45830 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 52.1770(e), is amended by 

adding entries for ‘‘110(a)(1) and (2) 

Infrastructure Requirements for 1997 

Fine Particulate Matter NAAQS’’, 

‘‘110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure 

Requirements for 2006 Fine Particulate 

Matter NAAQS’’, ‘‘110(a)(1) and (2) 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 

Lead NAAQS’’, ‘‘110(a)(1) and (2) 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 

8-Hour Ozone NAAQS’’, ‘‘110(a)(1) and 

(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 

2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS’’, ‘‘110(a)(1) 

and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for 

the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS’’, and 

‘‘110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 2012 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS’’ at the end of the table to read 

as follows: 

§ 52.1770 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED NORTH CAROLINA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Provision State effective 

date 

EPA approval 

date 

Federal Register citation Explanation 

*******

110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for 1997 Fine Particulate Matter 

NAAQS.

4/1/2008 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of 

publication in Federal Register].

Approved the PSD elements of sections 

110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 

3) and 110(a)(2)(J). 

110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for 2006 Fine Particulate Matter 

NAAQS.

9/21/2009 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of 

publication in Federal Register].

Approved the PSD elements of sections 

110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 

3) and 110(a)(2)(J). 

110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead NAAQS.6/15/2012 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of 

publication in Federal Register].

Approved the PSD elements of sections 

110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 

3) and 110(a)(2)(J). 

110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone 

NAAQS.

11/2/2012 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of 

publication in Federal Register].

Approved the PSD elements of sections 

110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 

3) and 110(a)(2)(J). 

110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS.8/23/2013 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of 

publication in Federal Register].

Approved the PSD elements of sections 

110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 

3) and 110(a)(2)(J). 

110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.3/18/2014 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of 

publication in Federal Register].

Approved the PSD elements of sections 

110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 

3) and 110(a)(2)(J). 

110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS.

12/4/2015 9/11/2018 [Insert citation of 

publication in Federal Register].

Approved the PSD elements of sections 

110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 

3) and 110(a)(2)(J). 

[FR Doc. 2018–19603 Filed 9–10–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2017–0582; FRL–9983– 

53—Region 10] 

Air Plan Approval; ID, Pinehurst PM10

Redesignation, Limited Maintenance 

Plan; West Silver Valley 2012 Annual 

PM2.5 Emission Inventory 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is approving the 

redesignation request and limited 

maintenance plan for the PM10 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard 

developed for the City of Pinehurst 

PM10 Nonattainment Area and the 

Pinehurst PM10 Expansion 

Nonattainment Area. This redesignation 

will change the status of both areas from 

nonattainment to attainment. The 

limited maintenance plan for these 

contiguous nonattainment areas 

addresses maintenance of the PM10

standard for a ten-year period beyond 

redesignation. Related to this action, the 

EPA is taking final agency action on the 

September 15, 2013, high wind 

exceptional event at the Pinehurst 

monitoring station. Additionally, the 

EPA is finalizing approval of the 

emissions inventory for the West Silver 

Valley 2012 annual PM2.5

nonattainment area. 

DATES: This action is effective on 

October 11, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R10–OAR–2017–0582. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the https://www.regulations.gov 

website. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., Confidential Business 

Information 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 through https://

www.regulations.gov, or please contact 

the person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section for 

additional availability information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Justin Spenillo at (206) 553–6125, or 

spenillo.justin@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is 

intended to refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background Information 

II. Response to Comments 

III. Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders Review 

I. Background Information 

On May 11, 2018, the EPA proposed 

to approve the redesignation request 

and limited maintenance plan (LMP) 

submitted by the Idaho Department of 

Environmental Quality (IDEQ) on 

September 29, 2017, for the City of 

Pinehurst PM10 Nonattainment Area and 

the Pinehurst PM10 Expansion 

Nonattainment Area, collectively 

referred to as the Pinehurst PM10

Nonattainment Area (Pinehurst PM10

NAA). 

