[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 14, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13630-13634]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6161]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 13631]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[IL63-3-6803; FRL-5170-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan; State of
Illinois
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On September 13, 1994, the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) published direct final rulemaking approving
1990 base year ozone precursor emissions inventories for the Chicago,
Metro-East St. Louis, and Jersey County, Illinois ozone nonattainment
areas as a revision to the Illinois State Implementation Plan (SIP). On
the same day, a proposed rule was also published which established a
30-day public comment period, noting that, if adverse comments were
received regarding the direct final rule, the USEPA would withdraw the
direct final rule and publish an additional final rule to address the
public comments. Adverse comments were received during the public
comment period. This revised final rule summarizes the public comments
and USEPA's responses and finalizes the approval of the 1990 base year
ozone precursor emissions inventories for the Illinois ozone
nonattainment areas.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This action will be effective April 13, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the SIP revision, public comments and USEPA's
responses are available for inspection at the following address: (It is
recommended that you telephone Edward Doty at (312) 886-6057 before
visiting the Region 5 office.)
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and
Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edward Doty, Regulation Development
Section (AR-18J), Regulation Development Branch, Air and Radiation
Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, Telephone Number (312)
886-6057.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background Information
The 1990 base year emissions inventories discussed in this rule
were submitted by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA)
on November 12, 1993 in compliance with the requirements of section
182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (Act). The emission inventory submittal
covers the emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), Oxides of
Nitrogen (NOx), and Carbon Monoxide (CO) for the following ozone
nonattainment areas: Chicago (Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, and
Will Counties, Aux Sable and Goose Lake Townships in Grundy County, and
Oswego Township in Kendall County); Metro-East St. Louis (Madison,
Monroe, and St. Clair Counties); and Jersey County. In addition to
emissions from the nonattainment areas, the submittal also covers VOC,
NOx, and CO emissions from major stationary sources located within
25 miles of the ozone nonattainment areas. The focus of this rulemaking
is the ozone precursor emissions in the ozone nonattainment areas.
On September 13, 1994 (59 FR 46920), USEPA published a direct final
rule approving the emissions inventories as a revision of the Illinois
ozone SIP. On the same day, USEPA published a proposed rule (59 FR
46948) noting that if adverse comments were received regarding the
direct final rule, the USEPA would withdraw the direct final and
publish another final rule addressing the public comments. Adverse
comments were received regarding the direct final rule. This subsequent
final rule addresses the adverse comments and announces USEPA's final
action regarding Illinois' base year ozone precursor emission
inventories.
II. Public Comments
The following discussion summarizes the comments received regarding
the emissions inventories and the USEPA responses to those comments.
All comments were included in a single set of comments submitted
jointly by the American Lung Association of Metropolitan Chicago and
the Citizens Commission for Clean Air in the Lake Michigan Basin.
Comment: The commenters note that air quality monitoring and
modeling performed by the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium
(LADCO) indicates that the Chicago area emissions inventory
underestimates VOC emissions by as much as 1.5 times and overestimates
NOx emissions. VOC speciation profiles indicate that the inventory
is underestimating mobile and/or area source emissions.
The commenters point out that the accuracy of the emissions
inventory is critical since it is difficult to solve an ozone
attainment problem when the source of the problem is not understood.
Errors in the emissions inventory could lead to errors in the
calculated emission reduction requirement (both in total and by source
category) and the efficacy of the VOC versus NOx controls, all of
which are important issues in the Lake Michigan Basin.
The commenters note that monitoring data contradicting emission
inventories is not unique to northeastern Illinois, suggesting that
there may be a fundamental flaw in the process recommended by the USEPA
for developing emission inventories. The commenters state that the
USEPA should act to resolve these problems immediately. Furthermore,
the inventories should be adjusted to be consistent with convincing
monitoring data like those collected by LADCO.
