95-24939. Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Louisiana  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 194 (Friday, October 6, 1995)]
    [Proposed Rules]
    [Pages 52348-52351]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-24939]
    
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    
    40 CFR Part 52
    
    [LA 32-1-7190; FRL-5309-8]
    
    
    Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Louisiana
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
    
    ACTION: Proposed rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve 
    Louisiana's request to grant an exemption for the Baton Rouge ozone 
    nonattainment area from the applicable oxides of nitrogen (NOX) 
    transportation conformity requirements. On July 25, 1995, Louisiana 
    submitted, to the EPA, a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 
    request for an exemption (under section 182(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act 
    (Act)) from the conformity requirements for NOX for the Baton 
    Rouge ozone nonattainment area, which is classified as serious. The 
    State of Louisiana bases its request for Baton Rouge upon a modeling 
    demonstration that additional NOX reductions would not contribute 
    to ozone attainment in the nonattainment area.
    
    DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing on 
    or before November 6, 1995.
    
    ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr. 
    Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section, at the EPA Regional Office 
    listed below. Copies of the documents relevant to this proposed action 
    are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the 
    following locations. The interested persons wanting to examine these 
    documents should make an appointment with the appropriate office at 
    least 24 hours before the visiting day.
    
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Multimedia Planning and 
    Permitting Division, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-
    2733.
    Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, H.B. Garlock Building, 
    7290 Bluebonnet, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70810.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Ms. Jeanne McDaniels or Mr. Quang Nguyen, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), 
    Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, U.S. EPA Region 6, 1445 
    Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-7214.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Background
    
        Clean Air Act section 176(c)(3)(A)(iii) requires, in order to 
    demonstrate conformity with the applicable SIP, that transportation 
    plans and transportation improvement programs (TIPs) contribute to 
    emissions reductions in ozone and carbon monoxide nonattainment areas 
    during the period before control strategy SIPs are approved by the EPA. 
    This requirement is implemented in 40 CFR 51.436 through 51.440 (and 
    93.122 through 93.124), which establishes the so-called ``build/no-
    build test.'' This test requires a demonstration that the ``Action'' 
    scenario (representing the implementation of the proposed 
    transportation plan/TIP) will result in lower motor vehicle emissions 
    than the ``Baseline'' scenario (representing the implementation of the 
    current transportation plan/TIP). In addition, the ``Action'' scenario 
    must result in emissions lower than 1990 levels.
        The November 24, 1993, final transportation conformity rule does 
    not require the build/no-build and less-than-1990 tests for NOX as 
    an ozone precursor in ozone nonattainment areas where the Administrator 
    determines that additional reductions of NOX would not contribute 
    to attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for 
    ozone. Clean Air Act section 176(c)(3)(A)(iii), which is the conformity 
    provision requiring contributions to emissions reductions before SIPs 
    with emissions budgets can 
    
