26710 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

reference. In accordance with the 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

Indiana rules 326 IAC 1–6–1, 326 IAC 

1–6–2, 326 IAC 1–6–4, 326 IAC 1–6–5, 

326 IAC 1–6–6; and 326 IAC 2–9–1, 

effective January 29, 2017, as discussed 

in Section II of this preamble. EPA has 

made, and will continue to make, these 

documents generally available through 

www.regulations.gov, and at the EPA 

Region 5 Office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

Also in this document, as described in 

section II of this preamble, EPA is 

proposing to remove provisions of the 

EPA-Approved Michigan and Minnesota 

Regulations and Statutes from the 

Michigan and Minnesota SIPs, which 

are incorporated by reference in 

accordance with the requirements of 1 

CFR part 51. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

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); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where 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 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). 

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. 

Dated: April 21, 2022. 

Debra Shore, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2022–09130 Filed 5–4–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2022–0124; FRL–9488–01– 

R10] 

Air Plan Approval; OR; Oakridge PM2.5

Redesignation to Attainment and 

Maintenance Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) proposes to redesignate 

the Oakridge, Oregon nonattainment 

area (Oakridge NAA or Oakridge area) to 

attainment for the 2006 24-hour fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS). EPA also proposes to approve 

a maintenance plan for the area 

demonstrating continued compliance 

with the PM2.5 NAAQS through 2035, 

which the Lane Regional Air Protection 

Agency (LRAPA) developed in 

coordination with the Oregon 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(ODEQ), for inclusion into the Oregon 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). The 

Oakridge PM2.5 maintenance plan was 

submitted to EPA by ODEQ along with 

the redesignation request on January 13, 

2022. Additionally, EPA proposes to 

approve the motor vehicle emissions 

budgets included in the Oakridge PM2.5

maintenance plan and inform the public 

that we are starting the adequacy 

process for the proposed motor vehicle 

emissions budgets, including a public 

comment period. EPA also proposes to 

approve additional control measures 

because incorporation of these measures 

will strengthen the Oregon SIP and 

ensure PM2.5 emissions reductions in 

the Oakridge area. Finally, EPA 

proposes to take final agency action on 

an exceptional events request submitted 

by ODEQ on July 22, 2021 and 

concurred on by EPA on April 1, 2022. 

EPA proposes these actions pursuant to 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before June 6, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

OAR–2022–0124, at https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

EPA may publish any comment received 

to its public docket. Do not 

electronically submit any information 

you consider to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information the disclosure of which 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. 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-epadockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christi Duboiski (15–H13), EPA Region 

10, 1200 Sixth Avenue (Suite 155), 

Seattle WA 98101, at (360) 753–9081, or 

duboiski.christi@epa.gov. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 26711 

1See part D of title I of the Clean Air Act and 

EPA’s Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards: State Implementation Plan 

Requirements (72 FR 20586, April 25, 2007). 

2See ‘‘State Implementation Plans; General 

Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 13498, 

April 16, 1992. 

3We note that the January 13, 2022 submittal also 

includes the Oakridge PM10 redesignation and 

maintenance plan and revisions to LRAPA’s Title 

29 rules, which EPA will address in a separate 

action. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it refers to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Clean Air Act Requirements for 

Redesignation to Attainment 

III. EPA’s Analysis of Oregon’s Submittal 

A. Attainment Determination 

B. Applicable Requirements Under Section 

110 and Part D of the CAA 

1. CAA Section 110 General SIP 

Requirements 

2. Part D of Title I Requirements 

3. Fully Approved SIP Under CAA Section 

110(k) 

C. Improvement in Air Quality Due to 

Permanent and Enforceable Measures 

D. Fully Approved Maintenance Plan 

1. Attainment Inventory 

2. Maintenance Demonstration 

3. Monitoring Network and Verification of 

Continued Attainment 

4. Contingency Plan 

E. Transportation Conformity and Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Budgets 

F. State Rule Changes To Reflect the 

Redesignation 

IV. Proposed Action 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

VI. Statutory and Executive Orders Review 

I. Background 

On October 17, 2006, EPA revised the 

level of the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, 

lowering the primary and secondary 

standards from the 1997 standard of 65 

micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) to 

35 mg/m3 (71 FR 61143). On November 

13, 2009, EPA designated a portion of 

Lane County, Oregon nonattainment for 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS (74 FR 

58688). This nonattainment area is 

referred to as the Oakridge, Oregon 

PM2.5 NAA (Oakridge NAA or Oakridge 

area). 

The Oakridge NAA boundary is a 

rectangular area that includes the City of 

Oakridge and the small town of Westfir. 

The City of Oakridge is situated in a 

valley where the middle fork of the 

Willamette River flows east to west, and 

mountains rise on the north and south 

sides. Westfir is a very small isolated 

rural mountain community also located 

in a valley along the north fork of the 

Willamette River about 1-mile NW of 

Oakridge. It is surrounded by the same 

high mountains. This topography can 

act as a barrier to air movement in the 

Oakridge NAA during temperature 

inversions, which occur in the winter 

months and are often the cause of 

elevated concentrations of PM2.5. 

Additional information pertaining to the 

specific boundary for the Oakridge NAA 

can be found in the November 13, 2009, 

final designations action for the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS (74 FR 58688). 

The nonattainment designation of the 

Oakridge NAA required Oregon to 

prepare and submit an attainment plan 

to meet statutory and regulatory 

requirements.1 ODEQ submitted this 

attainment plan to EPA on December 12, 

2012 (2012 attainment plan). EPA 

approved the description of the 

Oakridge NAA and the baseline 

emissions inventory and disapproved 

everything else submitted in the 

attainment plan on October 21, 2016 (81 

FR 72714). ODEQ submitted a 

supplement to the attainment plan on 

January 20, 2017 (2017 Oakridge 

Update). On February 8, 2018, EPA 

approved the 2017 Oakridge Update 

including the attainment year emission 

inventory, the control measures in the 

attainment plan as meeting reasonably 

available control measures/technology 

(RACM/RACT), the attainment 

demonstration, the motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (MVEBs) for PM2.5, 

the demonstration of reasonable 

progress, the quantitative milestones 

and contingency measures (83 FR 5537). 

In addition, on July 18, 2016, EPA 

granted a one-year extension, under 

CAA section 188(d), to the December 31, 

2015, Moderate attainment date for the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 Oakridge NAA (81 

FR 46612). On February 8, 2018, EPA 

finalized a determination that the 

Oakridge NAA had attained the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS (Determination 

of Attainment) by the December 31, 

2016, attainment date (83 FR 5537). 

II. Clean Air Act Requirements for 

Redesignation to Attainment 

The CAA provides the requirements 

for redesignating a nonattainment area 

to attainment. Specifically, section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, allows for 

redesignation provided that: (1) EPA 

determines that the area has attained the 

applicable NAAQS; (2) EPA has fully 

approved the applicable 

implementation plan for the area under 

section 110(k) of the CAA; (3) EPA 

determines that the improvement in air 

quality is due to permanent and 

enforceable reductions in emissions 

resulting from implementation of the 

applicable SIP and applicable Federal 

air pollutant control regulations and 

other permanent and enforceable 

reductions; (4) EPA has fully approved 

a maintenance plan for the area as 

meeting the requirements of section 

175A of the CAA; and (5) the state has 

met all requirements applicable to the 

area under section 110 and part D of the 

CAA. In this proposed action, EPA will 

review CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) 

requirements (2) and (5) together as part 

of our evaluation of Oregon’s 

redesignation request. 

EPA has provided guidance on 

redesignations in the ‘‘General 

Preamble,’’ 2 and has provided further 

guidance on processing redesignation 

requests in the following documents: (1) 

‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to 

Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ 

Memorandum from John Calcagni, 

Director, Air Quality Management 

Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter 

the ‘‘Calcagni Memo’’); (2) ‘‘State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions 

Submitted in Response to Clean Air Act 

(CAA) Deadlines,’’ Memorandum from 

John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, October 28, 1992; 

and (3) ‘‘Part D New Source Review 

(part D NSR) Requirements for Areas 

Requesting Redesignation to 

Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary 

D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for 

Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994. 

These documents are included in the 

Docket for this proposed action. 

