36578 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 129 /Tuesday, July 7, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

1The Act addresses interstate coordination for

inter-state nonattainment areas (42 U.S.C. 7504)

mainly for nonattainment planning. Because the

interstate air quality planning organization

involved, the MWAQC, meets the requirements of

section 174 of the Act, EPA believes all interstate

coordination requirements have been fulfilled. In

the absence of an agreement to prepare a

nonattainment area-wide plan, each state could

have developed and submitted a SIP revision to

obtain the 15% reasonable further progress

requirement independently of the others. The

MWAQC process also ensures that the consultation

between air quality and transportation planning

agencies is performed as required under the Act (42

U.S.C. 7506(c)) and under EPA’s transportation

conformity final rule (40 CFR 93.100).

information or law enforcement

investigatory information by such entity

or individual.

Dated: May 31, 1998.

Madeleine K. Albright,

Secretary of State.

[FR Doc. 98–17870 Filed 7–6–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710–08–V

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[SIPTRAX NO. DC–25–2010a; FRL–6120–3]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans; District

of Columbia; 15 Percent Plan for the

Metropolitan Washington, D.C. Ozone

Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is granting conditional

approval of a State Implementation Plan

(SIP) revision submitted by the District

of Columbia (the District) to meet the 15

percent reasonable further progress

implementation plan (15% plan)

requirements of the Clean Air Act (the

Act) for the District’s portion of the

Metropolitan Washington, D.C. ozone

nonattainment area. EPA is granting

conditional approval because the

District’s enhanced inspection

maintenance (I/M) program, which is

one of the many control measures

adopted by the District to achieve the

15% reduction in volatile organic

compounds (VOC), has only been

conditionally approved, the 15% plan

must also be conditionally approved.

The intended effect of this action is to

conditionally approve the 15% plan

submitted by the District of Columbia in

accordance with the Clean Air Act.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective

on September 8, 1998 without further

notice, unless EPA receives adverse

comment by August 6, 1998. If adverse

comment is received, EPA will publish

a timely document withdrawing the

rule.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

David L. Arnold, Chief, Ozone and

Mobile Sources Branch, Mailcode

3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency—Region III, 841 Chestnut

Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,

19107. Copies of the documents relevant

to this action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the Air Protection Division,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 1650 Arch Street,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

Persons interested in examining these

documents should schedule an

appointment with the contact person

(listed below) at least 24 hours before

the visiting day. Copies of the

documents relevant to this action are

also available at the District of Columbia

Department of Public Health, Air

Quality Division, 2100 Martin Luther

King Ave, S.E., Washington, DC 20020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christopher Cripps, Ozone and Mobile

Sources Branch (3AP21), U.S. EPA—

Region III, 1650 Arch Street,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103, or by

telephone at (215) 814–2179. Questions

may also be addressed via e-mail, at:

cripps.christopher@epamail.epa.gov

[Please note that only written comments

can be accepted for inclusion in the

docket.]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April

16, 1998 the District of Columbia

Department of Health (DoH) submitted a

revision to its State Implementation

Plan (SIP) for the Washington, D.C.

ozone nonattainment area. The revision

consists of a plan to achieve a fifteen

percent reduction from 1990 base year

levels in volatile organic compound

(VOC) emissions. During the

summertime months, VOC emissions

contribute significantly to the formation

of ground level ozone, and many

volatile organic compounds are also

toxic or hazardous air pollutants.

I. Background

The Washington, D.C. metropolitan

area is classified as a serious ozone

nonattainment area. Section 182(b)(1) of

the Act requires ozone nonattainment

areas classified as moderate or above to

develop plans to meet specific

reasonable further progress, also known

as rate-of-progress (ROP), for the

reduction of VOC emissions.

Specifically, section 182(b)(1) requires a

SIP revision to reduce by 1996 VOC

emissions by fifteen percent from 1990

baseline levels in the area while

accounting for growth in VOC emissions

from 1990 to 1996. These ‘‘15% plans’’

were due to be submitted to EPA by

November 15, 1993, with the reductions

to occur within 6 years (i.e., November

15, 1996). The Act sets limitations on

the creditability of certain control

measures towards reasonable further

progress. Specifically, states cannot take

credit for reductions achieved by

Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program

(FMVCP) measures (e.g., new car

emissions standards) promulgated prior

to 1990; or for reductions stemming

from regulations promulgated pursuant

to section 211(h) of the Act to lower the

volatility [i.e., Reid Vapor Pressure

(RVP)] of gasoline. Furthermore, section

182(b)(1) of the Act does not allow

credit towards reasonable further

progress for post-1990 corrections to

existing motor vehicle inspection and

maintenance (I/M) programs or

corrections to reasonably available

control technology (RACT) rules, since

these programs were required to be inplace prior to 1990. In addition to these

restrictions, a creditable measure must

be either in the SIP, result from a

national rule promulgated by EPA or be

contained in a permit issued under Title

V of the Act. Any measure must result

in real, permanent, quantifiable and

enforceable emission reductions to be

creditable toward the 15% goal.

