[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 158 (Wednesday, August 16, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42491-42494]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-20253]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[IL132-1-7104; FRL-5278-2]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Illinois

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 
proposes to approve Illinois' request to grant an exemption for the 
Chicago ozone nonattainment area from the applicable oxides of nitrogen 
(NOX) transportation conformity requirements. On June 20, 1995, 
Illinois submitted to the USEPA a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
revision request for an exemption under section 182(b)(1) of the Clean 
Air Act (Act) from the conformity requirements for NOX for the 
Chicago ozone nonattainment area, which is classified as severe. The 
request is based on the urban airshed modeling (UAM) conducted for the 
attainment demonstration for the Lake Michigan Ozone Study (LMOS) 
modeling domain. 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 
September 15, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are 
available for inspection at the following address: (It is recommended 
that you telephone Patricia Morris at (312) 353-8656, before visiting 
the Region 5 office.) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 
Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois, 60604.
    Written comments shall be sent to: J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, 
Regulation Development Section, Regulation Development Branch (AR-18J), 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, Illinois, 60604.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia Morris, Regulation 
Development Section, Regulation Development Branch (AR-18J), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois, 60604. (312) 353-8656.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Clean Air Act section 176(c)(3)(A)(iii) requires, in order to 
demonstrate conformity with the applicable SIP, that transportation 
plans and transportation improvement programs (TIPs) contribute to 
emissions reductions in ozone and carbon monoxide nonattainment areas 
during the period before control strategy SIPs are approved by USEPA. 
This requirement is implemented in 40 CFR 51.436 through 51.440 (and 
93.122 through 93.124), which establishes the so-called ``build/no-
build test.'' This test requires a demonstration that the ``Action'' 
scenario (representing the implementation of the proposed 
transportation plan/TIP) will result in lower motor vehicle emissions 
than the ``Baseline'' scenario (representing the implementation of the 
current transportation plan/TIP). In addition, the ``Action'' scenario 
must result in emissions lower than 1990 levels.
    The November 24, 1993, final transportation conformity rule does 
not require the build/no-build test and less-than-1990 test for 
NOx as an ozone precursor in ozone nonattainment areas where the 
Administrator determines that additional reductions of NOx would 
not contribute to attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality 
Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. Clean Air Act section 176(c)(3)(A)(iii), 
which is the conformity provision requiring contributions to emission 
reductions before SIPs with emissions budgets can be approved, 
specifically references Clean Air Act section 182(b)(1). That section 
requires submission of State plans that, among other things, provide 
for specific annual reductions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and 
NOx emissions ``as necessary'' to attain the ozone standard by the 
applicable attainment date. Section 182(b)(1) further states that its 
requirements do not apply in the case of NOx for those ozone 
nonattainment areas for which USEPA determines that additional 
reductions of NOx would not contribute to ozone attainment.
    For ozone nonattainment areas, the process for submitting waiver 
requests and the criteria used to evaluate them are explained in the 
December 1993 USEPA document ``Guidelines for Determining the 
Applicability of Nitrogen Oxides Requirements Under Section 182(f),'' 
and the May 27, 1994, and February 8, 1995, memoranda from 

[[Page 42492]]
John S. Seitz, Director of the Office of Air Quality Planning and 
Standards, to Regional Air Division Directors, titled ``Section 182(f) 
NOx Exemptions--Revised Process and Criteria.''
    On July 13, 1994, the States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and 
Wisconsin (the States) submitted to the USEPA a petition for an 
exemption from the requirements of section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act 
(Act). The States, acting through the Lake Michigan Air Directors 
Consortium (LADCo), petitioned for an exemption from the Reasonably 
Available Control Technology (RACT) and New Source Review (NSR) 
requirements for major stationary sources of NOx. The petition 
also asked for an exemption from the transportation and general 
conformity requirements for NOx in all ozone nonattainment areas 
in the Region.
    On March 6, 1995, the USEPA published a rulemaking proposing 
approval of the NOx exemption petition for the RACT, NSR and 
transportation and general conformity requirements. A number of 
comments were received on the proposal. Several commenters argued that 
NOx exemptions are provided for in two separate parts of the Act, 
in sections 182(b)(1) and 182(f), but that the Act's transportation 
conformity provisions in section 176(c)(3) explicitly reference section 
182(b)(1). In April 1995, the USEPA entered into an agreement to change 
the procedural mechanism through which a NOx exemption from 
transportation conformity would be granted (EDF et al. v. USEPA, No. 
94-1044, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit). Instead of a petition 
under 182(f), transportation conformity NOx exemptions for ozone 
nonattainment areas that are subject to section 182(b)(1) now need to 
be submitted as a SIP revision request. The Chicago ozone nonattainment 
area is classified as severe and, thus, is subject to section 
182(b)(1).
    The transportation conformity requirements are found at sections 
176(c) (2), (3), and (4). The conformity requirements apply on an 
areawide basis in all nonattainment and maintenance areas. The USEPA's 
transportation conformity rule 1 and general conformity rule 
2 currently reference the section 182(f) exemption process as a 
means for exempting any nonattainment area from NOx conformity 
requirements. The USEPA intends to amend the transportation conformity 
rule to instead reference section 182(b)(1) as the means for exempting 
areas subject to section 182(b)(1) from the transportation conformity 
NOx requirements. After the USEPA amends the transportation 
conformity rule to reference section 182(b)(1) for granting NOx 
waivers, the USEPA will take final action on today's proposal.

