Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan for Vehicle Miles Traveled Forecasting and Tracking: Alaska

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AK9-1-6975a; FRL-5223-1]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan for Vehicle

Miles Traveled Forecasting and Tracking: Alaska

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA today approves the State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revision submitted by the State of Alaska for the purpose of

forecasting and tracking vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the Anchorage

area. On March 24, 1994, the Alaska Department of Environmental

Conservation (ADEC) submitted a SIP revision to EPA to satisfy the

requirements of sections 187(a)(2)(A) and 187(a)(3) of the Clean Air

Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA).

Section 187(a)(2)(A) requires Moderate and Serious carbon monoxide

(CO) non-attainment areas with a design value above 12.7 to submit a

SIP revision that contains a forecast of VMT in the non-attainment area

for each year before the year in which the SIP projects the National

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for CO to be attained. The SIP

revision, which was due by November 15, 1992, also requires annual

updates of the forecasts and specific contingency measures to be

implemented if the annual estimate of actual VMT or a subsequent VMT

forecast exceeds the most recent prior forecast of VMT or if the area

fails to attain the CO NAAQS by the attainment date.

DATES: This action will be effective on August 28, 1995 unless adverse

or critical comments are received by July 31, 1995. If the effective

date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Montel Livingston,

SIP Manager, EPA, Air & Radiation Branch (AT-082), 1200 Sixth Avenue,

Seattle, Washington 98101.

Documents which are incorporated by reference are available for

public inspection at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information

Center, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington,

D.C. 20460. Copies of material submitted to EPA may be examined during

normal business hours at the following locations: EPA, Region 10, Air &

Radiation Branch, 1200 Sixth Avenue (AT-082), Seattle, Washington

98101, and ADEC, 410 Willoughby, Suite 105, Juneau, AK 99801-1795.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Montel Livingston, Air & Radiation

Branch (AT-082), EPA, Seattle, Washington 98101, (206) 553-0180.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Section 187(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act required EPA, in

consultation with the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), to

develop guidance for states to use in complying with the VMT

forecasting and tracking provisions of section 187. A Notice of

Availability for the resulting Section 187 VMT Forecasting and Tracking

Guidance was published in the Federal Register on March 19, 1992.

The Section 187 Guidance identifies the Federal Highway

Administration's Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) as the

foundation for VMT estimates and forecasts. HPMS was chosen as the best

method for estimating actual VMT since it is a count-based,

statistically-based, nationwide program with auditing procedures in

place, and since travel demand models would require resource intensive,

annual updates of input data and annual validation against traffic

counts in order to be useful for estimating annual VMT. EPA believes

that these time and resource requirements generally make travel demand

models an unrealistic option for estimating actual annual VMT with

reasonable accuracy.

To develop growth factors for forecasting VMT, the Section 187

Guidance offers as one alternative the use of network-based travel

demand models. If these models are properly updated and validated, and

if they use an equilibrium approach to allocating trips, they are

considered to be the best predictor of growth factors for VMT

forecasts. Moderate areas without a network model that is validated

according to the specifications described in the Section 187 Guidance

are offered the alternative of developing growth factors based on a

linear regression extrapolation of the past six years' HPMS VMT. In

both cases, the growth factors are applied to the HPMS VMT reported to

the Federal Highway Administration.

As specified in the Act, the contingency measure triggers serve to

address as early as possible any situation in which a trend towards

higher than expected VMT has been detected, since such a trend may

affect the forecasted attainment date.

When determining that actual annual VMT or a VMT forecast has

exceeded the most recent prior forecast and, therefore, that

contingency measures should be implemented, EPA believes that it is

appropriate to take into account the statistical variability in the

estimates of VMT generated through HPMS. Consequently, EPA has

identified a margin of error to be applied when making VMT comparisons.

With the expectation that HPMS sampling procedures will improve over

the next few years in response to recent Federal Highway Administration

guidance, the margin of error starts at 5.0 percent for VMT comparisons

made in 1994, becomes 4.0 percent for VMT comparisons made in

[[Page 33728]]

1995, and is reduced to 3.0 percent for VMT comparisons made in 1996

and thereafter. However, since each revised VMT forecast becomes the

VMT baseline for triggering contingency measures, the application of a

margin of error every year could allow the forecasts to increase

without bound, without ever triggering contingencies. To prevent this

occurrence, EPA believes it is appropriate to allow the application of

the margin of error only as long as, cumulatively, neither an estimate

of actual VMT nor a VMT forecast ever exceed by more than 5.0 percent

the VMT forecast relied upon in the area's attainment demonstration.

In practice, then, there are two ways in which an estimate of

actual VMT or an updated forecast can be found to exceed a prior

forecast. Individual yearly comparisons can result in an exceedance of

the forecast made 12 months earlier by more than the prescribed

percentage for that year, and exceedances can accumulate so that,

cumulatively, they exceed the 5.0 percent cap above the attainment

demonstration forecast.

