[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 103 (Wednesday, May 29, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32131-32135]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12514]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R10-OAR-2012-0712; FRL-9817-1]
Revision to the Washington State Implementation Plan; Tacoma-
Pierce County Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) dated
November 28, 2012. The EPA's final rulemaking approves two revisions to
the SIP. First, the EPA is approving the ``2008 Baseline Emissions
Inventory and Documentation'' included as Appendix A to the SIP
revision. The emissions inventory was submitted to meet Clean Air Act
(CAA) requirements related to the Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment
area for the 2006 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) National
Ambient Air Quality Standard
[[Page 32132]]
(NAAQS). Second, the EPA is approving updated rules submitted by
Ecology on behalf of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA),
contained in Appendix B, ``SIP Strengthening Rules.'' The updated PSCAA
rules help implement the recommendations of the Tacoma-Pierce County
Clean Air Task Force, an advisory committee of community leaders,
citizen representatives, public health advocates, and other affected
parties, formed to develop PM2.5 reduction strategies.
DATES: This final rule is effective June 28, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this Action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R10-OAR-2012-0712. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Programs Unit, Office of Air Waste and Toxics, EPA
Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA, 98101. EPA requests that if
at all possible, you contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You
may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m.
to 4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Hunt at telephone number: (206)
553-0256, email address: [email protected], or the above EPA, Region 10
address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain
words or initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials ``Act'' or ``CAA'' mean or refer to the
Clean Air Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The words ``EPA'', ``we'', ``us'' or our mean or refer to the
United States Environmental Protection Agency.
(iii) The initials ``SIP'' mean or refer to State Implementation
Plan.
(iv) The words ``Washington'' and ``State'' mean the State of
Washington.
Table of Contents
I. Background Information
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review
I. Background Information
Detailed information on the history of the PM2.5 NAAQS
as it relates to the Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment area is
included in the EPA's proposal for this action (78 FR 4804, January 23,
2013). As discussed in the proposal, on September 4, 2012, the EPA
published a final ``clean data'' determination of attainment, based
upon complete certified ambient air monitoring data showing that the
Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment area met the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS for the 2009-2011 monitoring period (77 FR 53772). Since the
determination, monitored PM2.5 levels continue to decline in
the Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment area. Monitoring data for 2010-
2012 show a preliminary design value of 28 [micro]g/m\3\.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A design value is a three year average used to determine
compliance with the 2006 PM2.5 24-hour NAAQS of 35
[micro]g/m\3\. Final design values generally are certified in June
or July after a complete quality assurance and quality control
process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The clean data determination suspended the obligation for the State
of Washington to submit an attainment demonstration, associated
reasonably available control measures, a reasonable further progress
plan, contingency measures, and other SIP revisions related to
attainment of the standard for so long as the nonattainment area
continues to meet the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. However, a clean
data determination does not suspend the obligation under CAA section
172(c)(3) for submission and approval of a comprehensive, accurate, and
current inventory of actual emissions. Accordingly, Ecology submitted
Appendix A, titled ``2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory and
Documentation,'' of its November 28, 2012, SIP revision to meet the
emissions inventory obligation under CAA section 172(c)(3). Ecology
also submitted Appendix B of the SIP revision, titled ``SIP
Strengthening Rules,'' which contained the most recent version of
Regulation 1--Article 13: Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards, adopted
by the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Board on October 25, 2012, imposing
more stringent standards to control PM2.5 emissions from
wood smoke. The EPA proposed to approve both Appendix A and Appendix B
of Washington's November 28, 2012, SIP revision consistent with
sections 110 and 172 of the CAA.
II. Response to Comments
The EPA received no comment on its proposed approval of Appendix B.
On February 22, 2013, EPA received one comment on its proposed approval
of Appendix A. This comment, submitted by Mr. Robert Ukeiley on behalf
of Sierra Club, focused on the potential impact of coal export
terminals proposed for the Pacific Northwest. The commenter wrote that
Ecology's 2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory does not sufficiently
address potential impacts as they relate to current or future shipments
of coal via rail through the Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment area.
The EPA is responding to this comment in two parts: (1) Comment on
Fugitive Coal Dust Emissions; and (2) Comment on Railroad Emission
Calculations.
A. Comment on Fugitive Coal Dust Emissions
Comment: The commenter wrote that Ecology's 2008 Baseline Emissions
Inventory does not meet the CAA section 172(c)(3) requirement which
states that, ``[s]uch plan provisions shall include a comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the
relevant pollutant or pollutants in such area, including such periodic
revisions as the Administrator may determine necessary to assure the
requirements of this part are met.'' Specifically, the commenter wrote
that the 2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory is not comprehensive because
it did not account for fugitive coal dust emissions from coal trains
that may have transited through the nonattainment area. The commenter
also requests that ``[i]f the current fugitive coal dust emissions are
zero because there are no coal trains traveling through the Tacoma
nonattainment area, then the inventory should say that.''
