[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 83 (Monday, May 1, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21045-21047]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10613]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[CA 122-1-6982a; FRL-5198-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California
State Implementation Plan Revision, Santa Barbara County Nonattainment
Area, Transportation Control Measure Replacement
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to approve a revision to the California State
Implementation Plan (SIP) for ozone for Santa Barbara County, which was
submitted to EPA on November 14, 1994. This direct final approval
action deletes a transportation control measure (TCM) from the
federally-approved 1982 California ozone SIP and replaces it with a TCM
from the state-adopted 1994 California ozone SIP. The intended effect
of direct final approval of this SIP revision is to control emissions
of ozone precursors in accordance with the requirements of the Clean
Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA or 1990 Act).
DATES: This direct final action is effective on June 30, 1995 unless
adverse or critical comments are received by May 31, 1995. If the
effective date is delayed, a timely notice will be published in the
Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the State submittal and EPA's technical support
document are available for public inspection at EPA's Region IX office
during normal business hours. Copies of the submitted SIP revision are
available for inspection at the following locations:
Mobile Sources Section (A-2-1), Air and Toxics Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, CA 94105
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), ANR 443, 401 ``M''
Street SW., Washington, DC 20460
California Air Resources Board, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 92123
Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District, 26 Castillian
Drive B-23, Goleta, CA 93117
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Schechter, Mobile Sources
Section, Air and Toxics Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone:
(415) 744-1227.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On March 3, 1978, Santa Barbara County was designated an ozone
nonattainment area by EPA under the provisions of the Clean Air Act, as
amended in 1977. 43 FR 8964, 40 CFR 81.305. On December 31, 1982 the
State of California submitted the 1982 ozone SIP for Santa Barbara
County.
EPA approved California's 1982 ozone SIP for Santa Barbara County
and published the Federal Register document on December 20, 1983 (48 FR
56215). The 1982 Santa Barbara County SIP, or Air Quality Attainment
Plan (AQAP), submitted in 1982 included nine TCMs. One of these was the
Goleta Transit Center, a transit center with limited park-and-ride
capability in downtown Goleta. No emission reduction credit was claimed
for this TCM in the 1982 AQAP. According to the Santa Barbara County
Association of Governments (SBCAG), the Goleta Transit Center and its
ancillary park-and-ride lot were constructed in 1980 and operated until
1985. The facilities were closed and sold by the Santa Barbara
Metropolitan Transit District (SBMTD) in October 1985 due to
insufficient usage.
On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (1990
Act) were enacted. Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42
U.S.C. 7401-7671q. On November 14, 1994, the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) submitted the 1994 ozone SIP to EPA. The portion of this
SIP for the Santa Barbara County nonattainment area, the 1994 Clean Air
Plan (CAP), stated that the TCMs in the 1994 CAP superseded those in
the 1982 AQAP. The 1994 CAP was adopted by the Santa Barbara County Air
Pollution Control District (SBAPCD) on November 2, 1994 and later by
CARB on November 14, 1994.
On January 18, 1995, the SBAPCD provided a letter to EPA requesting
expedited rulemaking action to replace the Goleta Transit Center TCM in
the 1982 AQAP with TCM-5, Improve Commuter Public Transit Service, in
the 1994 CAP.
In a letter to the State dated March 24, 1995, EPA found the
submittal of TCM-5 complete.
II. Summary and Evaluation of SIP Revision
Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) prohibits any
metropolitan planning organization (MPO) designated under section 134
of title 23 of the United States Code, from approving any
transportation project, program, or plan which does not conform to a
SIP approved under section 110 of the CAA. The federal transportation
conformity regulation (40 CFR part 51, subpart T) implements the
transportation-related requirements of section 176(c). Section 51.418
of the regulation requires the transportation plan and program to
provide for the timely implementation of transportation control
measures (TCMs) from the applicable federally-approved implementation
plan. A TCM is defined in section 51.392 as any measure that is
specifically identified and committed to in the applicable
implementation plan that is either one of the types listed in section
108 of the CAA, or any other measure for the purpose of reducing
emissions or concentration of air pollutants from transportation
sources by reducing vehicle use or changing traffic flow or congestion
conditions. [[Page 21046]]
Under the federal transportation conformity rule, before an MPO or
the Department of Transportation (DOT) can approve a transportation
plan or program, a conformity determination must be made which shows
timely implementation of all of the TCMs in the approved SIP and
demonstrates that all obstacles to TCM implementation have been
removed. In the case of Santa Barbara County, the nine TCMs identified
in the 1982 SIP must meet the timely implementation criterion in order
for the transportation plan and program to be approved and projects to
be funded. Because the Goleta Transit Center was implemented but was
later discontinued, this TCM cannot be found to meet the criterion of
timely implementation.
The preamble to the conformity regulation at 58 FR 62198 states
that if the original project sponsor or the cooperative planning
process decides not to implement the TCM or decides to replace it with
another TCM, a SIP revision which removes the TCM will be necessary
before plans and programs may be found in conformity. (In order to be
approved by EPA, such a SIP revision must include substitute measures
that achieve emissions reductions sufficient to meet all applicable
requirements of the CAA, including section 110(l).)
