Air Plan Approval; Washington; Olympic Region Clean Air Agency, Recreational Fires, 84842-84845 [2024-24714]
Download as PDF
84842
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Designations and Reporting Points,
which is incorporated by reference in 14
CFR 71.1 on an annual basis. This
document proposes to amend the
current version of that order, FAA Order
JO 7400.11J, dated July 31, 2024, and
effective September 15, 2024. These
updates would be published in the next
update to FAA Order JO 7400.11. That
order is publicly available as listed in
the ADDRESSES section of this document.
FAA Order JO 7400.11J lists Class A,
B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic
service routes, and reporting points.
The Proposal
The FAA is proposing an amendment
to 14 CFR part 71 to establish RNAV
Routes T–492 and T–494 in the eastern
United States. This action supports
continued FAA NextGen efforts to
provide a modern RNAV route structure
that improves the efficiency of the NAS.
The proposed RNAV routes are
described below.
T–492: T–492 is a new RNAV route
proposed to extend between the FIINN,
FL, waypoint (WP) and the DEARY, FL,
Fix. The proposed route would provide
RNAV connectivity for aircraft operating
under instrument flight rules (IFR) to
transition between the east and west
sides of the Tampa International
Airport, FL, and would overlay VOR
Federal Airway V–441 between the
YOJIX, FL, Fix and the DEARY Fix.
T–494: T–494 is a new RNAV route
proposed to extend between the
SKWAD, FL, WP and the TWOON, FL,
WP. The proposed route would provide
RNAV connectivity for aircraft operating
under IFR to transition between the east
and west sides of the Orlando
International Airport, FL.
with FAA Order 1050.1F,
‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and
Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final
regulatory action.
Regulatory Notices and Analyses
The Proposed Amendment
The FAA has determined that this
proposed regulation only involves an
established body of technical
regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to
keep them operationally current. It,
therefore: (1) is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under Executive
Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant
rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February
26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant
preparation of a regulatory evaluation as
the anticipated impact is so minimal.
Since this is a routine matter that will
only affect air traffic procedures and air
navigation, it is certified that this
proposed rule, when promulgated, will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as
follows:
Environmental Review
This proposal will be subject to an
environmental analysis in accordance
T–492 FIINN, FL to DEARY, FL [New]
FIINN, FL
WP
PMPNO, FL
WP
WEZER, FL
WP
YOJIX, FL
FIX
ODDEL, FL
FIX
DEARY, FL
FIX
*
*
*
*
(Lat.
(Lat.
(Lat.
(Lat.
(Lat.
(Lat.
*
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 18,
2024.
Frank Lias,
Manager, Rules and Regulations Group.
[FR Doc. 2024–24589 Filed 10–23–24; 8:45 am]
long.
long.
long.
long.
long.
long.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R10–OAR–2024–0430: FRL–12243–
01–R10]
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
revision to the Washington State
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR
part 71 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103,
40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR,
1959–1963 Comp., p. 389.
§ 71.1
[Amended]
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order JO 7400.11J,
Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated July 31, 2024, and
effective September 15, 2024, is
amended as follows:
■
Paragraph 6011 United States Area
Navigation Routes.
*
*
082°46′57.63″
082°19′18.44″
082°02′39.60″
081°33′45.34″
081°10′10.24″
080°54′51.40″
*
*
*
W)
W)
W)
W)
W)
W)
(Lat. 28°25′45.51″ N, long. 081°27′23.25″ W)
(Lat. 28°25′45.46″ N, long. 081°08′54.93″ W)
Air Plan Approval; Washington;
Olympic Region Clean Air Agency,
Recreational Fires
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
N,
N,
N,
N,
N,
N,
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).
*
T–494 SKWAD, FL to TWOON, FL [New]
SKWAD, FL
WP
TWOON, FL
WP
*
27°58′36.45″
27°57′57.52″
28°02′26.59″
28°02′44.04″
28°05′45.51″
28°06′02.53″
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
16:25 Oct 23, 2024
Jkt 265001
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Implementation Plan (SIP) that was
submitted by the Department of Ecology
(Ecology) in coordination with the
Olympic Region Clean Air Agency
(ORCAA). In 2013, Ecology and ORCAA
inadvertently submitted for
incorporation into the SIP a ban on
small, recreational fires in Thurston
County. These fires are defined as
having a maximum pile size of three feet
in diameter by two feet high using
seasoned firewood or charcoal,
generally associated with backyard,
summer campfires. Ecology and ORCAA
provided a review of the historical
record to demonstrate that the ban on
recreational fires was not relied upon
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2024 / Proposed Rules
for attainment, maintenance, or
reasonable further progress in the
Thurston County area. Ecology and
ORCAA also provided data to
demonstrate that removing the ban on
recreational fires would not interfere
with maintenance of the national
ambient air quality standards.
