[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 1, 2004)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30847-30852]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-12302]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[Docket Number: WA-04-001; FRL-7668-6]


Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: 
Washington; Central Puget Sound Carbon Monoxide and Ozone Second 10-
Year Maintenance Plans

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve second 10-year maintenance plans 
for carbon monoxide (CO) and ozone for the Central Puget Sound area. 
Specifically, in this action EPA proposes to approve Washington's 
demonstration that the Central Puget Sound area will maintain air 
quality standards for CO and ozone through the year 2016; a revised CO 
motor vehicle emissions budget for transportation conformity purposes 
using the MOBILE6.2 emissions model and latest growth and planning 
assumptions; updates and enhancements of state implementation plan 
(SIP) control measures and contingency measures; and identification of 
emissions associated with the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport 
included in the area-wide emissions inventory through the maintenance 
period.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 1, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. WA-04-001, 
by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
     E-mail: [email protected].
     Fax: (206) 553-0110.
     Mail: Office of Air Quality, Environmental Protection 
Agency Region 10, Mail code: OAQ-107, 1200 Sixth Ave., Seattle, 
Washington 98101.
     Hand Delivery: Environmental Protection Agency Region 10, 
Service Center, 14th Floor, 1200 Sixth Ave., Seattle, Washington 98101. 
Such deliveries are only accepted during normal hours of operation, and 
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed 
information.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. WA-04-001. 
EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the 
public docket without change, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through regulations.gov, or 
e-mail. The Federal regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' 
system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact 
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you 
send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through 
regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and 
included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and 
made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, 
EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information 
in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If 
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot 
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your 
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, 
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: Docket materials are publicly available in hard copy at the 
Office of Air Quality, Environmental Protection Agency, Mail code: OAQ-
107, 1200

[[Page 30848]]

Sixth Ave., Seattle, Washington 98101; open from 8 a.m.-4:30 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number 
is (206) 553-6985.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mahbubul Islam, Office of Air Quality, 
Region 10, Mail code OAQ-107, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 
Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101; telephone number: (206) 553-
6985; fax number: (206) 553-0110; e-mail address: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    1. Submitting Confidential Business Information (CBI). Do not 
submit this information to EPA through regulations.gov or e-mail. 
Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be 
CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark 
the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify 
electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that 
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment 
that includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that 
does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for 
inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be 
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR) part 2.
    2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments, 
remember to:
    i. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying 
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    ii. Follow directions--The Agency may ask you to respond to 
specific questions or organize comments by referencing a CFR part or 
section number.
    iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and 
substitute language for your requested changes.
    iv. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information 
and/or data that you used.
    v. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you 
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
    vi. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.
    vii. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of 
profanity or personal threats.
    viii. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified.

II. What Is the Purpose of This Proposed Rulemaking?

    The purpose of this proposed rulemaking is to revise the existing 
CO and ozone maintenance plans for the Central Puget Sound Area in 
Washington State to take account of new and updated information and to 
demonstrate continued maintenance of the ambient air quality standards 
for a second 10-year period through 2016. Portions of the existing 
first 10-year maintenance plans which are not proposed for revision 
shall remain unchanged.
    The State of Washington presented a trend analysis of the 
historical CO and ozone monitored data for the Central Puget Sound area 
demonstrating continued maintenance of the air quality standards with a 
margin of safety. Implementation of new national and local control 
measures including tighter standards for motor vehicle tailpipe 
emissions and cleaner fuel will result in significant improvements of 
air quality for the next 10-year period. EPA agrees with Washington's 
analysis and proposes to approve the second 10-year maintenance plan 
through this rulemaking and notice in the Federal Register.
    Federal transportation conformity regulations require that 
transportation agencies use the latest EPA mobile source emissions 
model for conformity determinations. EPA officially released a new 
version of motor vehicle emissions model (MOBILE6) on January 29, 2002. 
All SIPs that are adopted after that date must use the new model to 
estimate motor vehicle emissions. The release of MOBILE6 also began a 
24-month grace period for conformity. All conformity determinations 
that are initiated after January 29, 2004 must use MOBILE6 model. The 
Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) used MOBILE6.2 to estimate 
CO emissions for the Central Puget Sound area for the next 10-year 
maintenance period through 2016 and conducted a technical analysis that 
showed the new MOBILE6.2 model based regional motor vehicle emissions 
will not cause or contribute to violations of the air quality 
standards. EPA agrees with this analysis and proposes to approve a 
revised motor vehicle emissions budget for conformity determinations.
    Previously approved and existing control measures for both CO and 
ozone remain in place. However, the State of Washington took this 
rulemaking opportunity to update and enhance several of these emissions 
control measures. EPA finds these enhancements and updates to the 
control measures beneficial and proposes to approve them in this 
rulemaking.
    Washington also submitted a comprehensive emissions inventory of 
the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport operation and construction 
activities through the 2006-2016 maintenance period for identification 
and specific inclusion in the SIP. The airport emissions data reflects 
best estimates, and was calculated based on current emissions 
estimation tools. EPA proposes to include, identify, and account for 
the direct and indirect emissions from airport operations and 
construction of airport improvements in this SIP action.

