Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan; Wisconsin

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[WI75-01-7304; FRL-5840-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plan; Wisconsin

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve

Wisconsin's request to grant an exemption for the Milwaukee severe and

Manitowoc County moderate ozone nonattainment areas from the applicable

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) transportation conformity

requirements. On July 10, 1996, the Wisconsin Department of Natural

Resource (WDNR) submitted to the EPA a State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revision request for an exemption under section 182(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act (Act) from the transportation conformity requirements for

NOX for the Milwaukee severe and Manitowoc County moderate

ozone nonattainment areas. The request is based on the urban airshed

modeling (UAM) conducted for the attainment demonstration for the Lake

Michigan Ozone Study (LMOS) modeling domain. The rationale for this

proposed approval is set forth in Supplementary Information; additional

information is available at the address indicated.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received by July 14,

1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Carlton T. Nash, Chief,

Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), USEPA,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590.

Copies of the SIP revision, public comments and EPA's responses are

available for inspection at the following address: United States

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division,

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. (It is recommended

that you telephone Michael Leslie at (312) 353-6680 before visiting the

Region 5 Office.)

A copy of this SIP revision is available for inspection at the

following location: Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) Docket and

Information Center (Air Docket 6102), room M1500, United States

Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street S.W., Washington, D.C.

20460, (202) 260-7548.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael G. Leslie, Regulation

Development Section (AR-18J), Air Programs Branch, Air and Radiation

Division, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, Telephone Number (312)

353-6680.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Clean Air Act section 176(c)(3)(A)(iii) requires, in order to

demonstrate conformity with the applicable SIP, that transportation

plans and Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) contribute to

emissions reductions in ozone and carbon monoxide nonattainment areas

during the period before control strategy SIPs are approved by USEPA.

This requirement is implemented in 40 CFR 51.436 through 51.440 (and

Secs. 93.122 through 93.124), which establishes the so-called ``build/

no-build test.'' This test requires a demonstration that the ``Action''

scenario (representing the implementation of the proposed

transportation plan/TIP) will result in lower motor vehicle emissions

than the ``Baseline'' scenario (representing the implementation of the

current transportation plan/TIP). In addition, the ``Action'' scenario

must result in emissions lower than 1990 levels.

The November 24, 1993, final transportation conformity rule

1 does not require the build/no-build test and less-than-

1990 test for NOX as an ozone precursor in ozone

nonattainment areas, where the Administrator determines that additional

reductions of NOX would not contribute to attainment of the

National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for ozone. Clean Air Act

section 176(c)(3)(A)(iii), which is the conformity provision requiring

contributions to emission reductions before SIPs with emissions budgets

can be approved, specifically references Clean Air Act section

182(b)(1). That section requires submission of State plans that, among

other things, provide for specific annual reductions of volatile

organic compounds (VOCs) and NOX emissions ``as necessary''

to attain the ozone standard by the applicable attainment date. Section

182(b)(1) further states that its requirements do not apply in the case

of NOX for those ozone nonattainment areas for which USEPA

determines that additional reductions of NOX would not

contribute to ozone attainment.

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

\1\ ``Criteria and Procedures for Determining Conformity to

State or Federal Implementation Plans of Transportation Plans,

Programs, and Projects Funded or Approved under Title 23 U.S.C. of

the Federal Transit Act'' November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188).

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

For ozone nonattainment areas, the process for submitting waiver

requests and the criteria used to evaluate them are explained in the

December 1993 USEPA document ``Guidelines for Determining the

Applicability of Nitrogen Oxides Requirements Under Section 182(f),''

and the May 27, 1994, and February 8, 1995, memoranda from John S.

Seitz, Director of the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to

Regional Air Division Directors, titled ``Section 182(f) NOX

Exemptions--Revised Process and Criteria.''

On July 13, 1994, the States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, and

Wisconsin (the States) submitted to the USEPA a petition for an

exemption from the requirements of section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act

(Act). The States, acting through the Lake Michigan Air Directors

Consortium (LADCo), petitioned for an exemption from the Reasonably

Available Control Technology (RACT) and New Source Review (NSR)

requirements for major stationary sources of NOX. The

petition also asked for an exemption from the transportation and

general conformity requirements for NOX in all ozone

nonattainment areas in the Region.

On March 6, 1995, the USEPA published a rulemaking proposing

approval of the NOX exemption petition

[[Page 32056]]

for the RACT, NSR and transportation and general conformity

requirements. A number of comments were received on the proposal.

