Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 29515

such grounds. Union Electric Co. v.

EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 256–66 (1976).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Motor vehicle

pollution, Hydrocarbons, Nitrogen

oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic

compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, National Parks,

Wilderness Areas.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: May 30, 1996.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–14759 Filed 6–10–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[WA52–7125; FRL–5513–2]

Approval and Promulgation of

Maintenance Plan and Designation of

Areas for Air Quality Planning

Purposes for Carbon Monoxide; State

of Washington

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) is announcing its intent

to redesignate the Seattle-TacomaEverett nonattainment area to

attainment for the carbon monoxide

(CO) air quality standard and to approve

a maintenance plan that will insure that

the area remains in attainment. Under

the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990

(CAA), designations can be revised if

sufficient data is available to warrant

such revisions. In this action, EPA is

proposing to approve the SeattleTacoma-Everett redesignation as

meeting the requirements set forth in

the CAA.

DATES: Comments must be postmarked

on or before July 11, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to: Montel Livingston, SIP

Manager, EPA, Office of Air Quality

(OAQ–107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,

Washington 98101.

Copies of the State’s redesignation

request and other information

supporting this proposed action are

available for public review during

normal business hours at the addresses

listed below: EPA, Alaska-Washington

Unit (OAQ–107), 1200 Sixth Avenue,

Seattle, Washington 98101, and the

Washington State Department of

Ecology, Air Quality Program, P.O. Box

47600, Olympia, Washington 98504–

7600.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christi Lee, EPA Region 10 Washington

Operation’s Office, at (360) 753–9079.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

In a March 15, 1991, letter to the EPA

Region 10 Administrator, the Governor

of Washington recommended the

Seattle-Tacoma-Everett area, including

the western portions of King, Pierce,

and Snohomish Counties, be designated

as nonattainment for CO as required by

section 107(d)(1)(A) of the 1990 Clean

Air Act Amendments (CAA) (Public

Law 101–549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at

42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q). The area, which

includes lands within the Puyallup

Reservation, Tulalip Reservation and

Muckleshoot Reservation, was

designated nonattainment and classified

as ‘‘moderate’’ under the provisions

outlined in sections 186 and 187 of the

CAA. (See 56 FR 56694 (Nov. 6, 1991),

codified at 40 CFR part 81, § 81.348.)

Because the Seattle-Tacoma-Everett area

had a design value of 14.8 ppm (based

on 1987 data), it was classified as

‘‘moderate > 12.7 ppm’’ (moderate plus).

The CAA established an attainment

date of December 31, 1995, for all

moderate CO areas. The Seattle-TacomaEverett area has ambient monitoring

data showing attainment of the CO

National Ambient Air Quality Standards

(NAAQS), since 1991. Therefore, in an

effort to comply with the CAA and to

ensure continued attainment of the

NAAQS, on March 6, 1996, the

Washington State Department of

Ecology (WDOE) submitted a CO

redesignation request and a

maintenance plan for the SeattleTacoma-Everett nonattainment area. The

WDOE submitted evidence that public

hearings were held on October 26, 1995

in Seattle at the office of the Puget

Sound Air Pollution Control Agency.

On April 8, 1996, EPA Region 10

determined that the information

received from the WDOE constituted a

complete redesignation request under

the general completeness criteria of 40

CFR part 51, appendix V, §§ 2.1 and 2.2.

II. Evaluation Criteria

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

specific requirements that an area must

meet in order to be redesignated from

nonattainment to attainment. They are:

1. The area must have attained the

applicable NAAQS;

2. The area must have a fully approved

SIP under section 110(k) of the CAA

and the area must have met all

relevant requirements under section

110 and Part D of the CAA.

3. The air quality improvement must be

permanent and enforceable;

4. The area must have a fully approved

maintenance plan pursuant to section

175A of the CAA.

III. Review of State Submittal

EPA proposes to find that the

Washington redesignation request for

the Seattle-Tacoma-Everett area meets

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

noted above. EPA also proposes to find

that information and requirements

provided in the WDOE redesignation

request and maintenance plan for the

Seattle-Tacoma-Everett nonattainment

area demonstrate that the 107(d)(3)(E)

requirements have been met for the

affected tribal lands which include

portions of the Tulalip Reservation, the

Puyallup Reservation and the

Muckleshoot Reservation. The Agency

has not determined whether it is bound

to follow the formal requirements of

section 107(d)(3)(E) when taking such

redesignation actions for tribal lands.

