[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 53 (Monday, March 18, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10920-10962]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-6011]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA114-1-7280; FRL-5439-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California--
Ozone
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTIONS: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve revisions to the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone for 7 nonattainment areas: South
Coast, Southeast Desert, Ventura, Sacramento, San Diego, San Joaquin
Valley, and Santa Barbara, submitted in order to comply with the
November 1994 deadline under the Clean Air Act (CAA). In addition, EPA
proposes to approve specific local and statewide air pollution control
measures, including the California enhanced motor vehicle inspection
and maintenance program.
EPA proposes to approve these revisions to the California SIP under
provisions of the CAA regarding EPA action on SIP submittals for
nonattainment areas.
EPA proposes to establish a consultative process on the potential
for additional mobile source controls that can contribute to attainment
in the South Coast.
DATES: Written comments on the proposed EPA actions must be received by
EPA at the address below on or before May 2, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on this proposed action should be addressed
to: Regional Administrator, Attention: Office of Federal Planning (A-1-
2), Air and Toxics Division, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9,
75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901
Copies of the SIP submittal and materials relevant to this
rulemaking are contained in Docket No. A-96-13, which is available for
viewing during normal business hours at the address shown above.
Copies of the SIP materials are also available for inspection at
the addresses listed below:
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), 401 M Street, S.W.,
Washington, DC
California Air Resources Board, 2020 L Street, Sacramento, California
In addition, copies of the relevant local plan, the State plan
(1994 California Ozone SIP), and EPA's technical support documents for
this rulemaking are available at the following locations:
Santa Barbara Air Pollution Control District, 26 Castilian Drive B-23,
Goleta, California
San Diego Air Pollution Control District, 9150 Chesapeake Drive, San
Diego, California
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, 1999
Tuolumne Street, Fresno, California
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District, 669 County Square Drive,
Ventura, California
Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District, 15428 Civic Drive, Suite
200, Victorville, California
South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Drive,
Diamond Bar, California
Electronic Availability
This document and EPA's technical support documents are available
at Region 9's site on the Internet's World Wide Web at http://
www.epa.gov/region09/air/sip/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julia Barrow, Director, Office of
Federal Planning (A-1-2), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901, (415) 744-2434
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. Summary
B. Requirements of the Act
C. Affected Areas
[[Page 10921]]
D. The California Ozone Plans
1. SIP Submittals
2. EPA Completeness Findings
E. Related SIP Approvals
II. Review of the State Submittal
A. State Measures
1. Mobile Source Measures
a. Introduction
b. Review of Measures
(i) M1
(ii) M2
(iii) M3
(iv) M4
(v) M5 34
(vi) M7
(vii) M8 39
(viii) M9
(ix) M11
(x) Additional New Control Technologies
c. EPA Action
2. I/M
a. Review of Program
b. Emission Reductions
c. EPA Action
3. Consumer Products
a. Introduction
b. Adopted Consumer Products Rules
(i) Measure CP-1
(ii) Measure CP-3 (Aerosol Paints)
c. Mid-Term Committal Measure (CP-2)
d. Long-Term Committal Measure (CP-4)
e. Alternative Compliance Plans (ACPs)
f. Emission Reductions
g. EPA Action
4. Pesticides
a. Review of Measure
b. Emission Reductions
c. EPA Action
B. Federal Measures
1. State Approach
2. EPA Action
C. Local ROP and Attainment Plans and Measures
1. Introduction and Common Elements
a. Emission Inventories
(1) 1990 Base Year Inventories
(2) Inventory Projections
b. Rate of Progress
c. NOX Substitution
d. Modeling
(1) Introduction
(2) Uncertainty and Model Performance
(3) Number of Episodes
(4) Attainment Test
(5) Transport
2. Santa Barbara
a. Identification of Plan
b. 1990 Base Year Inventories
c. SIP Control Measures
(1) Description
(2) EPA Action
d. ROP Provisions
(1) ROP Emission Targets
(2) ROP Control Strategy
(3) EPA Action
e. Demonstration of Attainment
(1) Control Strategy
(2) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
(3) EPA Action
f. Overall EPA Action
3. San Diego
a. Identification of Plan
b. 1990 Base Year Inventories
c. SIP Control Measures
(1) Description
(2) EPA Action
d. ROP Provisions
(1) ROP Emission Targets
(2) ROP Control Strategy
(3) EPA Action
e. Demonstration of Attainment
(1) Control Strategy
(2) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
(3) EPA Action
f. Overall EPA Action
4. San Joaquin Valley
a. Identification of Plan
b. 1990 Base Year Inventories
c. SIP Control Measures
(1) Description
(2) EPA Action
d. ROP Provisions
(1) ROP Emission Targets
(2) 15% ROP Control Strategy
(3) Post-1996 ROP Control Strategy
(4) EPA Action
e. Demonstration of Attainment
(1) Control Strategy
(2) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
(3) EPA Action
f. Overall EPA Action
5. Sacramento
a. Identification of Plan
b. 1990 Base Year Inventories
c. SIP Control Measures
(1) Description
(2) EPA Action
d. ROP Provisions
(1) ROP Emission Targets
(2) 15% ROP Control Strategy
(3) Post-1996 ROP Control Strategy
(4) EPA Action
e. Demonstration of Attainment
(1) Control Strategy
(2) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
(3) EPA Action
f. Overall EPA Action
6. Ventura
a. Identification of Plan
b. 1990 Base Year Inventories
c. SIP Control Measures
(1) Description
(2) EPA Action
d. ROP Provisions
(1) ROP Emission Targets
(2) 15% ROP Control Strategy
(3) Post-1996 ROP Control Strategy
(4) EPA Action
e. Demonstration of Attainment
(1) Control Strategy
(2) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
(3) EPA Action
f. Overall EPA Action
7. South Coast
a. Identification of Plan
b. 1990 Base Year Inventories
c. SIP Control Measures
(1) Description
(2) EPA Action
d. ROP Provisions
(1) ROP Emission Targets
(2) 15% ROP Control Strategy
(3) Post-1996 ROP Control Strategy
(4) EPA Action
e. Demonstration of Attainment
(1) Control Strategy
(2) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
(3) EPA Action
f. Overall EPA Action
8. Southeast Desert
a. Identification of Plans
b. 1990 Base Year Inventories
c. SIP Control Measures
(1) Description
(2) EPA Action
d. ROP and Attainment Provisions
(1) ROP and Attainment Emission Targets
(2) State Approach
(3) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
(4) EPA Action
e. Overall EPA Action
III. Summary of EPA Actions
IV. Regulatory Process
V. Unfunded Mandates
Appendix: Status of EPA's Activities Relating to the ``Federal
Measures'' in the California SIP Submittal
I. Background
A. Summary
Air pollution remains a significant public health concern in many
parts of the country, including many areas in California. The Clean Air
Act requires states to develop state implementation plans (SIPs) that
lay out how areas will reduce pollution and attain the health-based air
quality standards for a number of pollutants, including ground level
ozone.
On the Clean Air Act deadline for ozone SIP submittals, November
15, 1994, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted to EPA
the State's ozone plans, including State and local measures and
regulations, emission inventories, modeling analyses, rate-of-progress
(ROP) plans, and attainment demonstrations. This material was followed
by several supplementary SIP submissions and technical documentation
over the past year, addressing in still greater detail and more
completely the critical ozone planning requirements of the Act.
Together these submissions present a road map of how the State of
California envisions meeting the health-based ozone air quality
standards in 7 distinct geographic areas within the State by the dates
specified in the Clean Air Act. The submittals represent the
culmination of years of work and collaboration among stakeholders at
the local, regional, State, national, and even international level. The
plans were carefully tailored to meet the clean air goals of
Californians, reflecting the social and economic priorities of each
affected area within the State as well as the legitimate concerns of
national and international commerce.
In the last 30 years, California has significantly improved air
quality in its cities through efforts by businesses and
[[Page 10922]]
communities to reduce ground level ozone pollution. California faces
additional challenges in its fight for clean air because of rapid
growth in population and motor vehicle use as well as meteorological
conditions conducive to ozone formation. Nevertheless, there are still
several areas where air pollution continues to threaten public health,
including Southern California, which violates the standard on almost
one out of every three days--25 times more frequently than the next
most polluted urban areas. The current plans build on California's
pioneering air pollution control efforts to make progress against, and
eventually eliminate, one of the most severe and intractable
environmental and public health problems in the Country.
The Clean Air Act guarantees to all Americans healthy air to
breathe. Unfortunately, approximately one-quarter of Americans
nationwide and more than three-quarters of all Californians are
currently exposed to health-threatening levels of air pollution. Of the
top ten U.S. urban areas with the most violations of the national
ambient air quality standard for ozone, nine are located in California.
Ozone is a highly reactive chemical compound which, at ground
level, can affect both biological tissues and man-made materials. Ozone
exposure causes a range of human pulmonary and respiratory health
effects. While ozone's effects on the pulmonary function of sensitive
individuals (e.g., asthmatics) are of primary concern, evidence
indicates that high ambient levels of ozone can cause respiratory
symptoms in healthy adults and children as well. For example, exposure
to ozone for several hours at moderate concentrations, especially
during outdoor work and exercise, has been found to decrease lung
function, increase airway inflammation, increase sensitivity to other
irritants, and impair lung defenses against infections in otherwise
healthy adults and children. Other symptoms include chest pain,
coughing, and shortness of breath.
There are also public health consequences from direct exposure to
the two principal pollutants that cause ozone formation: oxides of
nitrogen (or NOX) and volatile organic compounds (or VOCs). Since
attainment of the ozone standard requires reductions in these two
precursor pollutants, successful implementation of the ozone SIPs will
yield additional health benefits. Exposure to nitrogen dioxide (a major
component of NOX) can reduce breathing efficiency and increase
lung and airway irritation even in healthy adults; elevated NO2
levels also increase symptoms of respiratory illness, lung congestion,
wheeze, and increased bronchitis in children. VOCs include many air
toxics (such as benzene), which can cause respiratory, immunological,
neurological, reproductive, developmental, and mutagenic problems. Some
VOCs are also probable or known human carcinogens.
Finally, the conversion of NOX into fine particulate matter is
a serious health concern, especially in Southern California. Studies
have shown that high concentrations of fine particulate matter are
associated with major human health problems, including deleterious
effects on breathing and the respiratory system, aggravation of
existing respiratory and cardiovascular disease, alternations in the
body's defense mechanisms against foreign materials, and damage to lung
tissue resulting in fibrosis, carcinogenesis, and premature death.
In addition to impacts on public health, ozone damages vegetation
and NOX emissions, in the form of acid deposition, both harms
plants and causes eutrophication of lakes and streams. Estimates based
on experimental studies of the major commercial crops in the U.S.
suggests that ozone may be responsible for significant agricultural
crop yield losses. In addition, ozone causes noticeable leaf damage in
many crops, which reduces their marketability and value.
Efforts to clean the air require significant resources, but the
benefits are substantial. While it is easier to put a price tag on a
regulation to limit air pollution than it is to assign a dollar value
to being able to breathe without losing lung capacity or to see
mountains that are a few miles away, we know that impacts on
individuals' health associated with air pollution have considerable
physiological, psychological, and purely financial costs. Similarly,
lower crop yields, decreased forest production, and accelerated
building deterioration due to air pollution also have financial costs
that will be reduced by attainment of the clean air standards.
At the same time, clean air has benefits even beyond healthy
breathing. The technologies and industries that will make air pollution
a problem of the past can also be the growth industries that bring to
California jobs and dollars from markets all around the world. A recent
World Bank study projects a $300 billion worldwide marketplace for
clean technologies by the year 2000. Innovative technologies offer the
promise of continued economic growth in concert with strong
environmental protection.
To achieve public health progress over the past 30 years,
California has already adopted uniquely stringent controls on a vast
array of industrial sources, consumer products, and motor vehicles. As
developed by California and Californians, these existing regulations
and the SIP's proposed enhancements to them promote technological
advances while meeting the economic and environmental needs of the
State. The credit for this achievement is shared by the State's air
pollution professionals, regulated industry, and citizens, who continue
to explore new and innovative ways to minimize pollution associated
with their products and activities.
Plan Approvals
When a state submits a SIP to EPA the Clean Air Act requires the
Agency to review the plan to determine if it meets the Act's
requirements and environmental goals. California's 1994 Ozone SIP
included, for both the State and local agencies, fully adopted
regulations and control measures for which regulations must be written.
Since November 1994, EPA has already completed approval of all but one
of the State's fully adopted regulations and most of the State's
commitments to adopt regulations in the future. The State submitted its
enhanced motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) regulations on
January 22, 1996. EPA is proposing today approval of the I/M
regulations, which should help to assure the maximum benefits from the
California motor vehicle emissions standards.
EPA believes that this SIP represents an important blueprint for
clean air in California. By today's actions, the Federal government
signals its intention to concur with these plans. California's
commitments, when implemented, will improve air quality and protect
public health. Now it is incumbent on California to meet those
commitments. EPA is today generally proposing to approve in full the
critical components of all of the plans for all of the areas.
EPA is proposing approval of:
The emission inventories and modeling analyses in all of
the affected areas;
The 15% rate-of-progress plans for the period 1990-1996 in
the South Coast (the Los Angeles basin), Ventura, San Joaquin, San
Diego, and Santa Barbara;
The post-1996 rate-of-progress plans in the South Coast,
Ventura, Sacramento, San Joaquin, and San Diego;
[[Page 10923]]
The attainment demonstrations for the South Coast,
Southeast Desert, Ventura, Sacramento, San Joaquin, San Diego, and
Santa Barbara;
All of the individual local measures included with the
plans.
EPA will take action separately on the 15% progress plan for Sacramento
and the progress plans for the Southeast Desert.
The South Coast ozone attainment demonstration raises a unique
issue. In the SIP, California assumes that EPA will issue specific
national mobile source emission reduction rules to help the South Coast
reach attainment. While some additional mobile source standards may be
feasible and desirable, EPA believes that it is important to examine
and discuss these standards because they have far-reaching
implications. As new national and international standards are being
discussed, EPA commits to support rather than hinder State and local
progress in implementing and updating the ozone attainment
demonstration for the South Coast.
To achieve this objective and allow for approval of the South Coast
attainment demonstration at this time, EPA proposes an approach which
the Agency believes is consistent with EPA's guiding principle for
implementing its statutory responsibilities: accomplish environmental
goals through innovative approaches that are collaborative rather than
adversarial, and that provide flexibility while requiring
accountability.
The South Coast attainment demonstration is based primarily on
those State and local components (enumerated in the text of the notice)
that make up the vast majority of reductions needed for attainment in
the South Coast. EPA has already approved most of the State and local
adopted regulations and many of the State's new commitments made as
part of California's 1994 Ozone SIP. EPA proposes in this document to
approve the enforceable State and local commitments that make up the
remainder of the plan. These State and local regulations and
commitments, together with creditable national controls which EPA has
promulgated or proposed, account for well over 90% of the reductions
needed for attainment.
To address the small remaining shortfall which the State has
assigned to the Federal government, EPA proposes to conduct a public
consultative process on future mobile source controls. The Agency also
commits to undertake rulemaking, after the consultative process, on any
controls which are determined to be appropriate for EPA. Finally, EPA
is proposing to require that the State submit, before EPA's final
action on the South Coast plan, an enforceable commitment to submit a
revised South Coast attainment demonstration and gap-filling State or
local control measures, if needed, after the consultative process.
In assigning EPA responsibility for issuing Federal emission
standards for various mobile sources, the State argued that attainment
in Southern California depends upon emission reductions from national
and international mobile sources which could not legally or practically
be regulated at the State or local level. EPA and the State have been
working together for the past several years to evaluate the potential
for additional national emission controls on mobile sources. EPA has
recently proposed or finalized national emission controls for
construction, farm, and lawn and garden equipment; pleasure craft and
some categories of marine vessels; and potential new controls on heavy-
duty truck emissions. The proposed nationwide heavy-duty truck
controls, in fact, are an outgrowth of an EPA-California joint
initiative, developed in consultation with heavy-duty engine
manufacturers, which also extends to possible future controls on heavy-
duty nonroad engines. Other assignments by the State present unique
challenges, such as the establishment of stringent engine emission
standards for aircraft and ocean-going vessels--sources which are today
regulated by treaty principally at the international level.
EPA proposes to continue to consult with the State and other
stakeholders to examine the potential for additional mobile source
controls that can contribute to attainment in the South Coast. This
period provides an opportunity to agree on a set of emission reductions
without adverse consequences to the State or the environment, whether
those additional reductions come from national and international
emission standards or from new State and local measures. At the
conclusion of this consultation, in June 1997, EPA expects that the
State and local agencies will be able to amend the attainment
demonstration appropriately, based on the final mix of national, State,
and local mobile source control responsibilities. During the
consultative process, the State and local agencies need to proceed
aggressively with implementing other parts of the SIP in order to
maintain progress towards cleaning the air.
As mentioned, EPA is proposing to approve all of the local agency
commitments to adopt and implement rules by scheduled dates to achieve
specified emission reductions. In some cases, most notably the South
Coast, scheduled adoption dates have already been missed. It is
critically important that these adoption schedules be amended, that the
local agency staff and governing board's commit themselves to
reasonable and aggressive schedules for rule development and adoption,
and that the affected agencies proceed successfully with plan
implementation to fulfill their public commitments to deliver clean
air. EPA will work with the local agencies, the regulated community,
and the public to help the government boards and officials to meet
their public health obligations. Implementation failures will prolong
the unacceptable current levels of pollution and will expose the areas
to potential sanctions under the Clean Air Act.
Section 182(e)(5) of the Clean Air Act authorizes inclusion of
conceptual, new-technology measures in the attainment demonstration for
the South Coast, the Country's only ``extreme'' ozone nonattainment
area. In this 1990 amendment, Congress recognized that the South
Coast's enormous emission reduction requirements justified giving more
time to allow for the completion of research and development phases
that must precede the successful commercialization of practically zero-
emitting products, industrial processes, and means of transportation. A
large portion of the remaining needed reductions in the 1994 South
Coast plan is now assigned to conceptual measures. If these measures
are to contribute to the solution of the South Coast's ozone problem in
later years, all responsible governmental agencies and private industry
must now increase their resource commitments and cooperative efforts to
develop the clean technologies and innovative market approaches that
will be the basis for the area's economic and environmental progress.
EPA is soliciting public comments on the proposed SIP actions. The
Addresses section of this document provides information on the public
comment process and opportunities to inspect the SIP and related
materials. EPA hopes to take final action soon so that California can
continue to make progress in implementing the challenging strategies in
the plans.
In transmitting the 1994 California Ozone SIP, the Chairwoman of
the California Air Resources Board stated that ``The SIP provides a
firm guarantee to citizens of California that clean air
[[Page 10924]]
goals will be met within the time frames set out in the CAA.'' Indeed,
the goal of the sweeping 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments has been not
simply to sustain the historic progress in reducing air pollution, but
instead to honor the underlying promise of the Act: clean, healthy air
for all Americans. We believe that California's achievement in these
plans for the most polluted areas of the nation proves that the Clean
Air Act is effective when citizens and public officials work together
to focus technical expertise and common sense to protect themselves,
the health of their children, and the welfare of future generations.
The Federal government is committed to playing its part in this final
effort to deliver clean air to all Californians.
B. Requirements of the Act
Title I of the 1990 Amendments to the CAA (CAAA) completely revised
the Part D nonattainment provisions for areas which had not attained
the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone. In
addition, Congress made numerous changes governing EPA's processing of
SIPs, as well as the repercussions of State failures to meet the
various SIP requirements.
Section 110 of Part A of Title I contains general requirements
applicable to all SIP revisions. Section 110(k) describes the Agency's
actions on SIP revisions, including findings as to whether submissions
are complete (section 110(k)(1)), deadlines for EPA actions (section
110(k)(2)), types of actions the Agency may take on complete submittals
(110(k) (3) and (4)), and sanctions which may be applied to areas which
fail to meet the Act's requirements (sections 179 and 110(m)) or fail
to implement approved SIPs (sections 113(a)(5), 173(4), and 179).
The requirements addressed by this proposal are generally those of
Part D of Title I, pertaining to nonattainment areas. Such areas are
designated under section 107 of the Act (codified at 40 CFR Part 81).
While Subpart 1 of Part D (sections 171 to 179 CAA) describes general
requirements for nonattainment areas, Subpart 2 (sections 181 to 185B)
lists additional provisions added under the 1990 CAAA for ozone
nonattainment areas.
Under this subpart, ozone nonattainment areas are classified
according to the severity of the nonattainment problem, and become
subject to a graduated series of requirements. The classification
scheme for ozone nonattainment areas is listed under section 181, which
also establishes deadlines for attainment. The nonattainment
classifications and applicable attainment deadlines are: marginal
(November 15, 1993), moderate (November 15, 1996), serious (November
15, 1999), severe (November 15, 2005 or 2007), and extreme (November
15, 2010). Section 181(a) further provides that the attainment date
shall be ``as expeditiously as practicable but not later than'' these
deadlines.
EPA has issued preliminary interpretations of the amended Act's
provisions applicable to these SIP obligations. See, for example, the
``General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990,'' (57 FR 13498 [April 16, 1992]). In this
proposed rulemaking action, EPA is applying these policies to the
proposed California ozone SIP, taking into consideration the specific
factual issues presented.
The central SIP requirements for ozone nonattainment areas are
demonstrations of reasonable further progress (or ``rate of progress'')
and attainment. Section 182(b)(1) requires, for areas classified as
moderate or above, submission by November 15, 1993 of a SIP revision
providing for reasonable further progress, defined as a reduction from
1990 baseline emissions of at least 15% actual emissions of volatile
organic compounds (VOC), taking into account growth, during the first 6
years following enactment of the 1990 CAAA (i.e., up to November 15,
1996).
Baseline emissions for calculating the required ROP reduction are
defined at section 182(b)(1)(B). Baseline emissions are relative to a
particular year for which the ROP reduction is calculated, and differ
from the 1990 base year emissions primarily in excluding reductions for
certain Federal programs which were already required prior to the 1990
CAAA. Section 182(b)(1)(C) describes a number of exclusions from
creditability for the purposes of meeting the ROP requirement.
For moderate areas, section 182(b)(1) requires submission of a plan
revision by November 15, 1993, that provides an attainment
demonstration including sufficient annual reductions in VOC and
NOX to attain the ozone NAAQS by November 15, 1996. The attainment
demonstration requirement can be met through applying EPA-approved
modeling techniques.
Section 182(c)(2)(B) requires, for serious and above areas,
submission by November 15, 1994, of reasonable further progress and
attainment plans. For these areas, the CAA defines reasonable further
progress as an additional ROP reduction above and beyond the required
1996 reductions, of 3% per year of baseline VOC emissions, averaged
over each consecutive 3-year period from November 15, 1996 until
attainment. Section 182(c)(2)(A) also requires attainment plans, based
on photochemical grid modeling, to be submitted by November 15, 1994,
for serious and above areas.
Section 182(c)(2)(C) allows for actual NOX emissions
reductions (after accounting for growth) that occur after the base year
of 1990 to be used to meet post-1996 ROP emission reduction
requirements. The reader is referred to section II.C.1.c. below for a
discussion of the Agency's NOX substitution criteria.
Sections 182(g)(3) and 182(g)(5) specify requirements for areas
which fail to submit a ROP milestone compliance demonstration under
section 182(g)(2) within the required period or if the Administrator
determines that the area has not met any applicable milestone. The
first ozone ROP milestone compliance demonstration is due April 1997,
for the period 1990-1996. Among the options discussed in section 182(g)
for curing a ROP shortfall is the use of an economic incentive program
(EIP). Under section 182(g)(4)(B), EPA promulgated requirements for
EIPs at 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart U (see 40 CFR 51.490 through 40 CFR
51.494--``EIP Rules and Guidance''). These EIP rules also serve as
policy guidance to determine the approvability of SIP measures that
rely on economic incentives (see 40 CFR 51.490(b)).
Under section 182(b)(4) of the Act, basic motor vehicle inspection
and maintenance (I/M) programs are required in all moderate ozone
nonattainment areas. Under section 182(c)(3), ozone nonattainment areas
designated as serious and worse with 1980 populations of 200,000 or
more are required to meet EPA regulations for ``enhanced'' I/M
programs. As required by section 182(a)(2)(B) of the Act, EPA published
updated requirements for I/M programs on November 5, 1992 (40 CFR part
51, Subpart S, see also 57 FR 52950). On September 18, 1995, EPA issued
flexibility amendments to these I/M rules, allowing for an additional,
less stringent enhanced I/M performance standard for areas that can
meet the ROP and attainment requirements with an I/M program that falls
below the originally promulgated enhanced I/M performance standard (see
60 FR 48029). On November 28, 1995, the National Highway System
Designation Act (Public Law 104-59) was enacted. Section 348 of this
legislation modifies the I/M provisions
[[Page 10925]]
of the Clean Air Act, providing a mechanism for approval with full
credit for decentralized or test-and-repair enhanced I/M programs under
certain circumstances. The legislation also establishes an 18-month
evaluation period to verify that the assigned credits have a basis in
fact, prior to permanent program approval.
Part D of the Act includes other ozone SIP requirements. EPA has
previously acted upon some SIP revisions addressing these requirements;
others will be addressed in future actions. Moreover, the ozone ROP and
attainment plans depend upon the successful adoption and implementation
of well over 100 State and local rules. EPA will approve or disapprove
individual rules relating to each local plan after the State submits
the rules and EPA deems them complete.
EPA believes that the law requires and the public expects that the
responsible California State and local agencies will honor all of their
clean air commitments in these ozone plans, and will consistently
pursue reasonable and aggressive plan implementation until the clean
air goals are reached. Nevertheless, the Act does allow the State to
amend the SIPs in the future, both with respect to the technical
foundations of the demonstrations and the specific mix of control
measures chosen for achieving progress and attainment. State and local
agencies have the flexibility to make changes as necessary and
appropriate to improve the plans, but EPA will fulfill the Agency's
responsibilities under section 110(l) of the CAA, which provides that
``the Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the
revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further progress * * * or any other
applicable requirement of the Act.''
C. Affected Areas
When California's ozone nonattainment areas were first classified
under the 1990 CAAA, 9 areas were classified as moderate and above, and
therefore subject to the progress and attainment requirements. The San
Francisco Bay Area was later redesignated to attainment (60 FR 27028,
May 22, 1995). CARB has also submitted a request to redesignate the
Monterey Bay Area to attainment. EPA will act on the Monterey
redesignation in the near future.
This proposal addresses ROP and attainment plans submitted for all
of the remaining nonattainment areas. These areas are the South Coast
(classified as extreme), the Southeast Desert (comprising the Mojave,
Coachella/San Jacinto, and Antelope Valley areas, severe-17), Ventura
(severe-15), Sacramento (severe-15), San Diego (serious), San Joaquin
Valley (serious), and Santa Barbara (moderate). The boundaries for
these areas are set forth at 40 CFR 81.305.
