Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Approval of the Carbon Monoxide Implementation Plan Submitted by the State of Connecticut Pursuant to Sections 186-187 and 211(m)

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CT26-1-7198; A-1-FRL-5296-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

Approval of the Carbon Monoxide Implementation Plan Submitted by the

State of Connecticut Pursuant to Sections 186-187 and 211(m)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes approval of the State implementation plans

(SIP) submitted by the State of Connecticut for the purpose of bringing

about the attainment of the national ambient air quality standard

(NAAQS) for carbon monoxide (CO). The implementation plans were

submitted by the State to satisfy the requirements of Sections

187(a)(2)(A), 187(a)(3), 187(a)(7) and 211(m) of the Clean Air Act for

an approvable nonattainment area CO SIP for Connecticut's portion of

the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut CO nonattainment area. This action

is being taken under Section 110 of the Act. The rationale for the

approval is set in this document, additional information is available

at the address indicated below.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received in writing by

October 16, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Susan S. Studlien, Director, Air,

Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region I, JFK Federal Bldg. (AAA), Boston, MA 02203.

Copies of the state's submittal and EPA's technical support document

are available for inspection during normal business hours, by

appointment at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Jerry

Kurtzweg, ANR-443, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, D.C. 20460; the Air,

Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region I, One Congress Street, 10th floor, Boston,

MA 02203; and the Bureau of Air Management, Department of Environmental

Protection, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Damien F. Houlihan, (617) 565-3266, of

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in Boston, MA.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 12, 1993, January 14, 1993, April

7, 1994, and August 1, 1995, the Connecticut Department of

Environmental Protection (DEP) submitted a revision to its State

Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality. The revision is designed to

satisfy the requirements of Sections 187(a)(2)(A), 187(a)(3), 187(a)(7)

and 211(m) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990 (CAA).

I. Background

The air quality planning requirements for moderate CO nonattainment

areas are set out in Sections 186-187 and Section 211(m) of the Clean

Air Act (Act) Amendments of 1990 (CAAA). These requirements pertain to

the classification of CO nonattainment areas and to the submission

requirements of the SIP's for these areas, respectively. The EPA has

issued a ``General Preamble'' describing EPA's preliminary views on how

EPA intends to review SIP's and SIP revisions submitted under Title I

of the Act. See generally 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070

(April 28, 1992). Because EPA is describing its interpretations here

only in broad terms, the reader should refer to the General Preamble

for a more detailed discussion of the interpretations of Title I

advanced in today's proposal and the supporting rationale. In today's

rulemaking action on the Connecticut CO SIP, EPA is proposing to apply

its interpretations taking into consideration the specific factual

issues presented. Thus, EPA will consider any timely submitted comments

before taking final action on today's proposal.

Those States containing CO nonattainment areas with design values

greater than 12.7 parts per million (ppm) were required to submit,

among other things, a State Implementation Plan revision, by November

15, 1992, that contains a forecast of VMT in the nonattainment area for

each year before the year in which the SIP projects the NAAQS for CO to

be attained and an attainment demonstration such that the plan will

provide for attainment by December 31, 1995 for moderate CO

nonattainment areas. The SIP revision is also required to provide for

annual

[[Page 47908]]

updates of the VMT forecasts along with annual reports regarding the

extent to which the forecasts proved to be accurate. In addition, these

annual reports must contain estimates of actual VMT in each year for

which a forecast was required. The attainment demonstration must

include a SIP control strategy, which is also due by November 15, 1992.

The SIP control strategy for a given nonattainment area must be

designed to ensure that the area meets the specific annual emissions

reductions necessary for reaching attainment by the deadline. In

addition, section 187(a)(3) requires these areas to implement

contingency measures if any estimate of actual vehicle miles travelled

(VMT) or any updated VMT forecast for the area contained in an annual

report for any year prior to attainment exceeds the number predicted in

the most recent VMT forecast. Contingency measures are also triggered

by failure to attain the NAAQS for CO by the attainment deadline.

Contingency measures must be submitted with the CO SIP by November 15,

1992. In addition, Section 211(m) of the Act requires a SIP revision

containing a provision to require that after November 1, 1992, any

gasoline sold, or dispensed, to the ultimate consumer in the CO

nonattainment area be blended to contain not less than 2.7 percent

oxygen by weight during the portion of the year in which the area is

prone to high ambient CO levels.