III. EPA’s Analysis of Oregon’s 

Submittal 

EPA proposes to redesignate the 

Oakridge NAA to attainment for the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and 

proposes to approve into the Oregon SIP 

the associated Oakridge PM2.5

maintenance plan. EPA’s proposed 

approval of the redesignation request 

and maintenance plan is based upon 

EPA’s determination that the area 

continues to attain the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS and that all other 

redesignation criteria have been met for 

the area. Sections III.A through D of this 

document describe how Oregon’s 

January 13, 2022, submittal satisfies the 

requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of 

the CAA for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standard.3

Oregon’s submittal also addresses 

transportation MVEBs and emissions 

from wildfire-influenced PM2.5

concentrations recorded in the Oakridge 

NAA in 2020. EPA proposes to approve 

the MVEBs and proposes to approve the 

exclusion of ambient air quality 

monitoring data associated with the 

wildfire-influenced exceptional events 

that affected this data in September of 

2020 for the purposes of showing 

continued attainment of the NAAQS. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
26712 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

4See 40 CFR part 50 and 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix N. 5AQS is EPA’s official repository of ambient air 

data. 6Under CAA section 319(b), an exceptional event 

means an event that (i) affects air quality; (ii) is not 

reasonably controllable or preventable; (iii) is an 

event caused by human activity that is unlikely to 

recur at a particular location or a natural event; and 

(iv) is determined by EPA under the process 

established in regulations promulgated by EPA in 

accordance with section 319(b)(2) to be an 

exceptional event. For the purposes of section 

319(b), an exceptional event does not include (i) 

stagnation of air masses or meteorological 

inversions; (ii) a meteorological event involving 

high temperatures or lack of precipitation; or (iii) 

air pollution relating to source noncompliance. 

7 72 FR 13560, March 22, 2007. 

8 81 FR 68216 (October 3, 2016). We refer herein 

to the 2016 revision as the ‘‘Exceptional Events 

Rule.’’ 

9 40 CFR 50.14(b)(4). 

A. Attainment Determination 

To redesignate an area from 

nonattainment to attainment, the CAA 

requires EPA to determine that the area 

has attained the applicable NAAQS 

(CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). EPA 

determines whether an area has attained 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based 

upon measured air quality levels at each 

eligible monitoring site to produce a 

design value equal to or below 35 mg/ 

m3.4 A state must demonstrate that an 

area has attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS through submittal of ambient 

air quality data from an ambient air 

monitoring network representing 

expected maximum PM2.5

concentrations. The data must be 

quality-assured, quality-controlled and 

certified in EPA’s Air Quality System 

(AQS) and it must show that the threeyear average of valid PM2.5 98th 

percentile mass concentrations is equal 

to or below the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS (35 mg/m3), pursuant to 40 CFR 

50.13. In making this showing, three 

years of complete air quality data must 

be used. 

The Exceptional Event Rule 

Congress has recognized that it may 

not be appropriate for EPA to use 

certain monitoring data collected by the 

ambient air quality monitoring network 

and maintained in EPA’s AQS 

database 5 in certain regulatory 

determinations. Thus, in 2005, Congress 

provided the statutory authority for the 

exclusion of data influenced by 

‘‘exceptional events’’ meeting specific 

criteria by adding section 319(b) to the 

CAA.6 To implement this 2005 CAA 

amendment, EPA promulgated the 2007 

Exceptional Events Rule.7 The 2007 

Exceptional Events Rule created a 

regulatory process codified at 40 CFR 

parts 50 and 51 (sections 50.1, 50.14 and 

51.930). These regulatory sections, 

which superseded EPA’s previous 

guidance on handling data influenced 

by events, contain definitions, 

procedural requirements, requirements 

for air agency demonstrations, criteria 

for EPA’s approval of the exclusion of 

event-affected air quality data from the 

data set used for regulatory decisions, 

and requirements for air agencies to take 

appropriate and reasonable actions to 

protect public health from exceedances 

or violations of the NAAQS. In 2016, 

EPA promulgated a comprehensive 

revision to the 2007 Exceptional Events 

Rule.8 The 2016 Exceptions Events Rule 

revision included the requirement that, 

if a state demonstrates that emissions 

from a wildfire smoke event caused a 

specific air pollution concentration in 

excess of the NAAQS at a particular air 

quality monitoring location and 

otherwise satisfies the requirements of 

40 CFR 50.14, EPA must exclude that 

data from use in determinations of 

exceedances and violations.9

The Oakridge NAA Exceptional Event 

Demonstrations and Concurrences 

The CAA allows for the exclusion of 

air quality monitoring data from design 

value calculations when there are 

NAAQS exceedances caused by events, 

such as wildfires, that meet the criteria 

for an exceptional event identified in 

EPA’s Exceptional Events Rule at 40 

CFR 50.1, 50.14 and 51.930. For the 

purposes of this proposed action, on 

July 22, 2021, ODEQ submitted an 

exceptional events demonstration to 

show that PM2.5 concentrations 

recorded at the Oakridge Willamette 

Center monitor from September 11, 

2020 through September 16, 2020 were 

influenced by wildfires. EPA concurred 

on this request on April 1, 2022. 

EPA found that Oregon’s 

demonstration met the Exceptional 

Events Rule criteria and determined that 

these wildfire events had regulatory 

significance for purposes of calculating 

the area’s most recent design value to 

demonstrate the area continues to attain 

the standard in order to redesignate the 

area to attainment for the PM2.5 NAAQS. 

As such, EPA proposes to take final 

regulatory action on the concurred 

dates, as detailed in the docket, as 

exceptional events to be removed from 

the data set used for regulatory 

purposes. For this proposed action, EPA 

will rely on the calculated values that 

exclude the event-influenced data for 

the purpose of demonstrating continued 

attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Further details on Oregon’s analyses 

and EPA’s concurrences can be found in 

the docket for this regulatory action. 

While EPA may agree with Oregon’s 

request to exclude event-influenced air 

quality monitoring data from regulatory 

decisions, these regulatory actions 

require EPA to provide an opportunity 

for public comment on the claimed 

exceptional events and all supporting 

data prior to EPA taking final agency 

action. This proposed action provides 

the public with an opportunity to 

comment on the claimed exceptional 

events, all supporting documents and 

EPA’s proposed concurrence with 

Oregon’s request. 

Evaluation of Continued Attainment 

As previously noted, on February 8, 

2018, EPA finalized a Determination of 

Attainment for the Oakridge NAA based 

upon quality-assured and certified 

ambient air quality monitoring data for 

the 2014–2016 design value period (83 

FR 5537). The monitoring data used as 

the basis for the Determination of 

Attainment under CAA section 188(b)(2) 

is provided in Table 1 of this document. 

TABLE 1—OAKRIDGE AREA PM2.5 2016 ATTAINING DESIGN VALUE

Monitor AQS site ID 

98th percentile value (μg/m3) 2014–2016 

design value 2014 2015 2016 

Willamette Center ................................................................ 410392013 41.1 28.9 21.7 31 

For this proposed action, EPA 

reviewed the subsequent PM2.5 ambient 

air monitoring data in the Oakridge area 

for the monitoring design value periods 

of 2017–2020. Consistent with the 

requirements at 40 CFR part 50, this 

ambient monitoring data in EPA’s AQS 

has been quality-assured, qualitycontrolled and certified by ODEQ. As 

Table 2 indicates, the Oakridge NAA 

has continued to attain the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS since EPA issued its 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 26713 

10Calcagni Memo, 3; Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426, 

438 (6th Cir. 2001); and Southwestern Pennsylvania 

Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–990 

(6th Cir. 1998). 

11See the General Preamble for further 

explanation of these requirements. 57 FR 13498 

(April 16, 1992). 

12See 75 FR 36023, 36026 (June 24, 2010) and 

citations within. 

13The LRAPA portion of the federally-approved 

Oregon SIP can be viewed at https://www.epa.gov/ 

sips-or/epa-approved-regulations-oregon-sip. 

14See 81 FR 58010 (August 24, 2016). Codified 

at 40 CFR part 51, subpart Z. 

February 8, 2018, Determination of 

Attainment for the area based on the 

2016 attaining design value shown in 

Table 1 of this document. 

TABLE 2—OAKRIDGE AREA PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES (2017–2020) 

Monitor 

98th percentile values (μg/m3) 2017–2020 design values a (μg/m3) 

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2017 2018 2019 2020 

Willamette Center .............................................................................. 28.9 21.7 35.7 33.2 36.7 32.2 29 30 35 34 

aEPA concurred on the removal of exceptional events data for 2017 in a letter dated 5/21/2020 and exceptional events data for 2020 in a letter dated 4/01/2022. 

The specified data was excluded from AQS. 

EPA’s review of the monitoring data 

supports the previous determination 

that the area has attained the standard 

and therefore EPA finds it is appropriate 

to conclude the area has continued to 

attain the NAAQS through 2020, based 

on uninterrupted attaining design 

values at the Willamette Center monitor. 

B. Applicable Requirements Under 

Section 110 and Part D of the CAA 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v) of the 

CAA states that for an area to be 

redesignated to attainment, it must be 

determined that the Administrator has 

fully approved the applicable 

implementation plan for the area under 

CAA section 110(k) and all the 

requirements applicable to the Area 

under section 110 of the CAA (general 

SIP requirements) and part D of Title I 

of the CAA (SIP requirements for 

nonattainment areas) must be met. We 

interpret this to mean that, for a 

redesignation request to be approved, 

the state must have met all requirements 

that applied to the subject area prior to, 

or at the time of, submitting a complete 

redesignation request. EPA may rely on 

prior SIP approvals in approving a 

redesignation request 10 as well as any 

additional measure it may approve in 

conjunction with a redesignation action. 

