[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 14, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13630-13634]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6161]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 13631]]

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[IL63-3-6803; FRL-5170-5]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan; State of 
Illinois

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On September 13, 1994, the United States Environmental 
Protection Agency (USEPA) published direct final rulemaking approving 
1990 base year ozone precursor emissions inventories for the Chicago, 
Metro-East St. Louis, and Jersey County, Illinois ozone nonattainment 
areas as a revision to the Illinois State Implementation Plan (SIP). On 
the same day, a proposed rule was also published which established a 
30-day public comment period, noting that, if adverse comments were 
received regarding the direct final rule, the USEPA would withdraw the 
direct final rule and publish an additional final rule to address the 
public comments. Adverse comments were received during the public 
comment period. This revised final rule summarizes the public comments 
and USEPA's responses and finalizes the approval of the 1990 base year 
ozone precursor emissions inventories for the Illinois ozone 
nonattainment areas.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action will be effective April 13, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the SIP revision, public comments and USEPA's 
responses are available for inspection at the following address: (It is 
recommended that you telephone Edward Doty at (312) 886-6057 before 
visiting the Region 5 office.)

United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and 
Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edward Doty, Regulation Development 
Section (AR-18J), Regulation Development Branch, Air and Radiation 
Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, Telephone Number (312) 
886-6057.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background Information

    The 1990 base year emissions inventories discussed in this rule 
were submitted by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) 
on November 12, 1993 in compliance with the requirements of section 
182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (Act). The emission inventory submittal 
covers the emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), Oxides of 
Nitrogen (NOx), and Carbon Monoxide (CO) for the following ozone 
nonattainment areas: Chicago (Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, and 
Will Counties, Aux Sable and Goose Lake Townships in Grundy County, and 
Oswego Township in Kendall County); Metro-East St. Louis (Madison, 
Monroe, and St. Clair Counties); and Jersey County. In addition to 
emissions from the nonattainment areas, the submittal also covers VOC, 
NOx, and CO emissions from major stationary sources located within 
25 miles of the ozone nonattainment areas. The focus of this rulemaking 
is the ozone precursor emissions in the ozone nonattainment areas.
    On September 13, 1994 (59 FR 46920), USEPA published a direct final 
rule approving the emissions inventories as a revision of the Illinois 
ozone SIP. On the same day, USEPA published a proposed rule (59 FR 
46948) noting that if adverse comments were received regarding the 
direct final rule, the USEPA would withdraw the direct final and 
publish another final rule addressing the public comments. Adverse 
comments were received regarding the direct final rule. This subsequent 
final rule addresses the adverse comments and announces USEPA's final 
action regarding Illinois' base year ozone precursor emission 
inventories.