Related to this action, the EPA is 

taking final agency action on the EPA’s 

concurrence with the IDEQ’s request for 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 45831 

1See Department of Energy Weatherization 

Program, https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/ 

2018/06/f52/EERE_WAP_Fact%20Sheet-v2.pdf. 

2See EPA Burnwise Program, https://

www.epa.gov/burnwise/burn-wise-energy-efficiency. 

exclusion of data measured on 

September 15, 2013, as a high wind 

exceptional event at the Pinehurst 

monitoring station, as set forth in the 

March 2, 2017 letter to the IDEQ, 

included in the docket. The Clean Air 

Act (CAA) allows for the exclusion of 

air quality monitoring data from design 

value calculations when there are 

exceedances caused by events, such as 

wildfires or high wind events, that meet 

the criteria for an exceptional event 

identified in the EPA’s implementing 

regulations, the Exceptional Events Rule 

at 40 CFR 50.1, 50.14 and 51.930. In 

2013, emissions from a high wind event 

entrained dust and impacted PM10

concentrations recorded at the Pinehurst 

monitor. The EPA evaluated the IDEQ’s 

exceptional event demonstration for the 

flagged values of the 24-hour PM10

NAAQS for September 15, 2013, at the 

monitor in Pinehurst, Idaho, with 

respect to the requirements of the EPA’s 

Exceptional Events Rule and 

determined that IDEQ met the rule 

requirements. 

Separately, the EPA also proposed 

approval of the base year emissions 

inventory for the West Silver Valley 

(WSV) PM2.5 Nonattainment Area 

(NAA). Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA 

requires a state with an area designated 

as nonattainment to submit a 

‘‘comprehensive, accurate, current 

inventory of actual emissions from all 

sources of the relevant pollutant’’ for the 

NAA. The IDEQ developed a 2013 base 

year emissions inventory for the WSV 

annual PM2.5 NAA. The base year 

emissions inventory includes data from 

2013 and 2014 and in large part was 

extracted from the 2014 periodic 

emissions inventory which is used to 

populate the EPA’s National Emissions 

Inventory. The 2013 base year inventory 

is one of the three years used to 

designate the area as nonattainment. 

This base year inventory presents direct 

PM2.5 emissions (condensable and 

filterable) and emissions of all PM2.5

precursors (NOX, VOCs, NH3, and SO2) 

to meet the emissions inventory 

requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) 

and 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1). The EPA has 

reviewed the results, procedures, and 

methodologies for the WSV Annual 

PM2.5 NAA base year emissions 

inventory. The EPA determined that the 

2013 base year emissions inventory for 

the WSV annual PM2.5 NAA met the 

requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) 

and 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1). 

An explanation of the CAA 

requirements, a detailed analysis of the 

submittal, and the EPA’s reasons for 

proposing approval were provided in 

the notice of proposed rulemaking (83 

FR 21976), and will not be restated here. 

The public comment period for this 

proposed rule ended on June 11, 2018. 

The EPA received adverse comments on 

the proposal. 

II. Response to Comments 

The Idaho Conservation League (ICL) 

submitted adverse comments on our 

proposed approval of the Pinehurst 

PM10 NAA redesignation request and 

LMP. Within this section, we have 

summarized the adverse comments and 

provided our responses. A full copy of 

comments received is available in the 

docket for this final action. 

Comment—Permanent and Enforceable 

Emissions Reductions 

Summary—The ICL comment letter 

asserts the ‘‘EPA must reject Idaho 

DEQ’s request for redesignation of the 

Pinehurst NAA’’ because the state has 

not met the redesignation requirements 

in CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii). The ICL 

cites the EPA’s September 4, 1992, 

guidance, which, among other things, 

addresses emissions reductions based 

on permanent and enforceable measures 

(Memorandum from John Calcagni, 

Director, Air Quality Management 

Division, EPA Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, entitled 

‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to 

Redesignate Areas to Attainment’’ 

(Calcagni Memo)). The ICL comment 

letter provides examples of 

nonattainment areas redesignated for 

PM10 and ozone in Ohio, Colorado, and 

Idaho, which use local rules, laws, and 

ordinances to provide for permanent 

and enforceable emissions reductions. 