Several commenters argued that NOX exemptions are provided

for in two separate parts of the Act, in sections 182(b)(1) and 182(f),

but that the Act's transportation conformity provisions in section

176(c)(3) explicitly reference section 182(b)(1). In April 1995, the

USEPA entered into an agreement to change the procedural mechanism

through which a NOX exemption from transportation conformity

would be granted (EDF et al. v. USEPA, No. 94-1044, U.S. Court of

Appeals, D.C. Circuit). Instead of a petition under 182(f),

transportation conformity NOX exemptions for ozone

nonattainment areas that are subject to section 182(b)(1) now need to

be submitted as a SIP revision request. The Milwaukee and the Manitowoc

ozone nonattainment areas are classified as moderate or above and,

thus, are subject to section 182(b)(1).

The transportation conformity requirements are found at sections

176(c) (2), (3), and (4). The conformity requirements apply on an

areawide basis in all nonattainment and maintenance areas. The USEPA's

transportation conformity rule was amended on August 29, 1995 (60 FR

44762) to reference section 182(b)(1) rather than 182(f) as the means

for exempting areas subject to section 182(b)(1) from the

transportation conformity NOX requirements.

The July 10, 1996, SIP revision request from Wisconsin was

submitted to meet the requirements in accordance with 182(b)(1). Public

hearings on this SIP revision request were held on January 11 and 12,

1995.

In evaluating the 182(b) SIP revision request, the USEPA considered

whether additional NOX reductions would contribute to

attainment of the standard in Milwaukee severe and Manitowoc County

moderate ozone nonattainment areas and also in the downwind areas of

the LMOS modeling domain.

The role that NOX emissions play in producing ozone at

any given place and time is complex. NOX primarily

represents a sum of two oxides of nitrogen, namely nitrogen oxide (NO)

and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). In the presence of sunlight,

NOX photo-dissociates into NO and a single oxygen atom. The

oxygen atom reacts with molecular oxygen (O2) to form ozone

(O3). NO, on the other hand, near its source area readily

reacts with ozone to form O2 and NO2. The

generated NO2 is then free to photo-dissociate and lead to

ozone formation further downwind. The reaction of NO with ozone, which

locally reduces ozone concentrations, is referred to as ozone

scavenging and is one of the primary local sinks for ozone in the lower

atmosphere in and near NO source areas. Since emissions of

NOX from fuel combustion sources, whether internal

combustion engines or stationary combustion sources, such as industrial

boilers, contain significant amounts of NO, it is expected that ozone

concentrations immediately downwind of such NOX sources will

be reduced through ozone scavenging. Therefore, reducing NOX

emissions can lead to increased ozone concentrations in the vicinity of

the controlled NOX emission sources, whereas reducing

NOX emissions may lead to reduction in ozone concentrations

further downwind. Reducing NOX emissions in VOC-limited

areas (areas with low VOC emissions relative to NOX

emissions) may produce minimal ozone reductions or even ozone

increases.

As outlined in relevant USEPA guidance, the use of photochemical

grid modeling is the recommended approach for testing the contribution

of NOX emission reductions to attainment of the ozone

standard. This approach simulates conditions over the modeling domain

that may be expected at the attainment deadline for three emission

reduction scenarios: (1) Substantial VOC reductions, (2) substantial

NOX reductions, and (3) both VOC and NOX

reductions. If the areawide predicted maximum one-hour ozone

concentration for each day modeled under scenario (1) is less than or

equal to those from scenarios (2) and (3) for the corresponding days,

the test is passed and the section 182(f) NOX emissions

reduction requirements would not apply.

In making this determination under section 182(b)(1) that the

NOX requirements do not apply, or may be limited in the Lake

Michigan area, the USEPA has considered the national study of ozone

precursors completed pursuant to section 185B of the Act. The USEPA has

based its decision on the demonstration and the supporting information

provided in the SIP revision request.

II. Summary of Submittal

On July 10, 1996, the State of Wisconsin submitted as a revision to

the SIP, a request for a waiver from the transportation conformity

NOX requirements. The submittal included the LMOS UAM

modeling for the attainment demonstration for 3 ozone episodes during

1991. The modeling supported the request by documenting that

NOX reductions in the LMOS modeling domain would not

contribute to attainment and, in fact, would be detrimental to the goal

of reaching attainment. The WDNR held public hearings on the submittal

on January 11 and 12, 1995.

