[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 105 (Thursday, June 2, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-13453]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: June 2, 1994]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-4891-4]
Air Pollution Control; Ozone Transport Commission; Recommendation
That EPA Adopt Low Emission Vehicle Program for the Northeast Ozone
Transport Region
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Notice of Round-Table Meetings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On February 10, 1994, the Northeast Ozone Transport Commission
(OTC) submitted a recommendation to EPA under Section 184 of the Clean
Air Act (the Act), for additional control measures to be applied
throughout the Northeast Ozone Transport Region (OTR). Specifically,
the OTC recommended that EPA require all State members of the OTC to
adopt an Ozone Transport Commission Low Emission Vehicle (OTC LEV or
LEV) program for the entire OTR. Under Section 184(c)(3) of the Act,
EPA is to review the OTC's recommendation to determine whether the
additional control measures are necessary to bring any area in the OTR
into attainment by the dates specified in the Act, and are otherwise
consistent with the Act. Based on this review, EPA is obligated to
approve, disapprove, or partially approve and partially disapprove the
OTC's recommendation.
EPA recently issued a proposed rule describing the framework for
EPA's action on the OTC's recommendation and describing the issues EPA
is considering in deciding whether to approve, disapprove, or partially
approve and partially disapprove the recommendation. Thereafter, EPA
held public hearings on the OTC's recommendation in Hartford,
Connecticut on May 2-3, 1994. As previously announced, EPA will be
holding a series of three public meetings in the OTR during June and
July, 1994 to provide an opportunity for interactive discussion of the
issues involved. As discussed in greater detail below, EPA is
structuring these three public meetings to generally follow the
framework for analysis it has described in its proposal for action on
the OTC's recommendation.
At the first meeting, EPA expects the discussion to focus on the
standard or test the Agency should apply in analyzing the OTC's
recommendation and the need for the Agency to act in a timely fashion
based on the best available information. Also at the first meeting, EPA
expects the discussion to focus on issues related to the OTC LEV
program, itself. At the second meeting, the Agency intends to take up
the policy, legal, and technical issues relating to the magnitude of
reductions needed, against which the OTC LEV program should be
assessed. Also, at the second meeting EPA intends to begin a discussion
of alternative proposals for obtaining additional emissions reductions
from new cars. EPA expects this discussion may carry over into the
third meeting. EPA also is reserving time at the third meeting to
discuss new issues that might arise in the course of the foregoing
agenda that EPA does not foresee now, or issues that should be
revisited in light of later discussions.
DATES: EPA will be holding three public round-table meetings on:
Wednesday, June 8, 1994 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Thursday, June
23, 1994 in Durham, New Hampshire; and Wednesday, July 13, 1994 in New
York, New York. Each round-table meeting will commence at 9 a.m. and
conclude by approximately 6 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The first round-table meeting will be held at: Center City
WHYY Television Station, Sixth & Arch Streets, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania.
The second round-table meeting will be held at: The New England
Center, University of New Hampshire, 1515 Stratford Avenue, Durham, New
Hampshire 03824.
The third round-table meeting will be held at: Holiday Inn Crown
Plaza, Manhattan, 1605 Broadway (at 49th Street), New York, New York
10019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Shields, Office of Mobile
Sources, USEPA, 401 M Street SW., Washington, DC 20460, telephone:
(202) 260-3450.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Organization of Public Meetings
EPA intends that the three public meetings will allow for a
fruitful exchange of information and views among the various interested
parties, the affected States, and EPA. The meetings will be organized
as ``roundtable'' discussions. In order to promote an interactive
discussion, EPA has retained a facilitator to direct discussions among
the various parties. EPA will arrange for representatives of the
various stake-holders, including the States, the auto manufacturers,
other industry, and environmental interest groups, to be seated at a
table with EPA. The facilitator will direct discussion first among
these representatives. All members of the public are encouraged to
attend and participate, and the public will have an opportunity to
comment on the discussion of each discrete topic on the agenda.
EPA believes that an opportunity for public interactive discussions
will provide a valuable opportunity for EPA to refine and synthesize
information from individual participants relevant to its action on the
OTC's recommendation. EPA is not, however, establishing the
representatives invited to participate in the roundtable discussions as
an advisory committee, and EPA is not seeking a group opinion or
recommendation from these representatives.
II. Agendas for Discussion
EPA's announcement of its receipt and availability of the OTC's
recommendation provides a short background discussion of the
recommendation and its context, 59 FR 12914 (March 18, 1994). EPA's
recent notice of proposed rulemaking, 59 FR 21720 (April 26, 1994),
provides a detailed description of the framework for EPA's action on
the recommendation and the issues EPA is considering in reaching a
decision. The reader should refer to these earlier notices for a full
understanding of the OTC's recommendation and the issues EPA is
interested in pursuing at the public meetings. Additional information
may be obtained from the docket for this rulemaking (A-94-11), which
includes a transcript of the May 2-3 public hearing held on EPA's
notice of proposed rulemaking. The description of the agendas for the
public meetings, below, presumes familiarity with these notices.
