[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 248 (Thursday, December 26, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 78315-78318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30857]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R10-OAR-2013-0002; FRL-9904-53-Region 10]
Revision to the Idaho State Implementation Plan; Approval of Fine
Particulate Matter Control Measures; Franklin County
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On December 14, 2012, the Idaho Department of Environmental
Quality (IDEQ) submitted a revision to the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) to address Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements for the Idaho portion
(hereafter referred to as ``Franklin County'') of the cross border
Logan, Utah-Idaho fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
nonattainment area (Logan UT-ID). The EPA is proposing a limited
approval of PM2.5 control measures contained in the December
2012 submittal because incorporation of these measures would strengthen
the Idaho SIP and reduce sources of PM2.5 emissions in
Franklin County that contribute to violations of the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in the Logan UT-ID nonattainment area.
Consequently, the EPA is not acting on the entire contents of the
December 2012 SIP submission revision at this time.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before January 27, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2013-0002, by any of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Email: [email protected].
Mail: Jeff Hunt, EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste and
Toxics (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101.
Hand Delivery/Courier: EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. Attention: Jeff Hunt, Office of Air,
Waste and Toxics, AWT-107. Such deliveries are only accepted during
normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-
2013-0002. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the
disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit information
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means the EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with
any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment due
to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the
EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should
avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be
free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., 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. Publicly available
docket materials are available either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Seattle WA, 98101.
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: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA.
The following outline is provided to aid in locating information in
this preamble.
I. Background
II. Description of the Franklin County PM2.5 Control
Measures
III. Proposed Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
[[Page 78316]]
I. Background
The 2006 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS), set forth at 40 CFR 50.13, effective December 18, 2006,
include 24-hour standards of 35 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\)
based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations (71 FR 61144, Oct. 17, 2006). Effective December 14,
2009, the EPA designated the Logan UT-ID area (cross state, partial
county designation) as a nonattainment area for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 standards (74 FR 58688, Nov. 13, 2009). The EPA
included a portion of Franklin County, Idaho within the Logan UT-ID
nonattainment area because emissions from sources in Idaho contribute
to violations of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the Logan,
UT-ID area as a whole.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Technical Support for State and Tribal Air Quality 24-Hour
Fine Particulate (PM2.5) Designations, Sections 4.8.2 and
4.10.2 (Dec. 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In March 2012, the EPA issued guidance to states for implementation
of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (March 2012 Implementation
Guidance).\2\ In this guidance, the EPA recommended that states submit
SIP revisions to meet the nonattainment area planning requirements of
the CAA within three years of the effective date of the nonattainment
area designation. The EPA also recommended in the guidance that states
make submissions for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS consistent with
the substantive requirements of 40 CFR part 51, subpart Z (Provisions
for Implementation of PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards, 40 CFR 51.1000 et seq.). Accordingly, in December 2012, IDEQ
submitted a SIP revision intended to address the nonattainment planning
requirements for the Franklin County portion of the Logan UT-ID
nonattainment area (also referred to as ``Cache Valley'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Implementation Guidance for
the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate (PM2.5) National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (Mar. 2, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 4, 2013, however, the Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia remanded to the EPA the ``Final Clean Air Fine Particle
Implementation Rule'' which forms the basis of the 40 CFR part 51,
subpart Z nonattainment planning requirements in Natural Resources
Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). The Court
concluded that the EPA had improperly based the implementation rule for
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS solely upon the requirements of part D,
subpart 1 of the CAA, and had failed to address the requirements of
part D, subpart 4. As a result of the Court's decision with respect to
the statutory implementation requirements for PM2.5
nonattainment areas the EPA withdrew its March 2012 Implementation
Guidance because it was based largely on the remanded rule promulgated
to implement the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.\3\ The EPA is currently
engaged in rulemaking to address the remand from the Court. In the
interim, however, the EPA believes that it may still be appropriate to
take certain actions on SIP submissions from states intended to address
nonattainment planning requirements for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Withdrawal of
Implementation Guidance for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (Jun. 6,
2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IDEQ's December 2012 SIP submission presented the state's
evaluation of the PM2.5 nonattainment problem in the area.
IDEQ explained that the Franklin County portion of the overall Logan
UT-ID nonattainment area is rural and sparsely populated, containing
only 10% of the overall Logan UT-ID nonattainment population base.
