![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; the Dallas/Fort Worth Nonattainment Area; Ozone
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: January 18, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 12)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 4756-4768]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18ja01-34]
[[Page 4756]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[TX-126-1-7477; FRL-6933-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; the
Dallas/Fort Worth Nonattainment Area; Ozone
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve the 1-hour ozone Attainment
Demonstration State Implementation Plan (SIP), the Post 96 Rate-of-
Progress (ROP) plan SIP, and the 15% ROP plan SIP for the Dallas/Fort
Worth (DFW) serious ozone nonattainment area. The EPA is also proposing
to extend the attainment date for the DFW area to November 15, 2007,
from November 15, 1999, based on transport from the Houston/Galveston/
Brazoria (HGA) ozone nonattainment area; approve the Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets contained in the Attainment Demonstration SIP and the
Post 1996 ROP plan SIP; approve the State's enforceable commitment to
perform a mid-course review and submit a SIP revision to the EPA by May
2004; approve the State's enforceable commitment to revise the SIP
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets using the MOBILE6 on-road emissions
model; approve revisions to the 1990 base year inventory; and find that
the DFW area meets the Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT)
requirements for major sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC)
emissions. The EPA is also proposing to convert the conditional,
interim approval of the DFW 15% plan (63 FR 62943) to a full approval
because the requirements for full approval appear to have been met.
This proposed action is based on the requirements of the Federal Clean
Air Act (the Act) related to ozone demonstrations.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 19, 2001.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Mr.
Thomas H. Diggs, Chief, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), at the EPA Region
6 Office listed below. Copies of documents relevant to this action,
including the Technical Support Document (TSD) are available for public
inspection during normal business hours at the following location.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, Air Planning Section
(6PD-L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, Office of Air
Quality, 12124 Park Circle, Austin, Texas 78753.
Anyone wanting to examine these documents should make an
appointment with the appropriate office at least two working days in
advance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Herbert R. Sherrow, Jr., Air Planning
Section (6PD-L), 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Telephone
Number (214) 665-7237, e-Mail Address: sherrow.herb@epa.gov.
Table of Contents
I. Attainment Demonstration and Attainment Date
A. Proposed Action
B. Attainment Demonstration Contents
C. Photochemical Modeling
D. Photochemical Modeling Results
E. Weight-Of-Evidence
F. Emission Control Strategy
G. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget
H. EPA's Analysis
II. Post 1996 Rate of Progress Plan
A. Proposed Action
B. Calculation of Requirements
C. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget
III. 15% Rate of Progress Plan
Proposed Action
IV. Background
A. The Relevant Clean Air Act Requirements
B. Dates of State's SIP Submissions
C. General Requirements for an Attainment Demonstration and its
Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
D. Ozone Transport Policy and Attainment Date Extensions
V. Administrative Requirements
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refers to EPA.
I. Attainment Demonstration and Attainment Date
A. Proposed Action
What Action Are we Taking?
We are proposing to approve the transport demonstration and
attainment demonstration SIP developed for the DFW ozone nonattainment
area because they meet the Clean Air Act. We believe that the State has
adequately followed our 1998 Transport Guidance for demonstrating
transport, and that the State's transport demonstration analyses
indicate that there are impacts of ozone and ozone precursor transports
from the upwind HGA area affecting the DFW area. In addition, we
believe that the modeling, the provided weight-of-evidence analyses,
and the analysis of transport of ozone and ozone precursor compounds
from the HGA area, demonstrate that the control strategy chosen by the
State will provide for attainment of the ozone standard. It is our
technical position that the control strategy will provide for
attainment of the ozone standard by November 15, 2007.
We are proposing to approve the DFW 1-hour ozone nonattainment area
attainment demonstration SIP; the State's request for an extension of
the attainment date to November 15, 2007, while retaining the area's
current classification as serious; the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets;
the State's enforceable commitment to conduct a mid-course review
(including evaluation of all modeling, inventory data, and other tools
and assumptions used to develop this attainment demonstration) and to
submit a mid-course review SIP revision, with recommended mid-course
corrective actions, to us by May 1, 2004; the Speed Limit Reductions in
nine counties (including the DFW 4-county area; Dallas, Tarrant,
Collin, and Denton Counties); a Voluntary Mobile Emissions Program in
nine counties (including the DFW 4-county area); Transportation Control
Measures in the DFW area; the 15% ROP Plan, the Post-1996 ROP Plan;
revisions to the 1990 base year inventory; and the State's enforceable
commitment to performing new mobile source modeling for the DFW area,
using MOBILE6, our on-road mobile emissions factor computer model,
within 24 months of the model's release; and, if transportation
conformity analysis is to be performed between 12 months and 24 months
after the MOBILE6 release, transportation conformity will not be
determined until Texas submits a motor vehicle emissions budget which
is developed using MOBILE6 and which we find adequate. We are also
proposing to find that the DFW area meets all remaining outstanding VOC
RACT requirements for major sources.
If the subsequent analyses conducted by the State as part of the
mid-course review indicate additional reductions are needed for the DFW
area to attain the ozone standard, we will require the State to
implement additional controls as soon as possible which demonstrate
attainment through photochemical grid modeling. We cannot finalize the
proposed action upon the Attainment Demonstration SIP, the State's
request for an extension of the attainment date, and the MVEB contained
in the Attainment Demonstration SIP unless and until we have fully
approved all of the control measures relied upon in the State's
Attainment Demonstration SIP for the DFW area and the control measures
required by the Act for a serious area such as the DFW area. See
[[Page 4757]]
section F., Action needed on Control Measures for a complete list of
the rulemaking actions which must be completed before we can finalize
action on the DFW Attainment Demonstration SIP, the attainment date
extension, and the Attainment Demonstration SIP's MVEB. Furthermore, we
cannot finalize action on these three items unless and until the
Governor submits the finally adopted enforceable commitment regarding
MOBILE6. The State has begun its public comment process on an
enforceable commitment and has committed to performing new mobile
source modeling for the DFW area, using MOBILE6, within 24 months of
the model's release. The public hearing is scheduled for January 4,
2001.
Was the Submittal Addressed in Public Hearings and Adopted by the
State?
Four Public hearings were held in the DFW area on January 26 and
27, 2000. The State formally adopted the submittal on April 19, 2000.
In addition, the State held six other public hearings in other cities
on the submittal. The Governor of Texas submitted the Attainment
Demonstration SIP, a request for extension of the attainment date for
the DFW ozone nonattainment area, adopted rules, orders and
initiatives, and the mid-course commitment on April 25, 2000. The State
has gone forward with its public participation requirements on a
commitment to performing new mobile source modeling for the DFW area,
using MOBILE6. The public hearing on this commitment is scheduled for
January 4, 2001. We anticipate that the Governor of Texas will submit
this adopted enforceable commitment in the Spring of 2001. The Governor
also submitted after public notice and hearing, the Post 1996 ROP Plan
and revisions to the 1990 base year inventory on October 25, 1999.
B. Attainment Demonstration Contents
What Are the Contents of the Attainment Demonstration Submittal?
The April 25, 2000 submittal, concerning the ozone attainment
demonstration and an extension of the attainment date for the DFW ozone
nonattainment area, contains:
1. A photochemical modeling demonstration and additional weight-of-
evidence analyses supporting the photochemical modeling demonstration,
2. An accompanying control strategy, comprised of:
a. Regulations and initiatives in the DFW area (and their
documentation);
b. Regulations and initiatives in certain counties surrounding the
DFW area (and their documentation); and
c. Additional regional rules and orders (and their documentation),
relied upon for demonstrating attainment in the DFW area.
3. A 2007 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEB) for transportation
conformity;
4. A demonstration of transport from the HGA area supporting an
attainment date extension to 2007;
5. Emissions growth estimates, and a 2007 forecast emissions
inventory; and,
6. A commitment to perform a mid-course review with submittal to us
by May 1, 2004.
The attainment control strategy; i.e., regulations, initiatives,
and orders, are primarily designed to control Nitrogen Oxides
(NOX) emissions from various sources, since the modeling
shows ozone reduction is more sensitive to NOX controls.
For purposes of this action, we are reviewing the modeling, weight-
of-evidence support, the transport analysis, the MVEB, forecasted
emissions inventory, the mid-course enforceable commitment, and the
Transportation Control Measures, the Speed limit reductions and the
Voluntary Mobile Emissions Program local initiatives. We are also
reviewing the enforceable commitment to perform new mobile source
modeling for the DFW area, using MOBILE6, within 24 months of the
model's release, including a provision stating that if transportation
conformity analysis is to be performed between 12 months and 24 months
after the MOBILE6 release, transportation conformity will not be
determined until Texas submits a motor vehicle emissions budget which
is developed using MOBILE6 and which we find adequate.
