Revision to the Washington State Implementation Plan; Tacoma-Pierce County Nonattainment Area, 32131-32135 [2013-12514]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Premiums and copayments will be paid
by the insured in accordance with the
terms of the insurance plan. Premiums
and copayments will be determined by
VA through the contracting process, and
will be adjusted on an annual basis. The
participating insurer will notify all
insureds in writing of the amount and
effective date of such adjustment.
(2) Benefits. Participating insurers
must offer, at a minimum, coverage for
the following dental care and services:
(i) Diagnostic services.
(A) Clinical oral examinations.
(B) Radiographs and diagnostic
imaging.
(C) Tests and laboratory examinations.
(ii) Preventive services.
(A) Dental prophylaxis.
(B) Topical fluoride treatment (office
procedure).
(C) Sealants.
(D) Space maintenance.
(iii) Restorative services.
(A) Amalgam restorations.
(B) Resin-based composite
restorations.
(iv) Endodontic services.
(A) Pulp capping.
(B) Pulpotomy and pulpectomy.
(C) Root canal therapy.
(D) Apexification and recalcification
procedures.
(E) Apicoectomy and periradicular
services.
(v) Periodontic services.
(A) Surgical services.
(B) Periodontal services.
(vi) Oral surgery.
(A) Extractions.
(B) Surgical extractions.
(C) Alveoloplasty.
(D) Biopsy.
(vii) Other services.
(A) Palliative (emergency) treatment
of dental pain.
(B) Therapeutic drug injection.
(C) Other drugs and/or medications.
(D) Treatment of postsurgical
complications.
(E) Crowns.
(F) Bridges.
(G) Dentures.
(3) Selection of participating insurer.
VA will use the Federal competitive
contracting process to select a
participating insurer, and the insurer
will be responsible for the
administration of VADIP.
(d) Enrollment. (1) VA, in connection
with the participating insurer, will
market VADIP through existing VA
communication channels to notify all
eligible persons of their right to
voluntarily enroll in VADIP. The
participating insurer will prescribe all
further enrollment procedures, and VA
will be responsible for confirming that
a person is eligible under paragraph (b)
of this section.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:39 May 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
(2) The initial period of enrollment
will be for a period of 12 calendar
months, followed by month-to-month
enrollment, subject to paragraph (e)(5)
of this section, as long as the insured
remains eligible for coverage under
paragraph (b) of this section and
chooses to continue enrollment, so long
as VA continues to authorize VADIP.
(3) The participating insurer will
agree to continue to provide coverage to
an insured who ceases to be eligible
under paragraphs (b)(1) through (2) of
this section for at least 30 calendar days
after eligibility ceased. The insured
must pay any premiums due during this
30-day period. This 30-day coverage
does not apply to an insured who is
disenrolled under paragraph (e) of this
section.
(e) Disenrollment. (1) Insureds may be
involuntarily disenrolled at any time for
failure to make premium payments.
(2) Insureds must be permitted to
voluntarily disenroll, and will not be
required to continue to pay any
copayments or premiums, under any of
the following circumstances:
(i) For any reason, during the first 30
days that the beneficiary is covered by
the plan, if no claims for dental services
or benefits were filed by the insured.
(ii) If the insured relocates to an area
outside the jurisdiction of the plan that
prevents the use of the benefits under
the plan.
(iii) If the insured is prevented by
serious medical condition from being
able to obtain benefits under the plan.
(iv) If the insured would suffer severe
financial hardship by continuing in
VADIP.
(v) For any reason during the monthto-month coverage period, after the
initial 12-month enrollment period.
(3) All insured requests for voluntary
disenrollment must be submitted to the
insurer for determination of whether the
insured qualifies for disenrollment
under the criteria in paragraphs (e)(2)(i)
through (v) of this section. Requests for
disenrollment due to a serious medical
condition or financial hardship must
include submission of written
documentation that verifies the
existence of a serious medical condition
or financial hardship. The written
documentation submitted to the insurer
must show that circumstances leading
to a serious medical condition or
financial hardship originated after the
effective date coverage began, and will
prevent the insured from maintaining
the insurance benefits.
(4) If the participating insurer denies
a request for voluntary disenrollment
because the insured does not meet any
criterion under paragraphs (e)(2)(i)
through (v) of this section, the
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
32131
participating insurer must issue a
written decision and notify the insured
of the basis for the denial and how to
appeal. The participating insurer will
establish the form of such appeals
whether orally, in writing, or both. The
decision and notification of appellate
rights must be issued to the insured no
later than 30 days after the request for
voluntary disenrollment is received by
the participating insurer. The appeal
will be decided and that decision issued
in writing to the insured no later than
30 days after the appeal is received by
the participating insurer. An insurer’s
decision of an appeal is final.