The comment letter states that the IDEQ 

and City of Pinehurst were aware of the 

need for permanent and enforceable 

measures, citing discussion notes taken 

during a 2016 advisory committee 

session for the West Silver Valley PM2.5

NAA, an overlapping area designated 

nonattainment for the 2012 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. The ICL comment letter 

concludes that the control measures and 

associated emissions reductions are not 

permanent nor enforceable. 

Response—We disagree with the 

commenter. Measures to attain the 24- 

hour PM10 NAAQS were submitted by 

IDEQ on April 14, 1992, and approved 

into the SIP on August 25, 1994 (59 FR 

43745). In the August 25, 1994 action, 

the EPA evaluated the IDEQ’s submittal 

with respect to the CAA section 172 

requirements, including the Reasonably 

Available Control Measures and their 

enforceability. The EPA approved the 

control measures into the SIP at 40 CFR 

part 52, subpart N as meeting CAA 

requirements and making them, along 

with the attainment plan itself, federally 

enforceable (59 FR 43745). Once 

approved, the state is subject to CAA 

section 179(a)(4), which provides that a 

state can be subject to federal sanctions 

for not implementing any requirement 

of an approved plan or part of an 

approved plan, unless the deficiency is 

corrected within 18 months. 

Reviewing the specific plan measures, 

the IDEQ has implemented woodstove 

replacements and home weatherization 

since the early 1990s in the Pinehurst 

PM10 NAA. As identified in Table 9 of 

the IDEQ submittal, the woodstove 

changeout program resulted in 76 

uncertified woodstoves being replaced 

by 1994, with an additional 87 between 

1995 and 2014 and 40 more between 

2015 and 2017. These measures have 

been implemented through a variety of 

programs and agencies. Changeouts of 

uncertified woodstoves were completed 

through a combined Federal assistance 

grant and state and local loan program. 

This combined program was 

administered by the Northern Idaho 

Community Action Agency. The home 

weatherization program was run 

through the Idaho Economic 

Opportunity Office with loan and grant 

funding supplied by the Idaho 

Department of Water Resources, 

Farmers Home Administration, 

Washington Water Power, and North 

Idaho Community Action Agency. In 

terms of emissions reductions, when 

comparing the emissions inventories 

from residential wood combustion from 

1988 to 2013, they dropped 80.25 lb/day 

(27.45%) during the winter season when 

particulate matter emissions are often 

the highest (Table 8 of the IDEQ 

submittal). These reductions are 

permanent in that both the woodstove 

replacement and the reduced energy 

needs from improved home energy 

efficiency via weatherization generally 

last and extend throughout the life of 

the home.1 Any subsequent home 

modification would likely improve, if 

not maintain, emissions reductions, and 

benefits are expected to be net positive 

given that emissions of EPA-certified 

stoves are estimated to be on average 

three to four times lower than 

uncertified stoves.2 The remaining 

measures, including the public 

awareness campaign focused on clean 

burning practices and the voluntary 

woodsmoke curtailment programs are 

all helpful in supporting the reduction 

of woodsmoke emissions in the area. 

Additionally, the EPA recently 

awarded IDEQ a 2015 Targeted Airshed 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
45832 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

3See LMP Option Memo. 

Grant for the West Silver Valley PM2.5

NAA. As a condition of the grant 

agreement with the EPA, the IDEQ 

committed to replace 183 uncertified 

wood heating devices and provide the 

associated emissions reductions. Each 

homeowner receiving a changeout must 

sign a certification document to ensure 

that they will remove an uncertified 

wood heating device from their home 

and agree to have two follow-up home 

inspections on the new certified device, 

commit to proper wood burning 

practices, and commit to not replacing 

the device with another solid fuel 

burning device. All removed stoves are 

rendered permanently and irreversibly 

inoperable and are properly disposed. 