II. Public Comments

    The following discussion summarizes the comments received regarding 
the emissions inventories and the USEPA responses to those comments. 
All comments were included in a single set of comments submitted 
jointly by the American Lung Association of Metropolitan Chicago and 
the Citizens Commission for Clean Air in the Lake Michigan Basin.
    Comment: The commenters note that air quality monitoring and 
modeling performed by the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium 
(LADCO) indicates that the Chicago area emissions inventory 
underestimates VOC emissions by as much as 1.5 times and overestimates 
NOx emissions. VOC speciation profiles indicate that the inventory 
is underestimating mobile and/or area source emissions.
    The commenters point out that the accuracy of the emissions 
inventory is critical since it is difficult to solve an ozone 
attainment problem when the source of the problem is not understood. 
Errors in the emissions inventory could lead to errors in the 
calculated emission reduction requirement (both in total and by source 
category) and the efficacy of the VOC versus NOx controls, all of 
which are important issues in the Lake Michigan Basin.
    The commenters note that monitoring data contradicting emission 
inventories is not unique to northeastern Illinois, suggesting that 
there may be a fundamental flaw in the process recommended by the USEPA 
for developing emission inventories. The commenters state that the 
USEPA should act to resolve these problems immediately. Furthermore, 
the inventories should be adjusted to be consistent with convincing 
monitoring data like those collected by LADCO.
    Response: The USEPA is aware of the monitoring data collected 
during the Lake Michigan Ozone Study (LMOS) and their implications 
regarding the emissions inventory. The data imply that VOC emissions in 
the LMOS domain, and particularly in the Chicago and Milwaukee ozone 
nonattainment areas, are underestimated or that NOx emissions are 
overestimated. It is noted, however, that these monitoring data are not 
sufficient in quantity and detail to allow detailed, source category-
specific corrections to the emissions inventory. The data imply that 
the States and the USEPA should continue to pursue improved emission 
inventory techniques.
    It is further noted that the LMOS States (Illinois, Indiana, 
Michigan, and Wisconsin) have pursued improvements in the emissions 
inventories subsequent to the submittal of the 1990 base year emissions 
inventories. These emissions inventory improvements have led to 
significantly improved agreement with the monitoring data collected 
during the LMOS. The emissions data to be used in the Lake Michigan 
Ozone Control Program (LMOP) (the modeling analysis conducted to select 
emission control measures, to assess the merits of VOC versus NOx 
controls, and to demonstrate attainment of the ozone standard in the 
LMOS/LMOP modeling domain) agree favorably with the monitoring data. 
Some changes in the base year emissions inventories are expected to 
result from this process. These changes will be assessed by the USEPA 
when the demonstrations of attainment are submitted. If significant 
changes in the base year emissions inventories are implied by the 
modeling input data, the USEPA may consider requesting the States to 
revise the base year emission inventories approved previously by the 
USEPA. Alternatively, with concurrence from the State, the USEPA may 
[[Page 13632]] rulemake to revise the approved base year emissions 
inventories at the same time that the USEPA acts on the demonstration 
of attainment.
    Because the State followed USEPA guidelines in preparing the 
emission inventories covered in this rulemaking, the USEPA does not 
believe it is appropriate to disapprove the base year emissions 
inventories at this time. Such a disapproval would not be adequately 
supported by the monitoring data collected during the LMOS.
    Comment: LADCO monitoring and speciation data indicate that mobile 
source emissions are underestimated in the Chicago area emissions 
inventory. A contributing factor may be inaccurate speed data. In 
comments addressing the conformity findings for the 1993-1997 and 1994-
1998 Transportation Improvement Programs and Transportation System 
Development Plans, a number of organizations identified problems with 
the Chicago Area Transit Study (CATS) transportation model that could 
lead to inaccurate speed estimates. The problems identified were:
    1. The speeds used to estimate mobile source emissions are not 
based on actual measurements but instead are a function of applicable 
speed limits, numbers of traffic lights, type of road, etc. With little 
or no empirical data to support the speed estimates, they are highly 
suspect.
    2. In order to generate accurate speeds, the model should post-
process link speeds.
    3. The model should account for intersection delays.
    These problems are likely to lead to underestimation of emissions.
    Other model deficiencies may have skewed speeds in a manner that 
resulted in overestimation of emissions or had no effect on emissions. 
For example, the model should feed trip times back to the mode choice 
and trip distribution portions of the model to account for persons who 
choose a different mode or avoid congested areas. The model should also 
have separate peak and non-peak components that account for drivers 
taking trips during less congested hours of the day, instead of the 
fixed time-of-day factors that the model currently uses.
    The above problems should be remedied before USEPA gives final 
approval to the emissions inventory.
    Response: It is true that the link speeds given in the 
transportation model output are not actual measured speeds, but rather 
``impedances'' with the dimensions of speed that are used to make the 
model's estimated traffic levels balance. Both the IEPA and CATS 
subjected the CATS network speed (impedance) data, used in the 
development of the 1990 base year mobile source emission estimates, to 
considerable scrutiny before they were used in the estimation of 
emissions. It was determined that the model speed data were 
representative and could be properly used ``as is.''
    As described in the emissions inventory documentation, the IEPA 
checked the model link speeds by road type and found them to be 
reasonable and representative. In particular, model speeds were checked 
by road type under free and congested conditions. Model speeds were, in 
general, less under congested conditions than under free flow 
conditions; and average speeds for different road types differed as 
expected. Local streets had the lowest average speeds, typically in the 
20 to 35 mile per hour range, while rural interstates had the highest 
average speeds, up to 65 miles per hour. Speeds on very congested 
streets were below 10 miles per hour, as would be expected during 
``rush hour'' periods. Model speeds for most roads, except interstates 
and freeways, were in the 25 to 45 mile per hour range. The model 
speeds for each roadway type agree broadly with speeds observed on 
roads of that type both in Chicago and elsewhere. It should be noted 
that the transportation model used by CATS takes intersection delays 
into account.
    With regard to the comments concerning the overestimation of 
emissions, CATS has recently introduced a modeling method of feeding 
trip times back into the mode choice and trip distribution parts of the 
transportation model. In addition, CATS has introduced the use of peak 
and off-peak modeling components. These new model features have had a 
negligible effect on the model output.
    Comment:  Accurate emissions are missing for the following source 
categories:

1. Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTWs);
2. Hazardous Waste Landfills;
3. Municipal Landfills;
4. Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs);
5. Lawn Care Pesticide Applications;
6. Agricultural Burning;
7. Catastrophic/Accidental Releases;
8. Waste Disposal Incinerators; and
9. Small (10 to 25 tons per year) VOC-emitting Facilities.

    Response: Each of the source categories are individually responded 
to below:

Publicly-Owned Treatment Works

    The Publicly-Owned Treatment Works (POTW) category was treated by 
the IEPA as a point source category and not as an area source category 
in the Chicago ozone nonattainment area. A total of 62 POTW facilities 
were addressed in the Chicago nonattainment point source inventory.
    The IEPA estimates were primarily based on data obtained from the 
IEPA's Division of Water Pollution Control, which issues permits to all 
POTW facilities. The permit files contain facility-specific data 
including, but not limited to, a facility's monthly average flowrates 
and the location of the facility. Other information not obtained from 
the permit files, such as industrial wastewater contribution, were 
either directly solicited from the facilities themselves or were given 
a default value consistent with the recommendations of the USEPA based 
on the guidelines contained in Procedures for the Preparation of 
Emission Inventories for Precursors of Ozone, Volume I (EPA-450/4-88-
021). The emissions inventory documentation submitted by the IEPA 
contained a detailed discussion of IEPA's emission estimation 
methodology for this source category.

Hazardous Waste Landfills and Municipal Landfills

    The Chicago ozone nonattainment area emissions inventory includes 
emissions for landfills within the point source emissions inventory 
rather than as an area source category. The IEPA used information from 
the IEPA Division of Land Pollution Control to determine the size, 
type, age, and location of landfills in the Chicago nonattainment area. 
In cases where some of the information was missing, estimates were 
based on the best available information. The emissions inventory 
contains emissions estimates for 229 landfills with a total of 4.59 
tons per day of VOC emissions.
    Calculation of landfill emissions was based on the 1988 document, 
Air Emissions from Municipal Solid Waste Landfills--Background 
Information for Proposed Standards and Guidelines. An emission factor 
of 35.36 tons VOC per year per million tons of refuse was used in the 
emission estimations. This was based on a recommended emission factor 
of 13.6 tons VOC per year per million tons of refuse multiplied by 2.6 
to account for the fact that the Chicago area receives more than 23 
inches of precipitation per year.

Catastrophic/Accidental Releases and Leaking Underground Storage Tanks

    Catastrophic/accidental releases were not included in the Chicago 
nonattainment area inventory due to the [[Page 13633]] lack of USEPA 
emission inventory guidance for this source category and the lack of 
available data. In addition, note that the USEPA guidance requires that 
the emissions be estimated for a typical ozone season weekday. Since 
such releases are random and the extent of emissions can not be 
calculated, the IEPA, with concurrence from the USEPA, did not include 
emissions from this category in the emissions inventory.
    There is a similar lack of information regarding VOC emissions from 
Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs). Although information on the 
location of LUST cleanups is available, quantifying the VOC emissions 
resulting from the leaks and from the cleanup operations is complicated 
by the lack of information on the amount of gasoline or other volatile 
materials released, the amount of material that has reached the water 
table, and the amount of material that has been trapped in the soil. 
The USEPA concurs with the omission of these emissions given the lack 
of data.