Pursuant to 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A, 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart T,

the SIP revision request seeks an exemption from the transportation

conformity requirements for NOX in the Milwaukee severe and

Manitowoc moderate ozone nonattainment area. The States have utilized

the UAM to demonstrate that reductions in NOX in the LMOS

modeling domain will not contribute to attainment of the standard. To

conduct the modeling analysis, the following steps were followed: (a)

Emissions were projected to 1996 (the deadline for implementation of

the 15 percent reasonable further progress reduction) and 2007 (the

attainment deadline for the severe nonattainment areas) from the 1990

base year, (b) it was assumed that a 40 percent VOC emission reduction

beyond that achieved as a result of emission controls mandated by the

Act would be necessary to attain the ozone standard in the LMOS

modeling domain, (c) a 40 percent NOX emission reduction in

grid B (that portion of the LMOS modeling domain that is essentially

composed of the ozone nonattainment areas within the modeling domain)

beyond the projected emission levels was assumed for all anthropogenic

NOX emissions, (d) a 40 percent VOC emission reduction and a

40 percent NOX reduction in grid B beyond projected emission

levels were assumed for all anthropogenic VOC and NOX

emissions and (e), the ozone modeling results for (b), (c), and (d)

were compared considering the modeled domain-wide peak ozone

concentrations and temporal and spatial extent of modeled ozone

concentrations above 120 parts per billion (ppb).

For all modeled days using 1996 and 2007 conditions, domain-wide

peak ozone concentrations for ``VOC-only'' controls were found to be

lower than or equal to those for ``NOX-only'' controls or

those for ``VOC plus NOX'' controls. In addition,

consideration of daily peak ozone isopleth maps (these maps are

included in the documentation of the section 182(b) SIP revision

request) shows that the ``VOC-only'' control scenario leads to the

smallest areas with predicted peak ozone concentrations exceeding 120

ppb.

Additional sensitivity tests were conducted for a 40 percent

NOX emission reduction that was applied only to point

sources in Grid B for episode 2 and 1996 conditions for both an assumed

NOX reduction alone and a 40 percent reduction in both VOCs

and

[[Page 32057]]

NOX. These sensitivity tests compared to the scenarios with

across the board anthropogenic NOX reductions demonstrated

that control of ground level NOX sources (such as

transportation sources) did not contribute to attainment of the

standard and in fact increased the domain wide peak ozone

concentrations exceeding 120 ppb and the number of hours that exceeded

120 ppb. This result was more pronounced than with the point source

only NOX control.

III. Analysis of the Submittal

Review of the modeling results show a very definite directional

signal indicating that application of NOX controls in the

Milwaukee severe and Manitowoc County moderate ozone nonattainment

areas would exacerbate peak ozone concentrations not in the LMOS

modeling domain. The LMOS modeling domain includes Chicago, Northwest

Indiana, Western Michigan and Eastern Wisconsin. The States and LADCo

have now completed the validation process for the UAM modeling system

used in the demonstration of attainment for the LMOS modeling domain.

Therefore, documentation supporting the validity of the modeling

results has been submitted with the SIP revision request.

It is noted that the use of simple, area-wide emission projection

factors raises some uncertainty in the modeling results for 1996 and

2007. Some changes in modeling results may be expected if area-specific

and source category-specific projection factors are used instead of the

average factors used in these analyses. These more detailed projection

factors will be used in the final demonstration of attainment for the

LMOS domain. These changes, however, are not expected to reverse the

directional signal of the modeling done to date, which shows that

NOX reductions will not contribute to attainment in

Milwaukee severe and Manitowoc County moderate ozone nonattainment

areas and throughout the LMOS domain.

Although ozone concentrations modeled further downwind from the

urban source areas increase as a result of increased NOX

point source emissions, this is not the case with the ground level

NOX sources. LADCo and the States view the potential

increase in outflow ozone concentrations with increasing NOX

point source emissions to be marginal. More importantly, the SIP

revision request demonstrates that additional reductions in

NOX would not contribute to attainment of the ozone standard

in the LMOS domain. These results are believed to be consistent with

USEPA's section 185B report to Congress. Therefore, based on the

report's conformance with USEPA guidance, the USEPA believes the State

of Wisconsin's demonstration is adequate, and thus is proposing to

approve the transportation conformity waiver request. It is noted by

LADCo, however, that subsequent modeling analyses may lead to an ozone

attainment plan which includes, for specified portions of the LMOS

domain only, both NOX and VOC emission controls. The

modeling indicates that these NOX emission controls most

likely will be limited to rural areas, will not be required in the

Wisconsin nonattainment area and will not be applied to ground level

sources.

Monitoring data such as concentrations of non-methane hydrocarbons

and NOX and derived/monitored ozone production potentials of

air parcels, collected for the urban source areas during the 1991 field

study, generally supports the approval of the NOX waiver.

