[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 194 (Friday, October 6, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 52348-52351]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-24939]



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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[LA 32-1-7190; FRL-5309-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Louisiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve 
Louisiana's request to grant an exemption for the Baton Rouge ozone 
nonattainment area from the applicable oxides of nitrogen (NOX) 
transportation conformity requirements. On July 25, 1995, Louisiana 
submitted, to the EPA, 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 Baton 
Rouge ozone nonattainment area, which is classified as serious. The 
State of Louisiana bases its request for Baton Rouge upon a modeling 
demonstration that additional NOX reductions would not contribute 
to ozone attainment in the nonattainment area.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing on 
or before November 6, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr. 
Thomas Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section, at the EPA Regional Office 
listed below. Copies of the documents relevant to this proposed action 
are available for public inspection during normal business hours at the 
following locations. The interested persons wanting to examine these 
documents should make an appointment with the appropriate office at 
least 24 hours before the visiting day.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Multimedia Planning and 
Permitting Division, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-
2733.
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality, H.B. Garlock Building, 
7290 Bluebonnet, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70810.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Jeanne McDaniels or Mr. Quang Nguyen, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), 
Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, U.S. EPA Region 6, 1445 
Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-7214.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

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 the EPA. 
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 and less-than-1990 tests 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 emissions reductions before SIPs 
with emissions budgets can 

[[Page 52349]]
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 the EPA 
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 EPA 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 John Seitz, 
Director of the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to 
Regional Air Directors, titled ``Section 182(f) NOX Exemptions--
Revised Process and Criteria.''
    In a petition dated November 17, 1994, and in two follow-up letters 
to the petition, the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality 
(LDEQ) requested that the EPA grant an exemption from the requirements 
of section 182(f) of the Act to include the reasonably available 
control technology (RACT) and new source review (NSR) requirements for 
major stationary sources of NOX, inspection and maintenance (I/M) 
NOX requirements, and transportation and general conformity 
requirements for NOX.
    On August 18, 1995, the EPA published a rulemaking proposing 
approval of the NOX exemption for the RACT, NSR, I/M, and general 
conformity requirements. The Region did not propose approval of the 
transportation conformity exemption in that notice, however. The reason 
for not including the transportation conformity among the proposed 
exemptions stems from an April 1995 agreement by the EPA to change the 
procedural mechanism through which a NOX exemption from 
transportation conformity exemption would be granted (EDF et al. v. 
U.S. E.P.A, No. 94-1044, U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit). (The EDF 
et al. 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).) Therefore, instead of a petition under 
section 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. The Baton Rouge ozone nonattainment 
area is classified as serious 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. As 
originally promulgated, the EPA's transportation conformity rule 1 
and general conformity rule 2 referenced the section 182(f) 
exemption process as a means for exempting any nonattainment area from 
NOX conformity requirements. On August 29, 1995, the EPA amended 
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.3

    \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).
    \3\ ``Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: Authority for 
Transportation Conformity Nitrogen Oxides Waivers; Interim Final 
Rule,'' August 29, 1995 (60 FR 44762).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The July 25, 1995, SIP revision request from Louisiana 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 June 29, 1995. The Baton Rouge serious 
ozone nonattainment area consists of the following parishes: East Baton 
Rouge, West Baton Rouge, Pointe Coupee, Livingston, Iberville, and 
Ascension.
    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 from 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 which the Administrator 
determines that additional reductions of NOX would not contribute 
to attainment. In evaluating the 182(b) SIP revision request, the EPA 
considered whether additional NOX reductions would contribute to 
attainment of the standard in the Baton Rouge area.
    As outlined in the relevant EPA guidance, the use of photochemical 
grid modeling is the recommended approach for testing 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.
    The EPA has made a determination under section 182(b)(1) that the 
NOX requirements do not apply. The EPA has based its decision on 
an urban airshed modeling (UAM) demonstration that additional NOX 
reductions would not contribute to attainment in the Baton Rouge area.

State Submittal

    On July 25, 1995, the State of Louisiana submitted, as a revision 
to the SIP, a request for an exemption from the transportation 
conformity NOX requirements. The State bases its request on an 
urban airshed modeling (UAM) demonstration that additional NOX 
reductions would not contribute to attainment in the area. The modeling 
demonstrates, consistent with the EPA's December 1993 section 182(f) 
guidance, that decreases in ozone concentrations resulting from VOC 
reductions alone are equal to or greater than decreases obtained from 
NOX reductions or a combination of VOC and NOX reductions. 
The State's submission includes a letter dated July 17, 1995, from the 
Governor of Louisiana requesting the exemption to the NOX 
transportation conformity requirements and a summary of the UAM 
modeling results. The State of Louisiana also provided supplemental 
technical reports based on the modeling demonstration in the Baton 
Rouge post-1996 rate-of-progress (ROP) plan submitted to the EPA on 
November 15, 1994, pursuant to the requirements of section 182(c)(2)(B) 
of the Act. These reports contained the following: base case model 
inputs, base case performance evaluation, 1999 emissions report, and 
attainment modeling report. These additional technical reports provided 
supplemental detail and 

[[Page 52350]]
documentation on the modeling information provided to the EPA in the 
State's petition.