We believe the grant terms and 

conditions and the homeowner 

certifications provide additional 

enforceability for purposes of 

maintaining the PM10 standard in the 

area. 

While not specifically taken credit for 

in the original attainment plan nor the 

LMP, road dust control has played an 

important part in the area. It is the 

second largest source of pollution 

according to the emissions inventory, 

and the area has taken measures to 

reduce emissions through paving roads, 

maintenance of roads, and adjusting 

street sweeping to reduce particulate 

matter. With respect to permanence of 

road controls, once paved their 

associated emissions will be reduced 

and road maintenance will ensure 

lasting emissions reductions. We 

received clarification from the IDEQ that 

since 2016, the majority of roads (over 

10 miles in a city roughly 1 square mile) 

in the Pinehurst area have been rebuilt 

or sealed. 

We have reviewed monitoring data for 

the area with respect to the permanence 

of the emissions reductions. In Table 2 

of the IDEQ submittal, monitoring data 

is provided from 1986 through 2015. 

From 1986 through 1993, the Pinehurst 

PM10 NAA was regularly recording 

values above 100 mg/m3, and exceeded 

the 3-year expected exceedances design 

value of 1.0. From 1994 through 2015, 

Table 2 shows that the area has 

consistently met the 24-hour PM10

standard, and the EPA has reviewed and 

confirmed the data. As noted in the 

submittal, the area came into attainment 

in the same timeframe as the IDEQ’s 

completion of the first batch of 

woodstove changeouts (76 by 1994). The 

area has continued to meet the 24-hour 

PM10 NAAQS design value since 1994, 

and it has also shown a continued 

decrease in maximum annual 24-hr 

PM10 concentrations. Additionally, the 

EPA has determined that the Pinehurst 

PM10 NAA meets the 5-year average 

design value for LMP qualification as 

identified in the proposal. 

Since the proposal, the IDEQ has 

submitted and the EPA has reviewed 

and concurred on the IDEQ’s 

demonstration that elevated PM10

concentrations on three days in 

September 2017 were attributable to 

wildfire exceptional events and qualify 

for exclusion under EPA’s Exceptional 

Events Rule. The August 24, 2018 

concurrence letter to the IDEQ is 

included in the docket. With the 

exceptional event days excluded, the 

area continues to meet the LMP average 

design value for the most recent 5-year 

period, through 2017. The EPA intends 

to propose final agency action on these 

2017 exceptional events in a 

forthcoming action. 

Based on the IDEQ PM10 LMP 

submission and the EPA’s review of air 

quality monitoring data, it is reasonable 

to conclude that the measures to reduce 

PM10 in the Pinehurst PM10 NAA have 

contributed to permanent emissions 

reductions. Emissions reductions in the 

area have been maintained since 1994, 

and enforceable control measures 

remain in place as approved into the 

SIP. We therefore conclude that the area 

has met its obligations with regard to 

permanent and enforceable measures to 

maintain the 24-hour PM10 standard and 

that no further action is required. 

Comment—Annual PM10 NAAQS 

Summary—The ICL requests that the 

EPA explain why the LMP and the 

EPA’s subsequent analysis only 

evaluated the 24-hour PM10 LMP design 

value and not the annual PM10 LMP 

design value. The commenter asserts 

that both are required. 

Response—On August 9, 2001, the 

EPA issued guidance on streamlined 

maintenance plan provisions for certain 

moderate PM10 nonattainment areas 

seeking redesignation to attainment 

(Memorandum from Lydia Wegman, 

Director, Air Quality Standards and 

Strategies Division, entitled ‘‘Limited 

Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate 

PM10 Nonattainment Areas’’ (LMP 

Option Memo)). Section IV of the LMP 

Option Memo discusses LMP 

qualification and qualifying design 

values specifically. It states that ‘‘[t]he 

area should be attaining the NAAQS 

and the average PM10 design value for 

the area, based on the most recent 5 

years of air quality data at all monitors 

in the area, should be at or below 40 mg/ 

m3 for the annual PM10 NAAQS and 98 

mg/m3 for the 24-hr PM10 NAAQS with 

no violations at any monitor in the 

nonattainment area.’’ 