Since a number of the State's measures apply throughout California
and thus contribute both toward attainment and maintenance of the ozone
NAAQS, the SIP submittal and EPA's proposed approval actions affect all
areas in the State.
D. The California Ozone Plans
1. SIP Submittals
On November 15, 1993, in response to the 15% ROP requirements of
section 182(b)(1)(A) of the Act, CARB submitted plans for all of the
areas addressed in this notice. These submittals have been superseded
by revised ROP plans submitted one year later.
On November 15, 1994, CARB submitted a revision to the ``State of
California Implementation Plan for Achieving and Maintaining the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (SIP) under cover letter from
James Boyd (CARB) to Felicia Marcus (EPA). This SIP revision includes
documentation that the public involvement and adoption requirements of
the CAA have been met at both the State and local level.
The revision itself consists of: (a) The State's comprehensive
ozone plan, including the State's own measures and the State's
summaries of, and revisions to, the local plans; (b) the State's
previously adopted regulations for consumer products and reformulated
gasoline and diesel fuels; and (c) local plans addressing the ozone
attainment demonstration and ROP requirements.
The ozone SIP submittal includes the following separate documents:
(a) The State's Comprehensive Ozone Plan
``The 1994 California State Implementation Plan for Ozone,''
volumes I-IV. The November 15, 1994, submittal letter refers to other
submittals, described below, as completing the 1994 California Ozone
SIP. Volume I provides an overview of the entire submittal; Volumes II
and III include the State's measures for mobile sources, consumer
products, and pesticides; and Volume IV treats the local plans. On
December 29, 1994 and February 7, 1995, the State submitted updates to
these documents, incorporating changes made by CARB at the time of
adoption, and providing other technical and editorial corrections.
(b) The State's Adopted Regulations
(1) The California Antiperspirants and Deodorants regulations and
Consumer Products regulations, as contained in Title 17 of the
California Code of Regulations, Sections 94507-94517, adopted on
December 27, 1990, August 14, 1991, and September 21, 1992.
(2) The California Diesel Fuel regulations, as contained in Title
13 of the California Code of Regulations, Sections 2281 and 2282,
adopted on August 22, 1989, June 21, 1990, April 15, 1991, October 15,
1993, and August 24, 1994.
(3) The California Reformulated Gasoline regulations, as contained
in Title 13, of the California Code of Regulations, Sections 2250,
2252, 2253.4, 2254, 2257, 2260, 2262.1, 2262.2, 2262.3, 2262.4, 2262.5,
2262.6, 2262.7, 2263, 2264, 2266-2272, 2296, and 2297, initially
adopted by CARB on November 17, 1988, and formally adopted on August
22, 1989, June 21, 1990, April 15, 1991, October 15, 1993, and August
24, 1994.
(c) Local Ozone Progress and Attainment Plans
(1) ``1994 Clean Air Plan for Santa Barbara County.'' The submittal
letter for this plan is from James Boyd to Regional Administrator
Felicia Marcus and is dated November 14, 1994.
(2) ``1994 Ozone Attainment and Rate-of-Progress Plans for San
Diego County.''
(3) ``San Joaquin Valley Attainment and Rate-of-Progress Plans.''
On December 28, 1994, the State submitted the ``Rate-of-Progress and
Attainment Demonstration Plans for the Kern County Air Pollution
Control District,'' applicable to the Kern desert portion of the San
Joaquin Valley nonattainment area.
(4) ``Sacramento Area Proposed Attainment and Rate-of-Progress
Plans.'' On December 29, 1994, the State replaced this with the
``Sacramento Area Attainment and Rate-of-Progress Plans.''
(5) ``1994 Air Quality Management Plan for Ventura County.''
(6) ``Rate-of Progress and Attainment Demonstration Plans for the
Mojave Desert.''
(7) ``1994 Air Quality Management Plan for South Coast Air Basin,
Antelope Valley and Coachella/San Jacinto Planning Area.''
On December 29, 1994, the State submitted the ``Rate-of-Progress
Plan Revision: South Coast Air Basin &
[[Page 10926]]
Antelope Valley & Coachella/San Jacinto Planning Area.'' 1
\1\ Antelope Valley and Coachella/San Jacinto Planning Area are
portions of the Southeast Desert Modified Air Quality Management
Area under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality
Management District.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 30, 1995, CARB submitted revised 1990 base year emission
inventories for each of the California ozone nonattainment areas.
On June 30, 1995, CARB submitted descriptive materials relating to
the State's motor vehicle inspection and maintenance program, adopted
by the California Bureau of Automotive Repair.
On January 22, 1996, CARB submitted the motor vehicle inspection
and maintenance regulations adopted by the California Bureau of
Automotive Repair.
2. EPA Completeness Findings
On January 30, 1995, EPA issued a finding of completeness under
Section 110(k)(1) of the Act for the following portions of the
California ozone SIP submittal: Diesel Fuel Regulations; Reformulated
Gasoline Regulations; CARB Measures M2, M3, M5, M8, M9, M11, CP-2, CP-
3, CP-4, Additional Measures; and SCAQMD Long Term Measures ADV-CTS-01/
02, ADV-FUG, ADV-PRC, ADV-UNSP. These elements of the revision were
found complete based on EPA's completeness criteria that are set forth
in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V.2
\2\ EPA adopted the completeness criteria on February 16, 1990
(55 FR 5830) and pursuant to section 110(k)(1)(A) of the CAA,
revised the criteria on August 26, 1991 (56 FR 42216).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 18, 1995 the EPA issued a finding of completeness for the
remaining portions of the November and December 1994 submittals with
regard to: (1) attainment and post-1996 RFP requirements at section
182(c)(2) of the Act; (2) 15% ROP requirement of section 182(b)(1)(A);
(3) attainment requirement for moderate areas (Santa Barbara) as
described at Section 182(b)(1)(A); and (4) 1990 base year inventory
requirements of section 182(a)(1).
On June 30, 1995, EPA issued a finding of completeness for the
State's submittal of revisions to the State's I/M program.
On February 5, 1996, EPA issued a finding of completeness for the
State's I/M regulations.
E. Related SIP Approvals
On February 14, 1995, the EPA Administrator signed documents taking
the following approval actions relating to the California ozone SIP:
(1) Final approval of the CARB Antiperspirants and Deodorants
regulations, Consumer Products regulations, Diesel Fuel regulations,
and Reformulated Gasoline regulations, as submitted on November 15,
1994.
(2) Interim final approval of CARB and SCAQMD New-Technology
Measures, submitted as part of the South Coast ozone SIP on November
15, 1994. The measures were approved under the provisions of section
182(e)(5) of the CAA, which authorizes the Administrator to approve
fully and credit as part of an extreme ozone area SIP conceptual
measures dependent upon new control technologies or new control
techniques. The specific measures approved are:
(a) CARB Measure M2, Improved Control Technology for Light-Duty
Vehicles, for adoption in the year 2000 and implementation in 2004-5.
(b) CARB Measure M9, Off-Road Diesel Equipment, 2.5 grams per brake
horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr) NOX standard, for adoption in 2001 and
implementation in 2005.
(c) CARB Measure CP-4, Consumer Products Advanced Technology and
Market Incentives, for adoption in 2005 and implementation in 2009.
(d) CARB Additional Measures, for adoption and implementation by
2009-2010.
(e) SCAQMD Measure ADV-CTS-01, Advance Technology-CTS (Coating
Technologies), for adoption in 2003.
(f) SCAQMD Measure ADV-FUG, Advanced Technology-Fugitives, for
adoption in 2003.
(g) SCAQMD Measure ADV-PRC, Advance Technology-Process Related
Emissions, for adoption in 2003.
(h) SCAQMD Measure ADV-UNSP, Advance Technology-Unspecified,
Stationary Sources, for adoption in 2003.
(i) SCAQMD Measure ADV-CTS-02, Advance Technology-CTS (Coatings
Technologies).
(3) Proposed approval of CARB's mid-term control measures: Measures
M3, Accelerated Ultra-Low Emission Vehicle (ULEV) requirement for
Medium-Duty Vehicles, for adoption in 1997 and implementation in 1998;
M5, Heavy-Duty Vehicle NOX regulations, for adoption in 1997 and
implementation in 2002; M8, Heavy-Duty Gasoline Vehicles lower
emissions standards, for adoption in 1997 and implementation in 1998;
M11, Industrial Equipment, Gas and LPG, for adoption in 1997 and
implementation in 2000; and CP2, Mid-Term Consumer Products, for
adoption in July 1997.
These actions were taken in conjunction with issuance of ozone
Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) for the South Coast, Ventura, and
Sacramento, and a carbon monoxide FIP for the South Coast. Prior to
publication of the FIP and SIP actions in the Federal Register,
legislation was enacted mandating that these FIPs ``shall be rescinded
and shall have no further force and effect'' (Public Law 104-6, Defense
Supplemental Appropriation, H.R. 889, enacted April 10, 1995).
On August 21, 1995, EPA announced the rescission of the FIPs (60 FR
43468), and reissued the final and interim final SIP approvals (60 FR
43379) and the proposed SIP approvals (60 FR 43421) referenced above.
On December 14, 1995 (60 FR 64126), EPA issued the final SIP approval
of the State's mid-term control measures (M3, M5, M8, M11, and CP-2).
II. Review of the State Submittal
On October 7, 1994 the State published a public notice regarding
its adoption hearings, to begin on November 9, 1994. Those hearings
were extended to November 14 and 15, at which time CARB adopted and
submitted the documents listed above (section I.C.).
The local elements of the State plan were the product of plan
development, public review and adoption processes conducted in each
nonattainment area. Following adoption by the local air pollution
control boards, the local plans were submitted to CARB, which amended
the plans and incorporated them into the overall California Ozone SIP.
This document discusses the State's submittal in terms of 3 broad
categories: measures which the State has adopted, or enforceably
committed to adopt (section II.A.); measures assigned by the State to
the Federal government (section II.B.); and local ROP and attainment
plans and measures (section II.C.).
A. State Measures
Statewide elements of the ozone progress and attainment plans
include measures to control mobile sources, consumer products, and
pesticides. These control measures consist of existing adopted rules,
commitments to adopt rules between 1995 and 1997, and long-term
measures scheduled for regulatory adoption in the year 2000 or later.
1. Mobile Sources Measures
a. Introduction. According to data from CARB, mobile sources (on-
road and non-road) account for more than 60 percent of ozone precursor
emissions in California. Therefore, further reductions in mobile source
emissions are essential if attainment of the NAAQS for ozone is to be
achieved.
[[Page 10927]]
CARB has an existing statewide control program for mobile source
emissions, which is expected to achieve significant reductions in
emissions in the ozone nonattainment areas of the State. A key element
of this existing control program is the Low-Emission Vehicle/Clean
Fuels (LEV) program which was originally adopted in 1990 and has been
amended several times since. The LEV program aims to reduce emissions
from future light- and medium-duty vehicles. The program contains
several categories of vehicle emission requirements. Increasingly
stringent fleet average requirements must be met by vehicle
manufacturers beginning in 1994. In addition, the LEV program requires
manufacturers to introduce increasing percentages of zero-emission
vehicles (ZEVs), beginning with two percent in 1998 (Title 13,
California Code of Regulations, Section 1960.1).
Other CARB-adopted mobile source control measures include the
California Diesel Fuel Regulations and the California Reformulated
Gasoline regulations. Both of these fuel regulations were originally
adopted in 1989 and frequently amended. As discussed above, EPA
approved the diesel and reformulated gasoline regulations on August 21,
1995 (60 FR 43379).
Beginning in 1988, CARB also adopted the following important sets
of mobile source regulations:
(1) Emission standards for diesel farm and construction equipment
over 175 hp;
(2) revised evaporative emission test procedures;
(3) Phase 2 on-board diagnostics (OBD) provisions;
(4) Revised emission standards for medium-duty vehicles (MDVs) and
light-heavy-duty vehicles (LHDVs); and
(5) Requirements for utility engines and off-highway recreational
vehicles/engines.
In addition to the adopted measures, the State has committed in the
1994 California Ozone SIP to future adoption of a series of mobile
source measures. The commitments fall chronologically into two
categories with regard to the adoption schedule: mid-term commitments
to be adopted during the 1995-1997 time frame, and long-term measures
scheduled for adoption in the year 2000 or later.
The long-term measures are relied upon only in the South Coast Air
Basin. The South Coast is the only area in the country classified as
extreme for ozone, and is subject to section 182(e)(5) of the Act,
which authorizes EPA to credit conceptual measures using new
technologies or control techniques if they are not needed for meeting
the first 10 years of ROP (see section II.C.7.e.(1).).
The following is a description of the State's mobile source
measures, or M Measures, and EPA's approval actions on the measures.
b. Review of Measures
(i) M1--Accelerated Retirement of Light-Duty Vehicles. The SIP
commits to adopt this measure in 1996 and implement it from 1996 to
2010. Responsibility for implementing this measure may be shared
between CARB and regional air districts. In this measure, CARB commits
to the annual retirement (scrappage or removal) of up to 75,000 older,
high-emitting vehicles in the South Coast Air Basin only, beginning in
1999. A smaller number of vehicles will be retired between 1996 and
1998 in order to gain experience with the program. CARB estimates that
$1,000 per car will be required to cover costs associated with vehicle
purchase and program administration. CARB committed in the SIP to
secure a financing mechanism for the program by the end of 1995, and
legislative efforts to do so have been partially successful. While all
critical near-term revenues should be obtained now, the State also
should begin to pursue long-term support for the program. CARB must
also ensure that implementation and monitoring of the measure prevents
double-counting of reduction credits, since scrappage is also a feature
of the State's I/M program and emission reduction credits from
scrappage may be claimed as emission reduction credits in trading
programs.3
\3\ These concerns were expressed in a letter from David P.
Howekamp, Director, Air & Toxics Division, USEPA Region 9, to James
D. Boyd, Executive Officer, CARB, dated June 15, 1995, on follow-up
issues to a June 9, 1995 meeting between CARB, USEPA, and the
Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While M1 is a commitment to implement an accelerated vehicle
retirement program only in the South Coast, the SIP states that
``implementation of light-duty vehicle retirement programs in other
non-attainment areas will be considered as a means of further reducing
emissions'' (Vol. II, p. B-2).
The emission reductions to be achieved in the South Coast by the
measure are displayed by year in the table below, labeled ``Reductions
from California Mobile Source Measure M1.''
Reductions From California Mobile Source Measure M1 South Coast Air
Basin
[Tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2002 2005 2007 2008 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG........................... 5 8 11 12 13 14
NOX........................... 4 6 9 10 10 11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) M2--Improved Control Technology for Light-Duty Vehicles. CARB
commits to adopt this measure in 2000 and begin implementation in 2004-
2005. This measure will achieve emission reductions from LDVs through
the use of one or more market-based and/or technology-forcing
approaches. Emission reductions may be achieved through: (1) cost-
effective gasoline engine control technology to meet or exceed Ultra
Low-Emission Vehicle (ULEV) standards in the post-2003 time frame; (2)
ZEV sales in excess of the 10% requirement beyond 2003; and/or (3)
availability of advanced hybrid electric vehicles with emissions
substantially lower than ULEVs. The SIP indicates that market forces
(e.g., incentives) and/or emission standards may be used to achieve the
emission reductions. Emission reductions associated with this measure
are relied upon in the South Coast only. The emission reductions to be
achieved in the South Coast by the measure are displayed by year in the
table below, labeled ``Reductions from California Mobile Source Measure
M2.''
[[Page 10928]]
Reductions From California Mobile Source Measure M2 South Coast Air
Basin
[Tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2002 2005 2007 2008 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG........................... 0 0 3 7 6 10
NOX........................... 0 0 5 9 9 15
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 21, 1995, EPA approved this measure under the provisions
of section 182(e)(5) of the Act.
(iii) M3--Accelerated Ultra-Low Emission Vehicle (ULEV) Requirement
for Medium-Duty Vehicles (MDVs). CARB commits in the SIP to adopt
regulations for this measure in 1997, with implementation occurring
from 1998 to 2002. This measure commits to an increase in the fraction
of MDV ULEVs from 10 percent of sales of new MDVs in the 1998 model
year to 100 percent in the 2002 and later model years. CARB believes
that the emission reductions associated with this measure can be
achieved by applying advancements in LDV emission control technologies
to the medium-duty fleet. This measure offers some flexibility by
allowing other mixes of vehicles and technologies that generate
equivalent emission reductions. The emission reductions to be achieved
by the measure are displayed by nonattainment area and milestone/
attainment year in the table below, labeled ``Reductions from
California Mobile Source Measure M3.''
Reductions From California Mobile Source Measure M3
[Tons per day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2002 2005 2007 2008 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So. Coast......................................... 0 1 1 10 2 21 ...... ...... 2 27 3 33
SE Desert......................................... 0 0.1 0.1 1.4 0.2 3.5 0.3 4.1
Ventura........................................... 0 0 0 0.5 0.1 1.0
Sacramento........................................ 0 0.2 0 1.7 0.4 3.9
S. Joaquin........................................ 0 0.4
S. Diego.......................................... 0.9 6.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA proposed to approve M3 on August 21, 1995, and finalized
approval on December 14, 1995 (60 FR 64126).
(iv) M4--Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDV); Early Introduction of
2.0 g/bhp-hr NOX engines. The SIP commits to implementation of
this measure beginning in 1996. CARB and the Districts share
responsibility for this measure. M4 is a commitment to increase the use
of existing low-emission engines among on-road HDDVs through locally
implemented demand-side programs and market incentives. This program is
intended to result in a 5% sales penetration of 2.0 g/bhp-hr NOX
engines through the period 1996-1999, and a 10% sales penetration of
these engines between 2000 and 2002. Other combinations of penetrations
and emission levels that provide equivalent emission reductions could
be implemented. The emission reductions to be achieved in the South
Coast by the measure are displayed by year in the table below, labeled
``Reductions from California Mobile Source Measure M4.''
Reductions From California Mobile Source Measure M4 (in South Coast Air
Basin in Tons per Day of NOX)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2002 2005 2008 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.17......... 3.90 2.93 2.34 1.36
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(v) M5--Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles (HDDVs); Additional NOX
Reductions. The SIP commits to adopt this measure in 1997 and begin
implementation in 2002. CARB commits to achieve emission reductions
through adoption of a 2.0 g/bhp-hr NOX emissions standard for new
HDDV engines sold in California beginning in 2002, or by implementation
of alternative measures which achieve equivalent or greater reductions.
Alternatives under consideration include expanded introduction of
alternative-fueled and low-emission HDDV engines through demand-side
programs and incentives, retrofit of aerodynamic devices, reduced
idling, and speed reduction. The emission reductions to be achieved by
the measure are displayed by nonattainment area and milestone/
attainment year in the table below, labeled ``Reductions from
California Mobile Source Measure M5.''
Reductions from California Mobile Source Measure M5
[Tons per day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2002 2005 2007 2008 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So. Coast......................................... 0 0 0.2 1.7 1.8 22.0 ...... ...... 3.1 37.6 4.8 56.2
SE Desert......................................... 0 0 0 0.2 0.2 3.9 0.4 5.1
Ventura........................................... 0 0 0 0.1 0.1 1.0
Sacramento........................................ 0 0 0 0.2 0.2 2.7
S. Joaquin........................................ 0 0
S. Diego.......................................... 0.7 8.3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 10929]]
This measure is designed to achieve emission reductions prior to
the introduction of a potential national 2.0 g/bhp-hr NOX standard
in 2004. The 1994 California Ozone SIP (``Federal Measure'' M6) assigns
to EPA responsibility for adopting such a national standard (see
discussion in section II.B.).
Significant progress toward fulfilling the M5 and M6 commitments
has been made by CARB, EPA, and truck and engine manufacturers. On
March 30, 1995, EPA signed a Memorandum of Understanding with CARB to
undertake a joint effort to develop a national program for controlling
NOX, PM, and HC emissions from onroad and nonroad heavy-duty
engines. This joint effort will involve sharing technology development
and information, resources, and expertise.
Further, on July 11, 1995, CARB, EPA, and members of the Engine
Manufacturers Association signed a Statement of Principles (SOP)
detailing their agreement on future NOX, HC, and PM standards for
heavy-duty engines. The goal of the SOP is to reduce NOX emissions
from onroad HDEs to approximately 2 g/bhp-hr beginning in 2004. This
will be achieved by giving manufacturers the flexibility to choose
between two options: (1) A combined non-methane hydrocarbon (NMHC) plus
NOX standard of 2.4 g/bhp-hr and (2) a combined NMHC plus NOX
standard of 2.5 g/bhp-hr together with a NMHC cap of .5 g/bhp-hr.
Signatories will work to achieve low emissions throughout the life of
the engine. EPA expects that this combined standard will result in
NOX reductions comparable to those achieved with a 2 g/bhp-hr
standard and significant reductions in HC emissions.
With respect to California standards, the SOP included the
following provision: ``Both EPA and California recognize the benefits
of harmonizing state and federal regulations. California confirms its
intent to notice a public hearing to consider actions to harmonize its
regulations * * * with the federal regulations adopted under this SOP,
provided such action would not compromise California's obligations to
comply with state and federal law including the SIP.''
On August 31, 1995, EPA published the SOP in an Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM). The ANPRM invited public comment on
national controls for onroad heavy-duty engines consistent with the
SOP, and also described EPA's plans to work cooperatively with engine
and equipment manufacturers to consider additional reductions from
nonroad heavy-duty engines (see 60 FR 45580-45604).
EPA proposed to approve M5 on August 21, 1995, and finalized
approval on December 14, 1995 (60 FR 64126).
(vi) M7--Accelerated Retirement of Heavy-Duty Vehicles. CARB
commits to adopt this measure in 1996 and begin implementation in the
same year. This measure involves the annual retirement (scrapping or
removal) of about 1600 of the oldest, high emitting trucks in the South
Coast Air Basin, beginning in 1999. A smaller number of trucks would be
scrapped in 1996 to 1998 in order to gain experience with the program
and determine the impacts on the used truck market. Incentives are
expected to be provided to operators of older trucks in return for
retirement and purchase of a newer, lower-emitting model. The
incentives may take the form of guaranteed low interest loans,
subsidies, or both. The SIP commits to secure a financing mechanism for
this measure by the end of 1995. While the SIP commits only to
implement this measure in the South Coast, the State indicates that
consideration is being given to establishing a truck retirement program
in Sacramento and other nonattainment areas. The emission reductions to
be achieved in the South Coast by the measure are displayed by year in
the table below, labeled ``Reductions from California Mobile Source
Measure M7.''
Reductions From California Mobile Source Measure M7 South Coast Air
Basin
[Tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2002 2005 2007 2008 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG........................... 0 1 1 1 1 1
NOX........................... 3 6 7 8 9 10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(vii) M8--Heavy-Duty Gasoline Vehicles (HDGVs), Lower Emission
Standards. The SIP commits to adoption of this measure by 1997 and
implementation beginning in 1998. This measure generates emission
reductions through the adoption of a LEV/ULEV program for HDGV engines
to obtain 50% reductions of NOX and ROG emissions through the
application of 3-way catalyst technology. The emission reductions to be
achieved by the measure are displayed by nonattainment area and
milestone/attainment year in the table below, labeled ``Reductions from
California Mobile Source Measure M8.''
Reductions From California Mobile Source Measure M8
[Tons per day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2002 2005 2007 2008 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So. Coast......................................... 0 0 0 0.8 0.1 1.8 ...... ...... 0.2 2.3 0.3 3.0
SE Desert......................................... 0 0 0 0.1 0 0.3 0 0.4
Ventura........................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0.1
Sacramento........................................ 0 0 0 0.2 0 0.4
S. Joaquin........................................ 0 0
S. Diego.......................................... 0.1 0.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 10930]]
EPA proposed to approve M8 on August 21, 1995, and finalized
approval on December 14, 1995 (60 FR 64126).
(viii) M9--Off-road Diesel Equipment; 2.5 g/bhp-hr NoX
Standard, California. CARB commits to adopt this measure in 2001 and
begin implementation in 2005. The measure requires CARB to adopt a 2.5
g/bhp-hr NOX standard effective in the 2005 model year for new
off-road industrial equipment diesel engines not primarily used in
construction and farm equipment. California is preempted from adopting
or enforcing any standard or other requirement relating to the control
of emissions from new construction and farm equipment or vehicles which
are smaller than 175 hp (see section 209(e) of the Act). The SIP
anticipates that this emissions standard can be achieved through the
transfer of cost-effective on-road diesel engine control technology to
new off-road engines. These control technologies include improved
engine design (especially in fuel/air management and delivery), exhaust
gas recirculation, and exhaust gas aftertreatment. The technology used
to meet the 2.5 g/bhp-hr NOX standard will also further reduce ROG
emissions from post-2005 new engines. The SIP only relies on this
measure in the South Coast. The emission reductions to be achieved in
the South Coast are displayed by year in the table below, labeled
``Reductions from California Mobile Source Measure M9.''
Reductions From California Mobile Source Measure M9 South Coast Air
Basin
[Tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2002 2005 2007 2008 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG........................... 0 0 0 4 1 3
NOX........................... 0 0 4 35 14 34
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 21, 1995, EPA approved M9 under the provisions of section
182(e)(5).
(ix) M11--Industrial Equipment; Gas and LPG-California; 3-way
catalyst technology. CARB commits to adopt this measure in 1997 and
implement it beginning in 2000. The measure requires CARB to adopt
emission standards for new gas and liquid petroleum gas (LPG) engines
25 to 175 horsepower that are not primarily used in construction or
farm equipment. As noted above, California is preempted from regulating
new farm and construction equipment smaller than 175 hp). The standards
will be phased-in 2000 and will be based on the use of closed-loop 3-
way catalyst systems. The catalyst systems are expected to reduce ROG
emissions by 75% and NOX by at least 50%.
Reductions From California Mobile Source Measure M11 South Coast Air
Basin
[Tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2002 2005 2007 2008 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG........................... 0 4 9 [ ] 15 23
NOX........................... 0 2 4 [ ] 8 12
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA proposed to approve M11 on August 21, 1995, and finalized
approval on December 14, 1995 (60 FR 64126).
