Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 154 / Tuesday, August 11, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 48033 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free Internet access to the 

official edition of the Federal Register 

and the Code of Federal Regulations is 

available via the Federal Digital System 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you 

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Adobe Portable Document 

Format (PDF). To use PDF you must 

have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Dated: August 5, 2015. 

Michael K. Yudin, 

Assistant Secretary for Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2015–19617 Filed 8–10–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2007–0112; FRL–9932–21– 

Region 10] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Washington 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 

submitted by the State of Washington, 

Department of Ecology (Ecology). These 

revisions pertain to the plan to maintain 

the 1997 8-hour national ambient air 

quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone in 

the Vancouver portion of the Portland/ 

Vancouver Air Quality Maintenance 

Area (Pdx/Van AQMA). The 

maintenance plan for this area meets 

Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements and 

demonstrates that the Vancouver 

portion of the Pdx/Van AQMA will be 

able to remain in attainment for the 

1997 ozone NAAQS through 2015. The 

EPA is approving the maintenance plan 

and minor revisions to the motor 

vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/ 

M) regulations in the statewide 

Emission Check Program. 

DATES: This action is effective on 

September 10, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R10–OAR– 

2007–0112. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the http://

www.regulations.gov Web site. Although 

listed in the index, some information 

may not be publicly available, i.e., 

Confidential Business Information or 

other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically through http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste, 

and Toxics, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, 

Washington 98101. The EPA requests 

that you contact the person listed in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section to schedule your inspection. The 

Regional Office’s official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Claudia Vergnani Vaupel, (206) 553– 

6121, or by email at vaupel.claudia@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

the EPA. 

I. Background 

The background for this action is 

discussed in more detail in our May 5, 

2010 proposal. See 75 FR 24542. In that 

action, the EPA proposed to approve the 

CAA 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone 

maintenance plan that the State of 

Washington submitted to demonstrate 

the continued attainment of the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS (the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS) in the Vancouver portion of 

the Pdx/Van AQMA. Areas like the 

Vancouver portion of the Pdx/Van 

AQMA, that had been designated 

attainment (unclassifiable/attainment) 

for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and had 

CAA 175A maintenance plans in place 

for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, were 

required under 40 CFR 51.905, to 

submit 110(a)(1) plans for 

antibacksliding purposes to provide for 

maintenance of the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for at least 10 years after 

designation for the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. In the May 5, 2010 proposed 

action, the EPA found that the 

maintenance plan and its supporting 

rules met the requirements of the CAA. 

The EPA also proposed to approve 

revisions to the I/M regulations in the 

statewide Emission Check Program. The 

revisions enhance the clarity of the rules 

and update them to reflect changing 

technology in automobiles, including 

allowing late model vehicles to be tested 

with their on-board diagnostic systems 

instead of with a tail-pipe test. The 

revisions also remove inspection fee 

provisions that had been previously 

approved into the SIP. 

II. Response to Comments 

The EPA received one comment on 

our May 5, 2010 proposed approval (75 

FR 24542). The comment from the 

Sierra Club raised concerns about 

affirmative defense provisions 

applicable to violations that occur due 

to excess emissions during startup, 

shutdown, maintenance and upsets 

(SSM) in the existing Washington SIP. 