Response: The USEPA is aware of the monitoring data collected
during the Lake Michigan Ozone Study (LMOS) and their implications
regarding the emissions inventory. The data imply that VOC emissions in
the LMOS domain, and particularly in the Chicago and Milwaukee ozone
nonattainment areas, are underestimated or that NOx emissions are
overestimated. It is noted, however, that these monitoring data are not
sufficient in quantity and detail to allow detailed, source category-
specific corrections to the emissions inventory. The data imply that
the States and the USEPA should continue to pursue improved emission
inventory techniques.
It is further noted that the LMOS States (Illinois, Indiana,
Michigan, and Wisconsin) have pursued improvements in the emissions
inventories subsequent to the submittal of the 1990 base year emissions
inventories. These emissions inventory improvements have led to
significantly improved agreement with the monitoring data collected
during the LMOS. The emissions data to be used in the Lake Michigan
Ozone Control Program (LMOP) (the modeling analysis conducted to select
emission control measures, to assess the merits of VOC versus NOx
controls, and to demonstrate attainment of the ozone standard in the
LMOS/LMOP modeling domain) agree favorably with the monitoring data.
Some changes in the base year emissions inventories are expected to
result from this process. These changes will be assessed by the USEPA
when the demonstrations of attainment are submitted. If significant
changes in the base year emissions inventories are implied by the
modeling input data, the USEPA may consider requesting the States to
revise the base year emission inventories approved previously by the
USEPA. Alternatively, with concurrence from the State, the USEPA may
[[Page 13632]] rulemake to revise the approved base year emissions
inventories at the same time that the USEPA acts on the demonstration
of attainment.
Because the State followed USEPA guidelines in preparing the
emission inventories covered in this rulemaking, the USEPA does not
believe it is appropriate to disapprove the base year emissions
inventories at this time. Such a disapproval would not be adequately
supported by the monitoring data collected during the LMOS.
Comment: LADCO monitoring and speciation data indicate that mobile
source emissions are underestimated in the Chicago area emissions
inventory. A contributing factor may be inaccurate speed data. In
comments addressing the conformity findings for the 1993-1997 and 1994-
1998 Transportation Improvement Programs and Transportation System
Development Plans, a number of organizations identified problems with
the Chicago Area Transit Study (CATS) transportation model that could
lead to inaccurate speed estimates. The problems identified were:
1. The speeds used to estimate mobile source emissions are not
based on actual measurements but instead are a function of applicable
speed limits, numbers of traffic lights, type of road, etc. With little
or no empirical data to support the speed estimates, they are highly
suspect.
2. In order to generate accurate speeds, the model should post-
process link speeds.
3. The model should account for intersection delays.
These problems are likely to lead to underestimation of emissions.
Other model deficiencies may have skewed speeds in a manner that
resulted in overestimation of emissions or had no effect on emissions.
For example, the model should feed trip times back to the mode choice
and trip distribution portions of the model to account for persons who
choose a different mode or avoid congested areas. The model should also
have separate peak and non-peak components that account for drivers
taking trips during less congested hours of the day, instead of the
fixed time-of-day factors that the model currently uses.
The above problems should be remedied before USEPA gives final
approval to the emissions inventory.
Response: It is true that the link speeds given in the
transportation model output are not actual measured speeds, but rather
``impedances'' with the dimensions of speed that are used to make the
model's estimated traffic levels balance. Both the IEPA and CATS
subjected the CATS network speed (impedance) data, used in the
development of the 1990 base year mobile source emission estimates, to
considerable scrutiny before they were used in the estimation of
emissions. It was determined that the model speed data were
representative and could be properly used ``as is.''
As described in the emissions inventory documentation, the IEPA
checked the model link speeds by road type and found them to be
reasonable and representative. In particular, model speeds were checked
by road type under free and congested conditions. Model speeds were, in
general, less under congested conditions than under free flow
conditions; and average speeds for different road types differed as
expected. Local streets had the lowest average speeds, typically in the
20 to 35 mile per hour range, while rural interstates had the highest
average speeds, up to 65 miles per hour. Speeds on very congested
streets were below 10 miles per hour, as would be expected during
``rush hour'' periods. Model speeds for most roads, except interstates
and freeways, were in the 25 to 45 mile per hour range. The model
speeds for each roadway type agree broadly with speeds observed on
roads of that type both in Chicago and elsewhere. It should be noted
that the transportation model used by CATS takes intersection delays
into account.
With regard to the comments concerning the overestimation of
emissions, CATS has recently introduced a modeling method of feeding
trip times back into the mode choice and trip distribution parts of the
transportation model. In addition, CATS has introduced the use of peak
and off-peak modeling components. These new model features have had a
negligible effect on the model output.
Comment: Accurate emissions are missing for the following source
categories:
1. Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs);
2. Hazardous Waste Landfills;
3. Municipal Landfills;
4. Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs);
5. Lawn Care Pesticide Applications;
6. Agricultural Burning;
7. Catastrophic/Accidental Releases;
8. Waste Disposal Incinerators; and
9. Small (10 to 25 tons per year) VOC-emitting Facilities.
Response: Each of the source categories are individually responded
to below:
Publicly-Owned Treatment Works
The Publicly-Owned Treatment Works (POTW) category was treated by
the IEPA as a point source category and not as an area source category
in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area. A total of 62 POTW facilities
were addressed in the Chicago nonattainment point source inventory.
The IEPA estimates were primarily based on data obtained from the
IEPA's Division of Water Pollution Control, which issues permits to all
POTW facilities. The permit files contain facility-specific data
including, but not limited to, a facility's monthly average flowrates
and the location of the facility. Other information not obtained from
the permit files, such as industrial wastewater contribution, were
either directly solicited from the facilities themselves or were given
a default value consistent with the recommendations of the USEPA based
on the guidelines contained in Procedures for the Preparation of
Emission Inventories for Precursors of Ozone, Volume I (EPA-450/4-88-
021). The emissions inventory documentation submitted by the IEPA
contained a detailed discussion of IEPA's emission estimation
methodology for this source category.
Hazardous Waste Landfills and Municipal Landfills
The Chicago ozone nonattainment area emissions inventory includes
emissions for landfills within the point source emissions inventory
rather than as an area source category. The IEPA used information from
the IEPA Division of Land Pollution Control to determine the size,
type, age, and location of landfills in the Chicago nonattainment area.
In cases where some of the information was missing, estimates were
based on the best available information. The emissions inventory
contains emissions estimates for 229 landfills with a total of 4.59
tons per day of VOC emissions.
Calculation of landfill emissions was based on the 1988 document,
Air Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste Landfills--Background
Information for Proposed Standards and Guidelines. An emission factor
of 35.36 tons VOC per year per million tons of refuse was used in the
emission estimations. This was based on a recommended emission factor
of 13.6 tons VOC per year per million tons of refuse multiplied by 2.6
to account for the fact that the Chicago area receives more than 23
inches of precipitation per year.
Catastrophic/Accidental Releases and Leaking Underground Storage Tanks
Catastrophic/accidental releases were not included in the Chicago
nonattainment area inventory due to the [[Page 13633]] lack of USEPA
emission inventory guidance for this source category and the lack of
available data. In addition, note that the USEPA guidance requires that
the emissions be estimated for a typical ozone season weekday. Since
such releases are random and the extent of emissions can not be
calculated, the IEPA, with concurrence from the USEPA, did not include
emissions from this category in the emissions inventory.
There is a similar lack of information regarding VOC emissions from
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs). Although information on the
location of LUST cleanups is available, quantifying the VOC emissions
resulting from the leaks and from the cleanup operations is complicated
by the lack of information on the amount of gasoline or other volatile
materials released, the amount of material that has reached the water
table, and the amount of material that has been trapped in the soil.
The USEPA concurs with the omission of these emissions given the lack
of data.
Lawn Care Pesticide Applications
The IEPA did not calculate these emissions due to a lack of
available USEPA guidance for this source and to a lack of available
data. In addition, the IEPA believes that such emissions are already
accounted for under the household pesticide subcategory of the
commercial/consumer solvents category. The USEPA concurs with the
omission of these emissions given the lack of data and guidance.
