Transportation Conformity Budget Adequacy Determination and Status of Maintenance Demonstration and Associated Budgets; San Francisco Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA-232-0176, FRL-6454-7]

Transportation Conformity Budget Adequacy Determination and

Status of Maintenance Demonstration and Associated Budgets; San

Francisco Bay Area Ozone Attainment Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is today proposing that the motor vehicle emissions

budgets contained in the 1999 ozone attainment plan for the San

Francisco Bay Area are adequate for transportation conformity purposes.

EPA is also proposing that the Bay Area's existing maintenance

demonstration and associated budgets are no longer applicable and

should be replaced by the new budgets upon a final determination of

adequacy. The attainment plan includes a budget of 175.2 tons per day

(tpd) for VOC and 247.1 tpd for NOX, both for the year 2000.

If, after public comment, EPA finalizes this adequacy determination of

the new budgets, and the determination that the maintenance

demonstration is no longer applicable, the new budgets would apply to

the attainment year of 2000 and beyond and become the sole 1-hour ozone

standard VOC and NOX budgets in the Bay Area for

transportation conformity.

[[Page 55221]]

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

November 12, 1999. Comments should be addressed to the contact listed

below.

ADDRESSES: A copy of the proposed rule is available in the air programs

section of EPA Region 9's website, http://www.epa.gov/region09/air, and

the EPA's Office of Mobile Sources' conformity website, http://

www.epa.gov/oms/traq (once there, click on the ``Conformity'' button,

then look for ``Adequacy Review of SIP Submissions for Conformity''). A

copy of the attainment plan can be obtained from the Bay Area Air

Quality Management District's website, http://sparc2.baaqmd.gov/sip/. A

copy of the plan is also included in the docket for this rulemaking and

is available for inspection during normal business hours at EPA Region

9, Planning Office, Air Division, 17th Floor, 75 Hawthorne Street, San

Francisco, California 94105. A reasonable fee may be charged for

copying parts of the docket. Please call (415) 744-1249 for assistance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Celia Bloomfield (415) 744-1249,

Planning Office (AIR-2), Air Division, EPA Region 9, 75 Hawthorne

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. The Bay Area's 1999 Ozone Attainment Plan Contains New On-Road

Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (``Attainment Budgets'') for

Transportation Conformity Purposes

On August 13, 1999, the California Air Resources Board (CARB)

submitted to EPA on behalf of the San Francisco Bay Area (Bay Area) a

plan designed to bring the Bay Area into attainment with the federal 1-

hour national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone. This plan

has an attainment year of 2000. The 2000 attainment year anticipates

specific emissions levels for on-road motor vehicles: 175.2 tpd for VOC

and 247.1 tpd for NOX. Upon a final determination of

adequacy, these emissions levels will become the transportation

conformity motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Bay Area.

The role of transportation conformity, a requirement set out in

section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act, is to ensure that motor vehicle

emissions from transportation activities will not exceed the levels

being relied on in the plan to achieve attainment. In other words,

emissions from the implementation of transportation plans and programs

must be ``consistent with estimates of emissions from motor vehicles

and necessary emission reductions contained in the applicable

implementation plan'' (CAA section 176(c)(2)(A)). Since the 2000

budgets in the ozone attainment plan are attainment budgets, they will

apply to conformity determinations for the attainment year 2000 and for

every year after 2000.

II. The New Attainment Budgets Are Adequate

The new attainment budgets are based on current motor vehicle

emissions information and represent the best estimates of motor vehicle

emissions levels needed for attainment of the federal 1-hour ozone

standard. EPA believes the budgets meet the criteria for adequacy as

set out in section 93.118(e)(4) (62 FR 43811, August 15, 1997) and

should be deemed adequate for transportation conformity purposes.

There are six criteria for adequacy listed in section 93.118(e)(4).

The first, a requirement that the budgets be endorsed by the governor

or his designee and be subject to a State public hearing (section

93.118(e)(4)(I)), was satisfied by CARB's normal plan approval and

submittal process. On July 22, 1999, the CARB board held a hearing to

approve the Bay Area attainment plan. On August 13, 1999, CARB

officially submitted the plan to EPA with a request from the Governor's

designee that EPA approve the plan.

The second criterion requires that prior to plan submittal, there

be ``consultation among federal, State, and local agencies * * *; full

implementation plan documentation * * *''; and resolution of EPA's

comments (section 93.118(e)(4)(ii)). The budgets, which were calculated

and added to the plan after consultation among federal, State, and

local agencies and in response to EPA comments, meet EPA's second

criterion as well.

In compliance with the third, fourth, and fifth adequacy criteria,

the motor vehicle emissions budgets are clearly identified and

precisely quantified (section 93.118(e)(4)(iii)) in Section 4 of the

submitted attainment plan; the budgets are consistent with the modeling

results from the attainment assessment, which define the emissions

levels needed for attainment (section 93.118(e)(4)(iv)); and the

budgets are not only ``consistent with'' and ``related to the emissions

inventory and the control measures in the submitted * * * plan,''

(section 93.118(e)(4)(v)) but are specifically derived from the motor

vehicle emissions information projected for the year 2000 taking into

account emissions reductions that will be achieved by the plan's

control measures.

Finally, the sixth criterion relating to revisions of previously

submitted plans (section 93.118(e)(4)(vi)) does not apply because the

ozone attainment plan is an initial submission, not a revision to a

previously submitted control strategy plan for the same Clean Air Act

purpose and time frame. It is a new attainment plan triggered by EPA's

redesignation of the Bay Area from maintenance to nonattainment on July

10, 1998 (63 FR 37258).

III. The 1995 Maintenance Budgets Are No Longer Applicable

On May 22, 1995, EPA redesignated the Bay Area to attainment and

approved the Bay Area's maintenance plan, which was submitted as part

of its redesignation request. 60 FR 27028. Such a plan is required by

the redesignation provisions of sections 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) and 175A of

the Act for maintenance areas--areas that are redesignated to

attainment from nonattainment. The Bay Area is no longer a maintenance

area. While its maintenance plan was designed to maintain compliance

with the federal 1-hour ozone standard, the plan failed. During the

first two years implementing the maintenance plan (1995-1996), the Bay

Area experienced 43 exceedances and 17 violations of the federal

standard. As a result, the Bay Area was redesignated back to

nonattainment on July 10, 1998 (63 FR 37258). Because the Bay Area is

now a nonattainment area subject to the attainment plan requirements of

section 172, rather than the maintenance requirements of section 175A,

we are finding through rulemaking that the maintenance demonstration is

no longer relevant and is not an applicable requirement under section

110(l).1 As part of the obsolete maintenance demonstration,

the maintenance budgets are also no longer an applicable requirement of

the Act. The maintenance demonstration and associated budgets were not

eliminated when the Bay Area was redesignated back to nonattainment.

The maintenance requirements can only be eliminated through rulemaking

and if the new attainment budgets are deemed adequate. If this adequacy

determination and determination that the maintenance budgets are no

longer applicable are finalized, the VOC and NOX

transportation conformity budgets for the Bay Area contained in the new

attainment plan submitted by CARB on August 13, 1999 will become the

only

[[Page 55222]]

applicable 1-hour ozone standard budgets for the Bay Area.

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

\1\ Unlike the maintenance demonstration, the measures approved

into the SIP as part of the maintenance plan remain in full force

and effect and cannot be removed from the SIP without equivalent

replacement because such removal would interfere with attainment

pursuant to section 110(l).

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

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, Regulatory

Planning and Review.

B. Executive Order 12875

Under Executive Order 12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental

Partnership, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by

statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local or tribal

government, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary

to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those governments, or

EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting,

Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office of

Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior

consultation with representatives of affected State, local and tribal

governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written

communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the

need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875

requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected

officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal

governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development

of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''

Today's rule does not create a mandate on State, local or tribal

governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these

entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875

do not apply to this rule.

C. Executive Order 13045

Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) Is

determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O.

12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA

has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children.

If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate

the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on

children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other

potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered

by the Agency. This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does

not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or

safety risks.

D. Executive Order 13084

Under Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordination with

Indian Tribal Governments, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the

communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial

direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal

government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those

governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084

requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a

separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a

description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with

representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature

of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the

regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop

an effective process permitting elected officials and other

representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful

and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters

that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.'' Today's rule

does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian

tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of

E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1990 requires federal agencies to

identify potentially adverse impacts of federal regulations upon small

entities. In instances where significant impacts are possible on a

substantial number of these entities, agencies are required to perform

a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (RFA).

EPA has determined that today's regulation will not have a

significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. This

regulation affects federal agencies and metropolitan planning

organizations, which by definition are designated only for metropolitan

areas with a population of at least 50,000. These organizations do not

constitute small entities.

Therefore, as required under section 605 of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., I certify that this rule will

not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small

entities.

F. Unfunded Mandates

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

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

must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or

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

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

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

must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative

that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan

for informing and advising any small governments that may be

significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not

include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs of

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

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

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

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

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic

compounds.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Dated: September 27, 1999.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator, Region IX.

[FR Doc. 99-26556 Filed 10-8-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P