C. Photochemical Modeling
What Model Approach Was Used for the Analysis?
The state used the Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions
(CAMx) version 2.01 photochemical grid model to conduct both the SIP
attainment demonstration modeling and the downwind transport modeling
for the DFW ozone nonattainment area. The State demonstrated that CAMx
performed better than UAM version IV, the regulatory model, in the HGA
nonattainment area and petitioned us to approve its use in the DFW
nonattainment area. We approved the use of CAMx for the DFW ozone
nonattainment area based upon the model's better performance in the HGA
nonattainment area. This was considered to be valid for the DFW area.
The State's modeling activities were performed as outlined in a series
of the modeling protocols, according to our ``Guideline for Regulatory
Application of the Urban Airshed Model'' (July, 1991) (Guideline). The
final modeling protocol developed by the State was submitted in August
1999. This protocol was reviewed and approved by us. The State used a
relatively large modeling domain with nested grids to capture the
influence of regional and long-range transport. The modeling domain
covers the DFW ozone nonattainment area which is comprised of Dallas,
Tarrant, Collin, and Denton Counties. The modeling domain also covers
most counties in central and east Texas, including the ozone
nonattainment counties of Harris, Jefferson, Orange, Chambers, Hardin,
Liberty, Montgomery, Waller, Brazoria, Galveston, and Fort Bend
counties. It also covers a number of other States; e.g., Louisiana and
Mississippi in the southeastern portion of the country.
How Were Exceedance Days Evaluated and What Days Were Modeled?
Our 1991 Guideline sets forth a recommended procedure for selecting
ozone exceedance days appropriate for conducting a modeling
demonstration. This procedure, in part, considers wind rose analyses
based upon the four morning hours of 0700 to 1000 local standard time.
These wind rose analyses are used to define the meteorological patterns
for source-receptor relationships associated with high ozone events.
The State used this method for defining meteorological patterns. The
number of ozone exceedance days for the period, 1990-1996, associated
with each meteorological pattern was identified. The most prominent
meteorological pattern for ozone exceedance days (i.e., 70%) was calm
winds; i.e., wind speeds 3mph. The meteorological pattern with
southerly winds was the second most prominent pattern with 25% of the
ozone exceedance days.
A total of eleven ozone exceedance days were identified as
candidates for modeling. From these, the State chose the candidate
episodes in 1995 (calm winds) and 1996 (southerly winds), in part,
since they are more applicable to the most currently available
emissions inventory (the 1996 Periodic) and since more ambient data is
generally available for these episodes.
The State selected June 21 and 22, 1995, which form a multi-day
episode, as two of the three primary episode days to model from the
calm meteorological regime. These two days also had 1-hour exceedances
fairly close to the current ozone design value (i.e., 139 ppb). For
[[Page 4758]]
the third primary episode day, the State selected July 3, 1996.
Although the meteorological pattern on July 3rd had neither calm nor
southerly winds, since the two days prior exhibited southerly winds,
the rationale for this selection is that July 3rd is associated with
southerly winds. It also occurred during the period of enhanced
aerometric monitoring. The high ozone episode days the State selected
and modeled meet with the requisite three primary episode days and
cover the two predominate types of meteorological patterns associated
with high ozone in the DFW area. A more complete description of the
episode selections and technical rationales can be found in the TSD.
How Was Potential Transport From the HGA Area Addressed?
The State demonstrated the potential transport of ozone and ozone
precursors from the upwind HGA nonattainment area upon the DFW area for
both the 1995 and the 1996 episodes. This demonstration was primarily
based upon two modeling analyses. The first used the same set of air
quality and meteorological inputs as used in the base case simulation,
but with an emissions data set in which anthropogenic (man-made)
emissions from the 8-county HGA area were eliminated. The second was an
ozone source apportionment analysis. The CAMx model has an optional
feature which tracks the sources of precursors that contribute to the
ozone formed at a given location. This feature was used to assess the
culpability of sources in the 8-county HGA nonattainment area to the
DFW four-county nonattainment area. These analyses show that for July
3, 1996, 2-4 ppb of ozone in portions of the DFW area comes from HGA
sources.
The State also submitted a back trajectory analysis of ozone
exceedance days in the DFW area for the six year period, 1993 to 1998.
During this period there were 160 exceedance days in the DFW area and
approximately ten percent had trajectories going back to the HGA area.
Thus, emissions from the HGA area have the potential to influence
DFW's ability to attain the 1-hour ozone standard. It is EPA's proposed
technical position that for some ozone exceedance days, the DFW area is
affected by transport from the HGA area. On other exceedance days, the
DFW area is affected only by ozone precursor emissions generated within
the DFW area itself.
Based on this transport demonstration, we propose to grant the
State's request for an extension of the attainment date to November 15,
2007. A detailed discussion of the acceptability of the demonstration
is in the section on EPA's Analysis in this notice. A discussion of the
Transport Policy is in the BACKGROUND section of this notice.
D. Photochemical Modeling Results
What Were the Modeling Results for the Primary Episode Days and for the
Future Attainment Date?
The model simulated ozone concentrations on selected primary
episode days for the 1995 and 1996 episodes using emissions specific
for those days, and emissions forecast to a 2007 future year. The
resulting DFW area summary of the performance statistics and ozone
peaks for 1995, 1996, and 2007 are shown in Table 1. The normalized
bias and gross error performance statistics shown in Table 1 are well
below our recommended maximum levels. This indicates that the model
adequately replicated the spacial and temporal ozone formation that
occurred on these ozone exceedance days. This provides an assurance
that the model is useful in testing future control measures. These
modeled ozone peaks reflect the results of the 2007 forecast emissions
and control strategy for the 1995 and 1996 episode days.
Table 1--Summary of Performance Statistics and Peak Observed and Modeled
Ozone Concentrations (ppb) in the DFW Ozone Nonattainment Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Period Episode days
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary Episode Day.............. 6/21/95 6/22/95 7/3/96
Peak Observed.................... 144 135 144
Peak Modeled Base Case........... 132.8 137.6 159.2
Peak Modeled 2007 Future Case.... 121.1 126.1 144.2
Peak Modeled 2007 Post-Control 110.3 113.1 131.5
Case............................
Normalized Bias Greater Than 60 -10.1% -8.8% -3.4%
ppb.............................
Normalized Gross Error Greater 12.2% 12.5% 15.0%
Than 60 ppb.....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do the Modeling Results Demonstrate Attainment of the Ozone Standard?
The Guidance on Use of Modeled Results to Demonstrate Attainment of
the Ozone NAAQS, (June, 1996) recommends the use of either a
statistical or deterministic approach to demonstrate attainment. Both
of these approaches allow for the use of Weight-of-Evidence (WOE) to
supplement the modeling results. The State elected to use the
deterministic approach with WOE. As noted in Table 1, the 1-hour
maximum predicted ozone concentration for the 2007 post-control
modeling in the DFW area on the controlling day (July 3, 1996) (131.5
ppb) is above the standard; whereas, the other two episode days modeled
are well below the standard.
The 2007 post-control modeling by itself does not conclusively
demonstrate attainment of the standard; (i.e., the deterministic test),
but its results are so close to attainment to warrant the consideration
of WOE analyses that support the demonstration of attainment. The State
conducted several WOE analyses (see next section for further details)
to provide additional confirmation that the demonstration shows that
DFW will attain the standard by 2007 with the planned emission
controls.
E. Weight-Of-Evidence
What WOE Analyses and Determinations Are Used To Support the Modeled
Attainment Demonstration?
As presented in section D, our 1996 guidance document provides for
the use of WOE to complement the control strategy modeling in
demonstrating attainment. The key concept behind our June 1996 guidance
is that determination of attainment, based on monitored ozone
concentrations, allows for some exceedances of the 1-hour standard.
Thus, even though the model may show some areas with peak
concentrations slightly above the NAAQS, such modeled exceedances do
[[Page 4759]]
not necessarily imply that monitored attainment will not be achieved.
Since the 2007 post-control modeling for the July 3, 1996, episode
day is the only day exceeding the standard, most of the WOE analyses
address this day. The State submitted the following WOE analyses:
1. Notable higher peak modeled than monitored ozone concentrations:
The monitored peak in the DFW area on July 3, 1996, was 144 ppb versus
a modeled peak of 159 ppb. Thus, there is some uncertainty regarding
the modeled peak, even though the episode satisfied all of our criteria
for model performance.
2. Meteorology: As previously indicated, the specific meteorology
on July 3, 1996, was not of the types most associated with ozone
exceedances in the DFW area. In addition, although the model
performance for July 3, 1996, was acceptable, there was an indication
that the meteorological features were not fully replicated for this
day. There were scattered rain showers in the area which may have
presented some meteorological effects which could not be modeled.
3. Additional ozone reduction metrics: The State presented
additional metrics, aside from the modeled peak. The metrics presented
are Area of exceedance, Area-hours of exceedance, and a measure of
potential exposure. These metrics measure the geographic extent and
temporal duration and duration of the ozone exceedance for various
control strategies. The results show that the modeled control strategy
produces a significant reduction in each of these additional metrics.
This indicates that the selected control strategy should reduce the
geographical and temporal aspects of the ozone exceedance, as well as
the peak concentration.
4. Estimated future design value: The estimated future design
value, as recommended in our draft guidance for assessing attainment of
the 8-hour standard, is determined by proportioning the change in the
modeled ozone results to a change in the design value.
To estimate the future design value, the State developed a ratio of
the 2007 post-control modeling results to that of the original Base
modeling results. Since episodes chosen for the DFW attainment
demonstration occurred during 1995 and 1996, the State used monitoring
data collected from 1995 to 1997 in the DFW area to establish the base
design values. Then the ratio of the modeling results is multiplied by
the 1995-1997 base design value to obtain an estimated future design
value. Using this procedure the estimated future design value for July
3rd is 115.3 ppb, which is less than the standard. This result suggests
that it is likely that the area will attain the standard by 2007.
5. Design value trends: The State analyzed historic monitored air
quality data in the DFW area for the period of 1981 to 1999. The
measure of air quality which determines the nonattainment
classification is the design value. The design value is the highest of
the fourth-highest daily peak ozone concentration over a three year
period at any monitoring site in the area. There had been a general
downtrend in the design value; however, it has remained constant in
recent years. The constant trend has occurred despite dramatic
increases in the level of construction and economic activity and
substantial growth in the mobile fleet. Existing regulations appear to
be adequate to keep the design value constant and new regulations
included in the SIP should provide a significant decline in the design
value.
6. New technologies: The State plans to continue reviewing and
implementing new technologies as appropriate for the DFW area. The area
will also benefit from our requirements for cleaner vehicles and fuels
in the future.
In summary, the State's WOE analyses provide adequate support for
the State's attainment demonstration. Maintaining air quality through
recent periods is demonstrated and future progress in air quality
improvement is shown to be likely. Our decision on the adequacy of the
WOE is based on the composite of the analyses, and not on any single
element. The WOE complements the modeled control strategy and indicates
attainment should be reached by November 15, 2007.
The 1996 guidance recognizes a need to perform a mid-course review
as a means for addressing uncertainty in the modeling results. Because
of the uncertainty in long term projections, we believe that a viable
attainment demonstration that relies on weight of evidence should
contain provisions for periodic review of monitoring, emissions, and
modeling data to assess the extent to which refinements to emission
control measures are needed. The State submitted an enforceable
commitment to perform such a mid-course review and to submit a SIP
revision by May 2004.
F. Emission Control Strategy
What Emission Control Strategies Were Included in the Attainment
Demonstration?
The DFW attainment demonstration SIP is directed at reductions of
NOX since the modeling shows reductions of NOX
will be most effective in bringing the area into attainment of the
Standard.
The attainment demonstration SIP relies on a combination of Federal
measures, State measures, CAA statutory requirements, local initiatives
applied to different groups of counties in, and adjacent to, the DFW
area, and projections of the level of control in the HGA area based on
enforceable commitments in the November 1999 SIP for the HGA area. The
attainment demonstration SIP also relies on Regional measures applied
in east and central Texas. Please refer to the TSD for more details
regarding these measures, initiatives, growth rates and emission
reductions.
Federal Measures: The State included the following Federal Measures
in the Future Year Base Case.
1. On-road mobile sources:
--Tier 2 vehicle emission standards and federal low sulfur gasoline in
DFW and HGA.
--National Low Emitting Vehicles standards.
--Heavy-duty diesel standards.
We believe that the projected growth rates and emissions reductions
from the sources subject to the above federal measures were calculated
correctly by the State.
2. Off-road mobile sources:
--Lawn and garden equipment standards.
--Tier III heavy-duty diesel standards.
--Locomotive standards.
--Compression ignition standards for vehicles and equipment.
--Spark ignition standards for vehicles and equipment.
--Recreational marine standards.
We believe that the State correctly projected the growth rates and
emissions reductions subject to these federal measures.
CAA Statutory Requirements: The State included the following CAA
Statutory Requirements in the Future Year Base Case.
--Phase II reformulated gasoline (RFG) in the DFW four-county
nonattainment area and HGA eight-county nonattainment area.
--Texas motorists' choice inspection and maintenance (I/M) program in
Harris, Dallas and Tarrant Counties.
We believe that the State correctly projected the growth rates and
[[Page 4760]]
emissions reductions from sources subject to these CAA Statutory
Requirements.
State Measures: The State included the following State Measures as
local (DFW) area controls in the Future Year Base Case.
--Electric generating and industrial point sources--four county area.
--An expanded vehicle Inspection/Maintenance program--nine county area.
--Low emission diesel fuel--nine county area.
--Heavy-duty diesel operating restrictions--four county area.
--Accelerated purchase of Tier 2/3 non-road compression ignition
equipment--four county area.
--Airport ground support equipment electrification--airports of a
certain size in the four county area.
--Gasoline heavy equipment engines--nine county area.
--Gas-fired water heaters, small boilers, and process heaters--State-
wide.
We have already published actions on some of the above control
measures in the Federal Register as discussed below. We believe that
the State correctly projected the growth rates for and the emissions
reductions from these affected sources.
Local Measures:
1. Speed limit reductions--nine county area.
2. Voluntary Mobile Emissions Program--nine county area.
3. Transportation Control Measures--four county area.
Our proposed action on these three local measures is discussed in
more detail later in this section.
Regional Measures:
1. Agreed orders with Alcoa, Inc. (formerly Aluminum Company of
America) for their Milam Facility, and the Eastman Chemical Company,
Texas operations, for their facility near Longview, Texas.
2. Electric generating facilities and cement plants in central and
eastern Texas.
3. Low Reid Vapor Pressure Gasoline in eastern and central Texas.
4. Stage I gasoline vapor recovery at gas stations in central and
eastern Texas.
We have already published actions on the above control measures in
the Federal Register, as discussed below.
Action Needed on Control Measures
We cannot finalize an action upon the Attainment Demonstration SIP,
its MVEB, and the State's Request for an Extension of the Attainment
Date until we have finalized action on the following:
1. The revised emission specifications in the DFW area for Electric
Utility Boilers, Industrial, Commercial or Institutional Boilers and
certain Process Heaters (30 TAC sections 117.104, 117.106, 117.108,
117.116, 117.206 as they relate to the DFW area, and the repeal of
sections 117.109 and 117.601 as they relate to the DFW area): Proposed
approval October 31, 2000. See 65 FR 64914.
2. Vehicle Inspection/Maintenance program (30 TAC 114.2, 114.50--
114.53).
3. Low emission diesel fuel (30 TAC 114.6, 114.312-114.317,
114.319).
4. Non-Road Large Spark-Ignition (LSI) Engines (30 TAC 114.420,
114.421, 114.422, 114.427, and 114.429). Accelerated Purchase of Tier2/
Tier3 Non-Road Compression-Ignition Equipment (30 TAC 114.410, 114.412,
114.416, 114.417, and 114.419). Non-Road Construction Equipment
Restriction (30 TAC 114.432, 114.436, 114.437, and 114.439).
Electrification of Airport Ground Support Equipment (GSE) (30 TAC
114.400, 114.402, 114.406, and 114.409.
5. The State-wide NOX rules for Water Heaters, Small
Boilers, and Process Heaters (30 TAC sections 117.460, 117.461,
117.463, 117.465, 117.467, 117.469): Direct final approval effective
December 25, 2000. See 65 FR 64148.
6. The agreed orders with Alcoa, Inc. (formerly Aluminum Company of
America) for their Milam Facility, and the Eastman Chemical Company,
Texas operations, for their facility near Longview, Texas: Direct final
approval effective December 25, 2000. See 65 FR 64148.
7. The NOX rules for Electric Generating Facilities and
cement plants in East and Central Texas (30 TAC sections 117.131,
117.133, 117.134, 117.135, 117.138, 117.141, 117.143, 117.145, 117.147,
117.149, 117.512, 117.260, 117.261, 117.265, 117.273, 117.279, 117.283,
117.524): Proposed approval October 31, 2000. See 65 FR 64914.
8. Lower Reid Vapor Pressure Gasoline in eastern and central Texas
(30 TAC sections 114.1, 114.301, 114.304-114.307, and 114.309).
Proposed approval November 20, 2000. See 65 FR 69720.
9. Stage I vapor recovery in eastern and central Texas (30 TAC
sections 115.222-114.229): Proposed approval December 20, 2000. See 65
FR 79745.
10. VOC rules as RACT for batch processing (30 TAC sections
115.160-115.169) and wastewater (30 TAC sections 115.140-115.149):
Proposed approval December 20, 2000. See 65 FR 79745.
11. The administrative revisions to the existing Texas
NOX SIP (30 TAC sections 117.101--117.121, 117.201-117.223,
117.510, 117.520, and 117.570): Proposed approval October 31, 2000. See
65 FR 64914.
12. Texas Clean Fleet Program (30 TAC 114.1, 114.3, 114.150,
114.151, 114.153-114.157, 114.201, 114.202, 114.152).
13. The 15% ROP Plan.
14. The Post 1996 ROP Plan.
15. The revisions to the 1990 base year inventory.
16. The speed limit reductions, the VMEP and the TCMs.
17. The finding that major sources of VOCs in the DFW area are
meeting RACT.
It should be noted that several of these measures are the subject
of ongoing litigation. Should the State lose, and as a result imperil
any reductions needed for attainment, and there are no measures which
make up the lost reductions, we may have to disapprove the attainment
demonstration SIP.
What Are the Local Initiatives and Are They Approvable?
The State submitted three local initiatives: Speed limit reductions
in the nine county area (Dallas, Tarrant, Collin, Denton, Ellis,
Johnson, Parker, Rockwall, and Kaufman Counties), a Voluntary Mobile
Emissions Program in the nine county area, and Transportation Control
Measures in the four county area.
Speed Limit Reductions
The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) revised regulations
relating to speed limits to allow TNRCC to submit a request to change
speed limits for environmental reasons when justified. Please see
adopted rules, 25 TexReg 5686, June 9, 2000; and proposed rules, 25
TexReg 2018, March 10, 2000). TxDOT, using this authority, will lower
all 70 mile per hour (mph) speed limits to 65 mph, and all 65 mph speed
limits to 60 mph in the four county area. These slower speeds are
anticipated to reduce the emissions of NOX and improve air
quality. We propose approval of the speed limit reductions control
measure.
Voluntary Mobile Emissions Program (VMEP) Reductions
What Is EPA's VMEP?
Voluntary mobile source strategies that attempt to complement
existing regulatory programs through voluntary, non-regulatory changes
in local transportation activities or changes in in-use vehicle and
engine composition
[[Page 4761]]
constitute the VMEP. The Clean Air Act allows SIP credit for new
approaches to reducing mobile source emissions. This flexible approach
is set forth in section 110. Economic incentive provisions are in
sections 182 and 108 of the Act. Credits generated through VMEP can be
counted toward attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. Up to 3% of the
total future year emissions reductions required to attain the
appropriate NAAQS may be claimed under the VMEP policy.
What Qualifies for SIP Credit?
The basic framework for ensuring SIP credit for VMEPs is spelled
out in guidance that came out under a memorandum from Richard D.
Wilson, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated
October 24, 1997, entitled ``Guidance on Incorporating Voluntary Mobile
Source Emission Reduction Programs in State Implementation Plans
(SIPs).'' Generally, to obtain credit for a VMEP, a State submits a SIP
that:
(1) Identifies and describes a VMEP;
(2) Contains projections of emission reductions attributable to the
program, along with any relevant technical support documentation;
(3) Commits to evaluation and reporting on program implementation
and results; and
(4) Commits to the timely remedy of any credit shortfall should the
VMEP not achieve the anticipated emission reductions.
More specifically, the guidance suggests the following key points
be considered for approval of credits. The credits should be
quantifiable, surplus, enforceable, permanent, and adequately
supported.
In addition, VMEPs must be consistent with attainment of the
standard and with the Rate of Progress requirements and not interfere
with other Clean Air Act requirements.
What Did the State Submit?
The State submitted program descriptions that projected emission
reductions attributable to each specific program as part of the DFW
attainment demonstration submitted April 25, 2000. The State commits to
evaluating each program to validate estimated credits. Table 2 lists
the programs and projected credits. Programs submitted with no credit
assigned are listed in Table 3.
Table 2.--Voluntary Mobile Emission Reduction Programs and Credits
Claimed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC benefits (tons NOX benefits (tons
Program type per day) per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Fuel Program.... 0.18................ 0.18
Employee Trip Reduction..... 0.29................ 0.53
Public Education Campaign/ 0.08................ 0.15
Ozone Season Fare Reduction.
Tier II Locomotive Engines.. 0 to 0.6............ 0 to 3.0
Vehicle Retirement Program/ 0.56................ 0.77
Vehicle Maintenance*.
Total Benefits (tpd)........ 1.11 to 1.71........ 1.63 to 4.63
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Emission benefits quantified for the Vehicle Retirement Program only.
Emission benefits for Vehicle Maintenance are credited in the Vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance Program.
Table 3.--Voluntary Emission Reduction Programs With No Credit Assigned
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sustainable Development
Non-Road Ozone Season Reductions
Off-Road Heavy Duty Diesel Engine Retrofits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State's goal is 5.0 tons per day of NOX benefit from
the VMEP program. This is within the 3% criteria in our guidance. The
State has committed to evaluating and reporting on the program
implementation and results and to timely remedy of any credit
shortfall.
The State also committed to additional Transportation Control
Measures that can be substituted for any shortfall in credit from the
estimated credits for VMEP. These include Signal Improvements and
Freeway Corridor Management.
Do the VMEPs Meet the Requirements for Approval?
A detailed analysis of all the VMEP measures can be found in the
TSD for this document. For each creditable VMEP, the measure was found
to be quantifiable. The reductions are surplus by not being substitutes
for mandatory, required emission reductions. The measures will be
enforced by the State. The reductions will continue at least for as
long as the time period in which they are used by this SIP
demonstration, so they are considered permanent. Each measure is
adequately supported by personnel and program resources for
implementation.
What Action is EPA Taking on the VMEP?
The DFW Attainment SIP VMEP meets the criteria for credit in the
SIP. The State has shown that the credits are quantifiable, surplus,
enforceable, permanent, adequately supported, and consistent with the
SIP and the Act. We propose to approve the VMEP portion of the Texas
SIP.
Transportation Control Measures (TCMs)
The State has included a variety of TCMs in the SIP as a control
strategy for attainment of the ozone NAAQS. The specific TCMs have been
described in detail in Appendix G of the SIP and will be incorporated
by reference in the Code of Federal Regulations in the final approval
action. Detailed information is necessary for those TCMs used as
emissions reduction measures in the SIP to ensure that they are
specific and enforceable as required by the Act and reflected in our
policy. The TCMs' description in the SIP includes identification of
each project, location, length of each project (if applicable), a brief
project description, implementation date, and emissions reductions for
both VOC and NOX.
The TCMs identified through this process and included in the SIP
are contained and funded in the metropolitan transportation plan (MTP)
and transportation improvement program (TIP) to ensure funding for
implementation. We propose approval of the transportation control
measures.
What Are the Projected NOX reductions From the Federal and
State Control Measures and Local Initiatives?
Table 4 provides the projected NOX reductions for the
2007 attainment year resulting from the Federal and State rules, and
the local initiatives.
Table 4.--NOX Reduction Estimates
(tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Measures........................................... Reduction
On-road mobile......................................... 93.00
Off-road mobile........................................ 48.00
Total Federal Measures............................. 141.00
State Measures............................................. ...........
Major point sources.................................... 129.00
Inspection/Maintenance................................. 54.45
[[Page 4762]]
Low emission diesel fuel............................... 3.48
HD diesel oper. restrictn (est)........................ 2.50
Acc purchase Tier II/III spark......................... 13.80
Airport GSE............................................ 9.54
Heavy equipment gas engines............................ 1.80
Gas-fired water heaters, etc........................... 0.50
Total State measures............................... 215.07
Local Initiatives
Speed limit reduction.................................. 5.42
VMEP (2.4 tpd--5.4 tpd)................................ 5.00
TCMs................................................... 4.73
Total Local Initiatives............................ 15.15
TOTAL NOX REDUCTIONS....................................... 371.22
------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget
What Is a Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEB) and Why Is it
Important?
The MVEB is the level of total allowable on-road emissions
established by a control strategy implementation plan or maintenance
plan. In this case, the MVEB establishes the maximum level of on-road
emissions that can be produced in 2007, when considered with emissions
from all other sources, which demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS. It
is important because the MVEB is used to determine the conformity of
transportation plans and programs to the SIP, as described by section
176(c)(2)(A) of the Act.
What Are the MVEBs Established by This Plan and Proposed for
Approval by This Action?
The MVEBs established by this plan and that the EPA is proposing to
approve are contained in Table 5.
Table 5.--2007 Attainment Year Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
(tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC........................................................ 107.60
NOX........................................................ 164.30
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What Is the State's Commitment to Revise the Motor Vehicle Emissions
Budgets With MOBILE6?
All States whose attainment demonstration includes the effects of
the Tier 2/sulfur program have committed to revise and resubmit their
motor vehicle emissions budgets after we release MOBILE6. The State has
begun its public comment process on an enforceable commitment and has
committed to performing new mobile source modeling for the DFW area,
using MOBILE6, within 24 months of the model's release. The public
hearing is scheduled for January 4, 2001. In addition, the enforceable
commitment includes a provision stating that if a transportation
conformity analysis is to be performed between 12 months and 24 months
after the release of MOBILE6, transportation conformity will not be
determined until the State submits an MVEB which is developed using
MOBILE6 and which we find adequate. The North Central Texas Council of
Governments and the Department of Transportation have been informed of
the commitment.
After adoption by the Commissioners, the Governor of Texas must
submit the enforceable commitment to us. If the State fails to meet its
commitment to submit revised budgets using MOBILE6, we could make a
finding of failure to implement the SIP, which would start a sanctions
clock under section 179 of the Act.
What Is the Applicable Budget To Use for Conformity Analysis?
The proposed approval of the MVEB in Table 5 would be effective for
conformity purposes only until revised motor vehicle emissions budgets
are submitted and we have found them adequate. In other words, the
budgets that are part of this attainment demonstration will apply for
conformity purposes only until there are new, adequate budgets
consistent with the State's commitments to revise the budgets. The
revised budgets will apply for conformity purposes as soon as we find
them adequate.
We are proposing to limit the duration of our approval in this
manner because we are only proposing to approve the attainment
demonstrations and their budgets because the States have committed to
revise them after we release MOBILE6 and after the State conducts its
mid-course review. Therefore, once we have confirmed that the revised
budgets are adequate, they will be more appropriate than the budgets we
are proposing to approve for conformity purposes now.
If the budgets we propose to approve raise issues about the
sufficiency of the attainment demonstration, we will work with the
State. If the revised budgets show that motor vehicle emissions are
lower than the budgets we approve, a reassessment of the attainment
demonstration's analysis will be necessary.
This action does not propose any change to the existing
transportation conformity rule or to the way it is normally implemented
with respect to other submitted and approved SIPs, which do not contain
commitments to revise the budget.
H. EPA's Analysis
Did the State Adequately Document the Techniques and Data Used To
Derive the Modeling Input Data and Modeling Results?
Yes, the submittal from the State thoroughly documented the
techniques and data used to derive the modeling input data. The
submittal adequately summarized the modeling outputs and the
conclusions drawn from these model outputs. The submittal adequately
documented the State's weight-of-evidence determinations and the bases
for concluding that these determinations support the attainment
demonstration.
Did the Modeling Procedures and Input Data Used Comply With the
Environmental Protection Agency Guidelines and Clean Air Act
Requirements?
Yes, the modeling procedures and input data (including the
emissions inventory inputs and procedures) meet the requirements of the
Act and are consistent with our July 1991 and June 1996 ozone modeling
guidelines.
Does the Emission Control Strategy Meet the Requirements of the Clean
Air Act?
Yes, the selected emission control strategy, based upon modeling
and the WOE techniques, plus additional information regarding the
effect of HGA upon DFW, demonstrates attainment of the 1-hour ozone
standard in DFW.
Does the Weight-of-Evidence Support the Attainment Demonstration?
Yes, the submittal adequately documented the State's WOE
determinations and the bases for concluding that these determinations
adequately complement the attainment demonstration.
The WOE, when viewed in aggregate with the modeling, shows
attainment of the standard and thus we are proposing approval.
Has the State Adopted the Selected Emission Control Strategy and Has
the State Adopted the Emission Control Regulations Needed to Implement
the Emission Control Strategies?
Yes, the State has adopted and submitted the emission control
strategies and all associated emission control regulations, orders, and
the TCMS, Speed Limit Reductions, and the VMEP initiatives.
[[Page 4763]]
Has the State Adopted all Local Measures Required by the Clean Air Act
for the Area's Current Ozone Classification?
Yes, the State has adopted all VOC and NOX emission
control requirements required under the Clean Air Act (Act) for a
serious ozone nonattainment area. Please see the TSD for a listing of
requirements and the dates they were satisfied.
It is our position that the State of Texas has met the 1998
Transport Policy's criteria for adoption and submittal to EPA for
approval of all measures required under the Act for an area classified
as serious.
Has the State Implemented all Reasonably Available Control Measures?
Yes. Section 172(c)(1) of the Act requires SIPs to provide for the
implementation of all reasonably available control measures (RACM) as
expeditiously as practicable and for attainment of the standard. We
have previously provided guidance interpreting the RACM requirements of
172(c)(1) in the General Preamble. See 57 FR 13498, 13560 (April 16,
1992). In the General Preamble, we indicated our interpretation of
section 172(c)(1), under the 1990 amendments, as imposing a duty on
States to consider all available control measures and to adopt and
implement such measures as are reasonably available for implementation
in the particular nonattainment area. We also retained our pre-1990
interpretation of the RACM provisions that where measures that might in
fact be available for implementation in the nonattainment area could
not be implemented on a schedule that would advance the date for
attainment in the area, we would not consider it reasonable to require
implementation of such measures. We indicated that States could reject
certain RACM measures as not reasonably available for various reasons
related to local conditions. A State could include area-specific
reasons for rejecting a measure as RACM, such as the rejected measure
would not advance the attainment date, or technological and economic
feasibility in the area.
We also issued a recent memorandum reaffirming our position on this
topic, ``Guidance on the Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM)
Requirement and Attainment Demonstration Submissions for Ozone
Nonattainment Areas.'' John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, dated November 30, 1999. A copy can be obtained
from www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html. In this memorandum, we state
that in order to determine whether a state has adopted all RACM
necessary for attainment and as expeditiously as practicable, the state
will need to provide a justification as to why measures within the
arena of potential reasonable measures have not been adopted. The
justification would need to support that a measure was not reasonably
available for that area and could be based on technological or economic
grounds.
We reviewed additional potential available measures, as documented
in the RACM analysis in the TSD (Appendix C) for this proposed
rulemaking. Our analysis showed that the State is already controlling
the significant major point sources and area sources to RACM levels and
the SIP contains the transportation control measures reviewed
nationally, as well as a motor vehicle Inspection and Maintenance
program. Based on this analysis, we propose to conclude that any
remaining evaluated measures are not reasonably available for the
specific DFW area, because (a) some would require an intensive and
costly effort for numerous small area sources or transportation control
measures, and (b) since the DFW area relies in part on reductions from
the upwind HGA area which are substantial, and the reductions projected
to be achieved by the evaluated additional set of measures are
relatively small, they would not produce emission reductions sufficient
to advance the attainment date in the DFW area and, therefore, should
not be considered RACM.
Although we encourage areas to implement available RACM measures as
potentially cost effective methods to achieve emissions reductions in
the short term, we do not believe that section 172(c)(1) requires
implementation of potential RACM measures that either require costly
implementation efforts or produce relatively small emissions reductions
that will not be sufficient to allow the DFW area to achieve attainment
in advance of full implementation of all other required measures.
Has the State Established an Acceptable MVEB?
The MVEB budget submitted by the State for the DFW area is adequate
and is consistent with all pertinent SIP requirements, and the MVEB is
proposed for approval.
Does the DFW Area Meet the RACT Requirements for Major Source VOC
Emissions?
On March 7, 1995, as part of our action approving VOC requirements,
we found that the State had implemented RACT on all major sources in
the DFW area except those that were to be covered by post-enactment
Control Technique Guidelines (CTG's) (44 FR 12438). Since that time
many expected CTGs were issued as Alternative Control Technique
documents--ACTs. Of the expected CTGs and ACT's, DFW had major sources
in the following categories; batch processing, reactors and
distillation, wood furniture and aerospace coating. We have approved
measures for all of these categories as meeting RACT. (See the TSD for
this action for dates.)
With regard to Aerospace coatings, we have approved Alternate RACT
determinations for the major sources in the DFW area: Lockheed-Martin,
Bell Helicopter Textron, and Raytheon Texas Instruments Systems, Inc.
January 20, 1994 (See 59 FR 02532), May 30,1997 (See 62 FR 29297), and
February 9, 1998 (See 63 FR 6491), respectively. With these Alternative
RACT determinations, we concluded that RACT was in place for these
Aerospace coating sources. On March 27, 1998, we published the National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) final rule and
the Control Technique Guideline for Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework
facilities. (See 63 FR 15006). The State submitted revisions to its
coating rules on July 13, 2000 to ensure the control requirements for
Aerospace companies remained consistent with the NESHAP rule. At the
same time, the State requested that these replace the Alternative-RACT
plans as a part of the Texas SIP. The revised 2000 aerospace rules
provide provisions that are more consistent with the new MACT standards
and we anticipate that we will propose approval of these provisions. In
the mean time, we believe the previously approved alternative RACT
plans continue to meet the RACT requirements for these three sources.
Also, with the reclassification of the DFW area to serious, the
major source size was decreased to 50 tons per year. This necessitated
that the State revise its rules for bakeries and adopt rules for the
large offset lithographers category. We have approved the rule
revisions for bakeries and the new rules for offset lithographers as
meeting the RACT requirements. (See TSD for dates and cites).
Thus, it is our position that RACT is in place for all major
sources of VOCs in the DFW area.
[[Page 4764]]
Was the Demonstration of Transport From the HGA Area Acceptable To
Support the Request for Extension of the Attainment Date?
The policy for the extension of an ozone attainment date is
discussed in the Background section of this notice. The State's
compliance with these requirements is discussed here.
a. Identification of the area as a downwind area affected by ozone
transport.
We have reviewed the photochemical modeling demonstrations, and are
proposing to agree with the State that the July 3, 1996, episode
adequately demonstrates transport of pollutants from the HGA area. We
are proposing that this transported pollution affects DFW's ability to
attain by the current attainment date. Thus, the DFW and HGA areas are
inextricably linked. Without controls in the HGA area, the DFW area's
ability to attain is jeopardized. We, therefore, propose to find that
the State's demonstration of ozone transport meets the criteria in our
attainment date extension policy.
b. Submittal of an approvable attainment demonstration.
EPA's review of the attainment demonstration SIP shows that it
should be approved. The State has modeled and adopted an acceptable
control strategy that demonstrates attainment. We are proposing to
approve the attainment demonstration SIP, and to agree that it meets
the criteria in the July 1998 transport policy and all other EPA
guidance and the regulatory and statutory requirements.
c. Adoption of all applicable local measures required under the area's
current ozone classification.
Texas has adopted all VOC and NOX related emission
control requirements required by the Act for a serious ozone
nonattainment area. A listing of applicable CAA serious classification-
related VOC and NOX related regulations and their state-
adopted dates for the DFW area, is provided in the TSD to this
rulemaking.
It is our position that the State of Texas has met the 1998
Transport Policy's criteria for adoption and submittal of all measures
required under the Act for an area classified as serious. We must
finalize approval actions upon the remaining serious area
requirements--the 15% ROP Plan, the Post-96 ROP Plan, the I/M SIP, and
the Clean-fuel Vehicle SIP, before we can make a final finding that the
DFW area is meeting all of its classification's statutory requirements,
however.
d. Implementation of all adopted measures by the time upwind controls
are expected.
All of the NOX and VOC rules will be implemented as
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than 2005, two years before
the HGA attainment date of November 15, 2007.
We are proposing to find that this transport policy criteria has
been met by the State. We are of the opinion that the phase-in
compliance dates are as expeditious as practicable compared with the
compliance dates of similar sources in serious ozone nonattainment
areas of the country.
II. Post 1996 Rate of Progress Plan
A. Proposed Action
What Action Are We Taking?
We are proposing approval of the Post 1996 Rate of Progress (ROP)
plan (9% plan), submitted by the Governor on October 25, 1999, which is
designed to reduce ozone forming emissions from the baseline emissions
by 9% in the DFW nonattainment area for the years 1997-1999. This plan
meets the Reasonable Further Progress requirements of the Act (section
182(c)(2)). In addition, we are proposing to approve the MVEBs
associated with the 9% plan. We are also proposing to approve the
changes to the 1990 base year emissions inventory for the DFW area. The
SIP was submitted October 25, 1999, and found complete January 6, 2000.
B. Calculation of Requirements
How Do we Calculate the Needed VOC Emissions Reductions?
Calculating the needed emission reductions is a multi-step process
as described below.
Emissions Inventory: The 1990 Final Base Year Inventory is the
starting point for calculating the reductions necessary to meet the
requirements of the 1990 Act. The 1990 Final Base Year Inventory
includes all area, point, non-road mobile, and on-road mobile source
emissions in the four county DFW ozone nonattainment area. The 1990
base year inventory was originally approved November 8, 1994 (59 FR
55586). The State revised the VOC inventory on August 8, 1996. These
changes were approved November 10, 1998 (63 FR 62943). The state
revised the 1990 base year VOC inventory again with the October 25,
1999, SIP revision. The October 25, 1999, SIP revision also contained
the State's first revisions to the 1990 base year NOX
emissions inventory. The changes resulted from data gathered for the
1993 and 1996 periodic inventories. Analysis of the changes in the
periodic inventories was backcast to the 1990 inventory for consistency
since the 1990 inventory remains the ROP beginning point. We have
reviewed the inventory revisions and they have been developed in
accordance with our guidance on emission inventory preparation. Thus,
we are proposing approval of the October 25, 1999, revisions to the
1990 base year inventory. The revised 1990 base year inventory is
summarized in Table 6. For more detail on how emissions inventories
were estimated, see Appendix H in the TSD for this action.
Table 6.--1990 Rate-of-Progress Base Year Emissions Inventory
(tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base year inventory
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source type VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point........................................... 63.98 71.76
Area............................................ 174.02 19.99
On-road Mobile.................................. 306.60 293.03
Non-road Mobile................................. 105.19 166.05
-----------------------
Total..................................... 649.79 550.83
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjusted Base Year Inventory: Section 182(b)(2)(C) explains that
the baseline from which emission reductions are calculated should be
determined as outlined in section 182(b)(1)(B) for 15% ROP plans. This
requires that the baseline exclude emission reductions due to Federal
Motor Vehicle Control Programs (FMVCP) promulgated by the Administrator
by January 1, 1990, and emission reductions due to the regulation of
Reid Vapor Pressure promulgated by the Administrator prior to the
enactment of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. These measures are
not creditable to the Rate of Progress Plans.
Growth Estimates: States need to provide sufficient control
measures in their ROP plans to offset any emissions growth. To do this
the State must estimate the amount of growth that will occur. The State
uses population and economic forecasts to estimate how emissions will
change in the future. Generally, the State followed our standard
guidelines in estimating the growth in emissions. For the projection of
NOX emissions from industrial sources, the State used data
collected during the development of the 1996 periodic emissions
inventory. With the 1996 periodic inventory, Texas surveyed industry to
determine why emissions were changing, to determine if changes were
actual changes in emissions to the atmosphere, or just
[[Page 4765]]
changes in the emission estimation methodology. For example, many
sources installed continuous emission monitors between 1990 and 1996,
and actual measurements replaced engineering estimates. For more detail
on how emissions growth was estimated, see Appendix H in the TSD for
this action.
Calculation of Target Level: Table 7 shows how the emissions
inventory, adjusted inventories and growth estimates are used to
calculate the target levels of emissions and needed emission
reductions.
Table 7.--Calculation of Required VOC Reductions
(tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1990 Emission Inventory....................................... 649.79
1990 Adjusted Relative to 1996................................ 547.54
1990 Adjusted Relative to 1999................................ 535.78
RVP and Fleet Turnover........................................ 11.76
9% of 1990 Adjusted Relative to 1999.......................... 48.22
1996 Target level............................................. 465.52
1999 Target level............................................. 405.54
1999 Projection............................................... 575.28
Total Reductions required by 1999............................. 169.74
Reductions required by 15%.................................... 139.98
Additional Reductions Required................................ 29.76
------------------------------------------------------------------------
How Are Those Emission Reductions Achieved?
Table 8 documents how the VOC emission reductions for this 9% plan
are to be achieved. The following control measures are used: Aircraft
Engines, Transportation Control Measures (TCMs), Windshield washer
fluid, Utility Engines 1997--1999, Underground Storage Tank
Remediation, vehicle Tier 1, vehicle Inspection/Maintenance, and RFG.
The State also revised its estimates of on-road motor vehicle
emissions based on vehicle registration data updated to 1998. We are
proposing to find them acceptable.
The State included a variety of TCMs in the SIP as a control
strategy for attainment of the ozone NAAQS. The specific TCMs are
described in detail in Appendix G of the SIP and will be incorporated
by reference in Code of Federal Regulations in the final approval
action. Please refer to the detailed discussion of TCM requirements
under Transportation Control Measures in the Emission Control Strategy
sub-section (sub-section I.E) of this action.
The TCMs identified through this process and included in the SIP
are contained and funded in the metropolitan transportation plan (MTP)
and transportation improvement program (TIP) to ensure funding for
implementation.
Please refer to the TSD for details of our analysis of the control
measures and our basis for proposing to find the projected emission
reductions from these measures acceptable.
Table 8.--Summary of VOC Emission Reductions
(tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required Reduction............................................. 29.76
Creditable Reductions..........................................
Aircraft Engines........................................... 1.52
TCMs....................................................... 3.74
Windshield washer fluid.................................... 0.29
1998 vehicle registration.................................. 3.57
Utility Engine 1997-1999................................... 2.37
UST remediation............................................ 1.81
Tier 1, I/M, RFG........................................... 16.82
--------
Total.................................................. 30.12
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does the Plan Achieve the Goal of a 9% Reduction in VOCs From the
Baseline for 1997 to 1999?
Yes. Since the required reductions are 29.76 tons per day and the
creditable reductions are 30.12 tons per day, the plan has excess
reductions of 0.36 tons per day and achieves the goal; therefore, we
are proposing approval of the Post 1996 ROP Plan.
Did the State Submit Additional Reductions?
Yes. The State also submitted NOX reductions. The
State's basic NOX RACT rules were approved September 1,
2000. See 65 FR 53172. We are accepting the State's NOX
reductions as creditable reductions.
Table 9.--Summary of NOX Emission Reductions
(tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required Reduction............................................. 0.00
Creditable Reductions..........................................
NOX RACT................................................... 10.45
RFG, I/M, FMVCP Tier I..................................... 56.25
Off-road heavy duty diesel................................. 11.98
--------
Total.................................................. 78.68
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget
What Are the MVEBs Established by This Plan and Approved by This
Action?
The MVEBs established by this plan and that we are proposing to
approve are contained in Table 10. The MVEBs have been found to meet
the adequacy criteria and upon further review of the SIP for
approvability continue to be consistent with ROP.
Table 10.--1999 9% ROP SIP Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
(tons per day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant 1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC............................................................ 147.22
NOX............................................................ 284.14
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. 15% Rate of Progress Plan
Proposed Action
What Action Are We Taking?
We are proposing full approval of the 15% plan submitted on August
8, 1996, contingent upon us finalizing approval of the State's I/M
program for the DFW area. The 15% plan was given conditional, interim
approval on November 10, 1998, pending corrections to the DFW I/M
program. It was given conditional, interim approval because it relied
on emissions reductions from the I/M program that received conditional,
interim approval. For further information on the I/M conditional,
interim approval, see 62 FR 37138, published on July 11, 1997. We found
that the State had met the conditions of the conditional approval. On
April 23, 1999, we removed the conditions and granted Texas a final
interim approval. See 64 FR 19910. The interim approval expired on
February 11, 1999. Texas has submitted significant revisions to the I/M
program for the DFW area. The revisions expand the program from the 2
core nonattainment counties to the 4 counties in the nonattainment area
plus 5 additional counties. We are taking a separate action on these I/
M revisions. Because the revisions appear to have eliminated the last
impediment to full approval of the I/M program for the DFW area, we are
proposing full approval of the DFW 15% plan. This proposed full
approval of the DFW 15% plan will not be finalized until action on the
I/M program is complete. If the I/M program is disapproved, a different
action on the 15% plan will have to be taken. See 63 FR 62943 and the
15% plan TSD for additional information on the DFW 15% plan.
How Did the Inspection/Maintenance Program Submitted With the
Attainment Demonstration Purport To Cure the Previous Deficiencies?
As stated previously, an interim conditional approval for the
Motorist Choice Program was proposed on October 3, 1996 (61 FR 51651).
An interim final conditional approval was published on July 11, 1997
(62 FR 37138). The conditions were removed from the interim approval on
April 23, 1999 (64 FR 19910). The interim
[[Page 4766]]
approval status of this program lapsed on February 11, 1999.
The State submitted an approvable 18-month demonstration on
February 8, 1999, as required by the National Highway System
Designation Act of 1995, Public Law 104-59, section 348(c)(1). The
program was not fully approved at that time because one provision of
the interim approval remained: that the State provide evidence that the
remote sensing program was effective in identifying the shortfall in
number of vehicles needed to make up for the lack of a tailpipe testing
program in all the nonattainment counties. This evidence has yet to be
submitted.
Modeling has since shown that NOX reductions are
essential to reaching attainment in the DFW area. As a result, the
Texas Motorist Choice I/M program has been revised to include
measurement for NOX emissions and to provide additional
NOX emission reductions by expanding coverage of the program
to all four counties within the DFW nonattainment area (Dallas,
Tarrant, Collin and Denton) and selected attainment counties in the DFW
consolidated metropolitan statistical area (Ellis, Johnson, Parker,
Rockwall, and Kaufman). By revising the program to expand area coverage
for NOX SIP credits, the deficiency that prohibited full
approval in DFW appears to be cured. All DFW nonattainment counties
will be participating in the full program. As indicated above, we have
not taken a final action on the I/M submittal. We will be seeking
comment on the I/M program in a separate action.
IV. Background
A. The Relevant Clean Air Act Requirements
The Act requires us to establish National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for certain widespread pollutants that cause or
contribute to air pollution that is reasonably anticipated to endanger
public health or welfare (Clean Air Act sections 108 and 109). In 1979,
we promulgated the 1-hour ground-level ozone standard of 0.12 parts per
million (ppm) (120 parts per billion (ppb)). 44 FR 8202 (February 8,
1979).
Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather,
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and Nitrogen Oxides (NOX),
emitted by a wide variety of sources, react in the presence of sunlight
to form ground-level ozone. NOX and VOC are referred to as
precursors of ozone.
Ozone formation is accelerated or enhanced under certain
meteorological conditions, such as high temperatures and low wind
speeds. Higher ozone concentrations occur downwind of areas with
relatively high VOC and NOX concentrations or in areas
subject to relatively high background ozone and ozone precursor
concentrations (ozone and ozone precursors entering an area as the
result of transport from upwind source areas).
VOC emissions are produced by a wide variety of sources, including
stationary and mobile sources. Significant stationary sources of VOC
include industrial solvent usage, various coating operations,
industrial and utility combustion units, petroleum and oil storage and
marketing operations, chemical manufacturing operations, personal
solvent usage, etc. Significant mobile sources of VOC include on-road
vehicle usage and off-road vehicle and engine usage, such as farm
machinery, aircraft, locomotives, and motorized lawn care and garden
implements.
NOX emissions are produced primarily through combustion
processes, including industrial and utility boiler use, process heaters
and furnaces, and on-road and off-road mobile sources.
An area exceeds the 1-hour ozone standard each time an ambient air
quality monitor records a 1-hour average ozone concentration above 124
ppb in any given day (only the highest 1-hour ozone concentration at
the monitor during any 24 hour day is considered when determining the
number of exceedance days at the monitor). An area violates the ozone
standard if, over a consecutive 3-year period, more than 3 days of
exceedances are expected to occur at any monitor in the area. 40 CFR
Part 50, App. H.
The highest of the fourth-highest daily peak ozone concentrations
over the 3 year period at any monitoring site in the area is called the
ozone design value for the area. The Act, as amended in 1990, required
EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that was violating the 1-
hour ozone standard, generally based on air quality monitoring data
from the 1987 through 1989 period. Clean Air Act section 107(d)(4); 56
FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). The Act further classified these areas,
based on the areas' ozone design values, as marginal, moderate,
serious, severe, or extreme.
The control requirements and date by which attainment is to be
achieved vary with an area's classification. Marginal areas were
subject to the fewest mandated control requirements and had the
earliest attainment date, November 15, 1993. Severe and extreme areas
are subject to more stringent planning requirements but are provided
more time to attain the standard. Moderate areas were required to
attain the 1-hour standard by November 15, 1996. Serious areas were
required to attain by November 15, 1999, and severe areas are required
to attain by November 15, 2005 or November 15, 2007, depending on the
areas' ozone design values for 1987 through 1989. The DFW ozone
nonattainment area was initially classified as ``moderate'' (56 FR
56694) with an attainment date of November 15, 1996. Since the area did
not attain the standard by November 15, 1996, we reclassified the area
to ``serious'' on March 20, 1998 (63 FR 8128). The statutory attainment
date for a serious area is November 15, 1999. The DFW ozone
nonattainment area contains Dallas, Tarrant, Collin, and Denton
Counties (40 CFR 81.314 and 81.326).
The specific requirements of the Act for serious ozone
nonattainment areas are found in part D, section 182(c) of the Act.
Section 172 in part D provides the general requirements for
nonattainment plans. Section 172(c)(6) and section 110 require SIPs to
include enforceable emission limitations, and such other control
measures, means or techniques as well as schedules and timetables for
compliance, as may be necessary to provide for attainment by the
applicable attainment date. Section 172(c)(1) requires the
implementation of all reasonably available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable and requires the SIP to provide for
attainment of the NAAQS. Section 182(b)(1)(A) requires the SIP to
provide for a 15% Rate of Progress Plan and also provide for specific
annual reductions in emissions of VOC and NOX ``as necessary
to attain'' the ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. Our
``General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air
Act Amendments of 1990'' (57 FR 13498 dated April 16, 1992) provides
the interpretive basis for EPA's rulemakings under the nonattainment
plan provisions of the Act (General Preamble). Section 182(c)(2)(A)
requires that a serious area use photochemical grid modeling or any
other methods judged by us to be at least as effective, to demonstrate
attainment of the ozone NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. In the
General Preamble, we provide that this requirement for demonstrating
attainment may be met by the use of EPA-approved modeling techniques.
Section 182(c)(2)(B) of the Act requires each serious and above
ozone nonattainment area to submit a SIP revision by November 15, 1994,
which describes, in part, how the area will
[[Page 4767]]
achieve an actual volatile organic compound (VOC) (and NOX
if required) emission reduction from the baseline emissions of at least
3 percent of baseline emissions per year averaged over each consecutive
3-year period beginning 6 years after enactment (i.e., November 15,
1996) until the area's attainment date. The plan providing for the
reduction between November 1996 and November 1999 is referred to as the
9% Plan, the Post-1996 ROP Plan. As part of today's proposal, we are
proposing action on the 15% ROP Plan, the 9% ROP Plan, and the
attainment demonstration SIP revision submitted by the State of Texas
for the DFW serious ozone nonattainment area.
B. Dates of State's SIP Submissions
As a result of the reclassification to serious, the State was
required to submit both an attainment demonstration SIP with an
attainment date of November 15, 1999; and a Rate of Progress SIP
covering the years from November 15, 1996 to November 15, 1999. The
State submitted those SIPs on March 19, 1999. The State had previously
submitted the moderate area 15% ROP plan on August 8, 1996, before the
area was reclassified to serious. The 15% plan was given conditional,
interim approval.
Our review showed that the attainment demonstration SIP submitted
in 1999 did not contain a control strategy or adopted measures to
implement the strategy and the 1999 Post-1996 ROP SIP did not achieve
the required 9% reduction in emissions for the time period. Therefore,
we found both SIPs incomplete and started sanctions and Federal
Implementation plan (FIP) clocks effective May 13, 1999.
A new Post-1996 ROP SIP was submitted October 25, 1999, and was
found complete on December 16, 1999, since the new plan contained
additional VOC reductions to meet the 9% requirement. The new
attainment demonstration SIP was submitted April 25, 2000, and was
found complete on June 23, 2000, because it contained a modeled control
strategy and adopted regulations to implement the strategy. These two
completeness findings stopped the sanctions clocks. The FIP clock
continues to run unless and until we approve the 9% ROP Plan and the
Attainment Demonstration SIP. Section 110(c)(1)(A) requires EPA to
promulgate a FIP for the DFW nonattainment area by May 14, 2001 if we
have not approved the SIPs by that time.
C. General Requirements for an Attainment Demonstration and its Motor
Vehicle Emissions Budgets
In general, an attainment demonstration SIP includes a modeling
analysis showing how an area will achieve the standard by its
attainment date and the emission control measures necessary to achieve
attainment. The attainment demonstration SIP must include MVEBs for
transportation conformity purposes. Transportation conformity is a
process required by Section 176(c) of the Act for ensuring that the
effects of emissions from all on-road sources are consistent with
attainment of the standard. Ozone attainment demonstrations must
include the estimates of motor vehicle VOC and NOX emissions
that are consistent with attainment, which then act as a budget or
ceiling for the purposes of determining whether transportation plans,
programs, and projects conform to the attainment SIP.
D. Ozone Transport Policy and Attainment Date Extensions
The DFW area is classified as serious and, therefore, was required
to attain the 1-hour ozone standard by November 15, 1999. The State of
Texas, in submitting the April 2000 attainment demonstration SIP,
requests an extension of the attainment date to November 15, 2007,
based on our July 1998 transport policy.
In developing the attainment demonstration for DFW, the State makes
the case that the 1998 Transport Policy is particularly relevant to
DFW, which is downwind of the HGA area, and that the DFW area is
affected by transport from HGA. If we approve of such a determination
for DFW, the area would have until no later than November 15, 2007, the
attainment date for HGA, to attain the 1-hour ozone standard.
In the DFW ozone attainment demonstration SIP reviewed here, the
State also relies, in part, on regional and statewide NOX
emission reductions in Texas, including the upwind HGA area and eastern
and central Texas. The SIP also relies on NOX reductions
from the NOX SIP Call States where appropriate.
Attainment Demonstration SIPs were originally due November 1994.
However, through a series of policy memoranda, we recognized that
States had not submitted these attainment demonstrations and were
constrained to do so until ozone transport had been further analyzed.
One of the policy memoranda addressing the issue of ozone transport is
the transport policy issued by us July 16, 1998, entitled ``Extension
of Attainment Dates for Downwind Transport Areas''. That memorandum
included our interpretation of the Act regarding the extension of
attainment dates for ozone nonattainment areas that have been
classified as moderate or serious for the 1-hour ozone standard and
which are downwind of areas that have interfered with their ability to
demonstrate attainment of the ozone standard by dates prescribed in the
Act. That memorandum stated that we will consider extending the
attainment date for an area or a State that:
(1) Has been identified as a downwind area affected by transport
from either an upwind area in the same State with a later attainment
date or an upwind area in another State that significantly contributes
to downwind ozone nonattainment;
(2) Has submitted an approvable attainment demonstration with any
necessary, adopted local measures and with an attainment date that
shows it will attain the 1-hour standard no later than the date that
the emission reductions are expected from upwind areas under the final
NOX SIP call and/or the statutory attainment date for upwind
nonattainment areas, i.e., assuming the boundary conditions reflecting
those upwind emission reductions;
(3) Has adopted all applicable local measures required under the
area's current ozone classification and any additional emission control
measures demonstrated to be necessary to achieve attainment, assuming
the emission reductions occur as required in the upwind areas; and
(4) Has provided that it will implement all adopted measures as
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than the date by which the
upwind reductions needed for attainment will be achieved.
Once an area receives an extension of its attainment date based on
ozone/precursor transport impacts, the area would no longer be subject
to reclassification to a higher ozone nonattainment classification
based on its original attainment date. If the DFW area is granted an
attainment date extension, it would no longer be subject to a
reclassification to severe nonattainment for ozone and no longer
subject to the additional emission control requirements that would
result from the reclassification to severe nonattainment based on a
failure to attain by its original attainment date.
Texas has requested an extension of the attainment date for the DFW
nonattainment area in conjunction with the ozone attainment
demonstration submittals. The ozone attainment
[[Page 4768]]
demonstration SIP uses November 15, 2007 as the ozone attainment date.
The chosen 2007 attainment date reflects the statutory attainment date
for the HGA area, as the DFW area is downwind of the HGA area and is
affected by transport from HGA.
V. Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. This proposed action merely approves state law as meeting
federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies
that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-
existing requirements under state law and does not impose any
additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does
not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect
small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). For the same reason, this proposed rule also does
not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of tribal
governments, as specified by Executive Order 13084 (63 FR 27655, May
10, 1998). This proposed rule will not have substantial direct effects
on the States, on the relationship between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among
the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132
(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely approves a state rule
implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically
significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. The proposed rule does
not involve special consideration of environmental justice related
issues as required by Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994). As required by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729,
February 7, 1996), in issuing this proposed rule, EPA has taken the
necessary steps to eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize
potential litigation, and provide a clear legal standard for affected
conduct. The EPA has complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859,
March 15, 1988) by examining the takings implications of the rule in
accordance with the ``Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for
the Evaluation of Risk and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued
under the executive order. This proposed rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Attainment,
Hydrocarbons, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: January 4, 2001.
Gregg A. Cooke,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 01-1346 Filed 1-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P