The Sierra Club commented that the 

existence of the affirmative defense 

provisions in the underlying SIP 

compromises the ability of the 

maintenance plan to achieve its goals 

and threatens to cause or contribute to 

NAAQS violations in the Pdx/Van 

AQMA and downwind. Specifically, the 

Sierra Club described three concerns 

with the affirmative defense provisions 

in Southwest Clean Air Agency 

(SWCAA) and Ecology regulations, 

SWCAA 400–107(4)–(6) and 

Washington Administrative Code 

(WAC) 173–400–107(4)–(6). The 

commenter argued that the affirmative 

defense for excess emissions during 

startup and shutdown should be 

removed because the provisions ‘‘lack 

justification’’ and because excess 

emissions ‘‘are already taken into 

consideration when setting emission 

standards and limits’’ and the regulatory 

provisions are inconsistent with EPA 

guidance for compliance with CAA 

requirements for SIP provisions as 

expressed in the Memorandum of 

Steven A. Herman and Robert 

Perciasepe, Policy on Excess Emissions 

During Malfunctions, Startup and 

Shutdown (August 11, 1999) (the 

‘‘Herman Memo’’). The commenter also 

argued that the affirmative defense for 

excess emissions during scheduled 

maintenance should be eliminated 

‘‘because routine maintenance is part of 

normal operations and should not, by 

itself, justify excess emissions’’ and that 

the regulatory provisions are 

inconsistent with the interpretation of 

the CAA in the Herman Memo. Finally, 

the commenter argued that the 

affirmative defense for excess emissions 

during upsets (i.e., malfunctions) is not 

consistent with the EPA interpretation 

of the requirements of the CAA in the 

Herman Memo for such provisions. 

The SWCAA and Ecology regulations 

that provide for an affirmative defense 

for emissions during certain events that 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
48034 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 154 / Tuesday, August 11, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

1May 20, 2005 memorandum from Lydia N. 

Wegman to Air Division Directors, Maintenance 

Plan Guidance Document for Certain 8-hour Ozone 

Areas Under Section 110(a)(1) of Clean Air Act. 

2Furthermore, the commenter’s characterization 

of the EPA’s interpretation of the CAA with respect 

to affirmative defense provisions in SIPs is no 

longer current. Readers interested in the EPA’s 

position on affirmative defense provisions should 

refer to the SSM SIP Call at 80 FR 33840 (June 12, 

2015). 

the commenter identified as 

objectionable are not a part of the 

specific SIP submission that was the 

subject of the EPA’s proposed action but 

were, rather, approved into the 

Washington SIP in 1995. The EPA 

acknowledges that these specific 

provisions are not consistent with CAA 

requirements, in light of more recent 

court decisions and regulatory actions. 

However, the EPA does not agree that 

the affirmative defense provisions in the 

Washington SIP provide a basis for 

disapproval of the maintenance plan 

submission. The EPA’s review for this 

submission is limited to whether the 

specific maintenance requirements in 

CAA section 110(a)(1) and the 

provisions of the EPA’s Phase 1 

Implementation Rule (40 CFR 

51.905(a)(3) and (4)) as explained in our 

May 20, 2005 guidance),1 have been 

met. While the EPA understands the 

commenter’s concerns about the 

existing SWCAA and Ecology SIP 

provisions, in the context of a 110(a)(1) 

maintenance plan approval the EPA is 

not required to re-evaluate the validity 

of all previously approved SIP 

provisions. 

Although it is not required to address 

existing affirmative defense provisions 

in the context of this action on a 

maintenance plan, the EPA does have 

other authority to address alleged 

deficiencies in existing SIP provisions. 

In particular, the EPA has authority 

under section 110(k)(5) to address 

existing SIP deficiencies whenever it 

determines that a SIP provision is 

substantially inadequate. The EPA notes 

that since receipt of the comments 

discussed above on this action, the EPA 

finalized a call for SIP revisions (SSM 

SIP Call) as necessary to remove the 

identified affirmative defense provisions 

from the Washington SIP. See 80 FR 

33840, June 12, 2015. Thus, the EPA has 

addressed the concerns regarding the 

affirmative defense provisions in the 

SWCAA and Ecology regulations raised 

by the commenter in a separate action.2

The EPA emphasizes that its approval 

of a maintenance plan does not mean 

that the SIP for the state in question 

fully meets each and every requirement 

of the CAA. More specifically, this 

approval does not constitute a finding 

that Washington’s SIP, including the 

affirmative defense provisions, meets all 

CAA requirements. Nor does this final 

action contradict the EPA’s separate 

finding in the SSM SIP Call that certain 

provisions in the Washington SIP, 

including the SWCAA rules, are 

substantially inadequate and therefore 

must be addressed to be consistent with 

CAA requirements. Rather, the nature of 

today’s final action is a finding 

addressing the adequacy of the SIP to 

meet certain identified maintenance 

requirements. As discussed in our 

proposed action, the following is a 

summary of our evaluation of the 

submission against the five maintenance 

requirements in CAA section 110(a)(1) 

and the provisions of the EPA’s Phase 

1 Implementation Rule (40 CFR 

51.905(a)(3) and (4)): 

1. An attainment inventory, which is 

based on actual typical summer day 

emissions of volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs) and oxides of 

nitrogen (NOX) from a base year chosen 

by the state. 

