Rule2024-29575
Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Redesignation Request and Associated Maintenance Plan for Whatcom County, WA 2010 SO2 Nonattainment Area
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
December 17, 2024
Effective
January 16, 2025
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
On July 25, 2024, the State of Washington (WA) submitted a request for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to redesignate to attainment a portion of Whatcom County immediately surrounding the now permanently closed aluminum smelter, Intalco Aluminum LLC, which the EPA designated nonattainment for the 2010 1-hour primary sulfur dioxide (SO<INF>2</INF>) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). Washington also submitted a request for the EPA to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision containing a maintenance plan for the area. The EPA is taking the following final actions: we have determined that the Whatcom County (partial) SO<INF>2</INF> nonattainment area (Whatcom County area or area) is attaining the 2010 1-hour primary SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS; we are approving Washington's plan for maintaining attainment of the 2010 1- hour primary SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS in the area; and we are redesignating the Whatcom County area to attainment for the 2010 1-hour primary SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 89 Issue 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 242 (Tuesday, December 17, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 101896-101901]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29575]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R10-OAR-2024-0371; FRL-12159-02-R10]
Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes;
Redesignation Request and Associated Maintenance Plan for Whatcom
County, WA 2010 SO2 Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July 25, 2024, the State of Washington (WA) submitted a
request for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to redesignate to
attainment a portion of Whatcom County immediately surrounding the now
permanently closed aluminum smelter, Intalco Aluminum LLC, which the
EPA designated nonattainment for the 2010 1-hour primary sulfur dioxide
(SO<INF>2</INF>) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).
Washington also submitted a request for the EPA to approve a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision containing a maintenance plan for
the area. The EPA is taking the following final actions: we have
determined that the Whatcom County (partial) SO<INF>2</INF>
nonattainment area (Whatcom County area or area) is
[[Page 101897]]
attaining the 2010 1-hour primary SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS; we are
approving Washington's plan for maintaining attainment of the 2010 1-
hour primary SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS in the area; and we are redesignating
the Whatcom County area to attainment for the 2010 1-hour primary
SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS.
DATES: This final rule is effective January 16, 2025.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2024-0371. All documents in the docket are
listed on the <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> website. Although listed in
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information or other information the disclosure
of which is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, or please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section for additional availability information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Hunt, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Suite 155, Seattle, WA 98101, at (206) 553-0256 or
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b9d1ccd7cd97d3dcdfdff9dcc9d897ded6cf"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d4bca1baa0fabeb1b2b294b1a4b5fab3bba2">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we'' or
``our'' is used, it means the EPA.
I. Background
On September 27, 2024 (89 FR 79195), The EPA proposed to take the
following four separate but related actions: (1) determine that the
Whatcom County area is attaining the 2010 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS;
(2) approve Washington's plan for maintaining the 2010 1-hour
SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS (maintenance plan), including proposed approval of
a ``reproducible approach'' to representing the air quality of the
affected area; (3) redesignate the Whatcom County area to attainment
for the 2010 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS; and (4) determine that the
Whatcom County area has clean monitoring data.
The public comment period for the proposed actions closed on
October 28, 2024. We received two anonymous comments, document EPA-R10-
OAR-2024-0371-0014 (comment #1) and EPA-R10-OAR-2024-0371-0015 (comment
#2). Both comments expressed support for the EPA's approval of
Washington's redesignation request and maintenance plan. However,
comment #1 and comment #2 raised concerns about Washington's ability to
verify continued attainment. In addition, comment #2 suggested the
contingency measures contain more specificity and that Washington
should include a public accessibility plan in its Maintenance Plan. The
full text of the comments may be found in the docket for this action,
and we have responded to the relevant comments in section II. of this
preamble. Under the Clean Air Act (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, the EPA's role is to
approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA.