The Washington, D.C. ozone

nonattainment area consists of the entire

District of Columbia, five counties in

Northern Virginia and five counties in

Maryland. Virginia, Maryland and the

District all must demonstrate reasonable

further progress for the Washington,

D.C. nonattainment area. The

Commonwealth of Virginia, State of

Maryland and the District of Columbia

in conjunction with municipal planning

organizations collaborated on a

coordinated 15% plan for the entire

Metropolitan Washington, D.C.

nonattainment area (regional 15% plan).

This was done under the auspices of the

regional air quality planning committee,

the Metropolitan Washington Air

Quality Committee (MWAQC), and with

the assistance of the local municipal

planning organization, the Metropolitan

Washington Council of Governments

(MWCOG), to ensure coordination of air

quality and transportation planning.1

Although the plan was developed by

a regional approach, each jurisdiction is

required to submit its 15% plan to EPA

as a revision to its SIP.

Because the reasonable further

progress requirements such as the 15%

plan affect transportation improvement

plans, municipal planning organizations

have historically been heavily involved

in air quality planning in the
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 129 /Tuesday, July 7, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 36579

Washington, D.C. area. As explained in

further detail below, the regional 15%

plan determined the regional target

level, regional projections of growth and

finally the total amount of creditable

reductions required under the

reasonable further progress requirement

in the entire Washington, D.C. ozone

nonattainment area. The three

jurisdictions, the State of Maryland, the

Commonwealth of Virginia and the

District agreed to apportion this total

amount of required creditable

reductions among the three

jurisdictions. EPA is taking action today

only on the District’s 15% plan

submittal, which addresses only the

District’s responsibility for the 15%

plan in the Washington, D.C.

metropolitan area.

The 15% plan for the District of

Columbia was submitted by the Mayor’s

designated official, the Director of the

District of Columbia DoH, on April 16,

1998. The April 16, 1998 submittal

effectively superseded previous

submittals. On May 15, 1995, the

District submitted a 15% plan SIP for

the District’s portion of Washington,

D.C. ozone nonattainment area. On

November 3, 1997 the District submitted

a Phase I attainment plan which

included revisions to the 1990 base year

inventory and to the 15% plan SIP

revision. This amended 15% plan SIP

revision was based upon the revised

1990 base year emissions inventory and

upon revised projections in growth in

emissions which came to light during

the preparation of the Phase I

attainment plan. The November 3, 1997

15% plan SIP revision did not however

reflect changes in the District’s motor

vehicle enhanced inspection and

maintenance (I/M) program. The April

16, 1998 15% plan SIP revision does

reflect the District’s current enhanced I/

M program.

EPA has reviewed the District’s April

16, 1998 15% plan SIP revision, and a

single factor prevents a full approval of

the District of Columbia’s 15% plan SIP.

A detailed discussion of the EPA’s

analysis of the District’s 15% plan SIP

revision is included below in the

‘Analysis’ portion of this rulemaking

action and also in the technical support

document (TSD) for this action. (Copies

of the TSD are available, upon request,

from the EPA Regional Office listed in

the ADDRESSES section of this notice.)

Because this one measure, the District’s

enhanced I/M program, has been

conditionally approved into the District

of Columbia’s SIP, under section

182(b)(2)(D), EPA can only grant a

conditional approval of the emission

reduction credits for this measure and,

therefore, can only grant conditional

approval of the District of Columbia’s

15% plan SIP revision. Satisfying the

condition for full approval of the

enhanced I/M program, namely that the

April 30, 1999 start date be met, will

satisfy the conditional approval of the

District’s 15% plan as well.

II. Analysis of the SIP Revision

A. Base Year Emission Inventory

The baseline from which states must

determine the required reductions for 15

percent planning is the 1990 base year

emission inventory. The inventory is

broken down into several emissions

source categories: stationary point, area,

on-road mobile sources, and off-road

mobile sources. The base year inventory

includes emissions of all sources within

the nonattainment area and certain large

point sources within twenty-five miles

of the boundary. A sub-set of the 1990

base year inventory is the 1990 rate-ofprogress (ROP) inventory which

includes only anthropogenic (manmade) emissions actually within the

nonattainment area boundaries. The

District of Columbia submitted a formal

SIP revision containing its official 1990

base year emission inventory on January

13, 1993 and submitted revisions on

November 3, 1997. In the Final Rules

section of this Federal Register, EPA is

also approving the District’s November

3, 1997 SIP revision consisting of

revisions to the 1990 base year emission

inventory as a direct final rule without

prior proposal because the Agency

views this as a noncontroversial SIP

revision and anticipates no adverse

comments. A detailed rationale for the

approval is set forth in that direct final

rule.