III. What Is a SIP and How Is It Revised From Time to Time?

    The Clean Air Act requires States to attain and maintain ambient 
air quality equal to or better than standards that provide an adequate 
margin of safety for public health and welfare. These ambient air 
quality standards are established by EPA and are known as the National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
    The State's plan for attaining and maintaining the NAAQS are 
outlined in the SIP for that state. The SIP is a planning document 
that, when implemented, is designed to ensure the achievement of the 
NAAQS. Each State currently has a SIP in place, and the Act requires 
that States make SIP revisions periodically as necessary to provide 
continued compliance with the standards.
    SIPs may include, among other things, the following: (1) An 
inventory of emission sources; (2) statutes and regulations adopted by 
the State legislature and executive agencies; (3) air quality analyses 
that include demonstrations that adequate controls are in place to meet 
the NAAQS; and (4) contingency measures to be undertaken if an area 
fails to attain the standard or make reasonable progress toward 
attainment by the required date.
    The State must make the SIP available for public review and comment 
through a public hearing before it is adopted by the State and 
submitted to EPA by the Governor or his appointed designee. When EPA 
takes Federal action to approve the SIP submittal, the rules and 
regulations become federally enforceable.
    For an area designated as nonattainment for a criteria pollutant, 
the State first submits a plan with emissions reduction measures to 
bring

[[Page 30849]]

the area into attainment. Once the area has attained the standard based 
on monitored air quality, the State then submits a redesignation 
request to attainment and a maintenance plan demonstrating that the 
area will continue to maintain the standard for at least 10 years after 
the redesignation into attainment. Near the end of the first 10 years 
of maintenance effort, the State reviews the adequacy of the existing 
control measures and future emissions growth forecasts for mobile and 
other sources, and prepares an updated maintenance plan for a second 
10-year period. The second 10-year CO and ozone maintenance plans for 
Central Puget Sound area of Washington are the subjects of this action.

IV. What Is the Background of Today's Action?

    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 (``The Act''). The 
area, which includes lands within the Puyallup, Tulalip, and 
Muckleshoot Indian Reservations, was designated by EPA as nonattainment 
for CO and classified as ``moderate'' under the provisions outlined in 
sections 186 and 187 of the Act.
    Similarly, under section 107(d)(1) of the Act, and upon considering 
the recommendation of the Governor of Washington, EPA designated the 
Central Puget Sound Area as nonattainment for ozone because the area 
violated the ozone standard during the period from 1989-1991. The 
Central Puget Sound ozone nonattainment area included lands within 
Puyallup, Tulalip, Muckleshoot, Stillaguamish, and Nisqually Indian 
Reservations.
    The State of Washington, following the requirements of the Act, 
prepared and submitted revisions to the Washington SIP that first 
included an attainment plan, and then developed further plans to 
demonstrate maintenance of the standards for a 10-year period beyond 
the statutory attainment date. EPA published the approval of the ozone 
redesignation request and the first 10-year maintenance plan for ozone 
in the September 26, 1996, Federal Register. As a result, the Central 
Puget Sound region was classified as being in attainment of the 1-hour 
ozone standard effective November 25, 1996. Similarly, EPA published 
approval of the CO redesignation request from nonattainment to 
attainment and the maintenance plan for the first 10-year period on 
October 10, 1996. In both actions, EPA itself redesignated to 
attainment those portions of the CO and ozone nonattainment areas that 
are within the boundaries of Indian reservations.
    The first 10-year CO and ozone maintenance plans included 
commitments for periodic review of the plans and submission of the 
second 10-year maintenance plans to EPA during the last two years of 
the first 10-year maintenance period. Beginning in 1999, Ecology and 
the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency undertook a comprehensive air quality 
planning effort to review and update the CO and ozone maintenance 
plans. The planning efforts included detailed technical analyses such 
as preparation of base and future year emissions inventories, regional 
ozone dispersion modeling, review of control measures for CO and ozone 
precursors, etc. The Puget Sound Clean Air Agency also employed expert 
consulting services and convened technical and policy subcommittees to 
review and guide the planning effort. The results of this planning 
effort provided the basis of today's proposed approval by EPA.