II. EPA Responses to Comments Received
A. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
Comment: The EPA's proposed rulemaking provided a synopsis of
Washington's strategy for verification of continued attainment in the
area as part of the State's maintenance plan.\1\ A more detailed
explanation of Washington's ``reproducible approach'' to representing
air quality, submitted to allow future monitor system modification
under 40 CFR 58.14(c)(3), was provided in the maintenance plan
itself.\2\ With respect to this issue, comment #1 contains the
statement, ``although this has well solidified evidence, it is
necessary to continue monitoring the nonattainment and attainment areas
of Whatcom County to ensure the air quality stays in line with the
EPA's NAAQS. If the EPA did approve the request from Washington State
it would further confirm the EPA's dedication to implementing their own
policies.'' Comment #2 states, ``while the plan allows for flexibility
in adjusting SO<INF>2</INF> monitoring sites, it is crucial to consider
that SO<INF>2</INF> impacts often disproportionately affect vulnerable
communities. Could the EPA establish clearer criteria or a more
rigorous review process before relocating or decommissioning monitors?
This would ensure that communities previously affected by emissions
from the Intalco facility continue to have adequate air quality
protections, even in the absence of a large point source.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 89 FR 79195 (September 27, 2024) at pages 79200-79202.
\2\ See Chapter 6, Verification of Attainment, Control Measures,
and Maintenance Demonstration, at pages 35-43.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Response: We agree that Washington's maintenance plan should
contain provisions for monitoring air quality in the area and verifying
continued attainment. As discussed in the preamble to the proposed
rulemaking, the maintenance plan contains these provisions and
otherwise meets the maintenance plan requirements in CAA section 175A
and the EPA's associated guidance.\3\ Neither comment directly
addresses the EPA's evaluation of these provisions in the preamble to
the proposed rulemaking nor provides a basis for disapproving
Washington's maintenance plan. To the extent the comments imply that
the maintenance plan is inadequate to monitor and verify continued
attainment or lacks specificity in this regard, we disagree. The
following discussion summarizes Washington's approach to monitoring air
quality in the area post-redesignation and verifying continued
attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 42 U.S.C. 7505a and the September 4, 1992, Memorandum from
John Calcagni titled ``Procedures for Processing Requests to
Redesignate Areas to Attainment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the EPA's December 2020 technical support document for the
nonattainment designation, we determined the region of violation was
most likely due to plume downwash at the Intalco facility during
certain wind conditions, that the modeled area of violation did not
extend far from the Intalco facility fence line, that the gradient of
concentration near the areas of violation was steep, quickly dropping
with distance from the Intalco facility fence line, and that other
nearby industrial facilities did not sufficiently contribute to
violations of the 1-hour primary SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS to warrant
inclusion in the nonattainment area boundary.\4\ In our final
nonattainment boundary determination, we concurred with the Washington
Department of Ecology (Ecology) and Northwest Clean Air Agency (NWCAA)
that the boundary should be drawn to encompass the cause of the
SO<INF>2</INF> violations, the Intalco facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See 201_Appendix A Whatcom County SO<INF>2</INF> Area
Designation.pdf, included in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the permanent closure of the Intalco facility, Washington's
comprehensive emissions inventory, prepared as part of the maintenance
plan, shows no remaining significant sources of SO<INF>2</INF>,
including mobile or area source emissions.\5\ Therefore, in the absence
of any current SO<INF>2</INF> emission sources, Washington's monitoring
network and verification of continued attainment strategy focused on
potential
[[Page 101898]]
future emission sources that may be located within the area.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Chapter 5, Emissions Inventory, at pages 25-34.
\6\ See Chapter 6, Verification of Attainment, Control Measures,
and Maintenance Demonstration, at pages 35-43.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described in our proposed rulemaking and the State's maintenance
plan, the new source review (NSR) program ensures that any single
facility applying for a permit to locate within the area complies with
the NAAQS and other regulatory requirements.\7\ In addition,
Washington's maintenance plan included a stepwise process for assessing
the cumulative impacts of new sources constructed in the area and
triggering deployment of SO<INF>2</INF> monitors. This process ensures
that cumulative impacts remain below the NAAQS should multiple
facilities move to the area. Under the maintenance plan verification of
continued attainment provisions, Washington, with NWCAA as the lead
agency for the jurisdiction in coordination with Ecology, will evaluate
the cumulative impacts of the new source or modifications using three
sequential ``Action Levels.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 89 FR 79195 (September 27, 2024) at page 79201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under Action Level 1, Washington will conduct cumulative dispersion
modeling using potential emissions if two conditions are met: (1) the
cumulative potential SO<INF>2</INF> emissions in the area are greater
than or equal to 250 tons per year of SO<INF>2</INF> and (2) the
proposed new source or modification has the potential to emit 40 tons
per year of SO<INF>2</INF> (the significant emission rate under the
major NSR program). Washington will use the EPA's preferred screening
and dispersion modeling tools identified in 40 CFR part 51 appendix W
(``Appendix W'') as normally applicable for any source seeking a
construction permit under the NSR program. If the results of the
modeling under Action Level 1 indicate a design concentration of
greater than or equal to 90% of the 1-hour NAAQS, then Washington will
proceed to Action Level 2.
