```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 206 (Thursday, October 24, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 84842-84845]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-24714]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2024-0430: FRL-12243-01-R10]

Air Plan Approval; Washington; Olympic Region Clean Air Agency, 
Recreational Fires

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a revision to the Washington State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
that was submitted by the Department of Ecology (Ecology) in 
coordination with the Olympic Region Clean Air Agency (ORCAA). In 2013, 
Ecology and ORCAA inadvertently submitted for incorporation into the 
SIP a ban on small, recreational fires in Thurston County. These fires 
are defined as having a maximum pile size of three feet in diameter by 
two feet high using seasoned firewood or charcoal, generally associated 
with backyard, summer campfires. Ecology and ORCAA provided a review of 
the historical record to demonstrate that the ban on recreational fires 
was not relied upon

[[Page 84843]]

for attainment, maintenance, or reasonable further progress in the 
Thurston County area. Ecology and ORCAA also provided data to 
demonstrate that removing the ban on recreational fires would not 
interfere with maintenance of the national ambient air quality 
standards. Therefore, we are proposing to approve the request by 
Ecology and ORCAA to remove this provision from the SIP.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 25, 2024.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2024-0430 at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any 
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located 
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other 
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA 
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, 
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Hunt, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth 
Avenue--Suite 155, Seattle, WA 98101, at (206) 553-0256, or 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background for Proposed Action
    A. Review of Attainment and Maintenance Plan Control 
Requirements
    B. Review of Particulate Matter Monitoring Data
II. The EPA's Proposed Action
III. Incorporation by Reference
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background for Proposed Action

A. Review of Attainment and Maintenance Plan Control Requirements

    On August 7, 1987, the EPA identified a portion of Thurston County 
as a ``Group I'' area of concern due to measured violations of the 
then-newly promulgated 24-hour national ambient air quality standard 
(NAAQS) for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 
or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers, referred to as PM10 
(52 FR 29383). The Thurston County PM10 area consists of the 
adjoining cities of Olympia, Lacey, and Tumwater, Washington. 
Geographically, the area is characterized by low rolling terrain with 
hills rising higher toward its southern and western boundaries. The 
surrounding hills trap pollutants during certain meteorological 
conditions occurring in the late fall and winter, called inversions, 
that create a shallow, stagnant layer of air near ground level. Studies 
at the time showed that woodsmoke from residential home heating 
contributed 80-95% of ambient PM10 concentrations on the 
high pollution days of concern. In response to this problem in Thurston 
County and other areas in the State, the Washington Legislature adopted 
a comprehensive, statewide residential wood heating control program in 
1987. Ecology promulgated regulations to implement the program under 
Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 173-433 Solid Fuel Burning Device 
Standards, establishing a curtailment program regulating fireplace and 
woodstove usage on high PM10 concentration days, as well as 
other requirements related to residential wood heating. This set of 
regulations, and ORCAA's implementation and enforcement of the 
regulations, formed the control measures relied upon in the attainment 
plan submitted in February 1989.
    On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments under 
section 107(d)(4)(B), designated the Thurston County Group I area as 
nonattainment for PM10 by operation of law. To address the 
additional moderate area requirements imposed by the 1990 CAA 
Amendments, Ecology submitted a supplement to the attainment plan in 
November 1991. However, the 1991 supplement to the attainment plan did 
not alter the primary focus on residential wood heating. The EPA took 
final action to approve the entire plan on July 27, 1993 (58 FR 40056). 
Importantly, in our final action, we clarified that the open burning 
ban for the area, which includes the smaller subset of recreational 
fires, was not submitted for approval and was not relied upon to 
demonstrate attainment of the PM10 NAAQS.
    The implementation of WAC 173-433 rapidly brought the area into 
attainment by 1991. As PM10 levels in the area steadily 
declined, the EPA redesignated the Thurston County nonattainment area 
to a maintenance area on October 4, 2000 (65 FR 59128). In addition to 
approving Ecology's redesignation request for the area, the EPA also 
approved a maintenance plan. The maintenance plan reaffirmed that the 
residential wood heating program was responsible for the permanent and 
enforceable reductions and would ensure continued compliance with the 
PM10 NAAQS for ten years, without any changes to the control 
measures already in place.