(5) Month-to-month enrollment, as
described in paragraph (d)(2) of this
section, may be subject to conditions in
insurance contracts, whereby upon
voluntarily disenrolling, an enrollee
may be prevented from re-enrolling for
a certain period of time as specified in
the insurance contract.
(f) Other appeals procedures.
Participating insurers will establish and
be responsible for determination and
appeal procedures for all issues other
than voluntary disenrollment.
(Authority: Sec. 510, Pub. L. 111–163)
(The Office of Management and Budget has
approved the information collection
requirement in this section under control
number 2900–0789.)
[FR Doc. 2013–12642 Filed 5–28–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R10–OAR–2012–0712; FRL–9817–1]
Revision to the Washington State
Implementation Plan; Tacoma-Pierce
County Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The EPA is approving State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the Washington
Department of Ecology (Ecology) dated
November 28, 2012. The EPA’s final
rulemaking approves two revisions to
the SIP. First, the EPA is approving the
‘‘2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory and
Documentation’’ included as Appendix
A to the SIP revision. The emissions
inventory was submitted to meet Clean
Air Act (CAA) requirements related to
the Tacoma-Pierce County
nonattainment area for the 2006 fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) National
Ambient Air Quality Standard
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\29MYR1.SGM
29MYR1
32132
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
(NAAQS). Second, the EPA is approving
updated rules submitted by Ecology on
behalf of the Puget Sound Clean Air
Agency (PSCAA), contained in
Appendix B, ‘‘SIP Strengthening Rules.’’
The updated PSCAA rules help
implement the recommendations of the
Tacoma-Pierce County Clean Air Task
Force, an advisory committee of
community leaders, citizen
representatives, public health advocates,
and other affected parties, formed to
develop PM2.5 reduction strategies.
DATES: This final rule is effective June
28, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this Action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R10–OAR–2012–0712. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information the disclosure
of which 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 through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Programs Unit, Office of Air
Waste and Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200
Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA, 98101. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the individual listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
view the hard copy of the docket. You
may view the hard copy of the docket
Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to
4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff
Hunt at telephone number: (206) 553–
0256, email address: hunt.jeff@epa.gov,
or the above EPA, Region 10 address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we
are giving meaning to certain words or
initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials ‘‘Act’’ or
‘‘CAA’’ mean or refer to the Clean Air
Act, unless the context indicates
otherwise.
(ii) The words ‘‘EPA’’, ‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ or
our mean or refer to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
(iii) The initials ‘‘SIP’’ mean or refer
to State Implementation Plan.
(iv) The words ‘‘Washington’’ and
‘‘State’’ mean the State of Washington.
Table of Contents
17:39 May 28, 2013
I. Background Information
Detailed information on the history of
the PM2.5 NAAQS as it relates to the
Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment
area is included in the EPA’s proposal
for this action (78 FR 4804, January 23,
2013). As discussed in the proposal, on
September 4, 2012, the EPA published
a final ‘‘clean data’’ determination of
attainment, based upon complete
certified ambient air monitoring data
showing that the Tacoma-Pierce County
nonattainment area met the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS for the 2009–2011 monitoring
period (77 FR 53772). Since the
determination, monitored PM2.5 levels
continue to decline in the TacomaPierce County nonattainment area.
Monitoring data for 2010–2012 show a
preliminary design value of 28 mg/m3.1
The clean data determination
suspended the obligation for the State of
Washington to submit an attainment
demonstration, associated reasonably
available control measures, a reasonable
further progress plan, contingency
measures, and other SIP revisions
related to attainment of the standard for
so long as the nonattainment area
continues to meet the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS. However, a clean data
determination does not suspend the
obligation under CAA section 172(c)(3)
for submission and approval of a
comprehensive, accurate, and current
inventory of actual emissions.
Accordingly, Ecology submitted
Appendix A, titled ‘‘2008 Baseline
Emissions Inventory and
Documentation,’’ of its November 28,
2012, SIP revision to meet the emissions
inventory obligation under CAA section
172(c)(3). Ecology also submitted
Appendix B of the SIP revision, titled
‘‘SIP Strengthening Rules,’’ which
contained the most recent version of
Regulation 1—Article 13: Solid Fuel
Burning Device Standards, adopted by
the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
Board on October 25, 2012, imposing
more stringent standards to control
PM2.5 emissions from wood smoke. The
EPA proposed to approve both
Appendix A and Appendix B of
Washington’s November 28, 2012, SIP
revision consistent with sections 110
and 172 of the CAA.
II. Response to Comments
The EPA received no comment on its
proposed approval of Appendix B. On
February 22, 2013, EPA received one
1 A design value is a three year average used to
determine compliance with the 2006 PM2.5 24-hour
NAAQS of 35 mg/m3. Final design values generally
are certified in June or July after a complete quality
assurance and quality control process.