V. What Is the Status of Current CO and Ozone Levels in the Central 
Puget Sound Area and How Do They Compare With the Federal Standards?

    The national 8-hour CO ambient standard is attained when the daily 
average 8-hour CO concentration of 9.0 ppm is exceeded no more than one 
time in a calendar year. Since the redesignation of the Central Puget 
Sound area to attainment for CO on October 11, 1996, the second highest 
daily average 8-hour CO concentration in a calendar year measured by 
the approved monitoring network was 8.4 ppm, which is less than 9.0 
ppm. The national 1-hour CO ambient standard is achieved when the daily 
average 1-hour concentration of 35.5 ppm is exceeded no more than one 
time in a calendar year. Since redesignation, the second highest daily 
average 1-hour CO concentration measured in a calendar year was 14.2 
ppm, which is less than 35 ppm.
    The national 1-hour ozone ambient standard is attained when the 
expected number of days per calendar year in a three year period with 
maximum hourly average concentrations above 0.12 parts per million 
(ppm) is equal to or less than 1 day in that period. Since the 
redesignation of the Central Puget Sound area to attainment for ozone 
on November 25, 1996, the expected number of days per calendar year 
over a consecutive three year period with maximum hourly average ozone 
concentrations measured above 0.12 ppm is 0.7 day, which was less than 
1 day.

VI. How Have the Public and Stakeholders Including Tribal Governments 
Been Involved in This Rulemaking Process?

    In August 2000, the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency convened a broad-
based stakeholder group, consisting of representatives from the fuel 
industry, health, environmental, business, and regulatory communities, 
to assist the Agency in its CO and ozone maintenance plan update 
process. Specifically, the stakeholders' group was charged with 
identifying and recommending the range of actions that might be prudent 
to include in the updated maintenance plans to achieve emission 
reductions necessary to maintain healthy levels of air quality and 
comply with the Federal standards.
    Nine public meetings of stakeholders were held from August 2000 
through May 2001. In addition, throughout the stakeholder process, 
briefings were given to Puget Sound Clean Air Agency's Board of 
Directors at their monthly meetings. After publishing notices in the 
newspaper for public comments and conducting public hearings, the Puget 
Sound Clean Air Agency Board approved the CO and ozone maintenance plan 
updates and adopted the associated contingency measures on December 19, 
2002. Ecology adopted these amended regulations into the Washington SIP 
on December 17, 2003. Similarly, the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Board 
approved the updated CO motor vehicle emissions budget using MOBILE6.2 
on November 20, 2003, and Ecology adopted it into the Washington SIP on 
December 17, 2003.
    Under the Act, EPA has the responsibility and authority to 
implement air quality regulations needed to maintain air quality 
standards within the exterior boundary of Indian country, in the 
absence of approved tribal programs. EPA has not yet formally approved 
any Clean Air Act programs for Tribes within the boundary of the 
Central Puget Sound CO and ozone maintenance area. Therefore, EPA has 
conducted government-to-government consultations with the Tulalip 
Tribes of Washington, the Puyallup Tribe of Indians, the Muckleshoot 
Indian Tribe, the Stillaguamish Tribe, and the Nisqually Indian Tribe, 
who are affected by this action. The EPA's consultations with Tribes 
included official letters

[[Page 30850]]

from EPA Region 10 Office of Air Quality Director to Tribal Chairs, and 
staff consultations between EPA and Tribal staff in the form of 
electronic communication and telephone discussion.