Analysis of State Submission

    In evaluating the section 182(b)(1) transportation conformity 
NOX exemption, the EPA applied the same criteria/guidance used for 
evaluating section 182(f) NOX waiver requests. The following items 
are the basis for the EPA's action proposing to approve the State of 
Louisiana's section 182(b)(1) NOX exemption request for the Baton 
Rouge ozone nonattainment area. Please refer to the EPA's Technical 
Support Document and the State's submittal for more detailed 
information.

A. Consistency With EPA NOX Exemption Guidance

    Chapter 4 of the EPA's December 1993 section 182(f) guidance 
requires that photochemical grid modeling be used to simulate 
conditions resulting from three emission reduction scenarios: (1) 
Substantial VOC reductions; (2) Substantial NOX reductions; and 
(3) both VOC and NOX reductions. To demonstrate that NOX 
reductions would not contribute to attainment, the areawide predicted 
maximum 1-hour ozone concentration for each day modeled under scenario 
(1) must be less than or equal to that from scenarios (2) and (3) for 
the same day. Chapter 7 specifies that the application of UAM should be 
consistent with the techniques specified in the EPA ``Guideline on Air 
Quality Models (Revised),'' and ``Guideline for Regulator Application 
of the UAM (July 1991).'' In addition, Chapter 8 of the EPA's December 
1993 section 182(f) guidance requires that the modeling simulating 
conditions from the NOX emission reduction scenarios include 
NOX emission increases after November 15, 1992, due to new or 
modified stationary sources of NOX. (Many of these sources would 
be subject to the best available control technology requirement through 
the prevention of significant deterioration program, but not to NSR 
offsets.) As discussed in the next section, the State has met these 
requirements by using the UAM consistent with the EPA's guidance.

B. UAM Modeling Analysis

    The LDEQ used UAM version IV, an EPA-approved photochemical grid 
model, to develop the attainment demonstration for the Baton Rouge 
area. The State's modeling activities were performed as outlined in the 
UAM modeling protocols, according to the EPA's ``Guideline for 
Regulatory Application of the Urban Airshed Model.'' A specific 
modeling protocol was developed by the State for its modeling 
activities. The State's modeling protocol was reviewed and approved by 
the EPA. The discussion below summarizes the EPA's analysis of how the 
State's modeling demonstrations complied with the EPA's guidance. 
Please refer to the EPA's Technical Support Document for more detailed 
information.
1. Episode Selection
    The State used the EPA ``Guideline For Regulatory Application of 
The Urban Airshed Model'' to select episodes for use in the Baton Rouge 
UAM modeling exercises. Data from 1987 through 1991 were examined for 
episodes which cover at least 48 consecutive hours and the worst-case 
meteorological conditions. Three episodes were selected for the UAM 
analysis for the area.
2. Model Domain and Meteorological Input
    The LDEQ used a sufficiently large modeling domain for Baton Rouge 
to ensure that the model captures the movement of ozone episodes as a 
result of the VOC and NOX emissions emitted from the surface 
sources. Meteorological data were collected from numerous monitoring 
stations in the area. The LDEQ followed the methods described in the 
UAM user's guides to develop model inputs for wind field data, mixing 
heights, temperature, and meteorological scalars for the areas.
3. Emissions Inventory
    The Baton Rouge modeling exercises were conducted using VOC and 
NOX emission inventories compiled by survey and direct measurement 
by the LDEQ. The modeling emissions inventories are composed of point 
source, area, on-road mobile, off-road mobile, and biogenic emissions. 
Where applicable, emissions were adjusted for pertinent conditions 
related to the episode day to be modeled, thus producing day-specific 
emissions. The State followed the EPA's procedures for developing 
episode-specific emission inventories.
    The EPA's section 182(f) guidance explains that, in general, the 
purpose of the section 182(f) requirements for NOX is related to 
attainment of the ozone standard, which suggests that an analysis be 
focussed on the time that attainment of that standard is required. For 
the purpose of a section 182(f) modeling demonstration, this means that 
the projected emissions inventory for the attainment year should be 
used.
    For Baton Rouge, the 1999 attainment year modeling inventory was 
developed from the 1990 base year emission inventory and adjusted to 
reflect the projected conditions for the attainment year. Demographic 
and econometric forecasting methods were employed to project activities 
levels to 1999, which, in turn, were used to develop a projected 
emissions inventory for 1999. The State then applied the VOC emission 
reductions that are projected to be realized through 1996 from the 
control regulations contained in the Baton Rouge 15 percent ROP SIP 
submitted to the EPA on November 15, 1994, and the NOX controls 
implemented between 1990 and 1994 due to facilities' voluntary 
participation in the early NOX reduction program. (The 1999 
inventories did not incorporate any additional NOX emission 
reductions that would have been achieved through implementation of the 
NOX RACT, NSR, general and transportation conformity, or NOX-
related I/M provisions.)
4. Model Performance
    For Baton Rouge, both graphical and statistical performance 
measures were used to evaluate the model. Using these analyses, the 
predicted results from the model were compared to the observed results 
for each episode. These analyses indicated that, overall, the model 
performed satisfactorily for the three episodes used for the UAM 
demonstration.
5. Modeling Demonstration
    The EPA's section 182(f) guidance requires the State to model three 
emission reduction scenarios to evaluate the benefits of NOX 
reductions: (1) Substantial VOC reductions; (2) substantial NOX 
reductions; and (3) both VOC and NOX reductions. For the section 
182(b)(1) exemption, the LDEQ modeled the three emission reduction 
scenarios for all three episodes using the 1999 projected emission 
inventory, which includes the voluntary early (1990-1994) point source 
NOX reductions and the VOC emission controls to be implemented 
through 1996 (i.e., 15 percent ROP). The LDEQ modeled the scenarios 
using across-the-board reductions in the projected VOC and NOX 
point source emission inventories. The State first modeled substantial 
NOX and VOC emission reductions as follows: A 100 percent 
reduction in point source VOC emissions alone; a 100 percent reduction 
in point source NOX emissions alone; and a 100 percent reduction 
in both VOC and NOX emissions combined. This reduction 