Ecology provided a comprehensive 

and current emissions inventory for 

NOX and VOCs for the 2002 base year 

from which it projected emissions. The 

inventory is based on emissions from a 

‘‘typical summer day.’’ 

2. A maintenance demonstration 

which shows how the area will remain 

in compliance with the 8-hour ozone 

standard for 10 years after the effective 

date of the designation. 

Ecology projected that the total 

emissions of ozone precursors from 

Vancouver will decrease through 2015, 

which is further than 10 years from the 

effective date of the initial designations 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard (See 

69 FR 23858, April 30, 2004). Ecology 

used air quality modeling to assess the 

comprehensive impacts of growth 

through 2015 on ozone levels in the area 

and demonstrated to the EPA that the 

highest predicted design value for 

Vancouver is 0.072 parts per million, 

which is below the 1997 and the 2008 

ozone NAAQS. 

3. A commitment to continue to 

operate ambient air quality monitors to 

verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone 

standard. 

Ecology commits to continue 

operating air quality monitoring stations 

in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 

throughout the maintenance period to 

verify maintenance of the 1997 8-hour 

ozone standard, and will submit quality 

assured ozone data to the EPA through 

the Air Quality System. 

4. A contingency plan that will ensure 

that any violation of the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS will be promptly corrected. 

The provisions in the contingency 

plan are linked to ambient 

concentrations of ozone and would be 

triggered if measured ozone levels at 

any of the ozone monitoring sites 

exceed early-warning thresholds or if a 

violation of the 8-hour ozone standard 

occurs. The contingency measures 

include a range of response actions that 

may be selected for implementation. 

5. An explanation of how the state 

will verify continued attainment of the 

standard under the maintenance plan. 

Ecology will continue to monitor 

ambient air quality ozone levels in the 

Vancouver portion of the Pdx/Van 

AQMA and will update countywide 

emission inventories every three years. 

If ambient ozone levels increase, 

Ecology will evaluate the emissions 

inventory against the 2002 and 2015 

inventories in the maintenance plan. 

Because the commenter’s concerns 

with the affirmative defense provisions 

of Washington’s SIP have been 

addressed through the SSM SIP Call and 

the instant action does not directly 

affect these existing provisions in 

Washington’s SIP, the EPA is taking 

final action to approve the ozone 

maintenance plan as originally 

proposed. 

The EPA emphasizes that approval of 

the maintenance plan does not relieve 

SWCAA or Ecology of the responsibility 

to remove legally deficient SIP 

provisions pursuant to a SIP call. To the 

contrary, the EPA maintains that 

affirmative defense provisions are 

contrary to CAA requirements and has 

taken separate action to require 

correction of those deficiencies. For an 

explanation of the EPA’s interpretation 

of the CAA with respect to affirmative 

defense provisions in SIPs, see 80 FR 

33840, 33981 (June 12, 2015). 

III. Final Action 

The EPA is approving the 110(a)(1) 

ozone maintenance plan for the 

Vancouver portion of the Pdx/Van 

AQMA and the new industrial growth 

allowances that have been used in the 

maintenance demonstration for this 

submission. Additionally, the EPA is 

incorporating by reference into the 

federally enforceable SIP the revisions 

to the I/M provisions (WAC Chapter 

173–422) that merely reflect the changes 

as a result of technology upgrades in 

automobiles and remove inspection fee 

provisions that had been previously 

approved into the SIP. 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is finalizing 

regulatory text that includes 

incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, the EPA is finalizing the 

incorporation by reference of the 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 154 / Tuesday, August 11, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 48035 

Ecology regulations (WAC Chapter 173– 

422) described in the amendments to 40 

CFR part 52 set forth below. The EPA 

has made, and will continue to make, 

these documents generally available 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov and/or in hard 

copy at the appropriate EPA office (see 

the ADDRESSES section of this preamble 

for more information). 