VII. What Are the Sources and Magnitude of CO and Ozone Precursors 
Emitted in the Central Puget Sound Maintenance Area?

    Ecology and Puget Sound Clean Air Agency developed a base case 
emissions inventory for the year 1996 and then projected inventories 
for the years 2007, and 2015. The emissions inventory is a list, by 
source, of the air contaminants directly emitted into the Region's air. 
The data in the emissions inventory is based on calculations and is 
developed using emission factors, which is a method for converting 
source activity levels into an estimate of emissions contributions for 
those sources. The CO is directly emitted by sources, but the ozone is 
formed in the atmosphere. VOC and NOX, generally known as 
ozone precursors, are directly emitted by sources that react in the 
atmosphere under sunlight to form ozone.
    VOC emissions were estimated at 1,051 tons per day on a peak 1996-
summer episode day. This included contributions from biogenic sources 
(577 tons per day, 55%), on-road mobile sources (186 tons per day, 
18%), non-road mobile sources (153 tpd, 15%), stationary area sources 
(116 tpd, 11%) and point sources (20 tpd, 2%). VOC emissions in 2015 
were estimated at 949 tons per day.

 Table 1.--Central Puget Sound Maintenance Area Summer Day VOC Emissions
                        (tons) by Source Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Source Category                 1996       2007       2015
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biogenic...............................        577        577        577
On-road Mobile.........................        186        148        109
Non-road Mobile........................        153        132        111
Stationary area........................        116        124        132
Point..................................         20         20         20
                                        ------------
    Total..............................      1,051      1,001        949
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NOX emissions were estimated at 506 tons per day on a 
peak 1996-summer episode day. This included contributions from biogenic 
sources (9 tpd, 2%), on-road mobile sources (346 tpd, 68%), non-road 
mobile sources (135 tpd, 27%), stationary area sources (9 tpd, 2%) and 
point sources (7 tpd, 1%). NOX emissions in 2015 were 
estimated at 291 tons per day.

 Table 2.--Central Puget Sound Maintenance Area Summer Day NOX Emissions
                        (tons) by Source Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Source category                 1996       2007       2015
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biogenic...............................          9          9          9
On-road Mobile.........................        346        251        156
Non-road Mobile........................        135        123        111
Stationary area........................          9          9          9
Point..................................          7          7          7
                                        ------------
    Total..............................        506        399        291
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CO emissions were estimated at 3,322 tons on a typical 1996 winter 
day. This included contributions from on-road mobile sources ( 2,694 
tpd 81%), non-road mobile sources (202 tpd, 6%), stationary area 
sources (360 tpd, 11%) and point sources (66 tpd, 2%). CO emissions in 
2015 were estimated at 2,092 tons per winter day. The emissions 
inventory predicts substantial future reductions in CO emissions, 
largely as a result of a decrease in on-road emissions, which are 
expected to continue to decline as older motor vehicles are replaced by 
newer vehicles that meet Federal Tier II emission standards and operate 
on low sulfur fuels.

 Table 3.--Central Puget Sound Maintenance Area Winter Day NOX Emissions
                        (tons) by Source Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Source category                 1996       2007       2015
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-road mobile.........................      2,694      2,037      1,380
Non-road Mobile........................        202        229        229
Stationary area........................        360        417        417
Point..................................         66         66         66
                                        ------------
    Total..............................      3,322      2,749      2,092
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 30851]]

    It was also demonstrated that emissions of CO and ozone precursors 
for 2016, the last year of the second 10-year maintenance plans, will 
be less than or equal to the emissions projected for 2015.