1. CAA Section 110 General SIP 

Requirements 

Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA 

delineates the general requirements for 

a SIP, which include enforceable 

emissions limitations and other control 

measures, means or techniques, 

provisions for the establishment and 

operation of appropriate devices 

necessary to collect data on ambient air 

quality, and programs to enforce the 

limitations. The general SIP elements 

and requirements set forth in CAA 

section 110(a)(2) include, but are not 

limited to the following: 

• Submittal of a SIP that has been 

adopted by the state after reasonable 

public notice and hearing; 

• Provisions for establishment and 

operation of appropriate procedures 

needed to monitor ambient air quality; 

• Implementation of a source permit 

program; provisions for the 

implementation of part C requirements 

(PSD); 

• Provisions for the implementation 

of part D requirements for NSR permit 

programs; 

• Provisions for air pollution 

modeling; and 

• Provisions for public and local 

agency participation in planning and 

emission control rule development.11

We note that SIPs must be fully 

approved only with respect to 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation in accordance with 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). Similarly, EPA 

believes that the other CAA section 

110(a)(2) (and part D) requirements that 

are not connected with nonattainment 

plan submittals and not linked with an 

area’s attainment status are not 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation because the area will still 

be subject to these requirements after it 

is redesignated. EPA considers the CAA 

section 110(a)(2) (and part D) 

requirements that relate to a particular 

nonattainment area’s designation and 

classification as the relevant measures 

to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation 

request. This approach is consistent 

with EPA’s existing policy on 

applicability of the conformity SIP 

requirement for redesignations.12

EPA has reviewed the Oregon SIP and 

concludes that it meets the general SIP 

requirements under Section 110(a)(2) of 

the CAA to the extent they are 

applicable for the purposes of 

redesignation.13 EPA has previously 

approved provisions of Oregon’s SIP as 

demonstrating compliance with the 

CAA section 110(a)(2) requirements for 

the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (78 FR 46514, 

August 1, 2013, and 80 FR 2313, January 

15, 2015). These requirements are, 

however, statewide requirements that 

are not linked to the PM2.5

nonattainment status of the Oakridge 

NAA. In addition, there are no 

outstanding or disapproved applicable 

SIP submittals with respect to the 

Oakridge portion of the SIP that would 

prevent redesignation of the Oakridge 

NAA for the PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore, 

we conclude that ODEQ and LRAPA 

have met all general SIP requirements 

for the Oakridge NAA that are 

applicable for purposes of redesignating 

the area to attainment of the PM2.5. 

2. Part D of Title I Requirements 

Part D of Title I of the CAA sets forth 

the basic nonattainment plan 

requirements applicable to all 

nonattainment areas at subpart 1 (CAA 

sections 172–176) and requirements 

specific to PM10 and PM2.5 areas at 

subpart 4 (CAA section 189). On August 

24, 2016, EPA promulgated the Fine 

Particulate Matter National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards; State 

Implementation Plan Requirements 

rule.14 This rule implements the 

requirements of part D of Title I of the 

CAA for areas designated nonattainment 

for any PM2.5 NAAQS. 

In accordance with 40 CFR 51.1015, 

upon a determination by EPA that a 

Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area has 

attained the PM2.5 NAAQS, the 

requirements for the state to submit an 

attainment demonstration, provisions 

demonstrating that RACM (including 

RACT for stationary sources) shall be 

implemented no later than 4 years 

following the date of designation of the 

area, Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) 

plan, quantitative milestones (QM) and 

reports, and contingency measures for 

the area shall be suspended until such 

time as: (1) The area is redesignated to 

attainment, after which such 

requirements are permanently 

discharged; or, (2) EPA determines that 

the area has re-violated the PM2.5

NAAQS. 

Those states containing Moderate 

PM2.5 NAAs were required to submit a 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
26714 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

15See Section 188(c)(1) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 

7513(c)(1), and 40 CFR 51.1004(a)(1). See also 

Identification of Nonattainment Classification and 

Deadlines for Submission of State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) Provisions for the 1997 Fine Particle 

(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS) and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (June 2, 2014), 

79 FR 31566, 31567–68. 

16See 40 CFR 51.160, 51.161, 51.165, and 51.166. 

See also EPA’s proposed approval of Oregon 

nonattainment NSR program (March 22, 2017, 82 

FR 14654, 14663) and EPA’s final approval (October 

11, 2017, 82 FR 47122). 

SIP by December 31, 2014, which 

demonstrated attainment of the PM2.5

NAAQS by December 31, 2015.15

Pursuant to CAA section 188(d) and 40 

CFR 51.1005(a), on July 18, 2016, EPA 

extended the attainment date for the 

Oakridge NAA from December 31, 2015 

to December 31, 2016 (81 FR 46612). As 

stated in the ‘‘Background’’ section of 

this document, EPA has approved all 

attainment plan elements for the 

Oakridge NAA. Specifically, EPA 

approved the following elements of the 

Oakridge attainment plan: Base year 

emissions inventory (October 21, 2016, 

81 FR 72714); control measures, RACM/ 

RACT level emission controls, 

attainment demonstration, contingency 

measures, RFP plan, QM and MVEB 

(February 8, 2018, 83 FR 5537); and 

nonattainment NSR (October 5, 2018, 83 

FR 50274). In addition, Pursuant to 40 

CFR 51.1015(a), on February 8, 2018, 

EPA determined that the Oakridge NAA 

achieved a Clean Data Determination 

(CDD) in accordance with EPA’s clean 

data policy and that the Oakridge area 

attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

by the December 31, 2016, attainment 

date (83 FR 5537). 

Determinations of attainment do not 

relieve states from submitting and EPA 

from approving certain part D planning 

requirements for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. CAA section 172(c)(3) requires 

submittals and approval of a 

comprehensive, accurate and current 

inventory of actual emissions. For 

purposes of the PM2.5 NAAQS, this 

emissions inventory should address not 

only direct emissions of PM2.5, but also 

emissions of all precursors to PM2.5

formation, i.e., SO2, NOX, VOC, and 

ammonia. As previously discussed, EPA 

determined that Oregon met the CAA 

section 172(c)(3) comprehensive 

emissions inventory requirement in a 

final rulemaking on October 21, 2016 

(81 FR 72714). 

CAA section 172(c)(4) requires the 

identification and quantification of 

allowable emissions for major new or 

modified stationary sources in an area, 

and CAA section 172(c)(5) requires 

source permits for the construction and 

operation of new or modified major 

stationary sources anywhere in the 

nonattainment area. EPA first approved 

the requirements of the part D, subpart 

1 NSR permit program for LRAPA on 

December 27, 2011 (76 FR 80747, 

80748). Subsequently, LRAPA revised 

its rules to meet additional part D, 

subpart 4 NSR requirements 

promulgated by EPA (81 FR 58010, 

August 24, 2016) and to align with the 

ODEQ’s rules.16 EPA approved LRAPA’s 

rules on October 5, 2018 (83 FR 50274). 

Once the Oakridge NAA is 

redesignated to attainment, the 

prevention of significant deterioration 

(PSD) requirements of part C of the CAA 

will apply. LRAPA’s PSD regulations 

are codified in LRAPA’s rules at Title 38 

(New Source Review) in conjunction 

with other provisions including but not 

limited to LRAPA’s rules in Titles 12, 

31, 34, 35, 40, 42, and 50. We most 

recently approved revisions to LRAPA’s 

PSD program on October 5, 2018 (83 FR 

50274). EPA finds that LRAPA’s PSD 

provisions meet all applicable Federal 

requirements for any area designated 

unclassifiable or attainment, and these 

provisions will become fully effective in 

the Oakridge NAA upon redesignation 

of the area to attainment. 

CAA section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP 

to meet the applicable provisions of 

CAA section 110(a)(2). As noted above, 

we find that the Oregon SIP meets the 

CAA section 110(a)(2) applicable 

requirements. For purposes of 

redesignation to attainment for the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA proposes to 

find that LRAPA has met all the 

applicable SIP requirements under part 

D of Title I of the CAA in accordance 

with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the CAA. 

3. Fully Approved SIP Under CAA 

Section 110(k) 

Section 110(k) of the CAA sets out 

provisions governing EPA’s review of 

SIP submittals. In order for an area to 

qualify for redesignation, the SIP for the 

area must be fully approved under 

section 110(k) of the CAA. As discussed 

in Sections III.B.1 and III.B.2 of this 

document, for purposes of redesignation 

to attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, EPA has fully approved all 

applicable requirements of Oregon’s SIP 

for the Oakridge area in accordance with 

CAA section 110(k). Therefore, the 

criterion for redesignation, set forth at 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii), is satisfied. 