Section 187(a)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990

required EPA, in consultation with the U.S. Department of

Transportation (DOT), to develop guidance for states to use in

complying with the VMT forecasting and tracking provisions of Section

187. A Notice of Availability for the resulting Section 187 VMT

Forecasting and Tracking Guidance was published in the Federal Register

on March 19, 1992.

The Section 187 Guidance identifies the Federal Highway

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

foundation for VMT estimates and forecasts. 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.

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 FHWA 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 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.

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 the

Federal Register, April 16, 1992, Volume 57, Number 74, pages 13532 and

13533.)

Section 110(k) of the Act sets out provisions governing EPA's

review of SIP submittals (see 57 FR 13565-66). The State of Connecticut

submitted SIP revisions to EPA on January 12, 1993, January 14, 1993,

April 7, 1994, and August 1, 1995 in order to satisfy the requirements

of Sections 186-187 and 211(m) of the Act. In order to gain approval,

the State submittals must provide for each of the following mandatory

elements: (1) a forecast of VMT in the non-attainment area for each

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

of the forecasts along with a provision for annual reports describing

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

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

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

implemented without further action by the State or the Administrator if

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

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

date; (4) Attainment Demonstration with Control Strategies and (5) a

provision to require that any gasoline sold, or dispensed, to the

ultimate consumer in the CO nonattainment area be blended to contain

not less than 2.7 percent oxygen by weight during the portion of the

year in which the area is prone to high ambient CO levels.

II. Analysis

In today's action EPA proposes to approve Connecticut's CO SIP

submittal for the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT CO nonattainment

area and invites public comment on the action. The following items are

the basis for approval of the SIP revision. Connecticut has met the

requirements of Section 186-187 and 211(m) of the Act by submitting SIP

revisions that implement all required elements as discussed below. The

state implementation plans submitted by Connecticut on January 12,

1993, January 14, 1993, April 7, 1994, and August 1, 1995, collectively

meet the requirements for those particular revisions to the SIP for the

Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT Moderate (greater than 12.7 ppm) CO

nonattainment area as set forth in Sections 187(a)(2)(A), 187(a)(3),

187(a)(7) and 211(m) of the Act.

1. VMT Forecasts

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

submittal a forecast of VMT in the nonattainment 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. Connecticut has

satisfied this requirement with their January 12, 1993 and April 7,

1994 SIP submittals which include VMT forecasts beginning with the year

1993 and including all subsequent years up to the year of attainment

(1995). The forecasts were projected using an annual growth factor of

two percent as determined from Connecticut's network-based travel

demand model. This model is properly updated and validated and uses an

equilibrium approach to allocating trips, therefore, it is considered

to be the best

[[Page 47909]]

predictor of growth factors for VMT forecasts in Connecticut and was

used appropriately as set forth in the Section 187 VMT Forecasting and

Tracking Guidance.

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. Connecticut satisfied this requirement

with their January 12, 1993 and April 7, 1994 SIP submittals.

3. Contingency Measures

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. Certain actions, such as notification of sources,

would probably be needed before a measure could be implemented

effectively. Connecticut has satisfied this requirement with their

January 12, 1993 and April 7, 1994 SIP submittals which include

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. Connecticut has demonstrated that expanded implementation of an

enhanced inspection and maintenance program, beyond what is required in

57 CFR 52950, will provide CO emission reductions to counteract the

effect of one years growth in VMT.

Although implementation of an enhanced I/M program is required in

the urbanized area of Connecticut's portion of the NY-NJ-CT CO

nonattainment area, Connecticut has demonstrated that requiring

vehicles traveling within the nonattainment area, but originating

outside the urbanized area, to meet the CO performance standard of the

enhanced I/M program, will result in CO emission reductions which

offset the CO emissions attributable to a two percent growth (one years

growth) of the projected 1995 VMT in the area. The legal authority for

the implementation of the enhanced I/M program was passed by the

General Assembly of the State of Connecticut in Public Act 90-312 which

took effect on July 1, 1993. Connecticut further demonstrated that if

the area does not attain the CO standard by the December 31, 1995

attainment date, the state is committed to implementing the Employee

Commute Option in the nonattainment area, which will provide reductions

in VMT to offset the anticipated growth in VMT from 1994 to the

attainment year of 1995. The Connecticut Legislature has effectively

authorized implementation of the ECO program through the promulgation

Public Act 93-334 which has been codified it into the Connecticut

General Statutes.

4. Attainment Demonstration

As noted, CO nonattainment areas with design values greater than

12.7 parts per million (ppm) were required to submit a demonstration by

November 15, 1992; the plan must provide for attainment by December 31,

1995 for moderate CO nonattainment areas and December 31, 2000 for

serious CO nonattainment areas.