Agricultural Burning
Agricultural burning was not considered to be significant
summertime source of VOC emissions in the Chicago ozone nonattainment
area since such burning occurs primarily outside of the summer months.
The Chicago nonattainment area does contain VOC emissions resulting
from forest fires as well as from burning of landscape waste under the
open burning category.
Waste Disposal Incinerators
The Chicago nonattainment area emissions inventory includes VOC
emissions from waste disposal incinerators. The summary of these
emissions can be found in Table 2-2 of the Chicago area emissions
inventory submittal under the category, Municipal Waste: Combustion.
This category summarizes the point source inventory for Commercial/
Institutional, Governmental, and Industrial Waste Incineration. There
are a total of 121 source facilities in this category, emitting a total
of 1.62 tons VOM per day.
Small (10 to 25 Tons Per Year) VOC-Emitting Facilities
The Chicago nonattainment area point source emissions inventory
includes emissions from small facilities emitting less than 25 tons VOC
per year. All permitted emission sources were included in the point
source emissions inventory regardless of their size. The emissions
inventory includes source facilities with emissions as low as 0.01 tons
per day or 0.1 pounds per hour. Although these facilities were not
individually documented in the major source summary documentation of
the emissions inventory submittal, their emissions were totalled in the
appropriate activity-related source categories.
Comment: An area of concern is the lack of rule effectiveness
factors for many source categories in the emission inventories. For
sources that do have rule effectiveness estimates, there is little
information explaining how the estimates were selected.
Response: As noted in the emission inventory documentation, the
State assumed a default rule effectiveness of 80 percent for most
source categories, as recommended in USEPA guidelines. A rule
effectiveness of 100 percent was used for sources that estimated
emissions using direct measurement methodologies, such as mass balance.
These procedures comply with Illinois' Inventory Preparation Plan,
previously approved by the USEPA.
The State, as part of the LMOS, determined facility-specific rule
effectiveness levels for major facilities with emission control
efficiencies in excess of 95 percent. All non-studied facilities with
emission control efficiencies in excess of 95 percent were assumed to
have rule effectiveness levels equal to the median rule effectiveness
determined in the facility-specific study, approximately 92 percent.
The study parameters and results were included in documentation
referenced in the emissions inventory submittal. The USEPA has reviewed
this documentation, and has determined it to be acceptable. Therefore,
the State has taken an acceptable approach to applying rule
effectiveness and has adequately documented this approach and the
resulting rule effectiveness estimates.
Comment: The use of questionable population-based emissions factors
appears to have contributed to low emission estimates for some area
sources. For example, estimates of graphic arts, auto body refinishing,
and non-road construction equipment VOC emissions are significantly
lower per capita than for other urban areas. Given that additional
controls on area sources are likely to be included in Illinois'
attainment plan, accuracy of the area source emissions is especially
important.
Response: With regard to the graphic arts category, USEPA
guidelines, as used by the IEPA, recommended the use of population-
based per capita emission factors to estimate county total graphic arts
emissions. However, since the Illinois point source emissions inventory
contains emissions from graphic arts facilities, the IEPA followed
USEPA guidelines and subtracted point source emissions for this source
category from the calculated area source emissions total. This
subtraction is performed to avoid double counting of emissions. If one
compares the total of point and area source emissions for this source
category on a per capita basis with similar emission rates for other
major areas, one would find better agreement. The low area source per
capita emission rate is an artifact of the thoroughness of Illinois'
point source emissions inventory.
Regarding the automobile refinishing area source category,
emissions were not estimated using only a population-based emission
factor. The Chicago automobile refinishing area source emission
estimates were determined by apportioning national automobile
refinishing activity data, such as the amount of coating usage, to the
Chicago area on the basis of population. This method was chosen, with
the approval and support (through the use of a USEPA contract) of the
USEPA, to better quantify the emissions from different operations
involved in automobile refinishing and for better estimation of
emission reductions resulting from required controls. The method
employed would lead to per capita emission rates differing from those
in urban areas where a strict per capita emission rate were used. The
directionality of the differences does not imply that the technique
used by the IEPA is in error.