    [[Page 52349]]
    be approved, specifically references Clean Air Act section 182(b)(1). 
    That section requires submission of State plans that, among other 
    things, provide for specific annual reductions of volatile organic 
    compounds (VOCs) and NOX emissions ``as necessary'' to attain the 
    ozone standard by the applicable attainment date. Section 182(b)(1) 
    further states that its requirements do not apply in the case of 
    NOX for those ozone nonattainment areas for which the EPA 
    determines that additional reductions of NOX would not contribute 
    to ozone attainment.
        For ozone nonattainment areas, the process for submitting waiver 
    requests and the criteria used to evaluate them are explained in the 
    December 1993 EPA document ``Guidelines for Determining the 
    Applicability of Nitrogen Oxides Requirements Under Section 182(f),'' 
    and the May 27, 1994, and February 8, 1995, memoranda from John Seitz, 
    Director of the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to 
    Regional Air Directors, titled ``Section 182(f) NOX Exemptions--
    Revised Process and Criteria.''
        In a petition dated November 17, 1994, and in two follow-up letters 
    to the petition, the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality 
    (LDEQ) requested that the EPA grant an exemption from the requirements 
    of section 182(f) of the Act to include the reasonably available 
    control technology (RACT) and new source review (NSR) requirements for 
    major stationary sources of NOX, inspection and maintenance (I/M) 
    NOX requirements, and transportation and general conformity 
    requirements for NOX.
        On August 18, 1995, the EPA published a rulemaking proposing 
    approval of the NOX exemption for the RACT, NSR, I/M, and general 
    conformity requirements. The Region did not propose approval of the 
    transportation conformity exemption in that notice, however. The reason 
    for not including the transportation conformity among the proposed 
    exemptions stems from an April 1995 agreement by the EPA to change the 
    procedural mechanism through which a NOX exemption from 
    transportation conformity exemption would be granted (EDF et al. v. 
    U.S. E.P.A, No. 94-1044, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit). (The EDF 
    et al. argued that NOX exemptions are provided for in two separate 
    parts of the Act in sections 182(b)(1) and 182(f), but that the Act's 
    transportation conformity provisions in section 176(c)(3) explicitly 
    reference section 182(b)(1).) Therefore, instead of a petition under 
    section 182(f), transportation conformity NOX exemptions for ozone 
    nonattainment areas that are subject to section 182(b)(1) now need to 
    be submitted as a SIP revision. The Baton Rouge ozone nonattainment 
    area is classified as serious and, thus, is subject to section 
    182(b)(1).
        The transportation conformity requirements are found at sections 
    176(c) (2), (3), and (4). The conformity requirements apply on an 
    areawide basis in all nonattainment and maintenance areas. As 
    originally promulgated, the EPA's transportation conformity rule 1 
    and general conformity rule 2 referenced the section 182(f) 
    exemption process as a means for exempting any nonattainment area from 
    NOX conformity requirements. On August 29, 1995, the EPA amended 
    the transportation conformity rule to instead reference section 
    182(b)(1) as the means for exempting areas subject to section 182(b)(1) 
    from the transportation conformity NOX requirements.3
    
        \1\ ``Criteria and Procedures for Determining Conformity to 
    State or Federal Implementation Plans of Transportation Plans, 
    Programs, and Projects Funded or Approved under Title 23 U.S.C. of 
    the Federal Transit Act,'' November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188).
        \2\ ``Determining Conformity of General Federal Actions to State 
    or Federal Implementation Plans; Final Rule,'' November 30, 1993 (58 
    FR 63214).
        \3\ ``Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: Authority for 
    Transportation Conformity Nitrogen Oxides Waivers; Interim Final 
    Rule,'' August 29, 1995 (60 FR 44762).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        The July 25, 1995, SIP revision request from Louisiana has been 
    submitted to meet the requirements of a formal SIP revision submittal 
    in accordance with the 182(b)(1) requirements. A public hearing on this 
    SIP revision request was held on June 29, 1995. The Baton Rouge serious 
    ozone nonattainment area consists of the following parishes: East Baton 
    Rouge, West Baton Rouge, Pointe Coupee, Livingston, Iberville, and 
    Ascension.
        Section 182(b)(1) requires submittal of a plan revision that 
    provides for reasonable further progress (RFP) reductions for moderate 
    and above ozone nonattainment areas. The plan must provide for specific 
    annual reductions in emissions from VOCs and NOX, as necessary to 
    attain the national primary ambient air quality standard for ozone by 
    the attainment date applicable under the Act. Further, the requirement 
    shall not apply in the case of NOX for which the Administrator 
    determines that additional reductions of NOX would not contribute 
    to attainment. In evaluating the 182(b) SIP revision request, the EPA 
    considered whether additional NOX reductions would contribute to 
    attainment of the standard in the Baton Rouge area.
        As outlined in the relevant EPA guidance, the use of photochemical 
    grid modeling is the recommended approach for testing contribution of 
    NOX emission reductions to attainment of the ozone standard. This 
    approach simulates conditions over the modeling domain that may be 
    expected at the attainment deadline for three emission reduction 
    scenarios: (1) Substantial VOC reductions, (2) substantial NOX 
    reductions, and (3) both VOC and NOX reductions. If the areawide 
    predicted maximum one-hour ozone concentration for each day modeled 
    under scenario (1) is less than or equal to those from scenarios (2) 
    and (3) for the corresponding days, the test is passed and the section 
    182(f) NOX emissions reduction requirements would not apply.
        The EPA has made a determination under section 182(b)(1) that the 
    NOX requirements do not apply. The EPA has based its decision on 
    an urban airshed modeling (UAM) demonstration that additional NOX 
    reductions would not contribute to attainment in the Baton Rouge area.
    