Under Action Level 2, Washington will conduct refined dispersion
modeling that uses actual emissions from existing sources and potential
emissions from the new source or modification. If the results of that
modeling indicate a design concentration of greater than or equal to
50% of the 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS, then Washington will proceed to
Action Level 3.
Under Action Level 3, Washington will deploy SO<INF>2</INF> ambient
monitors within 1 year of the initial startup of the new source or
modification. Any new monitors established for verification of
continued attainment will be operated as State and Local Air Monitoring
Stations (SLAMS) as part of Ecology's Primary Quality Assurance
Organization (PQAO). Ecology will verify that monitor siting complies
with 40 CFR part 58 appendix E (Probe and Monitoring Path Siting
Criteria for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring) and will include any new
site proposals in its annual Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan. This
plan is available for public inspection and comment for at least 30
days before its submission to the EPA by July 1 of each year. Any such
proposal will be subject to review and approval by the EPA Regional
Administrator, following the process described in 40 CFR 58.10.
Therefore, we disagree with the implication in comment #2 that the
verification of continued attainment framework described in the State's
maintenance plan lacked clear criteria or a rigorous review process.
The commenter provided no details for improving the methodology or
raising specific concerns with the presented framework.
With respect to the broader issue of protecting ``communities
previously affected by emissions from the Intalco facility'' we agree
with the commenter that these communities should be protected against
future violations of health-based air quality standards. Washington's
maintenance plan does so, and the commenter did not provide any
specific reasons why the EPA should find to the contrary. We note that
during the operation of the Intalco facility, the areas impacted by the
elevated levels of SO<INF>2</INF> were very close to the facility's
fence line and did not reach the nearby city of Ferndale.\8\ More
importantly, there are no current SO<INF>2</INF> sources in the area or
SO<INF>2</INF> exposure risks. Current 2021-2023 design value
SO<INF>2</INF> concentrations in the area are 3 parts per billion
(ppb), much lower than the EPA's health-based NAAQS of 75 ppb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Chapter 2, Intalco--Ferndale SO<INF>2</INF>
Nonattainment Area, at pages 8-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to monitoring, we reiterate that the current monitors
were sited for the specific purpose of measuring building downwash
impacts immediately surrounding the Intalco facility and thus are not
necessarily suitable to assessing impacts to the surrounding
community.\9\ Accordingly, Washington included in its maintenance plan
its reproducible approach to assessing future impacts on the community
from new sources. This approach--coupled with NWCAA and Washington's
NSR program--is adequate to ensure future development does not cause or
contribute to a violation of the SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See 201_Appendix A Whatcom County SO2 Area Designation.pdf
and 202_Intalco Sulfur Dioxide Attainment Plan_2202035.pdf, included
in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Contingency Measures
Comment: Comment #2 stated ``while the contingency measures are
well-defined, additional detail about specific control measures and
response timelines would help reassure the public of the plan's
robustness. Particularly, if SO<INF>2</INF> levels approach the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) threshold, having a more
explicit list of immediate actions the EPA or the Northwest Clean Air
Agency (NWCAA) would take would demonstrate the agency's commitment to
rapid response in the event of future exceedances.''
Response: We disagree that Washington's contingency measures should
be more specific. As discussed in the preamble of our proposed
rulemaking, the only significant source of SO<INF>2</INF> in the area
has permanently shut down, thus the cause of any potential future NAAQS
exceedance is unknown. Therefore, Washington cannot develop specific
contingency measures as part of its maintenance plan.\10\ Rather,
Washington committed to concrete trigger levels and timelines for
determining the appropriate contingency measures, but did not include
specific measures in its maintenance plan. Therefore, our position
remains that Washington's maintenance plan contains such contingency
provisions as the Administrator deems necessary to assure that the
State will promptly correct any violation of the standard which occurs
after the redesignation of the area as an attainment area.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See 89 FR 79195 (September 27, 2024) at page 79202.