Response: As noted in the proposal for this action, the EPA
referred to the August 2005 ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for
Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter NAAQS and Regional Haze
Regulations'' (hereafter ``emissions inventory guidance'' or
``guidance''), to assess the adequacy of Washington's submission. The
guidance covers several elements related to this comment. First, the
mobile source section in the guidance contains no discussion or
requirement for calculating fugitive dust from locomotive payloads.
Instead, fugitive dust emissions from all source categories are
discussed in section 5.4 of the guidance addressing nonpoint sources.
The guidance states, ``[n]onpoint sources are generally described as
those sources that are too small, numerous, or difficult to be
inventoried individually. Potential nonpoint sources of emissions are
given
[[Page 32133]]
in Table 5.4-1 and potential crustal (dust) sources of PM emissions are
in Table 5.4-2. These tables are presented as guides to assist State,
local and Tribal agencies in focusing their nonpoint source emission
inventory efforts.'' The guidance goes on to state, ``[t]he State,
local and Tribal agencies may want to concentrate their efforts on the
most significant source categories.'' The guidance acknowledges that
States cannot individually inventory all nonpoint source emissions, but
should use the best available data to inform which nonpoint source
categories to focus on in creating a comprehensive and accurate
inventory of actual emissions.
As part of the effort to focus on the most significant source
categories, Ecology conducted extensive speciation analysis included in
the docket for the EPA's proposed action, see Sources of Fine Particles
in the Wapato Hills-Puyallup River Valley PM2.5 Nonattainment Area (the
name formerly used for the Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment area),
April 2010. Speciation analysis, also called receptor modeling or
source apportionment, is a method of using chemical signatures from
monitoring samples to determine both the types of emission sources
impacting a monitor and the magnitude of those source impacts. The
study examined monitoring samples from 2006 to 2009 and used chemical
signature information to identify the relevant emission sources.
Ecology determined that 4% of PM2.5 annually in the Tacoma-
Pierce County nonattainment area originated from the combination of all
fugitive dust sources. To put this number in perspective, the
contribution from fugitive dust was only slightly greater than the
PM2.5 contribution from sea salt. The percent contribution
from fugitive dust was also found to be the lowest during winter months
when violations of the 2006 PM2.5 standard occur. From an
analysis of fugitive dust impacts and wind direction, Ecology concluded
that the majority of the PM2.5 related fugitive dust was
likely re-suspended dust from on-road motor vehicle traffic and
fugitive emissions from a gravel operation near the monitoring site.
Ecology's speciation analysis for the one violating Tacoma monitor on
South L Street concluded by stating, ``[f]ugitive dust was poorly
correlated with total PM2.5 mass (r2 = 0.19) indicating that
its influence on the measured total mass was not significant.''
As described above, the 2005 emissions inventory guidance
recognizes that agencies may need to concentrate their efforts on the
most significant source categories, and the closely related regulations
at 40 CFR 51.20 for reporting under the National Emissions Inventory
(NEI) also state, ``[n]onpoint source categories or emission events
reasonably estimated by the State to represent a de minimis percentage
of total county and State emissions of a given pollutant may be
omitted.'' Based on Ecology's analysis of fugitive dust impacts on 2006
PM2.5 concentrations in the area, the EPA agrees with
Ecology that fugitive dust emissions from railroad transport of coal do
not constitute a significant source category for the 2008 Baseline
Emissions Inventory. To the extent that the commenter raises issues
related to coal export proposals that may impact the Tacoma-Pierce
County nonattainment area in the future, or to the calculation of
changes to the emission sources after 2008, the EPA has determined that
these questions are beyond the scope of the 2008 Baseline Emissions
Inventory. The inventory required under section 172(c)(3) does not
require submission or assessment of future emissions.
The EPA also concludes that the 2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory
accurately represents the emission sources that led to the EPA's
nonattainment designation for Tacoma-Pierce County in 2009. In
particular, the inventory informed and helped support development of
the residential wood smoke control measures approved in this action. In
2008, residential wood combustion represented 74% of all emissions
during the critical winter season, well above all other emission
sources. To the extent that the mix of emission sources may change over
time from the 2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory, the EPA believes these
changes are best addressed as part of the maintenance plan inventory
process to ensure continued compliance with the NAAQS, or as part of
the attainment planning requirements that would become applicable
should the area not continue in attainment. In response to the concerns
raised by the commenter, the EPA independently analyzed publicly
available data from the speciation monitor and found no evidence of
increasing fugitive dust trends from 2008 to 2011. See Tacoma PMF Soil
Results, included in the docket for this action. As noted previously,
monitored PM2.5 levels in the nonattainment area continue to
decline below the level of the NAAQS. For the reasons stated above, the
EPA has determined that Ecology's 2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory is
consistent with applicable guidance and satisfies the requirement of
CAA section 172(c)(3).
