[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 113 (Thursday, June 12, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32055-32058]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-15412]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[WI75-01-7304; FRL-5840-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan; Wisconsin
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve
Wisconsin's request to grant an exemption for the Milwaukee severe and
Manitowoc County moderate ozone nonattainment areas from the applicable
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) transportation conformity
requirements. On July 10, 1996, the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resource (WDNR) submitted to the EPA a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision request for an exemption under section 182(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act (Act) from the transportation conformity requirements for
NOX for the Milwaukee severe and Manitowoc County moderate
ozone nonattainment areas. The request is based on the urban airshed
modeling (UAM) conducted for the attainment demonstration for the Lake
Michigan Ozone Study (LMOS) modeling domain. The rationale for this
proposed approval is set forth in Supplementary Information; additional
information is available at the address indicated.
DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received by July 14,
1997.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Carlton T. Nash, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), USEPA,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590.
Copies of the SIP revision, public comments and EPA's responses are
available for inspection at the following address: United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. (It is recommended
that you telephone Michael Leslie at (312) 353-6680 before visiting the
Region 5 Office.)
A copy of this SIP revision is available for inspection at the
following location: Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) Docket and
Information Center (Air Docket 6102), room M1500, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street S.W., Washington, D.C.
20460, (202) 260-7548.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael G. Leslie, Regulation
Development Section (AR-18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and Radiation
Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, Telephone Number (312)
353-6680.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Clean Air Act section 176(c)(3)(A)(iii) requires, in order to
demonstrate conformity with the applicable SIP, that transportation
plans and Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) contribute to
emissions reductions in ozone and carbon monoxide nonattainment areas
during the period before control strategy SIPs are approved by USEPA.
This requirement is implemented in 40 CFR 51.436 through 51.440 (and
Secs. 93.122 through 93.124), which establishes the so-called ``build/
no-build test.'' This test requires a demonstration that the ``Action''
scenario (representing the implementation of the proposed
transportation plan/TIP) will result in lower motor vehicle emissions
than the ``Baseline'' scenario (representing the implementation of the
current transportation plan/TIP). In addition, the ``Action'' scenario
must result in emissions lower than 1990 levels.
The November 24, 1993, final transportation conformity rule
1 does not require the build/no-build test and less-than-
1990 test for NOX as an ozone precursor in ozone
nonattainment areas, where the Administrator determines that additional
reductions of NOX would not contribute to attainment of the
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. Clean Air Act
section 176(c)(3)(A)(iii), which is the conformity provision requiring
contributions to emission reductions before SIPs with emissions budgets
can be approved, specifically references Clean Air Act section
182(b)(1). That section requires submission of State plans that, among
other things, provide for specific annual reductions of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) and NOX emissions ``as necessary''
to attain the ozone standard by the applicable attainment date. Section
182(b)(1) further states that its requirements do not apply in the case
of NOX for those ozone nonattainment areas for which USEPA
determines that additional reductions of NOX would not
contribute to ozone attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Criteria and Procedures for Determining Conformity to
State or Federal Implementation Plans of Transportation Plans,
Programs, and Projects Funded or Approved under Title 23 U.S.C. of
the Federal Transit Act'' November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For ozone nonattainment areas, the process for submitting waiver
requests and the criteria used to evaluate them are explained in the
December 1993 USEPA document ``Guidelines for Determining the
Applicability of Nitrogen Oxides Requirements Under Section 182(f),''
and the May 27, 1994, and February 8, 1995, memoranda from John S.
Seitz, Director of the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to
Regional Air Division Directors, titled ``Section 182(f) NOX
Exemptions--Revised Process and Criteria.''
On July 13, 1994, the States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and
Wisconsin (the States) submitted to the USEPA a petition for an
exemption from the requirements of section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act
(Act). The States, acting through the Lake Michigan Air Directors
Consortium (LADCo), petitioned for an exemption from the Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT) and New Source Review (NSR)
requirements for major stationary sources of NOX. The
petition also asked for an exemption from the transportation and
general conformity requirements for NOX in all ozone
nonattainment areas in the Region.
On March 6, 1995, the USEPA published a rulemaking proposing
approval of the NOX exemption petition
[[Page 32056]]
for the RACT, NSR and transportation and general conformity
requirements. A number of comments were received on the proposal.
Several commenters argued that NOX exemptions are provided
for in two separate parts of the Act, in sections 182(b)(1) and 182(f),
but that the Act's transportation conformity provisions in section
176(c)(3) explicitly reference section 182(b)(1). In April 1995, the
USEPA entered into an agreement to change the procedural mechanism
through which a NOX exemption from transportation conformity
would be granted (EDF et al. v. USEPA, No. 94-1044, U.S. Court of
Appeals, D.C. Circuit). Instead of a petition under 182(f),
transportation conformity NOX exemptions for ozone
nonattainment areas that are subject to section 182(b)(1) now need to
be submitted as a SIP revision request. The Milwaukee and the Manitowoc
ozone nonattainment areas are classified as moderate or above and,
thus, are subject to section 182(b)(1).
The transportation conformity requirements are found at sections
176(c) (2), (3), and (4). The conformity requirements apply on an
areawide basis in all nonattainment and maintenance areas. The USEPA's
transportation conformity rule was amended on August 29, 1995 (60 FR
44762) to reference section 182(b)(1) rather than 182(f) as the means
for exempting areas subject to section 182(b)(1) from the
transportation conformity NOX requirements.
The July 10, 1996, SIP revision request from Wisconsin was
submitted to meet the requirements in accordance with 182(b)(1). Public
hearings on this SIP revision request were held on January 11 and 12,
1995.
In evaluating the 182(b) SIP revision request, the USEPA considered
whether additional NOX reductions would contribute to
attainment of the standard in Milwaukee severe and Manitowoc County
moderate ozone nonattainment areas and also in the downwind areas of
the LMOS modeling domain.
The role that NOX emissions play in producing ozone at
any given place and time is complex. NOX primarily
represents a sum of two oxides of nitrogen, namely nitrogen oxide (NO)
and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). In the presence of sunlight,
NOX photo-dissociates into NO and a single oxygen atom. The
oxygen atom reacts with molecular oxygen (O2) to form ozone
(O3). NO, on the other hand, near its source area readily
reacts with ozone to form O2 and NO2. The
generated NO2 is then free to photo-dissociate and lead to
ozone formation further downwind. The reaction of NO with ozone, which
locally reduces ozone concentrations, is referred to as ozone
scavenging and is one of the primary local sinks for ozone in the lower
atmosphere in and near NO source areas. Since emissions of
NOX from fuel combustion sources, whether internal
combustion engines or stationary combustion sources, such as industrial
boilers, contain significant amounts of NO, it is expected that ozone
concentrations immediately downwind of such NOX sources will
be reduced through ozone scavenging. Therefore, reducing NOX
emissions can lead to increased ozone concentrations in the vicinity of
the controlled NOX emission sources, whereas reducing
NOX emissions may lead to reduction in ozone concentrations
further downwind. Reducing NOX emissions in VOC-limited
areas (areas with low VOC emissions relative to NOX
emissions) may produce minimal ozone reductions or even ozone
increases.
As outlined in relevant USEPA guidance, the use of photochemical
grid modeling is the recommended approach for testing the contribution
of NOX emission reductions to attainment of the ozone
standard. This approach simulates conditions over the modeling domain
that may be expected at the attainment deadline for three emission
reduction scenarios: (1) Substantial VOC reductions, (2) substantial
NOX reductions, and (3) both VOC and NOX
reductions. If the areawide predicted maximum one-hour ozone
concentration for each day modeled under scenario (1) is less than or
equal to those from scenarios (2) and (3) for the corresponding days,
the test is passed and the section 182(f) NOX emissions
reduction requirements would not apply.
In making this determination under section 182(b)(1) that the
NOX requirements do not apply, or may be limited in the Lake
Michigan area, the USEPA has considered the national study of ozone
precursors completed pursuant to section 185B of the Act. The USEPA has
based its decision on the demonstration and the supporting information
provided in the SIP revision request.
II. Summary of Submittal
On July 10, 1996, the State of Wisconsin submitted as a revision to
the SIP, a request for a waiver from the transportation conformity
NOX requirements. The submittal included the LMOS UAM
modeling for the attainment demonstration for 3 ozone episodes during
1991. The modeling supported the request by documenting that
NOX reductions in the LMOS modeling domain would not
contribute to attainment and, in fact, would be detrimental to the goal
of reaching attainment. The WDNR held public hearings on the submittal
on January 11 and 12, 1995.
Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A, 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart T,
the SIP revision request seeks an exemption from the transportation
conformity requirements for NOX in the Milwaukee severe and
Manitowoc moderate ozone nonattainment area. The States have utilized
the UAM to demonstrate that reductions in NOX in the LMOS
modeling domain will not contribute to attainment of the standard. To
conduct the modeling analysis, the following steps were followed: (a)
Emissions were projected to 1996 (the deadline for implementation of
the 15 percent reasonable further progress reduction) and 2007 (the
attainment deadline for the severe nonattainment areas) from the 1990
base year, (b) it was assumed that a 40 percent VOC emission reduction
beyond that achieved as a result of emission controls mandated by the
Act would be necessary to attain the ozone standard in the LMOS
modeling domain, (c) a 40 percent NOX emission reduction in
grid B (that portion of the LMOS modeling domain that is essentially
composed of the ozone nonattainment areas within the modeling domain)
beyond the projected emission levels was assumed for all anthropogenic
NOX emissions, (d) a 40 percent VOC emission reduction and a
40 percent NOX reduction in grid B beyond projected emission
levels were assumed for all anthropogenic VOC and NOX
emissions and (e), the ozone modeling results for (b), (c), and (d)
were compared considering the modeled domain-wide peak ozone
concentrations and temporal and spatial extent of modeled ozone
concentrations above 120 parts per billion (ppb).
For all modeled days using 1996 and 2007 conditions, domain-wide
peak ozone concentrations for ``VOC-only'' controls were found to be
lower than or equal to those for ``NOX-only'' controls or
those for ``VOC plus NOX'' controls. In addition,
consideration of daily peak ozone isopleth maps (these maps are
included in the documentation of the section 182(b) SIP revision
request) shows that the ``VOC-only'' control scenario leads to the
smallest areas with predicted peak ozone concentrations exceeding 120
ppb.
Additional sensitivity tests were conducted for a 40 percent
NOX emission reduction that was applied only to point
sources in Grid B for episode 2 and 1996 conditions for both an assumed
NOX reduction alone and a 40 percent reduction in both VOCs
and
[[Page 32057]]
NOX. These sensitivity tests compared to the scenarios with
across the board anthropogenic NOX reductions demonstrated
that control of ground level NOX sources (such as
transportation sources) did not contribute to attainment of the
standard and in fact increased the domain wide peak ozone
concentrations exceeding 120 ppb and the number of hours that exceeded
120 ppb. This result was more pronounced than with the point source
only NOX control.
III. Analysis of the Submittal
Review of the modeling results show a very definite directional
signal indicating that application of NOX controls in the
Milwaukee severe and Manitowoc County moderate ozone nonattainment
areas would exacerbate peak ozone concentrations not in the LMOS
modeling domain. The LMOS modeling domain includes Chicago, Northwest
Indiana, Western Michigan and Eastern Wisconsin. The States and LADCo
have now completed the validation process for the UAM modeling system
used in the demonstration of attainment for the LMOS modeling domain.
Therefore, documentation supporting the validity of the modeling
results has been submitted with the SIP revision request.
It is noted that the use of simple, area-wide emission projection
factors raises some uncertainty in the modeling results for 1996 and
2007. Some changes in modeling results may be expected if area-specific
and source category-specific projection factors are used instead of the
average factors used in these analyses. These more detailed projection
factors will be used in the final demonstration of attainment for the
LMOS domain. These changes, however, are not expected to reverse the
directional signal of the modeling done to date, which shows that
NOX reductions will not contribute to attainment in
Milwaukee severe and Manitowoc County moderate ozone nonattainment
areas and throughout the LMOS domain.
Although ozone concentrations modeled further downwind from the
urban source areas increase as a result of increased NOX
point source emissions, this is not the case with the ground level
NOX sources. LADCo and the States view the potential
increase in outflow ozone concentrations with increasing NOX
point source emissions to be marginal. More importantly, the SIP
revision request demonstrates that additional reductions in
NOX would not contribute to attainment of the ozone standard
in the LMOS domain. These results are believed to be consistent with
USEPA's section 185B report to Congress. Therefore, based on the
report's conformance with USEPA guidance, the USEPA believes the State
of Wisconsin's demonstration is adequate, and thus is proposing to
approve the transportation conformity waiver request. It is noted by
LADCo, however, that subsequent modeling analyses may lead to an ozone
attainment plan which includes, for specified portions of the LMOS
domain only, both NOX and VOC emission controls. The
modeling indicates that these NOX emission controls most
likely will be limited to rural areas, will not be required in the
Wisconsin nonattainment area and will not be applied to ground level
sources.
Monitoring data such as concentrations of non-methane hydrocarbons
and NOX and derived/monitored ozone production potentials of
air parcels, collected for the urban source areas during the 1991 field
study, generally supports the approval of the NOX waiver.