I. Background Information
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
VerDate Mar<15>2010
IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
comment on its proposed approval of
Appendix A. This comment, submitted
by Mr. Robert Ukeiley on behalf of
Sierra Club, focused on the potential
impact of coal export terminals
proposed for the Pacific Northwest. The
commenter wrote that Ecology’s 2008
Baseline Emissions Inventory does not
sufficiently address potential impacts as
they relate to current or future
shipments of coal via rail through the
Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment
area. The EPA is responding to this
comment in two parts: (1) Comment on
Fugitive Coal Dust Emissions; and (2)
Comment on Railroad Emission
Calculations.
A. Comment on Fugitive Coal Dust
Emissions
Comment: The commenter wrote that
Ecology’s 2008 Baseline Emissions
Inventory does not meet the CAA
section 172(c)(3) requirement which
states that, ‘‘[s]uch plan provisions shall
include a comprehensive, accurate,
current inventory of actual emissions
from all sources of the relevant
pollutant or pollutants in such area,
including such periodic revisions as the
Administrator may determine necessary
to assure the requirements of this part
are met.’’ Specifically, the commenter
wrote that the 2008 Baseline Emissions
Inventory is not comprehensive because
it did not account for fugitive coal dust
emissions from coal trains that may
have transited through the
nonattainment area. The commenter
also requests that ‘‘[i]f the current
fugitive coal dust emissions are zero
because there are no coal trains
traveling through the Tacoma
nonattainment area, then the inventory
should say that.’’
Response: As noted in the proposal
for this action, the EPA referred to the
August 2005 ‘‘Emissions Inventory
Guidance for Implementation of Ozone
and Particulate Matter NAAQS and
Regional Haze Regulations’’ (hereafter
‘‘emissions inventory guidance’’ or
‘‘guidance’’), to assess the adequacy of
Washington’s submission. The guidance
covers several elements related to this
comment. First, the mobile source
section in the guidance contains no
discussion or requirement for
calculating fugitive dust from
locomotive payloads. Instead, fugitive
dust emissions from all source
categories are discussed in section 5.4 of
the guidance addressing nonpoint
sources. The guidance states,
‘‘[n]onpoint sources are generally
described as those sources that are too
small, numerous, or difficult to be
inventoried individually. Potential
nonpoint sources of emissions are given
E:\FR\FM\29MYR1.SGM
29MYR1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
in Table 5.4–1 and potential crustal
(dust) sources of PM emissions are in
Table 5.4–2. These tables are presented
as guides to assist State, local and Tribal
agencies in focusing their nonpoint
source emission inventory efforts.’’ The
guidance goes on to state, ‘‘[t]he State,
local and Tribal agencies may want to
concentrate their efforts on the most
significant source categories.’’ The
guidance acknowledges that States
cannot individually inventory all
nonpoint source emissions, but should
use the best available data to inform
which nonpoint source categories to
focus on in creating a comprehensive
and accurate inventory of actual
emissions.
As part of the effort to focus on the
most significant source categories,
Ecology conducted extensive speciation
analysis included in the docket for the
EPA’s proposed action, see Sources of
Fine Particles in the Wapato HillsPuyallup River Valley PM2.5
Nonattainment Area (the name formerly
used for the Tacoma-Pierce County
nonattainment area), April 2010.
Speciation analysis, also called receptor
modeling or source apportionment, is a
method of using chemical signatures
from monitoring samples to determine
both the types of emission sources
impacting a monitor and the magnitude
of those source impacts. The study
examined monitoring samples from
2006 to 2009 and used chemical
signature information to identify the
relevant emission sources. Ecology
determined that 4% of PM2.5 annually in
the Tacoma-Pierce County
nonattainment area originated from the
combination of all fugitive dust sources.
To put this number in perspective, the
contribution from fugitive dust was only
slightly greater than the PM2.5
contribution from sea salt. The percent
contribution from fugitive dust was also
found to be the lowest during winter
months when violations of the 2006
PM2.5 standard occur. From an analysis
of fugitive dust impacts and wind
direction, Ecology concluded that the
majority of the PM2.5 related fugitive
dust was likely re-suspended dust from
on-road motor vehicle traffic and
fugitive emissions from a gravel
operation near the monitoring site.
Ecology’s speciation analysis for the one
violating Tacoma monitor on South L
Street concluded by stating, ‘‘[f]ugitive
dust was poorly correlated with total
PM2.5 mass (r2 = 0.19) indicating that its
influence on the measured total mass
was not significant.’’
As described above, the 2005
emissions inventory guidance
recognizes that agencies may need to
concentrate their efforts on the most
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:39 May 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
significant source categories, and the
closely related regulations at 40 CFR
51.20 for reporting under the National
Emissions Inventory (NEI) also state,
‘‘[n]onpoint source categories or
emission events reasonably estimated by
the State to represent a de minimis
percentage of total county and State
emissions of a given pollutant may be
omitted.’’ Based on Ecology’s analysis of
fugitive dust impacts on 2006 PM2.5
concentrations in the area, the EPA
agrees with Ecology that fugitive dust
emissions from railroad transport of coal
do not constitute a significant source
category for the 2008 Baseline
Emissions Inventory. To the extent that
the commenter raises issues related to
coal export proposals that may impact
the Tacoma-Pierce County
nonattainment area in the future, or to
the calculation of changes to the
emission sources after 2008, the EPA
has determined that these questions are
beyond the scope of the 2008 Baseline
Emissions Inventory. The inventory
required under section 172(c)(3) does
not require submission or assessment of
future emissions.
The EPA also concludes that the 2008
Baseline Emissions Inventory accurately
represents the emission sources that led
to the EPA’s nonattainment designation
for Tacoma-Pierce County in 2009. In
particular, the inventory informed and
helped support development of the
residential wood smoke control
measures approved in this action. In
2008, residential wood combustion
represented 74% of all emissions during
the critical winter season, well above all
other emission sources. To the extent
that the mix of emission sources may
change over time from the 2008 Baseline
Emissions Inventory, the EPA believes
these changes are best addressed as part
of the maintenance plan inventory
process to ensure continued compliance
with the NAAQS, or as part of the
attainment planning requirements that
would become applicable should the
area not continue in attainment. In
response to the concerns raised by the
commenter, the EPA independently
analyzed publicly available data from
the speciation monitor and found no
evidence of increasing fugitive dust
trends from 2008 to 2011. See Tacoma
PMF Soil Results, included in the docket
for this action. As noted previously,
monitored PM2.5 levels in the
nonattainment area continue to decline
below the level of the NAAQS. For the
reasons stated above, the EPA has
determined that Ecology’s 2008 Baseline
Emissions Inventory is consistent with
applicable guidance and satisfies the
requirement of CAA section 172(c)(3).
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
32133
B. Comment on Railroad Emission
Calculations
Comment: The commenter notes that
Ecology’s 2008 Baseline Emissions
Inventory submission includes only a
summary of emissions from railroad
locomotive diesel consumption, without
the corresponding background
information used to calculate the
estimates. The commenter states that the
background information is necessary for
both public understanding and for
future conformity obligations under the
CAA.
Response: Since emission control
measures for railroad locomotive traffic
are generally formulated and managed
at the federal level, it is understandable
that the State SIP submission would
include summary data rather than a
more elaborate discussion of underlying
data. Ecology did include an extensive
explanation of the underlying data for
the predominant source categories, such
as residential wood combustion, which
comprises 74% of the winter time
inventory. By contrast, emissions from
all nonroad vehicles and engines,
including railroad locomotives, account
for only 5% of wintertime inventory.
Moreover, although Ecology included
only summary results for railroad
emissions, it clearly referenced the
documentation used in calculating the
final railroad diesel emissions, listed as
endnotes 26, 27, and 28 in the 2008
Baseline Emissions Inventory SIP
submission. These documents were
available from Ecology and the EPA
during the comment period, and remain
available for public review. Neither the
EPA nor Ecology has received a request
for these documents. For the
convenience of the reader these
background documents have been
added to the docket for this action.
The comment only questions the level
of detail in the discussion of the
locomotive emission calculations and
states that a comprehensive and
accurate emissions inventory must
provide figures of gallons of diesel
consumed and emission factors or other
calculations used in the emissions
estimates. The availability of the
additional detail requested by the
comment is described above.
Specifically, the emission factors were
based on standard EPA emission factors
for locomotives and fuel consumption
data was provided by the rail freight
carriers operating in the area. As the
comment notes, these data are part of
the comprehensive and accurate
emissions inventory required by section
172(c)(3), and were appropriately relied
upon by Ecology to calculate diesel
emissions from locomotives. The EPA
E:\FR\FM\29MYR1.SGM
29MYR1
32134
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
independently calculated the
locomotive emissions estimates based
on the information referenced in
endnotes 26, 27, and 28 of the State’s
emissions inventory SIP submission,
and obtained results that were
consistent with the State’s (see EPA
review of emission calculations.xlsx).
To the extent that the commenter
raises issues related to future conformity
determinations or potential coal export
proposals that may impact the TacomaPierce County nonattainment area in the
future, or to the calculation of changes
to the emission sources after 2008, the
EPA has determined that these
questions are beyond the scope of the
2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory and
the requirements of section 172(c)(3).
