43084 Federal Register I Vol. 58, No. 155 I Friday. August 13, 1993 I Rules and Regulations 

(lAC) 6-1-12 as amended, effective 

January 13, 1990. 

IFR Doc. 93-19495 Filed 8-12-93; 8:45 ami 

BILUNG CODE ~ 

40 CFR Part 52 

{AK2-1-6480; AD-FRL-4666-3) 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Implementation Plans; Alaska 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA proposes approval of the 

state implementation plan (SIP) 

submitted by the State of Alaska 

Department of Environmental 

Conservation (ADEC) for the purpose of 

bringing about the attainment of the 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS) for particulate matter with an 

aerodynamic diameter less than or equal 

ton nominal10 micrometers (PM111). 

The implementation plan was submitted 

by ADEC on October 15, 1991, to satisfy 

certain federal. Clean Air Act 

requirements for an approvable 

moderate PM10 nonattainment area SIP 

for Eagle River, Alaska. This action to 

approve this plan has the effect of 

making requirements adopted by the 

ADEC federally enforceable by EPA. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 12, 1993. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the materials 

submitted to EPA may be examined 

during normal business hours at: Public 

Information Reference Unit, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 401 

M Street, SW., Washington, DC 20460; 

Environmental Protection Agency, Air 

Programs Branch, Docket# AK2-1-

5480, 1200 Sixth Avenue, AT4J82, 

Seattle, Washington 98101; Alaska 

Department of Environmental 

Conservation, 410 Willoughby, Suite 

105, Juneau, Alaska 99801-1795. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christi Lee, Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Sixth Avenu·e, AT-082, 

Seattle, Washington 98101, Telephone: 

206/553-6510. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Eagle River, Alaska area was 

designated nonattainment for PM to and 

classified as moderate under sections 

107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) of the Clean Air 

Act, upon enactment of the Clean Air 

Act Amendments of 1990.1 See 56 FR 

• The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act 

made significant changes to the Act. See Pub. L. 

101-549, 104 Stat. Z399. References herein are to 

the Clean Air Act, as amended ("the Act"). The 

56694 (November 6, 1991). The air 

quality planning requirements for 

moderate PM10 nonattainment areas are 

set out in subparts 1 and 4 of part D, 

title I of the Act.z EPA has issued a 

"General Preamble" describing EPA's 

preliminary views on how EPA intends 

to review SIP's and SIP revisions 

submitted under Title I of the Act. 

including those state submittals 

containing moderate PM10 

nonattainment area SIP requirements. 

See generally 57 FR 13498 (April16, 

1992); see also 57 FR 18070 (April28, 

1992). 

On March 12, 1993, EPA announced 

its proposed approval of the moderate 

nonattainment area PM to SIP for Eagle 

River, Alaska (58 FR 13572-13575).1n · 

that rulemaking action, EPA described 

its interpretations of Title 1 and its 

rationale for proposing to approve the 

Eagle River PM10 SIP taking into 

consideration the specific factual issues 

presented. 

Those states containing initial 

moderate PMto nonattainment areas 

(those areas designated nonottainment 

under section 107(d)(4)(B)) were 

required to submit, among other things, 

the following provisions by November 

15, 1991: 

1. Provisions to assure that reasonably 

available control measures (RACM) 

(including such reductions in emissions 

from existing sources in the area as may 

be obtained through the adoption, at a 

minimum, of reasonably available 

control technology (RACf}) shall be 

implemented no later than December 

10, 1993; 

2. Either a demonstration (induding 

air quality modeling) that the plan will 

provide for attainment as expeditiously 

as practicable but no later than 

December 31, 1994, or a demonstration 

that attainment by that date is 

impracticable; 

3. Quantitative milestones which are 

to be achieved every three years and 

which demonstrate reasonable further 

progress (RFP) toward attainment by 

December 31, 1994; and 

4. Provisions to assure that the control 

requirements applicable to major 

stationary sources ofPM10 also apply to 

major stationary sources of PM 10 

precursors except where the 

Administrator determines that such 

Clean Air Act Is codified, as amended, in the U.S. 

Code at 4Z U.S.C. sections 7401, el seq. 

•Subpart 1 contains provisions applicable to 

nonattainment areas generally and subpart 4 

contains provisions specifically applicable to PM"' 

nonattainment areas. At times, subpart 1 and 

subpart 4 overlap or connict. EPA has atlempted to 

clarify the relationship among these provisions in 

1ho "General Preamble" and, as appropriate, in 

loday's notice and supporting informal ion. 

I kinOnlinc -- 5X Fed. Reg 430X4 1993 

sources do not contribute significantly 

to PM to levels which exceed the 

NAAQS in the area. See sections 1 72(c), 

188, and 189 of the Act. 

Additional provisions are due at a 

later date. States with initial moderate 

PM Ill nonattainment areas were required 

to submit a permit program for the 

construction and operation of new and 

modified major stationary sources of 

PM tl1 by June 30, 1992 (see section 

189(a)). Such states also must submit 

contingency measures by November 15. 