The action to redesignate to attainment

these tribal lands is being proposed

today without answering that question

because information submitted by

WDOE satisfies each required element

for redesignation.

The following is a brief description of

how each of the 107(d)(3)(E)

requirements are met. A Technical

Support Document, on file at the EPA

Region 10 office, contains a more

detailed analysis of this redesignation

proposal.

1. Attainment of the CO NAAQS

To attain the CO NAAQS, an area

must have complete quality-assured

data showing no more than one

exceedance of the standard per year

over at least two consecutive years. The

redesignation is based on air quality

data that showed that the CO standard

was not violated in 1993 and 1994.

These data were collected by WDOE in

accordance with 40 CFR 50.8, following

EPA guidance on quality assurance and

quality control and are in the EPA

Aerometric Information and Retrieval

System (AIRS). Since the SeattleTacoma-Everett area has complete

quality-assured monitoring data

showing attainment of the standard over

two consecutive years (1993 and 1994),

and has not violated the standard since

that time, the area has met the first

statutory criterion for attainment of the

CO NAAQS. The WDOE has committed

to continue monitoring in this area in

accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
29516 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

2. Fully Approved SIP That Meets

Applicable Requirements of Section 110

and Part D of the CAA

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

states that EPA may not approve

redesignation of a nonattainment area to

attainment unless EPA has fully

approved all of the SIP requirements

that were due under the 1990 CAA. The

1990 CAA required that nonattainment

areas achieve specific new requirements

depending on the severity of the

nonattainment classification. As noted

earlier, Seattle-Tacoma-Everett was

classified as a moderate CO

nonattainment area with a design value

greater than 12.7 ppm. Therefore, the

1990 CAA requirements for the SeattleTacoma-Everett nonattainment area

include the preparation of a 1990

emission inventory with periodic

updates, adoption of an oxygenated

fuels program, the development of

contingency measures, adoption of an

enhanced inspection and maintenance

program, a forecast of vehicle miles

traveled, development of conformity

procedures, and the establishment of a

permit program for new or modified

major stationary sources.

For the purposes of evaluating the

request for redesignation to attainment,

EPA has approved all but three elements

of the WDOE CO SIP. Specifically, the

three elements of the WDOE CO SIP that

have not been fully approved by EPA

are the 1990 base year emission

inventory, the inspection and

maintenance program and the

attainment demonstration. EPA is

reviewing the SIP revisions for each of

these three requirements, which have

been submitted by the WDOE. Final

approval of the Seattle-Tacoma-Everett

CO area redesignation request is

contingent on final action by EPA to

approve these three elements.

A. Conformity

Under section 176(c) of the CAA,

states were required to submit revisions

to their SIPs that include criteria and

procedures to ensure that Federal

actions conform to the air quality

planning goals in the applicable SIPs.

The requirement to determine

conformity applies to transportation

plans, programs and projects developed,

funded or approved under Title 23

U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act

(‘‘transportation conformity’’), as well as

all other Federal actions (‘‘general

conformity’’). Congress provided for the

State revisions to be submitted one year

after the date of promulgation of final

EPA conformity regulations. EPA

promulgated final transportation

conformity regulations on November 24,

1993 (58 FR 62188) and final general

conformity regulations on November 30,

1993 (58 FR 63214). These conformity

rules require that the States adopt both

transportation and general conformity

provisions in the SIP for areas

designated nonattainment or subject to

a maintenance plan approved under

CAA section 175A. Pursuant to 40 CFR

§ 51.396 of the transportation

conformity rule, the WDOE was

required to submit a SIP revision

containing transportation conformity

criteria and procedures consistent with

those established in the Federal rule by

November 25, 1994. Similarly, pursuant

to 40 CFR § 51.851 of the general

conformity rule, the WDOE was

required to submit a SIP revision

containing general conformity criteria

and procedures consistent with those

established in the Federal rule by

December 1, 1994. The WDOE

submitted its transportation conformity

SIP revision to EPA on December 1,

1995. This SIP has not been fully

approved by EPA. The WDOE has not

submitted its general conformity SIP

revision.

Although this redesignation request

was submitted to EPA after the due

dates for the SIP revisions for

transportation conformity (58 FR 62188)

and general conformity (58 FR 63214)

rules, EPA believes it is reasonable to

interpret the conformity requirements as

not being applicable requirements for

purposes of evaluating the redesignation

request under section 107(d). The

rationale for this is based on a

combination of two factors. First, the

requirement to submit SIP revisions to

comply with the conformity provisions

of the Act continues to apply to areas

after redesignation to attainment.

Therefore, the State remains obligated to

adopt the transportation and general

conformity rules even after

redesignation and would risk sanctions

for failure to do so. While redesignation

of an area to attainment enables the area

to avoid further compliance with most

requirements of section 110 and part D,

since those requirements are linked to

the nonattainment status of an area, the

conformity requirements apply to both

nonattainment and maintenance areas.

Second, the federal conformity rules

require the performance of conformity

analyses in the absence of state-adopted

rules. Therefore, a delay in adopting

State rules does not relieve an area from

the obligation to implement conformity

requirements.

Because areas are subject to the

conformity requirements regardless of

whether they are redesignated to

attainment, and must implement

conformity under Federal rules if State

rules are not yet adopted, EPA believes

it is reasonable to view these

requirements as not being applicable

requirements for purposes of evaluating

a redesignation request.

Therefore, EPA has modified its

national policy regarding the

interpretation of the provisions of

section 107(d)(3)(E) concerning the

applicable requirements for purposes of

reviewing a carbon monoxide

redesignation request. (See 61 FR 2918,

January 30, 1996). Under this policy, for

the reasons just discussed, EPA believes

that the CO redesignation request for the

Seattle-Tacoma-Everett area may be

approved notwithstanding the lack of

submitted and approved state

transportation and general conformity

rules.

B. Periodic Emission Inventory

Under Part D of the CAA a 1993 CO

periodic emission inventory is required

to be submitted to EPA for approval into

the Washington SIP. Ecology submitted

a 1993 emission inventory as an element

of the maintenance plan for purposes of

meeting the attainment emission

inventory requirement of section 175A.

EPA is accepting and proposing to

approve the 1993 emission inventory as

satisfying both the Part D and section

175A requirements.

3. Improvement in Air Quality Due to

Permanent and Enforceable Measures

EPA approved the WDOE’s CO SIP

under the 1990 CAA. Emission

reductions achieved through the

implementation of control measures

contained in that SIP are enforceable.

These measures were: an enhanced

inspection and maintenance program,

the Federal Motor Vehicle Control

Program, and an oxygenated fuels

program. As discussed above, the

Seattle-Tacoma-Everett area initially

attained the NAAQS in 1991 (prior to

implementation of the oxygenated fuels

program) with monitored attainment

through the 1995–1996 CO season. This

indicates that the improvements are due

to the permanent and enforceable

measures contained in the 1990 CO SIP

and did not rely on the oxygenated fuels

program.

The WDOE has demonstrated that

actual enforceable emission reductions

are responsible for the air quality

improvement and that the CO emissions

in the base year are not artificially low

due to local economic downturn or

unusual or extreme occurrences in the

weather patterns. EPA finds that the

combination of certain existing EPAapproved SIP and federal measures

contribute to the permanence and

enforceability of reduction in ambient
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules 29517

CO levels that have allowed the area to

attain the NAAQS.

4. Fully Approved Maintenance Plan

Under Section 175A

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth

the elements of a maintenance plan for

areas seeking redesignation from

nonattainment to attainment. The plan

must demonstrate continued attainment

of the applicable NAAQS for at least ten

years after the Administrator approves a

redesignation to attainment. Eight years

after the redesignation, the state must

submit a revised maintenance plan

which demonstrates attainment for the

ten years following the initial ten-year

period. To provide for the possibility of

future NAAQS violations, the

maintenance plan must contain

contingency measures, with a schedule

for implementation adequate to assure

prompt correction of any air quality

problems. In this notice, EPA is

proposing to approve the WDOE’s

maintenance plan for the SeattleTacoma-Everett area because EPA finds

that it meets the requirements of section

175A.