    On July 1, 2013, Ecology and ORCAA submitted a limited maintenance 
plan to fulfill the second 10-year planning requirement of Clean Air 
Act section 175A(b) to ensure compliance through 2020. A limited 
maintenance plan is used when monitored PM10 concentrations 
are very low relative to the NAAQS, and the suite of control measures 
that brought the area into attainment remain in place. In this case, 
the EPA promulgated a new 24-hour NAAQS for particulate matter with an 
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers, 
referred to as PM2.5 (62 FR 38652, July 18, 1997). The EPA 
subsequently revised the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 
micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\), while leaving the 24-hour 
PM10 NAAQS unchanged at 150 [micro]g/m\3\. Ecology and ORCAA 
submitted a demonstration as part of the 2013 limited maintenance plan 
to show that converting the existing residential wood heating program 
from a focus on PM10 to the new PM2.5 standard 
would continue to protect the PM10 NAAQS. The agencies 
provided an analysis of PM10 and PM2.5 data 
collected by collocated Federal reference monitors at the Thurston 
County monitoring site, finding that in the critical winter season, the 
majority of PM10 was PM2.5. The statistical 
relationship between the two PM parameters indicated that 
PM2.5 levels would need to exceed 139 [micro]g/m\3\ before 
the PM10 NAAQS was exceeded. Therefore, the State determined 
that conversion of the residential wood heating program from a focus on 
the PM10 NAAQS to the PM2.5 NAAQS would increase 
the stringency and effectiveness of the program. In conjunction with 
this demonstration, Ecology and ORCAA submitted revised State and local 
regulations to reflect the update to the PM2.5 NAAQS and 
wood burning, generally. It was during this update that Ecology and 
ORCAA inadvertently submitted ORCAA regulation 6.2.7(c) banning 
recreational fires in the area, which was not a control measure 
contained or relied upon in the attainment or maintenance plans. On 
October 3, 2013, EPA approved ORCAA regulation 6.2.7(c) into the ORCAA 
portion of the

[[Page 84844]]

Washington SIP as part of EPA's approval of the area's second 10-year 
PM10 limited maintenance plan (78 FR 61188).

B. Review of Particulate Matter Monitoring Data

    In addition to providing a historical analysis that ORCAA 
regulation 6.2.7(c) was not relied upon as part of the 1989 and 1991 
attainment plans or the 1999 maintenance plan, ORCAA provided an 
analysis of particulate matter monitoring data to show that removing 
the ban on recreational fires is highly unlikely to affect compliance 
with the PM10 or PM2.5 NAAQS in any meaningful 
way.\1\ A graph of maximum summer and winter concentrations in Thurston 
County, calculated with the EPA's assistance and included in docket for 
this action, shows two important trends. The first trend is that, 
historically, winter concentrations are well above summer 
concentrations as the season of concern. As noted by ORCAA in the 
agency's demonstration, ``if we consider the usual backyard social 
event with a BBQ and people getting together and perhaps in the evening 
sitting around a fire, those generally happen in the warmer months of 
the year which are opposite of the wood stove season use.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As part of the 2013 limited maintenance plan, the EPA 
approved use of PM2.5 monitoring data as a surrogate for 
PM10. Thurston County does not experience significant 
windblown dust events like some eastern Washington maintenance 
areas, therefore the statistical relationship between 
PM2.5 and PM10 can be relied upon with a high 
degree of confidence in the Thurston area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Even if one does not accept that assumption, the second trend shows 
the diminishing PM10 concentrations in the winter season, 
both in terms of maximum and mean PM10 concentrations. The 
EPA attributes this to two factors. The first is the conversion of the 
residential wood heating program to the more stringent 24-hour 
PM2.5 NAAQS enshrined in the Ecology and ORCAA regulations 
and submitted as part of the 2013 limited maintenance plan, which led 
to the implementation of more stringent thresholds for when wood stove 
use is curtailed due to air quality conditions. The second factor is 
the Ecology grant program administered by ORCAA which replaced 
uncertified wood burning devices with certified devices and non-
emitting devices such as heat pumps.