III. Final Action
The EPA has determined that
Washington’s SIP revisions, dated
November 28, 2012, are consistent with
sections 110 and 172 of the CAA.
Therefore, we are approving the SIP
revisions, specifically Appendix A,
‘‘2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory and
Documentation’’ and Appendix B, ‘‘SIP
Strengthening Rules.’’
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
IV. Statutory and Executive Orders
Review
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, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this 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 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.);
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:39 May 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
• 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 rule
neither imposes substantial direct
compliance costs on tribal governments,
nor preempts tribal law. Therefore, the
requirements of section 5(b) and 5(c) of
the Executive Order do not apply to this
rule. Consistent with EPA policy, the
EPA nonetheless provided a
consultation opportunity to the
Puyallup Tribe in a letter dated
December 11, 2012. The EPA did not
receive a request for consultation.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by July 29, 2013.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this action for
the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a
petition for judicial review may be filed,
and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Visibility,
and Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: May 13, 2013.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart WW—Washington
2. Section 52.2470 is amended:
a. In paragraph (c) Table 4 by revising
entries 13.01 through 13.05, adding in
numerical order entry 13.06, and
revising entry 13.07.
■ b. In paragraph (e) by adding a
heading for ‘‘Recently Approved Plans’’
and a new entry for ‘‘Particulate Matter
(PM2.5) 2008 Baseline Emissions
Inventory and SIP Strengthening Rules’’
at the end of the table.
■
■
§ 52.2470
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\29MYR1.SGM
29MYR1
*
*
*
*
32135
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 4—PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY REGULATIONS
State citation
State adopted
date
Title/subject
*
*
*
EPA approval date
*
*
Explanations
*
*
*
*
Regulation 1—Article 13: Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards
13.01 .......................................
Policy and Purpose ................
10/25/12
13.02 .......................................
Definitions ..............................
10/25/12
13.03 .......................................
Opacity Standards .................
10/25/12
13.04 .......................................
Allowed and Prohibited Fuel
Types.
10/25/12
13.05 .......................................
Restrictions on Operation of
Solid Fuel Burning Devices.
10/25/12
13.06 .......................................
Emission Performance Standards.
10/25/12
13.07 .......................................
Prohibitions on Wood Stoves
that are not Certified Wood
Stoves.
10/25/12
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
5/29/13 [Insert page number
where the document begins].
5/29/13 [Insert page number
where the document begins].
5/29/13 [Insert page number
where the document begins].
5/29/13 [Insert page number
where the document begins].
5/29/13 [Insert page number
where the document begins].
5/29/13 [Insert page number
where the document begins].
5/29/13 [Insert page number
where the document begins].
*
*
(e) * * *
STATE OF WASHINGTON NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES
Applicable geographic or
nonattainment area
Name of SIP provision
*
*
State submittal
date
*
EPA approval date
*
Comments
*
*
*
Recently Approved Plans
Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
2008 Baseline Emissions
Inventory and SIP
Strengthening Rules.
Tacoma, Pierce County ........
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
[EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0147; FRL–9816–6]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Atlanta, Georgia
1997 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment
Area; Reasonable Further Progress
Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:39 May 28, 2013
Jkt 229001
5/29/13 [Insert page number
where the document begins].
EPA is taking direct final
action to approve a state
implementation plan (SIP) revision,
submitted by the State of Georgia,
through the Georgia Environmental
Protection Division (GA EPD), on
October 21, 2009, to address the
reasonable further progress (RFP) plan
requirements for the Atlanta, Georgia
1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS)
nonattainment area. The Atlanta,
Georgia 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area (hereafter referred to
as the ‘‘Atlanta Area’’ or ‘‘the Area’’) is
comprised of Barrow, Bartow, Carroll,
Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta,
Dekalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth,
Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Newton,
SUMMARY:
[FR Doc. 2013–12514 Filed 5–28–13; 8:45 am]
AGENCY:
11/28/12
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding and
Walton Counties in Georgia. EPA is also
finding adequate the motor vehicle
emissions budgets (MVEB) for volatile
organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen
oxides (NOx) that were included in
Georgia’s RFP plan. Further, EPA is
approving these MVEB. Additionally, as
an administrative update EPA is also
removing the numbering system from
the non-regulatory provisions in the
Code of Federal Regulations.