\11\ CAA section 175A(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Impacts of Future Sources
Comment: Comment #2 stated ``while I understand that the Clean Air
Act may not require environmental justice analysis for this action, it
would be prudent to consider the impacts of future sources or
monitoring changes on historically marginalized communities. The
inclusion of a public accessibility plan to provide real-time air
quality data would support EPA's goals under Executive Order 12898,
ensuring fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all residents in
air quality decisions.''
Response: The EPA responded to the commenter's concern regarding
[[Page 101899]]
monitoring changes in section II.A of this preamble. With respect to
impacts of future sources, our proposed rulemaking discussed how the
NSR permitting program is the mechanism the EPA, States, and local
clean air agencies use to assess the impacts of future sources.
Washington's SIP includes NWCAA Rule 300 which establishes the minor
NSR program applicable to sources constructed or modified in the
Ferndale Area. Under Rule 300, save for certain limited exemptions,
sources with a potential to emit more than 2.0 tons per year (tpy) of
SO<INF>2</INF> must obtain approval prior to construction.\12\ NWCAA
may not approve construction or modification unless, among other
things, the source will employ best available control technology and
allowable emissions will not cause or contribute to a violation of any
NAAQS.\13\ As to the latter, NWCAA may require modeling using the EPA
guidelines in appendix W of 40 CFR part 51 to determine whether
construction and operation of the source will cause or contribute to a
violation of any NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Rule 300.1(A); 300.4.
\13\ Rule 300.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Washington's SIP also includes a major new source review program to
regulate the construction and modification of major sources constructed
or modified in the Ferndale Area.\14\ In general, Washington's major
NSR program incorporates by reference the Federal major NSR program at
40 CFR 52.21. The major NSR program applies to sources with a potential
to emit of 100 tpy of any regulated NSR pollutant for certain listed
source categories, and 250 tpy of any regulated NSR pollutant for
unlisted sources. Regulated NSR pollutant includes pollutants for which
the EPA has established a NAAQS. Similar to the minor NSR program, all
sources subject to the major NSR program must obtain a permit before
commencing construction. In order to obtain a permit, the source must,
among other things, demonstrate the source will apply best available
control technologies for each regulated NSR pollutant that the source
has the potential to emit in significant amounts. In the case of
SO<INF>2</INF>, the significant emissions rate is 40 tpy. In addition,
the source must demonstrate through dispersion modeling that
construction and operation of the source will not cause or contribute
to a violation of any NAAQS or violate any prevention of significant
deterioration increment. We believe the NSR permitting programs
described above provide the best tools available for assessing impacts
to communities from future sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 40 CFR 52.2470(c); WAC 173-400-113 and WAC 173-400-700
through 173-400-750.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Final Action
For the reasons stated in our proposed rulemaking (89 FR 79195,
September 27, 2024) and in section II. of this preamble, we are taking
the following three separate but related final actions: (1) determining
that the Whatcom County area is attaining the 2010 1-hour
SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS; (2) approving Washington's plan for maintaining
the 2010 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS, including approval of a
``reproducible approach'' to representing the air quality of the
affected area; and (3) redesignating the Whatcom County area to
attainment for the 2010 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS.
Specifically, as described in our proposed rulemaking, the EPA has
determined that the Whatcom County area is attaining the 2010 1-hour
primary SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS based on the most recent complete
monitoring data for the three-year (2021-2023) design value period.
The EPA is approving the maintenance plan under the 2010 1-hour
SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS for the Whatcom County area into the Washington
SIP (under CAA section 175A). The maintenance plan demonstrates that
the area will continue to maintain the 2010 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS
and includes a process to develop and implement contingency measures to
remedy any future violations of the 2010 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS
and procedures for evaluating potential violations.
The EPA has determined that the Whatcom County area has met the
criteria under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment for the 2010 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS.
On this basis, the EPA is approving Washington's redesignation request
for the area. Accordingly, the EPA is revising the legal designation of
the portion of Whatcom County designated nonattainment at 40 CFR 81.348
to attainment for the 2010 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS.