(x) Additional New Control Technologies. In addition to the new
control technologies described above in measures M2 and M9, CARB has
committed to the implementation of additional innovative measures to
achieve the emission reductions needed in the South Coast to reach
attainment by 2010. CARB anticipates that these additional measures
will include a combination of market-based and technology-based
measures. CARB has committed to adoption of these measures no later
than 2006 to ensure the needed emissions reductions are achieved by
2009. Table 5 (on page I-21) of Volume II of the 1994 California Ozone
SIP lists the following strategies that may be pursued to meet the
emission reduction targets:
A. Possible New Control Technologies
Introduction in fleets of ultra-low emitting heavy-duty
trucks, post-2003
B. Possible Market-Incentive Measures
Incentives to purchase or produce ``cleaner'' technology/
vehicles
Incentives to encourage retrofits of emission control
technology
Incentives for alternative fuel conversions
Incentives to promote the development of alternative fuel
infrastructure
Revise tax rate structure to promote investment in low-
emission technology
Provide opportunity for low-interest loans
Preferred state vendor/contract bid status
Company emission averages
Air basin emission averages
Mobile source emission reduction credit/trading programs
C. Possible Operational Measures Applicable to Heavy-Duty Vehicles
Longer combination vehicles on selected routes
Increased gross vehicle weight
Better enforcement of the 55 mile-per-hour speed limit
Reduced idling time
Reexamine trailer package concept for local deliveries
Aerodynamic devices for all power units and trailers
Other (intermodal transportation, advanced traffic
control/tracking technology, alternative fuel for existing fork lifts)
The SIP states that this list of new control technologies is not
exhaustive and indicates that other new control technologies and
techniques are possible and will be considered as potential sources of
emission reductions. Additional control options mentioned in the SIP
include: pricing to affect the amount of travel and related emissions
(such as congestion pricing or an emission index based on per mile
emissions and VMT); retrofit technologies which reduce emissions;
additional use of alternative fuels; and episodic controls such as
speed reduction and idling curtailment. CARB has committed to further
define and quantify these measures and to adopt them by 2006 for
implementation by
[[Page 10931]]
2009. On August 21, 1995, EPA approved CARB's additional new control
technologies measure under the provisions of section 182(e)(5).
c. EPA Action. As described in section I.D. above, EPA has already
approved or proposed to approve many of the State's M Measure
commitments. On August 21, 1995, EPA approved the CARB new-technology
measures M2, M9, and Additional New Technology Measures (described
above), and assigned credit in the South Coast ozone attainment
demonstration to the measures. At the same time, EPA proposed approval
of the State's control measure commitments for M3, M5, M8, and M11. EPA
issued finalized approval of the measures on December 14, 1995 (60 FR
64126). Because EPA was at that time not acting on the State's ROP and
attainment demonstrations, EPA's approval of the State's commitments
did not include assignment of specific emission reduction credits
associated with the measures. As discussed below in section II.C., EPA
is here proposing to approve the ROP and attainment demonstrations of
California ozone nonattainment area plans, which rely, in part, on the
M Measure commitments. Therefore, EPA now proposes to assign credit to
the State's enforceable commitments to achieve the specific emission
reductions associated with M3, M5, M8, and M11, and displayed in the
tables above for each measure.
EPA is also proposing to approve, under sections 110(a)(3) and
301(a) of the Act, and assign credit to measures M1, M4, and M7 as part
of the ROP and attainment demonstrations for appropriate nonattainment
areas, as shown in the tables above. EPA believes that CARB is making
significant progress toward the development and adoption of regulations
to fulfill the M measure commitments. In several cases, regulations
have already been adopted or are expected to be adopted prior to EPA's
final action on the ozone SIPs. EPA therefore proposes to approve and
credit CARB's enforceable commitments to the M measures under sections
110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, as part of the demonstrations of ROP
and attainment in the California ozone nonattainment areas.
2. I/M
a. Review of Program. CARB submitted its motor vehicle inspection
and maintenance (I/M) program, known as the Smog Check program, as a
revision to its SIP on June 30, 1995. The submittal was made to fulfill
EPA's requirements for basic and enhanced I/M programs as set forth in
40 CFR Part 51, Subpart S. EPA found the submittal complete on June 30,
1995. A supplemental revision to the SIP was submitted by the State on
January 22, 1996 and found complete on February 5, 1996. Section 348 of
the National Highway System Designation Act (Public Law 104-59),
hereafter referred to as the Highway Act, which was enacted on November
28, 1995, modified EPA's I/M regulation. In this notice EPA is
proposing approval of California's basic program as meeting the
requirements of 40 CFR, Part 51, Subpart S as amended (see 60 FR 48029,
September 18, 1995) and approval of California's enhanced I/M program
as meeting the requirements of 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart S, as amended
and section 348(c) of the Highway Act.
The table labeled ``California I/M Program Coverage by County''
shows for every county in the State whether the I/M program is
implemented as enhanced or basic, or is required only upon change of
ownership. For many counties, the type of I/M program in effect varies
depending upon air quality designations and whether the area is
urbanized. The State has established these I/M program boundaries
within counties based upon ZIP code. The reader may contact the Bureau
of Automotive Repair (BAR) to obtain specific program applicability
information by ZIP code.
California I/M Program Coverage by County
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Change of
County Enhanced Basic ownership
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alameda...................................................... ............... X ...............
Alpine....................................................... ............... ............... X
Amador....................................................... ............... ............... X
Butte........................................................ ............... X ...............
Calaveras.................................................... ............... ............... X
Colusa....................................................... ............... X ...............
Contra Costa................................................. ............... X ...............
Del Norte.................................................... ............... ............... X
El Dorado.................................................... ............... X X
Fresno....................................................... X X ...............
Glenn........................................................ ............... X ...............
Humboldt..................................................... ............... ............... X
Imperial..................................................... ............... ............... X
Inyo......................................................... ............... ............... X
Kern......................................................... X X ...............
Kings........................................................ ............... X ...............
Lake......................................................... ............... ............... X
Lassen....................................................... ............... ............... X
Los Angeles.................................................. X ............... ...............
Madera....................................................... ............... X ...............
Marin........................................................ ............... X ...............
Mariposa..................................................... ............... ............... X
Mendocino.................................................... ............... ............... X
Merced....................................................... ............... X ...............
Modoc........................................................ ............... ............... X
Mono......................................................... ............... ............... X
Monterey..................................................... ............... X ...............
Napa......................................................... ............... X ...............
Nevada....................................................... ............... X ...............
Orange....................................................... X ............... ...............
Placer....................................................... X X X
Plumas....................................................... ............... ............... X
[[Page 10932]]
Riverside.................................................... X X X
Sacramento................................................... X X ...............
San Benito................................................... ............... X ...............
San Bernardino............................................... X X X
San Diego.................................................... X X X
San Francisco................................................ ............... X ...............
San Joaquin.................................................. X X ...............
San Luis Obispo.............................................. ............... X ...............
San Mateo.................................................... ............... X ...............
Santa Barbara................................................ ............... X ...............
Santa Clara.................................................. ............... X ...............
Santa Cruz................................................... ............... X ...............
Shasta....................................................... ............... X ...............
Sierra....................................................... ............... ............... X
Siskiyou..................................................... ............... ............... X
Solano....................................................... X X ...............
Sonoma....................................................... ............... X X
Stanislaus................................................... X X ...............
Sutter....................................................... ............... X ...............
Tehama....................................................... ............... X ...............
Trinity...................................................... ............... ............... X
Tulare....................................................... ............... X ...............
Tuolumne..................................................... ............... ............... X
Ventura...................................................... X X ...............
Yolo......................................................... X X ...............
Yuba......................................................... ............... X ...............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SIP revision submitted to EPA by CARB includes the laws and
regulations relating to California's I/M program which is comprised of
pertinent sections of the California Business and Profession Code, the
Civil Code, the Health and Safety Code, the Penal Code, the Revenue and
Taxation Code, the Welfare and Institutions Code, the Vehicle Code, and
the Code of Regulations. Included in the supplemental submittal are
final regulations for the mandatory exhaust emissions inspection
standards and test procedures for the enhanced program and for the
licensing of I/M stations and technicians which became legally
effective on December 1, 1995 and December 5, 1995, respectively. Other
documents in the submittal are: the Request for Conceptual Design for
Test-only Networks and Referee Services; the BAR-90 Test Analyzer
System Specifications (June 1995); the California Smog Check Inspection
Manual; the Quality Assurance Operations Manual, Chapter 27 of the
Department of Motor Vehicles Manual of Registration Procedures; the
Smog Check Diagnostic and Repair Manual; the Request for proposal for
On-Road Emissions Measurement Systems Services, and the Radian Report
entitled ``Evaluation of the California Pilot Inspection/Maintenance
(I/M) Program.''
EPA's I/M regulation establishes minimum performance standards for
basic and enhanced I/M programs as well as requirements for the
following: network type and program evaluation; adequate tools and
resources; test frequency and convenience; vehicle coverage; test
procedures and standards; test equipment; quality control; waivers and
compliance via diagnostic inspection; motorist compliance enforcement
program oversight; quality assurance; enforcement against contractors,
stations and inspectors; data collection; data analysis and reporting;
inspector training and licensing or certification; public information
and consumer protection; improving repair effectiveness; compliance
with recall notices; on-road testing; SIP revisions; and implementation
deadlines. The performance standard for basic I/M programs remains the
same as it has been since initial I/M policy was established in 1978,
pursuant to the 1977 amendments to the Clean Air Act. The high
performance standard for enhanced I/M programs is based on high-
technology loaded mode exhaust testing for HC, CO, and NOX and
testing of the integrity and performance of the evaporative control
system.
California's basic program is a test-and-repair program utilizing
two-speed idle testing. California's enhanced program is a hybrid
program in which 15% of the dirtiest vehicles, based upon high-emitter
profile and remote sensing results as well as other factors, are
targetted for test-only inspection. All vehicles in the enhanced areas
will be subject to loaded mode testing. More stringent requirements
apply to technicians licensed in the enhanced areas. The two programs
are essentially the same in all other respects, excepting that
frequency of enforcement related activities such as remote sensing will
be much greater in the enhanced areas. (A more detailed discussion of
how the elements of California's I/M programs address the requirements
of EPA's I/M regulations is contained in the TSD for this notice.) The
SIP submittal includes modeling which demonstrates that the program
design for California's basic program will meet EPA's performance
standard for basic programs. EPA is, therefore, proposing to approve
this revision to California's SIP for the basic I/M program.
The Highway Act prohibits the Administrator from disapproving or
applying an automatic discount of emission reduction credits to a SIP
revision because the I/M program is decentralized or a test-and-repair
program. The Highway Act directs the Administrator to propose approval
of the program for the full credit proposed by the state if the
proposed credits reflect good faith estimates by the state and the
revision is otherwise in compliance with the Clean Air Act. The
approval remains effective for up to 18 months after the date of final
rulemaking. After the 18-month period,
[[Page 10933]]
permanent approval of the SIP revision based on the credits proposed by
the state shall be granted if the data collected on the operation of
the program demonstrates that the credits are appropriate and the
program is otherwise in compliance with the Act.
EPA issued guidance regarding approval of I/M plans under the
Highway Act on December 12, 1995. EPA believes that at least six months
of program operation are needed in order to evaluate the performance of
the program. Thus programs must start no later than 12 months after EPA
takes final rulemaking action. EPA proposes that if the State fails to
start its program on this schedule, the approval granted under the
provisions of the Highway Act will convert to a disapproval after a
finding letter is sent to the state. As mentioned above, the Highway
Act specifies that EPA grant approval if good faith estimates of
credits are made. The Conference Report states that good faith
estimates may be based on previous I/M program performance, remote
sensing programs, or other evidence relevant to effectiveness of I/M
programs. EPA has further suggested that good faith estimates could be
based on innovative program designs. In order to evaluate the program
EPA believes that a continuous sample collection technique should
provide sufficient data to determine program effectiveness. Samples may
be taken in a variety of ways including roadside pullovers and
randomized call-in programs. EPA plans to issue detailed guidance on
data collection and analysis after consultation with states and other
experts. At the end of the 18-month approval period, EPA will take
action to make the approval of the I/M program permanent, if the
program evaluation data collected by the state demonstrates that the I/
M program is achieving the emission reduction credits claimed in the
SIP.
According to the schedule submitted by California test-only
inspection began in Sacramento in August 1995. The program is expected
to be fully operational in Fresno, Bakersfield and San Diego by the
fall of 1996, and in the South Coast areas in early 1997. California
has made a good faith estimate that its hybrid enhanced I/M program
will meet EPA's high performance standard based on the California Pilot
Program and innovative program features including an electronic
transmission program, a high visibility remote sensing program, and
stringent licensing and training requirements.
The pilot program conducted as part of the Memorandum of Agreement
between EPA and California provided data on the effectiveness of
targetting high emitting vehicles through the use of the high-emitter
profile (HEP) and remote sensing combined with the HEP, and the use of
Acceleration Simulation Mode (ASM) testing. The vehicles required to go
to test-only facilities for inspection will be comprised of likely
high-emitters as identified through use of the HEP and remote sensing,
previously identified high emitters which must undergo annual testing
for 2 to 5 years, high emitters identified by test-and-repair stations,
high mileage fleet vehicles, vehicles for hire, a 2% random sample, and
motorists voluntarily choosing to go to test-only stations.
California's program includes an electronic transmission program. A
central Vehicle Information Database will be created and an electronic
network enabling the test analyzer system units to connect
automatically to the database will be established. The central database
will be able to restrict the issuance of certificates under certain
circumstances, e.g., if a test-only inspection is required, when the
vehicle is identified as a high emitter, or when an enhanced test is
required. The database will also furnish a real-time communications
link to vehicle emissions data which will provide information to BAR
enforcement teams to help immediately identify illicit activity. The
database will also be used to develop a trigger program to identify
shops that are performing improper inspections and to track the
location and performance of licensed smog check technicians.
The State will also be phasing in a high-visibility remote sensing
program. California plans to identify as least 200,000 high emitting
vehicles annually in the enhanced program areas. Data collected from
the program will be use as a target parameter for the enforcement
program. The program will also serve as a visible reminder to both
motorists and test-and-repair stations that improper inspections and/or
program avoidance may be detected. Stringent licensing and training
requirements are being required for test-and-repair stations and repair
technicians, respectively.
California has committed to performing quarterly evaluations of its
program to determine if EPA's performance standard is being met and the
credits taken for the program are being achieved. California plans to
adjust the number of vehicles sent to test-only stations based on these
evaluations. EPA will work with California to further define
California's data collection protocols and analysis as EPA's guidance
on program evaluation is developed.
b. Emissions Reductions. The emission reductions to be achieved by
the measure are displayed by nonattainment area and milestone/
attainment year in the table below, labeled ``Reductions from
California I/M Program.''
Reductions From California Enhanced I/M Program
[Tons per pay]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2002 2005 2007 2008 2010
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So. Coast............................................. 34.8 32.4 40.3 35.5 32.5 33.0 ...... ...... 30.2 34.8 26.2 31.1
SE Desert............................................. 2.4 2.3 3.0 2.6 2.9 2.8 2.6 2.8
Ventura............................................... 1.6 1.9 1.8 2.0 1.4 1.9
Sacramento............................................ 5.4 5.7 6.3 6.5 5.1 6.4
S. Joaquin............................................ 4.3 4.9
S. Diego.............................................. 0 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. EPA Action. EPA is proposing to approve the California I/M
regulations submitted on January 22, 1996, under sections 110(k)(3) and
301(a) of the Act as strengthening the SIP and contributing specific
emission reductions toward the progress, attainment, and maintenance
requirements of the Act.
[[Page 10934]]
EPA is also proposing to approve under sections 110(k)(3) and
301(a) of the Act the California I/M program submitted on June 30,
1995, and the I/M regulations submitted on January 22, 1996, as meeting
the requirements of section 182(b)(4) of the Act for basic I/M in
applicable areas of the State classified as moderate for ozone.
Finally, under section 348(c) of the Highway Act, EPA is proposing
to grant approval for a period of 18 months to the California I/M
submittals of June 30, 1995, and January 22, 1996, as meeting the
requirements of section 182(c)(3) of the CAA for enhanced I/M in
applicable areas of the State classified as serious and above for
ozone. Section 348(c)(3) of the Highway Act provides that EPA will take
regulatory action to make the approval permanent if, at the expiration
of the 18-month period or at an earlier time, the data collected on the
operation of the State program demonstrates that ``the credits are
appropriate and the revision is otherwise in compliance with the Clean
Air Act.''
If the State fails to start its program within 12 months of
approval, EPA proposes to have the approval convert to a disapproval
after a finding letter is sent to the State. If the required State
demonstration is not completed within 18 months or does not show that
the credits are appropriate and that the program is otherwise in
compliance with the CAA, EPA will take regulatory action to disapprove
the program for purposes of compliance with the enhanced I/M
requirements of section 182(c)(3). In that event, the SIP will no
longer meet the specific requirements of the Act relating to enhanced
I/M, but the State's regulations will continue in the SIP as
contributing to progress, attainment, and maintenance of the NAAQS.
3. Consumer Products
a. Introduction. ``Consumer products'' are a variety of products
generally purchased from a retail establishment for household use by
the end user. These products include: cleaning products, insecticides,
toiletries, aerosol paints (non-architectural paints are not considered
consumer products under California environmental law), adhesives, air
fresheners, cooking sprays, disinfectants, and other common household
articles that contain volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and are
considered ``consumption goods''. The term does not refer to consumer
electronics, furniture, appliances, cooking or serving utensils,
furnishings, or other items that are considered ``durable goods'', nor
does the term refer to food items (except cooking sprays), beverages,
or tobacco products.
In its 1994 ozone SIP submittal, CARB presents a discussion of the
State's current and anticipated measures for controlling the VOC
content of consumer products, and sets forth the claimed emissions
reductions. CARB classifies the emissions reductions resulting from
regulations on consumer products regulations into 3 main categories:
near-term, mid-term, and long-term with regard to date of promulgation
and implementation.
CARB's near-term measures are comprised of rules adopted prior to
May 1995. The existing consumer products regulations, antiperspirant
and deodorant regulations, and the 1996 and 1999 VOC content standards
of the recently adopted aerosol paints rule comprise the near-term
measures.
CARB's mid-term measures consist of anticipated regulations from
categories of consumer products for which regulations had not yet been
adopted at the time of the submittal. These reductions are expected to
be adopted by July 1, 1997 and implemented by the year 2005, and will
cover 150 consumer product categories which are currently not regulated
by the State of California. These mid-term measures are needed for
attainment demonstrations in the Sacramento Metropolitan and Ventura
County air basins. In the SIP, CARB asserts that these measures, like
the near-term measures, rely on available technology.
CARB has committed to obtaining further reductions (as compared to
the near- and mid-term measures) from consumer products after 2000.
These reductions would not rely on available technology, but would
currently be considered technology forcing. These long-term measures
would be enforced on a statewide basis, but only the South Coast plan
relies on the emissions reductions to demonstrate attainment.
CARB has further categorized their emission reduction commitments
into 4 classifications, or ``measures'': CP-1, CP-2, CP-3, and CP-4.
These measures are either adopted rules or commitments to adopt rules
to reduce VOC emissions from consumer products and aerosol paints. A
description of each of these measures follows.
b. Adopted Consumer Products Rules
i. Measure CP-1. Measure CP-1 is comprised of two rules, both
adopted prior to November 1994, that are designed to control VOC
emissions from commercial products. One rule controls VOC emissions
from antiperspirants and deodorants; the other rule controls emissions
from household products, such as air fresheners, shaving cream, and
hairsprays. Both rules were submitted to EPA on November 15, 1994. EPA
approved these rules into the SIP on August 21, 1995 (see 60 FR 43379).
ii. Measure CP-3 (Aerosol Paints). Measure CP-3 is a near term
commitment to adopt and implement VOC content standards in aerosol
paints. Regulations meeting these commitments were adopted in mid-1995.
These regulations limit the VOC content of aerosol paints by
establishing sets of VOC content standards for various coating types.
These standards establish the maximum percentage of VOC by weight
allowed in the various types of aerosol coatings. The coating standards
are divided into two phases. In the first phase, which is due to take
effect January 1, 1996, aerosol coatings' VOC content will have limits
that range from 60 percent to 95 percent, depending on the coating.
In the second phase, currently due to take effect December 31,
1999, aerosol coatings' VOC content limits will range from 30 percent
to 80 percent, depending on the type of coating. Before the second
phase of content limits can be implemented, CARB must conduct a public
hearing to determine if the limits are commercially and technologically
feasible. If the Board determines that they are not feasible, the
implementation of some or all of the limits may be postponed for up to
5 years. However, CARB may not submit the 1999 limits to EPA as a SIP
revision until after the Board has determined that they are
technologically and commercially feasible, and is prohibited from doing
so by section 41712(f)(3) of the California Health and Safety Code.
EPA approval action on both phases of the aerosol paint rules will
be taken in separate rulemakings following SIP submittal of the rules.
c. Mid-Term Committal Measure CP-2. Measure CP-2 is a mid-term
commitment to adopt additional regulations prior to 1997 to further
reduce VOC emissions from household consumer products. These reductions
are anticipated to result from the further regulation of new categories
of consumer products through technology that is currently feasible and
commercially viable. EPA proposed to approve CP-2 on August 21, 1995,
and finalized approval on December 14, 1995 (60 FR 64126).
d. Long-Term Committal Measure CP-4. Measure CP-4 is a long-term
measure to further reduce emissions after measures CP-1, CP-2, and CP-3
are implemented. The control strategies committed to in CP-4 depend on
[[Page 10935]]
advancement of manufacturing technology for consumer products and
aerosols. On August 21, 1995, EPA approved CARB's Measure CP-4 as
meeting the requirements of section 182(e)(5).
e. Alternative Compliance Plans (ACPs). In order to provide
industry with flexibility in meeting the VOC content limits for aerosol
paints, CARB has adopted regulations that will allow manufacturers to
meet the VOC standards on an average basis. The regulations, CARB's
Alternate Control Plan (ACP) for consumer products and aerosol
coatings, require that manufacturers carefully track sales and VOC
content of all products being averaged together in order to determine
total VOC emissions from their products and compliance with the rule.
EPA will act on the ACP regulations following submittal by the State.
f. Emission Reductions. The following table describes the ROG
emission reductions in terms of tons per day, as identified in the SIP
submittal. Credits for near-term consumer products (CP-1) are not
included, since they were presumed in baseline emissions projections as
adopted regulations. The ROP and attainment demonstrations for San
Diego, San Joaquin Valley or Santa Barbara do not rely on reductions
from the consumer products measures, although real reductions will
occur in those areas. Credits for consumer products and aerosol paints
(near-term and long-term) are combined. Credit for CP-4 is claimed only
for South Coast.
Reductions From California Consumer Products and Aerosol Paint Program
[Reductions beyond those achieved by CP-1] [tons per day of ROG]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2002 2005 2007 2008 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------
South Coast................... 0 8 39.2 ..... 42.2 89.2
SE Desert..................... 0 0.4 3.5 4.0
Ventura....................... 0 0.4 2.2
Sacramento.................... 0 1.1 5.6
San Joaquin................... 0
San Diego..................... 16.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
g. EPA Action. As discussed above, EPA has already fully approved
all of the State's consumer products rules and committal measures with
the exception of CP-3 (Aerosol Paints). EPA is now proposing to approve
CP-3 under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, and assign credit
to this measure, as well as to the previously approved consumer
products measures, as part of the ROP and attainment demonstrations for
appropriate nonattainment areas. EPA will take regulatory action on the
recently adopted ACP and Aerosol Paints regulations themselves in
separate rulemakings.
4. Pesticides
a. Review of Measure. California's 1994 SIP submittal includes a
commitment to reduce VOC emissions from the application of agricultural
and structural pesticides. The submittal describes relevant authority
in Section 6220 of Title 3 of the California Code of Regulations that
has been granted to the California Department of Pesticide Regulation
(DPR). However, since CARB has overall responsibility for developing
the SIP, California's pesticide commitment is described in a letter
from DPR to CARB,4 which CARB then submitted to EPA with the
balance of the 1994 SIP. In May 1995, California used a similar
mechanism to clarify technical details of the pesticide
commitment.5 This clarification is considered part of California's
SIP.
\4\ James Wells (DPR) to James Boyd (CARB), dated November 15,
1994.
\5\ May 9, 1995 letter from Wells to Boyd under a May 11, 1995
cover letter from Boyd to Felicia Marcus (EPA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Emission Reductions. As described in the SIP, California has
committed to adopt and submit to U.S. EPA by June 15, 1997, any
regulations necessary to reduce VOC emissions from agricultural and
commercial structural pesticides by specific percentages of the 1990
base year emissions,6 by specific years, and in specific
nonattainment areas as listed in the table labeled, ``Reductions from
1990 Pesticide Emissions Baselines.'' The table labeled ``Reductions
from Pesticides Measure'' shows reductions counted toward the ROP
milestones and attainment in each area.
\6\ In a March 31, 1995 letter from Wells to David Howekamp
(EPA), California clarified its commitment to limit future VOC
emissions from pesticides to the target percentages of the 1990 base
year emissions, regardless of future growth in emissions that might
otherwise occur. ``Therefore, the proposed 20 percent reduction goal
could be considered to be greater than 20 percent if one includes
growth in pesticidal VOC emissions.'' (March 31 letter, page 2.)
Reductions From 1990 Pesticide Emissions Baselines
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ozone nonattainment area 1996 (percent) 1999 (percent) 2002 (percent) 2005 (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sacramento Metro................................ 8 12 16 20
San Joaquin Valley.............................. 8 12 16 20
South Coast..................................... 8 12 16 20
Southeast Desert................................ 8 12 16 20
Ventura......................................... 8 12 16 20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reductions From Pesticides Measure
[Tons per day of ROG]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2002 2005 2007 2008 2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
South Coast............................................. 1.5 1.6 1.3 ....... 1.6 1.7
Southeast Desert........................................ 0 0 1.2 1.5 ....... .......
[[Page 10936]]
Ventura................................................. 0 0 2.4 ....... ....... .......
Sacramento.............................................. 0 0 2.7 ....... ....... .......
San Joaquin............................................. 13 ........ ....... ....... ....... .......
San Diego............................................... 0.2 ........ ....... ....... ....... .......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The pesticide component of California's SIP also describes
education and outreach programs intended to achieve these emission
reductions voluntarily. EPA strongly encourages these programs, and
hopes to work with DPR and the affected industries to make them
successful. In the event, however, that additional control strategies
are needed, California's commitment to adopt and submit any necessary
pesticide regulations is sufficient to ensure those emission reductions
described in the table labeled, ``Reductions from 1990 Pesticide
Emissions Baselines.'' 7
\7\ Note that for purposes of ROP and attainment demonstrations
in the SIPs, California has not claimed emission reduction credit
for the 8% pesticide emission reductions planned for 1996.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. EPA Action. EPA is proposing to approve the Pesticides measure
under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, and assign credit to
the measure as part of the ROP and attainment demonstrations for
appropriate nonattainment areas. EPA will take regulatory action on the
State's Pesticides regulations, if any regulations are required and are
submitted, in separate rulemakings.
B. Federal Assignments
1. State Approach
In addition to, and in association with, the State's mobile source
control measures, the 1994 California Ozone SIP sets forth a group of 7
specific mobile source control measures that the State would not be
responsible for adopting and implementing.
These new ``Federal assignments'' and the adoption and
implementation dates in the California SIP are as follows:
M6--Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles: a national standard of 2.0 g/bhp-
hr, to be adopted in 1997 and implemented in 2004. M10--Off-Road Diesel
Equipment: a national standard of 2.5 g/bhp-hr, to be adopted in 2001
and implemented in 2005. M12--Industrial Equipment, Gas and LPG: a
national standard reflecting application of three-way catalyst systems,
to be adopted in 1997 and implemented from 2000 to 2004.