C. Improvement in Air Quality Due to 

Permanent and Enforceable Measures 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA 

provides that for an area to be 

redesignated to attainment, the 

Administrator must determine that the 

improvement in air quality is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the applicable 

implementation plan, implementation 

of applicable Federal air pollutant 

control regulations, and other 

permanent and enforceable reductions. 

The main source of PM2.5 emissions in 

the Oakridge NAA during the winter 

season days—when concentrations of 

emissions accumulate leading to 

exceedances of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS—is wood combustion in 

woodstoves, fireplaces and pellet stoves. 

Therefore, LRAPA identified strategies 

in the 2017 Oakridge Update that 

focused primarily on residential wood 

combustion (RWC) emission reductions 

such as Oakridge’s mandatory 

curtailment program and the woodstove 

change-out programs. EPA approved 

these control measures as RACM into 

the Oregon SIP on February 8, 2018 (83 

FR 5537), making them federally 

enforceable. 

The 2017 Oakridge Update includes 

specific sections of the City of 

Oakridge’s RWC Ordinance 920 (RWC 

Ordinance) as it applies within the City 

of Oakridge. The SIP-approved 

provisions of the RWC Ordinance 

include a mandatory curtailment 

program, which has been important in 

helping this area reach attainment of the 

NAAQS. Modeling showed that the 

curtailment program would result in a 

calculated PM2.5 emissions reduction of 

7.1 mg/m3 in the Oakridge NAA, the 

largest of all the control measures 

included in the plan. 

The provisions of the RWC Ordinance 

that EPA approved into the SIP also 

prohibit the burning of any fuel other 

than ‘‘seasoned wood,’’ which is 

defined as any species of wood that has 

been sufficiently dried to contain 20 

percent or less moisture by weight. EPA 

also approved into the SIP provisions of 

the RWC Ordinance that specifically 

prohibit the burning of specified 

materials such as plastic, rubber 

products, petroleum-treated materials 

and other materials which normally 

emit dense smoke, noxious odors, or 

hazardous air contaminants in a solid 

fuel burning device. 

LRAPA also quantified the emission 

reduction benefits from woodstove 

change-outs that were conducted 

between 2009 and 2012, replacing 90 

uncertified woodstoves in the Oakridge 

NAA. These woodstove change-out 

programs achieved permanent and 

enforceable emissions reductions 

because the higher-emitting woodstoves 

were removed and required to be 

destroyed. In addition, the Oregon Heat 

Smart Program, a statewide mandate 

approved by EPA on October 11, 2017 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 26715 

17Exemptions from the use of woodstoves and 

similar devices during curtailment periods are 

available on an annual basis if the woodstove or 

similar device is the sole source of heat in the 

residence and/or due to economic need based on 

specified criteria. 

(82 FR 47122), and the RWC Ordinance 

prohibit the installation of non-EPA 

certified devices and ban the sale or 

installation of non-EPA certified devices 

in new or existing buildings. The 

collective permanent and enforceable 

PM2.5 reductions for these changeout 

programs in the Oakridge NAA were 

calculated to be 2.6 mg/m3. 

LRAPA also referenced Federal 

transportation and fuel-related control 

measures to reduce mobile source 

emissions, including the ‘‘Tier 3 Motor 

Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards 

Rule’’ as permanent and enforceable 

reductions leading to improvement in 

air quality (1.3 mg/m3 reduction on a 

worst-case winter day) and ultimately to 

attainment, in the Oakridge NAA. See 

79 FR 23414 (April 28, 2014). 

The RWC Ordinance 920—Section 

Two(3) was initially submitted in the 

2017 Oakridge Update, but was 

ultimately not approved as part of the 

2017 Oakridge Update. The RWC 

Ordinance 920—Section Two(3) was 

later resubmitted as part of the Oakridge 

PM2.5 maintenance plan. The Lane 

County Code—Restriction on Use of 

Solid Fuel Space Heating Devices 

(9.120–9.140) (Lane County Code) is 

also included in the Oakridge PM2.5

maintenance plan submittal and applies 

more broadly to the Oakridge Urban 

Growth Boundary. Both establish 

additional permanent and enforceable 

control measures on residential heating 

devices for the purpose of ensuring 

continued attainment in the Oakridge 

NAA. The Lane County Code, like the 

previously approved provisions of the 

RWC Ordinance, includes a curtailment 

program in the Oakridge urban growth 

boundary, prohibiting the burning of 

any fuel other than seasoned wood and 

other specified prohibited materials in 

solid-fuel heating devices. These 

restrictions on materials that may be 

burned limit PM2.5 emissions from 

woodstoves and fireplaces on a 

continuous basis. 

Section Two(3) of the RWC 

Ordinance, which EPA did not act on as 

part of the 2017 Oakridge Update, 

prohibits emissions from solid-fuel 

heating devices with an opacity greater 

than 20%. The Lane County Code, 

included in the Oakridge PM2.5

maintenance plan submittal, also 

includes this restriction. These 20% 

opacity limits provide a visual indicator 

for the proper operation of a solid-fuel 

heating device, including the use of 

properly seasoned wood. The opacity 

limits apply at all times under each rule, 

except during a ten-minute startup 

period in any 4-hour period. During 

these startup periods, however, solidfuel heating devices are subject to other 

restrictions, namely a fuel-content 

restriction that limits the moisture 

content of burned wood and restrictions 

on the type of fuel burned, such as a 

prohibition on burning any material that 

normally emits dense smoke, noxious 

odors, or hazardous air pollutants. EPA 

also notes that the current, federallyapproved SIP includes no opacity limit 

for residential wood burning, meaning 

that approval of this provision will 

result in a net air quality benefit over 

the status quo. 

EPA has longstanding guidance that 

provides recommendations to states 

concerning the development of 

alternative emission limitations 

applicable during startup and 

shutdown. In a June 12, 2015, Federal 

Register notice (80 FR 33840) (the ‘‘2015 

SSM policy’’), EPA recommended States 

consider seven criteria when developing 

alternative emission limitations to 

replace automatic or discretionary 

exemptions from otherwise applicable 

SIP requirements. These recommended 

criteria assure the alternative emission 

limitations meet basic CAA 

requirements. 

As discussed above, although the 20% 

opacity limit does not apply during 

short periods of startup and refueling, 

owners and operators of solid-fuel 

heating devices are subject to alternative 

fuel-content limitations during these 

periods. EPA evaluated whether these 

alternative requirements are consistent 

with the Agency’s 2015 SSM policy, 

including the seven criteria 

recommended therein. For the reasons 

explained below, EPA finds that the 

opacity limit and other restrictions on 

fuel are consistent with the 

recommended criteria set forth in that 

policy and proposes to approve these 

provisions into the Oregon SIP as part 

of this action. 

First, the opacity limit for residential 

woodstoves and similar devices and the 

alternative restrictions on fuel content— 

which are codified in both the Lane 

County Code, Section 9.135, and 

Oakridge Ordinance No. 920, Section 

Two(3)—apply to a narrow subset of 

source categories: Solid-fuel heating 

devices. Second, application of the 20% 

opacity limit to startup and refueling 

periods would be technically infeasible 

because lower temperatures during 

these periods result in less complete 

combustion and, therefore, higher 

opacity. Third, for this source category, 

EPA believes the startup period is 

minimized to the greatest extent 

practicable. The startup period is 

limited to just ten minutes in every 4- 

hour period to account for starting the 

solid fuel burning device and refueling. 

This ten minute period represents the 

minimum time necessary to adequately 

start a fire in a solid fuel burning device. 

Furthermore, the startup period is 

limited to once every four hours, which 

reasonably reflects the amount of time 

before a residential fire needs additional 

fuel. 

With respect to the fourth factor, EPA 

believes that LRAPA’s proposed control 

strategy, specifically the episodic 

curtailment program, would effectively 

prohibit the use of solid fuel burning 

devices at most locations 17—and thus 

largely prohibit use of the startup 

exemption—during worst-case air 

quality scenarios. 

Fifth, the limits on fuel content and 

type are designed to ensure that all 

possible steps are taken to minimize the 

impact of emissions during the startup 

period. With respect to this factor, EPA 

also notes that the emission source at 

issue here is subject to curtailment 

requirements during periods of high 

PM2.5 ambient air concentration, which 

would further minimize potential air 

quality impacts from reliance on the 

alternative emission limits when the 

opacity limit does not apply. 

Similarly, EPA believes the sixth 

factor—that the alternative emission 

limit requires operation of the facility in 

a manner consistent with good practices 

for minimizing emissions and bestefforts regarding planning, design, and 

operating procedures—supports 

approval of the State’s chosen control 

strategy. As noted above, limits on fuel 

content and type used in conjunction 

with emission curtailment during air 

quality episodes represent the best 

practices available in this context. 

