: Oregon
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
Oregon, Department of Environmental
Quality (ODEQ). These revisions pertain
to the Clean Air Act (CAA) section
110(a)(1) maintenance plans prepared
by ODEQ to maintain the 8-hour
national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS) for ozone in the Portland
portion of the Portland/Vancouver Air
Quality Maintenance Area (Pdx/Van
AQMA) and the Salem-Keizer Area
Transportation Study (SKATS) air
quality area. The 110(a)(1) maintenance
plans for this area meet CAA
requirements and demonstrate that each
of the above mentioned areas will be
able to remain in attainment for the
1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
through 2015. As SKATS appears to be
significantly impacted by emissions
from the Portland area, an approved
plan for the Pdx/Van AQMA is one of
the control strategies for SKATS air
quality area. Therefore, EPA is
proposing to approve the section
110(a)(1) plans for the Portland portion
of the Pdx/Van AQMA and the SKATS
area at the same time.
Additionally, the EPA is proposing to
approve SIP revisions submitted by
ODEQ that phase out the State’s Vehicle
Inspection Program (VIP) enhanced
BAR–31 test, and eliminate the Gas Cap
Pressure Test and the Evaporative Purge
Tests.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before June 7, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10–
E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM
06MYP1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 87 / Thursday, May 6, 2010 / Proposed Rules
OAR–2008–0155, 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–2008–
0155. 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.govindex.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:10 May 05, 2010
Jkt 220001
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:
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 Revisions
A. The Pdx/Van AQMA, SKATS, and
Section 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plans for
the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
B. Phasing Out of the State’s VIP Enhanced
BAR–31 Test, the Elimination of the Gas
Cap Pressure Test and the Evaporative
Purge Test
III. Proposed Action
IV. Oregon 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. EPA interprets this provision to
require that states with areas that were
maintenance areas for the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS but attainment for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS must 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
five following components:
1. An attainment inventory, which is
based on actual typical summer day
emissions of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) for a 10-year period 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 designations (June 15, 2004);
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24845
3. A commitment to continue to
operate air quality monitors;
4. A contingency plan that will ensure
that a violation of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS is promptly addressed; and
5. An explanation of how the State
will track the progress of the
maintenance plan.
On May 22, 2007, EPA received a
request from the ODEQ to approve a SIP
revision pertaining to the maintenance
plan for the Portland portion of the Pdx/
Van AQMA and SKATS, under section
110 of the CAA. This plan was
developed by the ODEQ, in
collaboration with the Southwest Clean
Air Agency in Vancouver, Washington,
and the Washington State Department of
Ecology (Ecology).
In 1979, SKATS was defined by EPA
as a ‘‘rural area’’ for ozone plan
development that appeared to be
significantly impacted by emissions
from Portland, a major urban area
located approximately 40 miles north of
Salem (44 FR 20375). Oregon submitted
an attainment Plan for SKATS which
was approved by EPA on April 12, 1982
(47 FR 15587). Based on EPA’s rural
ozone policy (45 FR 42265), one of the
controls strategies for ozone in the
SKATS area, is an approved plan for the
Portland portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA;
therefore the two plans are considered
concurrently in this action.
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. As both these submissions from
the States of Washington and Oregon
pertain to the Pdx/Van AQMA, EPA
intends to act on these submissions
concurrently. This action addresses only
the Portland portion of the Pdx/Van
AQMA and SKATS.
The EPA has also prepared a
Technical Support Document (TSD)
with more detailed information about
the SIP revisions ODEQ has asked us to
approve. The TSD is available for
review as part of the docket for this
action.
II. Summary of SIP Revisions
A. The Pdx/Van AQMA, SKATS, and
Section 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plans for
the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
ODEQ’s 8-hour ozone maintenance
plan addresses the five components of
the section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan as outlined in EPA’s
May 20, 2005 guidance. Oregon has
submitted its 8-hour ozone maintenance
plan for approval and also submitted
rules that support the maintenance for
E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM
06MYP1
24846
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 87 / Thursday, May 6, 2010 / Proposed Rules
approval and incorporation into the
federally enforceable SIP.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
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. ODEQ provided a
comprehensive and current emissions
inventory for NOX and VOCs. ODEQ
used 2002 as the base year from which
it projected emissions. The maintenance
plan includes an explanation of the
methodology used to determine
emissions from point, area, and mobile
sources. The inventory is based on
emissions from a ‘‘typical summer day.’’