1993, which become effective without 

further action by the state or EPA, upon 

a determination by EPA that the area 

has failed to achieve RFP or to aHa in the 

PM to NAAQS by the applicable 

statutory deadline (see section 172(c)(9) 

and 57 FR 13543-13544). 

II. Response to Comments 

EPA received no comments on its 

March 12, 1993, (58 FR 13572-13575) 

Federal Register proposal to approve 

the Eagle River moderate nonattainment 

area PM to SIP as a revision. 

III. Today's Action 

Section 110(k) of the Act sets out 

provisions governing EPA's review and 

processing of SIP submittals (see 57 FR 

13565-13566). In today's action, EPA is 

approving the plan submitted to EPA on 

October 15, 1991. EPA has determined 

that the submittal meets all of the 

applicable requirements of the Act. 

Among other things, the Alaska 

Department of Environmental 

Conservation has demonstrated the 

Eagle River moderate PM to 

nonattainment area will attain the PM,., 

NAAQS by December 31, 1994. 

IV. Administrative Review 

This action has been classified as a 

Table 2 action by the Regional 

Administrator under the procedures 

published in the Federal Register on 

January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225). On 

January 6, 1989, the Office of 

Management and Budget waived Table 

2 and 3 SIP revisions (54 FR 2222) from 

the requirements of section 3 of 

Executive Order 12291 for a period of 

two years. 

Nothing in this action should be 

construed as permitting or allowing or 

establishing a precedent for any future 

request for revision to any state 

implementation plan. Each request for 

revision to the state implementation 

plan shall be considered separately in 

light of specific technical, economic and 

environmental factors and in relation to 

relevant statutory and regulatory 

requirements. 

Under 5 U.S. C. 605(b), I certify that 

this revision will not have a significant 
Federal Register I Vol. 58, No. 155 I Friday, August 13, 1993 I Rules and Regulations 

economic-impact on a subs~antial 

number of small entities (See 46 FR 

8709). 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 

5 U.S.C. 600 et. seq., EPA must prepare 

a regulatory flexibility analysis 

assessing the impact of any proposed or 

final mle on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify 

that thB rule will not h11ve-a significant 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. Smail entities fnclude small 

business~. small not-for-profit 

enterprises, and government entities 

with iurisdiction over populatiol!s of 

less than 50,000. 

SIP approvals under section 110 and 

subchapter I, part D of the CAA d{) not 

create any new requirements, but 

simply approve requirements that the 

state is a1.ready imposing. Therefore, 

because the federal SIP-approval does 

not impose any new requir.ements,l 

certify that it does not have a significant 

impact on any smallentitiesaffected. 

· Moreover. due to the nature o.£ the 

federal-state relationship under the 

CAA, preparation of a regulatory 

flexibility analysis would constitute 

federal inquiry into the economic 

reasona81eoess o( state action. The CAA 

forbids EPA t.o base its actiAillls 

concemi.Rg SIPs on such grounds. 

Union Electric Co. v. U.S.E:P.A..42'1 

u.s. 246, 25~ (S.Ct. 197&}; 42 u.s.c. 

7 4l0(a.)( 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 October 12, 1993. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Adminiskawr of UMs linal rule does 

not affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend ilie time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed and 

shall not postpou fue effectiyeness of 

sucll rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later iD: proceedin~s to 

e·nforce its requmments. ISee section 

307{b}(2)) lSee 42 u.s.c. 7607~)(2)) 

Lis I of Subjects in 4U CFit Part 52 

Air pollution control, Carbon 

monoxide. Hydtclcm:bons,lncorporation 

by reference,lut~JDe.llltal 

relatims, Lead, Nitrogen diox:iide, 

Ozone, Particulat~ uralter, Reportilng 

and recordkeeping requiremellllts, Sulfur 

oxides. 

Note: lllCOI'poration by reference of the 

Implr:mentalion P't8R A>rthe State of Alaska was appnM!d by the DDectvr of lhe Office of 

the Fedeml ~eron July 1, 1;!9>12. 

Dated: ,._ 3.. 1!93. 

Gerald' A. Emison, 

ActingRegft'mrrl Administrotur. 

Title 40, chapter I. part 52 of the Code 

of Federal RegJJlations is amended as 

follows: 

PART ~-{AillfNDED) 

1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q. 

Subpart c-Alaska 

2. Section 52.70 H. amended by 

aQd.ing pwagsapa lc){l7) t~ read as 

follows: 

§ 52.70 Identification of plan. 

• * * 

(c)* • • 

(17)0n October 17,1991, the State of 

Alaska De~l'lli!Dl of EDvinnmwm.ta.l 

Conservation submitted a PM,o 

nonattainment area state 

implementation plan for Eagle1itiver, 

Alaska. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) October 15.,. 1991 lel1ller from 

Alaska Department of Environmental 

Conservation to EPA Region l!J 

submitting the PM10 nonattainmenf area 

state implementation plan far Eagle 

River. Alaska. 