With respect to the last criterion for 

alternative emission limits, Oregon has 

not included a requirement that affected 

sources document startup periods using 

properly signed, contemporaneous logs 

or other evidence. Given that the rule at 

issue here generally applies to 

individual homeowners, rather than 

industrial sources accustomed to 

complying with such recordkeeping 

requirements, EPA believes a 

recordkeeping requirement would 

impose an unreasonable burden on both 

regulators implementing the rule and 

the regulated community, with virtually 

no enforcement benefit justifying the 

burden. 

For all of these reasons, EPA proposes 

to approve (and incorporate by 

reference) the Oakridge RWC Ordinance 

920—Section Two(3) and the Lane 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
26716 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

18See Calcagni Memo at 8. 

19 83 FR 5537, February 8, 2018. 

County Code as they apply to the 

Oakridge area because they are 

permanent and enforceable SIPstrengthening measures that contribute 

to continued maintenance of the 2006 

PM2.5 24-hour NAAQS. Both provisions 

include limits on emissions that apply 

during all modes of source operation 

and impose continuous emission 

controls on solid-fuel heating devices 

consistent with the requirements of the 

CAA applicable to SIP provisions. In 

addition, they support the maintenance 

and continued attainment of the PM2.5

NAAQS in the Oakridge area. 

Based on the foregoing evaluation of 

the Oakridge PM2.5 control measures, 

EPA proposes to determine that the 

improvement in air quality is reasonably 

attributable to permanent and 

enforceable reductions in emissions 

resulting from implementation of the 

applicable implementation plan, 

implementation of applicable Federal 

air pollutant control regulations, and 

other permanent and enforceable 

reductions. 

D. Fully Approved Maintenance Plan 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) requires 

that, for a nonattainment area to be 

redesignated to attainment, EPA must 

fully approve a maintenance plan for 

the area as meeting the requirements of 

CAA section 175A. The maintenance 

plan must demonstrate continued 

attainment of the relevant NAAQS in 

the area for at least 10 years after our 

approval of the redesignation. Eight 

years after redesignation, the state must 

submit a revised maintenance plan 

demonstrating attainment for the 10 

years following the initial 10-year 

period. The maintenance plan must also 

contain a contingency plan to ensure 

prompt correction of any violation of 

the NAAQS that occurs after 

redesignation of the area. See CAA 

sections 175A(a), (b) and (d). The 

Calcagni Memo provides additional 

guidance on the content of a 

maintenance plan, stating that a 

maintenance plan should include the 

following elements: (1) An attainment 

emissions inventory; (2) a maintenance 

demonstration showing attainment for 

10 years following redesignation; (3) a 

commitment to maintain and operate an 

appropriate air quality monitoring 

network; (4) verification of continued 

attainment; and (5) a contingency plan 

to prevent or correct future violations of 

the NAAQS. In this proposed action, 

EPA will review requirements (3) and 

(4) together as part of our evaluation of 

LRAPA’s maintenance plan for the 

Oakridge area. 

In conjunction with Oregon’s request 

to redesignate the Oakridge area to 

attainment, Oregon submitted a SIP 

revision to provide for maintenance of 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS through 

2035. EPA proposes to approve 

LRAPA’s PM2.5 maintenance plan for 

the Oakridge area. The following 

paragraphs describe how each of the 

maintenance plan elements are 

addressed in the maintenance plan. 

1. Attainment Inventory 

As discussed in the CAA General 

Preamble (See 57 FR 13498, April 16, 

1992) and the Calcagni Memo, PM2.5

maintenance plans should include an 

attainment emission inventory to 

identify the level of emissions in the 

area, which are sufficient to maintain 

the NAAQS. The maintenance plan 

attainment inventory should be 

consistent with EPA’s emissions 

inventory requirements and most recent 

guidance on emission inventories for 

nonattainment areas available at the 

time and should represent emissions 

during the time period associated with 

the monitoring data showing 

attainment.18 The inventory must also 

be comprehensive, including emissions 

from stationary point sources, area 

sources, mobile sources, and must be 

based on actual emissions during the 

appropriate season, if applicable. 

The EPA-approved 2017 Oakridge 

Update included projected 2015 PM2.5

attainment year emission inventories for 

the Oakridge NAA. Oregon’s January 13, 

2022, Oakridge PM2.5 maintenance plan 

submittal provided a revised and 

updated 2015 attainment year inventory 

of actual emissions. The year 2015 is 

one of the years during the time period 

where the Oakridge area first monitored 

attainment of the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

(See section III.A of this document).19

The 2015 maintenance plan attainment 

year emission inventory is based on 

emission reduction strategies that were 

implemented as of 2015. 

The 2015 maintenance plan 

attainment year inventory includes 

emissions of PM2.5, nitrogen oxides 

(NOX), sulfur dioxide (SO2), ammonia 

(NH3) and volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs). The 2015 attainment levels of 

point, area, on-road mobile and nonroad 

mobile source emissions are 

summarized in Tables 3 and 4, along 

with future year projected emissions for 

a ‘‘horizon year’’ (a future year at least 

10 years from the approval date of the 

maintenance plan) of 2035, and two 

interim years of 2025 and 2030. 

Oregon developed the attainment 

inventory based on the methods and 

assumptions presented in detail in 

Appendix II of the Oakridge PM2.5

maintenance plan (‘‘Emision Inventory 

for 2015 Base Year’’). The attainment 

year inventory is based on typical 

season and worst-case day (episodic) 

emissions. The typical season day 

emissions represent an average daily 

emission value occurring from 

November 1 through the end of 

February. This four-month time period 

is considered to be the particulate 

matter season and is when the PM2.5

standard has historically been exceeded. 

The worst-case day emissions represent 

a day during the PM season when 

emissions generating activity is at its 

highest due to meteorological factors 

like temperature. However, residential 

woodburning and other area source 

emissions on worst-case days are lower 

than on typical season days in the 

inventory due to woodburning 

curtailments and outdoor burning bans. 

This approach is consistent with the 

PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule in which 

EPA stated that an episodic period, 

developed in order to reflect periods of 

higher emissions during periods of high 

ambient PM2.5 can help, in some 

situations, to ensure the area’s inventory 

reflects the emissions conditions that 

led to the nonattainment designation for 

the area (81 FR 58010, 58030, August 

24, 2016). 

RWC emissions from certified and 

non-certified woodstoves, fireplaces and 

pellet stoves continue to be the major 

source of PM2.5 emissions on both 

typical season days and worst-case 

winter days contributing to exceedances 

of the NAAQS. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 26717 

TABLE 3—OAKRIDGE PM2.5 MAINTENANCE PLAN EMISSIONS INVENTORIES

[In pounds per day] 

Source category 2015 

attainment 

2025 

interim 

2030 

interim 

2035 

maintenance 

Difference 

from 2015 

and 2035 

PM2.5 Typical Season Day 

Point ......................................................................................................... 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 

Area ......................................................................................................... 444.8 364.1 364.0 363.5 ¥81.3 

Onroad ..................................................................................................... 34.4 23.0 22.1 22.1 ¥12.3 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 0.0 

Total .................................................................................................. 481.9 389.8 389.3 388.8 ¥93.1 

PM2.5 Worst-Case Day 

Point ......................................................................................................... 0.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 

Area ......................................................................................................... 334.5 250.9 233.8 216.5 ¥118 

Onroad ..................................................................................................... 41.4 26.6 26.6 24.7 ¥16.7 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 0 

Total .................................................................................................. 378.6 281.0 263.9 244.7 ¥133.9 

Secondary particulate is a very minor 

contributor to the Oakridge PM2.5 air 

pollution concentrations on both typical 

season days and worst-case winder days 

as summarized in Appendix II of the 

Oakridge PM2.5 maintenance plan. 

Historical speciated PM2.5 filter analyses 

indicate that concentrations of all the 

precursors groups (NOX, SO2, NH3 and 

VOCs) were determined to be below 

insignificant thresholds (less than 1.3 

mg/m3). The precursor emission shown 

in Table 4 are projected to decrease 

between 2015 and 2035, indicating that 

precursor emissions will continue to be 

below insignificant threshold 

contributions to PM2.5 in the future. 

TABLE 4—OAKRIDGE PM2.5 MAINTENANCE PLAN PRECURSOR EMISSIONS INVENTORIES

[In pounds per day] 

Source category 2015 

attainment 

2025 

interim 

2030 

interim 

2035 

maintenance 

Difference 

from 2015 

and 2035 

NOX Typical Season Day 

Point ..................................................................................... 0.0 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 

Area ...................................................................................... 55.5 48.5 48.5 48.5 ¥7.0 

Onroad ................................................................................. 613.6 171.2 103.2 87.8 ¥525.8 

Nonroad ............................................................................... 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 

Total .............................................................................. 669.2 224.9 156.9 141.5 ¥527.7 

NOX Worst-Case Day 

Point ..................................................................................... 0.0 8.7 8.7 8.7 8.7 

Area ...................................................................................... 42.1 33.9 34.9 32.9 ¥9.2 

Onroad ................................................................................. 711.3 193.1 127.9 108.8 ¥602.5 

Nonroad ............................................................................... 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 

Total .............................................................................. 753.5 235.8 171.6 150.5 ¥603.0 

SO2 Typical Season Day 

Point ..................................................................................... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Area ...................................................................................... 11.2 10.3 10.3 10.3 ¥0.9 

Onroad ................................................................................. 2.4 1.1 1.0 1.0 ¥1.4 

Nonroad ............................................................................... 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 

Total .............................................................................. 13.7 11.5 11.4 11.4 ¥2.3 

SO2 Worst-Case Day 

Point ..................................................................................... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Area ...................................................................................... 7.0 5.9 5.6 5.2 ¥1.8 

Onroad ................................................................................. 2.9 1.4 1.2 1.2 ¥1.7 

Nonroad ............................................................................... 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
26718 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

20See ‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for 

Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 

and Regional Haze Regulations,’’ May 2017, 

available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/ 

2017-07/documents/ei_guidance_may_2017_final_

rev.pdf. 21See Calcagni Memo, pages 9–10. 

TABLE 4—OAKRIDGE PM2.5 MAINTENANCE PLAN PRECURSOR EMISSIONS INVENTORIES—Continued 

[In pounds per day] 

Source category 2015 

attainment 

2025 

interim 

2030 

interim 

2035 

maintenance 

Difference 

from 2015 

and 2035 

Total .............................................................................. 10.0 7.4 6.9 6.5 ¥3.5 

VOC Typical Season Day 

Point ..................................................................................... 0.0 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 

Area ...................................................................................... 507.0 349.3 346.0 341.7 ¥165.3 

Onroad ................................................................................. 522.7 173.7 15.7 13.2 ¥509.5 

Nonroad ............................................................................... 5.2 5.1 5.1 5.1 ¥0.1 

Total .............................................................................. 1,034.9 528.5 367.2 360.4 ¥674.5 

VOC Worst-Case Day 

Point ..................................................................................... 0.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 

Area ...................................................................................... 321.2 179.3 165.1 150.5 ¥170.7 

Onroad ................................................................................. 543.2 183.2 18.8 15.9 ¥527.3 

Nonroad ............................................................................... 5.2 5.1 5.1 5.1 ¥0.1 

Total .............................................................................. 869.6 368.4 189.8 172.3 ¥697.3 

NH3 Typical Season Day 

Point ..................................................................................... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Area ...................................................................................... 30.0 25.4 25.4 25.4 ¥4.6 

Onroad ................................................................................. 9.7 7.4 4.4 4.3 ¥5.4 

Nonroad ............................................................................... 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 

Total .............................................................................. 39.8 32.9 29.9 29.8 ¥10.0 

NH3 Worst-Case Day 

Point ..................................................................................... 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 

Area ...................................................................................... 18.2 13.5 12.6 11.8 ¥6.4 

Onroad ................................................................................. 12.0 9.1 5.4 5.3 ¥6.7 

Nonroad ............................................................................... 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 

Total .............................................................................. 30.3 22.7 18.1 17.2 ¥13.1 

In addition to the precursor 

assessment, LRAPA assessed the 

condensable and filterable fractions of 

the PM2.5 emission inventory. Since 

condensable and filterable emissions 

currently are not required to be reported 

for the mobile source and the residential 

wood combustion portion of the 

inventory and EPA’s best tools to date 

do not have a declarative answer for the 

condensable emissions portion for these 

sources, there was no information to 

report. In addition, condensable and 

filterable information for the other 

source categories were similarly either 

unavailable or not applicable. Based on 

available data sources, therefore, the 

condensible portion of PM2.5 was 

reported as zero in the 2015 emissions 

inventory and the projected inventories 

do not include separately reported 

filterable and condensable components 

of direct PM2.5 emissions. 

EPA has reviewed the results, 

procedures, and methodologies for the 

Oakridge area 2015 attainment 

emissions inventories and proposes to 

find that they are based on the most 

current and accurate information 

available to LRAPA at the time they 

were developed. Based on our review of 

the emissions inventories Oregon 

provided in its January 13, 2022 

submittal, we propose to find that 

LRAPA prepared an adequate 

attainment inventory for the Oakridge 

area.20

2. Maintenance Demonstration 

CAA section 175A requires a state 

seeking redesignation to attainment to 

submit a SIP revision to provide for 

maintenance of the NAAQS in the area 

‘‘for at least 10 years after the 

redesignation.’’ A state can make this 

demonstration by either showing that 

future emissions of a pollutant or its 

precursors will not exceed the level of 

the attainment inventory, or by 

modeling to show that the future mix of 

sources and emissions rates will not 

cause a violation of the NAAQS.21

In its maintenance demonstration for 

the Oakridge area, LRAPA elected to 

demonstrate maintenance of the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS for at least 10 years 

following redesignation using the 

attainment inventory method. LRAPA 

developed projected inventories, 

provided in Tables 3 and 4 of this 

document, to show that the Oakridge 

area will remain in attainment through 

the year 2035. These projected 

inventories, covering interim years 2025 

and 2030 and a horizon year of 2035, 

show that future emissions of direct 

PM2.5 throughout the nonattainment 

area will remain at or below the 2015 

attainment-level emissions for the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

The projected emissions inventories 

in the Oakridge PM2.5 maintenance plan 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 26719 

22See EPA’s February 22, 2022 approval of 

Oregon’s 2021 Annual Ambient Criteria Pollutant 

Air Monitoring Network Plan, in the docket for this 

action. 

23See Calcagni Memo at 12. 

address four major source categories: 

Point, area, onroad mobile and nonroad 

mobile. Oregon estimated future year 

emission inventories using the latest 

socioeconomic growth indictors and 

applying emissions reduction benefits 

from adopted control strategies when 

appropriate. A detailed description of 

the 2015 base year inventory and the 

2025, 2030 and 2035 projected 

inventories can be found in Appendix 

III of LRAPA’s January 13, 2022, PM2.5

maintenance plan submittal, which is in 

the docket for this action. 

As discussed in the Oakridge PM2.5

maintenance plan, direct PM2.5

emissions estimates for stationary point 

sources reflect actual emissions for both 

industrial point sources in Oakridge. 

The Oakridge Sand & Gravel ready-mix 

concrete plant and rock crusher did not 

operate in Oakridge in 2015, resulting in 

actual 2015 emissions that were zero. In 

addition, the ready-mix concrete plant 

air discharge permit was terminated on 

January 24, 2014, resulting in zero 

emissions in the 2015 and projected 

year emission inventories. Future year 

emissions were therefore based on the 

January 2011 PM2.5 emissions at this 

source. 

Areawide sources occur over a wide 

geographic area with the most 

significant emissions resulting from 

RWC sources such as fireplaces, 

woodstoves and pellet stoves. These 

residential wood heating devices are 

commonly used to heat homes in 

Oakridge since natural gas is not 

available in this area. The permanent 

and enforceable RWC control strategies 

are discussed in Section III.C. of this 

document. The only other area source 

category with potentially significant 

emissions is outdoor burning, which is 

banned in Lane County from NovemberFebruary. Emissions for these categories 

are derived using various surveys, PM2.5

emission factors and other 

methodologies. 

Emissions from on-road mobile 

sources (exhaust, brake wear and tire 

wear), which include passenger 

vehicles, buses, and trucks, were 

estimated using MOVES2014a. Traffic 

growth in Vehicle-Miles Traveled 

(VMT) was based on transportation 

modeling by the Lane Council of 

Governments (LCOG) and the Oregon 

Department of Transportation (ODOT). 

LRAPA confirmed re-entrained road 

dust calculations for both paved and 

unpaved roads using AP–42 protocols. 

Federal control measures included in 

the MOVES2014a modeling are all 

Federal measures that affect the fleets 

and fuels used in future years once 

implemented by EPA. 

The nonroad emissions from railroads 

were calculated using the EPA 

NONROAD2008a emission protocol. 

The National Emissions Inventories 

(NEIs) for Lane County indicate a 

significant decrease in locomotive 

emissions from 2008 to 2014 (40.09 

tons/year and 18.26 tons/year, 

respectively). The 2015 PM2.5 railroad 

emissions have been adjusted to reflect 

the locomotive emission reductions as 

seen in the 2014 NEI data. Future year 

emissions are based on the adjusted 

2014 and 2017 NEI data. All other 

Oakridge nonroad mobile sources are 

categorized by LRAPA as insignificant 

during the PM2.5 winter season. 

EPA has reviewed the documentation 

provided by Oregon for developing the 

projected 2025, 2030 and 2035 

emissions inventories for the Oakridge 

PM2.5 NAA. Based on our review, EPA 

finds that the projected inventories were 

developed using appropriate 

procedures, comprehensively address 

all source categories in the Oakridge 

area, and sufficiently account for PM2.5

projected actual emissions. These 

inventories indicate a decrease in PM2.5

and precursor emissions throughout the 

maintenance period, therefore EPA 

proposes to determine that the projected 

emissions inventories in the 

maintenance plan sufficiently 

demonstrate that the Oakridge PM2.5

area will continue to attain the 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 standard throughout the 

maintenance period. 