In order to meet the requirement of the conformity regulation for
timely implementation of TCMs and to enable FHWA to approve SBCAG's
transportation plan and program, Santa Barbara County and the State of
California have opted to revise the SIP to delete the Goleta Transit
Center TCM from the SIP and replace the measure with an alternative TCM
for which timely implementation can be demonstrated. On November 14,
1994, California submitted a SIP revision for Santa Barbara County
which replaces the Goleta Transit Center TCM with TCM-5, Improve
Commuter Public Transit Service.
The state-adopted 1994 SIP commits to implement the following
levels of transit service associated with TCM-5:
1. SBMTD Isla Vista/Santa Barbara City College (SBCC) Express
Service: SBMTD will continue to operate an express bus line between
Isla Vista and SBCC (about 25 miles). The service was initiated in
September 1993.
2. SBMTD Downtown Waterfront Shuttle Service and Expansion: SBMTD
will continue to provide electric shuttle service along State Street
and on the Waterfront in the City of Santa Barbara. In addition, SBMTD
will purchase two additional electric-powered buses to expand this
service.
3. APCD Clean Air Express and Expansion: The SBAPCD will continue
to operate compressed natural gas (CNG) commuter bus service from the
northern county and Ventura County into Santa Barbara. Four new buses,
for a total of nine, will be added to this service.
4. Santa Maria Area Transit (SMAT) New Service Lines and Expansion:
SMAT will maintain new Route 6 which was added in 1993. Another route,
Route 7, will be added to this service. In addition, SMAT will purchase
one new CNG bus to serve Route 7.
5. Santa Ynez Transit Expansion: A new electric bus will be
purchased for expansion of fixed route service in the Santa Ynez
Valley.
6. Santa Barbara Rail Service Expansion (AMTRAK): Two additional
trains per day are planned between Santa Barbara and San Diego.
Improvements to the existing Santa Barbara rail station have also been
programmed to support the service expansion.
The SIP anticipates a reduction of 3,301 daily vehicle trips, or a
total of 45,410 daily VMT in 1996 from the implementation of TCM-5. The
reduction in vehicle trips and VMT is estimated to lead to emission
reductions of 36.2 kg ROG/day and 73.1 kg NOX/day in 1996. The
1982 ozone SIP took no emission reduction credit for the Goleta Transit
Center. SBMTD survey data indicated that an average of seven persons
per day were using the transit center and the park-and-ride lot was
providing free parking for patrons of nearby businesses. Because TCM-5
is expected to result in significantly greater reductions in vehicle
trips, VMT, and emissions than the Goleta Transit Center, the SIP
revision does not weaken the federally-approved 1982 SIP.
III. EPA's Action
This action approves TCM-5, contained in the California ozone SIP
for Santa Barbara County submitted to EPA by the State of California on
November 14, 1994. The action also deletes the Goleta Transit Center
from the 1982 ozone SIP. This latter TCM is no longer subject to the
timely implementation criterion of the conformity regulation. EPA has
evaluated the submitted TCM and has determined that it is consistent
with the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. Therefore, TCM-5 in
Santa Barbara's SIP revision is being approved under section 110(k)(3)
of the CAA as meeting the requirements of sections 110(a) and (l) and
part D. Today's action does not affect the remainder of the submitted
1994 ozone SIP revision for Santa Barbara County. EPA will take
separate action on the bulk of Santa Barbara's 1994 ozone SIP revision
in future rulemaking.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future implementation
plan. Each request for revision to the state implementation plan shall
be considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
EPA is publishing this notice without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal
Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision
should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be
effective June 30, 1995, unless, by May 31, 1995, adverse or critical
comments are received.
If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn
before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based a separate proposed rule.
The EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. Any
parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this
time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this
action will be effective June 30, 1995.
IV. Regulatory Process
This action has been classified as a Table 2 Action by the Regional
Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on
January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by an October memorandum
from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation.
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 businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises and
government entities with jurisdiction over population of less than
50,000.
SIP approvals under sections 110 and 301(a) and subchapter I, Part
D of the CAA do not create any new requirements, but simply approve
[[Page 21047]] requirements that the State is already imposing.
Therefore, because the Federal SIP-approval does not impose any new
requirements, I certify that it does not have a significant impact on
any small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the
Federal-state relationship under the CAA, preparation of a regulatory
flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic
reasonableness of state action. The CAA 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). The OMB has
exempted this action from review under Executive Order 12866.
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 this state implementation plan revision, the
State and any affected local or tribal governments have elected to
adopt the program provided for under sections 110 and 182(b) of the
Clean Air Act. 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 by this action 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 direct final 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, Hydrocarbons,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Note: Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation
Plan for the State of California was approved by the Director of the
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
Dated: April 19, 1995.
Jeff Zelikson,
Acting Regional Administrator.
Subpart F of part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart F--California
2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(211) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(211) Revised Clean Air Plans for ozone for the following APCDs
submitted on November 14, 1994, by the Governor's designee.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Santa Barbara Air Pollution Control District
(1) TCM-5, Improve Commuter Public Transit Service, adopted on
November 2, 1994
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 95-10613 Filed 4-28-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