To demonstrate attainment, the 1-hour and 8-hour and National

Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for CO are not to be exceeded

more than once per year. The 1-hour CO NAAQS is 35 ppm (40 mg/m \3\)

and the 8-hour CO NAAQS is 9 ppm (10 mg/m \3\). Connecticut has

satisfied this requirement with its April 7, 1994 SIP submittal in

which Connecticut conducted an attainment demonstration using

intersection modeling for a representative set of the most congested

intersections with high traffic volumes and the greatest potential to

generate high CO concentrations in the Connecticut portion of the NY-

NJ-CT CO nonattainment area. This analysis also demonstrated that the

two CO monitors in downtown Bridgeport and downtown Stamford are in

fact sited where the local conditions result in the highest CO levels

in Connecticut's portion of the nonattainment area. The design value

for the entire NY-NJ-CT CO nonattainment area was 13.5 ppm in 1988,

based on monitoring data from site in Manhattan, New York.

Connecticut's SIP revision indicated that based solely on the two

monitors located in the Connecticut portion of the nonattainment area,

the design value for the Connecticut portion of the area would have

been 6.9 ppm, and these CO monitors have not monitored a violation of

the NAAQS since 1984. Therefore, Connecticut demonstrates that the

existing CO levels in the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT

nonattainment area are in attainment of the NAAQS and CO emissions will

continue to decrease throughout the attainment year of 1995

demonstrating continued attainment through the December 31, 1995

attainment date.

The Act requires that the CO nonattainment area plan revisions

demonstrating attainment must contain measures which demonstrate

reasonable further progress through specific annual emission reductions

as are necessary to attain the standard by December 1995. EPA has

reviewed the attainment demonstration and control strategy for the area

to determine whether annual incremental reductions different from those

provided in the SIP should be required in order to ensure attainment of

the CO NAAQS by the applicable attainment date (see section 171(1)).

Connecticut has demonstrated that the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-

CT nonattainment area is currently in attainment and although further

reduction in CO emissions will result from the implementation of

oxygenated fuels, enhanced inspection and maintenance and the Federal

Motor Vehicle Control Program, specific emission reductions are not

necessary to attain the standard by the attainment date. EPA believes

the implementation of these measures will assure that the area CO

emissions continue to decrease and therefore ensuring attainment of the

area in December 1995.

5. Oxygenated Fuels Program

Motor vehicles are significant contributors of CO emissions. An

important measure toward reducing these emissions is the use of

cleaner-burning oxygenated gasoline. Extra oxygen, contained within the

fuel, enhances fuel combustion and helps to offset fuel-rich operating

conditions, particularly during vehicle starting. Section 211(m) of the

CAAA requires that States with CO nonattainment areas classified as

moderate or above, submit state implementation plan revisions to

implement oxygenated gasoline programs by no later than November 1,

1992. The oxygenated gasoline program must require gasoline sold or

dispensed in the specified control area to contain not less than 2.7

percent oxygen by weight during that portion of the year in which the

area is prone to high ambient concentrations of CO (the control

period). EPA announced guidance on the establishment of control

periods, by area, in the Federal Register on October 20, 1992 which

also announced the availability of oxygenated gasoline credit program

guidelines. Under a credit program, marketable oxygen

[[Page 47910]]

credits may be generated from the sale of gasoline with a higher oxygen

content than is required (i.e., an oxygen content greater than 2.7

percent by weight). These oxygen credits may be used to offset the sale

of gasoline with a lower oxygen content than is required. As an

alternate to the credit program, the State may elect a program in which

a minimum of 2.7 percent by weight oxygen must be present in every

gallon of gasoline sold. The EPA also issued labeling regulations under

section 211(m)(4) of the CAA. These labeling regulations were also

published in the Federal Register on October 20, 1992.

Connecticut has satisfied the requirements of Section 211(m) with

their January 14, 1993, April 7, 1994, and August 1, 1995 SIP

submittals which contain adopted amendments and revisions to the

Regulation of Connecticut State Agencies (RCSA), to add Section 22a-

174-28, which establishes an Oxygenated Fuel Program. EPA is approving,

in a separate direct final rulemaking notice, the oxygenated fuel

program, except as it applies to the Southwestern Control Area, as

defined in 22a-174-28. In this notice, EPA is proposing approval of the

definition for the Southwestern Control Area and that portion of the

definition of ``control period'' that applies to the Southwestern

Control Area. The program is one in which all oxygenated gasoline must

contain a minimum oxygen content of 2.7 percent by weight of oxygen.