Franklin County contains no major point sources of PM2.5 or
PM2.5 precursors, defined by IDEQ for purposes of this SIP
revision as a facility with the potential to emit annual emissions of
100 tons or more. Additionally, IDEQ stated that Franklin County
accounts for roughly one-tenth of the overall mobile source emissions
from cars and trucks and generally small area source contributions in
the Logan UT-ID nonattainment area. Because the majority of emission
sources impacting the nonattainment area are located outside Franklin
County, IDEQ's December 2012 SIP submittal acknowledged that control
measures either already promulgated or required as part of the Utah SIP
are necessary to demonstrate attainment for the entire Logan UT-ID
area.
As part of its December 2012 submission, IDEQ included a modeled
attainment test conducted by the Utah Department of Environmental
Quality Division of Air Quality (UDAQ). This modeled attainment test
predicted the Logan UT-ID area would attain by the end of 2014 based
solely on control measures adopted in the Utah portion of the area,
with the Idaho controls providing additional reductions. Because the
Idaho submission relies on the Utah control measures in demonstrating
attainment, however, the EPA must also complete a comprehensive review
of Utah's SIP submission for the Logan UT-ID area before the EPA can
act on the entire SIP submission for the Franklin County portion of the
area. Moreover, the EPA's evaluation of the SIP submissions from both
states would need to include the emissions inventory, approach to
PM2.5 precursors, analysis and adoption of reasonably
available control measures and reasonably available control technology
(RACM and RACT), reasonable further progress (RFP) and quantitative
milestones, contingency measures, and the attainment demonstration. The
EPA will need to evaluate these submissions against the statutory
requirements of part D, subpart 4.
In light of the court's decision in Natural Resources Defense
Council v. EPA, and the need to evaluate the IDEQ submission in
conjunction with the SIP submission for the Utah portion of the Logan
UT-ID nonattainment area, the EPA is not at this time making a
determination whether IDEQ's December 2012 SIP submission satisfies all
of the statutory nonattainment planning requirements for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS. Instead, the EPA's proposed action on IDEQ's
December 2012 SIP revision is limited to approving specific control
measures included in the submission that are expected to strengthen the
SIP. These measures independently meet requirements for control
measures in attainment plans and the emissions reductions they achieve
will contribute to attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in the
Logan UT-ID area. Despite the limited nature of this proposed approval,
the EPA believes that approval and incorporation of the control
measures in the December 2012 SIP submission strengthen the Idaho SIP
and provide important PM2.5 emission reductions.
II. Description of the Franklin County PM2.5 Control
Measures
IDEQ, in close coordination with UDAQ, completed an emissions
inventory for directly emitted PM2.5 (primary
PM2.5) and the PM2.5 precursors sulfur dioxide
(SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX), volatile organic
compounds (VOC), and ammonia. An analysis of the baseline year
emissions inventory indicated that sources in Franklin County
contribute about one-fifth of the overall area primary PM2.5
emissions during wintertime episodes when the area is most likely to
violate the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The important source
categories identified for this contribution of primary PM2.5
consist of 70% reintrained dust from winter road sanding, 14%
residential wood burning emissions, and 6% mobile source primary
PM2.5 emissions.
[[Page 78317]]
It is important to note that the EPA is not in this action evaluating
whether IDEQ's or UDAQ's evaluation of which PM2.5
precursors should be controlled within Franklin County, or within the
entire Logan UT-ID area, is correct and consistent with the statutory
requirements of part D, subpart 4. Nevertheless, the EPA agrees with
IDEQ's determination that control of direct PM2.5 emissions
in this area is a necessary and appropriate step that will contribute
to attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in this area.