Therefore, we are proposing to approve
the request by Ecology and ORCAA to
remove this provision from the SIP.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before November 25, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10–
OAR–2024–0430 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:
Table of Contents
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
I. Background for Proposed Action
A. Review of Attainment and Maintenance
Plan Control Requirements
B. Review of Particulate Matter Monitoring
Data
II. The EPA’s Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background for Proposed Action
A. Review of Attainment and
Maintenance Plan Control Requirements
On August 7, 1987, the EPA identified
a portion of Thurston County as a
‘‘Group I’’ area of concern due to
measured violations of the then-newly
promulgated 24-hour national ambient
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Oct 23, 2024
Jkt 265001
air quality standard (NAAQS) for
particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter less than or equal to a nominal
10 micrometers, referred to as PM10 (52
FR 29383). The Thurston County PM10
area consists of the adjoining cities of
Olympia, Lacey, and Tumwater,
Washington. Geographically, the area is
characterized by low rolling terrain with
hills rising higher toward its southern
and western boundaries. The
surrounding hills trap pollutants during
certain meteorological conditions
occurring in the late fall and winter,
called inversions, that create a shallow,
stagnant layer of air near ground level.
Studies at the time showed that
woodsmoke from residential home
heating contributed 80–95% of ambient
PM10 concentrations on the high
pollution days of concern. In response
to this problem in Thurston County and
other areas in the State, the Washington
Legislature adopted a comprehensive,
statewide residential wood heating
control program in 1987. Ecology
promulgated regulations to implement
the program under Washington
Administrative Code (WAC) 173–433
Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards,
establishing a curtailment program
regulating fireplace and woodstove
usage on high PM10 concentration days,
as well as other requirements related to
residential wood heating. This set of
regulations, and ORCAA’s
implementation and enforcement of the
regulations, formed the control
measures relied upon in the attainment
plan submitted in February 1989.
On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air
Act (CAA) Amendments under section
107(d)(4)(B), designated the Thurston
County Group I area as nonattainment
for PM10 by operation of law. To address
the additional moderate area
requirements imposed by the 1990 CAA
Amendments, Ecology submitted a
supplement to the attainment plan in
November 1991. However, the 1991
supplement to the attainment plan did
not alter the primary focus on
residential wood heating. The EPA took
final action to approve the entire plan
on July 27, 1993 (58 FR 40056).
Importantly, in our final action, we
clarified that the open burning ban for
the area, which includes the smaller
subset of recreational fires, was not
submitted for approval and was not
relied upon to demonstrate attainment
of the PM10 NAAQS.
The implementation of WAC 173–433
rapidly brought the area into attainment
by 1991. As PM10 levels in the area
steadily declined, the EPA redesignated
the Thurston County nonattainment
area to a maintenance area on October
4, 2000 (65 FR 59128). In addition to
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
84843
approving Ecology’s redesignation
request for the area, the EPA also
approved a maintenance plan. The
maintenance plan reaffirmed that the
residential wood heating program was
responsible for the permanent and
enforceable reductions and would
ensure continued compliance with the
PM10 NAAQS for ten years, without any
changes to the control measures already
in place.
On July 1, 2013, Ecology and ORCAA
submitted a limited maintenance plan to
fulfill the second 10-year planning
requirement of Clean Air Act section
175A(b) to ensure compliance through
2020. A limited maintenance plan is
used when monitored PM10
concentrations are very low relative to
the NAAQS, and the suite of control
measures that brought the area into
attainment remain in place. In this case,
the EPA promulgated a new 24-hour
NAAQS for particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal
to a nominal 2.5 micrometers, referred
to as PM2.5 (62 FR 38652, July 18, 1997).