To qualify for the LMP option, the 

area must meet the design value test 

with respect to the standard for which 

the area was designated nonattainment.3

The Pinehurst PM10 NAA was 

designated nonattainment for the 24-hr 

PM10 NAAQS and therefore the 

appropriate statistical test is with 

respect to the 98 mg/m3 5-year average 

design value. The EPA has confirmed 

that the area meets the 5-year average 

design value of 98 mg/m3. We believe 

that the IDEQ has met the requirements 

of the LMP with regards to the 24-hr 

PM10 standard and the IDEQ does not 

need to address the annual PM10

standard. 

Comment—Federal Clean Air 

Deregulation 

Summary—The ICL states that they 

are concerned about recent actions and 

statements by federal agencies that may 

affect vehicle emissions reductions in 

the future, and how that may affect the 

Pinehurst PM10 NAA ability to attain 

and its permanence. The ICL comment 

letter specifically points to the IDEQ’s 

reference to Tier 3 vehicle standards 

and the EPA’s proposal to reduce 

Corporate Average Fuel Economy 

(CAFE) standards. The comment then 

requests that the EPA ‘‘identify any and 

all of its models and analyses that may 

be impacted by current and proposed 

deregulation of vehicle emissions. 

Furthermore, we request that any 

vehicle emission model or emission 

factor for PM10 be revised such that the 

models and factors are not based on any 

federal emission regulation currently 

under judicial or administrative 

review.’’ 

Response—We do not agree with the 

commenter’s assertion regarding the 

impact of current or proposed changes 

to motor vehicle emissions standards on 

the proposed action, because the 

Pinehurst PM10 NAA does not rely on 

motor vehicle emissions reductions for 

attainment or its continued maintenance 

of the NAAQS. Additionally, there are 

no proposed changes to Tier 3 vehicle 

standards and proposed CAFE standards 

have minimal effect on criteria 

pollutants, their focus instead being on 

greenhouse gas emissions reductions. 

When reviewing the submitted 

Pinehurst PM10 2013 Emissions 

Inventory in Table 7 of the IDEQ’s 

submittal, the primary source of PM10 is 

residential wood combustion at 17.75 

tons per year (TPY), which is 44.5% of 

the PM10 emissions in the area. Road 

dust, paved and unpaved, is the next 

largest contributor at a cumulative 8.91 

TPY, or 22.3% of emissions. 

Cumulatively, residential wood 

combustion and road dust make up 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 45833 

4The IDEQ submittal and ICL comment letter use 

the terminology ‘‘contingency measures,’’ when 

referring to the CAA section 175A ‘‘contingency 

provisions’’ requirements. ‘‘Contingency measures’’ 

are associated with attainment planning and have 

different requirements. 

66.8% of the emissions inventory. 

During winter days when particulate 

matter levels are often higher, 

residential wood combustion is 212.05 

lb/day, which is 82.17% of the PM10

emissions in the area (Table 8). Paved 

road dust (unpaved is no longer part of 

the emissions inventory), is the next 

largest contributor at a 25.38 lb/day, or 

9.83% of emissions. Residential wood 

combustion currently makes up the 

majority of the emissions inventory. 

Motor vehicle emissions by comparison 

make up a very small portion of the 

emissions inventory at 1.84 

TPY(annual) and 11.09 lb/day(winter), 

or less than 5% of both the annual and 

winter emissions inventories. This is 

expected as motor vehicle emissions do 

not contribute large quantities of PM10. 

As described in section 3.4 Control 

Measures and section 3.2.2 Emissions 

Inventory Results and Adequacy 

Determination, the Pinehurst PM10 LMP 

focuses primarily on the reduction of 

PM10 emissions from residential 

woodsmoke and from road dust from 

paved and unpaved roads. The 

Pinehurst PM10 LMP itself does not take 

credit for emissions reductions from 

motor vehicle emissions reductions nor 

does it rely on it for continued 

attainment of the PM10 NAAQS. 