A. Attainment Emission Inventory

The WDOE submitted comprehensive

inventories of CO emissions from point,

area, stationary and mobile sources

using 1993 as the attainment year for

calculations to demonstrate that the CO

standard will be maintained in the

Seattle-Tacoma-Everett area. Since air

monitoring recorded attainment in 1993,

1993 is an acceptable year for the

attainment inventory. The 1993

emission inventory summaries by

source category are in Table 1 and

detailed inventory data is contained in

the docket maintained by EPA.

Although the 1993 inventory can be

considered representative of attainment

conditions because the NAAQS was not

violated during 1993, the WDOE

established CO emissions for the

attainment year, 1993, as well as five

forecast years out to the year 2010

(1995, 1998, 2005, 2007 and 2010) in

their redesignation request. The future

emission estimates are based on forecast

assumptions about growth of the

regional economy and vehicle miles

traveled. The assumptions for the

annual VMT growth rate and the annual

employment growth rate were

calculated using the State Highway

Performance Monitor System, regional

VMT data and the Central Puget Sound

Regional Econometric Model

respectively. Stationary and mobile

source inventories were compiled

following EPA guidance. Mobile source

emission estimates were prepared

following the approach recommended

by EPA. The WDOE used the Highway

Performance Monitor System and

regional transportation system network

data to estimate vehicle miles traveled

and used the MOBILE 5.1 emission

model for CO emissions estimates.

TABLE 1.—1993 CO ATTAINMENT YEAR EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOR THE SEATTLE-TACOMA-EVERETT NONATTAINMENT

AREA (TONS PER WINTER DAY)

Year Area Nonroad Mobile Point Total

1993 .......................................................................................................... 316 214 1497 61 2088

SEATTLE-TACOMA-EVERETT NONATTAINMENT AREA CO EMISSIONS INVENTORY PROJECTIONS (TONS PER WINTER DAY)

Year Area Nonroad Mobile Point Total

1995 .......................................................................................................... 317 211 1290 61 1879

1998 .......................................................................................................... 317 221 1458 61 2057

2001 .......................................................................................................... 318 218 1317 61 1914

2005 .......................................................................................................... 319 198 1262 61 1840

2007 .......................................................................................................... 320 195 1259 61 1835

2010 .......................................................................................................... 321 198 1253 61 1833

B. Demonstration of Maintenance:

Projected Inventories

Total CO emissions were projected

from the 1993 attainment year out to

2010. These projected inventories were

prepared in accordance with EPA

guidance. The projections show that

calculated CO emissions, assuming no

oxygenated fuels program, are not

expected to exceed the level of the 1993

attainment year inventory during this

time period. The WDOE will

discontinue implementation of the

Oxygenated Fuel program in the SeattleTacoma-Everett Consolidated

Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA)

once approval of the CO maintenance

plan becomes effective. Therefore, it is

anticipated that the Seattle-TacomaEverett area will maintain the CO

standard without the oxygenated fuels

program, and this program would not

need to be implemented following

redesignation, except as a contingency

measure.

C. Verification of Continued Attainment

Verification of continued attainment

of the CO NAAQS in the SeattleTacoma-Everett area depends, in part,

on the State’s efforts toward tracking

indicators of continued attainment

during the maintenance period. The

WDOE has also committed to perform

comprehensive reviews of the CO

maintenance plan commencing in the

year 2000 and occurring again at four

year intervals in 2004 and 2008. The

plan elements to be reviewed at each of

these times include VMT and

socioeconomic forecasts; emission

inventory projections and control

strategy implementation effectiveness.

The results of the plan review in 2008

will be used as the basis for developing

a CO maintenance plan for the next

maintenance planning period.

In addition, the WDOE has committed

to pursuing amendments to the

maintenance plan if substantive changes

are required as a result of the above

reviews.

D. Contingency Plan

Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires

that all control measures contained in

the SIP prior to redesignation be

retained as contingency measures in the

CO maintenance plan. Since the

oxygenated fuels program was a control

measure contained in the SIP prior to

redesignation, the WDOE SIP retains

oxygenated fuels as the contingency

measure in the maintenance plan. The

plan contains a triggering mechanism to

determine when the contingency

measure is needed. In the event of a

future CO violation, implementation of

the oxygenated fuels program will be

triggered. This contingency measure

would require all gasoline blended for
29518 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 113 / Tuesday, June 11, 1996 / Proposed Rules

sale in the Puget Sound CO

nonattainment area during the winter

months to contain an average oxygenate

content of at least 2.7 percent by weight.