The EPA subsequently revised the 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 micrograms
per cubic meter (mg/m3), while leaving
the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS unchanged at
150 mg/m3. Ecology and ORCAA
submitted a demonstration as part of the
2013 limited maintenance plan to show
that converting the existing residential
wood heating program from a focus on
PM10 to the new PM2.5 standard would
continue to protect the PM10 NAAQS.
The agencies provided an analysis of
PM10 and PM2.5 data collected by
collocated Federal reference monitors at
the Thurston County monitoring site,
finding that in the critical winter
season, the majority of PM10 was PM2.5.
The statistical relationship between the
two PM parameters indicated that PM2.5
levels would need to exceed 139 mg/m3
before the PM10 NAAQS was exceeded.
Therefore, the State determined that
conversion of the residential wood
heating program from a focus on the
PM10 NAAQS to the PM2.5 NAAQS
would increase the stringency and
effectiveness of the program. In
conjunction with this demonstration,
Ecology and ORCAA submitted revised
State and local regulations to reflect the
update to the PM2.5 NAAQS and wood
burning, generally. It was during this
update that Ecology and ORCAA
inadvertently submitted ORCAA
regulation 6.2.7(c) banning recreational
fires in the area, which was not a
control measure contained or relied
upon in the attainment or maintenance
plans. On October 3, 2013, EPA
approved ORCAA regulation 6.2.7(c)
into the ORCAA portion of the
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
84844
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2024 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Washington SIP as part of EPA’s
approval of the area’s second 10-year
PM10 limited maintenance plan (78 FR
61188).
B. Review of Particulate Matter
Monitoring Data
In addition to providing a historical
analysis that ORCAA regulation 6.2.7(c)
was not relied upon as part of the 1989
and 1991 attainment plans or the 1999
maintenance plan, ORCAA provided an
analysis of particulate matter
monitoring data to show that removing
the ban on recreational fires is highly
unlikely to affect compliance with the
PM10 or PM2.5 NAAQS in any
meaningful way.1 A graph of maximum
summer and winter concentrations in
Thurston County, calculated with the
EPA’s assistance and included in docket
for this action, shows two important
trends. The first trend is that,
historically, winter concentrations are
well above summer concentrations as
the season of concern. As noted by
ORCAA in the agency’s demonstration,
‘‘if we consider the usual backyard
social event with a BBQ and people
getting together and perhaps in the
evening sitting around a fire, those
generally happen in the warmer months
of the year which are opposite of the
wood stove season use.’’
Even if one does not accept that
assumption, the second trend shows the
diminishing PM10 concentrations in the
winter season, both in terms of
maximum and mean PM10
concentrations. The EPA attributes this
to two factors. The first is the
conversion of the residential wood
heating program to the more stringent
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS enshrined in the
Ecology and ORCAA regulations and
submitted as part of the 2013 limited
maintenance plan, which led to the
implementation of more stringent
thresholds for when wood stove use is
curtailed due to air quality conditions.
The second factor is the Ecology grant
program administered by ORCAA which
replaced uncertified wood burning
devices with certified devices and nonemitting devices such as heat pumps.
The EPA proposes to determine that
this significant decline in particulate
matter emissions over the years almost
certainly offsets any potential emissions
growth from allowing small,
recreational fires. Both graphs provided
1 As part of the 2013 limited maintenance plan,
the EPA approved use of PM2.5 monitoring data as
a surrogate for PM10. Thurston County does not
experience significant windblown dust events like
some eastern Washington maintenance areas,
therefore the statistical relationship between PM2.5
and PM10 can be relied upon with a high degree of
confidence in the Thurston area.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Oct 23, 2024
Jkt 265001
by ORCAA shows declining PM10
concentrations, especially during the
winter months when concentrations
tend to be highest. The first graph
representing ‘‘max’’ concentrations
indicates that recent levels are
consistently less than a third of the 150
mg/m3 PM10 NAAQS. Additionally, the
second graph representing ‘‘average’’
conditions indicates that the mean
concentrations for both summer and
winter are approximately 10 mg/m3, less
than a tenth of the 150 mg/m3 PM10
NAAQS. Given these extremely low
concentrations, the EPA proposes to
find that it is highly unlikely that
potential emissions growth from
removing the ban on recreational fires
could imperil compliance with the
NAAQS. Even if one were to take that
worst case scenario, the EPA notes that
ORCAA Rule 6.2.6 Curtailment remains
in the approved SIP and bans any form
of outdoor burning, including
recreational fires, on high concentration
days when a burn ban has been declared
by ORCAA.
II. The EPA’s Proposed Action
The EPA is proposing to approve
ORCAA regulation 6.2.7, State effective
March 6, 2023, and incorporate it by
reference into the Washington SIP at 40
CFR 52.2470(c)—Table 6—Additional
Regulations Approved for the Olympic
Region Clean Air Agency (ORCAA)
Jurisdiction. The effect of this action
would be to repeal paragraph (c) of
ORCAA regulation 6.2.7 which
historically banned recreational fires
within the city limits of Lacey, Olympia,
and Tumwater, and unincorporated
areas of Thurston County lying within
or between the municipal boundaries of
these cities. Based on the demonstration
provided by Ecology and ORCAA, we
propose to find that the revision will not
interfere with attainment of the national
ambient air quality standards or other
applicable requirements of the Clean Air
Act.
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, the EPA is
proposing to include in a final rule
regulatory text that includes the
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, the EPA is proposing to
incorporate by reference ORCAA
regulation 6.2.7, State effective March 6,
2023, as described in section II of this
preamble. The EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these documents
generally available through https://
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region 10 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
section of this
preamble for more information).
INFORMATION CONTACT
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Clean Air 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 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR
21879, April 11, 2023);
• 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 subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
because it approves a State program;
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001); and
• 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.
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 rulemaking 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).
Executive Order 12898 (Federal
Actions to Address Environmental
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
24OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2024 / Proposed Rules
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal
agencies to identify and address
‘‘disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects’’
of their actions on communities with
environmental justice (EJ) concerns to
the greatest extent practicable and
permitted by law. The EPA defines EJ as
‘‘the fair treatment and meaningful
involvement of all people regardless of
race, color, national origin, or income
with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of
environmental laws, regulations, and
policies.’’ The EPA further defines the
term fair treatment to mean that ‘‘no
group of people should bear a
disproportionate burden of
environmental harms and risks,
including those resulting from the
negative environmental consequences of
industrial, governmental, and
commercial operations or programs and
policies.’’
The Olympic Region Clean Air
Agency did not evaluate environmental
justice considerations as part of its SIP
submittal; the CAA and applicable
implementing regulations neither
prohibit nor require such an evaluation.
The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis
and did not consider EJ in this action.
Due to the nature of the action being
taken here, this action is expected to
have a neutral impact on the air quality
of the affected area. Consideration of EJ
is not required as part of this action, and
there is no information in the record
inconsistent with the stated goal of
Executive Order 12898 of achieving
environmental justice for communities
with EJ concerns.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 18, 2024.
Casey Sixkiller,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2024–24714 Filed 10–23–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:25 Oct 23, 2024
Jkt 265001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 213
[Docket No. FRA–2024–0032]
RIN 2130–AC96
Track Geometry Measurement System
(TGMS) Inspections
Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
FRA is proposing to revise its
regulations governing the minimum
safety requirements for railroad track.
The proposed changes would require all
Class I and II railroads, as well as
intercity passenger railroads and
commuter railroads, to operate a
qualifying Track Geometry
Measurement System (TGMS), a type of
automated track inspection (ATI)
technology, at specified frequencies on
all Class 1 through 5 mainline and
controlled siding track that transports:
annual tonnage greater than 10 million
gross tons (MGT); regularly scheduled
passenger rail service; or trains
containing hazardous materials. FRA
also proposes increasing the required
frequency of TGMS inspections on Class
6 track.
DATES: Written comments must be
received by December 23, 2024.
Comments received after that date will
be considered to the extent possible
without incurring additional expense or
delay.
ADDRESSES:
Comments: Comments related to
Docket No. FRA–2024–0032 may be
submitted by going to https://www.
regulations.gov and following the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the agency name, docket
number (FRA–2024–0032), and
Regulatory Identification Number (RIN)
for this rulemaking (2130–AC96). All
comments received will be posted
without change to https://www.
regulations.gov; this includes any
personal information. Please see the
Privacy Act heading in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document for Privacy Act
information related to any submitted
comments or materials.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and follow the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
84845
online instructions for accessing the
docket.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: YuJiang Zhang, Staff Director, Track and
Structures Division, Office of Railroad
Safety, Federal Railroad Administration,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, W33–302,
Washington, DC 20590, telephone: 202–
493–6460; or Aaron Moore, Senior
Attorney, Office of the Chief Counsel,
Federal Railroad Administration, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, W31–216,
Washington, DC 20590, telephone: 202–
853–4784.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Supplementary
Information
I. Executive Summary
II. Legal Authority
III. Background
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
V. Regulatory Impact and Notices
A. Executive Order 12866 as Amended by
Executive Order 14094
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive
Order 13272
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Federalism Implications
E. International Trade Impact Assessment
F. Environmental Impact
G. Executive Order 12898 (Environmental
Justice)
H. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
I. Energy Impact
J. Privacy Act Statement
K. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal
Consultation)
L. Rulemaking Summary, 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(4)
I. Executive Summary
Purpose of the Regulatory Action
ATI technologies have been evolving
since the 1970s and FRA has been
researching ATI technology, including
TGMS, for many years. This effort has
included multiple FRA-authored or
sponsored technical reports,1 as well as
1 See e.g., Autonomous Track Geometry
Measurement Technology Design, Development,
and Testing (2018), available at https://downloads.
regulations.gov/FRA-2020-0013-0003/attachment_
5.pdf; Evaluation of the Federal Railroad
Administration’s Autonomous Track Geometry
Measurement System Research and Development
Program (2016), available at https://railroads.dot.
gov/sites/fra.dot.gov/files/fra_net/17086/ATGMS%
20final%20report_final.pdf; FRA Autonomous
Track Geometry Measurement System Technology
Development—Past, Present, and Future (2014),
available at https://downloads.regulations.gov/
FRA-2020-0013-0003/attachment_1.pdf;
Development and Use of FRA Autonomous Track
Geometry Measurement System Technology (2014),
available at https://downloads.regulations.gov/
FRA-2020-0013-0003/attachment_3.pdf;
Development of Autonomous Track Geometry
Measurement Systems for Overall Track
Assessment (2011), available at https://downloads.
regulations.gov/FRA-2020-0013-0003/attachment_
4.pdf; Autonomous Track Inspection Systems—
Today and Tomorrow (2009), available at https://
E:\FR\FM\24OCP1.SGM
Continued
24OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 206 (Thursday, October 24, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 84842-84845]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-24714]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R10-OAR-2024-0430: FRL-12243-01-R10]
Air Plan Approval; Washington; Olympic Region Clean Air Agency,
Recreational Fires
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a revision to the Washington State Implementation Plan (SIP)
that was submitted by the Department of Ecology (Ecology) in
coordination with the Olympic Region Clean Air Agency (ORCAA). In 2013,
Ecology and ORCAA inadvertently submitted for incorporation into the
SIP a ban on small, recreational fires in Thurston County. These fires
are defined as having a maximum pile size of three feet in diameter by
two feet high using seasoned firewood or charcoal, generally associated
with backyard, summer campfires. Ecology and ORCAA provided a review of
the historical record to demonstrate that the ban on recreational fires
was not relied upon
[[Page 84843]]
for attainment, maintenance, or reasonable further progress in the
Thurston County area. Ecology and ORCAA also provided data to
demonstrate that removing the ban on recreational fires would not
interfere with maintenance of the national ambient air quality
standards. Therefore, we are proposing to approve the request by
Ecology and ORCAA to remove this provision from the SIP.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 25, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2024-0430 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:
Table of Contents
I. Background for Proposed Action
A. Review of Attainment and Maintenance Plan Control
Requirements
B. Review of Particulate Matter Monitoring Data
II. The EPA's Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background for Proposed Action
A. Review of Attainment and Maintenance Plan Control Requirements
On August 7, 1987, the EPA identified a portion of Thurston County
as a ``Group I'' area of concern due to measured violations of the
then-newly promulgated 24-hour national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS) for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than
or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers, referred to as PM10
(52 FR 29383). The Thurston County PM10 area consists of the
adjoining cities of Olympia, Lacey, and Tumwater, Washington.
Geographically, the area is characterized by low rolling terrain with
hills rising higher toward its southern and western boundaries. The
surrounding hills trap pollutants during certain meteorological
conditions occurring in the late fall and winter, called inversions,
that create a shallow, stagnant layer of air near ground level. Studies
at the time showed that woodsmoke from residential home heating
contributed 80-95% of ambient PM10 concentrations on the
high pollution days of concern. In response to this problem in Thurston
County and other areas in the State, the Washington Legislature adopted
a comprehensive, statewide residential wood heating control program in
1987. Ecology promulgated regulations to implement the program under
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-433 Solid Fuel Burning Device
Standards, establishing a curtailment program regulating fireplace and
woodstove usage on high PM10 concentration days, as well as
other requirements related to residential wood heating. This set of
regulations, and ORCAA's implementation and enforcement of the
regulations, formed the control measures relied upon in the attainment
plan submitted in February 1989.