VIII. How Does the State Demonstrate Maintenance of the CO and Ozone 
Standards for the Second 10-Year Period?

    The State used a numerical photochemical grid model to demonstrate 
maintenance of the ozone standard for the second 10-year maintenance 
period. The basis for the modeling was a regional air quality modeling 
system developed over the past several years by Washington State 
University and Ecology. This system includes the use of a mesoscale 
meteorological model (MM5), a diagnostic wind model (CALMET), and a 
photochemical dispersion model (CALGRID). The modeling system was 
employed to simulate an ozone episode that occurred during July 11-14, 
1996, with monitored ozone level reaching and exceeding the one-hour 
standard at multiple sites. The model performance for this base episode 
was within EPA guidelines for acceptable photochemical ozone modeling. 
The maximum monitored ozone concentration during the episode was 118 
ppb at the Enumclaw monitoring site southeast of Seattle and the model 
predicted maximum concentration at this site was 106 ppb. Once the 
model performance was verified, the 1996 base case emission inventory 
was projected into the future for maintenance years and then these 
projected emission inventories were used with the 1996 meteorological 
conditions to simulate the impact of emission changes in the future. 
The simulation showed that emissions in 2007 would produce 
approximately 2 ppb improvement from the 1996 level and in 2015 the 
change in emissions would decrease peak ozone concentration by about 7 
ppb. It appeared from these simulations that reduction in emissions 
over time due to the implementation of new Federal motor vehicle and 
fuel standards will produce adequate reduction in maximum ozone 
formation during the maintenance period and keep the area in attainment 
with some margin of safety. Therefore, the modeling demonstrated 
continued compliance with the ozone standard for a second 10-year 
maintenance period with existing control measures and future federally 
implemented measures.
    The current, EPA-approved first 10-year CO maintenance plan used a 
probabilistic rollback approach to evaluate different control measure 
scenarios and to demonstrate maintenance of the CO standard with a 
reasonable margin of safety. A review and update of this methodology 
using more recent monitored air quality and projected emissions data 
was conducted to demonstrate continued maintenance of the CO standard 
for a second 10-year period. The probabilistic rollback approach 
demonstrated regional, long-term maintenance by evaluating maintenance 
at the two permanent monitoring sites (Pacific Ave, Tacoma and NE. 45th 
Street, Seattle) using the maximum observed concentrations for 1999-
2002. The probabilistic analysis showed that the CO standard was 
maintained on both sites in 2002 with at least 99% probability and will 
be maintained for a second 10-year period with the same level of 
assurance.

IX. What Control Measures Are Considered for the Contingency Plans, in 
Case of the Monitored Exceedance or Violation of the Federal Standard?

    The maintenance plans are to contain contingency control measures 
to ensure that the State will promptly correct any violation of the 
standard that occurs after the area is redesignated from nonattainment 
to attainment. The ozone contingency measures in the second 10-year 
maintenance plan for the Central Puget Sound Area include a regulatory 
program requiring enhanced storage tank vapor recovery systems at 
gasoline stations. If needed due to a quality-assured violation of the 
ambient ozone standard, this measure would take effect the following 
May 1, after releasing a public notice. Also, an open burning ban would 
be in effect during the months of July and August. The existing ozone 
contingency measure of a mandatory reduction in gasoline volatility 
would remain in place.
    The CO contingency measures were designed based on a tiered 
approach. The first tier contingency measures would be triggered upon a 
quality assured exceedance of the CO standard at a single monitoring 
site throughout the Central Puget Sound region. If that occurs, local 
and State government entities will investigate traffic conditions where 
the exceedance occurred and evaluate the effectiveness of local 
mitigation measures. If local transportation system improvements at the 
``hot spot'' could be implemented promptly, and would help prevent 
future exceedances, the most effective measure would be implemented. 
The second tier contingency measure would be triggered if there were 
violations of the CO standard at multiple monitoring sites throughout 
the Central Puget Sound region. This measure would consist of 
implementation of a region-wide ethanol-based oxygenated gas 
requirement as prescribed in the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency's 
Regulation.