The term ‘‘typical summer day’’ refers to
a 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, ODEQ projects that the
total emissions from the Portland and
Salem areas will decrease overall during
the 10-year maintenance period. EPA
has reviewed ODEQ’s emissions
projections and maintenance
demonstration and finds it to be
adequate. ODEQ 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 emissions from the
Portland portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA
were 958,531 lbs/day for VOCs and
377,794 lbs/day for NOX. The projected
2015 emissions are 1,005,171 lbs/day for
VOCs and 261,375 lbs/day for NOX. For
the Portland area, this amounts to 2015
VOCs increasing by about 5% from 2002
actual emissions, and 2015 NOX
emissions decreasing by about 30%
from 2002 levels. The greatest reduction
in VOC and NOX emissions is from onroad and non-road mobile sources.
For SKATS, the 2002 total emissions
were 439,610 lbs/day of VOCs and
106,967 lbs/day of NOX. The 2015
projections for this area are 405,062 lbs/
day of VOCs and 52,103 lbs/day of NOX.
For SKATS, this summarizes to 2015
VOCs decreasing by about 8% from
2002 actual emissions, and 2015 NOX
emissions decreasing by about 51%
from the 2002 levels. As such, the plan
demonstrates that emissions are
projected to decrease overall in both the
Portland portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA
and SKATS.
It is important to note that the
formation of ozone is dependent on a
number of variables which cannot be
estimated solely through emissions
growth and reduction calculations. A
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:10 May 05, 2010
Jkt 220001
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; Oregon used air quality
modeling to assess the comprehensive
impacts of growth through 2015 on
ozone levels in both areas. Results of
modeling conducted by ODEQ and
submitted to EPA demonstrate that the
highest predicted design value for this
area 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 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.’’ ODEQ has submitted evidence
to EPA that the State provided
reasonable notice and public comments
prior to State adoption and submission
of this plan to the EPA.
EPA concludes that this plan
demonstrates maintenance of all
applicable ozone NAAQS, namely the
2008 and 1997 8-hour standards. The
Portland and SKATS areas are within
the compliance levels for all criteria
pollutants 1, based on historical
monitoring.
Based on the VOC, NOX, and carbon
monoxide (CO) 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.
SKATS is well within the compliance
level for the remaining NAAQS 1 based
on actual monitoring and actions in this
proposed SIP will not cause or
contribute to higher levels of other
criteria pollutants. Therefore, an
approval of this plan revision will not
interfere with any applicable
1 EPA’s AirData Database—https://www.epa.gov/
oar/data/reports.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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, ODEQ 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.
4. Contingency Measures
EPA interprets section 110(a)(1) of the
CAA to require that the State develop a
contingency plan that will ensure that
any violation of a NAAQS is promptly
corrected. The purposes of contingency
measures, as outlined in ODEQ’s
maintenance plan, is to accordingly
select and adopt one or more measures
outlined in the maintenance plan so as
to assure continued attainment in the
event that a violation of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS is measured. Violation of
the 1997 8-hour ozone standard would
trigger one or more of the control
measures as outlined in the plan.
5. Verification of Continued Attainment
ODEQ will continue to monitor
ambient air quality ozone levels in the
Portland portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA
and SKATS as described in the
Contingency Plan. ODEQ will update
countywide emissions inventories every
three years as required by the
Consolidated Emissions and Reporting
Rule (CERR) to update the National
Emissions Inventory. If ambient ozone
levels increase, ODEQ 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
ODEQ submitted several rules that
would create controls programs to
support the emissions reductions and
the maintenance demonstration. ODEQ
submitted the following modified
sections of the Oregon Administrative
Rules (OAR) to EPA for approval and
incorporation into the Oregon SIP.
These sections include: General Air
Pollution Procedures and Definition:
OAR 340–200; Ambient Air Quality
Standards and PSD Increments: OAR
340–202; Designation of Air Quality
Areas: OAR 340–204; Major New Source
Review: OAR 340–224; Air Quality
Analysis Requirements: OAR 340–225;
E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM
06MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 87 / Thursday, May 6, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Emission Standards for VOC Point
Sources: OAR 340–232; Rules
Applicable to the Portland Area: OAR
340–242; Employee Commute Options
Program (OAR 340–242–0010 through
0290); and Industrial Emission
Management Program (OAR 340–242–
0400 through 0440). After a review of
the submissions, EPA is proposing to
approve these changes to Oregon’s rules
and incorporate them into the federally
approved SIP for Oregon.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
1-Hour Ozone NAAQS Requirements
That No Longer Apply in This Area
Approval of two amendments to
ODEQ’s existing 1-hour maintenance
plan has also been requested by the
State of Oregon pursuant to 40 CFR
51.905(e)(1). ODEQ has submitted a
maintenance SIP for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS for these areas that meets the
requirements of sections 110 and 193 of
the CAA. Therefore, EPA is
concurrently proposing 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 1hour 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.
Oregon’s SIP submittal meets the CAA
requirements for SIP submittals with
respect to these two changes.
B. Phasing Out of the State’s VIP
Enhanced BAR–31 Test, the Elimination
of the Gas Cap Pressure Test and the
Evaporative Purge Test
On August 9, 2005, ODEQ submitted
revisions to the Oregon State
Implementation Plan: Volume 2—
section 5.4.7—Test Procedures and
Standards, pertaining to phasing out of
the State’s VIP enhanced BAR–31 test,
the elimination of the Gas Cap Pressure
Test and the Evaporative Purge Test.
The submitted revisions are
supported by a demonstration that these
changes will not affect the ability of the
State of Oregon to meet all applicable
NAAQS, especially CO and ozone. For
CO, this requirement was addressed
when the Portland CO Second 10-Year
Maintenance Plan demonstrated
continued maintenance of attainment of
the CO standard through the year 2017,
without the enhanced test. The CO
maintenance plan was approved by the
EPA on January 24, 2006 (71 FR 3768).
For ozone, the submittal refers to the
subsequently submitted section
110(a)(1) maintenance plans for the
Portland portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA
and SKATS. Section 110(a)(1)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:10 May 05, 2010
Jkt 220001
maintenance plans for these areas
demonstrate how the State of Oregon
will maintain compliance with the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. The 110(a)(1)
maintenance plans for both these areas
meet the CAA requirements and
demonstrate that the Portland portion of
the Pdx/Van AQMA and the SKATS Air
Quality Area will be able to remain in
attainment for 1997 ozone NAAQS
through 2015. The applicable NAAQS
for ozone is the 2008 8-hour standard
and the 110(a)(1) maintenance plan
includes technical information that
shows the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
will also not be violated with all the
revisions and changes proposed.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan and
supporting rules for Portland and
Salem, OR submitted on May 22, 2007
and described in this action and the
TSD, as revisions to the Oregon SIP.
EPA is proposing to approve the
maintenance plan and supporting rules
for the Portland portion of the Pdx/Van
AQMA and the SKATS Air Quality Area
because they meet the requirements of
section 110(a)(1) and section 110(l) of
the CAA.
Further, based on our review, we are
proposing recommending a full
approval of the revisions to the Oregon
State Implementation Plan: Volume 2—
section 5.4.7—Test Procedures and
Standards and supporting rules.
EPA is soliciting public comments on
the issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
IV. Oregon Notice Provision
Oregon Revised Statute 468.126
prohibits ODEQ from imposing a
penalty for violation of an air, water or
solid waste permit unless the source has
been provided five days’ advanced
written notice of the violation and has
not come into compliance or submitted
a compliance schedule within that fiveday period. By its terms, the statute does
not apply to Oregon’s Title V program
or to any program if application of the
notice provision would disqualify the
program from federal delegation. Oregon
has previously confirmed that, because
application of the notice provision
would preclude EPA approval of the
Oregon SIP, no advance notice is
required for violation of SIP
requirements.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
24847
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,
E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM
06MYP1
24848
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 87 / Thursday, May 6, 2010 / Proposed Rules
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. 2010–10652 Filed 5–5–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 745
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2010–0173; FRL–8823–6]
RIN 2070–AJ56
Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting
Program for Public and Commercial
Buildings
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking.
SUMMARY: EPA is giving advance notice
of the Agency’s intention to regulate the
renovation, repair, and painting of
public and commercial buildings under
section 402(c)(3) of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA). This
notice announces the commencement of
proceedings to propose lead-safe work
practices and other requirements for
renovations on the exteriors of public
and commercial buildings and to
determine whether lead-based paint
hazards are created by interior
renovation, repair, and painting projects
in public and commercial buildings. For
those renovations in the interiors of
public and commercial buildings that
create lead-based paint hazards, EPA
will propose regulations to address
these hazards.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 6, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2010–0173, by
one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Document Control Office
(7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–
0001.
• Hand Delivery: OPPT Document
Control Office (DCO), EPA East Bldg.,
Rm. 6428, 1201 Constitution Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC; Attention: Docket ID
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:10 May 05, 2010
Jkt 220001
Number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2010–0173.
The DCO is open from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
DCO is (202) 564–8930. Such deliveries
are only accepted during the DCO’s
normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPPT–
2010–0173. EPA’s policy is that all
comments received will be included in
the 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 regulations.gov or email. The regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through
regulations.gov, your e-mail address
will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is
placed in the docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an
electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other
contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the docket index available
at https://www.regulations.gov. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available electronically at
https://www.regulations.gov, or, if only
available in hard copy, at the OPPT
Docket. The OPPT Docket is located in
the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC) at Rm.
3334, EPA West Bldg., 1301
Constitution Ave., NW., Washington,
DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room
hours of operation are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number of
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the EPA/DC Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the OPPT Docket is (202)
566–0280. Docket visitors are required
to show photographic identification,
pass through a metal detector, and sign
the EPA visitor log. All visitor bags are
processed through an X-ray machine
and subject to search. Visitors will be
provided an EPA/DC badge that must be
visible at all times in the building and
returned upon departure.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
For technical information contact:
Hans Scheifele, National Program
Chemicals Division, Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–
0001; telephone number: (202) 564–
3122; e-mail address:
scheifele.hans@epa.gov.
For general information contact: The
TSCA-Hotline, ABVI—Goodwill, 422
South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY
14620; telephone number: (202) 554–
1404; e-mail address: TSCAHotline@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
This document is directed to the
public in general. However, this
document may be of particular interest
to the following entities:
• Building construction (North
American Industrial Classification
System (NAICS) code 236), e.g.,
commercial building construction,
industrial building construction,
commercial and institutional building
construction, building finishing
contractors, drywall and insulation
contractors, painting and wall covering
contractors, finish carpentry contractors,
other building finishing contractors.
• Specialty trade contractors (NAICS
code 238), e.g., plumbing, heating, and
air-conditioning contractors, painting
and wall covering contractors, electrical
contractors, finish carpentry contractors,
drywall and insulation contractors,
siding contractors, tile and terrazzo
contractors, glass and glazing
contractors.
• Real estate (NAICS code 531), e.g.,
lessors of non-residential buildings and
dwellings, non-residential property
managers.
• Facilities support services (NAICS
code 561210).
• Other general government support
(NAICS code 921) e.g., general services
departments, government, public
property management services,
government.
E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM
06MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 87 (Thursday, May 6, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 24844-24848]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-10652]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R10-OAR-2008-0155; FRL-9144-8 ]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon
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 Oregon, Department of
Environmental Quality (ODEQ). These revisions pertain to the Clean Air
Act (CAA) section 110(a)(1) maintenance plans prepared by ODEQ to
maintain the 8-hour national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for
ozone in the Portland portion of the Portland/Vancouver Air Quality
Maintenance Area (Pdx/Van AQMA) and the Salem-Keizer Area
Transportation Study (SKATS) air quality area. The 110(a)(1)
maintenance plans for this area meet CAA requirements and demonstrate
that each of the above mentioned areas will be able to remain in
attainment for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 2015. As
SKATS appears to be significantly impacted by emissions from the
Portland area, an approved plan for the Pdx/Van AQMA is one of the
control strategies for SKATS air quality area. Therefore, EPA is
proposing to approve the section 110(a)(1) plans for the Portland
portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA and the SKATS area at the same time.
Additionally, the EPA is proposing to approve SIP revisions
submitted by ODEQ that phase out the State's Vehicle Inspection Program
(VIP) enhanced BAR-31 test, and eliminate the Gas Cap Pressure Test and
the Evaporative Purge Tests.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 7, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
[[Page 24845]]
OAR-2008-0155, 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-
2008-0155. 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.govindex. 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: 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 Revisions
A. The Pdx/Van AQMA, SKATS, and Section 110(a)(1) Maintenance
Plans for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
B. Phasing Out of the State's VIP Enhanced BAR-31 Test, the
Elimination of the Gas Cap Pressure Test and the Evaporative Purge
Test
III. Proposed Action
IV. Oregon 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. EPA interprets
this provision to require that states with areas that were maintenance
areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS but attainment for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS must 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 five following components:
1. An attainment inventory, which is based on actual typical summer
day emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) for a 10-year period 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 designations (June 15, 2004);
3. A commitment to continue to operate air quality monitors;
4. A contingency plan that will ensure that a violation of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS is promptly addressed; and
5. An explanation of how the State will track the progress of the
maintenance plan.
On May 22, 2007, EPA received a request from the ODEQ to approve a
SIP revision pertaining to the maintenance plan for the Portland
portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA and SKATS, under section 110 of the CAA.