On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments under
section 107(d)(4)(B), designated the Thurston County Group I area as
nonattainment for PM10 by operation of law. To address the
additional moderate area requirements imposed by the 1990 CAA
Amendments, Ecology submitted a supplement to the attainment plan in
November 1991. However, the 1991 supplement to the attainment plan did
not alter the primary focus on residential wood heating. The EPA took
final action to approve the entire plan on July 27, 1993 (58 FR 40056).
Importantly, in our final action, we clarified that the open burning
ban for the area, which includes the smaller subset of recreational
fires, was not submitted for approval and was not relied upon to
demonstrate attainment of the PM10 NAAQS.
The implementation of WAC 173-433 rapidly brought the area into
attainment by 1991. As PM10 levels in the area steadily
declined, the EPA redesignated the Thurston County nonattainment area
to a maintenance area on October 4, 2000 (65 FR 59128). In addition to
approving Ecology's redesignation request for the area, the EPA also
approved a maintenance plan. The maintenance plan reaffirmed that the
residential wood heating program was responsible for the permanent and
enforceable reductions and would ensure continued compliance with the
PM10 NAAQS for ten years, without any changes to the control
measures already in place.
On July 1, 2013, Ecology and ORCAA submitted a limited maintenance
plan to fulfill the second 10-year planning requirement of Clean Air
Act section 175A(b) to ensure compliance through 2020. A limited
maintenance plan is used when monitored PM10 concentrations
are very low relative to the NAAQS, and the suite of control measures
that brought the area into attainment remain in place. In this case,
the EPA promulgated a new 24-hour NAAQS for particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers,
referred to as PM2.5 (62 FR 38652, July 18, 1997). The EPA
subsequently revised the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS to 35
micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\), while leaving the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS unchanged at 150 [micro]g/m\3\. Ecology and ORCAA
submitted a demonstration as part of the 2013 limited maintenance plan
to show that converting the existing residential wood heating program
from a focus on PM10 to the new PM2.5 standard
would continue to protect the PM10 NAAQS. The agencies
provided an analysis of PM10 and PM2.5 data
collected by collocated Federal reference monitors at the Thurston
County monitoring site, finding that in the critical winter season, the
majority of PM10 was PM2.5. The statistical
relationship between the two PM parameters indicated that
PM2.5 levels would need to exceed 139 [micro]g/m\3\ before
the PM10 NAAQS was exceeded. Therefore, the State determined
that conversion of the residential wood heating program from a focus on
the PM10 NAAQS to the PM2.5 NAAQS would increase
the stringency and effectiveness of the program. In conjunction with
this demonstration, Ecology and ORCAA submitted revised State and local
regulations to reflect the update to the PM2.5 NAAQS and
wood burning, generally. It was during this update that Ecology and
ORCAA inadvertently submitted ORCAA regulation 6.2.7(c) banning
recreational fires in the area, which was not a control measure
contained or relied upon in the attainment or maintenance plans. On
October 3, 2013, EPA approved ORCAA regulation 6.2.7(c) into the ORCAA
portion of the
[[Page 84844]]
Washington SIP as part of EPA's approval of the area's second 10-year
PM10 limited maintenance plan (78 FR 61188).