B. Comment on Railroad Emission Calculations
Comment: The commenter notes that Ecology's 2008 Baseline Emissions
Inventory submission includes only a summary of emissions from railroad
locomotive diesel consumption, without the corresponding background
information used to calculate the estimates. The commenter states that
the background information is necessary for both public understanding
and for future conformity obligations under the CAA.
Response: Since emission control measures for railroad locomotive
traffic are generally formulated and managed at the federal level, it
is understandable that the State SIP submission would include summary
data rather than a more elaborate discussion of underlying data.
Ecology did include an extensive explanation of the underlying data for
the predominant source categories, such as residential wood combustion,
which comprises 74% of the winter time inventory. By contrast,
emissions from all nonroad vehicles and engines, including railroad
locomotives, account for only 5% of wintertime inventory. Moreover,
although Ecology included only summary results for railroad emissions,
it clearly referenced the documentation used in calculating the final
railroad diesel emissions, listed as endnotes 26, 27, and 28 in the
2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory SIP submission. These documents were
available from Ecology and the EPA during the comment period, and
remain available for public review. Neither the EPA nor Ecology has
received a request for these documents. For the convenience of the
reader these background documents have been added to the docket for
this action.
The comment only questions the level of detail in the discussion of
the locomotive emission calculations and states that a comprehensive
and accurate emissions inventory must provide figures of gallons of
diesel consumed and emission factors or other calculations used in the
emissions estimates. The availability of the additional detail
requested by the comment is described above. Specifically, the emission
factors were based on standard EPA emission factors for locomotives and
fuel consumption data was provided by the rail freight carriers
operating in the area. As the comment notes, these data are part of the
comprehensive and accurate emissions inventory required by section
172(c)(3), and were appropriately relied upon by Ecology to calculate
diesel emissions from locomotives. The EPA
[[Page 32134]]
independently calculated the locomotive emissions estimates based on
the information referenced in endnotes 26, 27, and 28 of the State's
emissions inventory SIP submission, and obtained results that were
consistent with the State's (see EPA review of emission
calculations.xlsx).
To the extent that the commenter raises issues related to future
conformity determinations or potential coal export proposals that may
impact the Tacoma-Pierce County nonattainment area in the future, or to
the calculation of changes to the emission sources after 2008, the EPA
has determined that these questions are beyond the scope of the 2008
Baseline Emissions Inventory and the requirements of section 172(c)(3).
III. Final Action
The EPA has determined that Washington's SIP revisions, dated
November 28, 2012, are consistent with sections 110 and 172 of the CAA.
Therefore, we are approving the SIP revisions, specifically Appendix A,
``2008 Baseline Emissions Inventory and Documentation'' and Appendix B,
``SIP Strengthening Rules.''
IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
rule neither imposes substantial direct compliance costs on tribal
governments, nor preempts tribal law. Therefore, the requirements of
section 5(b) and 5(c) of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.
Consistent with EPA policy, the EPA nonetheless provided a consultation
opportunity to the Puyallup Tribe in a letter dated December 11, 2012.
The EPA did not receive a request for consultation.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by July 29, 2013. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Visibility, and Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: May 13, 2013.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart WW--Washington
0
2. Section 52.2470 is amended:
0
a. In paragraph (c) Table 4 by revising entries 13.01 through 13.05,
adding in numerical order entry 13.06, and revising entry 13.07.
0
b. In paragraph (e) by adding a heading for ``Recently Approved Plans''
and a new entry for ``Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 2008
Baseline Emissions Inventory and SIP Strengthening Rules'' at the end
of the table.
Sec. 52.2470 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
* * * * *
[[Page 32135]]
Table 4--Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State adopted
State citation Title/subject date EPA approval date Explanations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regulation 1--Article 13: Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13.01............................ Policy and Purpose. 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
page number where
the document
begins].
13.02............................ Definitions........ 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
page number where
the document
begins].
13.03............................ Opacity Standards.. 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
page number where
the document
begins].
13.04............................ Allowed and 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
Prohibited Fuel page number where
Types. the document
begins].
13.05............................ Restrictions on 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
Operation of Solid page number where
Fuel Burning the document
Devices. begins].
13.06............................ Emission 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
Performance page number where
Standards. the document
begins].
13.07............................ Prohibitions on 10/25/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
Wood Stoves that page number where
are not Certified the document
Wood Stoves. begins].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(e) * * *
State of Washington Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable
Name of SIP provision geographic or State submittal EPA approval date Comments
nonattainment area date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently Approved Plans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 2008 Tacoma, Pierce 11/28/12 5/29/13 [Insert ...................
Baseline Emissions Inventory County. page number where
and SIP Strengthening Rules. the document
begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2013-12514 Filed 5-28-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P