    State Submittal
    
        On July 25, 1995, the State of Louisiana submitted, as a revision 
    to the SIP, a request for an exemption from the transportation 
    conformity NOX requirements. The State bases its request on an 
    urban airshed modeling (UAM) demonstration that additional NOX 
    reductions would not contribute to attainment in the area. The modeling 
    demonstrates, consistent with the EPA's December 1993 section 182(f) 
    guidance, that decreases in ozone concentrations resulting from VOC 
    reductions alone are equal to or greater than decreases obtained from 
    NOX reductions or a combination of VOC and NOX reductions. 
    The State's submission includes a letter dated July 17, 1995, from the 
    Governor of Louisiana requesting the exemption to the NOX 
    transportation conformity requirements and a summary of the UAM 
    modeling results. The State of Louisiana also provided supplemental 
    technical reports based on the modeling demonstration in the Baton 
    Rouge post-1996 rate-of-progress (ROP) plan submitted to the EPA on 
    November 15, 1994, pursuant to the requirements of section 182(c)(2)(B) 
    of the Act. These reports contained the following: base case model 
    inputs, base case performance evaluation, 1999 emissions report, and 
    attainment modeling report. These additional technical reports provided 
    supplemental detail and 
    
    [[Page 52350]]
    documentation on the modeling information provided to the EPA in the 
    State's petition.
    
    Analysis of State Submission
    
        In evaluating the section 182(b)(1) transportation conformity 
    NOX exemption, the EPA applied the same criteria/guidance used for 
    evaluating section 182(f) NOX waiver requests. The following items 
    are the basis for the EPA's action proposing to approve the State of 
    Louisiana's section 182(b)(1) NOX exemption request for the Baton 
    Rouge ozone nonattainment area. Please refer to the EPA's Technical 
    Support Document and the State's submittal for more detailed 
    information.
    
    A. Consistency With EPA NOX Exemption Guidance
    
        Chapter 4 of the EPA's December 1993 section 182(f) guidance 
    requires that photochemical grid modeling be used to simulate 
    conditions resulting from three emission reduction scenarios: (1) 
    Substantial VOC reductions; (2) Substantial NOX reductions; and 
    (3) both VOC and NOX reductions. To demonstrate that NOX 
    reductions would not contribute to attainment, the areawide predicted 
    maximum 1-hour ozone concentration for each day modeled under scenario 
    (1) must be less than or equal to that from scenarios (2) and (3) for 
    the same day. Chapter 7 specifies that the application of UAM should be 
    consistent with the techniques specified in the EPA ``Guideline on Air 
    Quality Models (Revised),'' and ``Guideline for Regulator Application 
    of the UAM (July 1991).'' In addition, Chapter 8 of the EPA's December 
    1993 section 182(f) guidance requires that the modeling simulating 
    conditions from the NOX emission reduction scenarios include 
    NOX emission increases after November 15, 1992, due to new or 
    modified stationary sources of NOX. (Many of these sources would 
    be subject to the best available control technology requirement through 
    the prevention of significant deterioration program, but not to NSR 
    offsets.) As discussed in the next section, the State has met these 
    requirements by using the UAM consistent with the EPA's guidance.
    