B. Growth in Emissions Between 1990

and 1996

EPA has interpreted the Act to require

that reasonable further progress towards

attainment of the ozone standard must

be obtained after offsetting any growth

expected to occur over that period.

Therefore, to meet the 15% reasonable

further progress requirement, a state

must enact measures achieving

sufficient emissions reductions to offset

projected growth in VOC emissions, in

addition to a 15 percent reduction of

VOC emissions. Thus, an estimate of

growth in VOC emissions and emissions

related activity from 1990 to 1996 is

necessary for demonstrating reasonable

further progress. Growth for all source

categories other than on-road mobile

sources, is calculated by multiplying the

1990 base year inventory by acceptable

forecasting indicators. For these

categories, growth must be determined

separately for each source, or by source

category, since sources typically grow at

different rates. EPA’s inventory

preparation guidance recommends the

following indicators, as applied to

emission units in the case of stationary

sources or to a source category in the

case of area sources, in order of

preference: product output, value

added, earnings, employment.

Population can also serve as an

acceptable surrogate indicator.

Growth for on-road mobile sources is

determined projecting future year

vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and

speeds using a traffic demand model

that represents the highway network in

the Washington, D.C. area. (The same

highway network and traffic demand

model is also used for conformity

determinations.) These results are

multiplied by emission factors

appropriate for the forecast year that

were generated by EPA’s Mobile 5.0b

emission factor model.

The District’s 15% plan contains

growth projections for point, area, onroad motor vehicle, and non-road

vehicle source categories. For a detailed

description of the growth methodologies

used by the District, please refer to the

TSD for this action. EPA is approving

the District’s 1990–1996 emissions

growth projections.

C. Enhanced Vehicle Inspection and

Maintenance (I/M) Program

Section 182(b)(1) of the Act requires

that states containing ozone

nonattainment areas classified as

moderate or above prepare SIP revisions

that provide for a 15 percent VOC

emissions reduction by November 15,

1996. Most of the 15% plan SIP

revisions originally submitted to the

EPA contained enhanced I/M programs

because this program achieves more

VOC emission reductions than most, if

not all other, control strategies.

However, because most states

experienced substantial difficulties with

these enhanced I/M programs, only a

few states are currently actually testing

cars using their original enhanced I/M

protocols.

In September 1995, EPA finalized

revisions to its enhanced I/M rule

allowing states significant flexibility in

designing I/M programs appropriate for

their needs (See 60 FR 48029,

September 18, 1995). Subsequently,

Congress enacted the National Highway

Systems Designation Act of 1995

(NHSDA), which provides states with

additional flexibility in determining the

design of enhanced I/M programs. The

substantial amount of time needed by

states to re-design enhanced I/M

programs in accordance with the

guidance contained within the NHSDA,
36580 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 129 /Tuesday, July 7, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

secure state legislative approval when

necessary, and set up the infrastructure

to perform the testing program has

precluded states that revise their I/M

programs from obtaining emission

reductions from such revised programs

by November 15, 1996.

The District submitted a SIP revision

amending the District’s existing I/M

program on July 13, 1995 and

supplemented this submittal on March

27, 1996 under the NHSDA. On October

10, 1996, EPA published a proposed

disapproval of the July 13, 1995 and

March 27, 1996 SIP revisions. The

proposed disapproval listed numerous

major and minor deficiencies. On

November 27, 1997, the District

submitted a completely revised

enhanced I/M SIP revision. The

November 27, 1997 enhanced I/M SIP

revision completely revised the testing

method from that contained in the

earlier SIP revisions. On March 30, 1998

(63 FR 15118), EPA proposed to

conditionally approve this enhanced I/

M SIP revision. EPA also withdrew its

previously proposed disapproval action

of an enhanced I/M SIP revision

submitted by the District of Columbia

on July 13, 1995 and supplemented

March 27, 1996 because that action was

no longer germane, given that the

District’s submittal of November 27,

1997 completely replaced those earlier

submittals. No comments were received

on EPA’s proposed conditional approval

of the District’s enhanced I/M program.

On June 2, 1998, EPA published its final

conditional approval (63 FR 29955).