As mentioned in the proposal, the 

Pinehurst area has met the PM10 3-year 

design value of expected exceedance of 

1.0 or less since 1994. Additionally, the 

Pinehurst area has only recorded one 

value (in 2010) above 98 mg/m3 since 

1999 that was not the result of an 

exceptional event. The area has 

demonstrated, and EPA has confirmed, 

that the 3-yr and 5-yr design values 

qualify for the LMP option. 

Additionally, the area has demonstrated 

that it meets the LMP motor vehicle 

regional analysis, which assesses 

increases in emissions based on the 

area’s growth rate as applied to paved 

road dust emissions, unpaved road dust 

emissions, and mobile source emissions. 

It is this last category where the ICL 

comment questions if any changes in 

federal emissions requirements would 

affect the area’s ability to attain. As 

explained above, motor vehicle 

emissions in the Pinehurst NAA are not 

expected to affect the areas ability to 

continue to attain as they are less than 

5% and were not taken credit for in the 

attainment plan, nor the redesignation 

request and LMP. 

While we do not believe that any 

changes to motor vehicle emissions are 

relevant to the area’s ability to attain, we 

did a basic evaluation to determine if 

the area would continue to meet the 

LMP motor vehicle regional analysis. 

The only portion of the calculation that 

would change would be the on-road 

mobile source. Currently, that value is 

calculated using the formula in the LMP 

Option Memo: DV mobile * VMT paved, 

where the DV mobile provides a 3.6509 

mg/m3 contribution to the design value 

and VMT paved is the 0.0166 percent 

growth rate (3.6509 * 0.0166 = 0.06 mg/ 

m3 contribution). Given that the growth 

rate in Pinehurst is very small, any 

potential changes to the emissions 

standards would have a small effect on 

the design value. Taking a conservative 

assumption and doubling the DV mobile 

from 3.6509 mg/m3 to 7.3018 mg/m3, and 

applying the 0.0166 growth rate would 

only increase the mobile contribution 

from 0.06 mg/m3 contribution to 0.12 mg/ 

m3 contribution and the Pinehurst area 

would still be able meet the motor 

vehicle regional analysis test. Given the 

small contribution of motor vehicle 

emissions and low growth rate in the 

Pinehurst area, we believe the Pinehurst 

PM10 NAA LMP is sufficient and no 

further action is required. 

The ICL’s request that the EPA 

identify and revise all of its models, 

analyses, and emissions factors that may 

be impacted by current or proposed 

changes to vehicle emissions standards 

is outside of the scope of this action. 

Comment—Emission Factors 

Summary—The ICL requested that the 

EPA confirm that all woodstoves 

replaced were ‘‘Phase II,’’ and to require 

that the IDEQ revise calculations in the 

case that any of the replacements were 

not Phase II. The ICL asserts that the 

IDEQ used incorrect emissions factors 

based on a comparison of AP–42 

emissions factors to those used by IDEQ 

in the Pinehurst PM10 LMP, and 

requests an explanation for this or 

revision, whichever is more appropriate. 

Response—We disagree that the IDEQ 

used incorrect emissions factors and do 

not believe that any further calculations 

are needed. In 1988, the EPA finalized 

the residential wood heaters new source 

performance standards (NSPS) that 

required performance standards for 

woodstoves. These performance 

standards were released in two phases; 

Phase I went into effect immediately in 

1988, and Phase II went into effect in 

1990. The Phase II performance 

standards required that catalytic stoves 

have an emission rate of 4.1g/hr or less 

and non-catalytic stoves have an 

emissions rate of 7.5 g/hr or less. All 

stoves that have been replaced in 

Pinehurst occurred after Phase II 

standards were in place. Additionally, 

we have received confirmation from 

IDEQ that these changeouts were 

completed and that they were Phase II 

EPA certified stoves. 