(B) The PM~ nonattainment a.rea state 

implemen.tatioD plan for Eagle Kiver. 

Alaska, as adopted by the Anclwrage 

Assembly on February i. 1'998 sad 

effective on September 24, 19Q.t. 

(FR Do~:. !113-19496 Filed 8--12-93; 8:4'5' ami 

BILUNG CODE I5IO-D0-8 

lleinOnl inc -- 5X Fed. Reg 43085 1993 
13572 Federal Register I Vol. 58, No. 47 I Friday, March 12, 1993 I Proposed Rules 

40 CFR Part 52 

[AK2-1~;AD-FRL~J 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Implementation Plan: Alaska 

AGENCY: U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes approval of 

the state implementation plan (SIP) 

.revision submitted by the State of 

Alaska for the purpose of bringing about 

the attainment of the national ambient 

air quality standards (NAAQS) for 

particulate matter with an aerodynamic 

diameter less than or equal to a nominal 

10 micrometers (PM-10). The 

implementation plan was submitted by 

the state to satisfy certain federal Clean 

Air Act requirements for an approvabla 

moderate nonottainment area PM-10 

SIP for Eagle River, Alaska. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed 

action must be postmarked by April12, 

1993. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

addressed to: Christi A. Lee, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Sixth Avenue, AT-Q82, Seattle, 

Washington 98101. Copies of the state's 

submittal and other information are 

available for inspection during normal 

business hours at the following 

locations: 

Air and Radiation Branch (AK2-1-

5480), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Sixth Avenue, AT-Q82, 

Seattle, Washington 98101. 

Alaska Department of Environmental 

Conservation, 410 Willoughby, suite 

100, Juneau, Alaska 99801-1795. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christi Lee, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1200 Sixth Avenue, 

AT-Q82, Seattle, Washington 98101, 

Telephone: (206) 553-1814. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Eagle River, Alaska, area was 

designated nonattainment for PM-10 

and classified as moderate under 

sections 107(d)(4)(B) and 188(a) ofthe 

Clean Air Act, upon enactment of the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.1 

See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). 

The air quality planning requirements 

for moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas are set out in subparts 1 and 4 of 

1 The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act 

made significant chan88S to the Act. See Public Law 

101-549, 104 Stat. 2399. References herein are to 

the Clean Air Act, as amended ("the Act"), The 

Clean Air Act is codlfted, as amended, In the U.S. 

Code at42 U.S.C. sections 7401. et seq. 

Part D, Title I of the Act. 2 The EPA has 

issued a "General Preamble" describing 

EPA's preliminary views on how EPA 

intends to review SIP's and SIP 

revisions submitted under Title I of the 

Act, including those state submittals 

containing moderate PM-10 

nonattainment area SIP requirements 

(sea generally 57 FR 13498 (Aprilt6, 

1992) and 57 FR 18070 (April28, 

1992)). Because EPA is describing its 

interpretations here only in broad terms, 

the reader should refer to the General 

Preamble for a more detailed discussion 

of the interpretations of Title I advanced 

in today's proposal and the supporting 

rationale. In today's rulemaking action on the Alaska moderate PM-10 SIP for 

Eagle River, EPA is proposing to apply 

its interpretations taking into 

consideration the specific factual issues 

presented. Additional information 

supporting EPA's action on this 

particular area is available for 

inspection at the addresses indicated 

above. EPA will consider any timely 

submitted comments before taking final 

action on today's proposal. 

Those states containing initial 

moderate PM-10 nonattainment areas 

were required to submit, among other 

things, the following provisions by 

November 15, 1991: 

1. Provisions to assure that reasonably 

available control measures (RACM) 

(including such reductions in emissions 

from existing sources in the area as may 

be obtained through the adoption, at a 

minimum, of reasonably available 

control technology-RACT) shall be 

implemented no later than December 

10, 1993; 

2. Either a demonstration (including 

air quality modeling) that the plan will 

provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but no later than 

Decamber 31, 1994 or a demonstration 

that attainment by that date is 

impracticable;(Insert date 30 days after 

the date of publication). [Insert date 30 

days after the date of publication). 

[Insert date 30 days after the date of 

publication). [Insert date 30 days after 

the date of publication). (Insert date 30 

days after the date of publication). 

3. Quantitative milestones which are 

to be achieved every 3 years and which 

demonstrate reasonable further progress 

(RFP) toward attainment by Dec'!mber 

31,1994;and 

2 Subpart 1 contains provisions applicable lo 

nonattainment areu generally and subpart 4 

contains provisions specifically applicable to PM10 nonattainmenl areu. At limes, subpart! and 

subpart 4 overlap or conftlct. EPA has attempted to 

clarify the relallonJhlp among these provisions in 

lhe "General Preamble" and. as appropriate, in 

loday's notice and supportins information. 

