FEDERAL REGISTER
Vol. 60, No. 189
Rules and Regulations

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)

40 CFR Part 81
[OR-A-95-01a; FRL-5302-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Definition of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Oregon-Washington

60 FR 50423

DATE: Friday, September 29, 1995
ACTION: Direct-Final rule.

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approves the separation of the Portland, Oregon-Vancouver, Washington interstate carbon monoxide (CO) nonattainment area into two distinct nonattainment areas. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (ODEQ) has submitted sufficient technical documentation to adequately assure EPA that Vancouver and Portland are two separate CO airsheds. EPA believes any future problems will be hotspot in nature and therefore, EPA believes the CO national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) will be protected in each state. This boundary correction will change the boundary description published in the November 6, 1991 Federal Register document.

DATES: This action will be effective on November 28, 1995 unless adverse or critical comments are received by October 30, 1995. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Montel Livingston, SIP Manager, Air & Radiation Branch (AT-082), EPA, Docket OR-A-95-01, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460. Copies of material submitted to EPA may be examined during normal business hours at the following locations: EPA, Region 10, Air & Radiation Branch, 1200 Sixth Avenue (AT-082), Seattle, Washington 98101, and Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 811 S.W. Sixth Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97204-1390.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christi Lee, Air and Radiation Branch (AT-082), EPA, Seattle, Washington 98101, (206) 553-1814.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

In the November 6, 1991 Federal Register notice, 56 FR 56847, the Portland-Vancouver area was designated as a nonattainment area for CO. The boundary for the Portland portion of the interstate nonattainment area is the Portland Metro Service District Boundary which includes Clackamas County (part), Multnomah County (part) and Washington County (part). The boundary for the Vancouver portion of the interstate nonattainment area is Clark County (part) Air Quality Maintenance Area (AQMA). The Portland-Vancouver interstate CO nonattainment area is classified as moderate less than or equal to 12.7 parts per million (ppm).

Prior to the boundary being set, the 1990 Clean Air Act required the Governor of each state to submit boundary descriptions for those areas which were to be designated nonattainment. The Governor of Oregon and the Governor of Washington each submitted a letter dated March 15, 1991, that listed and described the nonattainment area boundaries for their respective states. For CO, Oregon listed the Portland Metropolitan Area as nonattainment with the boundary being the Metropolitan Service District (METRO) which surrounds the urban growth boundaries of cities within the greater Portland Metropolitan Area n1 . The Washington letter listed Vancouver as nonattainment with the boundary being the Washington portion of the Portland-Vancouver Interstate AQMA.

n1 The Portland portion of the Air Quality Maintenance Area had been designated as a CO nonattainment area prior to the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, 43 FR 8962, (March 3, 1978), listed as Portland-Vancouver (Oregon Portion).

In the November 6, 1991, notice EPA identified Portland-Vancouver as an interstate nonattainment area with the Portland portion of the nonattainment area boundary being METRO and the Vancouver portion of the nonattainment boundary being the AQMA (Vancouver portion).

The ODEQ contends that the November 6, 1991, Federal Register notice is in error. The ODEQ has written EPA that it never recommended nor acknowledged an interstate CO nonattainment area or a contiguous boundary with Vancouver, Washington.

EPA considered ODEQ's request, and finds that the designations were properly promulagated. However, EPA acknowledges ODEQ's position in that there are two distinct airsheds that should be separately regulated. EPA requested a technical justification be submitted by the state of Oregon to demonstrate that the Portland and Vancouver CO airsheds are distinct and that there is an acceptably minimal CO transport between the two cities.

On August 5, 1994, and January 3, 1995, the State of Oregon, through the ODEQ, submitted technical justification which supports the separation of the Portland-Vancouver CO interstate nonattainment area into two distinct nonattainment areas (Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington).

Of significance in EPA's review is that both areas have been successful in attaining the CO standard. Portland has been in attainment of the CO standard since 1990, and Vancouver has been in attainment since 1991. Both cities are currently in the process of preparing CO maintenance plans for redesignation.

Technical Justification Conclusions

EPA requested ODEQ submit documentation which demonstrates that the Portland and Vancouver airsheds are distinct, and that the CO NAAQS which have been attained will be maintained despite any differences in the prospective maintenance plans. EPA also requested ODEQ discuss the potential CO impacts of the interstate commute.

To address EPAs technical concerns, ODEQ completed a monitoring data analysis which compared Portland and Vancouver CO data, taking into consideration meteorological impacts (wind direction and wind speed) for pollutant transport. The results of this analysis demonstrated that elevated CO concentrations in either city were not influenced by meteorological transport of the pollutant between the two airsheds.

To further support this conclusion, ODEQ also conducted a statistical analysis which compared Portland and Vancouver CO monitored data to investigate whether a correlation existed between measured concentrations at the Portland and Vancouver monitoring sites. The analysis demonstrated no correlation in measured CO concentrations between the two cities.

In addition, special studies were performed in both Portland (September 1991, the 1994 report is in development) and Vancouver (May 1994) that demonstrated that CO impacts in each area are limited to intersections with steep gradients of decreasing CO concentration away from the intersections.

To address EPA's interstate commuting concerns, ODEQ conducted a CO impact analysis of the interstate commute traffic focusing on high volume intersections. Since vehicles registered in both nonattainment areas are subjected to essentially identical control strategies (oxygenated fuel, basic I/M), the impact of either the Portland or Vancouver vehicles on the contiguous CO nonattainment areas concentrations is insignificant.

The ODEQ has written EPA of its commitment to providing long-term maintenance of the CO national ambient air quality standard not only in it's own jurisdiction but in other contiguous areas. Any future change in the CO control strategies for either Portland or Vancouver will be addressed in their future CO redesignation/ maintenance plans which have to be evaluated and approved by EPA.

The technical justification submitted to EPA contains an adequate demonstration that Vancouver's and Portland's airsheds are distinct, relative to CO, and that Oregon and Washington are firmly committed to air quality maintenance in both Portland and Vancouver despite potential differences in the prospective maintenance plans.

II. This Action

With this action EPA is approving the technical correction to the CO nonattainment boundary description for Portland-Vancouver under section 110(k)(6). EPA believes that any future problems will be hotspot in nature and therefore EPA believes that the CO NAAQS will be protected in each state. This action will separate the Portland-Vancouver Interstate CO nonattainment area into two separate nonattainment areas; Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington.

In separating the Portland-Vancouver nonattainment area, the METRO boundary will be recognized as the CO nonattainment boundary for Portland, and the Vancouver portion of the AQMA will remain Vancouver's CO nonattainment boundary. Both areas will remain classified as moderate nonattainment (less than or equal to 12.7 ppm) for CO. Vancouver's design value will remain at 10.0 ppm and Portland's design value has been determined to be 9.8 ppm.

The separated Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington CO nonattainment designations are listed under "Designated Area" in the table at the end of this rulemaking action. The additional language is highlighted for easy reference.

III. 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-for-profit 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).

The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be effective November 28, 1995 unless, within 30 days of its publication, adverse or critical comments are received.

If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn before the effective date by publishing a subsequent notice that will withdraw the final action. All public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this action will be effective November 28, 1995.

The EPA has reviewed this request for revision of the federally-approved SIP for conformance with the provisions of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The EPA has determined that this action conforms with those requirements.

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 the SIP shall be considered separately in light of specific technical, economic and environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 28, 1995. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2), 42 U.S.C. 7607(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

Dated: September 22, 1995.

Carol M. Browner, U.S. EPA Administrator.

Part 81, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

2. Section 81.338 is amended by removing the entry for "Portland-Vancouver Area" and adding the entry for "Portland Area" in "Oregon-Carbon Monoxide" table to read as follows:

@ 81.338 -- Oregon. 

* * * * * 
                        Oregon--Carbon Monoxide 

                      Designation                Classification 
Designated area     Date fn 1     Type      Date fn 1          Type 
                                 * * * * * * * 
Portland Area: 
Portland Metro 
Service District 
Boundary 
Clackamas              Nonattainment           Moderate <=12.7ppm. 
County (part) 
Multnomah              Nonattainment           Moderate <=12.7ppm. 
County (part) 
Washington             Nonattainment           Moderate <=12.7ppm. 
County (part) 

fn 1 This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted. 

3. Section 81.348 is amended by removing the entry for "Portland-Vancouver Area" and adding an entry for "Vancouver Area" in the "Washington-Carbon Monoxide" table to read as follows:

@ 81.348 -- Washington. 

                     Washington--Carbon Monoxide 

                        Designation               Classification 
Designated area     Date fn 1     Type      Date fn 1         Type 
                                * * * * * * * 
Vancouver Area 
Clark County (part)     Nonattainment           Moderate >12.7ppm. 
Air Quality 
Maintenance Area 

fn 1 This date is November 15, 1990, unless otherwise noted. 

[FR Doc. 95-24041 Filed 9-28-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P