Air Plan Approval; Washington; Wallula Second 10-Year Maintenance Plan, 70130-70135 [2019-27275]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
70130
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 245 / Friday, December 20, 2019 / Proposed Rules
of CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9)
for RFP and attainment contingency
measures. Our proposed approval is
based on commitments by the District
and CARB to supplement the element
through submission, as a SIP revision
(within one year of the effective date of
our final conditional approval action),
of a revised District rule or rules that
would add new limits or other
requirements if an RFP milestone is not
met or if Ventura County fails to attain
the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date.144
The EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in
this document. We will accept
comments from the public on this
proposal for the next 30 days and will
consider comments before taking final
action.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
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 proposes to approve, or
conditionally approve, state plans 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• 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
144 Letter dated August 16, 2019, from Michael
Villegas, Air Pollution Control Officer, VCAPCD, to
Richard Corey, Executive Officer, CARB; and letter
dated August 30, 2019, from Richard W. Corey,
Executive Officer, CARB, to Mike Stoker, Regional
Administrator, EPA Region IX.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Dec 19, 2019
Jkt 250001
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 the EPA with the
discretionary authority to address
disproportionate human health or
environmental effects with practical,
appropriate, and legally permissible
methods under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the proposed rule does
not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 5, 2019.
Michael Stoker,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2019–27545 Filed 12–19–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R10–OAR–2019–0669; FRL–10003–
32–Region 10]
Air Plan Approval; Washington;
Wallula Second 10-Year Maintenance
Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
plan for the Wallula area in Washington
State that addresses the second 10-year
maintenance period for particulate
matter with an aerodynamic diameter
less than or equal to a nominal 10
micrometers (PM10). This plan relies
upon the control measures contained in
the first 10-year maintenance plan, with
revisions to reflect updated permits and
agreements, also proposed for approval
in this action. Lastly, we are proposing
to take final agency action on high wind
and wildfire exceptional events
associated with the Wallula area.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before January 21, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10–
OAR–2019–0669, at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff
Hunt, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue—Suite 155, Seattle, WA 98101,
at (206) 553–0256, or hunt.jeff@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is
intended to refer to the EPA. This
supplementary information section is
arranged as follows:
SUMMARY:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Requirements of a Maintenance Plan
III. Analysis of Washington’s Submission
A. Attainment Emissions Inventory
B. Maintenance Demonstration
C. Monitoring Network
D. Verification of Continued Attainment
E. Contingency Provisions
E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM
20DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 245 / Friday, December 20, 2019 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Proposed Actions
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
The Wallula area lies in eastern
Washington near the Oregon border in
the southern portion of the Columbia
Plateau. The area is comprised of parts
of Walla Walla and Benton Counties and
a small portion of Sacajawea State Park
in Franklin County. It is generally rural
and agricultural. Prominent land uses
include dryland and irrigated cropland,
industrial sites, and natural vegetation.
There is one major stationary source
located in the Wallula area, Boise Paper
Wallula Mill (a division of Packaging
Corporation of America), a large pulp
and paper mill and associated compost
facility and landfill. There is also a large
beef cattle feedlot, a beef processing
plant, a natural gas compressor station,
grain storage silos, and a few other
minor sources. The Wallula area is in
the lowest and driest section of eastern
Washington and receives as little as
seven to nine inches of precipitation
each year. The surrounding Columbia
Plateau is known for prolonged periods
of strong winds which carry dust
particles for hundreds of miles
downwind. Wind erosion is a problem
throughout the Columbia Plateau, due to
its dry environment, scant vegetation,
unpredictable high winds, and soils
which contain substantial quantities of
PM10.
The Wallula area was designated
nonattainment for the 24-hour PM10
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) and classified as a Moderate
area upon enactment of the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990 (56 FR 56694,
November 6, 1991). The Washington
Department of Ecology (Ecology)
submitted a Moderate area attainment
plan for the Wallula area on November
13, 1991, and a Serious area plan on
November 30, 2004. The EPA acted on
the plans on January 27, 1997, and May
2, 2005, respectively (62 FR 3800 and 83
FR 22597). During the planning process,
the EPA determined that the area
attained the PM10 NAAQS based on
1999 through 2001 air quality
monitoring data (67 FR 64815, October
22, 2002).
As discussed in the EPA’s finding of
attainment and the state’s attainment
plan submissions, windblown dust
during high wind events is a significant
contributor to exceedances of the PM10
NAAQS in the Wallula area. Under the
Clean Air Act, specific exceedances due
to natural events, such as unusually
high winds, may be discounted or
excluded entirely from decisions
regarding an area’s air quality status in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Dec 19, 2019
Jkt 250001
appropriate circumstances. From 1996
to 2007, EPA’s Natural Events Policy 1
governed the process by which states
could request exclusion of monitored
values that exceeded the NAAQS due to
‘‘natural events’’ in making attainment
determinations. As part of the EPA’s
finding of attainment for the Wallula
area in 2002, the EPA determined that
all exceedances that occurred in 1999
through 2001 qualified as high wind
natural events under the EPA’s Natural
Events Policy. (67 FR 64815, October 22,
2002).
Subsequently, Ecology conducted a
final review of high wind natural events
for the area and provided the EPA
information in support of the state’s
maintenance plan and request to
redesignate the Wallula area, submitted
on March 29, 2005. Ecology found that
there had been nine reported PM10
exceedances in the Wallula area since
January 1, 1995, and all but one was
reasonably attributed to dust raised by
unusually high winds.2 The EPA
approved the submitted maintenance
plan and redesignation request on
August 26, 2005 (70 FR 50212). This
maintenance plan covered the first 10year period and demonstrated, after
excluding the high wind natural events
under EPA’s Natural Events Policy, that
the existing control measures approved
in the Moderate and Serious attainment
plans were adequate to maintain the
PM10 NAAQS.