    B. UAM Modeling Analysis
    
        The LDEQ used UAM version IV, an EPA-approved photochemical grid 
    model, to develop the attainment demonstration for the Baton Rouge 
    area. The State's modeling activities were performed as outlined in the 
    UAM modeling protocols, according to the EPA's ``Guideline for 
    Regulatory Application of the Urban Airshed Model.'' A specific 
    modeling protocol was developed by the State for its modeling 
    activities. The State's modeling protocol was reviewed and approved by 
    the EPA. The discussion below summarizes the EPA's analysis of how the 
    State's modeling demonstrations complied with the EPA's guidance. 
    Please refer to the EPA's Technical Support Document for more detailed 
    information.
    1. Episode Selection
        The State used the EPA ``Guideline For Regulatory Application of 
    The Urban Airshed Model'' to select episodes for use in the Baton Rouge 
    UAM modeling exercises. Data from 1987 through 1991 were examined for 
    episodes which cover at least 48 consecutive hours and the worst-case 
    meteorological conditions. Three episodes were selected for the UAM 
    analysis for the area.
    2. Model Domain and Meteorological Input
        The LDEQ used a sufficiently large modeling domain for Baton Rouge 
    to ensure that the model captures the movement of ozone episodes as a 
    result of the VOC and NOX emissions emitted from the surface 
    sources. Meteorological data were collected from numerous monitoring 
    stations in the area. The LDEQ followed the methods described in the 
    UAM user's guides to develop model inputs for wind field data, mixing 
    heights, temperature, and meteorological scalars for the areas.
    3. Emissions Inventory
        The Baton Rouge modeling exercises were conducted using VOC and 
    NOX emission inventories compiled by survey and direct measurement 
    by the LDEQ. The modeling emissions inventories are composed of point 
    source, area, on-road mobile, off-road mobile, and biogenic emissions. 
    Where applicable, emissions were adjusted for pertinent conditions 
    related to the episode day to be modeled, thus producing day-specific 
    emissions. The State followed the EPA's procedures for developing 
    episode-specific emission inventories.
        The EPA's section 182(f) guidance explains that, in general, the 
    purpose of the section 182(f) requirements for NOX is related to 
    attainment of the ozone standard, which suggests that an analysis be 
    focussed on the time that attainment of that standard is required. For 
    the purpose of a section 182(f) modeling demonstration, this means that 
    the projected emissions inventory for the attainment year should be 
    used.
        For Baton Rouge, the 1999 attainment year modeling inventory was 
    developed from the 1990 base year emission inventory and adjusted to 
    reflect the projected conditions for the attainment year. Demographic 
    and econometric forecasting methods were employed to project activities 
    levels to 1999, which, in turn, were used to develop a projected 
    emissions inventory for 1999. The State then applied the VOC emission 
    reductions that are projected to be realized through 1996 from the 
    control regulations contained in the Baton Rouge 15 percent ROP SIP 
    submitted to the EPA on November 15, 1994, and the NOX controls 
    implemented between 1990 and 1994 due to facilities' voluntary 
    participation in the early NOX reduction program. (The 1999 
    inventories did not incorporate any additional NOX emission 
    reductions that would have been achieved through implementation of the 
    NOX RACT, NSR, general and transportation conformity, or NOX-
    related I/M provisions.)
    4. Model Performance
        For Baton Rouge, both graphical and statistical performance 
    measures were used to evaluate the model. Using these analyses, the 
    predicted results from the model were compared to the observed results 
    for each episode. These analyses indicated that, overall, the model 
    performed satisfactorily for the three episodes used for the UAM 
    demonstration.
    5. Modeling Demonstration
        The EPA's section 182(f) guidance requires the State to model three 
    emission reduction scenarios to evaluate the benefits of NOX 
    reductions: (1) Substantial VOC reductions; (2) substantial NOX 
    reductions; and (3) both VOC and NOX reductions. For the section 
    182(b)(1) exemption, the LDEQ modeled the three emission reduction 
    scenarios for all three episodes using the 1999 projected emission 
    inventory, which includes the voluntary early (1990-1994) point source 
    NOX reductions and the VOC emission controls to be implemented 
    through 1996 (i.e., 15 percent ROP). The LDEQ modeled the scenarios 
    using across-the-board reductions in the projected VOC and NOX 
    point source emission inventories. The State first modeled substantial 
    NOX and VOC emission reductions as follows: A 100 percent 
    reduction in point source VOC emissions alone; a 100 percent reduction 
    in point source NOX emissions alone; and a 100 percent reduction 
    in both VOC and NOX emissions combined. This reduction 
    