X. How Does This Action Affect Transportation Conformity?

    Under section 176(c) of the Act, transportation plans, programs, 
and projects in nonattainment or maintenance areas that are funded or 
approved under the Federal Transit Act, must conform to the applicable 
SIPs. In short, a transportation plan is deemed to conform to the 
applicable SIP if the emissions resulting from implementation of that 
transportation plan are less than or equal to the motor vehicle 
emission level established in the SIP for the maintenance year and 
other analysis years.
    In this maintenance plan, procedures for estimating motor vehicle 
emissions are well documented. The regional motor vehicle emissions 
calculated by MOBILE6.2 were used in the probabilistic rollback method 
to compute a threshold level of regional emissions inventory that would 
provide maintenance of the CO standard with 99% certainty and 
confidence through the second 10-year maintenance period. The computed 
attainment threshold of regional motor vehicle emissions can be used to 
assess the long term attainment prospects. The total on-road motor 
vehicle CO emissions in the Central Puget Sound area are expected to 
remain below 2,510 tons per winter day from the present through 
calendar year 2016 in order to maintain the CO ambient standard. 
Accordingly, the new CO motor vehicle emissions budget are set at a 
fixed limit of 2,510 tons per day, not to be exceeded in any given year 
through 2016.

     Table 4.--Central Puget Sound Maintenance Area CO Motor Vehicle
                            Emissions Budget
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO Motor Vehicles Emissions Budget.....  2,510 tons per winter day.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This action does not affect or change the motor vehicle emission 
budget for ozone precursors, VOC and NOX, already 
established in the first 10-year maintenance plan. For convenience of 
the readers, we have listed below the motor vehicle emissions budgets 
for VOC an NOX.

[[Page 30852]]



    Table 5.--Central Puget Sound Maintenance Area VOC Motor Vehicle
                            Emissions Budget
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Motor Vehicles Emissions Budget....  248.2 tons per summer day.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Table 6.--Central Puget Sound Maintenance Area NOX Motor Vehicle
                            Emissions Budget
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Years                 NOX motor vehicles  emissions budget
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005...........................  269.84 tons per summer day.
2007...........................  267.61 tons per summer day.
2010...........................  263.01 tons per summer day.
2016...........................  263.01 tons per summer day.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The motor vehicle emissions budget for all years after the second 
10-year maintenance period may use the same level for the last year of 
the maintenance plan (40 CFR 93.118 (b)(2)(ii)), unless changed by a 
subsequent maintenance plan revision.

XI. Why Is EPA Proposing To Specifically Identify Airport Emissions in 
the SIP?

    EPA's general conformity guidance for airports encourages airport 
operators to develop comprehensive emissions inventories for their 
facilities as well as estimates of future activities and associated 
emissions and then work with local and State air quality agencies to 
ensure that the corresponding SIP accurately reflects and accounts for 
all emissions at the airport and growth rates for operations at the 
airport. The operator of the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport 
prepared a comprehensive emissions inventory from its regular 
operation, maintenance, and construction activities throughout the span 
of the second 10-year maintenance plans and the State included these 
emissions in total regional emissions used to demonstrate continued 
maintenance of the CO and ozone air quality standards. The proposed SIP 
approval does not alter regional non-road emissions totals, but rather 
clarifies the portion of non-road emissions that are related to 
airport.

                  Table 7.--Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Emissions Inventory (tons/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Year                          1996       1996       1996       2015       2015       2015
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant.....................................        VOC        NOX         CO        VOC        NOX         CO
Airport construction..........................          0          0          0        0.5        2.3        4.5
Aircraft and ground support equipment.........        3.8        8.8          6        2.3       11.1         42
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

XII. In Conclusion, How Would This EPA Approval Affect the General 
Public and Citizens of the Central Puget Sound Area?

    This action proposes to approve measures adopted by Ecology to 
ensure maintenance of the Federal air quality standards for CO and 
ozone in the Central Puget Sound area for a second 10-year period and 
protect the health and welfare of the area citizens from adverse 
effects of degraded air quality levels. Such assurance of healthy air 
quality level is predicted because the second 10-year maintenance plans 
include enhanced control measures and clearer contingency measures.

XIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and 
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive 
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This 
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by State law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that 
this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under State law and does not impose any 
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by State law, it 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).
    This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because 
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian 
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian 
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive 
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not 
have federalism implications because it does not have substantial 
direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified 
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action 
merely proposes to approve a State rule implementing a Federal 
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of 
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This 
proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This proposed rule does 
not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Dated: May 24, 2004.
Ronald A. Kreizenbeck,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 04-12302 Filed 5-28-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P