B. Review of Particulate Matter Monitoring Data
In addition to providing a historical analysis that ORCAA
regulation 6.2.7(c) was not relied upon as part of the 1989 and 1991
attainment plans or the 1999 maintenance plan, ORCAA provided an
analysis of particulate matter monitoring data to show that removing
the ban on recreational fires is highly unlikely to affect compliance
with the PM10 or PM2.5 NAAQS in any meaningful
way.\1\ A graph of maximum summer and winter concentrations in Thurston
County, calculated with the EPA's assistance and included in docket for
this action, shows two important trends. The first trend is that,
historically, winter concentrations are well above summer
concentrations as the season of concern. As noted by ORCAA in the
agency's demonstration, ``if we consider the usual backyard social
event with a BBQ and people getting together and perhaps in the evening
sitting around a fire, those generally happen in the warmer months of
the year which are opposite of the wood stove season use.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As part of the 2013 limited maintenance plan, the EPA
approved use of PM2.5 monitoring data as a surrogate for
PM10. Thurston County does not experience significant
windblown dust events like some eastern Washington maintenance
areas, therefore the statistical relationship between
PM2.5 and PM10 can be relied upon with a high
degree of confidence in the Thurston area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even if one does not accept that assumption, the second trend shows
the diminishing PM10 concentrations in the winter season,
both in terms of maximum and mean PM10 concentrations. The
EPA attributes this to two factors. The first is the conversion of the
residential wood heating program to the more stringent 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS enshrined in the Ecology and ORCAA regulations
and submitted as part of the 2013 limited maintenance plan, which led
to the implementation of more stringent thresholds for when wood stove
use is curtailed due to air quality conditions. The second factor is
the Ecology grant program administered by ORCAA which replaced
uncertified wood burning devices with certified devices and non-
emitting devices such as heat pumps.
The EPA proposes to determine that this significant decline in
particulate matter emissions over the years almost certainly offsets
any potential emissions growth from allowing small, recreational fires.
Both graphs provided by ORCAA shows declining PM10
concentrations, especially during the winter months when concentrations
tend to be highest. The first graph representing ``max'' concentrations
indicates that recent levels are consistently less than a third of the
150 [micro]g/m\3\ PM10 NAAQS. Additionally, the second graph
representing ``average'' conditions indicates that the mean
concentrations for both summer and winter are approximately 10
[micro]g/m\3\, less than a tenth of the 150 [micro]g/m\3\
PM10 NAAQS. Given these extremely low concentrations, the
EPA proposes to find that it is highly unlikely that potential
emissions growth from removing the ban on recreational fires could
imperil compliance with the NAAQS. Even if one were to take that worst
case scenario, the EPA notes that ORCAA Rule 6.2.6 Curtailment remains
in the approved SIP and bans any form of outdoor burning, including
recreational fires, on high concentration days when a burn ban has been
declared by ORCAA.
II. The EPA's Proposed Action
The EPA is proposing to approve ORCAA regulation 6.2.7, State
effective March 6, 2023, and incorporate it by reference into the
Washington SIP at 40 CFR 52.2470(c)--Table 6--Additional Regulations
Approved for the Olympic Region Clean Air Agency (ORCAA) Jurisdiction.
The effect of this action would be to repeal paragraph (c) of ORCAA
regulation 6.2.7 which historically banned recreational fires within
the city limits of Lacey, Olympia, and Tumwater, and unincorporated
areas of Thurston County lying within or between the municipal
boundaries of these cities. Based on the demonstration provided by
Ecology and ORCAA, we propose to find that the revision will not
interfere with attainment of the national ambient air quality standards
or other applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act.
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, the EPA is proposing to include in a final rule
regulatory text that includes the incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to
incorporate by reference ORCAA regulation 6.2.7, State effective March
6, 2023, as described in section II of this preamble. The EPA has made,
and will continue to make, these documents generally available through
https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 10 Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this preamble for more information).
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Clean Air 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 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 Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023);
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 subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it approves a State program;
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
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.
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 rulemaking 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).
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental
[[Page 84845]]
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on communities with environmental justice
(EJ) concerns to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
The EPA defines EJ as ``the fair treatment and meaningful involvement
of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income
with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of
environmental laws, regulations, and policies.'' The EPA further
defines the term fair treatment to mean that ``no group of people
should bear a disproportionate burden of environmental harms and risks,
including those resulting from the negative environmental consequences
of industrial, governmental, and commercial operations or programs and
policies.''
The Olympic Region Clean Air Agency did not evaluate environmental
justice considerations as part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and
applicable implementing regulations neither prohibit nor require such
an evaluation. The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and did not
consider EJ in this action. Due to the nature of the action being taken
here, this action is expected to have a neutral impact on the air
quality of the affected area. Consideration of EJ is not required as
part of this action, and there is no information in the record
inconsistent with the stated goal of Executive Order 12898 of achieving
environmental justice for communities with EJ concerns.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 18, 2024.
Casey Sixkiller,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2024-24714 Filed 10-23-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P