Program requirements would be

identical to those incorporated into the

current oxygenated gasoline program

(Chapter 173–492, Washington

Administrative Code, Motor Fuel

Specifications for Oxygenated Gasoline,

adopted October 6, 1992 and PSAPCA

Regulation II, Section 2.09, Oxygenated

Gasoline, adopted October 14, 1993).

This contingency measure will be

triggered in the event of a qualityassured violation of the NAAQS for CO

at any one of the permanent monitoring

sites in the nonattainment area. Thus,

this triggering will occur when any one

monitoring site records two 8-hour

average CO concentrations that equal or

exceed 9.5 ppm in a single calendar

year.

The oxygenated fuels program will be

fully implemented no later than the next

full winter season following the date

when the trigger was activated.

Implementation will continue

throughout the balance of the CO

maintenance period, or until such time

that a reassessment of the ambient CO

monitoring data establishes that the

contingency measure is no longer

necessary.

As mentioned above, the WDOE has

chosen to convert its oxygenated fuels

requirement in the Seattle-TacomaEverett CMSA to a contingency measure

in its maintenance plan upon

redesignation. EPA is approving the

WDOE’s contingency measure for the

Seattle-Tacoma-Everett area.

E. Subsequent Maintenance Plan

Revisions

In accordance with section 175A(b) of

the CAA, the State has agreed to submit

a revised maintenance SIP eight years

after the area is redesignated to

attainment. That revised SIP will

provide for maintenance for an

additional ten years.

Conclusion

EPA proposes to approve the SeattleTacoma-Everett, Washington CO

maintenance plan and request for

redesignation to attainment because

WDOE has demonstrated compliance

with the requirements of section

107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation.

In addition, EPA, after notification of

and consultation with the affected tribal

governments, proposes to redesignate to

attainment those areas in the SeattleTacoma-Everett CO nonattainment area

that are located within the Tulalip

Reservation, the Puyallup Reservation

and the Muckleshoot Reservation. The

Agency believes that the redesignation

requirements are effectively satisfied

here based on information provided by

WDOE and requirements contained in

the WDOE SIP and maintenance plan.

EPA is soliciting public comments on

this notice and on issues relevant to

EPA’s proposed action. Comments will

be considered before taking final action.

Interested parties may participate in the

federal rule making procedure by

submitting written comments to the

person and address listed in the

ADDRESSES section at the beginning of

this notice.

IV. Administrative Review

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

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

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

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

§§ 603 and 604. Alternatively, EPA may

certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities. Small entities

include small businesses, small not-forprofit enterprises, and government

entities with jurisdiction over

populations of less than 50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and

subchapter I, Part D of the CAA do not

create any new requirements, but

simply approve requirements that the

state is already imposing. Therefore,

because the federal SIP-approval does

not impose any new requirements, I

certify that it does not have a significant

impact on any small entities affected.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

federal-state relationship under the

CAA, preparation of a regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The CAA

forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

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

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

7410(a)(2).

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

prepare a budgetary impact statement to

accompany any proposed or final rule

that includes a Federal mandate that

may result in estimated costs to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to the private sector, of

$100 million or more. Under Section

205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome

alternative that achieves the objectives

of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203

requires EPA to establish a plan for

informing and advising any small

governments that may be significantly

or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the

proposed action promulgated does not

include a Federal mandate that may

result in estimated costs of $100 million

or more to either State, local, or tribal

governments in the aggregate, or to the

private sector. This Federal action

approves pre-existing requirements

under State or local law, and imposes

no new Federal requirements.

Accordingly, no additional costs to

State, local, or tribal governments, or to

the private sector, result from this

action.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any SIP. Each

request for revision to any SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

This action has been classified as a

Table 3 action by the Regional

Administrator under the procedures

published in the Federal Register on

January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214–2224), as

revised by a July 10, 1995,

memorandum from Mary Nichols,

Assistant Administrator for Air and

Radiation. The Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from E.O. 12866

review.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations.

40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, National parks,

and Wilderness areas.

Authority: 42 U.S.C 7401–7671q.

Dated: May 22, 1996.

Jane S. Moore,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96–14679 Filed 6–10–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

44 CFR Part 67

[Docket No. FEMA–7182]

Proposed Flood Elevation

Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency

Management Agency, FEMA.