HeinOnline --58 Fed. Reg. 13572 1993 

4. Provisions to assure that the con'trol 

requirements applicable to major 

stationary sources ofPM-10 also apply 

to major stationary sources of PM-10 

precursors except where the 

Administrator determines that such 

sources do not contribute significantly 

to PM-10 levels which exceed the 

NAAQS in the area. See sections t12(c), 

188, and 189 of the Act. 

Some provisions are due at a later 

date. States with initial moderate PM10 nonattainment areas were required to 

submit a permit program for the 

construction and operation or new and 

modified major stationary sources of 

PM-10 by June 30, 1992 (see section 

189(a)). Such states also must submit 

contingency measures by November 15, 

1993 which become effective without 

further action by the state or EPA, upon 

a determination by EPA that the area has failed to achieve RFP or to attain the 

PM-10 NAAQS by the applicable 

statutory deadline (see section 172(c)(9) 

and 57 FR 13543-44). 

II. Today's Action 

Section llO(k) of the Act sets out 

provisions governing EPA's review of 

SIP submittals (see 57 FR 13565-13566). 

In today's action, EPA is proposing to 

approve the plan revision certified by 

the Lieutenant Governor on June 21, 

1991 and submitted to EPA on October 

15, 1991 because it meets all of the 

applicable requirements of the Act. 

A. Analysis of State Submissicn 

1. Procedural Background 

The Act requires states to observe 

certain procedural requirements in 

developing implementation plans and 

plan revisions for submission to EPA. 

Sections 110(a)(2) and 110(1) of the Act 

provides that each implementation plan 

submitted by a state must be adopted 

after reasonable notice and public 

hearing. 3 

EPA also must determine whether a 

submittal is complete and therefore 

warrants further EPA review and action 

(see section 110(k)(1) and 57 FR 13565}. 

EPA's completeness criteria for SIP 

submittals are set out at 40 CFR part 51, 

appendix V (1991), as amended by 56 

FR 42216 (August 26, 1991). EPA 

attempts to make completeness 

determinations within 60 days of 

receiving a submission. However, a submittal is deemed complete by 

operation of law if a completeness . determination is not made by EPA six 

months after receipt of the submission. 

~Section 17Z(c)(7) of the Act requires that plan 

provisions for nonaltalnment areas meellhe 

applicable provisions of section 110(a)(2). 
Federal Register I Vol. 58, No. 47 I Friday, March 12, 1993 I Proposed Rules 13573 

After providing adequate public 

notice, the Alaska Department of 

Environmental Conservation (ADEC) 

held a public hearing on November 21, 

1989.to entertain public comment on 

the implementation plan for the Eagle 

River nonattainment. Following the 

public hearing the plan was adopted by 

the state and signed by the Governor on 

July 15, 1990, and submitted to EPA as 

a proposed revision to the SIP on July 

17, 1990. The state subsequently 

readopted the SIP revisions and 

resubmitted them to EPA on October 15, 

1991. 

The SIP revision was reviewed by 

EPA to determine completeness shortly 

after its submittal, in accordance with 

the completeness criteria set out at 40 

CFR Part 51, Appendix V (1991), as 

amended by 57 FR 42216 (August 26, 

1991). The submittal was found to be 

complete and a letter dated February 19, 

1992, was forwarded to the Director of 

ADEC indicating the completeness of 

the submittal and the next steps to be 

taken in the review process. 

2. Accurate Emissions Inventory 

Section 172(c)(3) of the Act requires 

that nonattainment plan provisions 

include a comprehensive, accurate, 

current inventory of actual emissions 

from all sources of relevant pollutants in 

the nonattainment area. Because the 

submission of the emissions inventory 

is a necessary adjunct to an area's 

attainment demonstration (or 

demonstration that the area cannot 

practicably attain), the emission!! 

inventory must be received with the 

demonstration (see 57 FR 13539). 

ADEC submitted an emissions 

inventory for base year 1987. Eagle 

River's base year emissions inventory 

identified the major source categories as 

fugitive dust from paved and unpaved 

streets and windblown dust. Since the 

PM-10 sources in the area are seasonal 

in nature and worst case emissions from 

.different sources may not occur 

concurrently, a separate inventory was 

compiled for each of the four seasons. 

The primary source of fall seasonal PM10 is locally generated road dust. 

Windblown dust, sanding material and 

vehicle-generated dust from paved roads 

are·significant sources of springtime 

PM-10. The combined contribution of 

all other sources was estimated to be 

less than ten percent of total emissions 

in both the spring and fall seasons. EPA is proposing to approve the 

emissions inventory because it generally 

appears to be accurate and 

comprehensive, and provides a 

sufficient basis for determining the 

adequacy of the attainment 

demonstration for this area.4 For further 

details see the Technical Support 

Document (TSD) corresponding with . 

this action, which is available at the 

address indicated above. 