V. 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 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 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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 

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

804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by October 13, 2015. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this action for 

the purposes of judicial review nor does 

it extend the time within which a 

petition for judicial review may be filed, 

and shall not postpone the effectiveness 

of such rule or action. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides, Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: July 30, 2015. 

Dennis J. McLerran, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, 40 CFR part 52 is 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 WW—Washington 

§ 52.2470 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 52.2470 is amended: 

■ a. In paragraph (c) Table 1— 

Regulations Approved Statewide by: 

■ i. Revising the entries 173–422–020, 

173–422–030, 173–422–031, 173–422– 

060, and 173–422–065, 173–422–070, 

173–422–075, 173–422–160, 173–422– 

190, 173–422–195; and 

■ ii. Removing the entry 173–422–130. 

■ b. In paragraph (e) in Table 2— 

ATTAINMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND 

OTHER PLANS by adding an entry for 

‘‘8-Hour Ozone 110(a)(1) Maintenance 

Plan’’ at the end of the table. 

The revisions and addition read as 

follows: 

§ 52.2470 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

TABLE 1—REGULATIONS APPROVED STATEWIDE

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date Explanations 

Washington Administrative Code, Chapter 173–422 Motor Vehicle Emission Inspection 

*******

173–422–020 ................. Definitions .................... 7/4/02 8/11/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

173–422–030 ................. Vehicle emission inspection requirement.7/4/02 8/11/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
48036 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 154 / Tuesday, August 11, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 1—REGULATIONS APPROVED STATEWIDE—Continued 

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date Explanations 

173–422–031 ................. Vehicle emission inspection schedules.7/4/02 8/11/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

* * * * * * * 

173–422–060 ................. Gasoline vehicle emission standards.7/4/02 8/11/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

173–422–065 ................. Diesel vehicle exhaust 

emission standards.

7/4/02 8/11/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

173–422–070 ................. Gasoline vehicle exhaust emission testing procedures.7/4/02 8/11/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

173–422–075 ................. Diesel vehicle inspection procedure.7/4/02 8/11/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

* * * * * * * 

173–422–160 ................. Fleet and diesel owner 

vehicle testing requirements.

3/31/95 8/11/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

Except: 

The part of 173–422–160(3) that says ‘‘of 

twelve or less dollars’’. 

* * * * * * * 

173–422–190 ................. Emission specialist authorization.7/4/02 8/11/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

173–422–195 ................. Listing of authorized 

emission specialists.

7/4/02 8/11/15 [Insert Federal 

Register citation].

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * (e) * * * 

TABLE 2—ATTAINMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND OTHER PLANS

Name of SIP provision 

Applicable 

geographic or 

nonattainment 

area 

State submittal 

date 

EPA 

Approval 

date 

Comments 

*******

8-Hour Ozone 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plan ...................................................... Vancouver ...... 1/17/2007 8/11/2015

[Insert page 

number 

where the 

document 

begins]. 

[FR Doc. 2015–19724 Filed 8–10–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0248; FRL–9932–20– 

Region 4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Georgia; 

Atlanta; Requirements for the 2008 8- 

Hour Ozone Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve a state 

implementation plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Georgia, 

through Georgia Environmental 

Protection Division (GA EPD) on 

February 6, 2015, to address the base 

year emissions inventory and emissions 

statements requirements for the 2008 8- 

hour ozone national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) for the Atlanta, 

Georgia 2008 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area (hereinafter referred 

to as the ‘‘Atlanta Area’’). These 

requirements apply to all ozone 

nonattainment areas. The Atlanta Area 

is comprised of 15 counties in Atlanta 

(Bartow, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, 

Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, 

Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, 

Newton, Paulding, and Rockdale). This 

action is being taken pursuant to the 

Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and its 

implementing regulations. 

DATES: This direct final rule is effective 

October 13, 2015 without further notice, 

unless EPA receives adverse comment 

by September 10, 2015. If EPA receives 

such comments, it will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register and inform the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2015–0248, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES