[Federal Register: February 14, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 31)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 7476-7489]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr14fe03-30]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[FRL-7452-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Rhode Island;
One Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration for the Rhode Island Ozone
Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to fully approve the one-hour ozone
attainment demonstration State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the Rhode
Island serious ozone nonattainment area, submitted by the Rhode Island
Department of Environmental Protection on January 27, 2003. This action
is based on the requirements of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990,
related to one-hour ozone attainment demonstrations.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 17, 2003.
ADDRESSES: Written comments (two copies if possible) should be sent to:
David B. Conroy at the EPA Region I (New England) Office, One Congress
Street, Suite 1100-CAQ, Boston, Massachusetts 02114-2023.
Copies of the state submittal and EPA's technical support document
(TSD) are available for public inspection during normal business hours
(9 A.M. to 4 P.M.) at the following addresses: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 1 (New England), One Congress St., 11th
Floor, Boston, Massachusetts, telephone (617) 918-1664, and at the
Office of Air Resources, Department of Environmental Management, 235
Promenade Street, Providence, Rhode Island 02908-5767. Please telephone
in advance before visiting.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard P. Burkhart, (617) 918-1664.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice provides an analysis of the one-
hour ozone attainment demonstration SIP submitted by the Rhode Island
Department of Environmental Management (Rhode Island DEM) in proposed
form on January 27, 2003 for the Rhode Island serious ozone
nonattainment area. This revision is being proposed under a procedure
called parallel processing. Under parallel processing, EPA proposes
action on a state submission before it has been formally submitted to
EPA, and will take final action on its proposal if the final submission
is substantially unchanged from the submission on which proposal is
based, or if significant changes in the final submission are
anticipated and adequately described in EPA's proposal as a basis for
EPA's proposed action.
The Rhode Island DEM will hold a public hearing on its proposed SIP
revision on February 27, 2003. The SIP revision that Rhode Island has
proposed includes all the basic elements of what EPA is proposing to
approve. If the proposed attainment demonstration plan is substantially
changed, EPA will evaluate those changes and may publish another notice
of proposed rulemaking. If no substantial changes are made, EPA will
approve the state's plan consistent with this proposal and any
submitted comments. Before EPA can finally approve this SIP revision,
Rhode Island must finally adopt the SIP revision and submit it formally
to EPA for incorporation into the SIP.
Table of Contents
I. Clean Air Act Requirements for Serious Ozone Nonattainment Areas
II. Background and Current Air Quality Status of the Rhode Island
Ozone Nonattainment Area
III. History and Time Frame for the State's Attainment Demonstration
SIP
IV. What are the Components of a Modeled Attainment Demonstration?
V. What is the Framework for Proposing Action on the Attainment
Demonstration SIPs?
VI. What are the Relevant Policy and Guidance Documents?
VII. How Does the Rhode Island Submittal Satisfy the Framework?
VIII. Proposed Action
IX. Administrative Requirements
I. Clean Air Act Requirements for Serious Ozone Nonattainment Areas
The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires EPA to establish national ambient
air quality standards (NAAQS or standards) for certain widespread
pollutants that cause or contribute to air pollution that is reasonably
anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. CAA sections 108 and
109. In 1979, EPA promulgated the one-hour 0.12 parts per million (ppm)
ground-level ozone standard. 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). Ground-
level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather, emissions of
nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
react in the presence of sunlight to form ground-level ozone.
NOX and VOC are referred to as precursors of ozone.
An area exceeds the one-hour ozone standard each time an ambient
air quality monitor records a one-hour average ozone concentration of
0.125 ppm or higher.\1\ An area is violating the standard if, over a
consecutive three-year period, more than three exceedances are expected
to occur at any one monitor. The area's 4th highest ozone reading at a
single monitor is its design value. The CAA, as amended in 1990,
required EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that was violating
the one-hour ozone standard, generally based on air quality monitoring
data from the three-year period from 1987-1989. CAA section 107(d)(4);
56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). The CAA further classified these areas,
based on the area's design value, as marginal, moderate, serious,
severe, or extreme. CAA section 181(a). Marginal areas were suffering
the least significant air pollution problems while the areas classified
as severe and extreme had the most significant air pollution problems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The one-hour ozone standard is 0.12 ppm. EPA's long-standing
practice is that monitored values of 0.125 ppm or higher are rounded
up, and thus considered an exceedance of the NAAQS and values less
than 0.125 ppm are rounded down and are not an exceedance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The control requirements and dates by which attainment needs to be
achieved vary with the area's classification. Marginal areas are
subject to the fewest mandated control requirements and have the
earliest attainment date. Severe and extreme areas are subject to more
stringent planning requirements but are provided more time to attain
the standard. Serious areas were required to attain the one-hour ozone
standard by November 15, 1999 and severe areas are required to attain
by November 15, 2005 or November 15, 2007. The Rhode Island ozone
nonattainment area is classified as serious and its attainment date is
November 15, 1999.
Under section 182(c)(2) of the CAA, serious areas were required to
submit by November 15, 1994 demonstrations of how they would attain the
one-hour ozone standard and how they would achieve reductions in VOC
emissions of 9 percent for each three-year period until the attainment
year. In some cases, NOX emission reductions can be
substituted for the required VOC emission reductions.
In general, an attainment demonstration SIP includes a modeling
analysis component showing how the area will achieve the standard by
its attainment date and the control
[[Page 7477]]
measures necessary to achieve those reductions. Another component of
the attainment demonstration SIP is a motor vehicle emissions budgets
for transportation conformity purposes. Transportation conformity is a
process for ensuring that the effects of emissions associated with new
or improved federally-funded roadways and transit are considered before
they are Federally funded or approved. As described in section
176(c)(2)(A) of the CAA, attainment demonstrations necessarily include
the estimates of motor vehicle emissions that are consistent with
attainment, which then act as a budget or ceiling for the purposes of
determining whether federally-supported transportation plans,
transportation implementation programs, and projects conform to the
attainment demonstration SIP.
II. Background and Current Air Quality Status of the Rhode Island Ozone
Nonattainment Area
The Rhode Island ozone nonattainment area is a state wide area.
Historically and throughout most of the 1990's, ozone monitors
throughout the Rhode Island nonattainment area violated the one-hour
ozone standard. Directly downwind of the Rhode Island nonattainment
area, there were also a number of other nonattainment areas violating
the one-hour ozone standard during the 1990's in Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, and in portions of southern Maine.
On June 9, 1999, EPA determined that the Rhode Island serious ozone
nonattainment area had attained the 1-hour ozone standard (64 FR
30911).\2\ This determination was based on data collected from 1996-
1998. On June 9, 1999, EPA also determined that the Eastern
Massachusetts area, the Portsmouth-Dover-Rochester, New Hampshire ozone
nonattainment area, and the Portland, Maine ozone nonattainment area
had also attained the 1-hour ozone standard based on data collected
from 1996-1998. See 64 FR 30911. At the time of these determinations of
attainment, there were no areas in any portion of Rhode Island, Eastern
Massachusetts, New Hampshire or Maine that violated the one-hour ozone
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In that notice, EPA also determined the one-hour ozone
standard no longer applied to the Rhode Island area. Subsequently,
due to continued litigation regarding the 8-hour ozone standard, EPA
reinstated the applicability of the one-hour ozone standard in all
areas. See 65 FR 45182 (July 20, 2000). EPA, however, did not modify
its determination that the Rhode Island area had attained the one-
hour ozone standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Rhode Island nonattainment area continued to have air quality
meeting the one-hour ozone standard in 1999 (based on data from 1997-
1999) and in 2000 (based on data from 1998-2000). Based on data
collected in 1999-2001, however, the Rhode Island area now has air
quality violating the one-hour ozone standard. The violating monitors,
based on 1999-2001 ozone data, are in West Greenwich, East Providence,
and Narragansett, Rhode Island. Ozone data readings from the monitors
for the area from the summer of 2002 now show only the West Greenwich
and East Providence monitors registering a violation of the one-hour
ozone NAAQS for the three-year period 2000-2002.
III. History and Time Frame for the State's Attainment Demonstration
SIP
A. Ozone Transport Assessment Group and the NOX SIP Call
Notwithstanding significant efforts by the states, in 1995 EPA
recognized that many states in the eastern half of the United States
could not meet the November 1994 time frame for submitting an
attainment demonstration SIP because emissions of NOX and
VOCs in upwind states (and the ozone formed by these emissions)
affected these nonattainment areas and the full impact of this effect
had not yet been determined. This phenomenon is called ozone transport.
On March 2, 1995, Mary D. Nichols, EPA's then Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, issued a memorandum to EPA's
Regional Administrators acknowledging the efforts made by states but
noting the remaining difficulties in making attainment demonstration
SIP submittals.\3\ Recognizing the problems created by ozone transport,
the March 2, 1995 memorandum called for a collaborative process among
the states in the eastern half of the country to evaluate and address
transport of ozone and its precursors. This memorandum led to the
formation of the Ozone Transport Assessment Group (OTAG)\4\ and
provided for the states to submit the attainment demonstration SIPs
based on the expected time frames for OTAG to complete its evaluation
of ozone transport.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Memorandum, ``Ozone Attainment Demonstrations,'' issued
March 2, 1995. A copy of the memorandum may be found on EPA's Web
site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.
\4\ Letter from Mary A. Gade, Director, State of Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency to Environmental Council of States
(ECOS) Members, dated April 13, 1995.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In June 1997, OTAG concluded and provided EPA with recommendations
regarding ozone transport. The OTAG generally concluded that transport
of ozone and the precursor NOX is significant and should be
reduced regionally to enable states in the eastern half of the country
to attain the ozone NAAQS.
In recognition of the length of the OTAG process, in a December 29,
1997 memorandum, Richard Wilson, EPA's then Acting Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, provided until April 1998 for
states to submit the following elements of their attainment
demonstration SIPs for serious and severe nonattainment areas: (1)
Evidence that the applicable control measures in subpart 2 of part D of
title I of the CAA were adopted and implemented or were on an
expeditious course to being adopted and implemented; (2) a list of
measures needed to meet the remaining rate-of-progress (ROP) emissions
reduction requirement and to reach attainment; (3) for severe areas
only, a commitment to adopt and submit target calculations for post-
1999 ROP and the control measures necessary for attainment and ROP
plans through the attainment year by the end of 2000; (4) a commitment
to implement the SIP control programs in a timely manner and to meet
ROP emissions reductions and attainment; and (5) evidence of a public
hearing on the state submittal.\5\ This submission is sometimes
referred to as the Phase 2 submission. Motor vehicle emissions budgets
can be established based on a commitment to adopt the measures needed
for attainment and identification of the measures needed. Thus, state
submissions due in April 1998 under the Wilson policy should have
included motor vehicle emissions budgets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Memorandum, ``Guidance for Implementing the 1-Hour Ozone and
Pre-Existing PM 10 NAAQS,'' issued December 29, 1997. A copy of this
memorandum may be found on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html
.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Building upon the OTAG recommendations and technical analyses, in
November 1997, EPA proposed action addressing the ozone transport
problem. In its proposal, EPA found that current SIPs in 22 states and
the District of Columbia (23 jurisdictions) were insufficient to
provide for attainment and maintenance of the one-hour ozone standard
because they did not regulate NOX emissions that
significantly contribute to ozone transport. 62 FR 60318 (November 7,
1997). The EPA finalized that rule in September 1998, calling on the 23
jurisdictions to revise their SIPs to require NOX emissions
reductions within the state to a level consistent with a NOX
emissions budget identified in the final rule. 63 FR 57356 (October 27,
1998). This final rule is commonly referred to as the NOX
SIP Call.
[[Page 7478]]
B. Rhode Island Ozone Attainment Demonstration Submittal
Unlike other states with serious ozone nonattainment areas, Rhode
Island did not in 1998 submit a final ozone attainment demonstration as
a SIP revision pursuant to EPA's December 29, 1997 memorandum. Based on
data collected from 1996-1998, EPA determined on June 9, 1999 (64 FR
30911) that the Rhode Island serious ozone nonattainment area had
attained the 1-hour ozone standard. Consistent with EPA policy, since
the Rhode Island area had attained the standard by November 15, 1999,
its statutory attainment date, Rhode Island did not need to submit an
attainment demonstration to EPA for EPA to take action on.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Policy guidance contained in a May 10, 1995 memorandum from
John Seitz, Director of EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, entitled ``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment
Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment
Areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard''
recommends that ROP and attainment demonstration requirements, along
with certain other related requirements, of Part D of Title 1 of the
Clean Air Act are no longer applicable to an area once it has air
quality data indicating that the one hour ozone standard has been
attained.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Rhode Island nonattainment area continued to have air quality
meeting the one-hour ozone standard through the summer of 2000, and it
was not until after the summer of 2001 that the Rhode Island area had
air quality violating the one-hour ozone standard. At that point in
time, this nonattainment area was once again required to have an
approved attainment demonstration and ROP plan with respect to section
182(c)(2) of the CAA. Today, in this proposed rule, EPA is proposing
action on the proposed attainment demonstration SIP submitted by the
Rhode Island DEM on January 27, 2003. EPA has previously approved the
state's 15% plan (63 FR 67594, 12/8/98) and 9% ROP plan (66 FR 30811,
6/8/01).
The Rhode Island Attainment Demonstration contains the following
elements: (1) The required photochemical grid attainment demonstration
modeling, supplemented with a weight-of-evidence (WOE) analysis showing
how attainment will be achieved; (2) an analysis showing that Rhode
Island is implementing all reasonably available control measures (RACM)
and that no other RACM could be adopted in Rhode Island that would
advance the attainment year; (3) motor vehicle emissions budgets for
the attainment year, which are used for conformity determinations, and
(4) contingency measures as required pursuant to section 172(c)(9) of
the CAA. Rhode Island Department of Environmental Protection will hold
a public hearing on this Attainment Demonstration SIP on February 27,
2003.
The statutory attainment date for the Rhode Island Area was
November 15, 1999. The area attained the standard as of its attainment
date, but then subsequently experienced a violation. The CAA does not
expressly address the appropriate attainment date for an area that
attains the standard by its attainment date but then subsequently
violates the standard nor does it address the planning requirements
that apply to such an area. (CAA sections 179 (c) and (d) and 181(b)(2)
establish requirements only for those areas that EPA determines do not
attain the standard by their attainment date.) With respect to the
attainment date, both subparts 1 and 2 specify outside dates for
attainment and provide that attainment must be ``as expeditiously as
practicable.'' CAA sections 172(a)(2) and 181(a)(1). With respect to
control obligations, EPA generally attempts first to work with the
State to submit a revised SIP and, where necessary, would issue a SIP
Call pursuant to section 110(k)(5). See e.g., 65 FR 64352 (Oct. 27,
2000). Here, Rhode Island is already well on its way to submitting a
final attainment demonstration and has indicated that the demonstration
provides for attainment as expeditiously as practicable, i.e. by
November 15, 2007. We review Rhode Island's submission in the following
sections.
IV. What Are the Components of a Modeled Attainment Demonstration?
The EPA provides that states may rely on a modeled attainment
demonstration supplemented with additional evidence to account for
inherent uncertainty in the modeling.\7\ In order to have a complete
modeling demonstration submission, states should have submitted the
required modeling analysis and identified any additional evidence that
EPA should consider in evaluating whether the area will attain the
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The EPA issued guidance on the air quality modeling that is
used to demonstrate attainment with the one-hour ozone NAAQS. See
U.S. EPA, (1991), Guideline for Regulatory Application of the Urban
Airshed Model, EPA-450/4-91-013, (July 1991). A copy may be found on
EPA's web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/ (file name:
``UAMREG''). See also U.S. EPA, (1996), Guidance on Use of Modeled
Results to Demonstrate Attainment of the Ozone NAAQS, EPA-454/B-95-
007, (June 1996). A copy may be found on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/
(file name: ``O3TEST'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Modeling Requirements
For purposes of demonstrating attainment, section 182(c) of the CAA
requires serious areas to use photochemical grid modeling or an
analytical method EPA determines to be as effective.\8\ The
photochemical grid model is set up using meteorological conditions
conducive to the formation of ozone. Emissions for a base year are used
to evaluate the model's ability to reproduce actual monitored air
quality values and to predict air quality changes in the attainment
year due to the emission changes which include growth up to and
controls implemented by the attainment year. A modeling domain is
chosen that encompasses the nonattainment area. Attainment is
demonstrated when all predicted concentrations inside the modeling
domain are at or below the NAAQS or at an acceptable upper limit above
the NAAQS consistent with conditions specified by EPA's guidance. When
the predicted concentrations are above the NAAQS, an optional weight-
of-evidence determination which incorporates, but is not limited to,
other analyses, such as air quality and emissions trends, may be used
to address uncertainty inherent in the application of photochemical
grid models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA guidance identifies the features of a modeling analysis
that are essential to obtain credible results. First, the state must
develop and implement a modeling protocol. The modeling protocol
describes the methods and procedures to be used in conducting the
modeling analysis and provides for policy oversight and technical
review by individuals responsible for developing or assessing the
attainment demonstration (state and local agencies, EPA Regional
offices, the regulated community, and public interest groups). Second,
for purposes of developing the information to put into the model, the
state must select air pollution days, i.e., days in the past with poor
air quality, that are representative of the ozone pollution problem for
the nonattainment area. Third, the state needs to identify the
appropriate dimensions of the area to be modeled, i.e., the domain
size. The domain should be larger than the designated nonattainment
area to reduce uncertainty in the boundary conditions and should
include large upwind sources just outside the nonattainment area. In
general, the domain is considered the local area where control measures
are most beneficial to bring the area into attainment. Fourth, the
state needs to determine the grid
[[Page 7479]]
resolution. The horizontal and vertical resolutions in the model affect
the dispersion and transport of emission plumes. Artificially large
grid cells (too few vertical layers and horizontal grids) may dilute
concentrations and may not properly consider impacts of complex
terrain, complex meteorology, and land/water interfaces. Fifth, the
state needs to generate meteorological data that describe atmospheric
conditions and emissions inputs. Finally, the state needs to verify
that the model is properly simulating the chemistry and atmospheric
conditions through diagnostic analyses and model performance tests.
Once these steps are satisfactorily completed, the model is ready to be
used to generate air quality estimates to support an attainment
demonstration.