To reduce the contribution of primary PM2.5 from
reentrained dust on paved roads, IDEQ entered into road sanding
agreements with Franklin County Road and Bridge and the Idaho
Transportation Department as part of the SIP. The Franklin County Road
and Bridge agreement reduces the amount of sand used on paved roads by
substituting a brine solution when appropriate. For those times when
antiskid treatment is required, Franklin County Road and Bridge agreed
to use a 4-to-1 sand to salt ratio instead of the 10-to-1 ratio used in
past years. Similarly, the Idaho Transportation Department agreed to
use straight salt and liquid salt brine throughout Franklin County,
except for occasional extenuating circumstances that warrant additional
anti-skid materials. IDEQ used the EPA's AP-42 road dust emission
estimation methodology in calculating future PM2.5
reductions and found that the road sanding agreements would reduce
primary PM2.5 emissions from 0.47 tons per day in an
uncontrolled scenario to 0.37 tons per day by 2014, for a typical
winter weekday. Although the road sanding agreements are expected to
reduce emissions of PM2.5, they are not directly
enforceable. However, the road sanding agreements are similar to
agreements previously approved by the EPA as voluntary measures in the
Idaho SIP (70 FR 29247), and consistently implemented by the relevant
state, county and municipal governments. Accordingly, the EPA is
proposing to approve the road sanding agreements as voluntary measures
in accordance with existing guidance.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Incorporating Emerging and Voluntary Measures in a State
Implementation Plan (Sept. 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IDEQ also worked with local jurisdictions in Franklin County to
establish residential woodstove ordinances to control primary
PM2.5 and VOC emissions from non-EPA certified devices
during mandatory burn ban days. IDEQ's Air Quality Index (AQI) program
supports the local jurisdictions by calling mandatory burn bans for
uncertified woodstoves when PM2.5 concentration levels are
at or forecasted to reach 25.4 [mu]g/m\3\. The ordinances also ban open
burning of any kind during burn ban days. Lastly, the ordinances
prohibit the sale or installation of non-EPA certified devices in new
or existing buildings, and prohibit the construction of any building
for which a solid fuel burning device is the sole source of heat.
Because the residential woodstove burn ban program for Franklin County
was newly launched in the 2012-2013 heating season, to estimate the
PM2.5 reductions are difficult and were not included in the
emission reduction modeling runs. Lastly, IDEQ conducted two woodstove
change-out programs in 2006 and 2011 replacing a total of 152
uncertified residential wood combustion devices in Franklin County. In
developing the emissions inventory for Franklin County, IDEQ calculated
an estimated 5.78 tons per year of primary PM2.5 emissions
reductions from these change-out programs. The recently enacted
woodstove ordinances prohibit the sale or installation of uncertified
devices which will help to assure that the 2006, 2011, and any future
change-out programs will continue to provide lasting emissions
reductions benefits over time.
Table 1--Franklin County PM2.5 Control Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title State or local effective date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter of Intent PM2.5 Reduction, July 16, 2012.
Franklin County Road Department
to Department of Environmental
Quality (Voluntary Measure).
Road Sanding Agreement, Idaho October 25, 2012.
Transportation Department to
Idaho Department of Environmental
Quality (Voluntary Measure).
Ordinance No. 120, City of August 11, 2012.
Clifton, Idaho.
Ordinance No. 287, City of Dayton, August 8, 2012.
Idaho.
Franklin City Ordinance, Solid September 12, 2012.
Fuel Heating Appliances, No. 2012-
9-12.
Franklin County Ordinance, Solid June 25, 2012.
Fuel Heating Appliances, No. 2012-
6-25.
Memorandum of Understanding, Solid October 22, 2012.
Fuel Heating Appliances, City of
Oxford, Idaho.
Ordinance No. 2012-1, City of June 11, 2012.
Preston, Idaho.
Ordinance No. 2012-01, City of August 1, 2012.
Weston, Idaho.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Proposed Action
The EPA proposes to approve and incorporate into the SIP the
specific control measures submitted by IDEQ on December 14, 2012. These
control measures are listed in Table 1 and full copies are included in
Appendix E of Idaho's SIP revision and in the docket for this proposed
action. If finally approved by the EPA, these specific control measures
will become part of the Idaho SIP for purposes of the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS. As described above, at this time the EPA is not
making a determination that these control measures satisfy RACM or any
other statutory nonattainment area planning requirements under part D,
subpart 4. However, the control measures adopted by IDEQ in the
Franklin County portion of the Logan UT-ID area provide important
PM2.5 reductions that strengthen the existing Idaho SIP. Due
to the cross-state nature of the Logan UT-ID nonattainment area, the
EPA will act on the remainder of Idaho's December 2012 SIP submission
following a complete review of the corresponding Utah SIP submission.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA 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 CAA. Accordingly, this
action
[[Page 78318]]
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 proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; 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).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and the EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 13, 2013.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Adminstrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2013-30857 Filed 12-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P