Regarding emissions from non-road construction equipment, it must
be noted that IEPA simply used emission estimates provided by USEPA's
Office of Mobile Sources. In 1991, the USEPA issued an emissions
inventory for each of the ozone and carbon monoxide nonattainment
areas. The IEPA used the emissions inventory provided by the USEPA for
the Chicago ozone nonattainment area. Given the detail of the data used
and the extent of the quality assurance of this emissions inventory,
the IEPA believes, and the USEPA agrees, that no better estimate of
[[Page 13634]] non-road construction equipment emissions is available
at this time and that the current emissions estimate is appropriate. It
is additionally noted that the emissions inventory submitted by the
IEPA incorporated by reference the documentation of the non-road
construction equipment emissions estimates supplied by the USEPA.
Comment: The commenters note that the emissions for railroads and
airport lack documentation. In addition, the commenters note that,
given that a high speed rail and a third airport are both under
consideration for the Chicago area, this lack of documentation is
especially troublesome.
Response: Discussion of the estimation procedures used for railroad
and airport emissions is contained on pages 196 through 221 of the
Chicago emissions inventory documentation submitted to the USEPA. The
discussion of railroad emissions includes an estimate of statewide
railroad fuel usage, which was apportioned to the nonattainment area
counties based on the county to State ratios of railroad track mileage.
The county fuel usage figures were then multiplied by a per unit fuel
usage emission rate factor. This approach is acceptable to the USEPA.
The method used for airport emissions evaluated commercial aircraft
activity at O'Hare and Midway Airports on an aircraft engine-specific
basis incorporating modal emission rates. The modal emission rate for
each engine is a function of the amount of fuel burned for each of the
four modes power settings. The four modes are taxi/idle, takeoff,
climbout, and approach. Emissions were estimated for approximately 60
different commercial engine types. Emissions from the remaining
aircraft categories, military and general aviation, were estimated
based on the number of landing and take-off (LTO) cycles of each
aircraft type. These LTO cycles were also the basis of the emissions
estimates performed for all of the other airports in the Chicago ozone
nonattainment area. These estimation procedures were documented in
IEPA's emissions inventory submittal and were found to be acceptable by
the USEPA.
III. Final Rulemaking Action
The State of Illinois has met the requirements [section 182(a)(1)]
of the Act for the submittal of base year ozone precursor emissions
inventories. The USEPA approves the State's 1990 base year ozone
precursor emission inventories for the Chicago, Metro-East St. Louis,
and Jersey County ozone nonattainment areas.
This action has been classified as a Table 2 action by the Regional
Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on
January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by an October 4, 1993,
memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has
exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to any SIP shall be
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., USEPA
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, USEPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant economic 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.
The SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D, of
the Act do not create any new requirements, but simply approve
requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the
Federal SIP approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify
that it does not have a significant impact on small entities. Moreover,
due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the Act,
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of State action. The
Act forbids the USEPA 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 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by May 15, 1995. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This section may not be callenged 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, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: February 23, 1995.
Robert Springer,
Acting Regional Administrator.
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is
amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart O--Illinois
2. Section 52.726 is amended by adding paragraph (i) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.726 Control strategy: Ozone.
* * * * *
(i) The base year (1990) ozone emission inventory requirement of
section 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990, has been
satisfied for the following Illinois ozone nonattainment areas: the
Chicago nonattainment area--Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, Will and McHenry
Counties, Aux Sable and Gooselake Townships in Grundy County, and
Oswego Township in Kendall County; the Metro-East St. Louis
nonattainment area--Madison, Monroe, and St. Clair Counties; and Jersey
County.
[FR Doc. 95-6161 Filed 3-13-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