M13--Marine Vessels: national and international standards to reduce
NOX emissions from new engines by 30 percent, and operational
controls, including shipping lane changes and vessel speed reduction,
to be adopted in 1996 and implemented from 1998 to 2001.
M14--Locomotives: national standards for new and rebuilt locomotive
engines, along with provisions to ensure that by 2010 locomotive fleets
in the South Coast Air Basin will emit on average no more than the 2005
emission level for new locomotives, to be adopted in 1995 and
implemented from 2000 to 2010.
M15--Aircraft: national standards to effect a 30 percent reduction
in ROG and NOX emissions, to be adopted in 1999 and implemented in
2000.
M16--Pleasure Craft: national standards (both Phase I and II).
CARB's decision to place responsibility on the Federal government
for these controls rests on the State's conclusion that: (1) State and
local agencies lack the legal authority or practical ability to control
these source categories; (2) the reductions contributed by the new
Federal assignments are essential for progress and attainment in
California; and (3) there are no feasible alternative sources of
reductions that are available to the State, given the stringent level
of control of all other source categories reflected in the SIPs.
2. EPA Action
While EPA does not believe that the CAA authorizes a state to
assign responsibility to the Federal government for meeting SIP
requirements, the Agency agrees that it has both the authority and
responsibility under the Act for regulating certain national sources of
air pollution. The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, in fact, extended
EPA's authority to regulate nonroad vehicles and engines and expressly
required EPA to evaluate nonroad engine emissions, determine whether
these emissions contribute significantly to ozone or CO in areas which
have failed to attain the ozone or CO NAAQS, and regulate these
emissions categories if found to be significant. Under this authority,
EPA completed a Nonroad Engine and Vehicle Emission Study and issued an
affirmative determination of significance (59 FR 31306, June 17, 1994).
EPA has also proposed, and in some cases finalized, rules for various
nonroad vehicles and engines, including several of the California SIP
``Federal measure'' source categories. The current status of EPA's
actions on each of the ``Federal measure'' categories is summarized in
the Appendix to this document.
EPA recently established a new policy that allows States to
incorporate into their ROPs and attainment demonstrations the estimated
emission reductions associated with court-ordered or statutorily-
mandated measures prior to final promulgation of the Federal
regulations.8 Consistent with this policy, EPA is proposing to
assign to the California Ozone SIPs emissions reduction credit for
nonocean-going marine vessels, locomotives, and pleasure craft, based
on EPA's current estimates of the reductions that will be achieved by
these national measures. These credits are sufficient, in conjunction
with those attributed by California to the State and local measures, to
demonstrate progress and attainment of the ozone NAAQS in all of the
California ozone nonattainment areas except for the South Coast.
\8\ This policy (January 30, 1996 memorandum from Mary Nichols,
Assistant Administrator for Air & Radiation, to EPA Regional
Administrators, on ``SIP Credits for Federal Nonroad Engine
Emissions Standards and Certain Other Mobile Source Programs'')
supersedes EPA's prior policy, expressed in a November 23, 1994
memorandum from Mary Nichols on the same subject. The earlier
memorandum allowed SIP credit for national mobile source measures
required but not yet promulgated ``provided states also commit to
adopt gap-filling measures to account for any shortfalls, identified
later, between currently anticipated and actual final rule
benefits.'' EPA is now eliminating the requirement for state
commitments. If the final national measure delivers less than
credited in the SIP, EPA may issue a call for plan revision under
section 110(k)(5) if the SIP for an area becomes, as a result,
substantially inadequate to comply with any requirement of the Act,
including the provisions relating to demonstrations of ROP and
attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, EPA has been evaluating other potential future
``Federal measures,'' including controls for most categories of mobile
sources. These measures have significance in the
[[Page 10937]]
South Coast. EPA's evaluation of these possible national controls has
been ongoing from the period of FIP preparation through the present,
and has evolved into a consultative process.
In the area of onroad controls, EPA's heavy-duty vehicle
initiative, developed in cooperation with CARB, is one aspect of this
process. This consultative initiative, which is consistent with the
State's measure M6, has already shown success and recently culminated
in a Statement of Principles (SOP) signed by EPA, individual members of
the heavy-duty engine industry, and CARB regarding future national
standards for on-highway heavy-duty engines. The goal of the SOP is to
reduce NOX emissions from on-highway heavy-duty engines to levels
approximating 2.0 g/bhp-hr beginning in model year 2004, while also
achieving reductions in HC. For further details on the SOP and
initiative, see EPA's Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (60 FR
45580, August 31, 1995). EPA is also engaged in cooperative efforts
with the State of California to discuss with affected industry a
similar heavy-duty nonroad initiative.
As discussed more fully in section II.C.7.e., below, setting forth
EPA's proposed approval of the South Coast attainment demonstration,
EPA agrees with the State that national and international mobile source
emissions are increasingly significant contributors to ozone pollution,
particularly in the South Coast. EPA also agrees with the State that
CARB and EPA share responsibility for controlling new mobile sources.
To address this challenge cooperatively, the CARB Board, in its
resolution of adoption of the 1994 California Ozone SIP, included
specific direction to the CARB Executive Officer to continue to meet
and confer with EPA regarding the federal assignments (CARB Resolution
No. 94-60, November 15, 1994).
Following adoption of the 1994 California Ozone SIP, EPA and CARB
have discussed the affected mobile source control categories and, while
the agencies have not reached consensus on difficult issues of
jurisdiction and responsibility, the two agencies share a strong mutual
interest in further consultation on and collaboration in identifying
and developing the most effective and least disruptive approaches to
achieving further reductions in air emissions from the various
categories of mobile sources.
Building on this interagency cooperation, EPA proposes to continue
and expand the ongoing consultative process with California and other
appropriate parties to examine the potential for additional mobile
source controls that can contribute to progress and attainment, and
that are compatible with other important regulatory considerations,
including those associated with interstate and international commerce.
EPA proposes that this consultative process conclude in June 1997 with
a decision on those additional measures that are appropriate for each
party to pursue. EPA further proposes to make an enforceable commitment
to undertake rulemakings, after the consultative process, on control
measures needed to achieve the emission reductions which are determined
to be appropriate for EPA.
Finally, EPA proposes to approve the South Coast attainment
demonstration if CARB submits, before EPA's final action, an
enforceable SIP commitment to adopt and submit as a SIP revision: (a)
by December 31, 1997, a revised attainment demonstration for the South
Coast as appropriate after the consultative process; and (b) by
December 31, 1999, enforceable emission limitations and other control
measures needed to achieve the emission reductions which are determined
to be appropriate for the State.
C. Local ROP and Attainment Plans and Measures
1. Introduction and Common Elements
This section discusses the progress and attainment plans for each
area, including local, state and Federal measures, and describes EPA's
proposed action on those plans with regard to the ROP requirements of
sections 182(b)(1)(A) and 182(c)(2)(B), and the attainment requirements
of sections 182(b)(1)(A) and 182(c)(2)(A).
As described earlier, following local adoption of the plans, the
State took further action on the plans, adding a statewide measure
component and, in some cases, modifying the locally adopted plan.
Volume IV of the 1994 California Ozone SIP presents CARB's adjustments
to the local plans, and summarizes the ROP and attainment
demonstrations. CARB also supplied detailed spreadsheets delineating
projected emissions reductions in each area, by State measure and
milestone year, to complete the technical documentation of each area's
ROP and attainment demonstrations.
a. Emission Inventories.
(1) 1990 Base Year Inventories
Section 182(a)(1) of the CAA requires that a comprehensive,
accurate, and current base year inventory of actual emissions be
submitted to EPA as a SIP revision for each area designated as
nonattainment and classified marginal and higher for ozone. The 1990
emissions inventory is defined as the base year inventory and provides
a benchmark for ROP and attainment planning.
Annual and ozone season weekday inventories of actual emissions are
required for VOC, NOX, and CO for each ozone nonattainment area.
These inventories detail emissions for all categories of stationary
point sources, area sources, onroad vehicles, offroad engines, and
biogenics (for VOC). The inventories use the best available emission
factors and activity indicators representative of the ozone season.
The 1990 base year inventories were initially submitted by CARB in
November 1992 and improved inventories were submitted again as part of
the 1994 California Ozone SIP. On March 30, 1995, CARB submitted
revised 1990 base year inventories which further refined the inventory
estimates. EPA is proposing approval of the March 30, 1995, inventory
submittal.
Annual emission inventory estimates are adjusted to represent the
ozone season weekday inventory (the ``planning inventory''). Seasonal
throughput, seasonal activity factors, and temperature considerations
are used, as appropriate, to develop the planning inventory. Although
EPA recommends a 3 month peak ozone season as the basis for the
planning inventory estimates, because of the persistence of ozone
violations in California from May through October, the CARB uses a 6
month average operating day emissions estimate.
Stationary sources are broadly grouped into point and area sources.
Point sources typically include permitted equipment located at a fixed,
identifiable establishment (e.g., a refinery). Actual emissions are
reported annually to local air pollution agencies as a part of an
ongoing operating permit renewal and emission statement processes.
Operating permit requirements generally pertain to sources emitting at
least 10 tons per year, with lower limits in some areas. This
information is used by the local air district to periodically update
inventory estimates for stationary sources.
Area sources generally include small point sources (e.g., gasoline
dispensing facilities) and ubiquitous emissions not associated with a
permit (e.g., consumer products). CARB and the local air pollution
control districts share the responsibility for calculating emissions
from the over 200 area source categories. The emission and activity
factors used
[[Page 10938]]
to develop area source inventories are described in CARB
guidance.9
\9\ Methods for Assessing Area Source Emissions in California
(CARB, September 1991 and updates).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile source estimates are divided into on-road and off-road
categories. On-road emissions are estimated by vehicle class, roadway
type and vehicle age. Caltrans, CARB, local government agencies, and
the Department of Motor Vehicles supply the data necessary to estimate
emissions from on-road mobile sources. On-road mobile source emissions
inventories for SIP purposes are generally developed using the latest
version of MOBILE, EPA's mobile source emission factor model, but in
California, CARB has developed its own on-road mobile source emission
factor model, EMFAC. Together with CARB's WEIGHT model, which estimates
accumulated mileage and activities by vehicle year, and BURDEN model,
which estimates vehicle trips and vehicle miles travelled by vehicle
type, CARB develops the on-road mobile source emissions inventories for
the nonattainment areas. The version of EMFAC used for the November 15,
1994 and March 30, 1995 submittals was EMFAC7F version 1.1.
The off-road mobile source inventory includes emissions from
categories ranging from lawn mowers to ocean-going vessels. Emission
estimates are a function of emission factors, activity rates, and
control factors. Emission factors and methodologies used to calculate
emissions are based on information compiled by EPA, CARB, and the local
districts.
The CARB base year inventory includes biogenic emission estimates.
EPA's biogenic emission estimation software, Biogenic Emission
Inventory System, was used in conjunction with temperature inputs
representative of the area of concern, consistent with EPA guidance.
This software is used to estimate emissions from natural sources (e.g.,
trees, crops, etc.). Although biogenic emissions represent an
uncontrollable source, these potentially significant emissions are
included in the attainment demonstration modeling.
Because the CARB inventories represent actual emissions, the
inventories already reflect excess, noncompliant emissions and,
consistent with EPA's guidance 10, they do not require further
adjustment by the 80% rule effectiveness discount.
\10\ EPA policy memorandum from OAQPS to Regional Air Division
Directors (April 27, 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While CAA requirements and EPA guidance are stated in terms of VOC,
some California District plans estimate their inventories in terms of
either Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) or Reactive Organic Compounds
(ROC). The Santa Barbara, San Joaquin Valley, and Sacramento area plans
use ROG while Ventura uses ROC. The only difference between VOC and
ROG/ROC is the inclusion of ethane in the ROG/ROC inventory estimates.
EPA has concluded that the VOC, NOX, and CO inventories of
actual emissions for the ozone nonattainment areas satisfy the
requirements of the Act and EPA's associated approval criteria.
Therefore, under section 182(a)(1) of the Act, EPA is proposing to
approve the 1990 base year inventories for each of the ozone
nonattainment areas addressed in this document.
(2) Inventory Projections
Future year inventories are needed to estimate milestone and
attainment year inventories. These estimates are then used in
projecting and calculating ROP and attainment. Future year inventories
are developed using base year inventory estimates adjusted using growth
and control factors. Growth factors are developed using socioeconomic
forecasts (i.e., population, housing, employment, and motor vehicle
activity) and Standard Industrial Classification data. Growth rates for
motor vehicles consider projected changes in vehicle miles traveled,
trips, and vehicles in use. Control factors are used to adjust future
year inventory estimates to account for reductions from adopted and
scheduled measures. EPA proposes to approve the inventory projections
for each of the nonattainment areas, since the projections meet all
applicable requirements.
b. ROP Targets. The CAA outlines and EPA guidance details the
method for calculating the ROP requirements for the milestone years.
Section 182(b)(1)(A) requires a 15% VOC reduction by November 15, 1996,
from the adjusted 1990 base year inventory (i.e., 3% per year reduction
from 1990 to 1996). Section 182(c)(2)(B) requires that after 1996, an
additional 3% per year VOC (or NOX equivalent) emission reduction
be achieved (in 3 year increments) until the attainment date. The
percent reduction requirements by milestone year and by area
classification are shown below in the table labeled ``ROP
Requirements.''
ROP Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reduction
Classification Year (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moderate and above.................................. 1996 15
Serious and above................................... 1999 24
Severe I and above.................................. 2002 33
2005 42
Severe II and above................................. 2007 48
Extreme............................................. 2008 51
2010 57
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 182(b)(1) requires that ROP reductions: (1) Be in addition
to those needed to offset any growth in emissions between the base year
and the milestone year; (2) exclude emission reductions from 4
prescribed Federal programs (i.e., the Federal motor vehicle control
program (FMVCP), the Federal Reid vapor pressure (RVP) requirements,
any Reasonably Available Control Technology corrections previously
specified by EPA, and any I/M program corrections necessary to meet the
basic I/M level); and (3) be calculated from an ``adjusted'' baseline
relative to the year for which the reduction is applicable. The
adjusted ROP base year inventory excludes the emission reductions from
fleet turnover between 1990 and 1996 and from Federal RVP regulations
promulgated by November 15, 1990 or required under section 211(h) of
the Act.
The net effect of these adjustments is that states are not able to
take credit for emissions reductions that would result from fleet
turnover of current Federal standard cars and trucks, or from already
existing Federal fuel regulations. However, the SIP can take full
credit for the benefits of any new (i.e., post-1990) vehicle emissions
standards, as well as any other new Federal or State motor vehicle or
fuel program that will be implemented in the nonattainment area,
including Tier I exhaust standards, new evaporative emissions
standards, reformulated gasoline, enhanced I/M, California low
emissions vehicle program, transportation control measures, etc.
When compared to the national tailpipe and fuel standards
promulgated by EPA, California has had more stringent standards for
some time. The methodology used in the November 1993 15% ROP submittals
was not necessarily the most appropriate way to model the exclusions,
in light of the effects of these differing standards. Therefore, CARB
recalculated the exclusions for Federal RVP and FMVCP for its adjusted
base year inventories and submitted revised ROP plans in November 1994.
The resulting ROP targets conform to applicable requirements and EPA
proposes to
[[Page 10939]]
approve them as part of the approval of the ROP demonstrations.
c. NOX Substitution. Section 182(c)(2)(C) allows for NOX
reductions (after accounting for growth) which occur after 1990 to be
used to meet the post-1996 ROP emission reduction requirements,
provided that such NOX reductions meet the criteria outlined in
EPA's NOX substitution guidance.11 The criteria require that:
(1) the sum of all creditable VOC and NOX reductions must meet the
3% per year ROP requirement; (2) substitution is on a percent-for-
percent of adjusted base year emissions for the relevant pollutant; and
(3) the sum of all substituted NOX reductions cannot be greater
than the cumulative NOX reductions required by the modeled
attainment demonstration. While the Act and the guidance do allow use
of 1990-1996 NOX reductions for substitution in the post-1996
period, the amount of NOX reductions available for substitution is
subject to the same creditability exclusions described above. As
discussed below in the review of the individual plans, the California
ozone areas relying on NOX substitution in post-1996 ROP
demonstrations (San Joaquin, San Diego, Sacramento, and Ventura) meet
applicable requirements pertaining to NOX substitution.
\11\ ``NOX Substitution Guidance,'' OAQPS, USEPA, December,
1993; ``Guidance on the Post-1996 Rate-of Progress Plan and the
Attainment Demonstration,'' EPA-452/R-93-015, OAQPS, USEPA, January,
1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The term ``VOC equivalents'' is used in the ROP tables for the
areas relying on NOX substitution. This term was taken from CARB's
November 1994 SIP. VOC equivalents is not meant to imply that NOX
reductions were substituted for VOC reductions on a one-for-one basis.
The amount of NOX substitution was determined by calculating the
VOC shortfall percentage, and then converting the percentage into an
equivalent reduction of NOX. For the areas relying on NOX
substitution, CARB and the districts have demonstrated that the
NOX reductions are creditable and not in excess of what is
necessary for attainment. A companion EPA technical support document
provides a more detailed description of the calculations and amount of
NOX reduction used to represent the VOC equivalents.
d. Modeling.
(1) Introduction
An attainment demonstration is a key part of a State Implementation
Plan: using air quality modeling, it shows that the proposed emission
control measures are sufficient for the NAAQS to be attained by the
applicable deadline. For ozone nonattainment areas classified serious,
severe, or extreme, section 182(c)(2)(A) requires an attainment
demonstration based on photochemical grid modeling, for which the Urban
Airshed Model (UAM) is the EPA-approved model. (See Appendix W of 40
CFR Part 51.)
The modeling portions of the SIP submittals were generally reviewed
in terms of technical accuracy, and for consistency with EPA modeling
guidelines. The guidelines are the Guideline for Regulatory Application
of the Urban Airshed Model (EPA, 7/91), Guideline for Regulatory
Application of the Urban Airshed Model for Areawide Carbon Monoxide
(EPA, 6/92), and Guidance on Urban Airshed Model (UAM) Reporting
Requirements for Attainment Demonstration (EPA, 3/94). Thus, the review
covered the appropriateness of data sources, appropriateness of
technical judgements and procedures followed in input preparation,
performance of quality assurance and diagnostic procedures, adequacy of
model base case performance, consistency of control measure simulation
inputs with the submitted control measures, adequacy of the
demonstration of attainment of the NAAQS, and consistency and
completeness of documentation. EPA's confidence in the conclusions
reached in the review is enhanced because of EPA's participation in
technical committees and meetings for each area, and other
communications with State and local technical staff, as the model
applications were being developed.
The UAM model uses an inventory of pollutant emissions, together
with air quality and meteorological data, as input to a system of
algorithms incorporating chemistry and dispersion, in order to simulate
an observed pollution episode. Once a ``base case'' is developed that
meets the minimum performance criteria, projected future emissions are
used as input to simulate air quality in the attainment deadline year.
Various combinations of geographically uniform emission reductions are
simulated to determine approximate attainment reduction targets.
Planners design a control strategy to meet these targets, and then
simulate it with UAM, including the spatially and temporally varying
effects of the selected controls. Attainment is demonstrated when the
modeled air quality with emission controls in effect is below the NAAQS
throughout the geographical modeling domain.
(2) Uncertainty and Model Performance
A modeling attainment demonstration is subject to several
uncertainties. The meteorological and air quality inputs have their own
associated uncertainties, both in measurement and in
representativeness. In addition, not all variables can be measured for
all hours, so default and interpolated values must be used. Processes
such as chemical reaction and advection necessarily appear in the model
in simplified form. The selected episodes may not represent all
conditions conducive to high pollutant levels. Finally, base case and
projected emissions are uncertain. Biogenic emission inventory
methodologies are in a state of flux. In spite of these sources of
uncertainty, photochemical grid modeling is the best tool that is
available for determining the emission reductions that are needed for
NAAQS attainment. The Guideline procedures are meant to ensure that
inputs are set in a scientifically sound manner, and to uncover
compensating errors that can be present even when the model predicts
ozone well.
As explained in the Guideline, episodes are chosen for modeling
based on their high ozone levels, data availability, and other
criteria. Generally, episodes should be chosen that are approximately
as severe as the area's design value, which is based on the historical
ozone highs. During a particular episode, the observed ozone peak may
be higher or lower than the design value; but as long as it is
relatively close, that episode can be accepted for use in an attainment
demonstration. See also the discussion of the attainment test, below.
Once an episode is chosen, modelers attempt to simulate it with
UAM. Various performance statistics and diagnostic tests are available
to gauge their success. Three of the statistics are presented in the
table in this notice. The most commonly stated one is the peak
accuracy, since it is the ozone peak that is ultimately to be reduced
to the NAAQS level. However, it uses only one place and time out of all
those simulated. In judging model performance to be acceptable,
predictions at many places and times are examined. Also, the overall
pattern of ozone and other chemical species are evaluated, in light of
the changing emissions and meteorology occurring during the episode.
Sometimes a lengthy process of diagnostic testing and refinement of
inputs is required. Thus, the finally accepted base case may show some
bias (e.g., simulated ozone peak not matching the observed), and yet be
fully adequate as a simulation of the episode, and for use in an
attainment demonstration. Except where noted, all of the submitted
California modeling
[[Page 10940]]
episodes had acceptable performance, meeting EPA Guideline criteria.
(3) Number of Episodes
The Guideline calls for a minimum of 3 primary episode days to be
modeled. EPA elected to allow areas to use just two if they were based
on a field study, since this provides substantially more complete data,
and so more confidence in model development procedures and results. The
tradeoff of higher quality modeling for fewer episodes is deemed by EPA
to be a reasonable one. Unfortunately, due to problems of model
performance or transport, some areas were only able to develop modeling
for a single ozone episode. The Guideline is silent on what should be
done in cases where, in spite of an area's best effort, the model
simply cannot be made to perform for a given ozone episode. EPA is
electing to accept the California efforts as adequate.
(4) Attainment Test
Recently, questions have arisen over what test an area has to meet
to demonstrate attainment; this has been thought of as showing that
every geographical point within the model domain is reduced to .12 ppm
ozone for every hour, for every episode modeled. However, the
statistical nature of the ozone NAAQS allows each point in space to
have one NAAQS exceedance per year (3 year average). Adding this to the
uncertainties in model inputs and in the model itself, the above test
may be overly conservative. In borderline cases, the overall weight of
evidence of modeling, emissions and meteorological characteristics of
an area may provide a useful adjunct to the attainment test, though
this was not used in the California SIP submittal.
(5) Transport
Pollutant transport between areas is an issue of continuing concern
for the areas of Sacramento, San Diego, San Joaquin Valley, Santa
Barbara, South Coast, and Ventura. For Sacramento and for the portions
of southern California downwind of South Coast, attainment has not been
demonstrated under transport conditions. The ozone episodes modeled
either did not include high levels of transported pollutants, were
found to be dominated by transport and then abandoned as not
representative, or the model did not perform particularly well.
Ideally, upwind and downwind areas would be included within a single
modeling domain; this was done in the SARMAP study centered on the San
Joaquin Valley, but thus far the model does not perform well for the
Sacramento area. Only a limited number of episodes have so far been
modeled, some of them having little transported pollution.
Nevertheless, EPA accepts the modeling done so far as adequate,
because it is the best modeling available, and does show attainment of
the NAAQS for locally generated days. However, the emission reductions
indicated as required by the modeling to date must be viewed as valid
for this stage of planning only; additional reductions may be necessary
in these nonattainment areas or in other areas upwind (such as the San
Francisco Bay Area) to guarantee attainment of the NAAQS. EPA expects
that this will be determined by the modeling additional transport
episodes over the next few years; this effort was not feasible for the
November 15, 1994 deadline because of constraints on available data,
funds and staff. In part because of the California Clean Air Act with
its more stringent ozone standards, modeling will continue in these
areas; for example, a Southern California Transport study is currently
being planned. SIP revisions may become necessary should such future
modeling indicate the need for additional emissions controls.
EPA proposes to approve the modeling in all of the ozone plans
acted on in this notice, as meeting the requirements for attainment
demonstrations in sections 182(b)(1)(A) and 182(c)(2)(A).
2. Santa Barbara
a. Identification of Plan. On November 3, 1994, the Santa Barbara
County Air Pollution Control Board adopted Santa Barbara's 1994 Clean
Air Plan (CAP). On November 14, 1994, CARB submitted the plan to EPA to
comply with ROP and attainment demonstration requirements of the
Act.12
\12\ November 14, 1994 letter from James Boyd (CARB) to Felicia
Marcus, EPA, forwarding the Santa Barbara SIP and CARB Executive
Order No. G-125-163 approving the Santa Barbara Plan. The Santa
Barbara submittal includes a November 3, 1994 letter from Douglas
Allard (SBAPCD) to James Boyd (CARB) forwarding the 1994 Santa
Barbara CAP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. 1990 Base Year Inventories. The SIP provides detailed estimates
of the actual VOC and NOX emissions that occurred in Santa Barbara
in 1990. These base year inventories are summarized in the table
labeled ``1990 Santa Barbara SIP Inventories.'' 13 A discussion of
these inventories and of EPA's proposed action on them can be found in
section II.C.1.a. of this notice.
\13\ More detailed summaries of this inventory can be found in
the 1994 CAP, Table 3-3.
1990 Santa Barbara SIP Inventories
[tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category ROG NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary................................................ 32 12
Mobile.................................................... 25 36
OCS....................................................... 6 22
-------------
Total............................................... 63 70
------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. SIP Control Measures.
(1) Description
The submittal describes a series of rules that have been adopted in
order to reduce ROG and NOX emissions in Santa Barbara. Chapters 4
and 5 of the CAP describes the control measures relied upon for
demonstrating compliance with the Act's progress and attainment
requirements. With the exception of contingency measure T-21, Enhanced
Inspection and Maintenance Program, all required measures identified in
Chapters 4 and 5 of the CAP have been adopted. Because the Santa
Barbara area will not achieve attainment of the ozone NAAQS by November
1996 with currently adopted controls, as described later under section
II.C.2.f., EPA expects that measure T-21 will be adopted in 1996 and
implemented in 1997 as described in the CAP. Reductions of
approximately .6 tons per day (tpd) of ROG and NOX are expected
from the implementation of T-21.
Table 5-1 describes the plan's transportation control measures
(TCMs), which, collectively, supersede the TCM list in the previously
approved 1982 Air Quality Attainment Plan (AQAP). The TCMs are
projected to result in net emissions reductions for the 1996 target
attainment year of .3 tpd ROG and .2 tpd NOX.
(2) EPA Action
EPA proposes to approve, under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the
Act, the control measures portion of the plan, including the
enforceable commitment to adopt contingency measure T-21.
EPA approval of the applicable State and local fully-adopted and
SIP-submitted regulations either has already occurred or will be
completed in separate rulemaking in the future. As requested by the
State, EPA also proposes to delete from the current SIP the 1982
transportation control measures.
d. ROP Provisions.
(1) ROP Emission Targets
The submittal describes the ROG emission reductions needed to meet
[[Page 10941]]
ROP requirements based on Santa Barbara's adjusted 1990 base year
inventories. The SIP also provides emission estimates for 1996, the
only applicable ROP milestone year, by determining the impacts of the
control strategy and calculating anticipated changes in emissions
resulting from projected levels of population, industrial activity,
motor vehicle use, etc. A summary of the ROP targets and the projected
ROG emissions is provided below in the Table labeled ``Santa Barbara
ROP Forecasts and Targets'' (see 1994 CAP, Tables 9-2 and 9-5). The
plan provides for achievement of the ROP target emission levels for
1996, the only applicable milestone year for a moderate ozone area.
Santa Barbara ROP Forecasts and Targets 14
[In tons of ROG per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 Base Year Inventory................................... 57
1996 Projections (Adopted Measures)........................ 41
1996 ROP Target............................................ 42
------------------------------------------------------------------------
14 For the ROP determination, OCS emissions were not included.
(2) ROP Control Strategy
In general, only adopted measures may be relied upon in meeting the
15% ROP requirement. This requirement is met, since the plan relies
only on adopted regulations to achieve the required ROP reductions. A
detailed description of Santa Barbara's 15% ROP demonstration is
provided in Chapter 9 of the CAP.
(3) EPA Action
The Santa Barbara 1994 CAP meets the ROP requirements of the Act,
including the requirement to achieve by 1996 a minimum of 15% of
creditable VOC emission reductions from the 1990 base year. EPA
therefore proposes to approve Santa Barbara's ROP plan under section
182(b)(1) of the Act.
e. Demonstration of Attainment. Santa Barbara is classified as a
moderate nonattainment area for ozone. As a result, the SIP must
contain adequate control measures and commitments to demonstrate
attainment of the ozone NAAQS by 1996.
(1) Control Strategy
The control strategy for Santa Barbara's SIP attainment
demonstration incorporates all of the measures identified in Chapters 4
and 5 of the CAP. The demonstration presumes the measures, which are
already fully adopted as regulations, will be implemented as shown in
the plan, resulting in the emission reductions indicated in the CAP.
(2) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
The 1994 SIP describes urban airshed modeling analysis performed to
demonstrate that the control strategy identified above will result in
NAAQS attainment. A summary of the emission reductions needed to attain
the standard is provided below in the table labeled ``Emission
Reductions Needed in Santa Barbara,'' which is derived from information
in the 1994 CAP.
Emission Reductions Needed in Santa Barbara
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 Baseline Emissions Inventory......................... 63 70
Carrying Capacity......................................... 44 56
Reductions Needed......................................... 19 14
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A summary of the emission reductions projected from the SIP control
strategy is provided below in the table labeled ``Santa Barbara
Attainment Demonstration,'' which is derived from the information in
the 1994 CAP.
Santa Barbara Attainment Demonstration
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reductions from adopted measures.......................... 19 14
Committed local measures.................................. 0 0
Committed State measures.................................. 0 0
-------------
Total............................................... 19 14
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Santa Barbara area was classified as a moderate ozone
nonattainment area based on a design value of .14 ppm, recorded at the
Carpenteria site. This was based on 1987-1989 data. The attainment
demonstration for Santa Barbara is based on Urban Airshed Modeling even
though use of photochemical modeling is not a specific Clean Air Act
requirement for a moderate area. Modeling for the Santa Barbara area is
discussed in two documents: the ``Santa Barbara County Photochemical
Modeling Investigation (May, 1994)'' and in the 1994 CAP (Chapter 7 and
Appendix D: Photochemical Modeling Documentation).
In the Santa Barbara County Photochemical Modeling Investigation, a
county-wide assessment of the July 29-31, 1991 episode was analyzed.
The peak ozone concentration measured during this period was .13 ppm at
the Paradise Road Monitoring station. The model performance statistics
did not meet EPA performance requirements as the peak ozone
concentrations were underpredicted by approximately 50%. Because of the
lack of performance, an attainment demonstration was not performed with
this episode.
Santa Barbara APCD and Ventura County APCD collaborated on a joint
modeling effort to satisfy the attainment demonstration requirements of
the Clean Air Act. This collaborative effort is summarized in the 1994
CAP. Two 1984 episodes were selected for the joint modeling effort:
September 5-7 and September 16-17. The episodes and modeling statistics
are discussed further in the accompanying technical support document.
Using 1996 emission forecasts, the photochemical modeling demonstrated
attainment of the ozone standard, although attainment for the September
5-7 episode required removal of the in-transit shipping channel
emissions.
Although the modeling does not fully meet EPA's performance
criteria, EPA believes that the modeling is sufficient to propose
approval of the attainment plan.
(3) EPA Action
EPA believes that the Santa Barbara attainment demonstration
satisfies CAA requirements. EPA therefore proposes to approve Santa
Barbara's attainment demonstration under section 182(b)(1)(A) of the
Act.
f. Overall EPA Action. EPA proposes to approve fully the Santa
Barbara ozone SIP with respect to the Act's requirements for emission
inventories, control measures, and demonstrations of ROP and
attainment.
The November 14, 1994, SIP submittal included an ozone
redesignation request and maintenance plan for the Santa Barbara
nonattainment area. During 1994-5, however, the Santa Barbara area
recorded a number of exceedances of the ozone standard. This will
prevent the area from attaining the ozone standard in 1996, since
attainment of the ozone NAAQS requires no more than three exceedances
over a three year period.
On July 18, 1995, the State agreed to withdraw its request for EPA
action on the redesignation request and the maintenance plan. As a
result, EPA is not taking action on the redesignation request and
maintenance plan at this time. However, even though the 1994-5
exceedances will prevent Santa Barbara from achieving the ozone
standard by 1996, EPA is proposing to approve Santa Barbara's 1994 CAP.
If
[[Page 10942]]
the Santa Barbara area experiences no more than one exceedance during
the 1996 ozone season and the state has complied with all requirements
and commitments in the Santa Barbara SIP, section 181(a)(5) of the Act
authorizes EPA to grant a one-year extension of the attainment date
upon request by the State. Up to two extensions can be granted.
Therefore, disapproval of the 1994 CAP and a reclassification of the
area to serious for failure to attain is not yet warranted.
3. San Diego
a. Identification of Plan. On November 1, 1994, the Board of the
San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) adopted the ``1994
Ozone State Implementation Plan Revision''. On November 15, 1994, CARB
adopted the SIP revision as the local element of the 1994 California
Ozone SIP, which CARB then submitted to EPA 15 to comply with ROP
and attainment demonstration requirements.
\15\ November 15, 1994 letter from James Boyd (CARB) to Felicia
Marcus, EPA, forwarding the San Diego component of the SIP and CARB
Board Resolution No. 94-63 approving the San Diego plan revision.
The San Diego submittal includes a November 3, 1994 letter from
Richard Sommerville (SDAPCD) to James Boyd (CARB) forwarding the
1994 San Diego plan and the SDAPCD Board Resolution approving the
SIP revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. 1990 Base year Inventories. The SIP provides detailed estimates
of the actual VOC and NOX emissions that occurred in San Diego in
1990. These base year inventories are summarized in the table below,
labeled ``1990 San Diego SIP Inventories.'' A more specific breakdown
of 1990 base year emissions can be found on page 9 of the plan, and
further inventory information is provided in the appendices to the
plan. A discussion of these inventories and of EPA's proposed action on
them can be found in section II.C.1.a., above.
1990 San Diego SIP Inventories
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary.............................................. 100.0 28.0
Mobile.................................................. 212.5 209.9
---------------
Total............................................. 312.5 237.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. SIP Control Measures.
(1) Description
The plan lists the VOC and NOX control measures relied upon
for demonstrating compliance with the Act's progress and attainment
requirements, all of which had been adopted at the time of the plan
submittal (see Table 4, ``1999 Attainment Demonstration Control
Measures'' on p. 29 of the SIP).
(2) EPA Action
EPA proposes to approve, under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the
Act, the control measures portion of the plan. EPA approval of the
adopted regulations has already occurred or will be completed in
separate rulemakings in the future.
d. ROP Provisions.
(1) ROP Emission Targets
The 1994 SIP describes the VOC emission reductions needed to meet
ROP requirements based on San Diego's adjusted 1990 base year
inventories (see pp. 33 and 35). The SIP also provides emission
estimates for the ROP milestone years by projecting the impacts of the
control strategy and of anticipated changes in population, industrial
activity, and other socio-economic factors. A summary of the ROP VOC
targets and the projected VOC emissions is provided below in the table
labeled ``San Diego ROP Forecasts and Targets.''
As the table shows, VOC reductions alone were not projected to be
sufficient to meet the ROP target levels for milestone years after
1996. Section 182(c)(2)(C) of the Act and EPA guidance allows
reductions in NOX emissions to be substituted for post-1996 VOC
reductions so long as certain conditions are met (see discussion above
in section II.C.1.c.). The San Diego plan meets those conditions and
the corresponding NOX reductions as substituted for VOC reductions
are also shown in the table. EPA concludes that the plan provides for
achievement of the ROP target emission levels for all years.
San Diego ROP Forecasts and Targets
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Milestone year 1996 1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 Base Year VOC Inventory.......................... 312.6 312.6
VOC Projections (Adopted Measures).................... 236.1 232.0
ROP VOC Target........................................ 241.2 212.2
VOC Shortfall......................................... 0 19.8
NOX Substitution in VOC Equivalents 16................ 0 19.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
16 The term ``VOC equivalents'' is not meant to imply that NOX
reductions were substituted for VOC reductions on a one-for-one basis.
The amount of NOX substitution was determined by calculating the VOC
shortfall percentage, and then converting the percentage into an
equivalent reduction of NOX. CARB and the district have demonstrated
that the NOX reductions are creditable and not in excess of what is
necessary for attainment. A companion TSD provides a more detailed
description of the calculations and amount of NOX reduction used to
represent the VOC equivalents.
(2) ROP Control Strategy
In general only adopted measures may be relied upon in meeting the
15% ROP requirement in section 182(b)(1) of the Act. Since the plan
relies only on adopted regulations, this requirement is met. According
to the submitted plan, the post-1996 ROP control strategy includes all
those VOC measures relied upon for the 15% ROP demonstration, as well
as fully adopted NOX regulations.
(3) EPA Action
The San Diego SIP meets the CAA requirements for ROP. EPA therefore
proposes to approve San Diego's 15% and post-1996 ROP plans under
sections 182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2) of the Act.
e. Demonstration of Attainment. San Diego County is classified as a
serious nonattainment area for ozone (see 40 CFR 81.305). As a result,
the SIP must contain adequate control measures to demonstrate
attainment of the ozone NAAQS by 1999.
(1) Control Strategy
The San Diego SIP attainment demonstration includes all of the
measures described earlier. The demonstration presumes the measures
will continue to be implemented, resulting in the emission reductions
shown.
(2) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
The 1994 SIP describes urban airshed modeling analysis performed to
demonstrate that the control strategy described in above will result in
NAAQS attainment. A summary of the emission reductions needed to attain
the standard is provided below in the table labeled ``Emission
Reductions Needed in San Diego,'' which is taken from the
[[Page 10943]]
1994 California Ozone SIP, Volume IV, Table F-1.
Emission Reductions Needed in San Diego
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 Baseline Emissions Inventory......................... 313 238
Carrying Capacity......................................... 232 175
Reductions Needed......................................... 81 63
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A summary of the emission reductions projected from the SIP control
strategy is provided below in the table labeled ``San Diego Attainment
Demonstration,'' which is taken from the 1994 California Ozone SIP,
Volume IV, Table F-2.
San Diego Attainment Demonstration
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reductions from Adopted Measures.......................... 81 63
Committed Local Measures.................................. 0 0
Committed State Measures.................................. 1 1
-------------
Total................................................. 82 64
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The San Diego area was originally classified as a severe ozone
nonattainment area based on a rounded 1987-1989 design value of .19
ppm, recorded at the Del Mar station. This was later changed to
serious, since the actual value was .185 ppm, which is within 5 percent
of the cutoff for serious (.180 ppm), as allowed under section
181(a)(4) of the Act (see 60 FR 3771, January 19, 1995). Exceedances of
the ozone NAAQS typically occur in the San Diego area more than 20
times per year. Most of these exceedances are classified by the SDAPCD
as due to transport of pollutants from the South Coast. Locally
generated ozone episodes are more in the neighborhood of .15 ppm.
In order to simulate air quality for the SIP and other planning
needs, San Diego contracted with Radian Corporation to conduct the San
Diego Area Air Quality Study (SDAQS) study during the summer of 1989,
and to perform subsequent modeling (summarized in draft report,
November 1991). That work was later extended by SDAPCD staff, with
participation by CARB. The field study involved a network of air
quality and meteorological instruments, including airplanes, to measure
ozone and its precursors and the meteorological inputs needed for UAM.
Two episodes were selected for modeling from among those recorded
during the field study. The August 28-29, 1989 episode had a monitored
maximum of .154 ppm, at Alpine. After diagnostic simulations and
refinement of model inputs, a base case was developed for the August
episode, representing a locally generated ozone exceedance. The model
performance statistics were within the goals set in EPA guidance, and
the episode simulation was judged adequate for determining emission
reduction targets.
A second episode, September 20-22, 1989, having a .156 ppm peak,
was strongly affected by upper air transport of pollutants from the Los
Angeles area. Only limited data was available on this transported
pollution. While the model's performance for NOX was poor, and the
expected phenomenon of a transported ozone cloud aloft mixing down to
the ground was not simulated well, the model met EPA statistical
performance goals for ozone.
Significant uncertainties remain, but the modeling does show the
beneficial effect on San Diego of the upwind Los Angeles area's
emissions reductions. EPA expects that additional study of transport,
to be conducted over the next few years, may result in the revisiting
of San Diego's air quality problems. The District is an active
participant in the planning of this study. Since San Diego has
demonstrated that such high levels are due primarily to pollutants
transported from the South Coast, additional San Diego emission
reductions are not required for attainment (see 60 FR 3771-2). Finally,
the impact of adopted State and SCAQMD reductions in the 1999
attainment year further support assumptions that transport of ozone and
ozone precursors into the San Diego area will decline significantly in
future years.
Using 1999 boundary conditions and a projected emission inventory
including the effect of already-adopted local and state emission
control measures, the ozone peaks were simulated to be .111 ppm and
.116 ppm for the August and September episodes, respectively, thus
demonstrating attainment of the ozone NAAQS.
(3) EPA Action
EPA believes that the San Diego component of the 1994 SIP fulfills
the CAA attainment demonstration requirements. EPA is therefore
proposing to approve the San Diego attainment demonstration under
section 182(c)(2)(A) of the Act.
f. Overall EPA Action. EPA proposes to approve fully the San Diego
ozone SIP with respect to the Act's requirements for emission
inventories, control measures, and demonstrations of ROP and
attainment.
4. San Joaquin Valley
a. Identification of Plan. On November 14, 1994, the Board of the
San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD)
adopted the Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan for the San Joaquin
Valley. On November 15, 1994, CARB modified the plan and adopted it as
the local element of the 1994 California Ozone SIP, which CARB then
submitted to EPA to comply with the ROP and attainment demonstration
requirements of the Act.\17\
\17\ November 15, 1994 letter from James Boyd (CARB) to Felicia
Marcus, EPA forwarding the San Joaquin Valley Ozone Attainment
Demonstration Plan and CARB Board Resolution no. 94-65 approving the
San Joaquin Valley revised 1993 Rate-of-Progress Plan, Post-1996
Rate-of-Progress Plan and the Attainment Demonstration Plan as
revisions to the SIP. The San Joaquin Valley submittal includes a
November 14, 1994 letter from David Crow (SJVUAPCD) to James Boyd
(CARB), forwarding the San Joaquin Valley Ozone Attainment
Demonstration Plan and the SJVUAPCD Board Resolution (94-11-02a)
approving the plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. 1990 Base year Inventories. The SIP provides detailed estimates
of the actual VOC and NOX emissions that occurred in San Joaquin
in 1990. These base year inventories are summarized in the table below,
labeled ``1990 San Joaquin Valley SIP Inventories.'' A discussion of
the inventories and of EPA's proposed action on them can be found in
section II.C.1.a. of this notice.
San Joaquin Valley 1990 SIP Inventories
[In tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary.......................................... 325.64 382.56
Mobile.............................................. 218.28 327.80
On-Road......................................... 170.86 228.53
Non-Road........................................ 47.44 99.28
-------------------
Total......................................... 543.9 710.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. SIP Control Measures.
(1) Description
The State of California and SJVUAPCD have already adopted many
measures which will contribute to the necessary emissions reductions
for meeting 15% ROP, post-1996 ROP and attainment requirements. In
addition, the SIP describes a series of rules that SJVUAPCD has
recently adopted or committed to adopt in order to reduce VOC and
NOX emissions (SJVUAPCD Attainment Demonstration Plan, table 4-1 &
1994 California Ozone SIP,
[[Page 10944]]
Volume IV, Table G-9. The table labeled ``San Joaquin Local Control
Measures'' indicates the dates of rule adoption and implementation and
the emission reductions presumed to occur by 1999. No reductions from
local measures are assumed in the 15% ROP plan for 1996.
San Joaquin Local Control Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reductions
Rule No. Control measure Implementing Adoption date Implementation -------------------
title agency date VOC NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 Emission Reductions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4403 (VOC)........... Components Serving SJVUAPCD........ 2Q/91........ 2Q/91......... 4.55 ........
Gas Production.
4703................. Stationary Gas SJVUAPCD........ 3Q/94........ 3Q/2000....... ........ 11.92
Turbine Engines.
4653................. Adhesives........... SJVUAPCD........ 1Q/94........ 1Q/95......... 1.3 ........
4623................. Organic Liquid SJVUAPCD........ 2Q/91........ 2Q/96......... 13.2 ........
Staorage.
TCMs................ ................ Ongoing...... Ongoing....... 1.8 1.5
4601................. Architectural SJVUAPCD........ 1Q/96........ 1Q/98......... 1.51 ........
Coatings.
4692................. Commercial SJVUAPCD........ 2Q/96........ 2Q/98......... 0.39 ........
Charbroiling.
4354................. Glass Melting SJVUAPCD........ 1Q/96........ 4Q/99......... ........ 2.87
Furnaces.
4607................. Graphic Arts........ SJVUAPCD........ 4Q/95........ 4Q/97......... 0.84 ........
4642................. Landfill Gas Control SJVUAPCD........ 1Q/95........ 4Q/99......... 1.41 ........
4412................. Oil Workover Rigs... SJVUAPCD........ 2Q/96........ 2q/98......... ........ 0.87
4623................. Organic Liquid SJVUAPCD........ 3Q/95........ 3q98.......... 3.0 ........
Storage.
4662................. Organic Solvent SJVUAPCD........ 1Q/96........ 1Q/98......... 2.44 ........
Degreasing.
4663................. Organic Solvent SJVUAPCD........ 2Q/96........ 2Q/98......... 0.19 ........
Waste.
4306................. Small Boilers, SJVUAPCD........ 3Q/95........ 3Q/99......... ........ 7.6
Process Heaters and
Steam Generators.
4611................. Smaller Printer SJVUAPCD........ 4Q/95........ 4Q/97......... 0.30 ........
Operations.
4702................. Stationary IC SJVUAPCD........ 2Q/95........ 4Q/99......... ........ 12.44
Engines.
4621 & 4622.......... Stationary Storage SJVUAPCD........ 2Q/96........ 2Q/98......... 0.41 ........
Tanks/Fuel Transfer
into Vehicle Tanks.
Waste Burning....... ND.............. ND........... ND............ ........
4411................. Well Cellars........ SJVUAPCD........ 2Q/96........ 2Q/98......... 0.56 ........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) EPA Action
According to the State's submissions, these measures are relied
upon in meeting the ROP and attainment requirements of the Act.
Accordingly, and because the measures strengthen the SIP, EPA proposes
to approve, under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act, the
enforceable commitments to adopt and implement the control measures by
the dates specified to achieve the emission reductions shown. EPA also
proposes to assign credit to the measures for purposes of ROP and
attainment. EPA approval of the adopted regulations will be completed
in separate rulemakings in the future.
d. ROP Provisions.
(1) ROP Emission Targets
The SIP describes the VOC emissions to meet the ROP target and the
VOC emissions with plan reductions (see the 1994 California Ozone SIP,
Table G-7). Additional information regarding the ROP provisions is
presented in the 1994 San Joaquin Valley Ozone Attainment Demonstration
Plan, Table 2-1. A summary of the ROP VOC targets and the projected VOC
emissions is provided below in the table labeled ``San Joaquin Valley
ROP Forecasts and Targets.''
As the table shows, VOC reductions alone were not projected to be
sufficient to meet the ROP target levels for milestone year 1999.
Section 182(c)(2)(C) of the Act and EPA guidance allows reductions in
NOX emissions to be substituted for post-1996 VOC reductions so
long as certain conditions are met (see discussion above in section
II.C.1). The San Joaquin Valley plan meets those conditions and the
corresponding NOX reductions as substituted for VOC reductions are
also shown in the table.
San Joaquin Valley ROP Forecasts and Targets
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Milestone year 1996 1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions to Meet ROP Target.......................... 433 383
VOC Emissions with Plan Reductions........................ 430 430
NOX Substitution in VOC Equivalents 18.................... 0 47
------------------------------------------------------------------------
18 See footnote 16.
The SIP includes a separate ROP analysis for the Kern District
portion of the San Joaquin Valley.
San Joaquin Valley (Kern District) ROP Forecasts and Targets
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Milestone year 1996 1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Emissions to Meet ROP Target.......................... 13.2 11.7
VOC Emissions with Plan Reductions........................ 13.2 13.3
NOX Substitution in VOC Equivalents....................... 0 1.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) 15% ROP Control Strategy
In general, only adopted measures may be relied upon in meeting the
15% ROP requirement. The San Joaquin Valley control strategy for the
15% ROP requirements, therefore, excluded all committed control
measures listed in the table labeled ``Control Strategy for San Joaquin
Valley.'' The description of adopted measures relied upon in providing
for this requirement is in the San Joaquin Valley Ozone Attainment
Demonstration Plan in Tables 4-1 and 3-2.
(3) Post-1996 ROP Control Strategy
According to the submitted plan, the post-1996 ROP control strategy
includes all those measures relied upon for the 15% ROP demonstration,
plus any measures for which emissions reductions are shown for
milestones occurring after 1996, excluding
[[Page 10945]]
projected reductions from Federal measures.
(4) EPA Action
The San Joaquin Valley SIP meets the CAA requirements for 15% ROP
and post-1996 ROP, including the requirement that the plan provide for
achievement of the ROP target emission levels for all years. EPA
therefore proposes to approve San Joaquin Valley's 15% ROP and post-
1996 ROP plans under sections 182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2) of the Act.
e. Demonstration of Attainment. The San Joaquin Valley is
classified as a serious nonattainment area for ozone (see 40 CFR
81.305). As a result, the SIP must contain adequate control measures to
demonstrate attainment of the ozone NAAQS by 1999.
(1) Control Strategy
The San Joaquin Valley attainment demonstration includes all of the
measures described earlier. The demonstration presumes the measures
will be adopted and implemented as scheduled, resulting in the emission
reductions shown.
(2) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
The 1994 SIP describes the urban airshed modeling analysis
performed to demonstrate that the control strategy described above will
result in attainment. The attainment analysis is based on the model
developed as part of the San Joaquin Valley Air Quality Study, and
divides the nonattainment area into three subregions, and the Kern
District portion. CARB notes that the model is being further refined
and appropriate changes in the SIP may be made in the future.
The area was classified as serious based on a design value of .17
ppm, recorded at the Edison site. This was based on 1987-1989 data.
CARB applied the SARMAP Air Quality Model to develop the attainment
demonstration for the San Joaquin Valley SIP. The SARMAP model is a
nonhydrostatic version of the Regional Acid Deposition Model, with
several modifications. The EPA approved UAM version IV was also applied
to the domain for performance comparison. The SARMAP field study,
conducted during the summer of 1990, provided an enhanced database of
air quality and meteorological data, both at the surface level and
aloft.
The model has been applied to one episode from the study period,
August 5-6, 1990. The episode was chosen because it represents a
typical regime conducive to relatively high ozone peaks. The peak ozone
concentration for the episode was .16 ppm, compared to the design
concentration of .17 ppm.
The EPA recommended statistical criteria for ozone were met for the
episode using the SARMAP model. The predicted peak for the episode for
the southern portion of the domain was .14 ppm, as compared to the
measured concentration of .16 ppm, an underprediction of 13%. The
predicted peak for the central portion of the domain was .152 ppm,
compared to the predicted peak of .131 ppm, an overprediction of 16%.
For the northern portion of the domain, a value of .137 ppm was
predicted compared to the measured value of .150 ppm, an
underprediction of 9%.
A summary of the emission reductions needed to attain the standard
is provided below in the table labeled ``Emission Reductions Needed in
the San Joaquin Valley,'' which is taken from the 1994 California Ozone
SIP, Volume IV, Tables G-1, G-3, and G-5.
Emission Reductions Needed in the San Joaquin Valley
[Tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Central South
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 Baseline Emissions Inventory. 129 124 126 115 217 367
Carrying Capacity................. >129 >124 88 90 145 165
Reductions Needed................. ........... ........... 38 25 72 202
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CARB's preliminary attainment calculations for the 3 subregions are
provided below in the table labeled ``San Joaquin Valley Attainment
Demonstration,'' which is taken from the 1994 California Ozone SIP,
Volume IV, Tables G-2, G-4, and G-6.
San Joaquin Valley Attainment Demonstration
[Tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Central South
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG NOX ROG NOX ROG NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reductions from Adopted Measures.. 15 8 27 9 58 164
Committed Local Measures.......... 5 ........... 8 6 22 20
Committed State Measures.......... 8 2 4 2 3 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... 28 11 39 16 83 185
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For purposes of the attainment demonstration, the Kern District
portion of the San Joaquin Valley was not separately modeled, under the
assumption that attainment in this area should result primarily from
upwind reductions achieved in the South San Joaquin sub-region.
(3) EPA Action
EPA believes that the San Joaquin Valley component of the 1994 SIP
fulfills the CAA attainment demonstration requirements. EPA is
therefore proposing to approve the San Joaquin attainment demonstration
under section 182(c)(2)(A) of the Act.
f. Overall EPA Action. EPA proposes to approve fully the San
Joaquin ozone SIP with respect to the Act's
[[Page 10946]]
requirements for emission inventories, control measures, and
demonstrations of ROP and attainment.