3. RACM (Including RACT) 

As noted, the initial moderate PM-10 

nonattainment areas must submit 

provisions to assure that RACM 

(including RACT) are implemented no 

later than December 10, 1993 (see 

sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(l)(C)). The 

General Preamble contains a detailed 

discussion of EPA's interpretation of the 

RACM (including RACT) requirement 

(see 57 FR 13539'-13545 and 1356G13561). The PM-10 problem in the area 

is more severe in the fall and for this 

reason, separate design concentrations 

were determined for fall and spring. The 

fall 24·hour design value of 238 ~g/m:t 

and the spring design value of 166 ~g/ 

m3 are based on monitored values. (The 

design value, which reflects high PM-10 

concentrations in the area, is the basis 

for determining the amount of reduction 

needed to attain the NAAQS). Spring 

season emissions are presently below 

the threshold emission rate necessary to ensure attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS 

as a result of the completion of paving 

projects. Fall season PM-10 levels are 

projected to be in attainment after 

completion of anticipated projects by 

the end of 1992. · In light of the PM-10 sources in the_ 

area described in the emissions 

inventory discussion above, the Eagle 

River attainment plan targeted controls 

of fugitive dust from unpaved and . 

paved streets for PM-10 emission 

reductions.5 The Municipality of 

Anchorage has identified funds that will 

be devoted to implementing the road 

paving and surfacing proj9cts intended 

to address the resuspended road dust 

problem in the area. EPA views these 

measures as enforceable control 

measures as required by sections 

10(a)(2)(A) and 172(c)(6) of the Act. The 

4 Tho EPA issued guidance on PM-10 emissions 

inventories prior to the enacbnent of tho Clean Air 

Act Amendments in the form of the 1987 PM-10 

SIP Development Guideline. The guidanct1 provided 

in this document appears to be consistent with the 

Act. 

'Where sources of PM-10 contribute . insignificantly to the PM-10 problem in the area, 

EPA's policy is that it would be unreaaonable(and 

would not constitute RACM) to require the sources 

to implement potentially available control , 

measures. 57 FR 13540. As indicated, the combined 

contribution of all other aourct1s Is estimated to be 

less than ten percent of total emissions. For this 

reason. EPA believes it would be unreasonable to 

require these other sources to Implement 

potentially available control measures. Further, 

EPA believes Implementation of such additional 

controls In this case would not expedite attainment 

and, therefore. such measures are not "reasonably" 

required. 57 FR 13543. · 

HeinOnlinc --58 Fed. Reg 13573 1993 

Municipality and ADEC should inform 

EPA if they believe the commitment to 

Implement these measures Is not 

enforceable. The measures intended to 

address resuspended road dust are 

described in further detail below. Note 

that most of the measures in question 

were scheduled for completion prior to 

today's action. Therefore, in taking final 

action on this SIP, EPA intends to 

consider any comments addressing tbe 

progress that has been made in 

implementing the measures. A 40 percent reduction in fall 

emissions is required to attain the 

NAAQS. The plan uses a fall emission 

reduction of 56 percent from controls on 

resuspended road dust. A significant 

reduction in fall PM-10 emissions 

occurred between 1987 and 1991 as a 

result of road paving and surfacing 

projects in Eagle River. Of the 22 miles 

of unpaved roads in the nonattainment 

(NA) area, 3.4 miles were strip-paved by 

mid-1989. In addition to these paving 

projects, 3.2 miles of recycled asphalt 

paving (RAP) has been applied to gravel 

roadways in the NA area. RAP is a 

product salvaged from road construction 

projects. To achieve the emission 

reduction goals, the Eagle River Rural 

Road Service Board (ERRRSB) has 

included 8.6 miles of existing gravel 

roadway within the PM-10 NA area on 

a priority list for paving or recycled 

asphalt improvements. Tho ERRRSB 

received $1.5 million in FY 92 capital 

furids for road projects. A significant 

portion is allocated for strip paving and 

approximately half is designated for 

RAP projects which would surface 

about 25 additional miles of road. This 

would include all areas in the NA area 

and a few outlying areas. The 

Municipality expected to complete most 

of the road surfacing projects in the May 

through October 1992 construction 

season. A small number of the hot 

asphalt paving projects may be delayed 

one year for pavement engineering. The 

Municipality of Anchorage expects to 

complete all8.6 miles of road surfacing 

_by the end of 1993. · By the end of 1989, fall PM-10 

omissions were estimated to have been 

reduced by 32 percent. An additional 24 

percent omission reduction is projected 

to result from planned 1992-93 projects. 

