[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 23, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43710-43713]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-20801]



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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[WA39-1-7028a; FRL-5268-3]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan for Vehicle 
Miles Traveled Forecasting and Tracking: Puget Sound, Washington

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA approves the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 
submitted by the State of Washington for the purpose of forecasting and 
tracking vehicle miles traveled (VMT) for the Puget Sound Carbon 
Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Area, Washington. On January 28, 1993, 
Washington State submitted a SIP revision for the Puget Sound Carbon 
Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Area to satisfy the requirements of Section 
187(a)(2)(A) and Section 187(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 
1990 (CAAA). 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 

[[Page 43711]]
National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for CO to be attained. 
The SIP revision, which was due by November 15, 1992, is also required 
to provide annual updates of the forecasts along with annual reports 
regarding the extent to which the forecasts proved to be accurate. 
These annual reports must contain estimates of actual VMT for each 
forecast year.
    The rationale for the approval is set forth in this notice; 
additional information is available at the address indicated below.

DATES: This final rule is effective on October 23, 1995 unless adverse 
or critical comments are received by September 22, 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: Stephanie Cooper, EPA Region 10, Mail 
Stop AT-082, Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 553-6917.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Section 187(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 
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.
    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. 
In practice, there are two ways in which an estimate of actual VMT or 
an updated forecast can be found to exceed a prior 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 State of Washington has submitted a SIP revision to EPA in 
order to satisfy the requirements of Section 187(a)(2)(A) and Section 
187(a)(3). In order to be approved, the State submittal must provide 
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

    EPA is approving the SIP revision for Puget Sound because 
Washington has met the requirements of Section 187(a)(2)(A) and Section 
187(a)(3).

1. VMT Forecasts

    Section 187(a)(2)(A) requires that Washington 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.
    Washington created a ``Memorandum of Understanding'' between the 
Puget Sound Regional Council, Spokane Regional Council, Washington 
State Department of Ecology and Washington State Department of 
Transportation to apportion responsibility for reporting of vehicle 
miles travelled to these agencies. Puget Sound Regional Council and 
Spokane Regional Council develop for peer review draft vehicle miles 
travelled reports for their respective Federal Aid Urban Areas, based 
on data submitted by the Department of Transportation. The draft 
reports are submitted to Ecology, which will submit the final vehicle 
miles travelled annual report to EPA.
    To arrive at vehicle miles travelled forecasts, the Puget Sound 
Regional Council, (which develops VMT forecasts for the Puget Sound CO 
nonattainment area), uses a four-part model consisting of a trip 
generation component, a trip distribution component, a mode choice 
component, and a transportation/mode assignment component. The model 
considers residential factors, employment, road network, land use, 
population, etc., and is reevaluated several times per year.

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.
    The SIP provided annual and daily VMT forecasts for 1993, 1994, and 
1995, and actual VMT for 1990. However, Puget Sound updated its 1993 
forecast prior to reporting the differences between HPMS (actual) 
values and forecasted values. The metropolitan planning organization 
updated its travel-demand-models with more current information and 
techniques. EPA received Washington's first annual VMT report on 
October 18, 1995. The report showed that Puget Sound's actual 1993 
vehicle miles travelled were within .95 percent of the forecast. Table 
1 outlines the difference between projected and actual VMT for 1993:


[[Page 43712]]
 Table 1.--Actual and Projected VMT for the Puget Sound Carbon Monoxide 
                        Nonattainment Area, 1993                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      Actual                            
                                   (HPMS) 1993   Projected     Percent  
        Nonattainment area          daily VMT   1993 VMT in   difference
                                   in millions    millions              
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Puget Sound......................   57,307,000   56,769,000        +.95%
------------------------------------------------------------------------



3. Contingency Measures

    Section 187(a)(3) specifies that the State 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. Implementation of the identified 
contingency measures must not require further rulemaking activities by 
the State or EPA. The State has met this requirement by adopting two 
programs as contingency measures. Both measures are ``over control'', 
meaning that Ecology is already implementing the measures but is not 
taking credit for the measures as part of a control strategy for 
attaining the NAAQS. The two control measures are: Commute Trip 
Reduction (CTR) programs, as specified in Washington State's 
Transportation Demand Management Act, and outreach and education to 
induce voluntary reductions in vehicle operations during periods of 
poor air quality. While these control measures are not contingency 
plans in the strict sense of the term ``contingency'', they satisfy the 
broader intent of the Act's contingency measure provision.
    The commute trip reduction measure is codified under Revised Code 
of Washington (RCW) 70.94.510-551. It calls for ``major employers'' 
located within counties with a population of 150,000 or more and to 
submit plans to reduce commuting trips to the workplace. The second 
control measure aims at voluntary curtailment of vehicle operation 
during periods of poor air quality. This measure intends to educate the 
public during periods of extreme temperature inversions, and to 
encourage the use of public transportation, mass transit, 
telecommuting, and other less polluting transit options. Outreach media 
will include television, radio, and newsprint. Both VMT contingency 
measures will, if required, be funded by statewide CMAQ (Congestion 
Mitigation and Air Quality) funds.

III. Today's Action

    In today's action, EPA is approving the SIP revision submitted by 
the State of Washington.
    The State of Washington has submitted a SIP revision implementing 
each of the required elements required by Section 187(a)(2)(A) and 
Section 187(a)(3) of the CAAA. Washington has crafted a ``memorandum of 
understanding'' among the Puget Sound Regional Council, the Spokane 
Regional Council, the Washington State Department of Ecology, and the 
Washington State Department of Transportation that delineates each 
agency's responsibility in reporting vehicle miles travelled in 
Washington State. Additionally, Washington has outlined two contingency 
measures (commute trip reduction and voluntary reduction of vehicle 
operation through public outreach and education) in case VMT forecasts 
are exceeded. EPA is therefore approving this submittal.

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 
CAAA 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 CAAA, 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 published 
elsewhere in this Federal Register, the EPA is proposing to approve the 
SIP revision should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action 
will be effective October 23, 1995 unless, within 30 days of its 
publication, 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 October 23, 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 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 OMB has exempted this regulatory action from 
E.O. 12866 review.
    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 

[[Page 43713]]
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 today 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.
    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 October 23, 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: July 20, 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 WW--Washington

    2. Section 52.2470 is amended by adding paragraph (c) (55) to read 
as follows:


Sec. 52.2470  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (55) On January 22, 1993 the Director of the Washington State 
Department of Ecology (WDOE) submitted the amendment to the Washington 
SIP for Carbon Monoxide (CO) in the King, Pierce, and Snohomish 
Counties' Urbanized Areas.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) The January 22, 1993 letter from the Director of the WDOE 
submitting the Amendment to the Washington SIP for Carbon Monoxide in 
the King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties' Urbanized Areas to EPA, 
``Supplement to the SIP for Washington State, Puget Sound Carbon 
Monoxide Nonattainment Area, January 1993,'' Section 6.0 Vehicle Miles 
Traveled Forecasting and Tracking, adopted on January 22, 1993.
    (ii) Additional material.
    (A) VMT supplements to include the VMT Tracking Report data 
required for the Puget Sound CO Nonattainment Areas, dated October 13, 
1994 and September 19, 1994.

[FR Doc. 95-20801 Filed 8-22-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P