    [[Page 52351]]
    represents approximately 46 percent of the total projected 
    anthropogenic VOC emissions and approximately 57% of the total 
    projected NOX emissions. The State also modeled smaller across-
    the-board reductions in the projected VOC and NOX point source 
    emissions of 25%, 50%, and 75% separately and then combined in order to 
    more accurately characterize near-term VOC and NOX control 
    scenarios.
        As explained in the EPA's section 182(f) guidance, the EPA believes 
    it is appropriate to focus this analysis on the areawide maximum 1-hour 
    predicted ozone concentration, since this value is critical for the 
    attainment demonstration. For all three episodes, the controlling day 
    showed that the domain-wide predicted maximum ozone concentrations are 
    lowest when only VOC reductions are modeled. In contrast, further 
    NOX reductions increase the domain-wide maximum ozone 
    concentrations. Please refer to the EPA's Technical Support Document 
    for more detailed information.
        The EPA believes that all NOX exemptions that are approved 
    should be approved only on a contingent basis. As described in the 
    EPA's NOX Supplement to the General Preamble (57 FR 55628, 
    November 25, 1992), the EPA would rescind a NOX exemption in cases 
    where NOX reductions were later found to be beneficial in the 
    area's attainment plan. That is, a modeling based exemption would last 
    for only as long as the area's modeling continued to demonstrate 
    attainment without the additional NOX reductions.
        If the EPA later determines that additional NOX reductions 
    from transportation sources are beneficial based on new photochemical 
    grid modeling in an area initially exempted, the area would be removed 
    from exempt status and would be required to implement the NOX 
    provisions of the transportation conformity rule except to the extent 
    that modeling shows NOX reductions to be ``excess reductions.''
        In summary, the UAM modeling results for the Baton Rouge 
    nonattainment area indicate that additional NOX reductions as well 
    as NSR control of any NOX increases related to expected growth 
    would not contribute to attainment of the ozone standard by 1999. The 
    EPA therefore proposes to approve the transportation conformity 
    NOX exemption for the Baton Rouge area. This exemption will remain 
    effective for only as long as modeling continues to show that NOX 
    control of transportation sources would not contribute to attainment in 
    the Baton Rouge nonattainment area.
    
    Proposed Rulemaking Action and Solicitation of Comments
    
        Based on the State's SIP revision request and associated 
    documentation, the EPA proposes to approve Louisiana's request for an 
    exemption from the transportation conformity NOX requirements.
        Public comments are solicited on the requested SIP revision and on 
    EPA's proposed rulemaking action. Comments received by November 6, 
    1995, will be considered in the development of the EPA's final rule.
        This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature 
    by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the 
    Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a 
    July 10, 1995, memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator 
    for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget has exempted 
    this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.
        Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing, 
    or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any 
    SIP. The EPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP in 
    light of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in 
    relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
        Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., the 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, the 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.
        This approval does not create any new requirements. Therefore, I 
    certify that this action does not have a significant impact on any 
    small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-
    State relationship under the Act, preparation of the regulatory 
    flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic 
    reasonableness of the State action. The Act forbids the 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 (1976).
        Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 
    (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the 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, the EPA 
    must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative 
    that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with 
    statutory requirements. Section 203 requires the EPA to establish a 
    plan for informing and advising any small governments that may be 
    significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule. The EPA has determined 
    that this action 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 will relieve requirements otherwise imposed 
    under the Act, and hence does not impose any Federal intergovernmental 
    mandate, as defined in section 101 of the Unfunded Mandates Act. 
    Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal 
    governments, or the private sector, result from this action.
    
    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
    
        Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Conformity, 
    Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Transportation 
    conformity.
    
        Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
    
        Dated: September 29, 1995.
    
    Samuel Coleman,
    Acting Regional Administrator.
    [FR Doc. 95-24939 Filed 10-5-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    

Document Information

Published:
10/06/1995
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Proposed Rule
Action:
Proposed rule.
Document Number:
95-24939
Dates:
Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing on or before November 6, 1995.
Pages:
52348-52351 (4 pages)
Docket Numbers:
LA 32-1-7190, FRL-5309-8
PDF File:
95-24939.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 52