A total omission reduction of 12 percent 

from paving, 28 percent hom recycled 

asphalt projects and 15 percent from 

reduced track out of dirt onto paved 

streets results in a projected overall 

emission reduction of 56 percent This 

estimated reduction exceeds the 40 

percent reduction required to reach 

attainment. . · An 11 percent reduction is required 

for spring emissions to yield compliance 
13514 li'MuaJ llegistet I 'Vol. sa, No .. 41 I .Friday, Mardt· 12, 1883 I Proposed Rttles 

with the NAAQS. The plan. uses " 

sprmg emissiou r.duet!OD! of tz. pncent 

from contnlis an resuspended roect dust.. 

Spring emissions have abaady beea 

reduced by 8% as a result of . 

improvements in wintar sanding ~d 

street cl81111·up practlcea instituted In 

the winter of 1987-1988. Tfte A.lasb 

Department of Transportation has 

estimated ,that the quutity of road sand 

appljJ!d to state and municipal roads has 

been cut from 17,000 to 10,000 tons 

during a typical winter. Furthennore, by 

tightening material specifications, the 

silt fraction (grain size less than 75 

microns) of the sanding material has 

been reduced. In addition to reductions 

achieved through improved winter 

sanding methods, road paving and · 

recycled asphalt projects are 8$limated 

to reduce spr.lng emissioas by an 

additional 4 percent Implementation of 

these two measures reS'IIlts in a total 

estimated reduction of 12 perceut in 

spring emissions. 

Changes in the quantity of road 

sanding material applied during winter, 

the tighteatlng of sanding material 

specifications and road surfacing 

projects have sufficiently reduced 

emissions to achieve NAAQS 

attainment in the &):!ring season. 

EPA has reviewe<l the ADEC's 

explanation Blld associated 

documentation and coacluded that it 

adequ&tely Justifies the control 

measures to be imflemented. The 

implementation o ADEC's l'llQderate 

PM-10 nonattainment plan control 

strategy will. provide for attainment of 

the PM-10 NAAQSin the Eagle River, 

Alaska nonattaimnent area by December 

31, 1992, By this netice, EPA is 

proposing to approve the ADE(::'s 

control strategy as Satisfying the RACM 

(lncludinz RACT) requirement. 

4. Demonstratioil 

As. noted, the initial moderate PM-10 

nonattainmentareas must submit a 

demonstration (including air quality 

modeling) showin& that the plan wi.ll 

provide for attainment as expeditiously 

as practicable INt no Jeter than. 

December 31, 1994 (s&e' section 

189(a)(1)(B)Ii) of the Act}. ThtiGeneral 

Preamble sets out EPA's guidance on the 

use of modeling for moderate area 

attainment demonstrations (57 FR 

13539). Altamatively, if,ft.DEC does not 

submit a demonstlatioa sf attainment, 

ADEC must show that attainment by 

Decembell31, t994 is impracticable 

(section 189(a)(1)(B){ii)~ · 

The Mumei pality of Ancllorage-Air 

Pollution Control Agency (AAPCA).In· 

consultation with th~ Alaska 

Deparlmant of Enviroomentol 

ConservaUen (1\DEC) condue:ta6 an 

attainment delnonetratiOR using 

receptor mod. eling ror Eagle River, 

Alaska and a "grid-by-grid rollback" 

approach. This d&~~~onstJetion indicates 

that the NAAQS for PM-10 will be 

attained by 19~2 in the Eagle River . 

nonattainment area and maintained in 

future years. The 24-bour PM-10 

NAAQS is 150 micrograms/cubic meter 

(vg/m3), and the standard is attained 

when the expected number of days per 

calendar year with a 24-bour average 

concentration above 150 tJs/m3 is equal 

to or Jess than one (see 40 CFR section 

50.6), The annual PM-10 NAAQS Is 50 

vg/m3, and the standard is attained 

when the expected annual arithmetic· 

mean concentration is less than or equal · 

to 50 vg/m3 (id). The demonstration 

predicted that the 24-hour design 

concentration in the attainment year of 

1992 will be below 150 pglm1, thus 

demonstrating attainment of the 24-hour 

PM-10 NAAQS. Ambient data show 

that the area has never approached an 

exceedance of the annual standard. 

Since no violations ofthe annual 

NAAQS have been noted with the 

current emissions inventory and since 

. the inventory was "rolled' back" to show· 

attainment- of the 24-hour NAAQS, no 

violatitlns of the annual NAAQS are 

likely. TherefOre, EPA believes that 

ADEC has adequately demonstrated' that 

the annual standard has been attained In 

the Eagle River nonattalnment area. Tbe control strategy used to achieve 

these design concentrations is 

summarized in the section titled 

"RACM (including RACf)." Fore more 

detailed description of the attainment 

demonstration and the control strategy 

used, see the TSD. 

5. PM-10 Precursors 

The.control requirements which are 

applicable to major stationary sources of 

PM-10, also apply to major stationary 

sources ofPM-10 precursors unless 

EPA detennines such sources do not 

contribute significantly to PM-10 levels 

in excess of the NAAQS in that area (see 

section 189(e) of the Act). 