II. Requirements of a Maintenance Plan
Section 175A of the Clean Air Act sets
forth the elements of a maintenance
plan. Under section 175A, a state must
submit a plan to demonstrate continued
attainment of the applicable NAAQS for
at least 10 years after an area is
redesignated to attainment. For Wallula,
this initial maintenance period was
2005 through 2015. The state must then
submit a revised maintenance plan
demonstrating that the area will
continue to attain for the 10 years
following the initial 10-year period. For
Wallula, this period is 2015 through
2025. The EPA’s Calcagni memorandum
contains a list of core provisions the
EPA anticipates to be necessary to
ensure maintenance of the relevant
NAAQS.3 The memorandum
1 See Memorandum from the EPA’s Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation to EPA
Regional Air Directors entitled ‘‘Areas Affected by
Natural Events,’’ dated May 30, 1996 (EPA’s Natural
Events Policy), in effect at that time.
2 The one exceedance not attributed to high
winds occurred on July 3, 1997, and was attributed
to an unusual and nonrecurring activity involving
the transport of multiple loads of composting
material near the monitor.
3 See Memorandum from the EPA’s Air Quality
Management Division Director to EPA Regional Air
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70131
recommends that a maintenance plan
address the following provisions: (1) An
attainment emissions inventory; (2) a
demonstration showing maintenance for
10 years; (3) a commitment to maintain
the existing monitoring network; (4)
verification of continued attainment;
and (5) a contingency plan to prevent or
correct future violations of the NAAQS.
Washington’s SIP submission discusses
each of these elements.
III. Analysis of Washington’s
Submission
A. Attainment Emissions Inventory
Washington’s second 10-year
maintenance plan for the Wallula area
includes a 2014 attainment emissions
inventory, which is the most up to date
emissions information available as part
of the National Emissions Inventory
(NEI) process. The EPA has reviewed
the procedures used to develop the 2014
attainment emissions inventory and we
find them to be reasonable and
approvable. The overall source mix and
emissions levels are generally consistent
with the 2002 attainment emissions
inventory contained in the first 10-year
maintenance plan. While there has been
some increase in emissions activity
since 2002, Ecology explained and the
EPA verified that much of the difference
between the 2002 and 2014 inventories
is due to revised emissions inventory
methodology. For example, Ecology
revised the emissions factor for cattle
feedlots by increasing it approximately
eightfold, a conservative approach.4
Based on the most up-to-date emissions
inventory information, Ecology
calculated the source mix for a typical
PM10 season day in the maintenance
area, which occurs from June through
October. The main emissions sources in
the area during this season include
agricultural tilling and harvesting in
aggregate (43%), Simplot Feeders (18%),
and Boise White Paper (10%). Other
smaller point sources, such as road dust,
construction dust, and motor vehicles
comprise the remaining emissions
source categories.5
Directors entitled ‘‘Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’
dated September 4, 1992 (Calcagni memorandum).
4 Bonifacio, H.M. (2012). Particulate matter
emission rates from beef cattle feedlots in Kansas—
Reverse dispersion modeling. Journal of the Air &
Waste Management Association, 62(3), 62(3),
pp.350–361.
5 Onroad motor vehicles are approximately 1% of
the overall inventory. As part of the serious area
attainment plan approval, the EPA granted
Washington’s request for an exemption from
regional analysis for transportation conformity
because motor vehicles were an insignificant source
of PM10 emissions.
E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM
20DEP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
70132
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 245 / Friday, December 20, 2019 / Proposed Rules
B. Maintenance Demonstration
To demonstrate maintenance,
emissions inventories are projected to
future dates to assess the influence of
changes in growth and controls. These
inventories show actual emissions in
pounds per season day equal to 6,334
pounds in 2014, and projected
inventories of 8,519 pounds in 2020,
and 8,599 pounds in 2025. As discussed
in the submission, Ecology used a
conservative projection methodology
including highest actual emissions,
potential to emit, and maximum
permitted capacity, as appropriate, in
developing the 2020 and 2025
projections.6 These projections would
be expected to represent an upper
bound of potential, future emissions,
explaining the difference between the
2014 actual emissions and possible
growth in 2020 and 2025.
Because the 2020 and 2025 projected
emissions inventories are greater than
the 2014 attainment inventory, Ecology
conducted a roll forward analysis to
demonstrate that the Wallula area will
continue to remain in attainment
through the year 2025. To perform the
roll forward modeling, Ecology
calculated a three-year design
concentration using 2012 through 2014
monitoring data.7 This 2014 design
concentration, equaling 112 micrograms
per cubic meter (mg/m3), corresponds to
the 2014 attainment emission inventory.
Ecology then modeled how the potential
emissions growth might impact future
PM10 design concentrations. The
maximum modeled 2025 design
concentration, using the most
conservative methodology, was 145 mg/
m3, below the level of the 24-hour PM10
NAAQS of 150 mg/m3. For comparison,
if a less conservative methodology is
used, factoring in potential natural
events and using maximum 5-year
actual rather than maximum allowable
permit limits, the projected 2025 design
concentration would be 82 mg/m3. As
shown in Table 20 of the second 10-year
plan, this projected 2025 design
concentration is generally consistent
with recent design concentrations after
factoring in the effect of natural events.
The Calcagni memorandum explains
that states are expected to maintain
implemented control strategies unless
such measures are shown to be
unnecessary for maintenance or
replaced with measures that achieve
equivalent reductions. Ecology retained
all control measures cited in the first 106 See Emissions Inventory Documentation for the
Wallula PM10 Second 10-Year Maintenance Plan.
7 See PM
10 design concentration table look-up
method, page 6–3, PM10 SIP Development
Guideline.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Dec 19, 2019
Jkt 250001
year maintenance plan; however, some
changed over time since the EPA’s last
approval on May 2, 2005 (70 FR 22597).
For example, in 2018, Ecology and
Simplot Feeders updated the ‘‘Fugitive
Dust Control Plan for Simplot Feeders’’
originally approved into the SIP in 2005
(70 FR 22597, May 2, 2005). The
updated fugitive dust control plan was
developed to prevent dust from any
fugitive or point sources from crossing
the Simplot property line. The updated
fugitive dust control plan requires road
dust suppression, better staff training,
daily observations, and daily adaptive
best management practices to make sure
potential fugitive dust emissions are
controlled. In a related 2018 update,
Ecology negotiated an update to the
1995 ‘‘Fugitive Dust Control Guidelines
for Beef Cattle Feedlots and Best
Management Practices’’ with the
Washington Cattlemen’s Association,
last approved into the SIP in 2005 (70
FR 22597, May 2, 2005). Ecology
requested that both updated agreements
replace the prior versions currently
approved in the SIP.