    \1\ ``Criteria and Procedures for Determining Conformity to 
State or Federal Implementation Plans of Transportation Plans, 
Programs, and Projects Funded or Approved under Title 23 U.S.C. of 
the Federal Transit Act'' November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188).
    \2\ ``Determining Conformity of General Federal Actions to State 
or Federal Implementation Plans; Final Rule'' November 30, 1993 (58 
FR 63214).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The June 20, 1995, SIP revision request from Illinois, has been 
submitted to meet the requirements of a formal SIP revision submittal 
in accordance with the 182(b)(1) requirements. A public hearing on this 
SIP revision request was held on July 17, 1995. The Chicago severe 
ozone nonattainment area includes the Counties of Cook, DuPage, Grundy 
(Aux Sable and Gooselake Townships), Kane, Kendall (Oswego Township), 
Lake, McHenry, and Will.
    Section 182(b)(1) requires submittal of a plan revision that 
provides for reasonable further progress (RFP) reductions for moderate 
and above ozone nonattainment areas. The plan must provide for specific 
annual reductions in emissions of VOCs and NOx as necessary to 
attain the national primary ambient air quality standard for ozone by 
the attainment date applicable under the Act. Further, the requirement 
shall not apply in the case of NOx for those areas for which the 
Administrator determines that additional reductions of NOx would 
not contribute to attainment. In evaluating the 182(b) SIP revision 
request, the USEPA considered whether additional NOx reductions 
would contribute to attainment of the standard in the Chicago area and 
also in the downwind areas of the LMOS modeling domain.
    As outlined in relevant USEPA guidance, the use of photochemical 
grid modeling is the recommended approach for testing the contribution 
of NOx emission reductions to attainment of the ozone standard. 
This approach simulates conditions over the modeling domain that may be 
expected at the attainment deadline for three emission reduction 
scenarios: (1) Substantial VOC reductions, (2) substantial NOx 
reductions, and (3) both VOC and NOx reductions. If the areawide 
predicted maximum one-hour ozone concentration for each day modeled 
under scenario (1) is less than or equal to those from scenarios (2) 
and (3) for the corresponding days, the test is passed and the section 
182(f) NOx emissions reduction requirements would not apply.
    In making this determination under section 182(b)(1) that the 
NOx requirements do not apply, or may be limited in the Lake 
Michigan area, the USEPA has considered the national study of ozone 
precursors completed pursuant to section 185B of the Act. The USEPA has 
based its decision on the demonstration and the supporting information 
provided in the SIP revision request.