The emissions inventory for the Eagle 

River nonattainment area did not reveal · 

any significant stationary source& of 

PM-10 precursors, and stationary 

sources as a whole provide an 

insignificant contribution to Eagle 

River's ambient PM-10 concentrations. 

as demonstrated through receptor 

modeling for the area. Thus, ambient 

PM-10 precursor concentrations in tbe 

Eagle. River nonattainmant area are 

considered to ba de mwmis aad EP~ is 

proposinl'tO srantl'be are&· the 

exclusfan from PM-10 precursor control' 

requirements authorized Wldin~ sactiOR• 

189(e) of the Act. 

HeinOnline -- 58 Fed. Reg. 13574 1993 

6. Quantitative Milestones and 

Reasonable Further Progress (RFPJ 

The PM-10 nonattainment 8J'8a plo 

revisions demonstratins attainment. 

must contain quantitative milestone& 

which are to be achieved avery three 

years until the area i11 redesiguated 

attainment and which demonstrate RFP, 

as defined in section 171·(1), toward· 

attainmea.t by December 31, 1994 (see 

section 189(c} of the Act}. RFP is 

defined in section 171(1) as such annual. 

incremental reductions in emissions of 

the relevant air pollutant as are required. 

by part D or may 1'8880nably be· required 

by the Administzator for the purpose of 

ensuring attainment of the applicable 

NAAQS by tbe applicable date. 

In implementing RFP (Qr this initial 

moderate area, EPA has 1'8viewedthe 

attainment demonstrati-on. and control 

strategy for the area to determine 

whether annual incremental MductiollS 

are different from those provided in the 

SIP and should be required in order to ensure attainment of the PM-10 NAAQS 

by December 31, 1994 (see section 

171(1)). Eagle River demonstrates 

attainment in 1992 and maintenance 

through 1·994, and therefore &&tisfies the 

initial quantitative·milestone· 

requirement (see 51 FR 13539tand RFP 

for the area. 

7. Enforceability Issues 

All measures and other eleJOents in 

the SIP must be enforceabl'vby the-state 

and EPA (see sections t72(c)(&). 

110(a)(2)(A) and 57 FR 13551~ EPA 

criteria eddreSBing the enforceability of 

SIP's and SIP ruvisions were stated in a 

September 23, 1987 memorandum fwitbattachments} from J. Craig Potter, 

Assistant Administrator for Air end 

Radiation, et al. (see 57 FR t354t:f.' 

Nonattainment area plan provisions 

must also contain a program that 

provides for enforcement of the control 

measures and other elemen~ in the SIP 

(see section llO(a)(2)(C)}'. · 

The particular controf meeSttres 

contained in the SIP are addressed 

above under the section headed "RACM 

(including RACO." These cont'rol 

measures apply ta the types of activities 

Identified in that discusskm including, 

for example, fugitive dust from paved 

and unpaved streets. The SIP provides 

that the affected activities will be 

controlled throughout tbe·ent:lre 

nonattainment area; 

As discussed previously, a state grant' 

has been allocated by the munid polity 

to finance various road surfacing and 

paving measures to address PM-to· emission~r from road dusr. rn addition,. 

both the state and local municipality 

have legal authority to adopt levy taxes, 
Federal Register I Vol. 58, No. 47 I Friday, March 12, 1993 I Proposed Rules 13575 

adopt annual budgets and borrow funds. 

EPA believes the SIP measures to 

address PM-10 emissions are 

enforceable. Further, the ADEC has a 

program that will ensure that control 

measures contained in the Eagle River 

PM-10 SIP (i.e., Title 21 of the 

Anchorage Municipal Code (AMC), 

sections 21.85.030 and 21.45.0BO.w.7) · 

are adequately enforced. 

B. Contingency Measures 

As provided in section 172(c)(9) of the 

Act, all moderate nonattainment area 

SIP's that demonstrate attainment must 

include contingency measures (see 

generally 57 FR 13543-13544). These 

measures must be submitted by 

November 15, 1993 for the initial 

moderate nonattainment areas. 

Contingency measures should consist of 

other available measures that are not 

part of the area's control strategy. These 

measures must take effect without 

further action by the state or EPA, upon 

a determination by EPA that the area 

has failed to make RFP or attain the 

PM-10 NAAQS by the applicable 

statutory deadline. Since contingency 

measures were not due with the 

November 15, 1991 moderate PM-10 

nonattainment area SIP requirements, 

EPA is not taking any action on this 

requirement in today's proposal. 

Ill. Implications ofToday's Action 

EPA is proposing to approve the plan 

revision submitted to EPA on November 

15, 1991, for the Eagle River 

nonattainment area. Among other 

things, ADEC has demonstrated that the 

Eagle River moderate PM-10 

nonattainment area will attain the PM10 NAAQS by December 31, 1992. 

As noted, additional submittals for 

the initial moderate PM-10 · 

nonattainment areas are due at later 

dates. EPA will detennine the adequacy 

of any such submittal as appropriate. 