The EPA is not finalizing a Clean Data Determination for the
Whatcom County area. As noted in our proposed rulemaking, the EPA
proposed the option to finalize a clean data determination in the event
that the EPA did not finalize the proposed redesignation. However,
because the EPA is finalizing the redesignation of the area to
attainment, it is not finalizing this portion of the proposal.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment is an action
that affects the status of a geographical area and does 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.
In addition, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Clean Air Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by State law. For these reasons, this final action:
<bullet> 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 14094 (88 FR 21879, April 11, 2023);
<bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
<bullet> 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.);
<bullet> 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);
<bullet> Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
<bullet> Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it approves a state program;
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); and
<bullet> Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act.
Executive Order 12898 (Federal Actions to Address Environmental
[[Page 101900]]
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629,
February 16, 1994) directs Federal agencies to identify and address
``disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects'' of their actions on communities with environmental justice
(EJ) concerns to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
The EPA defines EJ as ``the fair treatment and meaningful involvement
of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income
with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of
environmental laws, regulations, and policies.'' The EPA further
defines the term fair treatment to mean that ``no group of people
should bear a disproportionate burden of environmental harms and risks,
including those resulting from the negative environmental consequences
of industrial, governmental, and commercial operations or programs and
policies.'' The Washington Department of Ecology did evaluate
environmental justice considerations as part of its SIP submittal; the
CAA and applicable implementing regulations neither prohibit nor
require such an evaluation. The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and
did not consider EJ in this action. Consideration of EJ is not required
as part of this action, and there is no information in the record
inconsistent with the stated goal of Executive Order 12898 of achieving
environmental justice for communities with EJ concerns.
In addition, this final action, pertaining to redesignation of the
Whatcom County area and approval of a maintenance plan for the area,
would not be approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where the EPA or an Indian Tribe has demonstrated that a
Tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule
would not have Tribal implications and would not impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or preempt Tribal law as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). Consistent
with EPA policy, the EPA provided a consultation opportunity to Tribes
located near the Whatcom County area, in letters dated July 25, 2024
and July 29, 2024, included in the docket for this action.
This action is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and the EPA
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United States. This action is not a ``major
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 18, 2025. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Sulfur dioxide, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: December 11, 2024.
Daniel Opalski,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.
40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart WW--Washington
0
2. In Sec. 52.2470, amend paragraph (e), table 2, by adding the
heading ``Attainment and Maintenance Planning--Sulfur Dioxide
(SO<INF>2</INF>)'' and the entry ``Sulfur Dioxide (SO<INF>2</INF>)
Maintenance Plan'' immediately after the entry for ``Particulate Matter
(PM<INF>2.5</INF>) Maintenance Plan'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2470 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
Table 2--Attainment, Maintenance, and Other Plans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable
geographic or State submittal EPA approval
Name of SIP provision nonattainment date date Explanations
area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attainment and Maintenance Planning--Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Whatcom County.. 7/25/24 12/17/2024,
Maintenance Plan. [INSERT FIRST
PAGE OF FEDERAL
REGISTER
CITATION].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES
0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
4. In Sec. 81.348, amend the table entitled ``Washington--2010 Sulfur
Dioxide NAAQS'' by revising the entry for ``Whatcom County (part)'' to
read as follows:
Sec. 81.348 Washington.
* * * * *
[[Page 101901]]
Washington--2010 Sulfur Dioxide NAAQS
[Primary]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation
Designated area \1\ --------------------------------------
Date \2\ Type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whatcom County (part)............ January 16, 2025.. Attainment.
That portion of Whatcom
County encompassed by the
rectangle with the vertices
using Universal Traverse
Mercator (UTM) coordinates
in UTM zone 10 with datum
NAD83 as follows: (1)
Vertices--UTM Easting (m)
519671, UTM Northing (m)
5412272; (2) Vertices--UTM
Easting (m) 524091, UTM
Northing (m) 5412261; (3)
Vertices--UTM Easting (m)
519671, UTM Northing (m)
5409010; (1) Vertices--UTM
Easting (m) 524111, UTM
Northing (m) 5409044.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes any Indian country in each county or area, unless otherwise
specified. EPA is not determining the boundaries of any area of Indian
country in this table, including any area of Indian country located in
the larger designation area. The inclusion of any Indian country in
the designation area is not a determination that the state has
regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act for such Indian country.
\2\ This date is April 9, 2018, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2024-29575 Filed 12-16-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on December 17, 2024.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.