[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 125 (Thursday, June 29, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 33727-33730]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-15954]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[AK9-1-6975a; FRL-5223-1]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan for Vehicle
Miles Traveled Forecasting and Tracking: Alaska
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA today approves the State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of Alaska for the purpose of
forecasting and tracking vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the Anchorage
area. On March 24, 1994, the Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation (ADEC) submitted a SIP revision to EPA to satisfy the
requirements of sections 187(a)(2)(A) and 187(a)(3) of the Clean Air
Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA).
Section 187(a)(2)(A) requires Moderate and Serious carbon monoxide
(CO) non-attainment areas with a design value above 12.7 to submit a
SIP revision that contains a forecast of VMT in the non-attainment area
for each year before the year in which the SIP projects the National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for CO to be attained. The SIP
revision, which was due by November 15, 1992, also requires annual
updates of the forecasts and specific contingency measures to be
implemented if the annual estimate of actual VMT or a subsequent VMT
forecast exceeds the most recent prior forecast of VMT or if the area
fails to attain the CO NAAQS by the attainment date.
DATES: This action will be effective on August 28, 1995 unless adverse
or critical comments are received by July 31, 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, EPA, Air & Radiation Branch (AT-082), 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,
D.C. 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 ADEC, 410 Willoughby, Suite 105, Juneau, AK 99801-1795.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Montel Livingston, Air & Radiation
Branch (AT-082), EPA, Seattle, Washington 98101, (206) 553-0180.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Section 187(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act required EPA, in
consultation with the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), to
develop guidance for states to use in complying with the VMT
forecasting and tracking provisions of section 187. A Notice of
Availability for the resulting Section 187 VMT Forecasting and Tracking
Guidance was published in the Federal Register on March 19, 1992.
The Section 187 Guidance identifies the Federal Highway
Administration's Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) as the
foundation for VMT estimates and forecasts. HPMS was chosen as the best
method for estimating actual VMT since it is a count-based,
statistically-based, nationwide program with auditing procedures in
place, and since travel demand models would require resource intensive,
annual updates of input data and annual validation against traffic
counts in order to be useful for estimating annual VMT. EPA believes
that these time and resource requirements generally make travel demand
models an unrealistic option for estimating actual annual VMT with
reasonable accuracy.
To develop growth factors for forecasting VMT, the Section 187
Guidance offers as one alternative the use of network-based travel
demand models. If these models are properly updated and validated, and
if they use an equilibrium approach to allocating trips, they are
considered to be the best predictor of growth factors for VMT
forecasts. Moderate areas without a network model that is validated
according to the specifications described in the Section 187 Guidance
are offered the alternative of developing growth factors based on a
linear regression extrapolation of the past six years' HPMS VMT. In
both cases, the growth factors are applied to the HPMS VMT reported to
the Federal Highway Administration.
As specified in the Act, the contingency measure triggers serve to
address as early as possible any situation in which a trend towards
higher than expected VMT has been detected, since such a trend may
affect the forecasted attainment date.
When determining that actual annual VMT or a VMT forecast has
exceeded the most recent prior forecast and, therefore, that
contingency measures should be implemented, EPA believes that it is
appropriate to take into account the statistical variability in the
estimates of VMT generated through HPMS. Consequently, EPA has
identified a margin of error to be applied when making VMT comparisons.
With the expectation that HPMS sampling procedures will improve over
the next few years in response to recent Federal Highway Administration
guidance, the margin of error starts at 5.0 percent for VMT comparisons
made in 1994, becomes 4.0 percent for VMT comparisons made in
[[Page 33728]]
1995, and is reduced to 3.0 percent for VMT comparisons made in 1996
and thereafter. However, since each revised VMT forecast becomes the
VMT baseline for triggering contingency measures, the application of a
margin of error every year could allow the forecasts to increase
without bound, without ever triggering contingencies. To prevent this
occurrence, EPA believes it is appropriate to allow the application of
the margin of error only as long as, cumulatively, neither an estimate
of actual VMT nor a VMT forecast ever exceed by more than 5.0 percent
the VMT forecast relied upon in the area's attainment demonstration.
In practice, then, there are two ways in which an estimate of
actual VMT or an updated forecast can be found to exceed a prior
forecast. Individual yearly comparisons can result in an exceedance of
the forecast made 12 months earlier by more than the prescribed
percentage for that year, and exceedances can accumulate so that,
cumulatively, they exceed the 5.0 percent cap above the attainment
demonstration forecast.
EPA interprets the requirement for contingency measures to ``take
effect without further action by the State or the Administrator'' to
mean that no further rulemaking activities by the State or EPA would be
needed to implement the measures. The General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,
published in the Federal Register on April 16, 1992, offers guidance on
the type and size of contingencies to be included in the SIP revision.
This guidance is advisory in nature and is non-binding. (See 57 FR at
13532-33, April 16, 1992.)
The State of Alaska has submitted a SIP revision to EPA in order to
satisfy the requirements of sections 187(a)(2)(A) and 187(a)(3). The
State submittal provides for each of the following mandatory elements:
(1) a forecast of VMT in the non-attainment area for each year prior to
the attainment year; (2) a provision for annual updates of the
forecasts along with a provision for annual reports describing the
extent to which the forecasts proved to be accurate; these reports
shall provide estimates of actual VMT in each year for which a forecast
was required; (3) adopted and enforceable contingency measures to be
implemented without further action by the State or the Administrator if
actual annual VMT or an updated forecast exceeds the most recent prior
forecast or if the area fails to attain the CO NAAQS by the attainment
date.
II. Analysis
The following items are the basis for approval of the SIP revision.
The State has met the requirements of sections 187(a)(2)(A) and
187(a)(3) by submitting a SIP revision that implements all required
elements.
1. VMT Forecasts
Section 187(a)(2)(A) requires that the State include in its SIP
submittal a forecast of VMT in the non-attainment area for each year
before the year in which the SIP projects the National Ambient Air
Quality Standard for CO to be attained. The forecasts are to be based
on guidance developed by EPA in consultation with DOT, i.e., the
Section 187 VMT Forecasting and Tracking Guidance. To accurately
forecast VMT in the Anchorage area, The Municipality of Anchorage and
the State Departments of Environmental Conservation and Transportation
and Public Facilities used the HPMS. The Central Region portion of the
Alaska HPMS database was expanded to contain most of the eligible roads
in the Anchorage area, and the HPMS sampling methodology was applied to
increase the accuracy of traffic estimates. This procedure resulted in
an increase in the number of roads included in the database, and an
increase in the number of sample sections on the roads. HPMS provides
VMT estimates based on actual traffic counts collected from a
representative set of sampling locations. The network-based travel
demand modelling process described in Section 187 VMT Tracking and
Forecasting Guidance was used to project future VMT for calendar years
1993, 1994 and 1995. The MinUPT travel demand model estimated growth in
vehicle travel during the forecast period. This model is maintained by
the Municipality of Anchorage Department of Economic Development and
Planning. Demographic data (population, land use, and employment data)
was used as inputs to the model. MinUTP model runs were performed for
the base year 1990 and for future year 1995. Runs incorporated a
population growth rate of roughly 1.2 percent per year. As a result of
the modeling runs, VMT were projected to increase by 13.3 percent over
the five-year period, or roughly 2.5 percent per year. VMT during
intervening years was estimated from straight-line interpolation.
Documentation on the model is contained in the 1985 Anchorage
Metropolitan Area Transportation Model Report. This annual VMT growth
rate is more than double the projected increase in population for the
same period. The use of a high ratio will provide a conservative
estimate of future reductions in emissions and resulting air quality
concentrations. A safety margin of 5.5 percent was added to the VMT
forecasts. Best estimates of future-year VMT were increased by 5.5
percent. Attainment projections were prepared with this VMT included.
For the 1990 base year, model estimates reflect the existing 1990
roadway network and the best available demographic data as inputs, and
no safety margin is required.
Below is a table showing the forecasted VMT for Anchorage:
Average Annualized Daily VMT for Anchorage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safety
Year Projected Margin Forecasted
VMT (percent) VMT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990............................ 2,854,000 -0- 2,854,000
1993............................ 3,081,530 +5.5 3,249,800
1994............................ 3,157,373 +5.5 3,329,800
1995............................ 3,233,216 +5.5 3,409,700
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Annual VMT Updates/Reports
Section 187(a)(2)(A) specifies that the SIP revision provide for
annual updates of the VMT forecasts and annual reports that describe
the accuracy of the forecasts and that provide estimates of actual VMT
in each year for which a forecast was required. The Section 187 VMT
Forecasting and Tracking Guidance specifies that annual reports should
be submitted to EPA by September 30 of the year following the year for
which the VMT estimate is made.
Annual VMT tracking is done by the Alaska Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities using the federally mandated and
annually audited HPMS.
[[Page 33729]]
The 1990 base year VMT estimate was used as a ``starting point'' for
future year VMT projections. The 1990 base year estimate of VMT and the
VMT forecasts for future years are summarized in the Anchorage Air
Quality Plan for Carbon Monoxide. Two additional reports provide
primary support to the estimates contained in the Plan. The first
report, 1990 Vehicle Miles of Travel in the Anchorage Bowl, Alaska
Department of Transportation and Public Facilities and the Municipality
of Anchorage, February 1992, describes the methods used to generate
HPMS estimates of base year VMT. The second report, Anchorage
Metropolitan Area 1990-1995 VMT Forecast Procedures, July 1992,
describes the methods and assumptions used in developing VMT forecasts.
Both of these reports are contained in the Appendix to the Air Quality
Plan.
In addition, Alaska has committed to meet the annual reporting
procedures requirements. The reports will contain annual updates of the
VMT forecasts, describe the accuracy of the forecasts, and provide
estimates of actual VMT in each year for which a forecast was required.
The reports will contain estimates of actual vehicle miles traveled in
each year for which the forecast was required. The annual reports will
show the comparison of the estimate of actual VMT and the previously
forecasted VMT. The reports will show that Anchorage area's actual VMT
is well within the forecasted VMT.
3. Contingency Measure
Section 187(a)(3) specifies that the State, in its SIP revision,
adopt specific, enforceable contingency measures to be implemented if
the annual estimate of actual VMT or a subsequent VMT forecast exceeds
the most recent prior forecast of VMT or if the area fails to attain
the CO NAAQS by the attainment date. Implementation of the identified
contingency measures must not require further rulemaking activities by
the State or EPA. Alaska meets this requirement. The contingency
measure that will be used by Alaska to satisfy the VMT requirement is
the expansion of the oxygenated fuel control area, and the State has
amended its regulation 18 AAC 53.015, ``Expansion of Control Area,'' to
provide for its implementation, if necessary. This amendment expands
the oxygenated fuels' control area for Anchorage to include geographic
areas outside of the municipality's boundaries, but within reasonable
driving distances of the municipality. At this time, EPA is approving
this contingency measure for the purpose of VMT exceedance.
III. Today's Action
In today's action, EPA is approving the SIP revision pertaining to
VMT forecast which was submitted by the State of Alaska for the
Anchorage area.
The State of Alaska has submitted a SIP revision implementing each
of the required elements required by sections 187(a)(2)(A) and
187(a)(3) of the CAA for the Municipality of Anchorage: VMT forecasts,
VMT updates/reports, and an enforceable contingency measure. If VMT
projections are exceeded by actual VMT in future years, the
implementation of the contingency measure will be triggered, together
with a revision of the air quality plan, as required by the CAA. EPA is
therefore approving this SIP revision.
IV. 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 August 28, 1995 unless, by July 31, 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 document 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 August 28, 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.
Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, 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 to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to
the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, 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 EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated 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 action approves pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new
Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local,
or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this
action.
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
[[Page 33730]]
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 August 28, 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 Alaska was approved by the Director of the Office of
Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
Dated: June 6, 1995.
Chuck Clarke,
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 C--Alaska
2. Section 52.70 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(23) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.70 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(23) On March 24, 1994, ADEC submitted a SIP revision to EPA to
satisfy the requirements of sections 187(a)(2)(A) and 187(a)(3) of the
CAA, forecasting and tracking VMT in the Anchorage area.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) March 24, 1994 letter from the Alaska Governor to the EPA
Regional Administrator including as a revision to the SIP the VMT
requirement in the Anchorage area, contained in ADEC's State Air
Quality Control Plan, Volume III: Appendices, Modifications to Section
III.B.6, III.B.8, III.B.10 and III.B.11, adopted January 10, 1994; and
further description on pages 10-14, 57-60 and 69-75 contained in ADEC's
State Air Quality Control Plan, Volume III: Appendices, Modifications
to Section III.B, III.B.1, and III.B.3, adopted January 10, 1994.
[FR Doc. 95-15954 Filed 6-28-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P