However, the primary basis for approval of the NOX waiver is
the modeling results submitted in support of the waiver. The 1991 field
data by themselves do not provide adequate support for the waiver,
since these data are limited in nature and do not assess the impacts of
post-1991 NOX controls on LMOS modeling domain peak ozone
concentrations.
VOC and NOX emission reductions were found to produce
different impacts spatially. In and downwind of major urban areas,
within the ozone nonattainment areas, VOC reductions were effective in
lowering peak ozone concentrations, while NOX emission
reductions resulted in increased peak ozone concentrations. Farther
downwind, within attainment areas, VOC emissions reductions became less
effective for reducing ozone concentrations, while NOX
emission reductions were effective in lowering ozone concentrations.
The magnitude of ozone decreases farther downwind due to NOX
emission reductions was less than the magnitude of ozone increases in
the ozone nonattainment areas as a result of the same NOX
emission reductions.
Analyses of ambient data by LMOS contractors provided results which
corroborated the modeling results. These analyses identified areas of
VOC and NOX-limited conditions (VOC-limited conditions would
imply a greater sensitivity of ozone concentrations to changes in VOC
emissions; the reverse would be true for NOX-limited
conditions) and tracked the ozone and ozone precursor concentrations in
the urban plumes as they moved downwind. The analyses indicated VOC-
limited conditions in the Chicago/Northwest Indiana and Milwaukee areas
and NOX-limited conditions further downwind. These results
imply that VOC controls in the Chicago/Northwest Indiana, Milwaukee,
and Western Michigan areas would be more effective at reducing peak
ozone concentrations within the Lake Michigan ozone nonattainment
areas.
The consistency between the modeling results and the ambient data
analysis results for all episodes with joint data supports the view
that the UAM modeling system developed in the LMOS may be used to
investigate the relative merits of VOC versus NOX emission
controls. The UAM-V results for all modeled episodes point to the
benefits of VOC controls versus NOX controls in reducing the
modeled domain peak ozone concentrations.
For a more detailed analysis of the modeling analysis results,
please see the August 22, 1994 memorandum entitled ``Technical Review
of a Four State Request for a Section 182(f) Exemption from Oxides of
Nitrogen (NOX) Reasonably Available Control Technology
(RACT) and New Source Review (NSR) Requirements'', which is contained
in the docket for this action.
The USEPA believes LADCo's UAM application has adequately met the
requirement to demonstrate that NOX controls within the
Milwaukee severe and Manitowoc County moderate ozone nonattainment
areas and throughout the LMOS domain will not contribute, but instead
will interfere with attainment of the ozone standard.
IV. EPA Action
The EPA is proposing approval of the transportation conformity
NOX waiver SIP revision for the State of Wisconsin. In light
of the modeling completed thus far and considering the importance of
the Ozone Transport Assessment Group (OTAG) process and attainment plan
modeling efforts, EPA proposes to approve this NOX waiver on
a contingent basis. When the results of OTAG technical work are
available, EPA intends to require appropriate States to submit SIP
measures to ensure emissions reductions of ozone precursors needed to
prevent significant transport of ozone. The EPA will evaluate the OTAG
technical work, along with EPA's emissions reduction requirements, to
determine whether the NOX waiver should be continued,
altered, or removed.
The EPA also reserves the right to require NOX emission
controls for transportation sources under section 110(a)(2)(D) of the
Act if future ozone
[[Page 32058]]
modeling demonstrates that such controls are needed to achieve the
ozone standard in downwind areas.
V. Miscellaneous
A. Applicability to Future SIP Decisions
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any
SIP. The EPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP in
light of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in
relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
B. Executive Order 12866
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 E.O. 12866 review.
C. Regulatory Flexibility
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 economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit
enterprises, and government entities with jurisdiction over populations
of less than 50,000.
This approval does not impose any requirements on small entities.
Therefore, I certify that this action does not have a significant
economic impact on any small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
costs of $100 million or more to State, local, or tribal governments in
the aggregate; or to the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under
section 205, the EPA must select the most cost-effective and least
burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule and is
consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 requires the EPA to
establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments that
may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
The EPA has determined that the approval proposed does not include
a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or
more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or
to the private sector.
This Federal document does not imposes any Federal requirements.
Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal
governments, or the private sector, result from this action.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Oxides of Nitrogen, Transportation
conformity, Transportation--air quality planning, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Dated: May 30, 1997.
Valdas V. Adamkus,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-15412 Filed 6-11-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