II. Summary of Submittal

    On June 20, 1995, the State of Illinois submitted as a revision to 
the SIP, a request for a waiver from the transportation conformity 
NOx requirements. The submittal included the LMOS UAM modeling for 
the attainment demonstration for 3 ozone episodes during 1991. The 
modeling supported the request by documenting that NOx reductions 
in the Chicago nonattainment area would not contribute to attainment 
and, in fact, would be detrimental to the goal of reaching attainment. 
The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) discussed the 
NOx waiver in the context of the public hearing on the attainment 
demonstration held on December 21, 1994. To assure that the public was 
fully informed and given appropriate opportunity for comment, the IEPA 
committed to hold a further hearing specifically to address the section 
182(b)(1) transportation conformity waiver. This public hearing was 
held on July 17, 1995.
    Pursuant to 40 CFR part 93, subpart A, 40 CFR part 51, subpart T, 
the SIP revision request seeks an exemption from the transportation 
conformity requirements for NOx in the Chicago ozone nonattainment 
area. The States' have utilized the UAM to demonstrate that reductions 
in NOx in the LMOS modeling domain will not contribute to 
attainment of the standard. To conduct the modeling analysis, the 
following steps were followed: (a) Emissions were projected to 1996 
(the deadline for implementation of the 15 percent reasonable further 
progress reduction) and 2007 (the attainment deadline for the severe 
nonattainment areas) from the 1990 base year, (b) it was assumed that a 
40 percent VOC emission reduction beyond that achieved as a result of 
emission controls mandated by the Act would be necessary to attain the 
ozone standard in the LMOS modeling domain, (c) a 40 percent NOx 
emission reduction in grid B (that portion of the LMOS modeling domain 
that is essentially composed of the ozone nonattainment areas within 
the modeling domain) beyond the projected emission levels was assumed 
for all 

[[Page 42493]]
anthropogenic NOx emissions, (d) a 40 percent VOC emission 
reduction and a 40 percent NOx reduction in grid B beyond 
projected emission levels were assumed for all anthropogenic VOC and 
NOx emissions and (e), the ozone modeling results for (b), (c), 
and (d) were compared considering the modeled domain-wide peak ozone 
concentrations and temporal and spatial extent of modeled ozone 
concentrations above 120 parts per billion (ppb).
    For all modeled days using 1996 and 2007 conditions, domain-wide 
peak ozone concentrations for ``VOC-only'' controls were found to be 
lower than or equal to those for ``NOx-only'' controls or those 
for ``VOC plus NOx'' controls. In addition, consideration of daily 
peak ozone isopleth maps (these maps are included in the documentation 
of the section 182(b) SIP revision request) shows that the ``VOC-only'' 
control scenario leads to the smallest areas with predicted peak ozone 
concentrations exceeding 120 ppb.
    Additional sensitivity tests were conducted for a 40 percent 
NOx emission reduction that was applied only to point sources in 
Grid B for episode 2 and 1996 conditions for both an assumed NOx 
reduction alone and a 40 percent reduction in both VOCs and NOx. 
These sensitivity tests compared to the scenarios with across the board 
anthropogenic NOx reductions demonstrated that control of ground 
level NOx sources (such as transportation sources) did not 
contribute to attainment of the standard and in fact increased the 
domain wide peak ozone concentrations exceeding 120 ppb and the number 
of hours that exceeded 120 ppb. This result was more pronounced than 
with the point source only NOx control.

III. Analysis of Submittal

    Review of the modeling results show a very definite directional 
signal indicating that application of NOx controls in the Chicago 
ozone nonattainment area would exacerbate peak ozone concentrations not 
only in the Chicago area but also in the LMOS modeling domain. The LMOS 
modeling domain includes northern Indiana, western Michigan and eastern 
Wisconsin. The States and LADCo have now completed the validation 
process for the UAM modeling system to be used in the demonstration of 
attainment for the LMOS modeling domain. Therefore, documentation 
supporting the validity of the modeling results has been submitted with 
the SIP revision request.
    It is noted that the use of simple, area-wide emission projection 
factors raises some uncertainty in the modeling results for 1996 and 
2007. Some changes in modeling results may be expected if area-specific 
and source category-specific projection factors are used instead of the 
average factors used in these analyses. These more detailed projection 
factors will be used in the final demonstration of attainment for the 
LMOS domain. These changes, however, are not expected to reverse the 
directional signal of the modeling done to date. Concluding that 
NOx reductions will not contribute to attainment in Chicago and 
throughout the LMOS domain.
    Although ozone concentrations modeled further downwind from the 
urban source areas increase as a result of increased NOx point 
source emissions, this is not the case with the ground level NOx 
sources. LADCo and the States view the potential increase in outflow 
ozone concentrations with increasing NOx point source emissions to 
be marginal. More importantly, the SIP revision request demonstrates 
that additional reductions in NOx would not contribute to 
attainment of the ozone standard in the LMOS domain. These results are 
believed to be consistent with USEPA's section 185B report to Congress.
    Therefore, based on its conformance with USEPA guidance, the USEPA 
believes the State of Illinois' demonstration is adequate, and thus is 
approving the transportation conformity waiver request. It is noted by 
LADCo, however, that subsequent modeling analyses may lead to an ozone 
attainment plan which includes, for specified portions of the LMOS 
domain only, both NOx and VOC emission controls. The modeling 
indicates that these NOx emission controls will most likely be 
limited to rural areas, but would not be required in the Chicago 
nonattainment area and will also not likely be applied to ground level 
sources.
    Monitoring data such as concentrations of non-methane hydrocarbons 
and NOx and derived/monitored ozone production potentials of air 
parcels, collected for the urban source areas during the 1991 field 
study support the approval of the NOx waiver. It is noted, 
however, that the primary basis for the approval of the NOx waiver 
is the modeling results submitted in support of the waiver. The 1991 
field data by themselves may not be an adequate support for the waiver 
since these data are limited in nature and do not present a complete 
picture of the impacts of NOx controls on LMOS modeling domain 
peak ozone concentrations.
    VOC and NOx emission reductions were found to produce 
different impacts spatially. In and downwind of major urban areas, 
within the ozone nonattainment areas, VOC reductions were effective in 
lowering peak ozone concentrations, while NOx emission reductions 
resulted in increased peak ozone concentrations. Farther downwind, 
within attainment areas, VOC emissions reductions became less effective 
for reducing ozone concentrations, while NOx emission reductions 
were effective in lowering ozone concentrations. It must be noted, 
however, that the magnitude of ozone decreases farther downwind due to 
NOx emission reductions was less than the magnitude of ozone 
increases in the ozone nonattainment areas as a result of the same 
NOx emission reductions.
    Analyses of ambient data by LMOS contractors provided results which 
corroborated the modeling results. These analyses identified areas of 
VOC- and NOx-limited conditions (VOC-limited conditions would 
imply a greater sensitivity of ozone concentrations to changes in VOC 
emissions; the reverse would be true for NOx-limited conditions) 
and tracked the ozone and ozone precursor concentrations in the urban 
plumes as they moved downwind. The analyses indicated VOC-limited 
conditions in the Chicago/Northwest Indiana and Milwaukee areas and 
NOx-limited conditions further downwind. These results imply that 
VOC controls in the Chicago/Northwest Indiana and Milwaukee areas would 
be more effective at reducing peak ozone concentrations within the 
severe ozone nonattainment areas.
    The consistency between the modeling results and the ambient data 
analysis results for all episodes with joint data supports the view 
that the UAM modeling system developed in the LMOS may be used to 
investigate the relative merits of VOC versus NOx emission 
controls. The UAM-V results for all modeled episodes point to the 
benefits of VOC controls versus NOx controls in reducing the 
modeled domain peak ozone concentrations.
    For a more detailed analysis of the modeling analysis results, 
please see the August 22, 1994 ``Technical Review of a Four State 
Request for a Section 182(f) Exemption from Oxides of Nitrogen 
(NOx) Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) and New 
Source Review (NSR) Requirements'' memorandum contained in the docket 
for this action.
    The USEPA believes LADCo's UAM application has adequately met the 
requirement to demonstrate that NOx 

[[Page 42494]]
controls within the Chicago ozone nonattainment area and throughout the 
LMOS domain will not contribute, but instead will interfere with 
attainment of the ozone standard.

IV. Proposed Rulemaking Action and Solicitation of Comments

    Based on the submittal accompanying the State's SIP revision 
request, the USEPA proposes to approve Illinois' request for an 
exemption from the transportation conformity requirement to provide 
annual reductions in NOx emissions as necessary to reach 
attainment, for the Chicago ozone nonattainment area.
    Public comments are solicited on the requested SIP revision and on 
USEPA's proposed rulemaking action. Comments received by September 15, 
1995, will be considered in the development of USEPA's final rule.
    This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature 
by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the 
Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a 
July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, 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, allowing 
or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any 
SIP. The USEPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP 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.
    This approval does not create any new requirements. Therefore, I 
certify that this action does not have a significant impact on any 
small entities affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-
State relationship under the Act, preparation of the regulatory 
flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic 
reasonableness of the State action. The Act forbids USEPA to base its 
actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. USEPA, 
427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (1976).
    Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the 
USEPA 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, the USEPA 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 the USEPA 
to establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments 
that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
    The USEPA has determined that this action 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 will relieve requirements otherwise imposed 
under the Act, and hence does not impose any federal intergovernmental 
mandate, as defined in section 101 of the Unfunded Mandates Act. 
Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal 
governments, or the private sector, result from this action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Conformity, 
Intergovernmental relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, Transportation 
conformity.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    Dated: August 4, 1995.
Corinne S. Wellish,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-20253 Filed 8-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P