This direct final rule is effective
July 29, 2013 without further notice,
unless EPA receives adverse comment
by June 28, 2013. If EPA receives such
comments, it will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\29MYR1.SGM
29MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 103 (Wednesday, May 29, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32131-32135]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12514]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R10-OAR-2012-0712; FRL-9817-1]
Revision to the Washington State Implementation Plan; Tacoma-
Pierce County Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) dated
November 28, 2012. The EPA's final rulemaking approves two revisions to
the SIP. First, the EPA is approving the ``2008 Baseline Emissions
Inventory and Documentation'' included as Appendix A to the SIP
revision. The emissions inventory was submitted to meet Clean Air Act
(CAA) requirements related to the Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment
area for the 2006 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National
Ambient Air Quality Standard
[[Page 32132]]
(NAAQS). Second, the EPA is approving updated rules submitted by
Ecology on behalf of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA),
contained in Appendix B, ``SIP Strengthening Rules.'' The updated PSCAA
rules help implement the recommendations of the Tacoma-Pierce County
Clean Air Task Force, an advisory committee of community leaders,
citizen representatives, public health advocates, and other affected
parties, formed to develop PM2.5 reduction strategies.
DATES: This final rule is effective June 28, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this Action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R10-OAR-2012-0712. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which 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 through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Programs Unit, Office of Air Waste and Toxics, EPA
Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA, 98101. EPA requests that if
at all possible, you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You
may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m.
to 4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Hunt at telephone number: (206)
553-0256, email address: hunt.jeff@epa.gov, or the above EPA, Region 10
address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain
words or initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials ``Act'' or ``CAA'' mean or refer to the
Clean Air Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The words ``EPA'', ``we'', ``us'' or our mean or refer to the
United States Environmental Protection Agency.
(iii) The initials ``SIP'' mean or refer to State Implementation
Plan.
(iv) The words ``Washington'' and ``State'' mean the State of
Washington.
Table of Contents
I. Background Information
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review
I. Background Information
Detailed information on the history of the PM2.5 NAAQS
as it relates to the Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment area is
included in the EPA's proposal for this action (78 FR 4804, January 23,
2013). As discussed in the proposal, on September 4, 2012, the EPA
published a final ``clean data'' determination of attainment, based
upon complete certified ambient air monitoring data showing that the
Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment area met the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS for the 2009-2011 monitoring period (77 FR 53772). Since the
determination, monitored PM2.5 levels continue to decline in
the Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment area. Monitoring data for 2010-
2012 show a preliminary design value of 28 [micro]g/m\3\.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A design value is a three year average used to determine
compliance with the 2006 PM2.5 24-hour NAAQS of 35
[micro]g/m\3\. Final design values generally are certified in June
or July after a complete quality assurance and quality control
process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The clean data determination suspended the obligation for the State
of Washington to submit an attainment demonstration, associated
reasonably available control measures, a reasonable further progress
plan, contingency measures, and other SIP revisions related to
attainment of the standard for so long as the nonattainment area
continues to meet the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. However, a clean
data determination does not suspend the obligation under CAA section
172(c)(3) for submission and approval of a comprehensive, accurate, and
current inventory of actual emissions. Accordingly, Ecology submitted
Appendix A, titled ``2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory and
Documentation,'' of its November 28, 2012, SIP revision to meet the
emissions inventory obligation under CAA section 172(c)(3). Ecology
also submitted Appendix B of the SIP revision, titled ``SIP
Strengthening Rules,'' which contained the most recent version of
Regulation 1--Article 13: Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards, adopted
by the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Board on October 25, 2012, imposing
more stringent standards to control PM2.5 emissions from
wood smoke. The EPA proposed to approve both Appendix A and Appendix B
of Washington's November 28, 2012, SIP revision consistent with
sections 110 and 172 of the CAA.
II. Response to Comments
The EPA received no comment on its proposed approval of Appendix B.
On February 22, 2013, EPA received one comment on its proposed approval
of Appendix A. This comment, submitted by Mr. Robert Ukeiley on behalf
of Sierra Club, focused on the potential impact of coal export
terminals proposed for the Pacific Northwest. The commenter wrote that
Ecology's 2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory does not sufficiently
address potential impacts as they relate to current or future shipments
of coal via rail through the Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment area.
The EPA is responding to this comment in two parts: (1) Comment on
Fugitive Coal Dust Emissions; and (2) Comment on Railroad Emission
Calculations.
A. Comment on Fugitive Coal Dust Emissions
Comment: The commenter wrote that Ecology's 2008 Baseline Emissions
Inventory does not meet the CAA section 172(c)(3) requirement which
states that, ``[s]uch plan provisions shall include a comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the
relevant pollutant or pollutants in such area, including such periodic
revisions as the Administrator may determine necessary to assure the
requirements of this part are met.'' Specifically, the commenter wrote
that the 2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory is not comprehensive because
it did not account for fugitive coal dust emissions from coal trains
that may have transited through the nonattainment area. The commenter
also requests that ``[i]f the current fugitive coal dust emissions are
zero because there are no coal trains traveling through the Tacoma
nonattainment area, then the inventory should say that.''