3. Monitoring Network and Verification 

of Continued Attainment 

Once a nonattainment area has been 

redesignated to attainment, the state 

must continue to operate an appropriate 

air quality monitoring network, in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58, to 

verify the attainment status of the area. 

The maintenance plan should contain 

provisions for continued operation of air 

quality monitors that will provide such 

verification. 

In the Oakridge PM2.5 maintenance 

plan, LRAPA noted that it currently 

operates a regulatory monitor (the 

Willamette Center since 1989) in the 

Oakridge NAA and committed to 

continue operating a regulatory 

monitoring network through the year 

2035 in order to verify continued 

attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS and 

track the progress of the maintenance 

plan. LRAPA also stated it will continue 

operation of the PM2.5 monitoring 

network as outlined in the Oregon 

Annual Ambient Criteria Pollutant Air 

Monitoring Network Plan (ANP) and 

any modification to the monitoring 

network will be done in consultation 

with ODEQ and EPA Region 10. ODEQ 

and LRAPA will work with EPA each 

year through the air monitoring network 

review process (per 40 CFR part 58) to 

determine the adequacy of the 

monitoring network.22

Oregon remains obligated to continue 

to quality-assure monitoring data and 

enter all data into AQS in accordance 

with Federal guidelines. LRAPA will 

review the air monitoring results and 

design values each year to verify 

continued attainment. LRAPA will 

determine annually if exceptional 

events influenced the continued 

attainment of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS and need to be documented. If 

needed, ODEQ and LRAPA will 

coordinate and provide exceptional 

events documentation to EPA Region 10 

for review. 

EPA proposes to determine that the 

Oakridge PM2.5 maintenance plan 

contains adequate provisions for 

continued operation of an air quality 

monitoring network and a commitment 

to annually verify continued attainment 

of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for 

the Oakridge area. 

4. Contingency Plan 

CAA section 175A(d) requires that a 

maintenance plan also include 

contingency provisions, as necessary, to 

promptly correct any violation of the 

NAAQS that occurs after redesignation 

of the area to attainment. For the 

purposes of CAA 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 plan to be 

approved. However, the contingency 

plan is an enforceable part of the SIP 

and should ensure that contingency 

measures are adopted expeditiously 

once they are triggered. The contingency 

plan should discuss the measures to be 

adopted and a schedule and procedure 

for adoption and implementation. The 

contingency plan must require that the 

state will implement all measures 

contained in the part D nonattainment 

plan for the area prior to redesignation. 

The state should also identify the 

specific indicators, or triggers, which 

will be used to determine when the 

contingency plan will be 

implemented.23

The Oakridge PM2.5 maintenance plan 

outlines the procedures for the adoption 

and implementation of contingency 

measures to further reduce emissions 

should a violation of the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS occur. If the PM2.5 design 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
26720 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

24LRAPA implements an advisory system that 

designates days as green, yellow, or red when 24- 

hour PM levels reach certain designated thresholds. 

During a red advisory day, LRAPA prohibits the use 

of any solid fuel space heating device that emits 

visible emissions into the air outside of the building 

housing the device unless a specific exemption has 

been granted. 

25Treatment of Data Influenced by Exceptional 

Events, October 3, 2016, 81 FR 68216. 

26See 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(iv)–(v) and (b)(3). 

27See 40 CFR 93.102(b), 93.122(f). 

28See 40 CFR 93.109(g). 

29See 40 CFR 93.118. 

value indicates a violation of the 

standard, after consideration of any 

exceptional events, the following 

contingency strategies, or equivalent, 

will be implemented by LRAPA and the 

City of Oakridge: 

• Stricter green-yellow-red advisory 

program,24 with more red advisory days 

each winter, by reducing the red 

advisory thresholds by 3 mg/m3 PM2.5.

This is projected to increase the average 

number of potential red advisory days 

by three to five additional days per year. 

• Prohibition of fireplace use on 

yellow advisory days (in addition to the 

existing prohibition on red advisory 

days). 

While these measures do not need to 

be fully adopted by LRAPA prior to the 

occurrence of a NAAQS violation, 

LRAPA commits to adopting and 

implementing the necessary 

contingency measures as expeditiously 

as possible, but not later than one year 

after a violation, based on confirmed 

quality-assured data. Any contingency 

measures adopted and implemented 

will become part of the control 

measures in the next revised 

maintenance plan submitted to EPA for 

approval. 

LRAPA will evaluate all appropriate 

data including air quality data, 

meteorological data, evaluation of wood 

smoke programs and information on 

unusual weather events (e.g., wildfires 

or winter power outages) and other data 

to determine the cause of the violation. 

LRAPA will perform this evaluation 

within three months of the 

determination of a violation. Where 

appropriate, LRAPA will follow EPA’s 

exceptional events rules and guidance if 

it is determined that an exceptional 

event contributed to the violation.25

Based on our analysis of Oregon’s 

submittal, we propose to find that the 

contingency measure provisions 

provided in the Oakridge PM2.5

maintenance plan are sufficient and 

meet the requirements of CAA section 

175A(d). 

E. Transportation Conformity and Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Budgets 

Transportation conformity is required 

by CAA section 176(c). EPA’s 

conformity rule at 40 CFR part 93, 

subpart A requires that transportation 

plans, programs, and projects conform 

to SIPs and establishes the criteria and 

procedures for determining whether 

they conform. Conformity to a SIP 

means that transportation activities will 

not produce new air quality violations, 

worsen existing violations, or delay 

timely attainment of the NAAQS. Thus, 

EPA’s conformity rule requires a 

demonstration that emissions from a 

Metropolitan Planning Organization’s 

Regional Transportation Plan and 

Transportation Improvement Program, 

involving Federal Highway 

Administration or Federal Transit 

Administration funding or approval, are 

consistent with the MVEB(s) contained 

in a control strategy SIP revision or 

maintenance plan (40 CFR 93.101, 

93.118, and 93.124). A MVEB is the 

level of mobile source emissions of a 

pollutant relied upon in the attainment 

or maintenance demonstration to attain 

or maintain compliance with the 

NAAQS in the nonattainment or 

maintenance area. 

A PM2.5 maintenance plan should 

identify MVEBs for direct PM2.5, NOX

and all other PM2.5 precursors from onroad mobile source emissions that are 

determined to significantly contribute to 

PM2.5 levels in the area.26 All direct 

PM2.5 SIP budgets should include direct 

PM2.5 motor vehicle emissions from 

tailpipe, brake wear and tire wear. A 

State must also consider whether reentrained paved and unpaved road dust 

are significant contributors and should 

be included in the direct PM2.5 budget.27

It should be noted that Oakridge is 

considered an isolated rural 

nonattainment area within the meaning 

of 40 CFR 93.109(g), so transportation 

conformity determinations are only 

required when a non-exempt Federal 

Highway Administration or Federal 

Transit Administration funded project is 

funded or approved.28

The Oakridge PM2.5 maintenance plan 

includes direct PM2.5 MVEBs for the 

attainment year (2015), two interim 

years (2025 and 2030) and the 

maintenance horizon year (2035). See 

Table 5, below. On February 8, 2018, 

EPA approved a 2015 attainment year 

PM2.5 MVEB of 22.2 lb/day (83 FR 

5537). The projected MVEBs (2025, 

2030 and 2035) reflect the total on-road 

PM2.5 worst-case day emissions (a sum 

of primary exhaust, brake wear and tire 

wear), plus a portion of the available 

safety margin to accommodate technical 

uncertainties due to model updates and 

inputs into the EPA MOVES model and 

travel forecasting models as well as 

potential changes to regional 

transportation plans. A safety margin is 

the amount by which the total projected 

PM2.5 emissions from all sources are less 

than the total emissions that would 

satisfy the NAAQS for the 2015 

attainment year. With the safety margin 

applied to the future year MVEB, the 

budgets still demonstrate maintenance 

of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Oregon used the Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Simulator model, 

MOVES2014a, during the development 

of the maintenance plan and executed it 

with locally developed inputs 

representative of wintertime calendar 

year 2015 conditions and future 

projections in order to appropriately 

calculate the budgets. MOVES2014a was 

the accepted model when this work 

began. EPA recently released MOVES3, 

but since sufficient work had taken 

place on this SIP with MOVES2014a, we 

are accepting that mobile model in this 

submittal (86 FR 1106, 1108, January 7, 

2021). Traffic growth in VMT for the 

Oakridge NAA is based on 

transportation modeling by Lane 

County, LCOG and ODOT. The mobile 

source emissions, in total, were 

modeled to steadily decrease between 

2015 and 2035 as a result of cleaner 

vehicles and cleaner fuels. The MVEBs 

are based on the control measures in the 

maintenance plan and consistent with 

maintaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. 