Connecticut has adopted labeling regulations, enforcement procedures,

and oxygenate test methods in accordance with Section 211(m) of the

Act.

On August 1, 1995, the State of Connecticut submitted a revision to

the control period for the Connecticut portion of the New Jersey/New

York/Connecticut CO nonattainment area changing the oxygenated fuels

control period to November 1 through the last day of February of each

year. Previously, the control period had been October 1 through April

30 of each year. Under Section 211(m) of the CAA, a control period must

be that portion of the year in which the control area is prone to high

ambient concentrations of CO, but no less than four months in length.

Section 211(m)(2) requires this control period to be based on air

quality monitoring data and established by the EPA Administrator. EPA

is proposing to approve Connecticut's four-month control period for the

Southwestern Control Area because it is consistent with section

211(m)(2) and the EPA 1992 guidance.

EPA is publishing concurrently with this notice a Notice of

Proposed Rulemaking to approve New York's oxygenated gasoline SIP

submission. That notice proposes to establish a four-month control

period for the New York portion of the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut

CO nonattainment area. Connecticut's establishment of a four-month

control period will be consistent with New York's four-month control

period.

The setting of a four-month control period for the nonattainment

area is consistent with established Agency guidance (announced for

availability at 57 FR 47853, October 20, 1992) regarding oxygenated

gasoline control periods to determine the proper control period length

for the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut CO nonattainment area. As part

of the 1992 guidance document, based on air quality data from 1990 and

1991, EPA suggested that the proper control period for the New York-New

Jersey-Connecticut CO nonattainment area was October 1 through April

30. However, the 1992 guidance does not establish a binding norm

regarding control periods and provides that the determination of the

control period will be an issue to be finally decided by EPA as part of

the review of individual state SIP revisions for oxygenated gasoline

programs. EPA has set forth the reasons for its proposed approval of

the four-month control period for the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut

CO nonattainment area in the above-mentioned notice regarding New

York's oxygenated gasoline SIP revision published concurrently with

this notice. In that notice, EPA explains the rationale for determining

that the appropriate control period is from November 1 through the last

day of February for the entire nonattainment area. EPA believes sale of

gasoline oxygenated to 2.7 percent by weight during the months of

October, March and April is no longer necessary for adequate carbon

monoxide control in the entire nonattainment area. EPA will not repeat

the rationale provided in that notice, but rather incorporates by

reference the same rationale into this notice.

Proposed Action

The EPA is proposing to approve collectively the plan revisions

submitted to EPA for the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT CO

nonattainment area on January 12, 1993, January 14, 1993, April 7,

1994, and August 1, 1995. Among other things, Connecticut has

demonstrated that the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT CO

nonattainment area will continue to attain the CO NAAQS through

December 31, 1995, the applicable attainment date.

This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature

by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the

Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a

July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for

Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has

exempted this regulatory action from review under Executive Order

12866.

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.

The CAA does 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).

As noted, additional submittals for the CO nonattainment areas are

required under Section 186 and 187 of the Act. The EPA will determine

the adequacy of any such submittal as appropriate. Nothing in this

action should be construed as permitting or allowing or establishing a

precedent for any future request for revision to any State

implementation plan. Each request for revision to the State

implementation plan shall be considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental factors and in relation to

relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

The Administrator's decision to approve or disapprove the SIP

revision will be based on whether it meets the requirements of Section

110(a)(2)(A)-(K) and 110(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act, as amended, and

EPA regulations in 40 CFR Part 51.

[[Page 47911]]

Unfunded Mandates

Under Sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform

Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 25,

1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed

or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in

estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to

State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.

Through submission of this state implementation plan or plan

revision, the State and any affected local or tribal governments have

elected to adopt the program provided for under section 175A and

section 187(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act. The rules and commitments

approved in this action may bind State, local and tribal governments to

perform certain actions and also may ultimately lead to the private

sector being required to certain duties. To the extent that the

imposition of any mandate upon the State, local or tribal governments

either as the owner or operator of a source or as mandate upon the

private sector, EPA's action will impose no new requirements under

State law; such sources are already subject to these requirements under

State law. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal

governments, or to the private sector, results from this action. EPA

has also determined that this final action does not include a mandate

that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to State,

local, or tribal governments in the aggregate or to the private sector.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and record keeping requirements.

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

Dated: August 31, 1995.

John P. DeVillars,

Regional Administrator, EPA-New England.

[FR Doc. 95-22958 Filed 9-14-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P