Response: As noted in the proposal for this action, the EPA
referred to the August 2005 ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for
Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter NAAQS and Regional Haze
Regulations'' (hereafter ``emissions inventory guidance'' or
``guidance''), to assess the adequacy of Washington's submission. The
guidance covers several elements related to this comment. First, the
mobile source section in the guidance contains no discussion or
requirement for calculating fugitive dust from locomotive payloads.
Instead, fugitive dust emissions from all source categories are
discussed in section 5.4 of the guidance addressing nonpoint sources.
The guidance states, ``[n]onpoint sources are generally described as
those sources that are too small, numerous, or difficult to be
inventoried individually. Potential nonpoint sources of emissions are
given
[[Page 32133]]
in Table 5.4-1 and potential crustal (dust) sources of PM emissions are
in Table 5.4-2. These tables are presented as guides to assist State,
local and Tribal agencies in focusing their nonpoint source emission
inventory efforts.'' The guidance goes on to state, ``[t]he State,
local and Tribal agencies may want to concentrate their efforts on the
most significant source categories.'' The guidance acknowledges that
States cannot individually inventory all nonpoint source emissions, but
should use the best available data to inform which nonpoint source
categories to focus on in creating a comprehensive and accurate
inventory of actual emissions.
As part of the effort to focus on the most significant source
categories, Ecology conducted extensive speciation analysis included in
the docket for the EPA's proposed action, see Sources of Fine Particles
in the Wapato Hills-Puyallup River Valley PM2.5 Nonattainment Area (the
name formerly used for the Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment area),
April 2010. Speciation analysis, also called receptor modeling or
source apportionment, is a method of using chemical signatures from
monitoring samples to determine both the types of emission sources
impacting a monitor and the magnitude of those source impacts. The
study examined monitoring samples from 2006 to 2009 and used chemical
signature information to identify the relevant emission sources.
Ecology determined that 4% of PM2.5 annually in the Tacoma-
Pierce County nonattainment area originated from the combination of all
fugitive dust sources. To put this number in perspective, the
contribution from fugitive dust was only slightly greater than the
PM2.5 contribution from sea salt. The percent contribution
from fugitive dust was also found to be the lowest during winter months
when violations of the 2006 PM2.5 standard occur. From an
analysis of fugitive dust impacts and wind direction, Ecology concluded
that the majority of the PM2.5 related fugitive dust was
likely re-suspended dust from on-road motor vehicle traffic and
fugitive emissions from a gravel operation near the monitoring site.
Ecology's speciation analysis for the one violating Tacoma monitor on
South L Street concluded by stating, ``[f]ugitive dust was poorly
correlated with total PM2.5 mass (r2 = 0.19) indicating that
its influence on the measured total mass was not significant.''
As described above, the 2005 emissions inventory guidance
recognizes that agencies may need to concentrate their efforts on the
most significant source categories, and the closely related regulations
at 40 CFR 51.20 for reporting under the National Emissions Inventory
(NEI) also state, ``[n]onpoint source categories or emission events
reasonably estimated by the State to represent a de minimis percentage
of total county and State emissions of a given pollutant may be
omitted.'' Based on Ecology's analysis of fugitive dust impacts on 2006
PM2.5 concentrations in the area, the EPA agrees with
Ecology that fugitive dust emissions from railroad transport of coal do
not constitute a significant source category for the 2008 Baseline
Emissions Inventory. To the extent that the commenter raises issues
related to coal export proposals that may impact the Tacoma-Pierce
County nonattainment area in the future, or to the calculation of
changes to the emission sources after 2008, the EPA has determined that
these questions are beyond the scope of the 2008 Baseline Emissions
Inventory. The inventory required under section 172(c)(3) does not
require submission or assessment of future emissions.
The EPA also concludes that the 2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory
accurately represents the emission sources that led to the EPA's
nonattainment designation for Tacoma-Pierce County in 2009. In
particular, the inventory informed and helped support development of
the residential wood smoke control measures approved in this action. In
2008, residential wood combustion represented 74% of all emissions
during the critical winter season, well above all other emission
sources. To the extent that the mix of emission sources may change over
time from the 2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory, the EPA believes these
changes are best addressed as part of the maintenance plan inventory
process to ensure continued compliance with the NAAQS, or as part of
the attainment planning requirements that would become applicable
should the area not continue in attainment. In response to the concerns
raised by the commenter, the EPA independently analyzed publicly
available data from the speciation monitor and found no evidence of
increasing fugitive dust trends from 2008 to 2011. See Tacoma PMF Soil
Results, included in the docket for this action. As noted previously,
monitored PM2.5 levels in the nonattainment area continue to
decline below the level of the NAAQS. For the reasons stated above, the
EPA has determined that Ecology's 2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory is
consistent with applicable guidance and satisfies the requirement of
CAA section 172(c)(3).