However, the primary basis for approval of the NOX waiver is

the modeling results submitted in support of the waiver. The 1991 field

data by themselves do not provide adequate support for the waiver,

since these data are limited in nature and do not assess the impacts of

post-1991 NOX controls on LMOS modeling domain peak ozone

concentrations.

VOC and NOX emission reductions were found to produce

different impacts spatially. In and downwind of major urban areas,

within the ozone nonattainment areas, VOC reductions were effective in

lowering peak ozone concentrations, while NOX emission

reductions resulted in increased peak ozone concentrations. Farther

downwind, within attainment areas, VOC emissions reductions became less

effective for reducing ozone concentrations, while NOX

emission reductions were effective in lowering ozone concentrations.

The magnitude of ozone decreases farther downwind due to NOX

emission reductions was less than the magnitude of ozone increases in

the ozone nonattainment areas as a result of the same NOX

emission reductions.

Analyses of ambient data by LMOS contractors provided results which

corroborated the modeling results. These analyses identified areas of

VOC and NOX-limited conditions (VOC-limited conditions would

imply a greater sensitivity of ozone concentrations to changes in VOC

emissions; the reverse would be true for NOX-limited

conditions) and tracked the ozone and ozone precursor concentrations in

the urban plumes as they moved downwind. The analyses indicated VOC-

limited conditions in the Chicago/Northwest Indiana and Milwaukee areas

and NOX-limited conditions further downwind. These results

imply that VOC controls in the Chicago/Northwest Indiana, Milwaukee,

and Western Michigan areas would be more effective at reducing peak

ozone concentrations within the Lake Michigan ozone nonattainment

areas.

The consistency between the modeling results and the ambient data

analysis results for all episodes with joint data supports the view

that the UAM modeling system developed in the LMOS may be used to

investigate the relative merits of VOC versus NOX emission

controls. The UAM-V results for all modeled episodes point to the

benefits of VOC controls versus NOX controls in reducing the

modeled domain peak ozone concentrations.

For a more detailed analysis of the modeling analysis results,

please see the August 22, 1994 memorandum entitled ``Technical Review

of a Four State Request for a Section 182(f) Exemption from Oxides of

Nitrogen (NOX) Reasonably Available Control Technology

(RACT) and New Source Review (NSR) Requirements'', which is contained

in the docket for this action.

The USEPA believes LADCo's UAM application has adequately met the

requirement to demonstrate that NOX controls within the

Milwaukee severe and Manitowoc County moderate ozone nonattainment

areas and throughout the LMOS domain will not contribute, but instead

will interfere with attainment of the ozone standard.

IV. EPA Action

The EPA is proposing approval of the transportation conformity

NOX waiver SIP revision for the State of Wisconsin. In light

of the modeling completed thus far and considering the importance of

the Ozone Transport Assessment Group (OTAG) process and attainment plan

modeling efforts, EPA proposes to approve this NOX waiver on

a contingent basis. When the results of OTAG technical work are

available, EPA intends to require appropriate States to submit SIP

measures to ensure emissions reductions of ozone precursors needed to

prevent significant transport of ozone. The EPA will evaluate the OTAG

technical work, along with EPA's emissions reduction requirements, to

determine whether the NOX waiver should be continued,

altered, or removed.

The EPA also reserves the right to require NOX emission

controls for transportation sources under section 110(a)(2)(D) of the

Act if future ozone

[[Page 32058]]

modeling demonstrates that such controls are needed to achieve the

ozone standard in downwind areas.

V. Miscellaneous

A. Applicability to Future SIP Decisions

Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing

or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any

SIP. The EPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP in

light of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

B. Executive Order 12866

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

by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the

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

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

Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget has exempted

this regulatory action from E.O. 12866 review.

C. Regulatory Flexibility

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 economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

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

enterprises, and government entities with jurisdiction over populations

of less than 50,000.

This approval does not impose any requirements on small entities.

Therefore, I certify that this action does not have a significant

economic impact on any small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, the EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or

final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated

costs of $100 million or more to State, local, or tribal governments in

the aggregate; or to the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under

section 205, the EPA must select the most cost-effective and least

burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule and is

consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 requires the EPA to

establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments that

may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.

The EPA has determined that the approval proposed 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 document does not imposes any Federal requirements.

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

governments, or the private sector, result from this action.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Oxides of Nitrogen, Transportation

conformity, Transportation--air quality planning, Volatile organic

compounds.

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

Dated: May 30, 1997.

Valdas V. Adamkus,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97-15412 Filed 6-11-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P