[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 12, 1999)]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-26556]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
Transportation Conformity Budget Adequacy Determination and
Status of Maintenance Demonstration and Associated Budgets; San
Francisco Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is today proposing that the motor vehicle emissions
budgets contained in the 1999 ozone attainment plan for the San
Francisco Bay Area are adequate for transportation conformity purposes.
EPA is also proposing that the Bay Area's existing maintenance
demonstration and associated budgets are no longer applicable and
should be replaced by the new budgets upon a final determination of
adequacy. The attainment plan includes a budget of 175.2 tons per day
(tpd) for VOC and 247.1 tpd for NOX, both for the year 2000.
If, after public comment, EPA finalizes this adequacy determination of
the new budgets, and the determination that the maintenance
demonstration is no longer applicable, the new budgets would apply to
the attainment year of 2000 and beyond and become the sole 1-hour ozone
standard VOC and NOX budgets in the Bay Area for
DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by
November 12, 1999. Comments should be addressed to the contact listed
ADDRESSES: A copy of the proposed rule is available in the air programs
section of EPA Region 9's website, http://www.epa.gov/region09/air, and
the EPA's Office of Mobile Sources' conformity website, http://
www.epa.gov/oms/traq (once there, click on the ``Conformity'' button,
then look for ``Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions for Conformity''). A
copy of the attainment plan can be obtained from the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District's website, http://sparc2.baaqmd.gov/sip/. A
copy of the plan is also included in the docket for this rulemaking and
is available for inspection during normal business hours at EPA Region
9, Planning Office, Air Division, 17th Floor, 75 Hawthorne Street, San
Francisco, California 94105. A reasonable fee may be charged for
copying parts of the docket. Please call (415) 744-1249 for assistance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Celia Bloomfield (415) 744-1249,
Planning Office (AIR-2), Air Division, EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.
I. The Bay Area's 1999 Ozone Attainment Plan Contains New On-Road
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (``Attainment Budgets'') for
Transportation Conformity Purposes
On August 13, 1999, the California Air Resources Board (CARB)
submitted to EPA on behalf of the San Francisco Bay Area (Bay Area) a
plan designed to bring the Bay Area into attainment with the federal 1-
hour national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone. This plan
has an attainment year of 2000. The 2000 attainment year anticipates
specific emissions levels for on-road motor vehicles: 175.2 tpd for VOC
and 247.1 tpd for NOX. Upon a final determination of
adequacy, these emissions levels will become the transportation
conformity motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Bay Area.
The role of transportation conformity, a requirement set out in
section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act, is to ensure that motor vehicle
emissions from transportation activities will not exceed the levels
being relied on in the plan to achieve attainment. In other words,
emissions from the implementation of transportation plans and programs
must be ``consistent with estimates of emissions from motor vehicles
and necessary emission reductions contained in the applicable
implementation plan'' (CAA section 176(c)(2)(A)). Since the 2000
budgets in the ozone attainment plan are attainment budgets, they will
apply to conformity determinations for the attainment year 2000 and for
every year after 2000.
II. The New Attainment Budgets Are Adequate
The new attainment budgets are based on current motor vehicle
emissions information and represent the best estimates of motor vehicle
emissions levels needed for attainment of the federal 1-hour ozone
standard. EPA believes the budgets meet the criteria for adequacy as
set out in section 93.118(e)(4) (62 FR 43811, August 15, 1997) and
should be deemed adequate for transportation conformity purposes.
There are six criteria for adequacy listed in section 93.118(e)(4).
The first, a requirement that the budgets be endorsed by the governor
or his designee and be subject to a State public hearing (section
93.118(e)(4)(I)), was satisfied by CARB's normal plan approval and
submittal process. On July 22, 1999, the CARB board held a hearing to
approve the Bay Area attainment plan. On August 13, 1999, CARB
officially submitted the plan to EPA with a request from the Governor's
designee that EPA approve the plan.
The second criterion requires that prior to plan submittal, there
be ``consultation among federal, State, and local agencies * * *; full
implementation plan documentation * * *''; and resolution of EPA's
comments (section 93.118(e)(4)(ii)). The budgets, which were calculated
and added to the plan after consultation among federal, State, and
local agencies and in response to EPA comments, meet EPA's second
criterion as well.
In compliance with the third, fourth, and fifth adequacy criteria,
the motor vehicle emissions budgets are clearly identified and
precisely quantified (section 93.118(e)(4)(iii)) in Section 4 of the
submitted attainment plan; the budgets are consistent with the modeling
results from the attainment assessment, which define the emissions
levels needed for attainment (section 93.118(e)(4)(iv)); and the
budgets are not only ``consistent with'' and ``related to the emissions
inventory and the control measures in the submitted * * * plan,''
(section 93.118(e)(4)(v)) but are specifically derived from the motor
vehicle emissions information projected for the year 2000 taking into
account emissions reductions that will be achieved by the plan's
Finally, the sixth criterion relating to revisions of previously
submitted plans (section 93.118(e)(4)(vi)) does not apply because the
ozone attainment plan is an initial submission, not a revision to a
previously submitted control strategy plan for the same Clean Air Act
purpose and time frame. It is a new attainment plan triggered by EPA's
redesignation of the Bay Area from maintenance to nonattainment on July
10, 1998 (63 FR 37258).
III. The 1995 Maintenance Budgets Are No Longer Applicable
On May 22, 1995, EPA redesignated the Bay Area to attainment and
approved the Bay Area's maintenance plan, which was submitted as part
of its redesignation request. 60 FR 27028. Such a plan is required by
the redesignation provisions of sections 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) and 175A of
the Act for maintenance areas--areas that are redesignated to
attainment from nonattainment. The Bay Area is no longer a maintenance
area. While its maintenance plan was designed to maintain compliance
with the federal 1-hour ozone standard, the plan failed. During the
first two years implementing the maintenance plan (1995-1996), the Bay
Area experienced 43 exceedances and 17 violations of the federal
standard. As a result, the Bay Area was redesignated back to
nonattainment on July 10, 1998 (63 FR 37258). Because the Bay Area is
now a nonattainment area subject to the attainment plan requirements of
section 172, rather than the maintenance requirements of section 175A,
we are finding through rulemaking that the maintenance demonstration is
no longer relevant and is not an applicable requirement under section
110(l).1 As part of the obsolete maintenance demonstration,
the maintenance budgets are also no longer an applicable requirement of
the Act. The maintenance demonstration and associated budgets were not
eliminated when the Bay Area was redesignated back to nonattainment.
The maintenance requirements can only be eliminated through rulemaking
and if the new attainment budgets are deemed adequate. If this adequacy
determination and determination that the maintenance budgets are no
longer applicable are finalized, the VOC and NOX
transportation conformity budgets for the Bay Area contained in the new
attainment plan submitted by CARB on August 13, 1999 will become the
applicable 1-hour ozone standard budgets for the Bay Area.
\1\ Unlike the maintenance demonstration, the measures approved
into the SIP as part of the maintenance plan remain in full force
and effect and cannot be removed from the SIP without equivalent
replacement because such removal would interfere with attainment
pursuant to section 110(l).
IV. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, Regulatory
Planning and Review.
B. Executive Order 12875
Under Executive Order 12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental
Partnership, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by
statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local or tribal
government, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary
to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those governments, or
EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting,
Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office of
Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected State, local and tribal
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's rule does not create a mandate on State, local or tribal
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these
entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875
do not apply to this rule.
C. Executive Order 13045
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) Is
determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O.
12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA
has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children.
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on
children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered
by the Agency. This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does
not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or
D. Executive Order 13084
Under Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not
required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.'' Today's rule
does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian
tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of
E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1990 requires federal agencies to
identify potentially adverse impacts of federal regulations upon small
entities. In instances where significant impacts are possible on a
substantial number of these entities, agencies are required to perform
a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (RFA).
EPA has determined that today's regulation will not have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. This
regulation affects federal agencies and metropolitan planning
organizations, which by definition are designated only for metropolitan
areas with a population of at least 50,000. These organizations do not
constitute small entities.
Therefore, as required under section 605 of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., I certify that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
F. Unfunded Mandates
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
annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate;
or to 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 annual 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
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: September 27, 1999.
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 99-26556 Filed 10-8-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P