IV. Requestror Public Comments 

EPA is requesting comments on all 

aspects oftoday's proposal. As 

indicated at the outset of this notice, 

EPA will consider any comments 

postmarked by April12, 1993. 

V. Administrative Review 

The Office of Management and Budget 

has exempted this rule from the 

requirements of Section 3 of Executive 

Order 12291. 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 

5 U.S.C. Section 600 et. seq., EPA must 

prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis 

assessing the impact of any proposed or 

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 

sections 603 and 604. Alternatively, 

EPA may certify that the rule will not 

have a significant economic impact on 

a substantial number of small entities. 

Small entities include small businesses, 

small not-for-profit enterprises, and 

government entities with jurisdiction 

over populations of less than 50,000. 

SIP approvals under section 110 and 

subchapter I, Part D of the CAA do not 

create any new requirements, but· . 

simply approve requirements that the 

state is already imposing. Therefore, 

because the federal SIP-approval does 

not impose any new requirements, I 

certify that it does not have a significant · 

impact on small entities affected. 

Moreover, due tQ the nature of the 

federal-state relationship under the 

CAA, preparation of a regulatory 

flexibility analysis would constitute 

federal inquiry into the economic 

reasonableness of state action. The CAA 

forbids EPA to base iis actions 

concerning SIPs on such grounds. 

Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 

U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 

section 7410(a)(2). 

Nothing in this action should be 

construed as permitting or allowing or 

establishing a precedent for any future 

request for revision to any state 

implementation plan. Each request for 

revision to the state implementation 

plan shall be considered separately in 

light of specific technical, economic and 

environmental factors and In relation to 

relevant statutory and regulatory 

requirements. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

dioxide, Volatile organic compounds. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q. 

Dated: February 18, 1993. 

Dana A. Rasmll858n, 

Regional Administrator. 

(FR Doc. 93-5660 Filed 3-11-93; 8:45 ami 

BILUNG CODE IJ560.-5CI...4' 

40 CFA Part 52 

[WA&-1-5519; AD-FRL-4603-4j) 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Implementation Plans: Washington 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes approval of 

the state implementation plan (SIP) 

submitted by the State of Washington 

for the purpose of bringing about the 

attainment of the national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS) for 

HeinOnline --58 Fed. Reg. 13575 1993 

particulate matter with an aerodynamic 

diameter less than or equal to a nominal 

10 micrometers (PM-10). The 

implementation plan was submitted by 

the ·State to satisfy certain Federal Clean 

Air Act requirements for an approvable 

moderate PM-10 nonattainment area 

SIP for Thurston County. Washington. 

DATES: Commenta on this proposed 

action must be postmarked by April12. 

1993. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

addressed to: George Lauderdale, 

EJJvironmental Protection Agency. Air 

and Radiation Branch, Docket No. 

WA6-1-5519,1200 Sixth Avenue, AT082, Seattle, Washington 98101. 

Copies of the State's submittal and 

other infonnation are available for 

inspection during nonnal business 

hours at the following location: 

Air and Radiation Branch (WA6-1-

5519), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency,1200 Sixth Avenue, AT--082, 

Seattle, Washington 98101. 

State of Washington Department of 

Ecology, College Street Building, 4550 

Third Avenue Southeast, Olympia, 

Washington 98504. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

George Lauderdale, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Air and Radiation 

Branch, Docket No. WA6-1-5519, 1200 

Sixth Avenue, AT-082, Seattle, 

Washington 98101. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The Thurston County, Washington, 

area (i.e. cities of Olympia, Tumwater, 

and Lacey) was designated 

nonattainment for PM-10 and classified 

as moderate under sections 107(d)(4)(B) 

arid 1BB(a) of the Clean Air Act, upon 

enactment of the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1990. 1 See 56 FR 56694 

(November 6, 1991). The air quality 

planning requirements for moderate 

PM-10 nonattainment areas are set out 

in subparts 1 and 4 of Part D. Title I of 

the Act.2 The EPA has issued a "General 

Preamble" describing EPA's preliminary 

views on how EPA intends to review 

SIP's and SIP revisions submitted under 

Title I of the Act, including those State 

1 The 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act 

made significant changes lo the Act. Sae Pub. L. No. 

101-549, 104 Stat. 2399. References herein are to 

the Clean Air Act, as amended ("the Act"). The 

Clean Air Act Is codified, as amended, in the U.S. 

Code at n U.S.C. sactions ?401, et seq. · 2 Subpart 1 contains provisions applicable to 

nonattainment aroas generally and subpart 4 

contains provisions specifically applicable to PM-

. 10 nonattainmenl areas. At times. subpart 1 and 

subpart 4 overlap or connlct. EPA has attempted to clartry the relationship among these provisions In 

the "General Preamble" and, as appropriate, in 

today's nolico and supporting informalion.