The modeled attainment test compares model-predicted one-hour daily
maximum concentrations in all grid cells for the attainment year to the
level of the NAAQS. A predicted concentration above 0.124 ppm ozone
indicates that the area is expected to exceed the standard in the
attainment year and a prediction at or below 0.124 ppm indicates that
the area is expected to attain the standard. This type of test is often
referred to as an exceedance test. The EPA's guidance recommends that
states use either of two modeled attainment or exceedance tests for the
one-hour ozone NAAQS: a deterministic test or a statistical test.
The deterministic test requires the state to compare predicted one-
hour daily maximum ozone concentrations for each modeled day \9\ to the
attainment level of 0.124 ppm. If none of the predictions exceed 0.124
ppm, the test is passed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The initial, ``ramp-up'' days for each episode are excluded
from this determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The statistical test takes into account the fact that the form of
the one-hour ozone standard allows exceedances. If, over a three-year
period, the area has an average of one or fewer exceedances per year,
the area is not violating the standard. Thus, if the state models a
very extreme day, the statistical test provides that a prediction above
0.124 ppm up to a certain upper limit may be consistent with attainment
of the standard. (The form of the one-hour ozone standard allows for up
to three readings above the standard over a three-year period before an
area is considered to be in violation.)
The acceptable upper limit above 0.124 ppm is determined by
examining the size of exceedances at monitoring sites which meet the
one-hour NAAQS. For example, a monitoring site for which the four
highest one-hour average concentrations over a three-year period are
0.136 ppm, 0.130 ppm, 0.128 ppm and 0.122 ppm is attaining the
standard. To identify an acceptable upper limit, the statistical
likelihood of observing ozone air quality exceedances of the standard
of various concentrations is equated to the severity of the modeled
day. The upper limit generally represents the maximum ozone
concentration observed at a location on a single day and it would be
the only reading above the standard that would be expected to occur no
more than an average of once a year over a three-year period.
Therefore, if the maximum ozone concentration predicted by the model is
below the acceptable upper limit, in this case 0.136 ppm, then EPA
might conclude that the modeled attainment test is passed. Generally,
exceedances well above 0.124 ppm are very unusual at monitoring sites
meeting the NAAQS. Thus, these upper limits are rarely substantially
higher than the attainment level of 0.124 ppm.
B. Additional Analyses Where Modeling Fails To Show Attainment
As with other predictive tools, there are inherent uncertainties
associated with modeling and its results. For example, there are
uncertainties in some of the modeling inputs, such as the
meteorological and emissions data bases for individual days and in the
methodology used to assess the severity of an exceedance at individual
sites. The EPA's guidance recognizes these limitations, and provides a
means for considering other evidence to help assess whether attainment
of the NAAQS is likely. The process by which this is done is called a
weight-of-evidence determination.
Under a WOE determination, the state can rely on and EPA will
consider factors such as: other modeled attainment tests, e.g., a
rollback analysis; other modeled outputs, e.g., changes in the
predicted frequency and pervasiveness of exceedances and predicted
changes in the design value; actual observed air quality trends;
estimated emissions trends; analyses of air quality monitored data; the
responsiveness of the model predictions to further controls; and,
whether there are additional control measures that are or will be
approved into the SIP but were not included in the modeling analysis.
This list is not an exclusive list of factors that may be considered
and these factors could vary from case to case. For example, the EPA's
guidance contains no limit on how close a modeled attainment test must
be to passing to conclude that other evidence besides an attainment
test is sufficiently compelling to suggest attainment. However, the
further a modeled attainment test is from being passed, the more
compelling the WOE needs to be.
The EPA's modeling guidance also 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, EPA
believes a viable attainment demonstration that relies on WOE needs to
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 mid-course review is discussed below.
V. What Is the Framework for Proposing Action on the Attainment
Demonstration SIPs?
In addition to the modeling analysis and WOE support demonstrating
attainment, the EPA has identified the following key elements which
generally must be present in order for EPA to approve the one-hour
attainment demonstration SIPs. These elements are: measures required by
the CAA and measures relied on in the modeled attainment demonstration
SIP; NOX reductions affecting boundary conditions; motor
vehicle emissions budgets; any additional measures needed for
attainment\10\; and a Mid-Course Review (MCR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ As discussed in detail below, the Rhode Island attainment
demonstration shows attainment without the need for additional
measures beyond what has been adopted into the SIP or will be
required by federal regulations. Therefore additional measures are
not required for Rhode Island.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. CAA Measures and Measures Relied on in the Modeled Attainment
Demonstration SIP
The states should have adopted the control measures already
required under the CAA for the area classification. In addition, a
state may have included control measures in its attainment strategy
that are in addition to measures required in the CAA. For purposes of
fully approving the state's SIP, the state needs to adopt and submit
all VOC and NOX controls within the local modeling domain
that were relied on for purposes of the modeled attainment
demonstration.
The information in Table 1 is a summary of the CAA requirements
that should be met for a serious area for the one-hour ozone NAAQS.
These requirements are specified in section 182 of the CAA. EPA must
have taken final action approving all measures
[[Page 7480]]
relied on for attainment, including the required ROP control measures
and target calculations, before EPA can issue a final full approval of
the attainment demonstration as meeting CAA section 182(c)(2). This was
done for all the measures for Rhode Island.
Table 1.--CAA Requirements for Serious Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
--NSR for VOC and NOX\11\, including an offset ratio of 1.2:1 and a
major VOC and NOX source cutoff of 50 tons per year
--Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) for VOC and NOX \11\.
--Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) program.
--15% volatile organic compound plans.
--Emissions inventory.
--Emission statements.
--Periodic inventories.
--Attainment demonstration.
--9 percent ROP plan through 1999.
--Clean fuels program or substitute.
--Enhanced monitoring Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations.
--Stage II vapor recovery.
--Contingency measures.
--Reasonably Available Control Measures Analysis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Unless the area has in effect a NOX waiver under section 182(f).
The Rhode Island area is not such an area.
1. Control Measures Adopted by Rhode Island
Adopted and submitted rules for all previously required CAA
mandated measures for the specific area classification that are being
relied on in the attainment demonstration are required. This also
includes measures that may not be required for the area classification
but that the state relied on in the SIP submission for attainment. As
explained in Table 2, Rhode Island has submitted and EPA has approved
SIPs for all of the measures the state is relying on for attainment.
Table 2.--Control Measures in the One-Hour Ozone Attainment Plan for the
Rhode Island Serious Ozone Nonattainment Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of control measure Type of measure Approval status
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-board Refueling Vapor Federal rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
Recovery. part 86.
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Federal rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
program (Tier 0). part 86 (pre-1990).
Heavy Duty Diesel Engines (On- Federal rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
road). part 86.
Federal Non-road Heavy Duty Federal rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
diesel engines. part 89.
Federal Non-road Gasoline Federal rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
Engines. part 90.
Federal Marine Engines........ Federal rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
part 91.
Rail Road Locomotive Controls. Federal rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
part 92.
Automotive Refinishing........ State initiative. SIP approved (61 FR
3827; 2/2/96).
Enhanced Inspection & CAA SIP SIP approved (66 FR
Maintenance. Requirement. 9663; 2/9/01).
NOX RACT...................... CAA SIP SIP approved (62 FR
Requirement. 46202; 9/2/97).
VOC RACT pursuant to sections CAA SIP SIP approved (59 FR
182(a)(2)(A) and 182(b)(2)(B) Requirement. 52429; 10/18/94).
of CAA.
VOC RACT pursuant to section CAA SIP Marine vessel loading
182(b)(2)(A) and (C) of CAA. Requirement. SIP approved (61 FR
14975; 4/4/96).
limited approval for
non-CTG RACT rule
(61 FR 14975; 4/4/96
64 FR 67500; 12/2/
99). EPA approval
pending for certain
non-CTG RACT
determinations. The
state does not rely
on reductions from
the facilities with
approval pending for
attainment.
Stage II Vapor Recovery....... CAA SIP SIP Approved (58 FR
Requirement. 65933; 12/17/93).
Reformulated Gasoline......... State opt-in..... SIP approved (65 FR
12476; 3/9/00).
National Low Emission Vehicle State opt-in..... Federal program
(NLEV). promulgated at 40
CFR 86 subpart R.
State opt-in SIP
approved (65 FR
12476; 3/9/00).
Clean Fuel Fleets............. CAA SIP SIP approved (65 FR
Requirement. 12476; 3/9/00).
Rhode Island used
RFG reductions to
meet the Clean Fuel
Fleet requirement.
Base Year Emissions Inventory. CAA SIP SIP approved (61 FR
Requirement. 55902; 10/30/96,
amended 63 FR 67600,
12/8/98).
15% VOC Reduction Plan and CAA SIP SIP approved (63 FR
Contingency Plan. Requirement. 67594; 12/8/98).
9% rate of progress plan...... CAA SIP SIP approved (66 FR
Requirement. 30811; 6/8/01).
Emissions Statements.......... CAA SIP SIP approved (60 FR
Requirement. 2526; 1/10/95).
Enhanced Monitoring (PAMS).... CAA SIP SIP approved (61 FR
Requirement. 55897; 10/30/96).
OTC NOX MOU Phase II.......... State initiative. SIP approved (64 FR
29567; 6/2/99).
NOX SIP Call.................. CAA requirement SIP approved (65 FR
established 81748; 12/27/00).
pursuant to SIP
call.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 7481]]
B. NOX Reductions Consistent With the Modeling Demonstration
On October 27, 1998, EPA completed rulemaking on the NOX
SIP call which required states to address transport of NOX
and ozone to other states. To address transport, the NOX SIP
call established emissions budgets for NOX that 23
jurisdictions were required to show they would meet by 2007 through
enforceable SIP measures adopted and submitted by September 30, 1999.
The NOX SIP call is intended to reduce emissions in upwind
states that significantly contribute to nonattainment problems. The EPA
did not identify specific sources that the states must regulate nor did
EPA limit the states' choices regarding where to achieve the emission
reductions. The courts have largely upheld EPA's NOX SIP
Call, Michigan v. United States Env. Prot. Agency, 213 F.3d 663 (D.C.
Cir. 2000), cert. denied, U.S., 121 S.Ct. 1225, 149 L.Ed. 135 (2001);
Appalachian Power v. EPA, 251 F.3d 1026 (D.C. Cir. 2001). Although a
few issues were vacated or remanded to EPA for further consideration,
states subject to the NOX SIP call have largely adopted the
controls necessary to meet the budgets set for them under the
NOX SIP call rule. The controls to achieve these reductions
should be in place by May 2004.
Rhode Island used the best available NOX SIP Call
information in its modeling analysis. The modeling analysis is
discussed in more detail below. Furthermore, Rhode Island adopted
control measures to meet the requirements of the NOX SIP
call. EPA approved the regulation Rhode Island adopted pursuant to the
NOX SIP call on December 27, 2000 (65 FR 81748).
C. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs)
The EPA believes that attainment demonstration SIPs must
necessarily estimate the level of motor vehicle emissions, which when
considered with emissions from all other sources (stationary, area and
other mobile source), is consistent with attainment. The estimate of
motor vehicle emissions is used to determine the conformity of
transportation plans and programs to the SIP, as described by CAA
section 176(c)(2)(A). For transportation conformity purposes, the
estimate of motor vehicle emissions is known as the motor vehicle
emissions budget. The EPA believes that appropriately identified motor
vehicle emissions budgets are a necessary part of an attainment
demonstration SIP. A SIP cannot effectively demonstrate attainment
unless it identifies the level of motor vehicle emissions that can be
produced while still demonstrating attainment. See section VII.I. below
for the discussion of the motor vehicle emissions budgets included in
the Rhode Island attainment demonstration.
D. Mid-Course Review
A mid-course review (MCR), which generally is performed midway
between approval of the attainment demonstration and the attainment
date, is a reassessment of modeling analyses and more recent monitored
data to determine if a prescribed control strategy is resulting in
emission reductions and air quality improvements needed to attain the
ambient air quality standard for ozone as expeditiously as practicable.
See section VII.G. below for additional discussion on Rhode Island's
mid-course review.
E. Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) Analysis
Section 172(c)(1) of the CAA requires SIPs to contain all RACM and
provide for attainment as expeditiously as practicable. EPA has
previously provided guidance interpreting the requirements of
172(c)(1). See 57 FR 13498, 13560. In that guidance, EPA indicated its
interpretation that potentially available measures that would not
advance the attainment date for an area would not be considered RACM.
EPA also indicated in that guidance that states should consider all
potentially available measures to determine whether they were
reasonably available for implementation in the area, and whether they
would advance the attainment date. Further, states should indicate in
their SIP submittals whether measures considered were reasonably
available or not, and if measures are reasonably available they must be
adopted as RACM. Finally, EPA indicated that states could reject
measures as not being RACM because they would not advance the
attainment date, would cause substantial widespread and long-term
adverse impacts, would be economically or technologically infeasible,
or would otherwise be inappropriate for local reasons, including costs.
The EPA also issued a memorandum re-confirming the principles in the
earlier guidance, entitled, ``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. November 30, 1999. Web
site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.
When EPA presented its statutory argument in support of its RACM
policy to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in defense of
its approval of the Washington D.C. ozone SIP, the D.C. Circuit found
reasonable EPA's interpretation that measures must advance attainment
to be RACM. Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162 (D.C. Cir. 2002).
Specifically, the Court found that:
EPA reasonably concluded that because the Act `use[s] the same
terminology in conjunction with the RACM requirement' as it does in
requiring timely attainment, compare 42 U.S.C. 7502(c)(1) (requiring
implementation of RACM `as expeditiously as practicable but no later
than' the applicable attainment deadline), with id. Sec. 7511(a)(1)
(requiring attainment under same constraints), the RACM requirement
is to be understood as a means of meeting the deadline for
attainment.
Id. Morever, the D.C. Circuit rejected, as a ``misreading of both text
and context,'' Sierra Club's arguments that EPA's interpretation of
RACM conflicts with the Act's text and purpose and lacks any rational
basis. The D.C. Circuit also found reasonable EPA's interpretation that
it could consider costs in a RACM analysis and that measures may be
rejected if they would require an intensive and costly effort for
regulation of many small sources. Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d at
162,163. See section VII.H. below for additional discussion on Rhode
Island's RACM analysis.
VI. What Are the Relevant Policy and Guidance Documents?
This proposal has cited several policy and guidance memoranda. The
documents and their location on EPA's web site are listed below; these
documents will also be placed in the docket for this proposal action.
Relevant Documents
1. ``Guidance for Improving Weight of Evidence Through
Identification of Additional Emission Reductions, Not Modeled.'' U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis Division, Air Quality
Modeling Group, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. November 1999. Web
site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram (file name: ``ADDWOE1H'').
2. ``Serious and Severe Ozone Nonattainment Areas: Information on
Emissions, Control Measures Adopted or Planned and Other Available
Control Measures.'' November 24, 1999. OAQPS. U.S. EPA, RTP, NC.
3. Memorandum, ``Guidance on Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in
One-Hour
[[Page 7482]]
Attainment Demonstrations,'' from Merrylin Zaw-Mon, Office of Mobile
Sources, to the Air Division Directors, Regions I-VI. November 3, 1999.
Web site: http://www.epa.gov/oms/transp/trafconf.html.
4. Memorandum from Lydia Wegman and Merrylin Zaw-Mon to the Air
Division Directors, Regions I-VI, ``1-Hour Ozone Attainment
Demonstrations and Tier 2/Sulfur Rulemaking.'' November 8, 1999. Web
site: http://www.epa.gov/oms/transp/trafconf.html.
5. Memorandum from John Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, ``Mid-Course Review Guidance for the 1-Hour
Ozone Nonattainment Areas that Rely on Weight-of-Evidence for
Attainment Demonstration.'' Web site: http://www.epa.gov/scram001/tt25.htm
(file name: ``MCRGUIDE'').
6. Memorandum, ``Guidance to Clarify EPA's Policy on What
Constitutes ``As Expeditiously as Practicable'' for Purposes of
Attaining the One-Hour Ozone Standard for Serious and Severe Ozone
Nonattainment Areas.'' John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards. November 1999. Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html
.
7. U.S. EPA, (1991), Guideline for Regulatory Application of the
Urban Airshed Model, EPA-450/4-91-013, (July 1991). Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/
(file name: ``UAMREG'').
8. U.S. EPA, (1996), Guidance on Use of Modeled Results to
Demonstrate Attainment of the Ozone NAAQS, EPA-454/B-95-007, (June
1996). Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/ (file name: ``O3TEST'').
9. Memorandum, ``Ozone Attainment Demonstrations,'' from Mary D.
Nichols, issued March 2, 1995. Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html
.
10. December 29, 1997 Memorandum from Richard Wilson, Acting
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation ``Guidance for
Implementing the 1-Hour Ozone and Pre-Existing PM10 NAAQS.''
Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.
VII. How Does the Rhode Island Submittal Satisfy the Framework?
This section provides a review of Rhode Island'' submittal and an
analysis of how this submittal satisfies the framework discussed in
Section V. of this notice.
A. What Did the State Submit?
The attainment demonstration SIP submitted by the Rhode Island
Department of Environmental Management for the Rhode Island area
includes a modeling analysis using the CALGRID model. The SIP was
submitted in proposed form on January 27, 2003. The SIP is subject to
public notice and comment and a hearing will be held on February 27,
2003. Information on how the photochemical grid modeling, the RACM
analysis, the mid-course review and the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
are consistent with the CAA and EPA guidance is summarized below.
As explained earlier, the Rhode Island area attained the one-hour
ozone standard as of 1999, its statutory deadline under the CAA.
Moreover, the Rhode Island nonattainment area continued to have air
quality meeting the one-hour ozone standard until the 1999 through 2001
time period. In its attainment demonstration, Rhode Island provides
evidence that the area will once again attain by 2007.
Rhode Island chose a 2007 attainment date because it has determined
that the current violations are due to upwind emissions, some of which
cannot be reduced until as late as the beginning of the 2007 ozone
season. The additional reductions that will occur in upwind areas, as
well as in Rhode Island, include the following programs: (1) EPA's
NOX SIP call, which will be implemented by May 31, 2004,
with states expected to fully comply with their budgets by 2007; (2)
EPA's Tier 2 standards, which will impose new tailpipe standards for
motor vehicles and reduce the sulfur content of fuel, and will be
phased in beginning in 2004; (3) EPA's NOX requirements for
highway heavy-duty engines (i.e., trucks and buses), which beginning in
2004 require new diesel trucks and buses to be 50 percent cleaner than
today's models; (4) new nonroad diesel NOX standards, which
started in 1996 with increasingly more stringent standards being phased
in through 2006; and (5) a number of upwind states will adopt new VOC
controls for architectural coatings and consumer products that will go
into effect in 2004.
Rhode Island also notes that New York, New Jersey and Connecticut
have CAA attainment dates of 2007, which is when these upwind states
will have fully implemented all measures necessary for them to attain
the standard. Also, as discussed in section VII.H there is nothing more
Rhode Island can do to advance their attainment date. Attainment in
Rhode Island will be achieved when transport of ozone into Rhode Island
is reduced below the one-hour standard, and the Rhode Island attainment
plan discussed below shows this will not occur until November 15, 2007.
Based on this information, EPA agrees that an attainment date of
November 15, 2007 is as expeditiously as practicable and EPA proposes
approval of this attainment date for the Rhode Island area.
B. How Was the Photochemical Grid Modeling Conducted?
The key element of the attainment demonstration is the
photochemical grid modeling required by the CAA. The Rhode Island SIP
used the CALGRID model which was approved for use by EPA since it was
found to be at least as effective as the guideline model which is UAM-
IV. The modeling domain for CALGRID extends from southwest Connecticut,
northward 340 km to northern Vermont, and eastward to east of
Nantucket, Massachusetts. For the Rhode Island nonattainment area, the
domain is consistent with EPA guidance since it contains adequate areas
both upwind and downwind of the nonattainment area. The domain also
includes the monitors with the highest measured peak ozone
concentrations in Rhode Island. Since the CALGRID modeling was done for
a much larger domain that includes not only all of Rhode Island but
also includes all of Massachusetts, most of Connecticut, southern New
Hampshire, southern Vermont, and most of southern Maine, the CALGRID
model has several ``source'' areas and several receptor areas. The only
receptor area of import to this notice and the Rhode Island SIP
submittal is the Rhode Island serious ozone nonattainment area. For the
purposes of this notice, only model results in Rhode Island will be
used, unless otherwise noted. As shown below, EPA believes the modeling
portion of the attainment demonstration is consistent with EPA
guidance.
The model was run for 10 days during four distinct episodes (August
14-17, 1987, June 21-22, 1988, July 7-8, 1988 and July 10-11, 1988).
These episodes represent a variety of ozone conducive weather
conditions, and reflect days with high measured ozone in a variety of
areas within the entire domain. This is because, as stated above, the
domain covers several nonattainment areas, and in order to model the
meteorology that causes high ozone, several different episodes were
needed. The episodes chosen for New England do include the worst ozone
episode for Rhode Island over the last 15 years. The CALGRID model
results for the first day of each episode are not used for attainment
demonstration purposes, because they are considered ``ramp-up days.''
Ramp-up days help reduce impacts of initial conditions; after ramp-up
days, model results are more reflective of actual
[[Page 7483]]
emissions being emitted into the atmosphere. Since the first day of
each episode was not considered, this leaves six days for strategy
assessment. August 16, 1987 was also not used for strategy assessment.
This leaves five strategy days: August 15, 1987; August 17, 1987; June
22, 1988; July 8, 1988 and July 11, 1988.
The CALGRID model was run using the CALMET meteorological
processor. This processor took actual meteorological data collected by
the National Weather Service and the State Air Pollution Agencies and
using extrapolation and other analysis techniques provided winds,
temperatures and other meteorological parameters at approximately 400
specific grid points for each hour of the episode up to 14 levels
(i.e., from the surface to top of the model which is about 5000 feet).
CALMET is described in detail in the Rhode Island attainment
demonstration, and was approved by EPA for use in the CALGRID modeling
system.
The CALGRID model was run with emissions data prepared by EPA
Region I and/or a contractor working with EPA Region I. The data were
taken from the EPA Aerometric Informational Retrieval System (AIRS)
data base in late 1993 and reflect the emission data supplied from the
six New England States. The emission data for the small portion of New
York state that forms the western edge of the domain was supplied by
New York. EPA Region I quality assured all the New England AIRS data,
the New York supplied data and all necessary modifications to the data.
The data was further processed through the Emissions Preprocessor
System (EPS Version 2.0). To more accurately model ozone in New
England, day specific emissions were simulated for on-road mobile
sources (cars, trucks, busses, etc.), and for large fossil-fueled fired
power plants in New England. The base case CALGRID model is consistent
with EPA guidance on model performance
Future emissions were projected to 1999 and 2007 accounting for
both emission increases due to industrial growth, population growth and
growth in the number of miles traveled by cars, as well as emission
reductions due to cleaner gasoline, cleaner cars and controls on
industrial pollution. Growth factors were derived using the EPA-
approved Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) factors and all the
emissions were processed using the EPS 2.0 system.
Model runs were also performed for the year 2007. The runs employed
2007 emission estimates inside the New England Domain, along with
boundary condition files reflecting EPA's NOX SIP Call
emission estimates in upwind areas. Year 2007 emissions estimates for
the states inside the modeling domain reflected EPA's NOX
SIP call as well as other federal and state control strategies being
implemented by the beginning of the 2007 ozone season. This was
accomplished using a two-step process. The first step was to project
emissions using growth factors to account for increases or decreases in
economic activity by industrial sector. In general, the states
projected their emissions using the same growth factors that were used
in the OTAG modeling effort. The second step involved applying control
factors to source categories that would be regulated by the year 2007.
States used a combination of information for control levels: those used
for the OTAG modeling effort, and state-specific information relating
to the effectiveness of control programs planned or in place. These
2007 emission estimates did not, however, include the Tier 2/Gasoline
Sulfur program that was subsequently adopted by EPA on February 10,
2000 (65 FR 6698). The ozone reductions in 2007 from the Tier 2/
Gasoline Sulfur program are discussed in Section VII.C.4.
C. What Are the Conclusions From the Modeling?
The EPA guidance for approval of the modeling aspect of a one-hour
ozone attainment demonstration is to use the one-hour ozone grid
modeling to apply one of two modeled attainment tests (deterministic or
statistical) with optional weight-of-evidence analyses to supplement
the modeled attainment test results when the modeled attainment test is
failed. For the July 8, 1988 ozone episode, the deterministic test is
passed for the future year 2007 for Rhode Island (i.e. all grid cells
for every hour of that day using 2007 emissions are below 0.124 ppm).
For the other modeled strategy days (i.e., August 15, 1987; August 17,
1987; June 22, 1988; and July 11, 1988), neither the 1999 nor the 2007
CALGRID modeling performed for the Rhode Island area predicts ozone
concentrations below the one-hour ozone standard (0.124 ppm) at every
grid cell for every hour of every strategy day modeled. The maximum
predicted 2007 concentration in the Rhode Island nonattainment area for
the relevant episodes is 0.140 ppm, which occurred for the July 11
episode. The 2007 modeling was performed for two episode days: July 8
and July 11. Only these two days could be run for 2007, because 2007
boundary conditions were not available for the other strategy days.
This maximum concentration is in western Rhode Island on the border
with Connecticut, and is the result of transport into Rhode Island.
Since the CALGRID model does not predict ozone concentrations below the
one-hour ozone standard (0.124 ppm) at every grid cell for every hour
of every episode day modeled, the strict deterministic test is not
passed. Although the CALGRID model, as run for this analysis, does not
pass the strict deterministic test at every grid cell, when additional
weight-of-evidence analyses are considered, attainment is demonstrated.
Rhode Island submitted an analysis using the model predicted change
in ozone to estimate a future air quality design value. In this
analysis, Rhode Island uses the photochemical ozone modeling in a
relative sense. In other word, Rhode Island uses the modeled ozone
concentrations, from the EPA-approved CALGRID model, in conjunction
with monitored ozone air quality data. Rhode Island conducted an
analysis which shows how the photochemical modeling results, when
applied to ozone design values at the West Greenwich, East Providence
and Narragansett monitors, predict attainment at these three monitors
by 2007 after taking into account anticipated emission reductions from
the NOX SIP call and the Tier 2/Low Sulfur program. The
results show that with the planned emission reductions in the two
precursor emissions (VOC and NOX), ground-level ozone
concentrations will be below the ambient standard by the 2007
attainment date. The steps Rhode Island DEM used in this analysis are
discussed in the next four subsections.
1. Base Year Ozone Design Values
In the attainment demonstration, Rhode Island DEM reviewed ozone
monitoring data to determine a base-year design value for each monitor
in Rhode Island. Ozone data collected in 1995, 1996, and 1997 were used
for calculating 1997 design values. Using 1997 design values versus
1999 design values results in a conservative analysis.
2. Ozone Reduction Between 1999 and 2007
The second step of this approach consists of comparing
photochemical modeling run results in order to determine the predicted
ozone reduction at each ozone monitor in Rhode Island between 1999 and
2007. Modeling runs were not performed for 1997 but were performed for
1999. The Rhode Island DEM's use of modeling results for 1999 is
conservative since as emissions reductions that occurred between 1997
and 1999 are not
[[Page 7484]]
accounted for and relied on. Modeling results for 1999 were then
compared with modeling results for 2007 (only two strategy days, July 8
and July 11, are used for 2007, because these are the only two days for
which 2007 boundary conditions are available) to estimate changes
between 1999 and 2007.
The average predicted change in ozone levels between 1999 and 2007
was determined for each 9-cell block of surface cells containing and
surrounding each Rhode Island monitor (i.e., the cell containing the
monitor and the 8 surrounding cells). The average predicted change in
ozone level was then divided by the 1999 average modeled concentration,
in order to calculate the percent ozone reduction between 1999 and
2007. The percent ozone reduction for each monitoring location in Rhode
Island are presented in the state's submittal.
3. Predicted Ozone Design Values for 2007
The third step was to determine a 2007 ozone design value for each
Rhode Island ozone monitoring station location. This was accomplished
by reducing the 1997 ozone design value by the percent ozone reduction
predicted for each monitoring location derived in step 2, above. If the
resulting design value dropped below the one-hour ozone standard, it is
reasonable to assume that the monitor can attain the one-hour ozone
standard by 2007. Rhode Island showed in their submittal that the
predicted 2007 design values for all monitors in Rhode Island are all
below the one-hour ozone NAAQS, except for one day at the East
Providence monitor. As discussed in detail below, additional reduction
in emissions will bring this monitor's predicted design value below the
standard by 2007 as well.
For the West Greenwich monitor (the monitor currently with the
highest design value), there was a reduction in ozone levels of 24
percent for the July 8 episode and a reduction in ozone levels of 13
percent at the West Greenwich monitor for the July 11 episode. For both
episodes, the future adjusted design value for the West Greenwich
monitor is predicted to be below the one-hour ozone standard (0.105 ppm
for July 8 and 0.124 ppm for July 11.)
It should also be noted that Rhode Island DEM performed this same
analysis for all of the ozone monitors in Massachusetts, New Hampshire
and Maine that are also in the CALGRID modeling domain (i.e., the areas
downwind of Rhode Island that may be affected by pollution transport
from Rhode Island on ozone conducive days). The results from this
analysis, which are contained in the submittal, show that all of these
monitors are predicted to have ozone values below the one-hour standard
by 2007. This is consistent with the EPA-approved attainment
demonstrations for both New Hampshire (67 FR 72574; 12/6/02) and
Massachusetts for both the Eastern (67 FR 72576; 12/6/02) and Western
Massachusetts (66 FR 665; 1/3/01) serious ozone nonattainment area.
4. Predicted Ozone Design Values for 2007 With the Tier 2/Gasoline
Sulfur Program
As previously noted, the CALGRID runs for 2007 included the
benefits of the NOX SIP call as well as other CAA measures,
but did not account for the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program. The Tier 2/
Gasoline Sulfur program consists of emission reductions due to more
protective tailpipe emissions standards for all passenger vehicles,
including sport utility vehicles (SUVs), minivans, vans and pick-up
trucks, as well as lower standards for sulfur in gasoline. These new
standards require passenger vehicles to be 77 to 95 percent cleaner
than those on the road today and to reduce the sulfur content of
gasoline by up to 90 percent. This program, which does not achieve
emission reductions until 2004 and beyond, was not included in the
CALGRID modeling analysis discussed above.
Rhode Island DEM, however, has looked at the EPA modeling performed
in 1999 \12\ to assess the effectiveness of the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur.
For three episodes in the summer of 1995, EPA performed two sets of
modeling runs: one run with 2007 CAA emission files including emission
reductions associated with Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program and a second
run that did not include Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program emission
reductions. In both cases, the CAA emission files included EPA's
NOX SIP Call emission reductions. After the modeling runs
were completed, EPA used the modeling results in a relative manner to
estimate the percent ozone reduction associated with the Tier 2/
Gasoline Sulfur program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See ``Technical Support Document for the Tier 2/Gasoline
Sulfur Ozone Modeling Analyses,'' EPA420-R-99-031, December 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rhode Island DEM included the predicted ozone design values for the
2007 CAA run and the 2007 Tier 2 run for each county in the Rhode
Island nonattainment area. As shown in their submittal, the benefit at
all ozone monitors in Rhode Island is at least an additional 0.001 ppm,
over what CALGRID predicted. The improvement at the East Providence
monitor is 1%. The Tier 2 modeling performed by EPA showed all 2007
design values for Rhode Island less than the one-hour standard. This
combined with the results of the CALGRID analysis add to the weight-of-
evidence.
Rhode Island DEM believes it is reasonable to conclude that the
design value at the East Providence monitor for 2007 will be reduced by
approximately 1 percent once the Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program is
implemented, which will result in attainment of the one-hour standard
at that monitor and throughout Rhode Island.
5. Conclusions From the Future Air Quality Design Value Analysis
Through this additional analysis, Rhode Island DEM has demonstrated
that substantial ozone reductions can be expected to occur after the
implementation of a number of control strategies that are in place both
within and upwind of the New England Domain. Those strategies include
EPA's NOX SIP Call as well as EPA's Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur
program. Therefore, EPA believes it is reasonable to conclude that the
Rhode Island nonattainment area will attain the one-hour ozone standard
by 2007. While the absolute modeling results do not demonstrate
attainment, the modeling results are useful in demonstrating a relative
reduction in ozone levels sufficient to demonstrate attainment in 2007.
6. Additional Evidence To Support Attainment in Rhode Island
In addition to the ozone design value analysis performed by the
Rhode Island DEM, EPA performed an additional design value analysis
using a slightly different method. EPA used the CALGRID modeling in a
relative sense to estimate a future design value. EPA compared base
case CALGRID runs to future case CALGRID runs to estimate the
improvement in ozone air quality levels between the base and future
cases. Four strategy days (August 15 and 17 1987; July 8, 1988 and July
11, 1988)\13\ are used in this analysis, which compared the improvement
in modeled air quality between the base and future modeling cases. The
following procedure is applied. First, base case CALGRID runs are
examined to discern the maximum one-hour ozone concentration modeled in
Rhode Island. The four strategy days are all examined.
[[Page 7485]]
Next, the same area is used to determine future modeled ozone values.
The modeled maximum results of the four strategy days are averaged and
a reduction factor calculated from the base case to the future case.
This reduction factor represents the amount of ozone reduced in this
area, as the result of the emission reductions modeled. This reduction
factor is used to adjust the average ozone design value for this part
of the model domain (i.e., Rhode Island), as monitored between 1985 and
1990. This monitored design value represents both the base case model
years of 1987 and 1988 and also the design values used in 1991 to
classify one-hour nonattainment areas. The future design value is
further reduced when the benefits of EPA's Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur
program are factored in.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The June 22, 1988 strategy day is not used because of
problems re-analyzing the base case model run for this episode.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This additional analysis also shows that air quality design values
in Rhode Island can reasonably be expected to be reduced below 0.124
ppm based on continued additional reductions within the domain and
reductions upwind, reflected in the future year boundary conditions,
and the benefits of EPA's Tier 2/Gasoline Sulfur program.
7. Summary of the Ozone Modeling
In summary, the ozone modeling submitted for the Rhode Island area
is consistent with the CAA and EPA guidance and demonstrates
attainment. Other information, which provides additional support for
concluding the Rhode Island area will attain in 2007 are the ambient
ozone data trends and a trajectory analysis of exceedance days in the
area.
D. What Are the Conclusions From the Ozone Trends?
There are three ozone air quality monitors in the Rhode Island
nonattainment area that have data from 2000-2002. They are in the Rhode
Island cities and towns of West Greenwich, East Providence, and
Narragansett. The original serious classification of the nonattainment
area was based on data from the 1987 through 1989 time period. Since
then and up to and including 2002 ozone data, all 3 sites show a
decrease in ozone due to emission reductions, both within Rhode Island
and also upwind.
At the three Rhode Island monitors the ozone trend is downward. At
the West Greenwich site, the one-hour ozone design value has dropped
from 0.162 ppm in 1988 to 0.130 ppm in 2002, a drop of 20 percent. This
site is not in attainment, based on 2000-2002 ozone data. At the East
Providence site, the one-hour design value has dropped from 0.138 ppm
in 1988 (site moved from Providence to East Providence in 1997) to
0.127 ppm in 2002, for a drop of 8 percent. This site, too, is not in
attainment, based on 2000-2002 ozone data. The Narragansett site only
has data for the last five years so no trend was calculated. The
current design value for the Narragansett site is 0.124 ppm, which is
below the standard. To show how close West Greenwich and East
Providence are to meeting the NAAQS one can look at the fifth highest
value over the same 3-year period 2000-2002. The fifth highest value
for West Greenwich is 0.127 ppm and for East Providence it is 0.125
ppm. The sixth highest value is below the one-hour standard at these
sites.
The ozone trend is also downward at the Truro, MA ozone monitor,
the only monitor in eastern Massachusetts with a design value over the
one-hour standard. At the Truro site, the one-hour design value has
dropped from 0.146 ppm in 1989 to 0.130 ppm in 2002, for a drop of 11
percent. This site is not in attainment, based on 2000-2002 ozone data.
To show how close Truro is to meeting the NAAQS one can look at the
fifth highest value over the same 3-year period 2000-2002, the fifth
highest value at the Truro site is below the level of the one-hour
ozone standard.
Based on the overall downward trend in one-hour ozone
concentrations in Rhode Island, and because precursor emissions are
projected to keep falling, both within the nonattainment area and
upwind from it, there is no reason to believe that the downward trend
in ozone concentrations will not continue over the near term. The
future emission reductions will be a result of the following: continued
benefits from tighter standards on vehicles (National Low Emission
Vehicles or CA LEV in upwind areas) due to fleet turnover; the
reductions from large point sources due to the OTC NOX
Budget Program and EPA's NOX SIP call; other federal control
measures such controls on non-road engines; and the Tier 2 vehicle and
low sulfur gasoline program.
E. What Do the Ozone Exceedance Day Trajectory Analyses Show?
Trajectory analysis is a tool for assessing atmospheric transport
and identifying likely source regions of locally measured air
contaminants. The Rhode Island DEM used the HYSPLIT-4 (Hybrid Single-
Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory) model, developed by NOAA's
Air Resources Lab (ARL), to compute backward trajectories.
To assess airflow patterns on days when any Rhode Island monitor
recorded exceedances of the one-hour ozone NAAQS during the period
1999-2002, 24-hour backward trajectories were computed by the Rhode
Island DEM. The surface-based trajectories (start height of 10 meters)
for these days, indicators of shorter range transport, follow a general
track that crosses near the New York metropolitan area before turning
northeastward toward Rhode Island. These trajectories cross no high
emission areas in Rhode Island. Upper-level trajectories (500 and 1000
meters elevation), indicators of long-range transport, generally begin
farther west over New York State, Pennsylvania or Ohio and follow a
more west-to-east track, passing north of the New York metropolitan
area. Since the trajectories for the exceedance days strongly resemble
one another, the Rhode Island DEM concluded that there is a consistent
meteorological pattern and source region for ozone and precursors when
monitors in Rhode Island exceed the one-hour ozone NAAQS. Furthermore,
the Rhode Island DEM concluded that one-hour exceedance level ozone
concentrations will occur at the West Greenwich, East Providence and
Narragansett monitors only if the air reaching these monitors had
previously crossed nearby high emission areas such as the greater New
York metropolitan area. It should be noted, that on all days when there
are exceedances at West Greenwich, East Providence and Narragansett,
there are also exceedances in Connecticut. EPA concludes that without
the influence of the emissions from the greater New York metropolitan
area, no one-hour exceedances would have occurred at these monitors.
Attainment demonstrations already approved by EPA for Connecticut and
the New York city area show attainment will be achieved in 2007, and
likewise this attainment demonstration for Rhode Island concludes that
attainment will be achieved in 2007.
To corroborate the Rhode Island DEM's results, EPA performed its
own trajectory analyses for those days when there were exceedances of
the one-hour ozone standard on either Cape Cod, in southeastern
Massachusetts, and/or in Rhode Island, over the three year period 1999
through 2001. This area encompasses the ozone monitoring sites in
Truro, MA; Fairhaven, MA; Narragansett, RI; East Providence, RI; and
West Greenwich, RI. The exceedance days at these sites during 1999-2001
are as follows: June 7, 1999, July 6, 1999, July 16, 1999, June 10,
2000, June 30, 2001, July 25, 2001, August 7, 2001, and August 9, 2001.
EPA's trajectory analyses of the days with ozone exceedances at
these sites (Truro, MA, Fairhaven, MA,
[[Page 7486]]
Narragansett, RI, East Providence, RI and West Greenwich, RI) support
the Rhode Island DEM trajectories and the CALGRID modeling which shows
that the most probable source region of the exceedances at these sites
is areas to the south and west of Rhode Island, including Connecticut
and the New York City area. Connecticut is less than 20 miles from West
Greenwich or less than 2 hours of typical meteorological transport
time. Details of this analysis are found in the TSD for this action.
Both the analyses done by the Rhode Island DEM and EPA support the
conclusion that without the influence of emissions from upwind, no
exceedances would have occurred at the Rhode Island ozone monitors.
This further supports the conclusion that the Rhode Island ozone
nonattainment area will attain in 2007.
F. Are the Causes of the Recent Violation Being Addressed?
The Rhode Island ozone nonattainment area was in attainment for
three consecutive, three-years periods from 1998-2000 (i.e., 1996-1998,
1997-1999, and 1998-2000). CALGRID sensitivity runs looked at the
effectiveness of NOX reductions versus VOC reductions by
reducing each pollutant individually within the domain by varying
percentages (i.e., 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%). These sensitivity runs
concluded that reducing nitrogen oxide emission reductions is a more
effective ozone control strategy for the New England Domain.
Furthermore, in order to assess the role of transport into the New
England domain, sensitivity modeling runs were preformed using very
clean boundary conditions. These runs use boundary conditions from the
OTAG run IN60, which assumed the reductions similar to NOX
SIP call emissions, plus an additional 60 percent reduction in
NOX from the ozone nonattainment areas classified as serious
or above. These runs show that upwind NOX reductions would
be effective at reducing ozone throughout southern New England,
including in Rhode Island where the current one-hour ozone violations
occur. From these sensitivity runs as well as its trajectory analyses,
EPA concludes that elevated ozone levels at the Rhode Island monitors
are principally due to ozone and NOX generated in
Connecticut and upwind areas. Rhode Island DEM further concluded based
on CAMx Source Apportionment Modeling described in EPA's October 27,
1998 Final Rulemaking on the NOX SIP Call (63 FR 57355),
that reducing NOX emissions in adjacent upwind areas--
Connecticut, New York City and New Jersey--will significantly reduce
ozone levels at the Rhode Island monitors. Emissions of NOX
and VOC will also be lowered in Rhode Island as well, as a result of
the emission control programs listed in Table 2. These local controls,
combined with upwind controls will result in the Rhode Island ozone
nonattainment area attaining in 2007.
As part of its submittal, Rhode Island DEM included the
NOX emission reductions anticipated to occur in Connecticut,
New York City and New Jersey between 1999 and 2007 and between 2002 and
2007. The reduction between 2002 and 2007 was intended to illustrate
the reductions that can be expected to reduce current air quality
levels being monitored in Rhode Island. The NOX reduction
expected to occur in Connecticut, New York City and New Jersey between
1999 and 2002 is expected to be 126.5 tons per summer day. Those
emission reductions have already occurred, and presumably affect the
current ozone levels measured in 2002. Between 2002 and 2007, the
NOX reduction expected to occur in Connecticut, New York
City and New Jersey is expected to be a bit higher, at 137 tons per
summer day. These reductions, which largely have not occurred yet, will
benefit future ozone levels in Rhode Island and will help the Rhode
Island ozone nonattainment area meet attainment by 2007.
As part of its submittal, Rhode Island DEM also calculated the
NOX and VOC emission reductions projected to occur between
1999 and 2007 in the Rhode Island area. VOC emissions in Rhode Island
are projected from 1999 to 2007 to go from 141.1 tons per summer day
(tpsd) to 119.0 tpsd, which is a reduction of 22.1 tpsd or 15.6
percent. NOX emissions in Rhode Island are projected from
1999 to 2007 to go from 93.1 tpsd to 73.6 tpsd, which is a reduction of
19.5 tpsd or 20.9 percent. When combined with the significant
reductions in NOX emissions expected in upwind states by
2007, the Rhode Island emissions inventory data provides additional
reason to anticipate that the area will attain the one-hour ozone
standard by 2007.
G. Is the Rhode Island Mid-Course Review Consistent With EPA Guidance?
As discussed above, the Rhode Island serious ozone nonattainment
area attained the ozone standard based on ozone data collected in 1997-
1999 and 1998-2000, but is now violating the standard. Rhode Island DEM
has submitted an attainment demonstration supplemented with a weight-
of-evidence analysis; therefore, Rhode Island DEM needs to commit to a
mid-course review. The Rhode Island DEM has committed to perform a mid-
course review for this area by December 31, 2004.
H. Is the Rhode Island RACM Analysis Consistent With the CAA and EPA
Guidance?
The EPA has reviewed the SIP and the RACM analysis submittal for
the Rhode Island area to determine if it includes all required RACM
measures and sufficient documentation concerning available RACM
measures. The RACM analysis will be subject to a public hearing on
February 27, 2003.
The trajectory analyses, which are discussed in greater detail in
section VII.E, indicate that elevated ozone levels at the three Rhode
Island monitors are largely the result of local transport from upwind
high emission areas in Connecticut, New York City and New Jersey.\14\
In addition to what the Rhode Island DEM submitted, EPA performed a
trajectory analysis of each of the days during 1999 through 2001 when
exceedances of the one-hour ozone NAAQS were monitored in the Rhode
Island ozone nonattainment area. That analysis shows similar results,
i.e., that the source region for these exceedances is areas to the
south and west of Rhode Island.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ These areas have approved attainment demonstrations and
also have EPA-enforceable emission reduction strategies to bring
about attainment of the one-hour standard by 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CAM-x source apportionment modeling showed that emissions in
Connecticut and Rhode Island combined contribute only 5% to the
anthropogenic one-hour ozone levels in Rhode Island. This CAM-x
modeling also shows that Rhode Island cannot attain the one-hour NAAQS
without substantial NOX emission reductions in upwind
states, and that, since upwind controls will not be fully implemented
prior to 2007, the adoption of additional in-state emission reduction
measures would not advance the State's attainment date.
The trajectory analyses and both the CALGRID and CAM-x modeling
discussed above indicate that Rhode Island must rely on significant
emission reductions from upwind states in order to attain the one-hour
ozone standard, and that additional emission reduction measures adopted
in Rhode Island alone would have a sufficiently small impact on ozone
levels that they could not advance the attainment date in the Rhode
Island area. Nonetheless, the Rhode Island DEM RACM analysis does
review control measures that could
[[Page 7487]]
reduce emissions of VOC and NOX in Rhode Island and analyzed
whether adoption of such measures might lead to attainment earlier than
2007.
Rhode Island DEM examined emissions from all significant emission
source categories to assess whether there are any additional RACM that
could be adopted. The methodology used consists of a two-step
procedure. First, Rhode Island DEM reviewed its 2007 emissions
inventory to identify significant source categories. After that, Rhode
Island DEM screened potential control measures for the significant
emitting source categories to determine if they could provide
sufficient benefits to accelerate attainment in the Rhode Island area,
and, if so, analyzed if the measures were feasible.
The methodology used by the Rhode Island DEM is based on the RACM
analysis performed by EPA for the Greater Connecticut serious ozone
nonattainment area. See 66 FR 634; January 3, 2001. The RACM analysis
for Greater Connecticut looked at projected 2007 emissions from various
source categories after taking into account CAA-mandatory controls,
additionally adopted regional and national controls, and State-adopted
SIP controls. The RACM analysis then assumed that stationary sources
that have already been controlled nationally, regionally or locally in
the SIP would not be effective candidates for additional controls that
could be considered RACM, since these categories have only recently
been required to reduce emissions or are about to shortly.
For VOC emissions, Rhode Island DEM reviewed its 2007 emissions
inventory for stationary point, area, and non-road sources and culled
from it the sixteen largest source categories. Emissions from each were
at least one ton per summer day (tpsd), and in their aggregate
emissions from these sixteen source categories represent approximately
90 percent of the total VOC inventory from these three sectors. Rhode
Island DEM then analyzed whether control requirements exist for each
source category, and found that in most instances state or federal
control are currently in place.
For example, the largest emitting source category from these three
sectors is the area source surface cleaning category. Rhode Island DEM
estimates 2007 emissions for this activity will be 12.44 tpsd. However,
Rhode Island DEM notes that most of the sources in the small surface
cleaning sector, including all vapor degreasers and cold cleaners, are
regulated by Rhode Island Air Pollution Control (APC) Regulation No.
36, ``Control of Emissions from Organic Solvent Cleaning,'' which
became effective in 1996. This regulation incorporates control
requirements from EPA's Control Technique Guideline (CTG) for this
source category, as well as the requirements of EPA's 1994 National
Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Halogenated
Solvent Cleaners. These requirements represent Reasonably Available
Control Technology (RACT). Rhode Island DEM believes that any
additional control measures for this activity would result in
relatively small decreases in emissions and would not accelerate the
State's attainment of the one-hour ozone NAAQS in emissions.
Control measures for the remaining VOC source categories were
reviewed in a similar manner, and then Rhode Island DEM performed a
similar analysis for the largest NOX emitting source
categories. Rhode Island's conclusion from this analysis is that, based
on the types of measures reviewed and the costs of these programs, in
association with the potential emission reduction benefits in the Rhode
Island area, there are no stationary point, area, or non-road RACM that
could be adopted in the state that would advance attainment prior to
2007.
Rhode Island also analyzed whether there were any additional mobile
source measures that could be implemented that represent RACM. The
Rhode Island DEM is already implementing a wide range of statewide
mobile source emissions reduction programs including Stage 2 vapor
recovery, enhanced inspection and maintenance, the national low
emissions vehicle program, and reformulated gasoline. In addition to
the above programs, Rhode Island implements transportation projects
under the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) program,
designed to reduce ozone precursor emissions in the transportation
sector. The CMAQ program in Rhode Island's 2003-2004 Transportation
Improvement Program (details are provided in the submittal and the TSD
for this proposal) includes measures aimed at increasing bicycle, ferry
and public transit travel, eliminating traffic congestion through
improving transportation management, signalization and roadways,
reducing emissions from diesel on-road vehicles with a heavy duty
vehicle inspection program, and the installation of emissions controls
on public transit diesel buses. However, implementation of these
projects, and other similar programs that will be funded with CMAQ
monies in the coming years, will only achieve a minimal emission
reduction of 0.07 tons per summer day of VOC and 0.06 tons per summer
day of NOX. This small reduction in precursors will not
result in an acceleration of the attainment date. Since a large number
of mobile source emissions control programs are already being
implemented and since additional measures of the type that have been
funded by CMAQ monies would not accelerate the attainment date, Rhode
Island has not identified any additional mobile source RACM measures.
The Rhode Island DEM's conclusion on mobile sources is that Rhode
Island is currently implementing all reasonably available control
measures for mobile sources, since the benefits from these projects is
minimal compared to Rhode Island's own emissions and even smaller when
compared to the transport of ozone and ozone precursors.
EPA concludes that based on the available information, there are no
additional technologically and economically feasible emission control
measures in Rhode Island that will advance the attainment date for the
Rhode Island ozone nonattainment area. Thus no potential measure can be
considered RACM for purposes of section 172(c)(1) for the Rhode Island
area for its one-hour ozone attainment demonstration. The Rhode Island
DEM analysis is consistent with EPA requirements, which as noted above
were upheld by the DC Circuit Court. The EPA therefore proposes that
the Rhode Island SIP is consistent with the requirements for RACM.
Although EPA does not believe that section 172(c)(1) requires
implementation of additional measures for this area, this conclusion is
not necessarily valid for other areas.
I. What About Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets?
On June 8, 2001 (66 FR 30811) EPA approved the Rhode Island post-
1996 plan which included a 1999 VOC motor vehicle emissions budgets of
41.57 tons per summer day VOC, as well as a NOX budget of
46.40 tons per summer day of NOX. These 1999 motor vehicle
emissions budgets were formally determined adequate by EPA New England
for use in transportation conformity on September 29, 1998. Subsequent
to the rate-of-progress SIPs, on January 27, 2003, Rhode Island DEM
submitted its ozone attainment demonstration to EPA, for parallel
processing, which includes new motor vehicle emissions budgets for both
VOC and NOX for 2007, and these budgets are shown in Table
3. EPA is proposing these budgets for approval.
[[Page 7488]]
Table 3.--2007 Emissions Budgets for On-road Mobile Sources in Tons per
Summer Day (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007 VOC 2007 NOX
Area budget budget
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rhode Island.................................. 30.37 33.62
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 2, 1999, the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit issued a decision on certain provisions of
EPA's 1997 conformity rule in response to a case brought by the
Environmental Defense Fund. As a result of the decision, a conformity
determination cannot be made using the submitted motor vehicle
emissions budgets until EPA makes a positive determination that the
submitted budget is adequate. In response to the court's decision, EPA
issued guidance on our new adequacy process on May 14, 1999 \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Memo from Gay MacGregor, Director, Regional and State
Programs Division, USEPA Office of Mobile Sources, to Regional Air
Division Directors, titled ``Conformity Guidance on Implementation
of March 2, 1999 Conformity Court decision,'' dated May 14, 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA believes that these motor vehicle emissions budgets are
adequate for use in future transportation conformity analyses as these
budgets meet all of the requirements set forth by EPA's adequacy
criteria, were developed using EPA's MOBILE6 model, and are consistent
with the attainment demonstration. However, prior to making an adequacy
finding, EPA must administer a 30 day comment period for these budgets.
Therefore, in today's action EPA is opening up the adequacy comment
period on these budgets to run concurrently with the comment period for
all of today's action. In addition, this Federal Register Notice will
appear on EPA's Transportation and Air Quality planning website at
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/transp/conform/adequacy.htm. All comments on
these budgets should be submitted to EPA using the procedure outlined
earlier in this notice.
J. Contingency Measures
Rhode Island addressed the contingency measure requirement of
section 172(c)(9) of the Clean Air Act by demonstrating that the
emission reductions from the federal on-road motor vehicle Tier 2
tailpipe standards and sulfur in gasoline rules, and the federal non-
road engine control program that accrue between 2007 and mid-2009,
which is the date by which emission reductions from contingency
measures would need to occur, will achieve more emission reductions
than Rhode Island needs to meet its three percent attainment
contingency obligation. We propose approval of Rhode Island's
contingency measure submittal.
VIII. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to fully approve as meeting CAA section 182(c)(2)
the ground-level one-hour ozone attainment demonstration State
Implementation Plan for the Rhode Island nonattainment area submitted
by Rhode Island on January 27, 2003. EPA is proposing an attainment
date of November 15, 2007 for the area, and is proposing that the RACM
analysis for the Rhode Island area is consistent with the requirements
of section 172(c)(1). EPA proposes approval of Rhode Island's
contingency measures submittal, which is consistent with the
requirements of section 172(c)(9) of the CAA. This notice also proposes
to approve 2007 motor vehicle emissions budgets for Rhode Island into
the SIP.
This SIP is being proposed under a procedure called parallel
processing, whereby EPA proposes rulemaking action concurrent with the
state's procedures for amending its regulations. If the proposed plan
is substantially changed, EPA will evaluate those changes and may
publish another notice of proposed rulemaking. If no substantial
changes are made, EPA will publish a Final Rulemaking Notice on the
revisions. Before EPA can finally approve this plan Rhode Island must
finally adopt the SIP revision and submit it formally to EPA for
incorporation into the SIP.
EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
proposal. These issues will be considered before EPA takes final
action. Interested parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking
procedure by submitting written comments to the EPA Regional office
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this action.
A more detailed description of the state submittal and EPA's
evaluation are included in a Technical Support Document (TSD) prepared
in support of this rulemaking action. A copy of the TSD is available
upon request from the EPA Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES
section of this document.
IX. Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This 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 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 approves 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 (Public Law 104-4).
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does 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 rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (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. This rule does
[[Page 7489]]
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, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 6, 2003.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 03-3698 Filed 2-13-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P