Lawn Care Pesticide Applications

    The IEPA did not calculate these emissions due to a lack of 
available USEPA guidance for this source and to a lack of available 
data. In addition, the IEPA believes that such emissions are already 
accounted for under the household pesticide subcategory of the 
commercial/consumer solvents category. The USEPA concurs with the 
omission of these emissions given the lack of data and guidance.

Agricultural Burning

    Agricultural burning was not considered to be significant 
summertime source of VOC emissions in the Chicago ozone nonattainment 
area since such burning occurs primarily outside of the summer months. 
The Chicago nonattainment area does contain VOC emissions resulting 
from forest fires as well as from burning of landscape waste under the 
open burning category.

Waste Disposal Incinerators

    The Chicago nonattainment area emissions inventory includes VOC 
emissions from waste disposal incinerators. The summary of these 
emissions can be found in Table 2-2 of the Chicago area emissions 
inventory submittal under the category, Municipal Waste: Combustion. 
This category summarizes the point source inventory for Commercial/
Institutional, Governmental, and Industrial Waste Incineration. There 
are a total of 121 source facilities in this category, emitting a total 
of 1.62 tons VOM per day.

Small (10 to 25 Tons Per Year) VOC-Emitting Facilities

    The Chicago nonattainment area point source emissions inventory 
includes emissions from small facilities emitting less than 25 tons VOC 
per year. All permitted emission sources were included in the point 
source emissions inventory regardless of their size. The emissions 
inventory includes source facilities with emissions as low as 0.01 tons 
per day or 0.1 pounds per hour. Although these facilities were not 
individually documented in the major source summary documentation of 
the emissions inventory submittal, their emissions were totalled in the 
appropriate activity-related source categories.
    Comment: An area of concern is the lack of rule effectiveness 
factors for many source categories in the emission inventories. For 
sources that do have rule effectiveness estimates, there is little 
information explaining how the estimates were selected.
    Response: As noted in the emission inventory documentation, the 
State assumed a default rule effectiveness of 80 percent for most 
source categories, as recommended in USEPA guidelines. A rule 
effectiveness of 100 percent was used for sources that estimated 
emissions using direct measurement methodologies, such as mass balance. 
These procedures comply with Illinois' Inventory Preparation Plan, 
previously approved by the USEPA.
    The State, as part of the LMOS, determined facility-specific rule 
effectiveness levels for major facilities with emission control 
efficiencies in excess of 95 percent. All non-studied facilities with 
emission control efficiencies in excess of 95 percent were assumed to 
have rule effectiveness levels equal to the median rule effectiveness 
determined in the facility-specific study, approximately 92 percent. 
The study parameters and results were included in documentation 
referenced in the emissions inventory submittal. The USEPA has reviewed 
this documentation, and has determined it to be acceptable. Therefore, 
the State has taken an acceptable approach to applying rule 
effectiveness and has adequately documented this approach and the 
resulting rule effectiveness estimates.
    Comment: The use of questionable population-based emissions factors 
appears to have contributed to low emission estimates for some area 
sources. For example, estimates of graphic arts, auto body refinishing, 
and non-road construction equipment VOC emissions are significantly 
lower per capita than for other urban areas. Given that additional 
controls on area sources are likely to be included in Illinois' 
attainment plan, accuracy of the area source emissions is especially 
important.
    Response: With regard to the graphic arts category, USEPA 
guidelines, as used by the IEPA, recommended the use of population-
based per capita emission factors to estimate county total graphic arts 
emissions. However, since the Illinois point source emissions inventory 
contains emissions from graphic arts facilities, the IEPA followed 
USEPA guidelines and subtracted point source emissions for this source 
category from the calculated area source emissions total. This 
subtraction is performed to avoid double counting of emissions. If one 
compares the total of point and area source emissions for this source 
category on a per capita basis with similar emission rates for other 
major areas, one would find better agreement. The low area source per 
capita emission rate is an artifact of the thoroughness of Illinois' 
point source emissions inventory.
    Regarding the automobile refinishing area source category, 
emissions were not estimated using only a population-based emission 
factor. The Chicago automobile refinishing area source emission 
estimates were determined by apportioning national automobile 
refinishing activity data, such as the amount of coating usage, to the 
Chicago area on the basis of population. This method was chosen, with 
the approval and support (through the use of a USEPA contract) of the 
USEPA, to better quantify the emissions from different operations 
involved in automobile refinishing and for better estimation of 
emission reductions resulting from required controls. The method 
employed would lead to per capita emission rates differing from those 
in urban areas where a strict per capita emission rate were used. The 
directionality of the differences does not imply that the technique 
used by the IEPA is in error.
    Regarding emissions from non-road construction equipment, it must 
be noted that IEPA simply used emission estimates provided by USEPA's 
Office of Mobile Sources. In 1991, the USEPA issued an emissions 
inventory for each of the ozone and carbon monoxide nonattainment 
areas. The IEPA used the emissions inventory provided by the USEPA for 
the Chicago ozone nonattainment area. Given the detail of the data used 
and the extent of the quality assurance of this emissions inventory, 
the IEPA believes, and the USEPA agrees, that no better estimate of 
[[Page 13634]] non-road construction equipment emissions is available 
at this time and that the current emissions estimate is appropriate. It 
is additionally noted that the emissions inventory submitted by the 
IEPA incorporated by reference the documentation of the non-road 
construction equipment emissions estimates supplied by the USEPA.
    Comment: The commenters note that the emissions for railroads and 
airport lack documentation. In addition, the commenters note that, 
given that a high speed rail and a third airport are both under 
consideration for the Chicago area, this lack of documentation is 
especially troublesome.
    Response: Discussion of the estimation procedures used for railroad 
and airport emissions is contained on pages 196 through 221 of the 
Chicago emissions inventory documentation submitted to the USEPA. The 
discussion of railroad emissions includes an estimate of statewide 
railroad fuel usage, which was apportioned to the nonattainment area 
counties based on the county to State ratios of railroad track mileage. 
The county fuel usage figures were then multiplied by a per unit fuel 
usage emission rate factor. This approach is acceptable to the USEPA.
    The method used for airport emissions evaluated commercial aircraft 
activity at O'Hare and Midway Airports on an aircraft engine-specific 
basis incorporating modal emission rates. The modal emission rate for 
each engine is a function of the amount of fuel burned for each of the 
four modes power settings. The four modes are taxi/idle, takeoff, 
climbout, and approach. Emissions were estimated for approximately 60 
different commercial engine types. Emissions from the remaining 
aircraft categories, military and general aviation, were estimated 
based on the number of landing and take-off (LTO) cycles of each 
aircraft type. These LTO cycles were also the basis of the emissions 
estimates performed for all of the other airports in the Chicago ozone 
nonattainment area. These estimation procedures were documented in 
IEPA's emissions inventory submittal and were found to be acceptable by 
the USEPA.

III. Final Rulemaking Action

    The State of Illinois has met the requirements [section 182(a)(1)] 
of the Act for the submittal of base year ozone precursor emissions 
inventories. The USEPA approves the State's 1990 base year ozone 
precursor emission inventories for the Chicago, Metro-East St. Louis, 
and Jersey County ozone nonattainment areas.
    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. The Office of Management and Budget (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 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.
    The 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. 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 the USEPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such 
grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 
(1976).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by May 15, 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 section may not be callenged later in proceedings to enforce its 
requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Hydrocarbons, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: February 23, 1995.
Robert Springer,
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 O--Illinois

    2. Section 52.726 is amended by adding paragraph (i) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 52.726  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (i) The base year (1990) ozone emission inventory requirement of 
section 182(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990, has been 
satisfied for the following Illinois ozone nonattainment areas: the 
Chicago nonattainment area--Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, Will and McHenry 
Counties, Aux Sable and Gooselake Townships in Grundy County, and 
Oswego Township in Kendall County; the Metro-East St. Louis 
nonattainment area--Madison, Monroe, and St. Clair Counties; and Jersey 
County.

[FR Doc. 95-6161 Filed 3-13-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P