5. Sacramento
a. Identification of Plans. The Sacramento Metropolitan Area
nonattainment area includes 6 counties (whole and in part) and
jurisdiction is divided among 5 local air pollution control agencies:
the Sacramento Metro Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD), the
Yolo-Solano Air Pollution Control District (YSAPCD), the Feather River
Air Quality Management District (FRAQMD), the Placer County Air
Pollution Control District (PCAPCD), and the El Dorado County Air
Pollution Control District (ECAPCD). Each local air pollution control
agency adopted and submitted the Sacramento Area Regional Ozone
Attainment Demonstration Plan which was transmitted to CARB. On
December 29, 1994, CARB then submitted the plan to EPA.
Sacramento Ozone SIP Adoptions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution
Agency Date of adoption No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SMAQMD........................... Dec. 1, 1994............. 94-0014
YSAPCD........................... Dec. 14, 1994............ 94-28
FRAQMD........................... Dec. 12, 1994............ 1994-13
PCAPCD........................... Dec. 20, 1994............ 94-07
ECAPCD........................... Dec. 13, 1994............ 321-94
------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. 1990 Base Year and Projected Inventories. The Sacramento Area
ozone attainment plan provides detailed estimates of 1990 emissions
from all VOC and NOX sources in the Sacramento nonattainment area
in 1990. These base year inventories are summarized in the table
labeled ``1990 Sacramento Area SIP Inventories.'' 19 A discussion
of these inventories and of EPA's proposed action can be found in
section II.C.1.c. of this notice.
\19\ More detailed summaries of this inventory can be found in
the 1994 Sacramento Area Regional Ozone Attainment Demonstration,
tables C-1 and C-2.
1990 Sacramento Area SIP Inventories
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category ROG NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary................................................ 88 12
Mobile.................................................... 134 151
On-road............................................... 110 118
Off-road.............................................. 24 34
-------------
Total............................................... 222 164
------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. SIP Control Measures.
(1) Description
The State of California and the local air districts in Sacramento
Area have already adopted many measures which will contribute to the
necessary emissions reductions for meeting 15% ROP, post-1996 ROP, and
attainment requirements. In addition, the 1994 SIP describes a series
of rules that the Sacramento Area air pollution control districts have
committed to adopt in order to reduce VOC and NOX emissions in the
Sacramento Area. The table labeled ``Sacramento Local Control
Measures'' describes the dates by which the plans presume adoption and
implementation, and the emission reductions presumed to occur by each
milestone, from 1999 through the attainment year (2005), to the extent
that information was available in the submitted plan.
Sacramento Local Control Measures
[Tons per day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission reductions
VOC control measure title Implementing agency Adoption date Implementation date --------------------------------
1996 2002 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG Control Measures
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adhesives........................... ECAPCD..................... 2/95....................... 1996................... 1.2 1.3 1.4
PCAPCD..................... 2/95
SMAQMD..................... 5/95
YSAPCD..................... Adopted '94
Architectural Coatings.............. ECAPCD..................... Adopted.................... 1996................... 0.9 1.3 1.6
PCAPCD..................... 4/95
Amendment to existing rule Adopted
SMAQMD.
YSAPCD..................... 3/95
Auto Refinishing.................... ECAPCD..................... Adopted '94................ 1996................... 2.1 2.6 3.2
PCAPCD..................... Adopted '94
SMAQMD..................... 5/95
YSAPCD..................... Adopted '94
Fugitive HC Emissions............... ECAPCD..................... 4/95....................... 1999................... 1.4 1.4 1.4
PCAPCD..................... Adopted
SMAQMD..................... Adopted
YSAPCD..................... Adopted 5/94
Graphic Arts........................ ECAPCD..................... Adopted 9/94............... June 1995.............. 0.4 0.5 0.5
PCAPCD..................... 11/94
SMAQMD..................... '81, '93
YSAPCD..................... Adopted 5/94
[[Page 10947]]
Landfill Gas Control................ ECAPCD..................... 12/94...................... 1996................... 1.2 1.2 1.2
PCAPCD..................... Adopted.................... 1996...................
SMAQMD..................... 2/95....................... 1997...................
YSAPCD..................... Adopted.................... 1996...................
Pleasure Craft Coating Operations... ECAPCD..................... 4/96....................... 1996-1999.............. 0.2 0.2 0.2
PCAPCD..................... 12/94
SMAQMD..................... 1998
YSAPCD..................... Adopted
Pleasure Craft Refueling............ ECAPCD..................... 3/98....................... 1999................... 0.1 0.1 0.2
PCAPCD..................... 3/98
SMAQMD..................... 3/98
YSAPCD..................... 3/98
Polyester Resin Operations.......... ECAPCD..................... 2/96....................... 1997................... 0.2 0.2 0.2
PCAPCD..................... 1/96....................... 1997...................
SMAQMD..................... 1998....................... 1999...................
YSAPCD..................... Adopted '93
Semiconductor Mfg................... PCAPCD others?............. 2/95....................... 1996................... 0.1 0.2 0.2
SOCMI Distillation/Reactors......... SMAQMD others?............. 9/95....................... 1997................... 1.4 1.5 1.6
Surface Preparation and Cleanup..... ECAPCD..................... 2/95....................... 1996................... 3.0 3.3 3.6
PCAPCD..................... 2/95
SMAQMD..................... 2/95
YSAPCD..................... Adopted 5/94
Vents on Underground Gasoline SMAQMD..................... 2/95....................... 1995................... 0.1 0.2 0.2
Storage Tanks.
YSAPCD..................... 1/95
(Both amend current rules).
Wood Products Coatings.............. ECAPCD..................... 2/95....................... 1996................... 0.5 0.5 0.5
PCAPCD..................... Adopted 11/94.............. 1996...................
SMAQMD..................... Adopted 11/94.............. 1996...................
YSAPCD..................... Adopted 11/94
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regional NOX Control Measures
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boilers and Steam Generators........ ECAPCD..................... Adopted '94................ 1996-1997.............. 0.8 0.9 1.0
PCAPCD..................... Adopted '94
SMAQMD..................... 2/95
YSAPCD..................... Adopted '94
Gas Turbines........................ PCAPCD..................... Adopted 10/94.............. 1997................... 0.2 0.3 0.3
SMAQMD..................... 2/97
YSAPCD..................... 5/94
Internal Combustion Engines......... ECAPCD..................... Adopted '94................ Phased in 1997......... 0.3 0.4 0.5
PCAPCD..................... 12/95
SMAQMD..................... 2/95
YSAPCD..................... Adopted '94
Residential Water Heaters........... ECAPCD..................... 1996....................... 1995-1997.............. 0.3 0.4 0.5
PCAPCD..................... 12/95
SMAQMD..................... 1996
YSAPCD..................... Adopted 11/94
Woodwaste Boilers................... PCAPCD..................... 5/95....................... ???.................... ??? ? ?
Mobile NOX Measures:
1. Off-Road Heavy Duty Vehicles. All........................ 12/95...................... 1/97................... 2.0 3.0 5.0
2. On-Road Heavy Duty Vehicles
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) EPA Action
According to the State's submissions, these measures are relied
upon in meeting the post-1996 ROP and attainment requirements of the
Act. Accordingly, and because the measures strengthen the SIP, EPA
proposes to approve, under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act,
the enforceable commitments to adopt and implement the control measures
by the dates specified to achieve the emission reductions shown. EPA
also proposes to assign credit to the measures for purposes of post-
1996 ROP and attainment. EPA approval of the adopted regulations will
be completed in separate rulemakings in the future.
d. Rate of Progress.
(1) ROP Emission Targets
The 1994 SIP describes the VOC emission reductions needed to meet
ROP requirements based on Sacramento's adjusted 1990 base year
[[Page 10948]]
inventories.20 The SIP also provides emission estimates for the
ROP milestone years by projecting the impact of the control strategy
and of anticipated changes in population, industrial activity, and
other socio-economic factors. A summary of the ROP VOC targets and the
projected VOC emissions is provided below in the table labeled
``Sacramento ROP Forecasts and Targets.''
As the table shows, VOC reductions alone were not projected to be
sufficient to meet the ROP target levels for milestone years after
1996. As discussed earlier (section II.C.1.c.), the Clean Air Act
allows substitution of reductions in NOX emissions for VOC
reductions so long as certain conditions are met. The Sacramento Area
plan meets those conditions and the corresponding NOX reductions
are also shown in the table below labeled ``Sacramento ROP Forecasts
and Targets.''
Sacramento ROP Forecasts and Targets
[Tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Milestone year 1996 1999 2002 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 Base Year VOC Inventory................................ 211 211 211 211
VOC Inventory Projection.................................... 175 167 163 159
ROP VOC Target.............................................. 162 142 124 107
Preliminary VOC Shortfall................................... 13 25 39 52
VOC Reductions from Committal Measures...................... 0 19 23 14
Total VOC Shortfall......................................... 13 6 16 38
NOX Substitution in VOC Equivalents 21...................... 13 6 16 38
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See footnote 16.
(2) 15% ROP Control Strategy
On November 15, 1993, CARB submitted to EPA a ROP plan intended to
demonstrate that VOC emissions would be reduced by 15% by 1996. EPA
determined that this ROP plan was incomplete because it relied on
controls not yet adopted in regulatory form. Appendix G of the 1994 SIP
submittal updates Sacramento's 1993 ROP plan. EPA has deemed this plan
complete. EPA will act on the Sacramento Area's 15% ROP submittal in
separate rulemaking.
\20\ See the Sacramento Area Regional Ozone Attainment Plan,
Tables G-1, G-2 and G-3 for ROP targets and lists of measures
included in meeting those targets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Post-1996 ROP
Appendix G of the Sacramento Area Regional Ozone Attainment Plan
provides detailed information on the ROP emissions reductions from 1996
to 2005. The following summary can be found at Table G-1 of the
Sacramento Area Regional Ozone Attainment Plan and provides a general
summary of how the expected ROP reductions will be met.
(4) EPA Action
EPA believes that the Sacramento area component of the 1994 SIP
meets the CAA requirements for post-1996 ROP. EPA is, therefore,
proposing to approve the Sacramento area's post-1996 ROP plan under
section 182(b)(2) of the Act. EPA will act on Sacramento's 15% ROP Plan
in separate rulemaking.
e. Attainment of the Ozone NAAQS. The Sacramento Area is classified
as a severe nonattainment area for ozone. As a result, the SIP must
contain adequate control measures and commitments to demonstrate
attainment of the ozone NAAQS by 2005.
(1) Control Strategy
The control strategy for the Sacramento Area's SIP attainment
demonstration includes all of the State measures and the local measures
identified in the Table labeled ``Sacramento Local Control Measures.''
The demonstration presumes the measures will be adopted and implemented
by the dates shown, resulting in the emission reductions shown.
(2) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
The 1994 SIP describes urban airshed modeling analysis performed to
demonstrate that the control strategy will result in ozone NAAQS
attainment. A summary of the emission reductions needed to attain the
standard is provided below in the table labeled ``Emission Reductions
Needed in Sacramento,'' taken from Table D-1 in Volume IV of the 1994
California Ozone SIP.
Emission Reductions Needed in Sacramento
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 Baseline Emissions Inventory......................... 222 164
Attainment Inventory...................................... 137 98
Reductions Needed......................................... 85 66
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A summary of the emission reductions projected from the SIP control
strategy is provided below in the table labeled ``Sacramento Attainment
Demonstration,'' which is based on Table D-2 from Volume IV of the 1994
California Ozone SIP.
Sacramento Attainment Demonstration
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reductions from Adopted Measures........................ 55 40
Committed Local Measures................................ 17 7
Committed State Measures................................ 15 14
Reductions from National Measures \1\................... 1.6 4.3
---------------
Total............................................. 88.6 65.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Credit shown is EPA's estimate of reductions from statutorily-
mandated national rules.
Based on the Sacramento Area's classification as a severe ozone
nonattainment area and the results of an Urban Airshed Modeling
analysis, Sacramento must reduce its 2005 emissions inventory to 137
tons per day of VOC and 98 tons per day of NOX in order to
demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS. The expected emissions reductions
from the combination of adopted measures and commitments to adopt
measures listed above and in the Sacramento's 1994 Regional Ozone
Attainment Plan will achieve the necessary reductions to meet the
attainment targets.
The Sacramento area was classified as a serious ozone nonattainment
area based on a design value of .16 ppm, recorded at the Folsom
station. This was based on 1987-1989 data; the 1990-1992 value was also
.16 ppm. Exceedances of the ozone NAAQS occur in the Sacramento area
about 6 to 10 times per year.
[[Page 10949]]
In order to simulate air quality for the SIP and other planning
needs, CARB and the Sacramento local agencies started planning the
Sacramento Area Ozone Study (SAOS) early in 1989, with intensive data
collection performed during the summer of 1990. This involved an
extended network of air quality and meteorological instruments,
including on airplanes, to measure ozone and its precursors and the
meteorological inputs needed for UAM. The Sacramento Modeling Advisory
Committee (SMAC) was established for technical oversight of the
modeling effort, and included regulatory, industry, and environmental
group participants. CARB and its contractor, Systems Applications
International, prepared a modeling protocol which was accepted by EPA
as meeting EPA Guideline requirements.
Two episodes were selected for modeling from those recorded during
the field study. Ozone maxima occurred in the Interstate 50 and in the
Interstate 80 corridors, downwind (east and northeast) of Sacramento.
While the observed ozone peaks were less than the design value of .16
ppm, they were high enough to meet EPA guidelines for episode
selection, especially considering the excellent database available for
analysis. They had features typical of urban ozone episodes, including
temperatures exceeding 100 deg.F, low wind speeds, and a temperature
inversion that tended to trap pollutants near the ground. After
extensive diagnostic simulations and refinement of model inputs, a base
case was developed for the July 11-13, 1990 episode. While not
outstanding, the model performance statistics were well within the
goals set in EPA's Guideline. This episode's performance was judged
adequate for determining emission reduction targets.
A second episode, August 8-10, 1990, was strongly affected by upper
air transport of pollutants into the area. Only limited data was
available on this transported pollution, so it was difficult to set
boundary conditions for the model. In addition, the source areas were
not certain; the San Francisco Bay Area, the San Joaquin Valley, and
recirculation from Sacramento itself are all possible sources for the
pollutant influx. For these reasons, an attainment demonstration using
this episode would be of little value and, after consultation with EPA,
the State did not pursue it.
Sacramento and the San Francisco Bay area are included within the
modeling domain of the SARMAP study, conducted for the San Joaquin
Valley nonattainment area. Ideally, modeling of transport should be
performed with both upwind and downwind areas in the same modeling
domain, as was the case here. Although the SARMAP episodes were not
chosen with a Sacramento attainment demonstration in mind, there is
significant transport to Sacramento in the San Joaquin Valley modeling.
Since that modeling showed attainment throughout the whole domain,
including Sacramento, EPA deems that attainment under transport
conditions has been addressed for Sacramento. Should additional
information analyses be performed for these areas, the issue of
transport to Sacramento will need to be revisited.
Using 2005 and boundary conditions and a projected emission
inventory without additional emission controls, the ozone peak was
simulated to be .134 ppm. Additional controls, giving reductions
relative to the 1990 baseline of 34% VOC and 40% NOX, brought
emissions under the carrying capacity of 137 tpd of VOC and 98 tpd of
NOX, and brought the ozone peak down to .124 ppm, thus
demonstrating attainment of the ozone NAAQS.
(3) EPA Action
EPA believes that the Sacramento Area component of the 1994 SIP
fulfills the CAA attainment demonstration requirements. EPA is
therefore proposing to approve, under section 182(c)(2)(A) of the Act,
the Sacramento Area attainment demonstration.
f. Overall EPA Action. EPA proposes to approve fully the Sacramento
Area ozone SIP with respect to the Act's requirements for emission
inventories, control measures, and demonstrations of post-1996 ROP and
attainment. EPA will take action separately on Sacramento's 15% ROP
provisions.
6. Ventura
a. Identification of Plan. On November 8, 1994, the Ventura County
Air Pollution Control District (VCAPCD) adopted Ventura's 1994 Air
Quality Management Plan (AQMP). On November 15, 1994, CARB modified the
AQMP and adopted it as the local element of the 1994 California Ozone
SIP, which CARB then submitted to EPA to comply with ROP and attainment
demonstration requirements of the Act.22
\22\ November 15, 1994 letter from James Boyd (CARB) to Felicia
Marcus, EPA, forwarding the Ventura AQMP and CARB Board Resolution
No. 94-62 approving the Ventura plan. The Ventura submittal includes
a November 8, 1994 letter from Richard Baldwin (VCAPCD) to James
Boyd (CARB) forwarding the 1994 Ventura AQMP and the VCAPCD Board
Resolution approving the AQMP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. 1990 Base Year Inventories. The SIP provides detailed estimates
of the actual VOC and NOX emissions that occurred in Ventura in
1990. These base year inventories are summarized in the table below,
labeled ``1990 Ventura SIP Inventories.'' A more specific breakdown of
1990 base year emissions can be found in Tables 9-3 and 9-4 of the 1994
AQMP. A discussion of these inventories and of EPA's proposed action on
them can be found in section II.C. of this notice.
1990 Ventura SIP Inventories
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category ROG NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary................................................ 44 18
Mobile.................................................... 41 55
Outer Continental Shelf 23................................ 2 8
-------------
Total............................................... 87 81
------------------------------------------------------------------------
23 OCS emissions are included because they are included in the modeled
attainment demonstration.
c. SIP Control Measures.
(1) Description
The 1994 AQMP (Tables 6-1 and 6-2) and 1994 California Ozone SIP
(Volume IV, Table E-6) describe a series of rules that the VCAPCD has
adopted or committed to adopt in order to reduce ROG and NOX
emissions in Ventura. Control measures not already adopted at the time
of the plan submittal are listed below in the table labeled ``Ventura
Local Control Measures.'' The table describes not only the dates by
which the plans presume adoption and implementation, but the emission
reductions presumed to occur by each milestone, to the extent that
information was available in the submitted plan. The information
contained in the table below reflects revisions in Ventura's recently
adopted 1995 Air Quality Management Plan, adopted on December, 19,
1995. The 1995 Plan slightly revised adoption dates, implementation
dates, and reductions for numerous district measures already contained
in the 1994 SIP. These revisions will have no adverse impact on ROP or
attainment. Although these revisions have not been formally submitted
from CARB to EPA at this time, CARB has indicated to EPA that they
intend to submit the revised adoption and implementation dates prior to
EPA's final action on the plan.
[[Page 10950]]
Ventura Local Control Measures
[Tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG/NOX reductions \1\
Rule No. Control measure Adoption date Implementation ---------------------------------------
date 1996 1999 2002 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
N-101............ Gas Turbines... 3/95 4/97 0.0 0.45 0.47 0.49
N-102............ Boilers, Steam 6/96 1/97 0.0 0.05 0.06 0.06
generators,
Heaters, <1 mmbtu.="" r-105............="" glycol="" 12/94="" 7/96="" 0.41="" 0.73="" 0.65="" 0.57="" dehydrators.="" r-317............="" clean-up="" 12/95="" 7/96="" 1.45="" 1.57="" 1.67="" 1.76="" solvents="" and="" solvent="" wastes.="" r-322............="" painter="" 6/97="" 12/97-12/98="" 0.0="" 0.48="" 0.51="" 0.53="" certification.="" r-324............="" screen="" printing="" 6/96="" 6/97="" 0.0="" 0.29="" 0.30="" 0.31="" operations.="" r-327............="" electronic="" 6/96="" 7/97="" 0.0="" 0.07="" 0.07="" 0.08="" component="" manufacture.="" r-403............="" vehicle="" gas="" 5/95="" 1/96="" 0.24="" 0.22="" 0.22="" 0.23="" dispensing--ph="" ase="" ii.="" r-410............="" marine="" tanker="" 6/96="" 7/97="" 0.0="" 0.0="" 0.0="" 0.0="" loading.="" r-419............="" tank="" degassing="" 11/94="" 3/95="" 0.04="" 0.03="" 0.03="" 0.02="" operations.="" r-420............="" pleasure="" craft="" 6/97="" 7/98="" 0.0="" 0.08="" 0.08="" 0.08="" fuel="" transfer.="" r-421............="" utility="" engine="" 9/96="" 9/97="" 0.0="" 0.19="" 0.20="" 0.20="" refueling="" operations.="" r-424............="" gasoline="" 5/95="" 1/96="" 0.01="" 0.03="" 0.04="" 0.04="" transfer/="" dispensing.="" r-425............="" enhanced="" 12/95="" 5/97="" 1.45="" 1.21="" 1.07="" 0.95="" fugitive="" i/m="" program.="" r-606............="" soil="" 9/95="" 9/95="" 0.10="" 0.10="" 0.10="" 0.11="" decontaminatio="" n.="" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------="" \1\="" ``r''="" refers="" to="" rog="" control="" measures,="" ``n''="" refers="" to="">X control measures. The reduction estimates were
taken from the 1994 Ventura County AQMP (Tables 11-1 and 11-2). The reductions do not reflect the most recent
estimates in the 1995 AQMP revision. In addition, the table does not include measure R-303, Architectural
Coatings. Overall, the revised reduction estimates do not negatively impact ROP or attainment. If a SIP
revision with the revision reduction estimates and measure R 303 is submitted before EPA's final action, EPA
proposes to approve it without further opportunity for public comment.
(2) EPA Action. According to the State's submissions, these
measures are relied upon in meeting the ROP and attainment requirements
of the Act. Accordingly, and because the measures strengthen the SIP,
EPA proposes to approve, under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the
Act, the enforceable commitments to adopt and implement the control
measures by the dates specified to achieve the emission reductions
shown. EPA also proposes to assign credit to the measures for purposes
of ROP and attainment. EPA approval of the adopted regulations will be
completed in separate rulemakings in the future.
d. ROP Provisions.
(1) ROP Emission Targets
The 1994 AQMP (Chapter 11) and Volume IV of the CA SIP (Table E-3)
describe the VOC emission reductions needed to meet ROP requirements
based on Ventura's adjusted 1990 base year inventories. The SIP also
provides emission estimates for the ROP milestone years by projecting
the impacts of the control strategy and of anticipated changes in
population, industrial activity, and other socio-economic factors. A
summary of the ROP VOC targets and the projected VOC emissions is
provided below in the table labeled ``Ventura ROP Forecasts and
Targets.'' 24
\24\ See 1994 SIP, Tables 11-3 through 11-14, and California
Ozone SIP, page IV-33.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The VOC reductions alone were not projected to be sufficient to
meet the ROP target levels for milestone years after 1996. As discussed
earlier (section II.B.1.b.iii.), reductions in NOX emissions may
be substituted for VOC reductions so long as certain conditions are
met. The Ventura plan meets those conditions and the corresponding
NOX reductions substituted for VOC reductions are also shown in
the table.
Ventura ROP Forecasts and Targets
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Milestone year 1996 1999 2002 2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 Base Year VOC Inventory................ 85 85 85 85
VOC Inventory after Adopted Measures........ 64 61 58 56
ROP VOC Target.............................. 69 60 53 46
VOC Inventory Including Committals.......... 64 61 58 56
VOC Shortfall............................... 0 1 5 10
NOX Substitution in VOC Equivalents 25...... 0 1 5 10
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) 15% ROP Control Strategy
\25\ See footnote 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In general only adopted measures may be relied upon in meeting the
15% ROP requirement. The Ventura control strategy for the 15% ROP
requirement, therefore, excluded all committed control measures listed
in the table above labeled ``Ventura Local Control Measures.'' The
description of adopted measures relied upon in providing for this
requirement is in the 1994 AQMP in Tables 6-1, 6-2, 11-1, and 11-2.
(3) Post-1996 ROP Control Strategy
According to the submitted plan, the post-1996 ROP control strategy
includes all those measures relied upon for the 15% ROP demonstration,
plus any measures for which emissions reductions are shown for
milestones after 1996.
(4) EPA Action
EPA believes that the Ventura component of the 1994 SIP meets the
CAA requirements for 15% ROP and post-1996 ROP. EPA is, therefore,
proposing to approve Ventura's ROP plan under sections 182(b)(1) and
182(c)(2) of the Act.
e. Demonstration of Attainment. Ventura County is classified as a
severe nonattainment area for ozone. As a result, the SIP must contain
adequate control measures and commitments to demonstrate attainment of
the ozone NAAQS by 2005.
(1) Control Strategy
The control strategy for Ventura's SIP attainment demonstration
includes the State and local measures identified above. The
demonstration presumes the measures will be adopted and implemented by
the dates shown, resulting in the emission reductions shown.
[[Page 10951]]
(2) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
The UAM analysis described below demonstrates that the control
strategy discussed above will result in attainment of the ozone NAAQS.
A summary of the emission reductions needed to attain the standard is
provided below in the table labeled ``Emission Reductions Needed in
Ventura,'' derived from the 1994 California Ozone SIP, Volume IV, Table
E-1. Since the November 1994 submittal, additional modeling refinements
and technical clarifications have resulted in a revised estimate of the
reductions needed for attainment. These technical clarifications to the
1994 SIP were submitted to EPA by CARB on February 6, 1996.\26\ The
summary table below reflects the revised reductions needed for
attainment.
\26\ Prior to the February 6, 1996 CARB letter, EPA, CARB, and
Ventura County APCD agreed on the need to clarify the attainment
demonstration and federal assignments in the 1994 SIP submittal.
This clarification was necessary because of two principle factors.
Recent modeling indicated that moving the shipping channel was no
longer essential for attainment of the ozone NAAQS in Ventura County
and, on December 19, 1995, Ventura County adopted revisions to their
AQMP which removed the measure requiring movement of the shipping
channel.
Emission Reductions Needed in Ventura
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 Baseline Emissions Inventory......................... 87 81
Attainment Inventory...................................... 45 52
Reductions Needed......................................... 42 29
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A summary of the emission reductions projected from the SIP control
strategy is provided below in the table labeled ``Ventura Attainment
Demonstration,'' taken from the 1994 California Ozone SIP, Volume IV,
Table E-2. As described above, the table below reflects the revised
estimate of the reductions needed.
Ventura Attainment Demonstration
[In tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROG NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reductions from Adopted Measures.......................... 30 24
Committed Local Measures.................................. 5 1
Committed State Measures.................................. 6 4
Reductions from National Measures \1\..................... 1 1
-------------
Total............................................... 42 30
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Credit shown is EPA's estimate of reductions from statutorily-
mandated national rules.
The Ventura area is classified as a Severe ozone nonattainment area
based on a design value of .174 ppm, recorded at the Simi Valley and
based on 1987-1989 data.
Ventura's photochemical modeling analysis was based on two
episodes, September 5-7, 1984 and September 16-17, 1984. The episodes
were selected from the period for which an enhanced database was
available from the 1984 South Central Coast Cooperative Aerometric
Monitoring Program. The peak measured concentration for the September
5-7 episode was .18 ppm, measured at the Casitas Pass site. The episode
was representative of widespread, high ozone. The peak measured
concentration for the September 16-17 episode was .14 ppm, also
measured at Casitas Pass. The episode represents an episode with less
transport of ozone and precursors from the South Coast Air Basin.