With regard to the ICL’s request for 

explanation of the emissions factors 

used, we reviewed the emissions factors 

(EFs) for residential wood combustion 

that IDEQ used and found them 

consistent with the EPA EFs and 

methodology used in the 2014 National 

Emissions Inventory. The IDEQ used 

EFs derived from EPA’s Residential 

Wood Combustion Emissions 

Estimation Tool version 3.1 (October 

2016) that are more up to date than the 

EFs in AP–42, which were last updated 

in 1996 for this source category. We 

have included in the docket the 

documentation for v3.1 and 3.2 of the 

Residential Wood Combustion 

Emissions Estimation Tool, which has 

the emissions factors used and the 

references for those EFs. Both versions 

of the tool use the same EFs. 

In response to the comment, we have 

confirmed with the IDEQ that the 

changeouts were with phase II or better 

EPA certified stoves. We have also 

confirmed that the IDEQ emissions 

inventory assumptions and calculations 

are correct and that the appropriate EFs 

were used. 

Comment—Contingency Plan 

Summary—The ICL requested that the 

EPA further explain how the IDEQ’s 

Contingency Plan is compliant with 

section 175A of the CAA. The comment 

provides a summary with references to 

CAA section 175A, the Calcagni Memo 

that provides guidance for maintenance 

plans, and the LMP Option Memo that 

provides guidance for LMPs. 

Response—While the commenter 

correctly identifies that CAA section 

175A provides the statutory 

requirements for maintenance plan 

requirements, and that the LMP Option 

Memo provides guidance for 

contingency provisions under the LMP 

option, the ICL’s contention that 

contingency provisions 4 must be fully 

adopted and take effect within one year 

and without further legislative action is 

incorrect. These requirements do not 

appear in the CAA section 175A 

requirements nor the LMP Option 

Memo, and are contradicted by the 

Calcagni Memo, EPA’s long-standing 

interpretation of redesignation and 

maintenance plan requirements. There, 

it states, ‘‘For the purposes of section 

175A, a State is not required to have 

fully adopted contingency measures that 

will take effect without further action by 

the State in order for the maintenance 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
45834 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

plan to be approved.’’ Calcagni Memo at 

12; see also Greenbaum v. EPA, 370 

F.3d 527, 541 (6th Cir. 2004) (upholding 

this portion of the Calcagni Memo). 

CAA section 175A(d) and EPA’s 

interpretation of that provision as set 

out in the Calcagni Memo and the LMP 

Option Memo provide the standards by 

which the EPA must evaluate 

contingency plans. Section 175A(d) 

states that ‘‘[e]ach plan revision 

submitted under this section shall 

contain such contingency provisions as 

the Administrator deems necessary to 

assure that the State will promptly 

correct any violation of the standard 

which occurs after the redesignation of 

the area as an attainment area. Such 

provisions shall include a requirement 

that the State will implement all 

measures with respect to the control of 

the air pollutant concerned which were 

contained in the State implementation 

plan for the area before redesignation of 

the area as an attainment area.’’ The 

Calcagni Memo and the LMP Option 

memo further elaborate that ‘‘Section 

175A of the Act states that a 

maintenance plan must include 

contingency provisions, as necessary, to 

promptly correct any violation of the 

NAAQS which may occur after 

redesignation of the area to attainment. 

These contingency measures do not 

have to be fully adopted at the time of 

redesignation. However, the 

contingency plan is considered to be an 

enforceable part of the SIP and the State 

should ensure that the contingency 

measures are adopted as soon as 

possible once they are triggered by a 

specific event. The contingency plan 

should identify the measures to be 

adopted, and provide a schedule and 

procedure for adoption and 

implementation of the measures if they 

are required. Normally, the 

implementation of contingency 

measures is triggered by a violation of 

the NAAQS but the State may wish to 

establish other triggers to prevent a 

violation of the NAAQS, such as an 

exceedance of the NAAQS.’’ 

The EPA has determined that the 

IDEQ’s contingency plan meets the 

requirements of Section 175A(d) and the 

EPA’s guidance memos. Section 3.5 of 

the IDEQ’s submittal confirms that all 

measures relied upon for attainment, 

including woodstove changeouts, 

voluntary curtailment program, home 

weatherization, and public awareness 

campaign continue to be in place and 

will be strengthened if the PM10

standard is exceeded. If the Pinehurst 

area exceeds the standard, Section 3.5.1 

identifies the Annual Network Plan 

monitoring data as the triggering 

mechanism for contingency provisions. 

A violation cited in the Annual Network 

Plan would trigger a schedule and 

process for IDEQ to examine the data, 

assess the source of the problem, and 

identify which contingency provision to 

adopt and implement. The submitted 

plan lists potential provisions focused 

on control of woodsmoke and road dust, 

the two primary sources of PM10 in the 

nonattainment area. The submitted 

contingency provisions meet the CAA 

section 175A requirement to continue 

implementing measures relied upon for 

attainment. There is an automatic 

process on a set schedule by which the 

Pinehurst area’s design value is 

evaluated annually (i.e., the Annual 

Network Plan submittal-reviewapproval), and a violation would trigger 

the state to be required to evaluate, 

identify, adopt, and implement 

contingency provisions best suited 

towards bringing the area back into 

attainment. Therefore, the EPA is 

finalizing approval of the IDEQ’s plan as 

meeting the requirements of section 

175A. 

III. Final Action 

The EPA is approving the Pinehurst 

PM10 NAA LMP submitted by the IDEQ 

and concurrently redesignating the area 

to attainment for the PM10 NAAQS. 

Related to this action, the EPA is taking 

final agency action on the September 15, 

2013, high wind exceptional event at 

the Pinehurst monitoring station. 

Additionally, the EPA is approving the 

West Silver Valley annual PM2.5 base 

year emissions inventory as meeting 

CAA section 172(c)(3) requirements. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Orders 

Review 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. 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 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 

FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory 

action because SIP approvals are 

exempted under Executive Order 12866; 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• does not provide the EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or 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 rule does not have tribal 

implications and it 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). 

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. The 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 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 176 / Tuesday, September 11, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 45835 

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by November 13, 2018. 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 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur dioxide. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: August 30, 2018. 

Michelle L. Pirzadeh, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

For the reasons set forth in the 

preamble, 40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are 

amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart N—Idaho 

■ 2. In § 52.670, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding an entry at the 

end of the table for ‘‘Pinehurst PM10

Limited Maintenance Plan’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.670 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED IDAHO NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES

Name of SIP 

provision 

Applicable geographic or 

nonattainment area 

State 

submittal 

date 

EPA approval date Comments 

*******

Pinehurst PM10 Limited Maintenance Plan.Shoshone County; Pinehurst Expansion Area and City of Pinehurst.9/29/2017 9/11/2018, ......................................

[Insert Federal Register citation] ..

PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS 

FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING 

PURPOSES 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

■ 4. In § 81.313, the table entitled 

‘‘Idaho-PM–10’’ is amended by revising 

the entry for ‘‘Eastern WashingtonNorthern Idaho Interstate AQCR 62 

(Idaho portion):’’ to read as follows: 

§ 81.313 Idaho. 

* * * * * 

IDAHO PM–10 

Designated area 

Designation Classification 

Date Type Date Type 

*******

Eastern Washington-Northern Idaho Interstate AQCR 62 (Idaho portion): 

Shoshone County: Pinehurst Expansion Area Northwest quarter of the 

Northwest quarter, Section 8, Township 48 North, Range 2 East; Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter, Section 8, Township 48, North, 

Range 2 East; Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter, Section 8, 

Township 48 North, Range 2 East; Southwest quarter, Section 8, Township 48 North, Range 2 East; Southwest quarter of the Southwest quarter, Section 48 North, Range 2 East, Boise Base (known as ‘‘Pinehurst 

expansion area’’).

October 11, 2018 Attainment ............ ..............................

City of Pinehurst .............................................................................................. October 11, 2018 Attainment ............ ..............................

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2018–19600 Filed 9–10–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES