[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 230 (Thursday, December 1, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-29579]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: December 1, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[ID8-1-6600a; FRL-5107-6]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Idaho
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approves a revision
of the Northern Ada County, Idaho State Implementation Plan (SIP) for
carbon monoxide (CO), which was submitted to EPA Region 10
Administrator, Chuck Clarke, on June 29, 1994. The action deletes
transportation control measures from the CO SIP which was last updated
in 1984. The action also adds to the CO SIP, enhancements to three
ongoing programs: Transit, rideshare, and vehicle inspection and
maintenance.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This direct final rule will be effective on January 30,
1995 unless adverse or critical comments are received by January 3,
1995. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published
in the Federal Register.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Montel Livingston,
SIP Manager, Air & Radiation Branch (AT-082), EPA, Docket #ID8-1-6600,
1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101.
Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for
public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information
Center, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW., Washington,
DC 20460. Copies of material submitted to EPA may be examined during
normal business hours at the following locations: EPA, Region 10, Air &
Radiation Branch, 1200 Sixth Avenue (AT-082), Seattle, Washington
98101, and the Idaho Division of Environmental Quality, 1410 N. Hilton,
Boise, Idaho 83706.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael J. Lidgard, Air & Radiation
Branch (AT-082), EPA, Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 553-4233.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Northern Ada County is a CO nonattainment area. The area was
initially designated as a nonattainment area in 1978. The CO SIP was
submitted to EPA in a series of submittals in the early 1980's. EPA
approved the CO SIP and published the Federal Register document on June
6, 1985. The area was designated after the 1990 Clean Air Act
Amendments as a ``not classified'' nonattainment area, since no
violations of the CO standard have occurred since 1987 (Federal
Register November 6, 1991). Since the area is not classified, there is
no requirement under the Clean Air Act for the state to submit an
attainment demonstration for this area. The state plans on developing a
maintenance plan and requesting a reclassification to attainment status
in 1995.
The Idaho CO SIP submitted in 1984 includes 14 transportation
control measures (TCMs) five of which were quantified as providing
specific CO emission reductions. Of the five measures that were
quantified in the original SIP, three measures (transit, rideshare and
improved parking design) fell short of the SIP goals, one measure met
the goal (staggered work hours), and one measure (transportation
improvement) exceeded the goal. The remaining nine TCMs which were not
quantified were either partially implemented or not implemented. The
vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program, not defined as a TCM,
exceeded the goals of the 1984 SIP. Changes in the socioeconomic trends
of the community over the last 10 years, federal funding of transit
budgets and unrealistic goals are all responsible for the shortfalls of
the 1984 TCMs.
Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) prohibits any
metropolitan planning organization (MPO) designated under section 134
of title 23, 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 implementation plan. Nothing in the transportation
plan or program may interfere with the implementation of any TCM in the
applicable implementation plan. Section 51.392 defines a TCM 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.
Under the federal conformity rule, before the Federal Highway
Administration can approve the transportation plan, program, and
projects for Northern Ada County, a conformity determination must be
made which shows timely implementation of all of the TCMs in the SIP,
and demonstrates that all obstacles in the way of implementation have
been removed. In the Northern Ada County case, the 14 TCMs identified
in the 1984 SIP must meet the timely implementation criterion in order
for the transportation plan or program to be approved and projects to
be funded. As noted above, a number of TCMs have not been, and are
currently not intended to be implemented. The State of Idaho has
therefore opted to revise the SIP to delete the 14 TCMs from the 1984
SIP and replace the measures with alternative TCMs and with vehicle I/M
program enhancements. The state submitted, on June 29, 1994, a SIP
revision which revises the TCM commitments and amends the I/M program.
As part of the SIP revision, the state also has provided a
demonstration that the substitute measures achieve at least as much
emission reductions as the reductions from the deleted 1984 SIP
measures.
The purpose of the SIP revision submitted to EPA on June 29, 1994,
is threefold. One is to delete old TCMs from the CO SIP. Secondly, the
SIP revision establishes new TCMs and new I/M requirements for the
Northern Ada County CO SIP. Finally, the 1994 submittal demonstrates
that the new TCMs, together with the enhancements of the I/M program,
have equal or greater than anticipated cumulative effects on CO
emission reductions than did the TCMs from the 1984 SIP submittal, thus
demonstrating that the SIP submittal does not weaken the existing CO
SIP.
II. This Action
This action approves the ``Minor Revision of the Northern Ada
County, Idaho 1984 State Implementation Plan (SIP) for carbon monoxide
(CO)'', submitted to EPA Regional Administrator Chuck Clark, from the
State of Idaho on June 29, 1994. The action deletes the 14 TCMs from
the 1984 CO SIP. The 14 TCMs from the 1984 SIP are no longer required
to demonstrate the timely implementation test of the conformity
regulation. The action approves enhancements to three existing
programs: transit, rideshare, and vehicle inspection and maintenance
(I/M).
A. Transit
The SIP commits to the following transit level:
1. Boise Urban Stages, Boise Transit System (BUS), will purchase 32
compressed natural gas (CNG) buses between 1994 and 1997 to replace its
entire fleet and increase the fleet size from 26 to 30 buses.
2. BUS will maintain its recently enhanced marketing efforts to
promote transit use in the area.
3. BUS has established the goal of breaking through the 1,000,000
ridership benchmark in 1994 and increasing ridership by 4% per year.
Therefore, the ridership levels will reach approximately 1,124,800 by
1997. These increases are, at a minimum, to maintain the existing
levels and offset the area's growth.
4. The City of Boise will launch the development of a three-phase
long range transit plan for the period of FY95-FY2006. The first phase
of the plan will address the transit system in the Boise Service Area,
the second phase will address the service in Ada County and the third
phase will address a multi-county service area in cooperation with all
cognizant agencies. Approximately $60,000 and 1.5 full time employees
have been committed to this effort for FY94.
B. Rideshare
The SIP commits to the following rideshare program:
1. Through marketing and promotion efforts by the Valley
Commuteride, rideshare level goals will increase to 16% of all commuter
trips by 1995 and to 17.5% by 1997.
2. Currently, 17 routes serve the Boise Area. The Ada County
Highway District (ACHD) Valley Commuteride goal will be to increase the
vanpool fleet by 10% per year; 19 vans by 1995, and 23 by 1997.
3. The Valley Commuteride Program will work with other public and
private entities to increase the number of Park and Ride lots and
promote the usage of existing lots. The goal is to initiate two Park
and Ride lots each year, expanding from 19 in 1994 to 25 in 1997. It is
also a goal to increase Park and Ride usage by 10% each year. These
increases are, at a minimum, to maintain the existing levels and offset
the area's growth.
On October 13, 1994, Ada Planning Association, the Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO) for the area, provided a letter to EPA
Region 10 which provided additional clarification to the SIP
commitments listed above (the letter is available in the docket for
public review). The letter clarifies that the purchase of buses, vans
and other equipment, the improvement/acquisition of Park and Ride lots,
and the budgeted marketing dollars are clearly SIP commitments. EPA
considers these commitments to be TCMs for the purpose of conformity
determinations. Since these TCMs are eligible for federal funding under
title 23 USC or the Federal Transit Act, their timely implementation
must be demonstrated in order for a conformity determination to be
made. The only exceptions from the conformity timely implementation
test from the SIP commitments listed above are the ridership goals. The
ridership levels of transit item 3 above, and the rideshare level of
rideshare item 1 above, are goals, and not considered TCMs for
conformity purposes. The ridership levels are expected to result from
the commitments made but are goals only and not enforceable under the
conformity criteria.
The October 13, 1994 letter also outlines the major components of
the current promotional campaign aimed at increasing transit ridership
and rideshare levels. The SIP commits to maintaining the marketing
efforts to promote transit and rideshare use.
The MPO also submitted on October 13, 1994, the Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) for Northern Ada County for fiscal year 1995-
2000. The TIP demonstrates the state and local agencies financial
commitment to the TCMs listed in the SIP. The TIP has been approved by
the MPO and has been included in the State TIP. By federal regulation,
the TIP is financially constrained. Additionally, the letter states
that the TCM projects in the TIP have been included in the adopted
budgets of the City of Boise and the Ada County Highway District
(ACHD).
The implementation agency for the transit program is the Boise
Urban Stages (BUS), a branch of the City of Boise government. Idaho
Code Sec. 50-322 allows the cities to operate a public transit system.
The City of Boise is officially designated the recipient of the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) funds for transit operation and capital
improvements. The implementation agency for the ridesharing program is
the Commuteride Program, which is a department of the Ada County
Highway District (ACHD). The Commuteride office operates carpooling,
vanpooling and Park and Ride services in Ada County and the adjacent
counties.