B. Comment on Railroad Emission Calculations
Comment: The commenter notes that Ecology's 2008 Baseline Emissions
Inventory submission includes only a summary of emissions from railroad
locomotive diesel consumption, without the corresponding background
information used to calculate the estimates. The commenter states that
the background information is necessary for both public understanding
and for future conformity obligations under the CAA.
Response: Since emission control measures for railroad locomotive
traffic are generally formulated and managed at the federal level, it
is understandable that the State SIP submission would include summary
data rather than a more elaborate discussion of underlying data.
Ecology did include an extensive explanation of the underlying data for
the predominant source categories, such as residential wood combustion,
which comprises 74% of the winter time inventory. By contrast,
emissions from all nonroad vehicles and engines, including railroad
locomotives, account for only 5% of wintertime inventory. Moreover,
although Ecology included only summary results for railroad emissions,
it clearly referenced the documentation used in calculating the final
railroad diesel emissions, listed as endnotes 26, 27, and 28 in the
2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory SIP submission. These documents were
available from Ecology and the EPA during the comment period, and
remain available for public review. Neither the EPA nor Ecology has
received a request for these documents. For the convenience of the
reader these background documents have been added to the docket for
this action.
The comment only questions the level of detail in the discussion of
the locomotive emission calculations and states that a comprehensive
and accurate emissions inventory must provide figures of gallons of
diesel consumed and emission factors or other calculations used in the
emissions estimates. The availability of the additional detail
requested by the comment is described above. Specifically, the emission
factors were based on standard EPA emission factors for locomotives and
fuel consumption data was provided by the rail freight carriers
operating in the area. As the comment notes, these data are part of the
comprehensive and accurate emissions inventory required by section
172(c)(3), and were appropriately relied upon by Ecology to calculate
diesel emissions from locomotives. The EPA
[[Page 32134]]
independently calculated the locomotive emissions estimates based on
the information referenced in endnotes 26, 27, and 28 of the State's
emissions inventory SIP submission, and obtained results that were
consistent with the State's (see EPA review of emission
calculations.xlsx).
To the extent that the commenter raises issues related to future
conformity determinations or potential coal export proposals that may
impact the Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment area in the future, or to
the calculation of changes to the emission sources after 2008, the EPA
has determined that these questions are beyond the scope of the 2008
Baseline Emissions Inventory and the requirements of section 172(c)(3).
III. Final Action
The EPA has determined that Washington's SIP revisions, dated
November 28, 2012, are consistent with sections 110 and 172 of the CAA.
Therefore, we are approving the SIP revisions, specifically Appendix A,
``2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory and Documentation'' and Appendix B,
``SIP Strengthening Rules.''
IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review
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, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this 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 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
rule neither imposes substantial direct compliance costs on tribal
governments, nor preempts tribal law. Therefore, the requirements of
section 5(b) and 5(c) of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.
Consistent with EPA policy, the EPA nonetheless provided a consultation
opportunity to the Puyallup Tribe in a letter dated December 11, 2012.
The EPA did not receive a request for consultation.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 29, 2013. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Visibility, and Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: May 13, 2013.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart WW--Washington
0
2. Section 52.2470 is amended:
0
a. In paragraph (c) Table 4 by revising entries 13.01 through 13.05,
adding in numerical order entry 13.06, and revising entry 13.07.
0
b. In paragraph (e) by adding a heading for ``Recently Approved Plans''
and a new entry for ``Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 2008
Baseline Emissions Inventory and SIP Strengthening Rules'' at the end
of the table.
Sec. 52.2470 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
* * * * *
[[Page 32135]]
Table 4--Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State adopted
State citation Title/subject date EPA approval date Explanations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation 1--Article 13: Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13.01............................ Policy and Purpose. 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
page number where
the document
begins].
13.02............................ Definitions........ 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
page number where
the document
begins].
13.03............................ Opacity Standards.. 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
page number where
the document
begins].
13.04............................ Allowed and 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
Prohibited Fuel page number where
Types. the document
begins].
13.05............................ Restrictions on 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
Operation of Solid page number where
Fuel Burning the document
Devices. begins].
13.06............................ Emission 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
Performance page number where
Standards. the document
begins].
13.07............................ Prohibitions on 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
Wood Stoves that page number where
are not Certified the document
Wood Stoves. begins].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(e) * * *
State of Washington Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable
Name of SIP provision geographic or State submittal EPA approval date Comments
nonattainment area date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently Approved Plans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 2008 Tacoma, Pierce 11/28/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
Baseline Emissions Inventory County. page number where
and SIP Strengthening Rules. the document
begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2013-12514 Filed 5-28-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