This plan was developed by the ODEQ, in collaboration with the
Southwest Clean Air Agency in Vancouver, Washington, and the Washington
State Department of Ecology (Ecology).
In 1979, SKATS was defined by EPA as a ``rural area'' for ozone
plan development that appeared to be significantly impacted by
emissions from Portland, a major urban area located approximately 40
miles north of Salem (44 FR 20375). Oregon submitted an attainment Plan
for SKATS which was approved by EPA on April 12, 1982 (47 FR 15587).
Based on EPA's rural ozone policy (45 FR 42265), one of the controls
strategies for ozone in the SKATS area, is an approved plan for the
Portland portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA; therefore the two plans are
considered concurrently in this action.
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. As both
these submissions from the States of Washington and Oregon pertain to
the Pdx/Van AQMA, EPA intends to act on these submissions concurrently.
This action addresses only the Portland portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA and
SKATS.
The EPA has also prepared a Technical Support Document (TSD) with
more detailed information about the SIP revisions ODEQ has asked us to
approve. The TSD is available for review as part of the docket for this
action.
II. Summary of SIP Revisions
A. The Pdx/Van AQMA, SKATS, and Section 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plans for
the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
ODEQ's 8-hour ozone maintenance plan addresses the five components
of the section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone maintenance plan as outlined in
EPA's May 20, 2005 guidance. Oregon has submitted its 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan for approval and also submitted rules that support the
maintenance for
[[Page 24846]]
approval and incorporation into the federally enforceable 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. ODEQ provided a comprehensive and current emissions inventory
for NOX and VOCs. ODEQ used 2002 as the base year from which
it projected emissions. The maintenance plan includes an explanation of
the methodology used to determine emissions from point, area, and
mobile sources. The inventory is based on emissions from a ``typical
summer day.'' The term ``typical summer day'' refers to a 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, ODEQ projects that the total emissions from the
Portland and Salem areas will decrease overall during the 10-year
maintenance period. EPA has reviewed ODEQ's emissions projections and
maintenance demonstration and finds it to be adequate. ODEQ 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 emissions from the
Portland portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA were 958,531 lbs/day for VOCs and
377,794 lbs/day for NOX. The projected 2015 emissions are
1,005,171 lbs/day for VOCs and 261,375 lbs/day for NOX. For
the Portland area, this amounts to 2015 VOCs increasing by about 5%
from 2002 actual emissions, and 2015 NOX emissions
decreasing by about 30% from 2002 levels. The greatest reduction in VOC
and NOX emissions is from on-road and non-road mobile
sources.
For SKATS, the 2002 total emissions were 439,610 lbs/day of VOCs
and 106,967 lbs/day of NOX. The 2015 projections for this
area are 405,062 lbs/day of VOCs and 52,103 lbs/day of NOX.
For SKATS, this summarizes to 2015 VOCs decreasing by about 8% from
2002 actual emissions, and 2015 NOX emissions decreasing by
about 51% from the 2002 levels. As such, the plan demonstrates that
emissions are projected to decrease overall in both the Portland
portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA and SKATS.
It is important to note that the formation of ozone is dependent on
a number of variables which cannot be estimated solely 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; Oregon used air quality
modeling to assess the comprehensive impacts of growth through 2015 on
ozone levels in both areas. Results of modeling conducted by ODEQ and
submitted to EPA demonstrate that the highest predicted design value
for this area 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 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.'' ODEQ has submitted evidence to EPA that the State
provided reasonable notice and public comments prior to State adoption
and submission of this plan to the EPA.
EPA concludes that this plan demonstrates maintenance of all
applicable ozone NAAQS, namely the 2008 and 1997 8-hour standards. The
Portland and SKATS areas are within the compliance levels for all
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 (CO)
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.
SKATS is well within the compliance level for the remaining NAAQS
\1\ based on actual monitoring and actions in this proposed SIP will
not cause or contribute to higher levels of other criteria pollutants.
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, ODEQ 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.
4. Contingency Measures
EPA interprets section 110(a)(1) of the CAA to require that the
State develop a contingency plan that will ensure that any violation of
a NAAQS is promptly corrected. The purposes of contingency measures, as
outlined in ODEQ's maintenance plan, is to accordingly select and adopt
one or more measures outlined in the maintenance plan so as to assure
continued attainment in the event that a violation of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS is measured. Violation of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard
would trigger one or more of the control measures as outlined in the
plan.