To allow participants to focus their attention and prepare for
topics on the agenda in advance, the Agency is disinclined to
substantially change these agendas. As the process advances, however,
the Agency may make slight changes in light of new issues that may
emerge or to proceed quickly through issues that may require less time
and attention than originally scheduled.
A. First Meeting; Philadelphia, PA on June 8, 1994
At the first meeting, EPA intends the morning discussion to focus
on the legal and policy aspects of the standard or test the Agency
should apply in analyzing the OTC's recommendation. The Agency believes
this is an overarching issue that should be addressed at the outset.
Background for this topic can be found in EPA's proposal, 59 FR at
21725-27.
The agenda for the morning session is as follows:
Interpretation of ``Necessity'' Finding
1. Relevance of standard under Section 211(c)(4)(C).
2. Relevance of alternatives.
3. Criteria for alternatives: standards for cost-effectiveness,
practicability and reasonableness.
4. Deference to the OTC and EPA's factual burden.
5. The need for a timely decision based on available information
despite scientific uncertainty.
At the first meeting, EPA intends in the afternoon session to shift
the discussion to focus on the recommended OTC LEV program, itself.
Background information for this topic can be found in EPA's proposal,
59 FR at 21722-23, 21730-31, and 21734-36. EPA believes there are both
important legal and policy, as well as technical aspects of the OTC LEV
program that merit discussion. Of course, the Agency has an obligation
to evaluate whether the recommended program is consistent with the Act.
While many issues regarding the legality of an OTC LEV program have
been the subject of litigation and may be addressed adequately in
written submissions, EPA believes that discussion of certain issues
would be helpful.
The agenda for the afternoon session is as follows:
OTC LEV
1. Required elements of an OTC LEV program for purposes of
consistency with Sections 177 and 209.
2. Reductions from an OTC LEV program: what; where; when.
3. Cost-effectiveness of an OTC LEV program.
4. Assumptions about fuel used throughout the OTR, including
attainment areas.
5. ZEV Component of OTC LEV
Is the ZEV sales mandate required to be part of the OTC
LEV program?
Status of Electric Vehicle technology
Permutations on the ZEV Sales Mandate
Possible conditions or incentives for ZEVs (such as sales
tax rebate or income tax credit).
Emissions impact of conditions or incentives for ZEVs in
the absence of a sales mandate.
Consistency of conditions or incentives for ZEVs with
Sections 177 and 209.
B. Second Meeting; Durham, NH on June 23, 1994
EPA intends the morning session to focus on the magnitude of
reductions needed in assessing the OTC LEV program or alternatives. The
Agency believes the amount of reductions that additional control
measures must achieve for attainment is a threshold criterion for
discussion. As noted in EPA's proposal, studies have consistently
concluded that substantial reductions in NOx and VOC emissions are
likely to be necessary to reduce ozone to the 0.12 ppm NAAQS or below
throughout the OTR during periods of adverse meteorological conditions.
The best available information about the amount, location, timing, and
type of these reductions may be important in assessing the need for the
OTC's recommended LEV program. EPA recognizes the discussions regarding
the magnitude of reductions needed involves legal, policy and technical
aspects that are in many ways interrelated. EPA expects that all of
these aspects will be addressed in the discussion of these issues.
Background information for the legal and policy aspects of this topic
can be found in EPA's proposal, 59 FR at 21727-30. Background
information for the technical aspects of this topic can be found in
EPA's proposal, 59 FR at 21730-31.
Also in the morning session, the Agency intends to provide an
opportunity for discussion of whether alternative control measures are
available to obtain sufficient emissions reductions so that more
stringent emissions standards for new cars would not be necessary. This
information could be relevant to the need for the OTC LEV program or a
program to obtain similar reductions from new cars. As discussed in
EPA's proposal, other measures may qualify as ``alternatives'' to LEV
only if the other measures, singly or in combination, generate enough
reductions to fill the entire shortfall needed without LEV. Background
information for the alternatives topic can be found in EPA's proposal,
59 FR at 21733-34.
The agenda for the morning session is as follows:
Magnitude of Reductions
1. Location of needed reductions; relevance of contribution to
downwind nonattainment, including discussion of requirements for
attainment demonstration and relevance of boundary conditions.
2. Best current information regarding the OTR's needs for
attainment, including timing of reductions for moderate, serious, and
severe areas.
3. Need for reductions for maintenance.
4. Magnitude of motor vehicle emissions in the overall inventory.
5. Confidence in current technical tools and information.
Sufficiency of Alternatives that Might Render OTC LEV Unnecessary,
Including Magnitude of Reductions Available, Cost, Practicability, and
Reasonableness
In the afternoon session, EPA intends to begin discussion of
alternative programs designed to reduce emissions from new motor
vehicles. EPA recognizes that such alternatives designed to reduce
emissions from new motor vehicles could conceivably constitute an
``alternative'' to OTC LEV. Such alternatives that obtain reductions
from the same sources as the OTC LEV program would thus be, at least in
part, redundant of the reductions that the OTC LEV program would
generate. (If entirely redundant of OTC LEV reductions, the sufficiency
of such an alternative to fill the entire shortfall might arguably not
be important.) EPA intends to begin discussion of such motor vehicle
alternatives in the afternoon session.
As a threshold matter, EPA notes that its responsibility under
Section 184 of the Act is to approve or disapprove the OTC's LEV
recommendation, and that Section 184 does not appear to authorize EPA
to mandate alternatives. Nevertheless, EPA believes that the emergence
of another approach to obtaining emissions reductions from new vehicles
might conceivably affect the need for the OTC LEV program.
EPA believes that threshold issues regarding such alternatives
include how they might affect EPA's obligations regarding the OTC's
recommendation now before EPA, and their legal consistency with
Sections 177 and 209 of the Act. Thereafter, EPA expects that the
discussion would turn to the specifics of the alternative proposals,
which will carry over into the third meeting.
The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) has presented one such
alternative. Under EDF's approach, the auto manufacturers would be
responsible for achieving reductions commensurate with those that the
OTC LEV program would achieve, and could do so by selling cars meeting
LEV standards or by trading emissions reduction credits among
themselves or with stationary sources. EPA expects to begin discussion
of this alternative in the afternoon session. EPA recognizes that it
may be ambitious to cover this entire topic at the second meeting, and
may have to resume discussion of it at the third meeting. Further
information pertaining to EDF's proposal is available in EDF's comments
and testimony in the public docket.
The agenda for the afternoon session is as follows:
Relevance of New Motor Vehicle Standards Alternatives to EPA's
Obligation to Approve or Disapprove the OTC LEV Recommendation
1. Should EPA disapprove the OTC LEV recommendation based on
proposals to change that program or on different, more stringent new
motor vehicle standards (e.g. The EDF proposal or the auto
manufacturers proposal, discussed below)?
2. Must there be a mechanism for EPA to be assured that the States
will adopt the different approach, and if so what would that mechanism
be?
EDF Trading Proposal
1. Mechanism for implementation.
2. Extent of trading: among auto companies; with stationary
sources; across State boundaries.
3. Baseline for assessing whether reductions are surplus and can be
traded to avoid otherwise applicable emissions reduction obligations.
4. Constraints on trading to ensure that areas reduce emissions
that contribute to nonattainment downwind.
5. Need for discounting credits.
6. Role of ZEVs in a trading scheme.
7. Consistency with Sections 177 and 209.
C. Third Meeting; New York, NY on July 13, 1994
EPA intends to dedicate the third meeting to continued discussion
of other proposals for obtaining additional emissions reductions from
new motor vehicles or other sources. EPA intends to first complete any
remaining carryover discussion of the EDF proposal from the second
meeting. EPA intends to then continue with a discussion of the auto
manufacturers' proposed alternative known as the Federal LEV or FLEV
program. EPA's proposal describes this alternative, 59 FR at 21732-33.
Also in the morning session, the Agency intends to provide an
opportunity for discussion of the proposal presented at EPA's May 2-3
public hearing by Texaco, Inc., Public Service Electric and Gas
(PSE&G), and Merck & Company, Inc. Further information regarding this
proposal is available in comments and testimony from these companies in
the public docket.
EPA expects that time will be left at the end of the third meeting
to address previously unidentified topics, alternatives or issues that
were not raised earlier. In addition, EPA expects that issues addressed
in the earlier meetings might be revisited at this time in light of
later discussions.
The agenda for the third meeting is as follows:
FLEV Proposal
1. Enforceability.
2. SIP creditability.
3. Consistency with Sections 177 and 209.
4. Emissions reductions, and comparison with LEV emissions
reductions, including timing.
5. EPA's authority to disapprove the OTC LEV recommendation based
on an alternative that States apparently could not adopt in their SIPs
or otherwise into State law.
NOx Cap Proposal from Texaco, PSE&G, and Merck
Additional Topics Not Previously Addressed or to be Revisited
Dated: May 24, 1994.
Mary D. Nichols,
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 94-13453 Filed 6-1-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