[[Page 52351]]
represents approximately 46 percent of the total projected 
anthropogenic VOC emissions and approximately 57% of the total 
projected NOX emissions. The State also modeled smaller across-
the-board reductions in the projected VOC and NOX point source 
emissions of 25%, 50%, and 75% separately and then combined in order to 
more accurately characterize near-term VOC and NOX control 
scenarios.
    As explained in the EPA's section 182(f) guidance, the EPA believes 
it is appropriate to focus this analysis on the areawide maximum 1-hour 
predicted ozone concentration, since this value is critical for the 
attainment demonstration. For all three episodes, the controlling day 
showed that the domain-wide predicted maximum ozone concentrations are 
lowest when only VOC reductions are modeled. In contrast, further 
NOX reductions increase the domain-wide maximum ozone 
concentrations. Please refer to the EPA's Technical Support Document 
for more detailed information.
    The EPA believes that all NOX exemptions that are approved 
should be approved only on a contingent basis. As described in the 
EPA's NOX Supplement to the General Preamble (57 FR 55628, 
November 25, 1992), the EPA would rescind a NOX exemption in cases 
where NOX reductions were later found to be beneficial in the 
area's attainment plan. That is, a modeling based exemption would last 
for only as long as the area's modeling continued to demonstrate 
attainment without the additional NOX reductions.
    If the EPA later determines that additional NOX reductions 
from transportation sources are beneficial based on new photochemical 
grid modeling in an area initially exempted, the area would be removed 
from exempt status and would be required to implement the NOX 
provisions of the transportation conformity rule except to the extent 
that modeling shows NOX reductions to be ``excess reductions.''
    In summary, the UAM modeling results for the Baton Rouge 
nonattainment area indicate that additional NOX reductions as well 
as NSR control of any NOX increases related to expected growth 
would not contribute to attainment of the ozone standard by 1999. The 
EPA therefore proposes to approve the transportation conformity 
NOX exemption for the Baton Rouge area. This exemption will remain 
effective for only as long as modeling continues to show that NOX 
control of transportation sources would not contribute to attainment in 
the Baton Rouge nonattainment area.

Proposed Rulemaking Action and Solicitation of Comments

    Based on the State's SIP revision request and associated 
documentation, the EPA proposes to approve Louisiana's request for an 
exemption from the transportation conformity NOX requirements.
    Public comments are solicited on the requested SIP revision and on 
EPA's proposed rulemaking action. Comments received by November 6, 
1995, will be considered in the development of the EPA'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 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 EPA 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., the 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, the 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.
    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 the 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 (1976).
    Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the 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, the 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 the EPA to establish a 
plan for informing and advising any small governments that may be 
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule. The EPA 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: September 29, 1995.

Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-24939 Filed 10-5-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P