For the 1994 AQMP, VCAPCD and their contractor used the UAM Version
IV for the photochemical modeling exercise. The Diagnostic Wind model
was used to generate meteorological input to the model. A discussion of
the modeling can be found in Chapter 10 of the 1994 AQMP. The modeling
was submitted as part of the November 1994 SIP.
In 1994-5, CARB staff refined the modeling application by reviewing
and modifying the input files to better reflect the most accurate
information for the Ventura nonattainment area. These refinements and
improvements are detailed in CARB's report, ``Revisions to the Base
Case and Future Year Urban Airshed Model Simulations for Ventura County
in Support of the 1994 State Implementation Plan.'' The report reflects
improvements made to the previous modeling submitted as part of the
1994 SIP. The modeling improvements were submitted by CARB on February
6, 1996. The TSD contains information regarding the performance of the
improved model application for the peak days of the episode. The
performance of the model meets EPA criteria.
The revised model application predicted peak ozone concentrations
in the year 2005 of .12 ppm for the September 5-7 episode and .11 ppm
for the September 16-17 episode.
(3) EPA Action
EPA has determined that the Ventura attainment demonstration meets
CAA requirements. EPA is therefore proposing to approve the Ventura
modeling and attainment demonstration under section 182(c)(2)(A) of the
Act.
f. Overall EPA Action. EPA proposes to approve the Ventura ozone
SIP with respect to the Act's requirements for emission inventories,
control measures, modeling, and demonstrations of 15% ROP and post-1996
ROP and attainment.
7. South Coast
a. Identification of Plans. On September 9, 1994, the SCAQMD
Governing Board adopted the South Coast 1994 Air Quality Management
Plan (AQMP). On November 15, 1994, CARB modified the AQMP and adopted
the ozone attainment, ozone ROP, and particulate matter (PM-10) Best
Available Control Measures (BACM) component of the AQMP, which CARB
then submitted to EPA to comply with ROP, attainment demonstration, and
other requirements of the Act.27 On December 9, 1994, CARB
submitted further revisions to the 15% ROP plan.28
\27\ November 15, 1994 letter from Jacqueline Schafer, CARB, to
Felicia Marcus, EPA, forwarding 1994 California SIP. The SIP
includes a November 15, 1994 letter from James Boyd (CARB) to
Felicia Marcus, EPA, forwarding the South Coast AQMP component of
the SIP and CARB Board Resolution No. 94-61 approving the South
Coast component. The South Coast component includes an October 6,
1994 letter from James M. Lents (SCAQMD) to James Boyd (CARB)
forwarding the 1994 South Coast AQMP and the SCAQMD Board Resolution
94-36 approving the AQMP.
\28\ On November 15, 1993, CARB submitted to EPA a rate-of-
progress plan intended to demonstrate that 1990 VOC emissions would
be reduced by at least fifteen percent by 1996 pursuant to Section
182(b)(1) of the Act. On April 13, 1994, EPA determined that this
ROP plan was incomplete because it relied on controls not yet
adopted in regulatory form. The 1994 SIP updates South Coast's 1993
ROP plan in order to correct this deficiency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. 1990 Base Year Inventories. The SIP provides detailed estimates
of the VOC and NOX emissions that occurred in the South Coast in
1990. These base year inventories are summarized in the table below
labeled, ``1990 South Coast SIP Inventories.'' 29 A discussion of
these inventories and of EPA's proposed action on them can be found in
section II.C.1.a. of this notice.
\29\ More detailed summaries of this inventory can be found in
Appendices III-A and III-B of the 1994 AQMP.
[[Page 10952]]
1990 South Coast SIP Inventories
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary................................................ 666 245
Mobile.................................................... 851 1116
-------------
Total............................................... 1517 1361
------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. SIP Control Measures.
(1) Description
The State of California and the South Coast have already adopted
many measures which will contribute to the necessary emissions
reductions for meeting the 15% ROP and post-1996 ROP and attainment
requirements. In addition, the 1994 SIP describes a series of rules
that the South Coast has committed to adopt in order to reduce VOC and
NOX emissions in the area. The table labeled ``South Coast Local
Control Measures'' describes the dates by which the plan presumes
adoption and implementation, and the emission reductions presumed to
occur by each milestone, every 3 years from 1996 through the attainment
year (2010), to the extent that information was available in the
submitted plan.30 No reductions from local measures are assumed in
the 15% ROP plan for 1996. The SCAQMD committed to adopt specific
enforceable measures by the date specified in the table, or within 1
year after the date of approval of the ozone plan, whichever is
earlier.
\30\ 1994 CARB Ozone SIP, Volume IV, Table A-5; CARB Ozone SIP
Emission Reductions for South Coast; 1994 AQMP, Appendix I-C, Post-
1996 Federal Clean Air Act Requirements--Detailed Calculations.
[[Page 10953]]
South Coast Local Control Measures
[Tons per day of VOC/NOX]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adoption Implementation
Control measure No. Control measure title Implementing agency date dates 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2010
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CTS-01.................... VOC RECLAIM............. SCAQMD................... 1995 1998-2010 ............ ............ ............ ............. ............. .............
CTS-02.................... Emission Reductions from SCAQMD................... 1997 1998-2005 0/0 25.0/0 58.1/0 80.9/0 88.3/0 92.8/0
Solvents and Coatings
at Non-RECLAIM Sources.
CTS-03.................... Consumer Product SCAQMD................... ........ 1998-2005 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Labeling Program.
CTS-04.................... Public Awareness/ SCAQMD................... ........ 1997-1997 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Education Programs--
Area Sources.
CTS-05.................... Further Emission SCAQMD................... 1994 1996-1996 2.14/0 2.49/0 2.73/0 2.9/0 2.99/0 2.99/0
Reductions from
Perchloroethylene Dry
Cleaning Operations.
CTS-07.................... Further Emission SCAQMD................... 1997 2001-2006 0/0 0/0 27.49/0 40.5/0 60.65/0 62.26/0
Reductions from
Architectural Coatings
(Rule 1113).
FUG-01.................... Emission Reductions from SCAQMD................... 1995 1996-1996 4.42/0 4.96/0 5.11/0 5.01/0 4.98/0 4.98/0
Organic Liquid Transfer.
FUG-02.................... Emission Reductions from SCAQMD................... 1995 1996-1996 5.08/0 5.52/0 5.73/0 5.49/0 5.05/0 4.76/0
Active Draining of
Liquid Products.
FUG-03.................... Further Emission SCAQMD................... 1996 1998-1998 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Reductions from
Floating Roof Tanks.
FUG-04.................... Further Emission SCAQMD................... 1997 2000-2010 0/0 0/0 .75/0 .75/0 .75/0 .75/0
Reductions of Fugitive
Emissions.
RFL-01.................... Emission Reductions from SCAQMD................... 1997 2000-2010 0/0 0/0 .04/0 .04/0 .05/0 .06/0
Utility Engine
Refueling Operations.
RFL-02.................... Further Emission SCAQMD................... 1995 1996-1997 1.96/0 4.94/0 5.06/0 5.2/0 5.44/0 5.58/0
Reductions from
Gasoline Dispensing
Facilities.
RFL-03.................... Emission Reductions from SCAQMD................... 1995 1996-1996 .74/0 .77/0 .80/0 .83 .86/0 .88/0
Pleasure Boat Fueling
Operations.
CMB-01A................... Control of Emissions SCAQMD................... 1997 1998-2000 0/0 0/.75 0/.79 0/.87 0/.89 0/.97
from Miscellaneous
Combustion.
CMB-01B................... Control of Emissions SCAQMD................... 1997 1998-2000 0/0 0/.12 0/.26 0/.26 0/.28 0/.28
from Small Boilers and
Process Heaters.
CMB-01C................... Control of Emissions SCAQMD................... 1997 1998-2000 0/0 0/.45 0/.47 0/.52 0/.53 0/.57
from Curing and Drying
Ovens.
CMB-01D................... Control of Emissions SCAQMD................... 1997 1998-2000 0/0 0/0 0/.52 0/.55 0/.60 0/.65
from Afterburners.
CMB-01E................... Control of Emissions SCAQMD................... 1997 1998-2000 0/0 0/0 0/.06 0/.06 0/.06 0/.08
from Metal Melting
Furnaces.
CMB-01F................... Further Emission SCAQMD................... 1997 1998-2008 0/0 3.36/4.91 3.79/4.64 4.31/3.78 4.71/2.46 4.81/1.4
Reductions from
Internal Combustion
Engines.
CMB-02A................... Control of Emissions SCAQMD................... 1997 1998-2000 0/0 0/3.87 0/4.21 0/4.56 0/4.92 0/5.16
from Miscellaneous
Combustion.
CMB-02B................... Control of Emissions SCAQMD................... 1997 1998-2000 0/0 0/1.34 0/2.98 0/3.19 0/3.40 0/3.55
from Small Boilers and
Process Heaters.
CMB-02C................... Control of Emissions SCAQMD................... 1997 1998-2000 0/0 0/1.11 0/1.08 0/1.15 0/1.21 0/1.26
from Curing and Drying
Ovens.
CMB-02F................... Further Controls of SCAQMD................... 1997 1998-2008 0/0 1.52/6.83 1.74/6.62 1.99 2.19 2.29/2.20
Emissions from Internal
Combustion Engines.
CMB-03.................... Area Source Credits for SCAQMD................... 1995 1997-2000 0/0 0/0 0/0 0 0 0
Commercial and
Residential Combustion
Equipment.
CMB-04.................... Area Source Credits for SCAQMD................... 1995 1997-2000 0/0 0/0 0/0 0 0 0
Energy Conservation.
CMB-05.................... Clean Stationary Fuels.. SCAQMD................... 1995 1996-2008 0/0 1.22/1.01 2.27/1.76 3.53 3.99 4.09
CMB-06.................... Emission Standard for SCAQMD/.................. 1994 1996-2002 0/.56 0/2.28 0/7.21 0 0 0
New Residential and local
Commercial Water govts
Heaters.
CMB-07.................... Emission Reductions from SCAQMD................... 1997 1999-1999 0/0 0/0 0/0 0 0 0
Petroleum Refinery
Flares.
CMB-10.................... Emission Reductions from SCAQMD................... 1995 1998-1998 0/0 0/.41 0/.42 0 0 0
Glass Melting Furnaces
(Non-RECLAIM).
CMB-11.................... Emission Reductions from SCAQMD................... 1995 1996 0/.64 0/.72 0/.68 0 0 0
Non-RECLAIM
Incinerators.
MSC-01.................... Promotion of Lighter SCAQMD/.................. ........ 1996-1998 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Color Roofing and Road local
Materials and Tree govts
Planting.
MSC-02.................... In-Use Compliance SCAQMD................... 1996 1997-1997 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Program for Air
Pollution Control
Equipment.
PRC-02.................... Further Emission SCAQMD................... 1996 1998-2001 0/0 .24/0 .64/0 .68/0 .72/0 .75/0
Reductions from
Bakeries.
PRC-03.................... Emission Reductions from SCAQMD................... 1994 1996-2001 1.23/0 8.55/0 10.77/0 11.14/0 11.49/0 11.7/0
Restaurant Operations.
PRC-04.................... Emission Reductions from SCAQMD................... 1996 1997-1997 0/0 .13/0 .13/0 .13/0 .13/0 .13/0
Rubber Products
Manufacturing.
PRC-05.................... Emission Reductions from SCAQMD................... 1996 1997-1997 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Malt Beverage
Production Facilities
and Wine or Brandy
Making Facilities.
SIP-01.................... SIP Amendments--for SCAQMD................... (\1\) 1998-1998 0/0 .06/0 .06/0 .06/0 .05/0 .05/0
Miscellaneous Sources.
WST-01.................... Emission Reductions from SCAQMD................... 1995 1996-2003 5.63/0 8.39/0 8.86/0 9.31/0 9.77/0 10.07/0
Livestock Waste.
WST-02.................... Emission Reductions from SCAQMD................... 1997 1998-2000 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Composting of Dewatered
Sewage Sludge.
WST-03.................... Waste Burning........... ......................... 1996 1998-1998 .7/0 .7/0 .7/0 .6/0 .06/0 .06/0
WST-04.................... Disposal of Materials ......................... 1996 1998-2001 0/0 .8/0 2.12/0 2.21/0 2.31/0 2.37/0
Containing Volatile
Organic Compounds.
TCM-01.................... Transportation SCAG..................... 1997 2000-2010 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Improvements.
ISR-01.................... Special Event Centers SCAQMD/.................. 1995 1997-2010 .9/1.03 .77/.84 1.4/1.67 1.07/1.43 .81/1.26 1.33/2.2
(SCAG Measure TCM #10). local 7
govts
[[Page 10954]]
ISR-02.................... Shopping Centers (SCAG SCAQMD/.................. 1996 1997-2010 0/0 1.36/1.5 2.30/2.73 1.75/2.35 1.34/2.07 1.69/2.8
Measure TCM #11). local 9
govts
ISR-03.................... Registration and SCAQMD................... 1995 1997-2000 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Commercial Vehicles
(SCAG Measure TCM #12).
ISR-04.................... Airport Ground Access SCAQMD/.................. 1997 1999-2010 0/0 .38/.42 .77/.92 .59/.79 .45/.7 .38/.65
(SCAG Measure TCM #13). local
govts
ISR-05.................... Trip Reduction for SCAQMD/.................. 1995 1997-2010 0/0 .21/.24 .47/.63 .46/.72 .35/.64 .38/.74
Schools (SCAG Measure local
TCM #14). govts
ISR-06.................... Enhanced Rule 1501 (SCAG SCAQMD/.................. 1996 1997-2000 0/0 2.86/3.15 3.01/3.59 2.30/3.08 1.75/2.72 1.48/2.5
Measure TCM #15). local 1
govts
ISR-07.................... Parking Cash-Out (SCAG SCAQMD/.................. 1995 1995-1997 .2/.22 .17/.17 .13/.14 .10/.12 .08/.11 .06/.1
Measure TCM #16). local
govts
MON-01.................... Emission Reduction SCAQMD/.................. 1996 1996-2010 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Credits for Low- CARB
Emission Retrofit Fleet
Vehicles.
MON-02.................... Eliminate Excessive Car SCAQMD/.................. ........ .............. 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Dealership Vehicle local
Starts; Educational. govts
MON-04.................... Eliminate Excessive Curb SCAQMD/.................. ........ .............. 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Idling; Educational. local
govts
MON-05.................... Emissions Reduction SCAQMD................... 1995 1995-2010 0/0 0/0 0/0 .12/.65 .11/.65 .11/.65
Credit for Heavy-Duty
Buses.
MON-06.................... Emissions Reduction SCAQMD................... 1995 .............. 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Credit for Heavy-Duty
Trucks.
MON-07.................... Emission Reductions for SCAQMD................... 1995 1996-1999 25.54/0 5.15/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
High Emitters.
RME-01.................... Regional Mobility ......................... ........ .............. 2.37/0 11.3/1.15 15.98/6.58 18.5/13.74 20.64/21.77 22.26/27.67
Adjustment.
MOF-03.................... Emission Reduction SCAQMD/.................. 1995 1996-2010 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Credits for Leaf local
Blowers. govts
MOF-04.................... Off-Road Mobile Source SCAQMD................... 1995 1996-2010 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Emission Reduction
Credit Programs.
ATT-01.................... Telecommunications...... SCAQMD/.................. ........ 1995-2010 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0.0
SCAG/....................
local
govts
ATT-02.................... Advanced Shuttle Transit SCAQMD/.................. ........ 1995-2010 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
SCAG/....................
local
govts
ATT-03.................... Zero Emission Vehicle/ Partnership.............. ........ 1995-2010 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Infrastructure.
ATT-04.................... Alternative Fuel Partnership.............. ........ 1995-2010 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Vehicles/Infrastructure.
ATT-05.................... Intelligent Vehicle SCAQMD/.................. ........ 1995-2010 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
Highway Systems. SCAG/
local
govts
MKT-01.................... Emission/VMT............ SCAG..................... ........ 2008-2010 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
MKT-02.................... At-the-Pump Fee......... SCAG..................... ........ 2008-2010 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
FSS-01.................... Stage I Episode Plans... SCAQMD................... ........ 2005-2010 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0
ADV-CTS-01................ Advanced Technology-- SCAQMD................... ........ .............. 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 14.35/0 23.88/0
Coating Technologies.
ADV-FUG................... Advanced Technology-- SCAQMD................... ........ .............. 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 14.13/0 23.11/0
Fugitive Emission
Controls.
ADV-PRC................... Advanced Technology-- SCAQMD................... ........ .............. 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 7.55/0 12.27/0
Process Related
Emissions.
ADV-UNSP.................. Advanced Technology-- SCAQMD................... ........ .............. 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 39.45/0 66.97/0
Unspecified Stationary
Source Controls.
ADV-CTS-02................ Advanced Technology-- SCAQMD................... ........ .............. 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/0 54.69/0
Coating Technologies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Various.
[[Page 10955]]
(2) EPA Action
EPA proposes to approve, under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the
Act, the control measures, including the commitment of the SCAQMD to
adopt and implement rules by scheduled dates to achieve specified
emission reductions. EPA action on the SCAQMD's adopted regulations
will be taken in separate rulemakings following their submittal as SIP
revisions.
The SCAQMD is currently considering adoption of a revised
regulatory agenda that shifts to 1996 all rule adoption dates that have
lapsed. In the final action on the South Coast SIP, EPA intends to
approve substitute dates if adopted by the SCAQMD and submitted as a
SIP revision before EPA's final action on the ozone SIP. The amended
schedule must be accompanied by a demonstration that this revision
would not interfere with any applicable requirement of the Act. Unless
the amended schedule and demonstration are submitted, EPA cannot
approve and credit the measures whose adoption dates have passed.
EPA wishes to encourage the SCAQMD to pursue the most aggressive
possible implementation of the AQMP, which remains an otherwise valid
and critically important blueprint for progress and eventual attainment
of the ozone NAAQS. EPA emphasizes that the failure of the SCAQMD to
adopt most of the rules scheduled for adoption in 1995 is not evidence
either that the AQMP is impractical or that the SCAQMD has failed in
meeting its overall commitment to air quality progress. The AQMP needs
amendment at this time only to replace the initial AQMP adoption dates
with an updated timetable for rule adoption.
d. ROP Provisions.
(1) ROP Emission Targets
The 1994 SIP describes the VOC emission reductions needed to meet
ROP requirements based on South Coast's adjusted 1990 base year
inventories.31 The SIP also provides emission estimates for the
ROP milestone years by projecting the impacts of adopted control
measures and of anticipated changes in population, industrial activity,
and other socio-economic factors. A summary of the ROP VOC targets and
the projected VOC emissions is provided below in the table labeled,
``South Coast ROP Forecasts.'' 32
\31\ See 1994 AQMP, Appendix I-C.
\32\ See 1994 AQMP, Appendix I-C, Table 3-4, and Attachment A.
The AQMP also calculates a ROP target for NOX and computes ROP
emissions reductions for NOX, but the AQMP depends upon
NOX substitution only for the 1999, 2002, and 2005 ROP
milestones.
South Coast ROP Forecasts
[In tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC emissions to meet ROP target.. 1074.4 976.6 846.6 732.2 617.6 544.1
VOC emissions with plan reductions 1066.4 976.6 846.6 732.2 470.0 312.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) 15% ROP Control Strategy
In general only adopted measures may generally be credited towards
the 15% ROP requirement. In addition, pre-1990 Federal motor vehicle
emission controls, Federal RVP limits on gasoline, and several other
existing measures cannot be credited in ROP plans. The control strategy
for the 15% ROP requirement, therefore, includes all VOC control
measures listed above, except for those showing no emission reductions
in the 1996 column.
(3) Post-1996 ROP Control Strategy
The post-1996 ROP control strategy includes all those measures
listed in above, except for those showing no emissions for the ROP
milestone years. As discussed, the SIP identifies no surplus measures
for the post-1996 ROP requirements. Therefore, all of the VOC emission
reductions in the post-1996 ROP control strategy are needed to meet the
post-1996 ROP requirements.
(4) EPA Action
EPA believes that the South Coast component of the 1994 SIP meets
the CAA requirements for ROP. EPA is, therefore, proposing to approve
South Coast's 15% ROP and post-1996 ROP plans under sections 182(b)(1)
and 182(c)(2) of the Act.
e. Demonstration of Attainment. The Los Angeles-South Coast Air
Basin Area is classified as an extreme nonattainment area for ozone. As
a result, the SIP must contain adequate control measures and
commitments to demonstrate attainment of the ozone NAAQS by 2010.
(1) Control Strategy
The control strategy for South Coast's SIP attainment demonstration
includes all of the State and local measures identified above. Among
those measures are several ``new-technology'' measures, which are
needed to achieve reductions beyond what could be accomplished with
existing control technologies or control techniques.
The 1990 Amendments to the Act added section 182(e)(5), which
applies exclusively to extreme ozone areas. This provision authorizes
the State to use conceptual, as yet unadopted measures for its ozone
attainment demonstration and ROP after the year 2000, if these measures
anticipate new or improved technology or control techniques, the
measures are not needed to meet the progress requirements for the first
10 years, and the State commits to submit contingency measures to be
implemented if the anticipated technologies do not achieve planned
reductions.
CARB and the SCAQMD included with their new-technology measures
commitments to submit contingency measures and a demonstration that
reductions from the CARB and SCAQMD new-technology measures are not
needed to achieve the first 10 years of required progress. Because the
section 182(e)(5) approval criteria are met by both the CARB and SCAQMD
submittals, EPA issued final approval of the new-technology measures on
August 21, 1995. See 60 FR 43379 for further details on the new-
technology control measures and EPA's action on them. EPA has therefore
already approved and credited the following SCAQMD and CARB new-
technology provisions.
Because much of the needed reductions in the 1994 South Coast plan
is now assigned to these conceptual measures, air quality progress in
future years requires substantial State and local staff and resource
investment at this time to lay the foundations for the necessary
advances in control technology or control techniques. EPA urges both
CARB and the SCAQMD to set out the timing and stages of projected
control measure development, and to involve the public and the
[[Page 10956]]
regulated community in a process by which they can understand and
contribute to the Agency's steady progress in developing the control
approaches. The SCAQMD's annual report to the California Legislature is
one mechanism for displaying the District's technology advancement
projects and ensuring that necessary resource needs are identified.
Finally, EPA also encourages both CARB and the SCAQMD to reduce the
dimensions of the section 182(e)(5) component of the plan by
substituting near-term control regulations as soon as these controls
can be identified, developed, and adopted. Such action not only
comports with the Act's requirements for attainment ``as expeditiously
as practicable'' (see, for example, section 181(a)(1)) but also
accelerates air quality progress in the interim, both within the SCAB
and in downwind nonattainment areas.
SCAQMD New-Technology Measures
Advance Tech-CTS (Coating Technologies), ADV-CTS-01, adoption 2003,
23.9 tpd ROG;
Advanced Tech-Fugitives, ADV-FUG, adoption 2003, 23.1 tpd ROG;
Advance Tech-Process Related Emissions, ADV-PRC, adoption 2003,
12.3 tpd ROG;
Advance Tech-Unspecified, Stationary Sources, ADV-UNSP, adoption
2003, 67 tpd ROG;
Advance Tech-CTS (Coatings Technologies), ADV-CTS-02, 54.7 tpd ROG.
CARB New-Technology Measures
Improved Control Technology for LDVs, M-2, adoption 2000,
implementation 2004-5, 2010 emission reductions--10 tpd ROB, 15 tpd
NOX;
Off-road diesel equipment--2.5 g/bhp-hr NOX standard, M-9,
adoption 2001, implementation 2005, 2010 emission reductions--3 tpd
ROG, 31 tpd NOX;
Consumer products advanced technology and market incentives
measures, CP-4, adoption 2005, implementation 2009, 2010 emission
reductions 46 tpd ROG;
Additional measures, 2010 emission reductions 79 tpd ROG, 60 tpd
NOX. The measures include possible market-incentive measures and
possible operational measures applicable to heavy-duty vehicles.
(2) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
The 1994 SIP describes urban airshed modeling analysis performed to
demonstrate that the control strategy described above will result in
NAAQS attainment. A summary of the emission reductions needed to attain
the standard is provided below in the table labeled, ``Emission
Reductions Needed in South Coast.''
Emission Reductions Needed in South Coast
[Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 Baseline Emissions Inventory......................... 1517 1361
Carrying Capacity......................................... 323 553
Reductions Needed......................................... 1194 808
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A summary of the emission reductions projected from the SIP control
strategy is provided below in the table labeled, ``South Coast
Attainment Demonstration.''
South Coast Attainment Demonstration
[Tons per summer day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reductions from Adopted measures.......................... 463 429
Committed Local measures.................................. 453 43
Committed State measures.................................. 231 227
Assigned Federal measures................................. 47 109
-------------
Total............................................... 1194 808
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SIP attainment demonstration was based on a modeling simulation
of 4 episodes of high ozone from the 1987 intensive air quality study.
In addition, one episode of very high ozone (.36 ppm) on June 5-7, 1985
was selected. The September 5-7, 1987 episode represents typical high
ozone episode, with a peak concentration of .33 ppm. The Urban Airshed
Model was used to model air quality. The wind field were generated
using the EPA Diagnostic Wind Model.
The model application does not meet all EPA performance criteria
with the unadjusted mobil source inventory. The base case indicates a
bias of -25% to -71%, indicating that the model tends to underpredict
the peak ozone concentration. In the sensitivity analysis with the
motor vehicle emission inventory increased by a factor of two, the
model performance is enhanced. The model predicts higher ozone values
for both the base and future years. Under the proposed emission
reduction strategy but with the grown motor vehicle inventory, the
model still predicts attainment of the standard by 2010.
Key uncertainties in the modeling analysis include mobile source
and biogenic emission inventory uncertainties. A 1997 field study
designed to study air quality in the Southern portion of the state of
California should improve the performance of the model. The model
inputs and performance are discussed in greater detail in the TSD.
(3) EPA Action
Despite the stringent existing State and local regulations and the
ambitious commitments by CARB and SCAQMD, the ozone attainment
demonstration for the SCAB is insufficient as submitted by the State
since, without any fall back State commitments, it depends upon
additional reductions, stemming from assignments to EPA to establish
specific future controls on national and international mobile sources
and EPA is not obligated by statute or court order to do so. As
discussed above, EPA has concluded that, while credit may be taken for
those national rules that are statutorily mandated, EPA does not
propose to credit the California SIP with Federal controls that are
discretionary. With respect to the South Coast SIP, the table titled
``Federal Assignments in the California SIP for the South Coast''
indicates what emission reductions are assigned by the State to EPA for
discretionary rules.
Federal Assignments in the California SIP for the South Coast
[Reductions from discretionary national measures]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SIP 2010
reductions
SIP measure -------------
ROG NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
M6--heavy-duty diesel vehicles (2.0 g/bhp-hour NOX
standard)................................................ 1.5 15.5
M10--nonroad diesel equipment (2.5 g/bhp-hour NOX
standard)................................................ 5.3 44.2
M12--industrial equipment, gas and LPG.................... 25.1 12.6
M13--marine vessels \1\................................... 0 1.7
M14--trains \2\........................................... 0 7.2
M15--planes............................................... 2.7 4.1
-------------
Total Reductions.................................... 34.6 85.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ SIP Measure M13 includes both the statutorily-mandated ship controls
and discretionary controls on ocean-going ships. The emissions
reductions shown are those beyond what EPA estimates from the
statutorily-mandated ship controls, which were proposed on November 9,
1994 (59 FR 55930).
[[Page 10957]]
\2\ The SIP includes in Measure M14 both the statutorily-mandated
national locomotive emission standards and additional reductions to be
achieved in the South Coast through a provision that requires that by
2010 the locomotive fleet in the SCAB will emit on average no more
than the 2005 emissions level for new locomotives. The emission
reductions shown are those specific to the South Coast, in excess of
reductions that would result from the national standards alone.
The unusually high emissions associated with these sources in the
SCAB is in part a reflection of the South Coast's dominant role as a
Pacific Rim trade center, heavily dependent upon every form of goods
transportation. For example, the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles,
now the busiest ports in the nation, annually move goods valued at
almost $150 billion, using a complex intermodal network of ships,
trains, trucks, airplanes, and every variety of loading and handling
equipment.
While stationary, area source, and light- and medium-duty vehicle
emissions are projected to decline very significantly as a result of
State and local control measures applicable in the SCAB, emissions from
the remaining mobile source categories are predicted to increase
substantially through the attainment year in the absence of further
controls.
EPA and CARB are already engaged in a cooperative process involving
engine manufacturers and other stakeholders to review the potential for
establishing standards for new heavy-duty motor vehicle engines, heavy-
duty nonroad engines, and controls or prohibitions on fuels and fuel
additives, in accordance with the terms of EPA's authority in sections
202(a)(3), 213, and 211(c) of the Act. This process of evaluating the
appropriateness of new national standards and issuing standards in
formal rulemaking is not expected to be concluded until mid-1997.
Moreover, international standard setting is now in progress under
the jurisdiction of the International Maritime Organization and the
International Civil Aviation Organization relating to ocean-going ships
and commercial aircraft, respectively. Again, by mid-1997 greater
certainty is expected regarding any new international emissions control
standards and the degree to which these standards would affect
predicted levels of SCAB emissions in 2010.
In view of the unique relevance to the SCAB of these ongoing
standard-setting projects, EPA believes that it is appropriate to
examine further the extent to which specific additional mobile source
controls might contribute to ozone attainment in the SCAB. Through June
1997, EPA will continue to engage in a consultative process with CARB,
the SCAQMD, and other stakeholders to examine the potential for
additional mobile source controls that can contribute to progress and
attainment. This review will focus not only on unilateral Federal
controls but also on the potential for cooperative and community-based
controls that reconcile, to the greatest extent practicable, State/
local interests and the legitimate concerns of interstate and
international commerce. EPA expects that the Agency and the State
entities will continue to work cooperatively to identify additional
measures that are appropriate and feasible for each party to pursue. As
discussed above in section II.B.2., EPA proposes to make an enforceable
commitment to undertake rulemakings, after the consultative process, on
control measures needed to achieve the emission reductions which are
determined to be appropriate for EPA.
EPA proposes to approve the South Coast attainment demonstration if
CARB submits, before EPA's final action, an enforceable SIP commitment
to adopt and submit as a SIP revision:
(a) A revised attainment demonstration for the South Coast as
appropriate after the consultative process. This SIP revision would be
due December 31, 1997; and
(b) Enforceable emission limitations and other control measures
needed to achieve the emission reductions which are determined to be
appropriate for the State. This SIP revision would be due no later than
December 31, 1999.
EPA believes that this gap-filling commitment and schedule for
additional SIP submissions for the SCAB is a reasonable application of
the Clean Air Act requirements for SIP submissions to the current
circumstances. EPA is mindful of the requirement in Clean Air Act
section 182(c)(2)(A) for submission of an attainment demonstration by
November 15, 1994. The SCAB has submitted modeling coupled with SIP
measures and commitments that provide the great bulk of reductions
needed for attainment. Granting additional time, as described above,
for the remaining measures is consistent with the statutory scheme
because the time delays are brief, in the context of the SCAB
attainment process, and EPA intends to ensure that there will be no
adverse impact on progress, attainment, or any other Part D requirement
as a result of the extended deadlines. EPA wishes to emphasize that the
South Coast attainment demonstration is clearly dependant on the
ability of the State and local agencies to faithfully adhere to their
rule adoption schedule. Their failure to do so will clearly jeopardize
the attainment demonstration no matter what resolutions are achieved
through the consultative process.
The South Coast attainment demonstration relies, in part, on
reductions from a fully-enhanced I/M program. As discussed in EPA's
proposed approval of California's enhanced I/M program (see section
II.A.2.c.), credits associated with this control measure will become
permanent following the State's submission of the required analysis
demonstrating that the enhanced I/M program is achieving the emission
reductions claimed in the attainment demonstration. At that point,
EPA's approval of the South Coast attainment demonstration will also
become permanent.
EPA believes that the current modeled attainment demonstration is
valid insofar as it projects attainment by the statutory attainment
date. EPA proposes to approve the modeling analysis at this time.
f. Overall EPA Action. EPA proposes to approve the South Coast
ozone SIP with respect to the Act's requirements for emission
inventories and demonstrations of 15% ROP and post-1996 ROP. EPA also
proposes to approve the State and local control measures and the
modeling analysis. With respect to the attainment demonstration, EPA
proposes to approve the attainment demonstration portion of the SIP if
the State submits, before EPA's final action on the ozone SIP, a
commitment to adopt a revised attainment demonstration and gap-filling
measures, if any are necessary after EPA's consultative process.
8. Southeast Desert
a. Identification of Plans. The Southeast Desert Modified Air
Quality Maintenance Area (``Southeast Desert'') is classified as a
severe-17 area based on a .24 ppm ozone design value measured in
Banning. Section 181(a)(2) of the Act
[[Page 10958]]
establishes a severe-17 classification for severe areas with a 1988
ozone design value between .19 ppm and .28 ppm, allowing these areas 17
years (rather than 15 years) to attain the ozone NAAQS. The Southeast
Desert covers the Victor Valley/Barstow region in San Bernardino County
(``Mojave''), the Coachella Valley/San Jacinto region in Riverside
County (``Coachella''), and the Antelope Valley region in Los Angeles
County (``Antelope''). The first of these areas is the responsibility
of the Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD). The
second and third areas are the responsibility of the SCAQMD. Separate
ROP and attainment demonstrations were prepared for each of the areas.
Air quality in all three areas is overwhelmingly impacted by transport
of ozone and ozone precursors from the South Coast Air Basin.
On September 9, 1994, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted the 1994
Air Quality Management Plan for the Coachella-San Jacinto Planning Area
(Appendix I-B of the South Coast 1994 AQMP) and the 1994 Air Quality
Management Plan for Antelope Valley (Appendix I-A of the South Coast
1994 AQMP).33 On October 26, 1994, the MDAQMD Board adopted the
post-1996 Attainment Demonstration and Reasonable Further Progress Plan
for the San Bernardino County Portion of the Southeast Desert AQMA, and
the Rate-of-Progress Plan for the San Bernardino County Portion of the
Southeast Desert AQMA.34
\33\ November 15, 1994 letter from Jacqueline Schafer, CARB, to
Felicia Marcus, EPA, forwarding the 1994 California Ozone SIP. The
SIP includes a November 15, 1994 letter from James Boyd (CARB) to
Felicia Marcus, EPA, forwarding the South Coast AQMP component of
the SIP and CARB Board Resolution No. 94-61 approving the South
Coast component. The South Coast component includes an October 6,
1994 letter from James M. Lents (SCAQMD) to James Boyd (CARB)
forwarding the 1994 South Coast AQMP and the SCAQMD Board Resolution
94-36 approving the AQMP. On November 15, 1993, CARB submitted to
EPA a rate-of-progress plan intended to demonstrate that 1990 VOC
emissions would be reduced by at least fifteen percent by 1996
pursuant to Section 182(b)(1) of the Act. On April 13, 1994, EPA
determined that this ROP plan was incomplete because it relied on
controls not yet adopted in regulatory form. The 1994 SIP updates
South Coast's 1993 ROP plan in order to correct this deficiency.
\34\ November 15, 1994 letter from James Boyd (CARB) to Felicia
Marcus, EPA, forwarding the MDAQMD portion of the SDMAQMA ozone SIP
and CARB Resolution No. 94-64 approving the Mojave Desert Plan.
Among other things, this submittal modifies an earlier 15%
Reasonable Further Progress Demonstration, adopted on March 23,
1994. EPA deemed this earlier SIP submittal incomplete on April 13,
1994.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. 1990 Base Year Inventories. The SIP provides detailed estimates
of the actual VOC and NOX emissions that occurred in 1990 in each
of the three portions of the Southeast Desert. These base year
inventories are summarized in the table labeled ``1990 Southeast Desert
SIP Inventories.'' More detailed inventory breakdowns appear in Chapter
3 of Appendix I-B of the South Coast 1994 AQMP (Coachella), Chapter 3
of Appendix I-A of the South Coast 1994 AQMP (Antelope), and Appendix A
of the Mojave RFP Plan.
1990 Southeast Desert SIP Inventories
[Tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coachella Antelope Mojave
Category -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stationary........................ 12.4 3.1 15.7 1.9 20.0 51.6
Mobile............................ 36.9 41.1 19.2 26.2 26.5 62.0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... 49.4 44.3 34.9 28.1 46.5 113.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. SIP Control Measures.
(1) Description
The SCAQMD's existing rules and committal measures apply not only
throughout the South Coast Air Basin but also in the SCAQMD's portions
of the Southeast Desert. The SIP includes the State measures and a
subset of the SCAQMD measures discussed above in sections II.A. and
II.C.7., but does not add to that list any unique State or local
controls for the Coachella and Antelope regions. The MDAQMD included in
the Mojave Plan the measures listed below as well as several mobile
source measures taken from EPA's Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for
the South Coast. CARB eliminated the FIP measures from the State's
submittal.
Mojave SIP Control Measures and VOC/NOX Reductions
[In Tons/day for 1996]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MDAQMD measure VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 1113 Architectural Coatings.......................... 0.92 .....
Rule 1160 Internal Combustion Engines..................... 0.23 6.08
Rule 461 Gasoline Transfer Dispensing..................... 3.74 .....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) EPA Action
EPA proposes to approve the control measures portion of the Mojave
plan under sections 110(k)(3) and 301(a) of the Act as strengthening
the SIP.
d. ROP and Attainment Provisions.
(1) ROP and Attainment Emission Targets
CARB's summary of ROP targets in Volume IV of the 1994 California
Ozone SIP identifies the following 15% ROP targets for the three
subregions within the Southeast Desert: Coachella 38 tpd VOC, Antelope
29 tpd VOC, Mojave 36 tpd VOC. CARB did not provide similar information
with respect to post-1996 ROP or attainment.
(2) State Approach
The SIP submittal for the three subregions includes detailed
information relating to compliance with the 15% ROP plan requirements.
With respect to the post-1996 ROP requirements, CARB and the SCAQMD
requested a waiver from the requirements for the Coachella and Antelope
subregions, based on the provisions of section 182(c)(2)(B)(ii) of the
Act, which allows the Administrator to approve post-1996 ROP plans that
achieve less than the 3% per year required reductions if the State
demonstrates that the plan includes all measures that can be feasibly
implemented in the area, including all measures achieved in practice by
sources in the same source category in nonattainment areas of the next
higher classification. CARB also asserted that
[[Page 10959]]
the post-1996 ROP requirements should be waived in all three subregions
based simply on the overwhelming transport into the Southeast Desert
(1994 California Ozone SIP, Volume IV, pp. IV-16 and IV-17).
In submitting the ROP and attainment demonstration plans for the
Southeast Desert, CARB asserted that ``the stringency of the NOX
and VOC precursor control strategy necessary for the district to meet
the 1994 ozone planning requirements for attainment and rate of
progress demonstrations is primarily dependent upon the severity of the
problem in the South Coast, as well as the mix and location of sources
which contribute to ozone precursor concentrations and the timing and
stringency of previously adopted controls in that area.'' (CARB
Resolution No. 94-64, para. 4)
The three local plans provide further documentation of the
overwhelming transport from the South Coast Air Basin. In the case of
the Coachella area, ozone and ozone precursors are transported by the
prevailing sea breeze through San Gorgonio (or Banning) pass. The
Antelope area is impacted by polluted air masses passing northward
through the Newhall and Soledad pass. The Mojave portion of the
nonattainment area is a vast, sparsely-populated high desert region, at
a greater distance from, but still strongly affected by, SCAB emissions
to the west and southwest.
CARB and the local agencies believe that the Southeast Desert will
attain the NAAQS by the 2007 deadline by virtue of the successful
implementation of the South Coast plan. The Mojave plan includes
further information to support MDAQMD's conclusion that opportunities
for further VOC and NOX reductions within the area are greatly
limited by the absence of significant sources of anthropogenic
emissions in the area, and the current degree of control imposed upon
those sources.
(3) Modeling and Attainment Demonstration
Photochemical grid modeling was required for the attainment
demonstration for the Southeast Desert Basin, because of the area's
severe-2 classification. Because of the relatively important role of
the western boundary conditions, it was determined that modeling the
SEDAB basin along with the South Coast Air Basin was preferable to
modeling the SEDAB basin alone.
Therefore, the attainment demonstration was performed by the
SCAQMD, using a domain that includes the South Coast Air Basin, much of
the Southeast Desert Basin, and Ventura County. The SCAQMD did not
enlarge the domain to include the entire Southeast Desert Basin.
Ideally, the domain would cover the entire nonattainment area. However,
the portions of the nonattainment area not covered by the domain were
expected to be below the NAAQS, when the other portions of the area are
able to demonstrate compliance with the standard.
The air quality results for the year 2007 projected inventories
were determined for the purpose of analyzing the ability of the
Southeast Desert to attain by the severe-2 attainment date. Five
episodes were modeled for the attainment demonstration. The episode
selection process was determined by the availability of an enhanced
data base of air quality and meteorological data, generated primarily
by the 1987 South Coast Air Quality Study. Since the modeling was
performed for the SCAB, the primary criteria for episode selection was
the presence of high ozone in the SCAB, rather than high ozone in the
Southeast Desert. The highest level of ozone recorded in the Mojave
Desert for the five episodes was .15 ppm, compared to a design value of
.24 ppm. Because of the high level of resources required to compile the
necessary air quality, emissions inventory, and meteorological data for
each episode, EPA accepts the decision not to model an additional
episode with higher levels of ozone in the Southeast Desert.
Using the emission reductions from proposed control measures,
including South Coast Air Basin emission reductions, the modeling
results show that peak predicted ozone concentrations for the year 2007
are below the ozone NAAQS.
In order to improve understanding of the formation of ozone in the
SCAB and transport between the South Coast, Southeast Desert, Ventura,
and San Diego air basins, a joint study is being planned by the local,
State, and Federal agencies, as well as the National Weather Service
and the Department of Defense. The purpose of the study is to provide
an enhanced data base of air quality and meteorological measurements,
both at the surface level and aloft, to allow modeling of more recent
episodes and a larger domain than is currently possible.
(4) EPA Action
EPA agrees with the State that attainment of the ozone NAAQS in the
Southeast Desert is heavily dependent upon reductions in the South
Coast. Modeling information, based on the South Coast UAM analysis,
supports the State's contention that reductions from the South Coast
SIP (along with SIP reductions within the area) will bring the
Southeast Desert into attainment by the statutory deadline. EPA
therefore proposes to approve the Southeast Desert modeling and
attainment demonstration under section 182(c)(2) of the Act.
e. Overall EPA Action. EPA proposes to approve fully the Southeast
Desert ozone SIP with respect to the Act's requirements for emission
inventories, control measures, and demonstration of attainment. EPA
will take action on the 15% ROP and the post-1996 ROP plan elements for
the three Southeast Desert subregions in separate rulemakings.
III. Summary of EPA Actions
EPA proposes to approve the following elements of the 1994
California Ozone SIP for the listed areas, as meeting applicable CAA
requirements:
(1) Emission Inventories for Santa Barbara, San Diego, San Joaquin,
Sacramento, Ventura, South Coast, and Southeast Desert, under section
182(a)(1) of the CAA.
(2) 15% ROP Plans for Santa Barbara, San Diego, San Joaquin,
Ventura, and South Coast, under section 182(b)(1).
(3) Post-1996 ROP Plans for San Diego, San Joaquin, Sacramento,
Ventura, and South Coast, under section 182(c)(2)(B) of the CAA.
(4) Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations for Santa Barbara, San
Diego, San Joaquin, Sacramento, Ventura, Southeast Desert, and South
Coast, under section 182(c)(2) of the CAA.
(5) All of the local control measures listed above in section
II.C., for each of the nonattainment areas, including the specific
emissions reductions for each milestone year, under sections 110(k)(3)
and 301(a) of the CAA. In the case of delinquent control measures in
the South Coast, EPA proposes approval only if a revised adoption
schedule is submitted.
(6) All of the State's control measures contained in the 1994
California Ozone SIP that EPA has not previously approved: M1--
Accelerated Retirement of LDVs, M4--Early Introduction of 2g/bhp-hr
Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicles, M7--Accelerated Retirement of HDVs, CP3--
Aerosol Paints, and Pesticides). EPA also proposes to assign specific
emissions reductions by nonattainment area and milestone year (as
displayed in the tables in section II.A.) for all of the State control
measures, including those previously approved under sections 110(k)(3),
182(e)(5), and 301(a) of the
[[Page 10960]]
CAA. All of these actions are proposed under sections 110(k)(3) and
301(a) of the CAA.
EPA proposes to approve California's I/M regulations under sections
110(k)(3) and 301(a). EPA also proposes to approve the State's basic I/
M program under section 182(b)(4) of the CAA and the enhanced I/M
program, including the assignment of specific emissions reductions
identified in section II.A.2. above, under section 182(c)(3) of the CAA
and section 348(c) of the Highway Act.
EPA will take separate regulatory action on the 15% ROP Plans for
Sacramento and the Southeast Desert, and the post-1996 ROP Plan for the
Southeast Desert.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
IV. Regulatory Process
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small
entities include small business, small not-for-profit enterprises and
government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than
50,000.
SIP approvals under sections 110 and 301 and subchapter I, part D
of the Clean Air 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,
it 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 a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.
Union Electric Co. v. U.S.E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
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.
V. Unfunded Mandates
Under sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act'') signed into law on March 22,
1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed
or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in
estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to
State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
Through submission of these SIP revisions, the State and any
affected local or tribal governments have elected to adopt the program
provided for under sections 110 and 182 of the CAA. These rules may
bind State, local, and tribal governments to perform certain actions
and also require the private sector to perform certain duties. To the
extent that the rules being approved today will impose any mandate upon
the State, local, or tribal governments either as the owner or operator
of a source or as a regulator, or would impose any mandate upon the
private sector, EPA's action will impose no new requirements; such
sources are already subject to these requirements under State law.
Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or to the private sector, result from this action. EPA has
also determined that this action does not include a mandate that may
result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to State, local, or
tribal governments in the aggregate or to the private sector.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Hydrocarbons, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Dated: March 4, 1996.
Felicia Marcus,
Regional Administrator.
Appendix: Status of EPA'S Activities Relating to the ``Federal
Measures'' in the California SIP Submittal
The information below represents the current status of EPA's
activities, including ongoing rulemaking, with respect to each of the
mobile source categories identified as ``Federal Measures'' in the 1994
California Ozone SIP.
Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicles
Measure M6 of the 1994 California Ozone State Implementation Plan
(``the SIP'') provides for adoption by EPA of a Federal oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) standard for new heavy-duty diesel on-highway
vehicles. The NOX standard called for in the SIP is 2.0 grams per
brake horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr), to be implemented beginning in 2004.
A Federal standard would help reduce emissions from the large number of
out-of-state trucks which operate in California.
EPA is fulfilling its commitment to propose tighter NOX
emission standards for Federal on-highway heavy-duty vehicles as part
of the NOX/PM (particulate matter) Initiative. On July 11, 1995,
EPA, the California Air Resources Board (CARB), and the leading
manufacturers of heavy-duty engines signed a Statement of Principles
(SOP) that established a consensus plan to substantially reduce
emissions from future trucks and buses on a nationwide basis. The goal
of the SOP is to ensure cleaner air in a manner which is both realistic
for the heavy-duty engine industry and responds to environmental needs
as well. As a result of the SOP, EPA published an Advanced Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on August 31, 1995. The ANPRM announced
plans to propose a non-methane hydrocarbon (NMHC) plus NOX
standard of 2.4 g/bhp-hr, or a combined NMHC plus NOX standard of
2.5 g/bhp-hr with an NMHC cap of .5 g/bhp-hr. Engines meeting these
future standards are expected to be over 80 percent cleaner than pre-
control engines. EPA is currently preparing a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) and expects to publish the NPRM late in the spring of
1996. The Final Rule has a target publication date of winter 1996-1997.
The new standards would be implemented beginning in 2004 and would
apply to all on-highway heavy-duty engines.
CARB played a very important role in the achievement of the
Statement of Principles (SOP). In addition, CARB has given EPA
tremendous support in the development of the ANPRM and the NPRM. As a
result of the SOP and rulemaking processes, EPA and CARB will have
harmonized programs for new heavy-duty engines, an advantage for engine
manufacturers.
Off-Road Industrial Equipment (Diesel)
Measure M10 of the SIP provides for adoption by EPA of a Federal
NOX standard for, at a minimum, new farm
[[Page 10961]]
and construction equipment with diesel engines rated at less than 175
hp (130 kw). These are the engines which California is preempted from
regulating under the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. The NOX
standard called for in the SIP is 2.5 g/bhp-hr (3.3 g/kw-hr), to be
implemented beginning in 2005.
In its 1991 Nonroad Study, EPA determined that nonroad diesel
engines rated at 37 kw and more, including those covered in SIP measure
M10, emit a substantial portion of the nation's NOX inventory. In
response, EPA set a 9.2 g/kw-hr NOX standard for these engines in
1994, to be phased-in beginning in 1996. The Agency also expressed its
intent to undertake a second tier of standard setting to further
control these emissions. The Clean Air Act provides for this as a
discretionary effort and contains no requirements or guidance regarding
the level or timing of the standards.
Initial work on this second tier of standard setting is currently
underway as part of the NOX/PM Initiative. The NOX/PM
Initiative has been a joint program of both EPA and CARB. EPA and CARB
recognize that harmonizing Federal and California standards would help
to achieve air quality goals in all states by eliminating the potential
for equipment with higher-emitting engines being transported across
state borders. Harmonized standards would also have obvious advantages
for manufacturers. The participation of CARB staff on this initiative
has been invaluable.
At this time, no decisions have been made regarding the level of
the second tier of Federal standards. Although substantial NOX
reductions are being pursued, there is no assurance that setting a
standard as low as 3.3 g/kw-hr in the 2005 timeframe will be the most
appropriate approach nationwide. A number of issues are likely to make
it difficult to set standards at such a level. Among these issues is
the strong desire by engine manufacturers for harmonization with
European nonroad equipment standards which are considerably less
stringent than the levels contained in the SIP. Another issue is the
effect that significant engine technology changes due to standards
could have on equipment designs. In order to fit redesigned engines
into their equipment, manufacturers may need to modify many of their
products to meet visibility, safety and performance specifications
which may require additional leadtime. Regardless of these issues, EPA
is committed to pursuing a second tier of standards for the heavy-duty
diesel nonroad engines covered by this measure.
Gas and LPG Equipment 25-175 Horsepower
Measure M12 of the SIP provides for adoption by EPA of a Federal
program that will implement three-way catalyst technology on new
nonroad equipment powered by gasoline or liquefied petroleum gas (LPG)
engines rated at between 25 hp (18 kw) and 175 hp (130 kw). The goal of
this measure is to reduce NOX emissions by at least 50 percent and
hydrocarbon emissions by 75 percent. This is a complementary measure to
measure M10 and much of the discussion of that measure applies here as
well.
EPA does not currently have any emission standards for gasoline or
LPG engines in this category. However, under a consent decree signed by
EPA with the Sierra Club on June 10, 1993, EPA agreed to determine by
November 30, 1996 whether or not to regulate large gasoline nonroad
engines and, if so, by what schedule. At this time, the Agency is
considering setting standards for these engines as part of the
NOX/PM Initiative. However, no decisions have been made regarding
the possible level of any standards. Although substantial emission
reductions may be pursued, there is no assurance that setting standards
as low as those sought by CARB would be the most appropriate approach
nationwide. The same issues that are likely to make it difficult to
achieve stringent standards for diesel nonroad engines also apply to
gasoline and LPG nonroad engines.
Marine Vessels
Measure M13 of the SIP provides for adoption by U.S. EPA and by the
International Maritime Organization (IMO) of emissions standards that
would reduce NOX emissions from new diesel engines used in ocean-
going vessels by 30 percent. M12 also assumes that EPA will issue
standards for non-ocean going vessels that will reduce NOX
emissions by at least 65 percent.
The IMO, a special agency of the United Nations, is developing
guidelines for the reduction of NOX and sulfur oxides (SOx) from
ships under a new Annex to the International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL 73/78). These guidelines
would address the control of air pollution from ships. An IMO committee
is scheduled to finalize a draft Annex in July 1996. After the
committee's action, a diplomatic conference will be held in the spring
of 1997 to review and approve the Annex. Each national will then
consider the Annex and its associated guidelines for implementation and
enforcement on vessels carrying its flag and on vessels entering its
waters. Before the Annex could be enforced within US waters, the
Congress would have to adopt it and its guidelines and then provide
appropriate authority to a government agency.
While it is true that the new Annex is intended to provide for a 30
percent reduction in NOX emissions, that reduction applies only to
ships beginning construction after a certain time (tentatively, January
1998). It should be noted that there is a provision for application to
existing ships that undergo a major modification or whose engines'
power output is changed by 10 percent or more. Beyond that, the Annex
does not address existing engines. Furthermore, achieving the target of
30 percent, would require full implementation of the Annex worldwide.
The NOX emission requirements in the new Annex would apply to
all engines over 100 kW installed on ships over 400 gross tons or which
have a total installed power of 1500 kW. The guidelines are composed of
two parts: Part A addresses guidelines for the implementation of
NOX limits for marine diesel engines; Part B addresses guidelines
for diesel engine test, survey, and certification for compliance with
the NO