As determined in the 2016 attainment 

plan approval (83 FR 5537, February 8, 

2018), secondary particulate are still 

minor contributors to the Oakridge 

PM2.5 air pollution concentrations on 

worst-case winter days as summarized 

in section III.D.1. Oregon excluded 

paved road dust emissions and NOX

emissions from the MVEB in accordance 

with 40 CFR 93.102(b)(3). Vehicle 

emissions of SO2 and NH3 were also 

found to contribute minimally to PM2.5

in the area and therefore the 

maintenance plan does not include 

MVEBs for these precursors in 

accordance with 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(v). 

See Appendix IV of LRAPA’s Oakridge 

PM2.5 maintenance plan, in the docket 

for this action, for further analysis of the 

MVEB pollutants and precursors. 

Therefore, based on its analysis, LRAPA 

set the Oakridge direct PM2.5 MVEBs for 

2015, 2025, 2030 and 2035 as provided 

in Table 5 of this proposed action. 

According to EPA’s conformity rule, the 

emissions budget acts as a ceiling on 

emissions in the year for which it is 

defined or until a SIP revision modifies 

the budget.29


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 26721 

30See EPA memorandum titled, ‘‘EPA Region 10 

Adequacy Review of Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budgets in Oakridge PM2.5 Maintenance Plan’’, 

dated April 6, 2022. 

31On January 13, 2022, Oregon also submitted 

LRAPA Title 29 Sections 0020, 0050–0090, 0300 

and 0320. Oregon made no changes to these 

sections, except for the State effective date. EPA has 

reviewed these rules and approved them in a 

previous action (83 FR 50274, March 23, 2018). 

TABLE 5—DIRECT PM2.5 MVEBS FOR THE OAKRIDGE PM2.5 NAA 

Motor vehicle emissions budgets 

Year 

2015 2025 2030 2035 

Direct PM2.5 (lb/day) ........................................................................................................ 22.2 8.2 7.2 6.5 

For MVEBs to be approvable, they 

must meet, at a minimum, EPA’s 

adequacy criteria (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)). 

EPA’s process for determining adequacy 

of a budget consists of three basic steps: 

(1) Notifying the public of a SIP 

submittal; (2) providing the public the 

opportunity to comment on the budget 

during a public comment period; and (3) 

making a finding of adequacy or 

inadequacy. The process for 

determining the adequacy of a 

submitted budget is codified at 40 CFR 

93.118(f). EPA can notify the public by 

either posting an announcement that 

EPA has received SIP budgets on EPA’s 

adequacy website (40 CFR 93.118(f)(1)), 

or via a Federal Register notice of 

proposed rulemaking when EPA 

reviews the adequacy of an 

implementation plan budget 

simultaneously with its review and 

action on the SIP itself (40 CFR 

93.118(f)(2)). 

Today, we are notifying the public 

that EPA will be reviewing the adequacy 

of the 2015, 2025, 2030 and 2035 

budgets in the Oakridge PM2.5

maintenance plan. The public has a 30- 

day comment period as described in the 

DATES section of this document. After 

this comment period, EPA will indicate 

whether the budgets are adequate via 

the final rulemaking on this proposed 

action or on the adequacy website, 

according to 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2)(iii). 

The details of EPA’evaluation of the 

budget for compliance with the budget 

adequacy criteria of 40 CFR 93.118(e) 

are provided in a separate memorandum 

included with the docket for this 

rulemaking.30 As noted earlier, the 

public comment period for EPA’s 

adequacy finding will be concurrent 

with the public comment period for this 

proposed action on the Oakridge PM2.5

Maintenance Plan. 

Based on the information presented in 

the Oakridge PM2.5 maintenance plan 

and our adequacy review to date, we 

propose to find that Oregon has 

evaluated the appropriate pollutants 

and precursors and appropriately 

established MVEBs for direct PM2.5

emissions. EPA has reviewed the 

Oakridge PM2.5 maintenance plan’s 

MVEBs and found them to be consistent 

with the control measures in the SIP 

and consistent with maintenance of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS within the 

Oakridge area through 2035. We 

propose to approve the MVEBs in the 

Oakridge PM2.5 maintenance plan as 

meeting the requirements of the CAA 

and EPA regulations. 

F. State Rule Changes To Reflect the 

Redesignation 

Oregon adopted maintenance plans 

for both the Oakridge PM2.5 and 

Oakridge PM10 area in the same state 

rulemaking package and submitted them 

as a single SIP submittal to EPA. This 

single submittal includes changes to 

LRAPA rules to reflect the anticipated 

redesignation of both areas. Today’s 

action addresses the Oakridge PM2.5

area, and we are addressing the 

Oakridge PM10 area in a separate action. 

However, in today’s action, for the sake 

of simplicity, we are proposing to 

approve all updates to LRAPA rules to 

reflect the anticipated redesignation of 

both areas. We believe this is 

appropriate because we intend to 

finalize our proposed actions on both 

areas within the same time frame. In 

today’s action, EPA is proposing to 

approve revisions to LRAPA’s Title 29 

Designation of Air Quality Areas, 

Section 29–0030(2) Designation of 

Nonattainment Areas and Section 29– 

0040(3) Designation of Maintenance 

Areas. These revisions will remove the 

Oakridge PM2.5 nonattainment areas 

from the list of PM2.5 nonattainment 

areas and add them to the list of PM2.5

maintenance areas within the federallyapproved Oregon SIP. EPA is also 

proposing to approve minor editorial 

changes to LRAPA’s Title 29 

Designation of Air Quality Areas, 

Section 29–0010 Definitions and Section 

29–0310 Designation of Reattainment 

Areas, to consistently refer to the 

‘‘Oakridge PM2.5 Maintenance Area’’ 

rather than the ‘‘Oakridge PM2.5 Nonattainment area.’’ 31

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA proposes to redesignate the 

Oakridge, Oregon PM2.5 NAA, and 

proposes approval of the associated 

maintenance plan for the area. If this 

proposal is finalized, the designation 

status of the Oakridge, Oregon PM2.5

NAA under 40 CFR part 81 will be 

revised to attainment upon the effective 

date of that final action. 

EPA proposes to approve and 

incorporate by reference into the Oregon 

SIP, the submitted revisions to LRAPA 

Title 29 Sections 29–0010, 29–0020, 29– 

0030(2), 29–0040(3), 29–0050, 29–0060, 

29–0070, 29–0080, 29–0090, 29–0300, 

29–0310 and 29–0320, state effective 

November 18, 2021. 

In addition, EPA proposes to approve 

and incorporate into the SIP specific 

sections of the local rule submitted on 

January 20, 2017, and the local rule 

submitted on January 13, 2022, as part 

of the maintenance plan to the extent set 

forth in this document. 

EPA also proposes to take final agency 

action on Oregon’s exceptional event 

demonstration for the Oakridge PM10

monitor as discussed in this action. 

Finally, we propose that the Oakridge 

PM2.5 maintenance plan’s MVEBs meet 

applicable CAA requirements for 

maintenance plans and transportation 

conformity requirements. With this 

action, we are starting the adequacy 

process for these proposed MVEBs and 

opening a public comment period. 

We note that the January 13, 2022 

submittal also includes the Oakridge 

PM10 redesignation and maintenance 

plan and additional revisions to 

LRAPA’s Title 29 rules, which EPA will 

address in a separate action. 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this document, EPA proposes to 

include, in a final rule, regulatory text 

that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with the 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA 

proposes to incorporate by reference the 

provisions described in Section IV of 

this document, specifically (1) The Lane 

County Code Chapter 9—Restriction on 

Use of Solid Fuel Space Heating 

Devices, Sections 9.120–9.140, (2) the 

City of Oakridge Ordinance No. 920— 

An Ordinance Amending Section 7 of 

Ordinance 914 and Adopting New 

Standards for the Oakridge Air 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
26722 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 87 / Thursday, May 5, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

Pollution Control Program; Section 

Two(3)—Solid Fuel Burning Devices— 

Prohibitions and (3) revisions to 

LRAPA’s Title 29 rules as described in 

Section IV of this document. 

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). 

VI. Statutory and Executive Orders 

Review 

Under the CAA, redesignation of an 

area to attainment and the 

accompanying approval of a 

maintenance plan under section 

107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the 

status of a geographical area and do not 

impose any additional regulatory 

requirements on sources beyond those 

imposed by state law. A redesignation to 

attainment does not in and of itself 

create any new requirements, but rather 

results in the applicability of 

requirements contained in the CAA for 

areas that have been redesignated to 

attainment. Moreover, the Administrator 

is required to approve a SIP submittal 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submittals, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely proposes to approve a 

State plan and State law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those already imposed by State law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive 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 CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects 

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. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

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

Dated: April 25, 2022. 

Michelle L. Pirzadeh, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2022–09256 Filed 5–4–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1