    The EPA proposes to determine that this significant decline in 
particulate matter emissions over the years almost certainly offsets 
any potential emissions growth from allowing small, recreational fires. 
Both graphs provided by ORCAA shows declining PM10 
concentrations, especially during the winter months when concentrations 
tend to be highest. The first graph representing ``max'' concentrations 
indicates that recent levels are consistently less than a third of the 
150 [micro]g/m\3\ PM10 NAAQS. Additionally, the second graph 
representing ``average'' conditions indicates that the mean 
concentrations for both summer and winter are approximately 10 
[micro]g/m\3\, less than a tenth of the 150 [micro]g/m\3\ 
PM10 NAAQS. Given these extremely low concentrations, the 
EPA proposes to find that it is highly unlikely that potential 
emissions growth from removing the ban on recreational fires could 
imperil compliance with the NAAQS. Even if one were to take that worst 
case scenario, the EPA notes that ORCAA Rule 6.2.6 Curtailment remains 
in the approved SIP and bans any form of outdoor burning, including 
recreational fires, on high concentration days when a burn ban has been 
declared by ORCAA.

II. The EPA's Proposed Action

    The EPA is proposing to approve ORCAA regulation 6.2.7, State 
effective March 6, 2023, and incorporate it by reference into the 
Washington SIP at 40 CFR 52.2470(c)--Table 6--Additional Regulations 
Approved for the Olympic Region Clean Air Agency (ORCAA) Jurisdiction. 
The effect of this action would be to repeal paragraph (c) of ORCAA 
regulation 6.2.7 which historically banned recreational fires within 
the city limits of Lacey, Olympia, and Tumwater, and unincorporated 
areas of Thurston County lying within or between the municipal 
boundaries of these cities. Based on the demonstration provided by 
Ecology and ORCAA, we propose to find that the revision will not 
interfere with attainment of the national ambient air quality standards 
or other applicable requirements of the Clean Air Act.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, the EPA is proposing to include in a final rule 
regulatory text that includes the incorporation by reference. In 
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to 
incorporate by reference ORCAA regulation 6.2.7, State effective March 
6, 2023, as described in section II of this preamble. The EPA has made, 
and will continue to make, these documents generally available through 
https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 10 Office (please 
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section of this preamble for more information).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Clean Air Act 
and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve State 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, 
April 23, 1997) because it approves a State program;
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the Clean Air Act.
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian 
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian Tribe 
has demonstrated that a Tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 
Indian country, the rulemaking does not have Tribal implications and 
will not impose substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or 
preempt Tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 
November 9, 2000).
    Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental

[[Page 84845]]

Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 
February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address 
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects'' of their actions on communities with environmental justice 
(EJ) concerns to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law. 
The EPA defines EJ as ``the fair treatment and meaningful involvement 
of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income 
with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of 
environmental laws, regulations, and policies.'' The EPA further 
defines the term fair treatment to mean that ``no group of people 
should bear a disproportionate burden of environmental harms and risks, 
including those resulting from the negative environmental consequences 
of industrial, governmental, and commercial operations or programs and 
policies.''
    The Olympic Region Clean Air Agency did not evaluate environmental 
justice considerations as part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and 
applicable implementing regulations neither prohibit nor require such 
an evaluation. The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and did not 
consider EJ in this action. Due to the nature of the action being taken 
here, this action is expected to have a neutral impact on the air 
quality of the affected area. Consideration of EJ is not required as 
part of this action, and there is no information in the record 
inconsistent with the stated goal of Executive Order 12898 of achieving 
environmental justice for communities with EJ concerns.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen 
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: October 18, 2024.
Casey Sixkiller,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2024-24714 Filed 10-23-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```