The first 10-year maintenance plan
also included site-specific permits and
orders for Boise White Paper and Tyson
Fresh Meats (formerly IBP). The SIPapproved order for Boise White Paper
(Order No. 1614–AQ04), and the dust
control plan for the associated landfill,
remain unchanged since the EPA’s
approval in 2005 (70 FR 22597, May 2,
2005). However, the SIP-approved Title
V air operating permit for Boise White
Paper, which cites the order and dust
control plan as a permit condition, has
since expired. Ecology requested that
the EPA replace the expired 2004 permit
in the SIP with the recently-issued 2018
version. The 2018 version retains permit
condition Q.1 requiring compliance
with the existing order and fugitive dust
plan (a copy of the 2018 permit is
included in the docket).
In a notice of construction (NOC)
approval order, issued by Ecology in
2002 and approved into the SIP in 2005,
Tyson Fresh Meats (formerly IBP)
requested a PM10 emission limitation to
remain below the 70 ton per year
threshold for a major source in a Serious
PM10 nonattainment area (02AQER–
5074). In 2007, Tyson Fresh Meats
submitted a notice of construction
application to increase hourly slaughter
rates and add two new cookers. In the
technical support document (TSD)
amending the SIP-approved Order,
Ecology determined the emissions
increase would be minimal, with an
estimated increase of 0.05 pounds per
hour and no increase on annual basis.
In implementing the new source review
provisions of Chapter 173–400
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Washington Administrative Code,
Ecology determined that the change
would not cause or contribute to
violations of the NAAQS. Ecology’s TSD
and the 2007 amended NOC approval
order are included in the docket for this
action.
In 2014, Ecology consolidated the air
permits for Tyson Fresh Meats into one
comprehensive permit, including the
permit conditions contained in
amended Order 02AQER–5074 (a copy
of the consolidated 2014 order is
included in the docket for this action).
This was done in connection with a
request from Tyson to remove propane
as a backup fuel for the boilers and not
using tallow as a fuel for the boilers and
dryers. The TSD for the 2007 permit
revision states that, with these changes
in allowable fuels, potential to emit
PM10 is reduced to 27.10 tons per year,
well below the 70 tons per year
emissions limitation established in the
2002 NOC order of approval, such that
Tyson is now a true minor source rather
than a synthetic minor source for Title
V. The limits on particulate matter from
amended Order 02AQER–5074
(currently approved in the SIP),
however, remain in effect and are
included in the 2014 consolidated
permit. Ecology submitted, and the EPA
is proposing to approve in the SIP, the
updated 2014 permit conditions and
related monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting that replace the permit
conditions contained in the 2002 NOC
order of approval. Because many of the
permit conditions contained in the 2014
consolidated permit are unrelated to the
original 2002 SIP-approved NOC order
of approval or are not required elements
for SIP incorporation, a strikeout
version of the exact permit conditions
proposed for approval is included in the
docket for this action.
C. Monitoring Network
Washington’s maintenance plan
includes a commitment to continue to
operate its EPA-approved monitoring
network to demonstrate compliance
with the PM10 NAAQS for the Wallula
area. On June 28, 2018, Ecology
submitted the 2018 Annual Monitoring
Network Plan, which the EPA approved
on August 13, 2018. Ecology’s network
plan and the EPA’s approval letter are
included in the docket for this action.
Any changes to the PM10 monitoring
network for the Wallula area must be
made in accordance with the
requirements of 40 CFR part 58 and
approved by the EPA as part of the
annual monitoring network plan
process.
E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM
20DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 245 / Friday, December 20, 2019 / Proposed Rules
D. Verification of Continued Attainment
The level of the PM10 NAAQS is 150
micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3), 24hour average concentration. The
NAAQS is attained when the expected
number of days per calendar year with
a 24-hour average concentration above
150 mg/m3 is equal to or less than one.
(40 CFR 50.6). Under the approved first
10-year maintenance plan, verification
of continued attainment was addressed
through operation of an appropriate air
quality monitoring network. In
developing the second 10-year
maintenance plan, Washington
evaluated the most recent three years of
complete, quality-assured data for the
Wallula area (2015 through 2017) to
verify continued attainment of the
standard.
As previously discussed, the Clean
Air Act allows the exclusion of certain
event-affected air quality data. This
process is currently implemented under
the Exceptional Events Rule (codified at
40 CFR 50.1, 50.14, and 51.930). Under
the EPA’s Exceptional Events Rule
process, Ecology flagged six
exceedances of the PM10 NAAQS during
the 2015 through 2017 monitoring
period as potential exceptional events.
Three of the flagged exceedances were
associated with unusually high wind
events that entrained dust (August 14,
2015, October 30, 2015, and November
17, 2015). As discussed in Ecology’s
submission, this entrained dust
primarily originated in the Horse
Heaven Hills area, located
approximately 70 miles from the
maintenance area, as well as other
Columbia Plateau counties, such as
Franklin and Adams Counties. An
additional three days in 2017 were
flagged as wildfire-influenced data, with
numerous active fires occurring
throughout Washington, Oregon, and
western Canada on those days
(September 5 through 7, 2017). The
Exceptional Events Rule recommends
that states submit exceptional event
demonstrations only for exceedances
‘‘flagged’’ as due to exceptional events
that have regulatory significance.
Consistent with this recommendation,
Ecology submitted one exceptional
event demonstration on November 30,
2017, to request exclusion of the August
14, 2015, high wind event data. On
March 20, 2019, Ecology submitted a
second exceptional event demonstration
to exclude the wildfire influenced data
on September 5 through 7, 2017.
The EPA evaluated Ecology’s
exceptional event demonstrations for
August 14, 2015, and September 5
through 7, 2017, with respect to the
requirements of the EPA’s Exceptional
Events Rule. On March 21, 2018, the
EPA concurred with Ecology’s request
to exclude event-influenced data for
August 14, 2015. On September 11,
2019, we concurred with Ecology’s
request to exclude the wildfire eventinfluenced data for September 5 and 6,
2017. We note that, although Ecology’s
exceptional event demonstration
included September 7, 2017, it was not
necessary for the EPA to concur on this
day because the area showed attainment
of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS with the
exclusion of September 5 and 6, 2017,
data. The EPA concurrence letters
explain how Ecology met the criteria in
the Exceptional Events Rule to
demonstrate that the August 14, 2015,
and September 5 and 6, 2017,
exceedances qualify as exceedances
attributable to exceptional events. The
EPA now proposes to take final agency
action on Ecology’s request to exclude
data from August 14, 2015, and
September 5 and 6, 2017. Exclusion of
the event-influenced data yields a threeyear average of 1.0 expected
exceedances for 2015 through 2017,
equal to the threshold of 1.0 to
demonstrate attainment of the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS. For further information,
refer to Ecology’s exceptional event
demonstration packages and the EPA’s
concurrence and analysis located in the
docket for this action.
E. Contingency Provisions
Due to the unique nature of the
Wallula area, with nearly all
exceedances since 1995 associated with
high wind or wildfire events, the first
10-year maintenance plan contingency
provisions relied heavily on the
‘‘Columbia Plateau Windblown Dust
Natural Events Action Plan’’ (NEAP)
approved into the SIP in 2005. The
NEAP focuses on agricultural sources,
primarily outside the maintenance area,
encouraging ongoing participation in
U.S. Department of Agriculture soil
conservation programs. The NEAP
remains unchanged in the SIP since the
first 10-year maintenance plan.
However, to comply with the EPA’s
revisions to the Exceptional Events
Rule, Ecology submitted a mitigation
plan to support future evaluation of
exceptional events in the Wallula area,
supplementing the SIP-approved NEAP.
The Exceptional Events Rule notes that
mitigation plans are not required to be
submitted as part of the SIP but are
evaluated as part of the ongoing EPA
and state coordination on exceptional
events. The current mitigation plan is
included in the docket for this action as
well as the EPA’s November 21, 2019,
letter approving Ecology’s mitigation
plan. In light of the exceptional event
considerations discussed above, Ecology
is retaining, unchanged the contingency
provisions approved in the first 10-year
maintenance plan.
IV. Proposed Actions
The EPA is proposing to approve
Ecology’s second 10-year maintenance
plan for the 24-hour PM10 Wallula area
as satisfying the requirements of section
175A of the Clean Air Act. We are also
proposing to take final agency action on
Ecology’s request to exclude wildfire
and high wind event-influenced data
from August 14, 2015, and September 5
and 6, 2017. In addition, we are
proposing to approve, and incorporate
into the SIP at 40 CFR part 52.2470(d),
the updated source-specific
requirements for Tyson Fresh Meats,
Boise White Paper, and Simplot Feeders
shown in Table 1, below.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE 1—STATE SOURCE-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL
Name of source
Order/Permit
No.
State effective
date
Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc ...................
13AQ–E526
................
................
................
................
................
................
4/16/2014
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Dec 19, 2019
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Explanations
Except:
1. Decontamination Cabinets;
2. Meat Cutting/Packing;
6. Wastewater Floatation;
8. Utility Equipment;
10. Other;
References to ‘‘WAC 173–460–040’’ in ‘‘Determinations’’;
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70133
E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM
20DEP1
70134
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 245 / Friday, December 20, 2019 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—STATE SOURCE-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS PROPOSED FOR APPROVAL—Continued
Order/Permit
No.
Name of source
State effective
date
................
Boise White Paper L.L.C ..................
Simplot Feeders Limited Partnership
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
................
0003697 ......
Fugitive Dust
Control
Plan.
In addition, we are proposing to
update the list of supplementary
documents in 40 CFR part 52.2470(e) to
include the 2003 ‘‘Columbia Plateau
Windblown Dust Natural Events Action
Plan’’ and Ecology’s 2018 update of the
‘‘Fugitive Dust Control Guidelines for
Beef Cattle Feedlots and Best
Management Practices.’’
Finally, we are proposing to take final
agency action on high wind and wildfire
exceptional events associated with the
Wallula area and determine that the
PM10 exceedances on the identified
dates were due to exceptional events
and can be excluded in determining the
attainment status of the area.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, the EPA is
proposing to include regulatory text in
an EPA final rule that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is proposing to
incorporate by reference in 40 CFR part
52.2470(d) the updated source-specific
requirements shown in section IV at
Table 1 of this preamble. The EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these
materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region X Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Dec 19, 2019
Jkt 250001
4/1/2018
3/1/2018
Explanations
The portion of Approval Condition 2.a which states, ‘‘and consumption of
no more than 128 million cubic feet/of natural gas per year. Natural
gas consumption records for the dryer shall be maintained for the
most recent 24 month period and be available to Ecology for inspection. An increase in natural gas consumption that exceeds the above
level may require a Notice of Construction.’’;
Approval Condition 3;
Approval Condition 4;
Approval Condition 5;
Approval Condition 6.e;
Approval Condition 9.a.ii;
Approval Condition 9.a.iv;
Approval Condition 9.a.v;
Approval Condition 9.a.vi;
Approval Condition 10.a.ii;
Approval Condition 10.b;
Approval Condition 11.a;
Approval Condition 11.b;
Approval Condition 11.e;
Approval Condition 12;
Approval Condition 15;
The section titled ‘‘Your Right to Appeal’’; and
The section titled ‘‘Address and Location Information.’’
Condition Q.1 only.
VI. 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 action merely
proposes to approve 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• 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.);
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• 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
this action does not involve technical
standards; and
• Does not provide the 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).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land, or any
other area where the EPA or an Indian
tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM
20DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 245 / Friday, December 20, 2019 / Proposed Rules
40 CFR Part 271
comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e.,
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission
methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or
multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://
www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sharon Leitch, RCRA Waste
Management, UST and Pesticides
Section; Land, Chemicals and
Redevelopment Division; EPA Region 1,
5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (Mail
code 07–1), Boston, MA 02109–3912;
telephone number: (617) 918–1647; fax
number (617) 918–0647; email address:
leitch.sharon@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[EPA–R01–RCRA–2019–0617; FRL–10003–
23–Region 1]
A. Why are revisions to state programs
necessary?
Maine: Proposed Authorization of
State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revisions
States that have received final
authorization from EPA under RCRA
section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must
maintain a hazardous waste program
that is equivalent to, consistent with,
and no less stringent than the Federal
program. As the Federal program
changes, states must change their
programs and ask EPA to authorize the
changes. Changes to state programs may
be necessary when Federal or state
statutory or regulatory authority is
modified or when certain other changes
occur. Most commonly, states must
change their programs because of
changes to EPA’s regulations in 40 Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 124,
260 through 268, 270, 273, and 279.
New Federal requirements and
prohibitions imposed by Federal
regulations that EPA promulgates
pursuant to the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA)
take effect in authorized states at the
same time that they take effect in
unauthorized states. Thus, EPA will
implement those requirements and
prohibitions in Maine, including the
issuance of new permits implementing
those requirements, until the State is
granted authorization to do so.
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter, and Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 2, 2019.
Chris Hladick,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2019–27275 Filed 12–19–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
Maine has applied to the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
for final authorization of changes to its
hazardous waste program under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA), as amended. EPA has
reviewed Maine’s application and has
determined that these changes satisfy all
requirements needed to qualify for final
authorization. Therefore, we are
proposing to authorize the State’s
changes. EPA seeks public comment
prior to taking final action.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before January 21, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01–
RCRA–2019–0617, at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from
www.regulations.gov. EPA may publish
any comment received to its public
docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. EPA will generally not consider
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Dec 19, 2019
Jkt 250001
B. What decisions has EPA made in this
rule?
On October 16, 2019, Maine
submitted a complete program revision
application seeking authorization of
changes to its hazardous waste program.
EPA concludes that Maine’s application
to revise its authorized program meets
all of the statutory and regulatory
requirements established under RCRA,
as set forth in RCRA section 3006(b), 42
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70135
U.S.C. 6926(b), and 40 CFR part 271.
Therefore, EPA proposes to grant Maine
final authorization to operate its
hazardous waste program with the
changes described in the authorization
application, and as outlined below in
Section F of this document.
Maine has responsibility for
permitting treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities within its borders
(except in Indian country) and for
carrying out the aspects of the RCRA
program described in its revised
program application, subject to the
limitations of HSWA, as discussed
above.
C. What is the effect of this proposed
authorization decision?
If Maine is authorized for the changes
described in Maine’s authorization
application, these changes will become
part of the authorized State hazardous
waste program and will therefore be
federally enforceable. Maine will
continue to have primary enforcement
authority and responsibility for its State
hazardous waste program. EPA would
maintain its authorities under RCRA
sections 3007, 3008, 3013, and 7003,
including its authority to:
• Conduct inspections, and require
monitoring, tests, analyses and reports;
• Enforce RCRA requirements,
including authorized State program
requirements, and suspend or revoke
permits; and
• Take enforcement actions regardless
of whether the State has taken its own
actions.
This action will not impose additional
requirements on the regulated
community because the regulations for
which EPA is proposing to authorize
Maine are already effective under state
law and are not changed by this
proposed action.
D. What happens if EPA receives
comments that oppose this action?
If EPA receives comments on this
proposed action, we will address all
such comments in a later final rule. You
may not have another opportunity to
comment. If you want to comment on
this authorization, you should do so at
this time.
E. What has Maine previously been
authorized for?
Maine initially received final
authorization on May 6, 1988, effective
May 20, 1988 (53 FR 16264) to
implement the RCRA hazardous waste
management program. EPA granted
authorization for changes to Maine’s
program on the following dates: June 24,
1997, effective August 25, 1997 (62 FR
E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM
20DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 245 (Friday, December 20, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70130-70135]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-27275]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R10-OAR-2019-0669; FRL-10003-32-Region 10]
Air Plan Approval; Washington; Wallula Second 10-Year Maintenance
Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a plan for the Wallula area in Washington State that addresses
the second 10-year maintenance period for particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers
(PM10). This plan relies upon the control measures contained
in the first 10-year maintenance plan, with revisions to reflect
updated permits and agreements, also proposed for approval in this
action. Lastly, we are proposing to take final agency action on high
wind and wildfire exceptional events associated with the Wallula area.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before January 21, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2019-0669, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Hunt, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue--Suite 155, Seattle, WA 98101, at (206) 553-0256, or
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA. This
supplementary information section is arranged as follows:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Requirements of a Maintenance Plan
III. Analysis of Washington's Submission
A. Attainment Emissions Inventory
B. Maintenance Demonstration
C. Monitoring Network
D. Verification of Continued Attainment
E. Contingency Provisions
[[Page 70131]]
IV. Proposed Actions
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
The Wallula area lies in eastern Washington near the Oregon border
in the southern portion of the Columbia Plateau. The area is comprised
of parts of Walla Walla and Benton Counties and a small portion of
Sacajawea State Park in Franklin County. It is generally rural and
agricultural. Prominent land uses include dryland and irrigated
cropland, industrial sites, and natural vegetation. There is one major
stationary source located in the Wallula area, Boise Paper Wallula Mill
(a division of Packaging Corporation of America), a large pulp and
paper mill and associated compost facility and landfill. There is also
a large beef cattle feedlot, a beef processing plant, a natural gas
compressor station, grain storage silos, and a few other minor sources.
The Wallula area is in the lowest and driest section of eastern
Washington and receives as little as seven to nine inches of
precipitation each year. The surrounding Columbia Plateau is known for
prolonged periods of strong winds which carry dust particles for
hundreds of miles downwind. Wind erosion is a problem throughout the
Columbia Plateau, due to its dry environment, scant vegetation,
unpredictable high winds, and soils which contain substantial
quantities of PM10.
The Wallula area was designated nonattainment for the 24-hour
PM10 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and
classified as a Moderate area upon enactment of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 (56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991). The Washington
Department of Ecology (Ecology) submitted a Moderate area attainment
plan for the Wallula area on November 13, 1991, and a Serious area plan
on November 30, 2004. The EPA acted on the plans on January 27, 1997,
and May 2, 2005, respectively (62 FR 3800 and 83 FR 22597). During the
planning process, the EPA determined that the area attained the
PM10 NAAQS based on 1999 through 2001 air quality monitoring
data (67 FR 64815, October 22, 2002).
As discussed in the EPA's finding of attainment and the state's
attainment plan submissions, windblown dust during high wind events is
a significant contributor to exceedances of the PM10 NAAQS
in the Wallula area. Under the Clean Air Act, specific exceedances due
to natural events, such as unusually high winds, may be discounted or
excluded entirely from decisions regarding an area's air quality status
in appropriate circumstances. From 1996 to 2007, EPA's Natural Events
Policy \1\ governed the process by which states could request exclusion
of monitored values that exceeded the NAAQS due to ``natural events''
in making attainment determinations. As part of the EPA's finding of
attainment for the Wallula area in 2002, the EPA determined that all
exceedances that occurred in 1999 through 2001 qualified as high wind
natural events under the EPA's Natural Events Policy. (67 FR 64815,
October 22, 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Memorandum from the EPA's Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation to EPA Regional Air Directors entitled ``Areas
Affected by Natural Events,'' dated May 30, 1996 (EPA's Natural
Events Policy), in effect at that time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subsequently, Ecology conducted a final review of high wind natural
events for the area and provided the EPA information in support of the
state's maintenance plan and request to redesignate the Wallula area,
submitted on March 29, 2005. Ecology found that there had been nine
reported PM10 exceedances in the Wallula area since January
1, 1995, and all but one was reasonably attributed to dust raised by
unusually high winds.\2\ The EPA approved the submitted maintenance
plan and redesignation request on August 26, 2005 (70 FR 50212). This
maintenance plan covered the first 10-year period and demonstrated,
after excluding the high wind natural events under EPA's Natural Events
Policy, that the existing control measures approved in the Moderate and
Serious attainment plans were adequate to maintain the PM10
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The one exceedance not attributed to high winds occurred on
July 3, 1997, and was attributed to an unusual and nonrecurring
activity involving the transport of multiple loads of composting
material near the monitor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Requirements of a Maintenance Plan
Section 175A of the Clean Air Act sets forth the elements of a
maintenance plan. Under section 175A, a state must submit a plan to
demonstrate continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least
10 years after an area is redesignated to attainment. For Wallula, this
initial maintenance period was 2005 through 2015. The state must then
submit a revised maintenance plan demonstrating that the area will
continue to attain for the 10 years following the initial 10-year
period. For Wallula, this period is 2015 through 2025. The EPA's
Calcagni memorandum contains a list of core provisions the EPA
anticipates to be necessary to ensure maintenance of the relevant
NAAQS.\3\ The memorandum recommends that a maintenance plan address the
following provisions: (1) An attainment emissions inventory; (2) a
demonstration showing maintenance for 10 years; (3) a commitment to
maintain the existing monitoring network; (4) verification of continued
attainment; and (5) a contingency plan to prevent or correct future
violations of the NAAQS. Washington's SIP submission discusses each of
these elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See Memorandum from the EPA's Air Quality Management
Division Director to EPA Regional Air Directors entitled
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' dated September 4, 1992 (Calcagni memorandum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Analysis of Washington's Submission
A. Attainment Emissions Inventory
Washington's second 10-year maintenance plan for the Wallula area
includes a 2014 attainment emissions inventory, which is the most up to
date emissions information available as part of the National Emissions
Inventory (NEI) process. The EPA has reviewed the procedures used to
develop the 2014 attainment emissions inventory and we find them to be
reasonable and approvable. The overall source mix and emissions levels
are generally consistent with the 2002 attainment emissions inventory
contained in the first 10-year maintenance plan. While there has been
some increase in emissions activity since 2002, Ecology explained and
the EPA verified that much of the difference between the 2002 and 2014
inventories is due to revised emissions inventory methodology. For
example, Ecology revised the emissions factor for cattle feedlots by
increasing it approximately eightfold, a conservative approach.\4\
Based on the most up-to-date emissions inventory information, Ecology
calculated the source mix for a typical PM10 season day in
the maintenance area, which occurs from June through October. The main
emissions sources in the area during this season include agricultural
tilling and harvesting in aggregate (43%), Simplot Feeders (18%), and
Boise White Paper (10%). Other smaller point sources, such as road
dust, construction dust, and motor vehicles comprise the remaining
emissions source categories.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Bonifacio, H.M. (2012). Particulate matter emission rates
from beef cattle feedlots in Kansas--Reverse dispersion modeling.
Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 62(3), 62(3),
pp.350-361.
\5\ Onroad motor vehicles are approximately 1% of the overall
inventory. As part of the serious area attainment plan approval, the
EPA granted Washington's request for an exemption from regional
analysis for transportation conformity because motor vehicles were
an insignificant source of PM10 emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 70132]]
B. Maintenance Demonstration
To demonstrate maintenance, emissions inventories are projected to
future dates to assess the influence of changes in growth and controls.
These inventories show actual emissions in pounds per season day equal
to 6,334 pounds in 2014, and projected inventories of 8,519 pounds in
2020, and 8,599 pounds in 2025. As discussed in the submission, Ecology
used a conservative projection methodology including highest actual
emissions, potential to emit, and maximum permitted capacity, as
appropriate, in developing the 2020 and 2025 projections.\6\ These
projections would be expected to represent an upper bound of potential,
future emissions, explaining the difference between the 2014 actual
emissions and possible growth in 2020 and 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Emissions Inventory Documentation for the Wallula
PM10 Second 10-Year Maintenance Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the 2020 and 2025 projected emissions inventories are
greater than the 2014 attainment inventory, Ecology conducted a roll
forward analysis to demonstrate that the Wallula area will continue to
remain in attainment through the year 2025. To perform the roll forward
modeling, Ecology calculated a three-year design concentration using
2012 through 2014 monitoring data.\7\ This 2014 design concentration,
equaling 112 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\), corresponds to
the 2014 attainment emission inventory. Ecology then modeled how the
potential emissions growth might impact future PM10 design
concentrations. The maximum modeled 2025 design concentration, using
the most conservative methodology, was 145 [mu]g/m\3\, below the level
of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS of 150 [mu]g/m\3\. For comparison,
if a less conservative methodology is used, factoring in potential
natural events and using maximum 5-year actual rather than maximum
allowable permit limits, the projected 2025 design concentration would
be 82 [mu]g/m\3\. As shown in Table 20 of the second 10-year plan, this
projected 2025 design concentration is generally consistent with recent
design concentrations after factoring in the effect of natural events.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See PM10 design concentration table look-up
method, page 6-3, PM10 SIP Development Guideline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Calcagni memorandum explains that states are expected to
maintain implemented control strategies unless such measures are shown
to be unnecessary for maintenance or replaced with measures that
achieve equivalent reductions. Ecology retained all control measures
cited in the first 10-year maintenance plan; however, some changed over
time since the EPA's last approval on May 2, 2005 (70 FR 22597). For
example, in 2018, Ecology and Simplot Feeders updated the ``Fugitive
Dust Control Plan for Simplot Feeders'' originally approved into the
SIP in 2005 (70 FR 22597, May 2, 2005). The updated fugitive dust
control plan was developed to prevent dust from any fugitive or point
sources from crossing the Simplot property line. The updated fugitive
dust control plan requires road dust suppression, better staff
training, daily observations, and daily adaptive best management
practices to make sure potential fugitive dust emissions are
controlled. In a related 2018 update, Ecology negotiated an update to
the 1995 ``Fugitive Dust Control Guidelines for Beef Cattle Feedlots
and Best Management Practices'' with the Washington Cattlemen's
Association, last approved into the SIP in 2005 (70 FR 22597, May 2,
2005). Ecology requested that both updated agreements replace the prior
versions currently approved in the SIP.