5. Verification of Continued Attainment
ODEQ will continue to monitor ambient air quality ozone levels in
the Portland portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA and SKATS as described in the
Contingency Plan. ODEQ will update countywide emissions inventories
every three years as required by the Consolidated Emissions and
Reporting Rule (CERR) to update the National Emissions Inventory. If
ambient ozone levels increase, ODEQ 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
ODEQ submitted several rules that would create controls programs to
support the emissions reductions and the maintenance demonstration.
ODEQ submitted the following modified sections of the Oregon
Administrative Rules (OAR) to EPA for approval and incorporation into
the Oregon SIP. These sections include: General Air Pollution
Procedures and Definition: OAR 340-200; Ambient Air Quality Standards
and PSD Increments: OAR 340-202; Designation of Air Quality Areas: OAR
340-204; Major New Source Review: OAR 340-224; Air Quality Analysis
Requirements: OAR 340-225;
[[Page 24847]]
Emission Standards for VOC Point Sources: OAR 340-232; Rules Applicable
to the Portland Area: OAR 340-242; Employee Commute Options Program
(OAR 340-242-0010 through 0290); and Industrial Emission Management
Program (OAR 340-242-0400 through 0440). After a review of the
submissions, EPA is proposing to approve these changes to Oregon's
rules and incorporate them into the federally approved SIP for Oregon.
1-Hour Ozone NAAQS Requirements That No Longer Apply in This Area
Approval of two amendments to ODEQ's existing 1-hour maintenance
plan has also been requested by the State of Oregon pursuant to 40 CFR
51.905(e)(1). ODEQ has submitted a maintenance SIP for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS for these areas that meets the requirements of sections 110 and
193 of the CAA. Therefore, EPA is concurrently proposing 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.
Oregon's SIP submittal meets the CAA requirements for SIP submittals
with respect to these two changes.
B. Phasing Out of the State's VIP Enhanced BAR-31 Test, the Elimination
of the Gas Cap Pressure Test and the Evaporative Purge Test
On August 9, 2005, ODEQ submitted revisions to the Oregon State
Implementation Plan: Volume 2--section 5.4.7--Test Procedures and
Standards, pertaining to phasing out of the State's VIP enhanced BAR-31
test, the elimination of the Gas Cap Pressure Test and the Evaporative
Purge Test.
The submitted revisions are supported by a demonstration that these
changes will not affect the ability of the State of Oregon to meet all
applicable NAAQS, especially CO and ozone. For CO, this requirement was
addressed when the Portland CO Second 10-Year Maintenance Plan
demonstrated continued maintenance of attainment of the CO standard
through the year 2017, without the enhanced test. The CO maintenance
plan was approved by the EPA on January 24, 2006 (71 FR 3768). For
ozone, the submittal refers to the subsequently submitted section
110(a)(1) maintenance plans for the Portland portion of the Pdx/Van
AQMA and SKATS. Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plans for these areas
demonstrate how the State of Oregon will maintain compliance with the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The 110(a)(1) maintenance plans for both these
areas meet the CAA requirements and demonstrate that the Portland
portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA and the SKATS Air Quality Area will be able
to remain in attainment for 1997 ozone NAAQS through 2015. The
applicable NAAQS for ozone is the 2008 8-hour standard and the
110(a)(1) maintenance plan includes technical information that shows
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS will also not be violated with all the
revisions and changes proposed.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan
and supporting rules for Portland and Salem, OR submitted on May 22,
2007 and described in this action and the TSD, as revisions to the
Oregon SIP. EPA is proposing to approve the maintenance plan and
supporting rules for the Portland portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA and the
SKATS Air Quality Area because they meet the requirements of section
110(a)(1) and section 110(l) of the CAA.
Further, based on our review, we are proposing recommending a full
approval of the revisions to the Oregon State Implementation Plan:
Volume 2--section 5.4.7--Test Procedures and Standards and supporting
rules.
EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.
IV. Oregon Notice Provision
Oregon Revised Statute 468.126 prohibits ODEQ from imposing a
penalty for violation of an air, water or solid waste permit unless the
source has been provided five days' advanced written notice of the
violation and has not come into compliance or submitted a compliance
schedule within that five-day period. By its terms, the statute does
not apply to Oregon's Title V program or to any program if application
of the notice provision would disqualify the program from federal
delegation. Oregon has previously confirmed that, because application
of the notice provision would preclude EPA approval of the Oregon SIP,
no advance notice is required for violation of SIP requirements.
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,
[[Page 24848]]
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. 2010-10652 Filed 5-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P