C. I/M
The SIP submitted and approved by EPA in 1984 established a
decentralized, manual program that inspected 1970 and newer light-duty
vehicles on an annual basis. Between 1990 and 1994, several changes
occurred in the program:
1. An anti-tampering program was started in 1990.
2. The program also was amended in 1990 to include model years
1965-1970, versus the prior commitment to inspect vehicles manufactured
from 1970 to the current year. This step increased the number of
vehicles inspected (based on 1990 registration data) by approximately
1,000.
3. The repair limit for 1981 and newer vehicles was increased from
$30 to $175 in 1990.
4. The program shifted to registration enforcement in 1993. Prior
enforcement was based on a three step notification to vehicle owners,
followed by court action. Since failure to have a vehicle inspected is
considered an ``infraction'' under the law, the largest penalty would
be $25 and a court order to get the vehicle inspected. Registration
enforcement allows Air Quality Board to prevent vehicles from getting
registered without proof of inspection.
5. The equipment specifications were changed in 1990. Inspection
facilities are now required to use computerized emissions analyzers
which further increases the effectiveness of the program.
6. The vehicle types covered was expanded in 1990 to include heavy
duty gas trucks (8,500 + lbs gross vehicle weight).
Ada County Ordinance 228, incorporating these changes, was
submitted with this SIP and is being approved with this action.
(Northern Ada County is a ``non-classified'' area since the CO
standard has not been violated since 1987. As such, the area is not
required to meet the ``basic'' or ``enhanced'' I/M program design as
specified in EPA I/M regulations.)
The SIP anticipates a CO reduction of 93,675 Kg/day from the
implementation of the transit, rideshare, and I/M programs. The 1984 CO
SIP anticipated reductions of 89,446 Kg/day from the entire TCM program
including the I/M program. This SIP revision has sufficiently
demonstrated that it is not a weakening of the 1984 SIP, but the test
for demonstrating no weakening of the SIP is less vigorous than the
test used to demonstrate emission reduction credit for control
strategies in either an attainment SIP or maintenance plan. Boise is
under no obligation to demonstrate attainment or to adopt TCMs, other
than to protect the levels of the 1984 SIP. As such, EPA's approval of
this SIP revision should not be construed to mean that the SIPs
estimation of emission reductions and commitments to the TCMs would be
considered adequate for a control strategy SIP.
In addition to the commitments identified above, other measures
have been implemented or will be implemented which are mentioned in the
SIP as voluntary measures. Although these additional programs were not
submitted as commitments, and are not being approved as part of the
federally enforceable SIP for Idaho, these additional measures will
provide emission benefits. These include transportation improvements,
additional CNG buses, improved parking design, and oxygenated fuel
usage (encouraged through tax credits versus oxygen in gasoline
specifications). Details of the quantification for both the committed
and voluntary measures are available in the docket for public review.
III. Administrative Review
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 populations of less than
50,000.
SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the CAA
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 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 EPA is publishing this action 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 January 30, 1995, unless, by January 3, 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 notice that will
withdraw the final action. All public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a
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 January 30, 1995.
The EPA has reviewed this request for revision of the federally-
approved SIP for conformance with the provisions of the 1990 Clean Air
Act Amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The EPA has determined
that this action conforms with those requirements.
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.
This action has been classified as a Table 2 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. The OMB has exempted this regulatory action from
E.O. 12866 review.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by January 30, 1995. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2), 42 U.S.C.
7607(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Note: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for
the State of Idaho was approved by the Director of the Office of
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
Dated: November 7, 1994.
Gerald A. Emison,
Acting Regional Administrator.
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 N--Idaho
2. Section 52.670 is amended by adding paragraph (c) (29) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.670 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(29) On June 29, 1994, the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare
submitted a CO State Implementation Plan for Northern Ada County,
Idaho.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) June 29, 1994 letter from Idaho Department of Health and
Welfare to EPA Region 10 submitting the CO SIP for Northern Ada County,
Idaho.
(B) Minor Revision of the Northern Ada County, Idaho 1984 State
Implementation Plan for CO, June 1994 (including Ada County Ordinance
228, City of Boise Ordinance 5273, City of Meridian Ordinance 547, City
of Garden City Ordinance 558, and City of Eagle Ordinance 177), as
adopted by the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare on June 28, 1994.
[FR Doc. 94-29579 Filed 11-30-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P