EPA interprets the requirement for contingency measures to ``take

effect without further action by the State or the Administrator'' to

mean that no further rulemaking activities by the State or EPA would be

needed to implement the measures. The General Preamble for the

Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,

published in the Federal Register on April 16, 1992, offers guidance on

the type and size of contingencies to be included in the SIP revision.

This guidance is advisory in nature and is non-binding. (See 57 FR at

13532-33, April 16, 1992.)

The State of Alaska has submitted a SIP revision to EPA in order to

satisfy the requirements of sections 187(a)(2)(A) and 187(a)(3). The

State submittal provides for each of the following mandatory elements:

(1) a forecast of VMT in the non-attainment area for each year prior to

the attainment year; (2) a provision for annual updates of the

forecasts along with a provision for annual reports describing the

extent to which the forecasts proved to be accurate; these reports

shall provide estimates of actual VMT in each year for which a forecast

was required; (3) adopted and enforceable contingency measures to be

implemented without further action by the State or the Administrator if

actual annual VMT or an updated forecast exceeds the most recent prior

forecast or if the area fails to attain the CO NAAQS by the attainment

date.

II. Analysis

The following items are the basis for approval of the SIP revision.

The State has met the requirements of sections 187(a)(2)(A) and

187(a)(3) by submitting a SIP revision that implements all required

elements.

1. VMT Forecasts

Section 187(a)(2)(A) requires that the State include in its SIP

submittal a forecast of VMT in the non-attainment area for each year

before the year in which the SIP projects the National Ambient Air

Quality Standard for CO to be attained. The forecasts are to be based

on guidance developed by EPA in consultation with DOT, i.e., the

Section 187 VMT Forecasting and Tracking Guidance. To accurately

forecast VMT in the Anchorage area, The Municipality of Anchorage and

the State Departments of Environmental Conservation and Transportation

and Public Facilities used the HPMS. The Central Region portion of the

Alaska HPMS database was expanded to contain most of the eligible roads

in the Anchorage area, and the HPMS sampling methodology was applied to

increase the accuracy of traffic estimates. This procedure resulted in

an increase in the number of roads included in the database, and an

increase in the number of sample sections on the roads. HPMS provides

VMT estimates based on actual traffic counts collected from a

representative set of sampling locations. The network-based travel

demand modelling process described in Section 187 VMT Tracking and

Forecasting Guidance was used to project future VMT for calendar years

1993, 1994 and 1995. The MinUPT travel demand model estimated growth in

vehicle travel during the forecast period. This model is maintained by

the Municipality of Anchorage Department of Economic Development and

Planning. Demographic data (population, land use, and employment data)

was used as inputs to the model. MinUTP model runs were performed for

the base year 1990 and for future year 1995. Runs incorporated a

population growth rate of roughly 1.2 percent per year. As a result of

the modeling runs, VMT were projected to increase by 13.3 percent over

the five-year period, or roughly 2.5 percent per year. VMT during

intervening years was estimated from straight-line interpolation.

Documentation on the model is contained in the 1985 Anchorage

Metropolitan Area Transportation Model Report. This annual VMT growth

rate is more than double the projected increase in population for the

same period. The use of a high ratio will provide a conservative

estimate of future reductions in emissions and resulting air quality

concentrations. A safety margin of 5.5 percent was added to the VMT

forecasts. Best estimates of future-year VMT were increased by 5.5

percent. Attainment projections were prepared with this VMT included.

For the 1990 base year, model estimates reflect the existing 1990

roadway network and the best available demographic data as inputs, and

no safety margin is required.

Below is a table showing the forecasted VMT for Anchorage:

Average Annualized Daily VMT for Anchorage

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

Safety

Year Projected Margin Forecasted

VMT (percent) VMT

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

1990............................ 2,854,000 -0- 2,854,000

1993............................ 3,081,530 +5.5 3,249,800

1994............................ 3,157,373 +5.5 3,329,800

1995............................ 3,233,216 +5.5 3,409,700

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

2. Annual VMT Updates/Reports

Section 187(a)(2)(A) specifies that the SIP revision provide for

annual updates of the VMT forecasts and annual reports that describe

the accuracy of the forecasts and that provide estimates of actual VMT

in each year for which a forecast was required. The Section 187 VMT

Forecasting and Tracking Guidance specifies that annual reports should

be submitted to EPA by September 30 of the year following the year for

which the VMT estimate is made.

Annual VMT tracking is done by the Alaska Department of

Transportation and Public Facilities using the federally mandated and

annually audited HPMS.

[[Page 33729]]

The 1990 base year VMT estimate was used as a ``starting point'' for

future year VMT projections. The 1990 base year estimate of VMT and the

VMT forecasts for future years are summarized in the Anchorage Air

Quality Plan for Carbon Monoxide. Two additional reports provide

primary support to the estimates contained in the Plan. The first

report, 1990 Vehicle Miles of Travel in the Anchorage Bowl, Alaska

Department of Transportation and Public Facilities and the Municipality

of Anchorage, February 1992, describes the methods used to generate

HPMS estimates of base year VMT. The second report, Anchorage

Metropolitan Area 1990-1995 VMT Forecast Procedures, July 1992,

describes the methods and assumptions used in developing VMT forecasts.

Both of these reports are contained in the Appendix to the Air Quality

Plan.

In addition, Alaska has committed to meet the annual reporting

procedures requirements. The reports will contain annual updates of the

VMT forecasts, describe the accuracy of the forecasts, and provide

estimates of actual VMT in each year for which a forecast was required.

The reports will contain estimates of actual vehicle miles traveled in

each year for which the forecast was required. The annual reports will

show the comparison of the estimate of actual VMT and the previously

forecasted VMT. The reports will show that Anchorage area's actual VMT

is well within the forecasted VMT.

3. Contingency Measure

Section 187(a)(3) specifies that the State, in its SIP revision,

adopt specific, enforceable contingency measures to be implemented if

the annual estimate of actual VMT or a subsequent VMT forecast exceeds

the most recent prior forecast of VMT or if the area fails to attain

the CO NAAQS by the attainment date. Implementation of the identified

contingency measures must not require further rulemaking activities by

the State or EPA. Alaska meets this requirement. The contingency

measure that will be used by Alaska to satisfy the VMT requirement is

the expansion of the oxygenated fuel control area, and the State has

amended its regulation 18 AAC 53.015, ``Expansion of Control Area,'' to

provide for its implementation, if necessary. This amendment expands

the oxygenated fuels' control area for Anchorage to include geographic

areas outside of the municipality's boundaries, but within reasonable

driving distances of the municipality. At this time, EPA is approving

this contingency measure for the purpose of VMT exceedance.

III. Today's Action

In today's action, EPA is approving the SIP revision pertaining to

VMT forecast which was submitted by the State of Alaska for the

Anchorage area.

The State of Alaska has submitted a SIP revision implementing each

of the required elements required by sections 187(a)(2)(A) and

187(a)(3) of the CAA for the Municipality of Anchorage: VMT forecasts,

VMT updates/reports, and an enforceable contingency measure. If VMT

projections are exceeded by actual VMT in future years, the

implementation of the contingency measure will be triggered, together

with a revision of the air quality plan, as required by the CAA. EPA is

therefore approving this SIP revision.

IV. Administrative Review

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA

must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of

any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.

Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small

entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,

and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than

50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, Part D of the CAA

do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements

that the state is already imposing. Therefore, because the federal SIP-

approval does not impose any new requirements, I certify that it does

not have a significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover,

due to the nature of the federal-state relationship under the CAA,

preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute

federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The

CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. U.S.E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42

U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because

the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates

no adverse comments. However, in a separate document in this Federal

Register publication, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision

should adverse or critical comments be filed. This action will be

effective August 28, 1995 unless, by July 31, 1995, adverse or critical

comments are received.

If the EPA receives such comments, this action will be withdrawn

before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will

withdraw the final action. All public comments received will be

addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period on

this action. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should

do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is

advised that this action will be effective August 28, 1995.

The EPA has reviewed this request for revision of the federally-

approved SIP for conformance with the provisions of the 1990 Clean Air

Act Amendments enacted on November 15, 1990. The EPA has determined

that this action conforms with those requirements.

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting or

allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for

revision to any SIP. Each request for revision to the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific technical, economic and

environmental factors and in relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

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

costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to

the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, EPA

must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative

that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan

for informing and advising any small governments that may be

significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not

include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100

million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-

existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new

Federal requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local,

or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this

action.

This action has been classified as a Table 2 action by the Regional

Administrator under the procedures published in the Federal Register on

January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by an October 4, 1993

[[Page 33730]]

memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for

Air and Radiation. The OMB has exempted this regulatory action from

E.O. 12866 review.

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for

judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court

of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 28, 1995. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule

does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial

review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial

review may be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such

rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings

to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2), 42 U.S.C.

7607(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the Implementation Plan for

the State of Alaska was approved by the Director of the Office of

Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: June 6, 1995.

Chuck Clarke,

Regional Administrator.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is

amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart C--Alaska

2. Section 52.70 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(23) to read as

follows:

Sec. 52.70 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(23) On March 24, 1994, ADEC submitted a SIP revision to EPA to

satisfy the requirements of sections 187(a)(2)(A) and 187(a)(3) of the

CAA, forecasting and tracking VMT in the Anchorage area.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) March 24, 1994 letter from the Alaska Governor to the EPA

Regional Administrator including as a revision to the SIP the VMT

requirement in the Anchorage area, contained in ADEC's State Air

Quality Control Plan, Volume III: Appendices, Modifications to Section

III.B.6, III.B.8, III.B.10 and III.B.11, adopted January 10, 1994; and

further description on pages 10-14, 57-60 and 69-75 contained in ADEC's

State Air Quality Control Plan, Volume III: Appendices, Modifications

to Section III.B, III.B.1, and III.B.3, adopted January 10, 1994.

[FR Doc. 95-15954 Filed 6-28-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P