|
|---|
|
Approval and Promulgation of an Implementation Plan for Vehicle Miles Traveled; Illinois Publication: Federal Register Agency: Environmental Protection Agency Byline: Michelle D. Jordan Date: 6 December 1994 Subjects: American Government  • The Environment
|
[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 233 (Tuesday, December 6, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-29986]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: December 6, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR PART 52
[IL98-1-6589; FRL-5117-5]
Approval and Promulgation of an Implementation Plan for Vehicle
Miles Traveled; Illinois
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)
proposes to approve a request for a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision, addressing the Chicago, Illinois ozone nonattainment area,
submitted by the State of Illinois for the purpose of offsetting any
growth in emissions from growth in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) or
number of vehicle trips, and to attain reduction in motor vehicle
emissions, in combination with other emission reduction requirements,
as necessary to comply with Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) milestone
requirements of the Clean Air Act (Act). The rationale for this
proposed approval is set forth below; additional information is
available at the address indicated below.
DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received on or before
January 5, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,
Regulation Development Section, Regulation Development Branch (AR-18J),
USEPA, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604-
3590.
Copies of the documents relevant to this action are available for
inspection during normal business hours at the following location:
Regulation Development Section, Regulation Development Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604.
Please contact Patricia Morris at (312) 353-8656 before visiting
the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Morris, Regulation
Development Section, Regulation Development Branch (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8656.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the Act, as amended in 1990 (Act), requires
States containing ozone nonattainment areas classified as ``severe''
pursuant to section 181(a) of the Act to adopt transportation control
measures (TCMs) and transportation control strategies to offset any
growth in emissions from growth in VMT or number of vehicle trips, and
to attain reductions in motor vehicle emissions (in combination with
other emission reduction requirements) as necessary to comply with the
Act's RFP milestones and attainment requirements. The requirements for
establishing a VMT Offset program are discussed in the April 16, 1992,
General Preamble to Title I of the Act (57 FR 13498), in addition to
section 182(d)(1)(A) of the Act.
For certain programs required under the Act (including VMT-Offset),
USEPA had earlier adopted a policy pursuant to section 110(k)(4) of the
Act to conditionally approve SIPs that committed to provide the USEPA
with specific enforceable measures by a date certain. That
interpretation was challenged in Natural Resources Defense Council v.
Browner, consolidated lawsuits brought in the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In a full opinion, dated
May 6, 1994 (and in a March 8, 1994 Order and April 22, 1994 Amended
Order issued earlier) the Court found that USEPA's conditional approval
interpretation exceeded USEPA's statutory authority. While the court
did not specifically address the VMT Offset program in it's orders or
opinions, USEPA believes that the court's general conclusion that the
Agency's construction of the conditional approval provision was
unlawful precludes USEPA from taking action to approve any submitted
VMT Offset committal SIPs.
On November 26, 1993, the USEPA published a proposed rule (58 FR
62309) to conditionally approve Illinois's commitment for the VMT-
Offset requirement.
In light of the decision reached in Natural Resources Defense
Council v. Browner, USEPA has decided not to go forward with
conditional approvals of VMT committal SIPs, but that it would be
appropriate to interpret the VMT Offset provision of the Act to account
for how States can practicably comply with each of the provision's
elements. The VMT Offset provision requires that States submit by
November 15, 1992, specific enforceable TCMs and strategies to offset
any growth in emissions from growth in VMT or number of vehicle trips,
sufficient to allow total area emissions to comply with the RFP and
attainment requirements of the Act.
The USEPA has observed that these three elements (i.e., offsetting
growth in mobile source emissions, attainment of the RFP reduction, and
attainment of the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
create a timing problem of which Congress was perhaps not fully aware.
As discussed in USEPA's April 16, 1992, General Preamble to Title I (57
FR 13498), ozone nonattainment areas affected by this provision were
not otherwise required to submit SIPs that show attainment of the 1996
15% RFP milestone until November 15, 1993, and likewise are not
required to demonstrate post-1996 RFP and attainment of the NAAQS until
November 15, 1994. The SIP demonstrations due on November 15, 1993, and
on November 15, 1994, are broader in scope than growth in VMT or trips
in that they necessarily address emission trends and control measures
for non motor vehicle emission sources and, in the case of attainment
demonstrations, complex photochemical modeling studies.
The USEPA does not believe that Congress intended the VMT Offset
provision to advance the dates for these broader submissions. Further,
USEPA believes that the November 15, 1992, date would not allow
sufficient time for States to have fully developed specific sets of
measures that would comply with all of the elements of the VMT Offset
requirements of Section 182(d)(1)(A) over the long term. Consequently,
USEPA believes it would be appropriate to interpret the Act to provide
the following alternative set of staged deadlines for submittal of
elements of the VMT Offset SIP.
Under this interpretation, the three required elements of Section
182(d)(1)(A) are separable, and can be divided into three separate
submissions that could be submitted on different dates. Section 179(a)
of the Act, in establishing how USEPA would be required to apply
mandatory sanctions if a State fails to submit a full SIP also provides
that the sanctions clock starts if a State fails to submit one or more
SIP elements, as determined by the Administrator. The USEPA believes
that this language provides the Agency the authority to determine that
the different elements of a SIP submission are separable. Moreover,
given the continued timing problems addressed above, USEPA believes it
is appropriate to allow states to separate the VMT Offset SIP into
three elements, each to be submitted at different times: (1) The
initial requirement to submit TCMs that offset growth in emissions; (2)
the requirement to comply with the 15% periodic reduction requirement
of the Act; and, (3) the requirement to comply with the post-1996
periodic reduction and attainment requirements of the Act.
Under this approach, the first element, the emissions offset
element, was due on November 15, 1992. The USEPA believes this element
is not necessarily dependent on the development of the other elements.
The State could submit the emissions growth offset element independent
of an analysis of that element's consistency with the periodic
reduction and attainment requirements of the Act. Emissions trends from
other sources need not be considered to show compliance with this
offset requirement. As submitting this element in isolation does not
implicate the timing problem of advancing deadlines for RFP and
attainment demonstrations, USEPA does not believe it is necessary to
extend the statutory deadline for submittal of the emissions growth
offset element.
The second element, which requires the VMT Offset SIP to comply
with the 15% RFP requirement of the Act, was due on November 15, 1993,
which is the same date on which the 15% RFP SIP itself was due under
section 182(b)(1) of the Act. The USEPA believes it is reasonable to
extend the deadline for this element to the date on which the entire
15% SIP was due, as this allows States to develop the comprehensive
strategy to address the 15% reduction requirement and assure that the
TCM elements required under section 182(d)(1)(A) are consistent with
the remainder of the 15% demonstration. Indeed, USEPA believes that
only upon submittal of the broader 15% plan can a State have had the
necessary opportunity to coordinate it's VMT strategy with it's 15%
plan.
The third element, which requires the VMT Offset SIP to comply with
the post-1996 RFP and attainment requirements of the Act, will be due
on November 15, 1994, the statutory deadline for those broader
submissions. The USEPA believes it is reasonable to extend the deadline
for this element to the date on which the post-1996 RFP and attainment
SIPs are due for the same reasons it is reasonable to extend the
deadline for the second element. First, it is arguably impossible for a
State to make the showing required by Section 182(d)(1)(A) for the
third element until the broader demonstrations have been developed by
the State. Moreover, allowing States to develop the comprehensive
strategy to address post-1996 RFP and attainment by providing a fuller
opportunity to assure that the TCM elements comply with the broader RFP
and attainment demonstrations, will result in a better program for
reducing emissions in the long term.
On July 14, 1994, Illinois submitted to USEPA a SIP submittal to
fulfill the first portion of the VMT-Offset SIP. A public hearing had
been held on the submittal on June 22, 1994. The SIP submittal was
found to be complete in a letter dated August 4, 1994.
Illinois submitted a 15 percent plan SIP on November 15, 1993. In
the 15 percent plan Illinois uses TCMs amounting to 2 tons per day for
credit toward the 15 percent reduction. The Illinois 15 percent plan
SIP revision request is not yet complete. The USEPA is proposing to
approve the second portion of the VMT Offset submittal after final TCM
commitments are submitted and USEPA makes a favorable finding of
completeness on the Illinois 15 percent plan.
Illinois will submit TCMs as necessary to meet post-1996 RFP and
attainment at the same time as the post-1996 RFP and attainment
demonstration SIPs.
Evaluation of the State Submittal
Section 182(d)(1)(A) of the Act requires the State to offset any
growth in emissions from growth in VMT. As discussed in the General
Preamble, the purpose is to prevent growth in motor vehicle emissions
from canceling out the emission reduction benefits of the federally
mandated programs in the Act. The USEPA interprets this provision to
require that sufficient measures be adopted so that projected motor
vehicle volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions will never be higher
during the ozone season in one year than during the ozone season in the
year before. When growth in VMT and vehicle trips would otherwise cause
a motor vehicle emissions upturn, this upturn must be prevented. The
emissions level at the point of upturn becomes a ceiling on motor
vehicle emissions. This requirement applies to projected emissions in
the years between the submission of the SIP revision and the attainment
deadline and is above and beyond the separate requirements for the RFP
and the attainment demonstrations. The ceiling level is defined
therefore, up to the point of upturn, as motor vehicle emissions that
would occur in the ozone season of that year, with VMT growth, if all
measures for that area in that year were implemented as required by the
Act. When this curve begins to turn up due to growth in VMT or vehicle
trips, the ceiling becomes a fixed value. The ceiling line would
include the effects of Federal measures such as new motor vehicle
standards, phase II RVP controls, and reformulated gasoline, as well as
the Act mandated SIP requirements.
The State of Illinois has demonstrated in its submittal of July 14,
1994, that the predicted growth in VMT in the Chicago, Illinois
nonattainment area is not expected to result in a growth in motor
vehicle emissions that will negate the effects of the reductions
mandated by the Act. Further, Illinois has projected motor vehicle
emissions to the year 2007 and has not predicted an upturn in motor
vehicle emissions. The nonattainment area includes the counties of
Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, Will and the townships of Aux Sable
and Goose Lake in Grundy County and Oswego in Kendall County. The
MOBILE5a model was used to calculate fleetwide on-highway motor vehicle
emission factors for future years. The average summer weekday VMT for
1990 has been estimated to be 140.35 million miles for the baseline
inventory.
For the years 1990 to 1996, Illinois used a VMT growth rate of 2.7
percent per year for the Chicago nonattainment area. There are
indications that VMT growth may be slowing. Since the future VMT growth
can be difficult to predict, Illinois used three different possible VMT
growth rates to project mobile source emissions and demonstrate
compliance. Illinois estimated mobile source emissions at a VMT growth
rate of 1 percent, 2 percent and 2.7 percent per year for 1996 to 2007.
The July 14, 1994, submittal lists the predicted average summer weekday
VMT for the years 1990, 1996, 1999, 2004 and 2007 at each of the three
VMT growth rates.
The MOBILE5a model was used to estimate motor vehicle emission
rates for the specified years as mandatory control measures become
effective. The control measures whose effects were modeled were: The
Federal motor vehicle control program; volatility controls for gasoline
and reformulated gasoline; and the inspection and maintenance program
(both the current program to 1996 and the enhanced program from 1996 to
2007). There were no benefits taken for the employee commute options
program.
Even at the 2.7 percent per year VMT growth rate, no upturn in
mobile source emissions is predicted. The July 14, 1994, submittal
demonstrates that emissions will continue to decline through the year
2010. This demonstration meets the first requirement of the 3 part
submittal.
On November 15, 1993, Illinois submitted the 15 percent reasonable
further progress plan. This submittal relies on a 2 ton per day credit
from transportation control measures (TCMs) to meet the 15 percent
reduction. A listing of TCMs was submitted with the SIP submittal. On
December 9, 1993, the Chicago Area Transportation Study's policy
committee officially adopted this package of TCMs as a component of the
Illinois 15 percent plan. Many of the TCMs have already been
implemented and all of the TCMs have been included in the Chicago
area's transportation improvement program. The USEPA requires further
documentation on these TCMs before the second element can be fully
approved. The further requirements for Illinois' TCM package are
discussed in a May 20, 1994, letter from the USEPA Regional
Administrator to the Director of the Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency. At this time, Illinois has met the VMT Offset requirement by
using TCMs as necessary in the 15 percent plan. The USEPA is proposing
to approve the second element when a favorable finding of completeness
on the 15 percent plan is made.
The attainment demonstration and the post-1996 RFP SIPs are due on
November 15, 1994. Illinois will address any necessary TCMs to reach
attainment and meet the post-1996 RFP in those SIP submittals.
Summary of Findings
In the requested SIP revision submittal, Illinois has projected
motor vehicle emissions until the statutory attainment year of 2007
using the most recent population and economic growth projections. These
projections went through public hearing and comment on June 22, 1994.
Using a VMT forecast of 2.7 percent per year, these projections show
that motor vehicle emissions are not expected to rise above the ceiling
level through the year 2010.
In addition, Illinois has identified and evaluated a number of
specific TCMs to reduce single occupancy vehicle usage. Several of
these identified TCMs are currently being implemented.
Illinois has met the first requirement of the VMT offset plan.
Illinois has demonstrated in the July 14, 1994, submittal that
projected growth in VMT is not expected to result in an increase in
emissions from motor vehicles and is not expected to negate the
progress in emissions reductions required to meet attainment of the
standard by 2007. In addition, Illinois has used TCMs as necessary to
meet the 15% RFP requirements by 1996. The third requirement is for
Illinois to use TCMs as necessary to meet the post - 1996 RFP and
attainment of the standard. This third requirement will be submitted
with the post - 1996 RFP and attainment demonstration SIPs and will be
addressed in a future rule.
III. Proposed Rulemaking Action
Based on the submittal accompanying the State's SIP revision
request, USEPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision submitted by
the State of Illinois as satisfying the first and second elements of
the three VMT offset plan requirements.
This action has been classified as a Table 2 action by the Regional
Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on
January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by an October 4, 1993
memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation. A future notice will inform the general public of
these tables. On January 6, 1989, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) waived Table 2 and Table 3 SIP revisions (54 FR 2222) from the
requirements of Section 3 of Executive Order 12291 for 2 years. The
USEPA has submitted a request for a permanent waiver for Table 2 and
Table 3 SIP revisions. The OMB has agreed to continue the temporary
waiver until such time as it rules on USEPA's request. This request
continues in effect under Executive Order 12866 which superseded
Executive Order 12291 on September 30, 1993. The OMB has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.
Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for
revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to any SIP shall be
considered separately in light of specific technical, economic, and
environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and
regulatory requirements.
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., USEPA
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of
any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Alternatively, USEPA may certify that the rule will not have a
significant 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.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Act
do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements
that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP-
approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it does
not have a significant impact on small entities 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 USEPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.
See 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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ozone.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Dated: November 22, 1994.
Michelle D. Jordan,
Deputy Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 94-29986 Filed 12-5-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P