The first 10-year maintenance plan also included site-specific
permits and orders for Boise White Paper and Tyson Fresh Meats
(formerly IBP). The SIP-approved order for Boise White Paper (Order No.
1614-AQ04), and the dust control plan for the associated landfill,
remain unchanged since the EPA's approval in 2005 (70 FR 22597, May 2,
2005). However, the SIP-approved Title V air operating permit for Boise
White Paper, which cites the order and dust control plan as a permit
condition, has since expired. Ecology requested that the EPA replace
the expired 2004 permit in the SIP with the recently-issued 2018
version. The 2018 version retains permit condition Q.1 requiring
compliance with the existing order and fugitive dust plan (a copy of
the 2018 permit is included in the docket).
In a notice of construction (NOC) approval order, issued by Ecology
in 2002 and approved into the SIP in 2005, Tyson Fresh Meats (formerly
IBP) requested a PM10 emission limitation to remain below
the 70 ton per year threshold for a major source in a Serious
PM10 nonattainment area (02AQER-5074). In 2007, Tyson Fresh
Meats submitted a notice of construction application to increase hourly
slaughter rates and add two new cookers. In the technical support
document (TSD) amending the SIP-approved Order, Ecology determined the
emissions increase would be minimal, with an estimated increase of 0.05
pounds per hour and no increase on annual basis. In implementing the
new source review provisions of Chapter 173-400 Washington
Administrative Code, Ecology determined that the change would not cause
or contribute to violations of the NAAQS. Ecology's TSD and the 2007
amended NOC approval order are included in the docket for this action.
In 2014, Ecology consolidated the air permits for Tyson Fresh Meats
into one comprehensive permit, including the permit conditions
contained in amended Order 02AQER-5074 (a copy of the consolidated 2014
order is included in the docket for this action). This was done in
connection with a request from Tyson to remove propane as a backup fuel
for the boilers and not using tallow as a fuel for the boilers and
dryers. The TSD for the 2007 permit revision states that, with these
changes in allowable fuels, potential to emit PM10 is
reduced to 27.10 tons per year, well below the 70 tons per year
emissions limitation established in the 2002 NOC order of approval,
such that Tyson is now a true minor source rather than a synthetic
minor source for Title V. The limits on particulate matter from amended
Order 02AQER-5074 (currently approved in the SIP), however, remain in
effect and are included in the 2014 consolidated permit. Ecology
submitted, and the EPA is proposing to approve in the SIP, the updated
2014 permit conditions and related monitoring, recordkeeping, and
reporting that replace the permit conditions contained in the 2002 NOC
order of approval. Because many of the permit conditions contained in
the 2014 consolidated permit are unrelated to the original 2002 SIP-
approved NOC order of approval or are not required elements for SIP
incorporation, a strikeout version of the exact permit conditions
proposed for approval is included in the docket for this action.
C. Monitoring Network
Washington's maintenance plan includes a commitment to continue to
operate its EPA-approved monitoring network to demonstrate compliance
with the PM10 NAAQS for the Wallula area. On June 28, 2018,
Ecology submitted the 2018 Annual Monitoring Network Plan, which the
EPA approved on August 13, 2018. Ecology's network plan and the EPA's
approval letter are included in the docket for this action. Any changes
to the PM10 monitoring network for the Wallula area must be
made in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR part 58 and approved
by the EPA as part of the annual monitoring network plan process.
[[Page 70133]]
D. Verification of Continued Attainment
The level of the PM10 NAAQS is 150 micrograms per cubic
meter ([mu]g/m\3\), 24-hour average concentration. The NAAQS is
attained when the expected number of days per calendar year with a 24-
hour average concentration above 150 [mu]g/m\3\ is equal to or less
than one. (40 CFR 50.6). Under the approved first 10-year maintenance
plan, verification of continued attainment was addressed through
operation of an appropriate air quality monitoring network. In
developing the second 10-year maintenance plan, Washington evaluated
the most recent three years of complete, quality-assured data for the
Wallula area (2015 through 2017) to verify continued attainment of the
standard.
As previously discussed, the Clean Air Act allows the exclusion of
certain event-affected air quality data. This process is currently
implemented under the Exceptional Events Rule (codified at 40 CFR 50.1,
50.14, and 51.930). Under the EPA's Exceptional Events Rule process,
Ecology flagged six exceedances of the PM10 NAAQS during the
2015 through 2017 monitoring period as potential exceptional events.
Three of the flagged exceedances were associated with unusually high
wind events that entrained dust (August 14, 2015, October 30, 2015, and
November 17, 2015). As discussed in Ecology's submission, this
entrained dust primarily originated in the Horse Heaven Hills area,
located approximately 70 miles from the maintenance area, as well as
other Columbia Plateau counties, such as Franklin and Adams Counties.
An additional three days in 2017 were flagged as wildfire-influenced
data, with numerous active fires occurring throughout Washington,
Oregon, and western Canada on those days (September 5 through 7, 2017).
The Exceptional Events Rule recommends that states submit exceptional
event demonstrations only for exceedances ``flagged'' as due to
exceptional events that have regulatory significance. Consistent with
this recommendation, Ecology submitted one exceptional event
demonstration on November 30, 2017, to request exclusion of the August
14, 2015, high wind event data. On March 20, 2019, Ecology submitted a
second exceptional event demonstration to exclude the wildfire
influenced data on September 5 through 7, 2017.
The EPA evaluated Ecology's exceptional event demonstrations for
August 14, 2015, and September 5 through 7, 2017, with respect to the
requirements of the EPA's Exceptional Events Rule. On March 21, 2018,
the EPA concurred with Ecology's request to exclude event-influenced
data for August 14, 2015. On September 11, 2019, we concurred with
Ecology's request to exclude the wildfire event-influenced data for
September 5 and 6, 2017. We note that, although Ecology's exceptional
event demonstration included September 7, 2017, it was not necessary
for the EPA to concur on this day because the area showed attainment of
the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS with the exclusion of September 5 and
6, 2017, data. The EPA concurrence letters explain how Ecology met the
criteria in the Exceptional Events Rule to demonstrate that the August
14, 2015, and September 5 and 6, 2017, exceedances qualify as
exceedances attributable to exceptional events. The EPA now proposes to
take final agency action on Ecology's request to exclude data from
August 14, 2015, and September 5 and 6, 2017. Exclusion of the event-
influenced data yields a three-year average of 1.0 expected exceedances
for 2015 through 2017, equal to the threshold of 1.0 to demonstrate
attainment of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. For further
information, refer to Ecology's exceptional event demonstration
packages and the EPA's concurrence and analysis located in the docket
for this action.
E. Contingency Provisions
Due to the unique nature of the Wallula area, with nearly all
exceedances since 1995 associated with high wind or wildfire events,
the first 10-year maintenance plan contingency provisions relied
heavily on the ``Columbia Plateau Windblown Dust Natural Events Action
Plan'' (NEAP) approved into the SIP in 2005. The NEAP focuses on
agricultural sources, primarily outside the maintenance area,
encouraging ongoing participation in U.S. Department of Agriculture
soil conservation programs. The NEAP remains unchanged in the SIP since
the first 10-year maintenance plan. However, to comply with the EPA's
revisions to the Exceptional Events Rule, Ecology submitted a
mitigation plan to support future evaluation of exceptional events in
the Wallula area, supplementing the SIP-approved NEAP. The Exceptional
Events Rule notes that mitigation plans are not required to be
submitted as part of the SIP but are evaluated as part of the ongoing
EPA and state coordination on exceptional events. The current
mitigation plan is included in the docket for this action as well as
the EPA's November 21, 2019, letter approving Ecology's mitigation
plan. In light of the exceptional event considerations discussed above,
Ecology is retaining, unchanged the contingency provisions approved in
the first 10-year maintenance plan.
IV. Proposed Actions
The EPA is proposing to approve Ecology's second 10-year
maintenance plan for the 24-hour PM10 Wallula area as
satisfying the requirements of section 175A of the Clean Air Act. We
are also proposing to take final agency action on Ecology's request to
exclude wildfire and high wind event-influenced data from August 14,
2015, and September 5 and 6, 2017. In addition, we are proposing to
approve, and incorporate into the SIP at 40 CFR part 52.2470(d), the
updated source-specific requirements for Tyson Fresh Meats, Boise White
Paper, and Simplot Feeders shown in Table 1, below.
Table 1--State Source-Specific Requirements Proposed for Approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
Name of source Order/Permit No. effective date Explanations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc................ 13AQ-E526................ 4/16/2014 Except:
......................... .............. 1. Decontamination Cabinets;
......................... .............. 2. Meat Cutting/Packing;
......................... .............. 6. Wastewater Floatation;
......................... .............. 8. Utility Equipment;
......................... .............. 10. Other;
......................... .............. References to ``WAC 173-460-
040'' in ``Determinations'';
[[Page 70134]]
......................... .............. The portion of Approval
Condition 2.a which states,
``and consumption of no more
than 128 million cubic feet/
of natural gas per year.
Natural gas consumption
records for the dryer shall
be maintained for the most
recent 24 month period and
be available to Ecology for
inspection. An increase in
natural gas consumption that
exceeds the above level may
require a Notice of
Construction.'';
......................... .............. Approval Condition 3;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 4;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 5;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 6.e;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 9.a.ii;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 9.a.iv;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 9.a.v;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 9.a.vi;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 10.a.ii;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 10.b;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 11.a;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 11.b;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 11.e;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 12;
......................... .............. Approval Condition 15;
......................... .............. The section titled ``Your
Right to Appeal''; and
......................... .............. The section titled ``Address
and Location Information.''
Boise White Paper L.L.C............... 0003697.................. 4/1/2018 Condition Q.1 only.
Simplot Feeders Limited Partnership... Fugitive Dust Control 3/1/2018
Plan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, we are proposing to update the list of supplementary
documents in 40 CFR part 52.2470(e) to include the 2003 ``Columbia
Plateau Windblown Dust Natural Events Action Plan'' and Ecology's 2018
update of the ``Fugitive Dust Control Guidelines for Beef Cattle
Feedlots and Best Management Practices.''
Finally, we are proposing to take final agency action on high wind
and wildfire exceptional events associated with the Wallula area and
determine that the PM10 exceedances on the identified dates
were due to exceptional events and can be excluded in determining the
attainment status of the area.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, the EPA is proposing to include regulatory text
in an EPA final rule that includes incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to
incorporate by reference in 40 CFR part 52.2470(d) the updated source-
specific requirements shown in section IV at Table 1 of this preamble.
The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally
available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region X Office
(please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).
VI. 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 action merely proposes to approve 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 Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
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 this action does not involve technical standards; and
Does not provide the 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).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land, or
any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications and will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal
[[Page 70135]]
governments or preempt tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, and
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 2, 2019.
Chris Hladick,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2019-27275 Filed 12-19-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