Given the heavy reliance by many

states upon enhanced I/M programs to

help achieve the 15% reduction in VOC

emissions required under section

182(b)(1) of the Act, the recent NHSDA

and regulatory changes regarding

enhanced I/M programs, EPA believes

that it was not possible for many states

to achieve the portion of the 15%

reductions that are attributed to I/M by

November 15, 1996. Under these

circumstances, disapproval of the 15%

plan SIP revisions would serve no

purpose. Consequently, under certain

circumstances, EPA has allowed states

that re-designed their enhanced I/M

programs to receive emission reduction

credit from these programs within their

15% plans, even though the emissions

reductions from the I/M program will

occur after November 15, 1996. The

provisions for crediting reductions for

enhanced I/M programs are contained in

two documents: ‘‘Date by which States

Need to Achieve all the Reductions

Needed for the 15 Percent Plan from I/

M and Guidance for Recalculation,’’

note from John Seitz and Margo Oge,

dated August 13, 1996, and ‘‘Modeling

15 Percent VOC Reductions from I/M in

1999—Supplemental Guidance,’’

memorandum from Gay MacGregor and

Sally Shaver, dated December 23, 1996.

Specifically, EPA is approving SIP

revisions if the emissions reductions

from the revised, enhanced I/M

programs, as well as from the other 15%

plan SIP measures, will achieve the

15% level as soon after November 15,

1996 as practicable, pursuant to a

February 12, 1997 memorandum from

John Seitz and Richard Ossias entitled,

‘‘15 Percent VOC SIP Approvals and the

‘As Soon As Practicable’ Test.’’ To make

this ‘‘as soon as practicable’’

determination, EPA must determine that

the SIP contains all VOC control

strategies that are practicable for the

nonattainment area in question and that

meaningfully accelerate the date by

which the 15% level is achieved. EPA

does not believe that measures

meaningfully accelerate the date by

which the 15% reduction is achieved if

they provide an insignificant amount of

reductions.

The EPA has examined other

available SIP measures to determine if

they are practicable for the District’s

portion of the Washington, D.C. area

and if they would meaningfully

accelerate the date by which the area

reaches the 15% level of reductions.

The EPA has determined that the

District’s SIP does contain the

appropriate measures. Measures for

which the District took credit in the

15% plan are identified in Table 1,

below, as ‘‘In 15% Plan’’ and are not

available as a possible alternative to

enhanced I/M. Measures in Table 1

identified as being ‘‘Pre-1990’’ were

implemented prior to 1990 under rules

adopted by the District and thus are not

available as a possible alternative to

enhanced I/M. The other programs that

the District included in its 15% plan

submittal result in less than a 1.3 tons

per day reduction and do not deliver in

the aggregate, anything close to the

reductions achieved by enhanced I/M.

TABLE 1.—VOC CONTROL MEASURES ANALYZED IN THE DISTRICT’S 15 PERCENT PLAN SUBMITTAL PLAN

Measures VOC reductions

(tons/day)

Area Source Measures:

AIM Coatings—Federal Rule ..................................................................................................................................................... In 15% Plan

Consumer Solvents—Federal Rule ........................................................................................................................................... In 15% Plan

Solvent Cleaning—Substitution ................................................................................................................................................. 0.1

Graphic Arts—Web Offset Control ............................................................................................................................................ 0.5

Autobody Refinishing—ACT control .......................................................................................................................................... In 15% Plan

Cutback Asphalt—100% Ban .................................................................................................................................................... 0.0

Other Dry Cleaning .................................................................................................................................................................... 0.2

Stage I Enhancement ................................................................................................................................................................ 0.4

Stage II Vapor Recovery ........................................................................................................................................................... Pre-1990

Nonroad—Reformulated Gasoline ............................................................................................................................................. In 15% Plan

Point Source Measures:

Flexographic Printing ................................................................................................................................................................. 0.0

Gravure Printing ......................................................................................................................................................................... <0.1

Web Offset Lithography ............................................................................................................................................................. Pre-1990

Non-mandated On-Road Mobile Measures:

Reformulated Gasoline .............................................................................................................................................................. In 15% Plan

I/M Reductions:

High Enhanced in 15% Plan ..................................................................................................................................................... In 15% Plan

EPA believes that the enhanced I/M

program is the only measure that will

significantly accelerate the date by

which the 15% reduction requirement

will be achieved. EPA is allowing

enhanced I/M reductions which occur
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 129 /Tuesday, July 7, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 36581

out until November 15, 1999 to count

toward the 15% emission reduction

level for the 15% plan, because in doing

so, the District will reach a 15%

reduction in VOC emissions as soon as

practicable.

The District claimed a total of 3.8 tons

per day credit from enhanced I/M in its

15% plan. In the 15% plan, the District

evaluated the enhanced I/M program

using EPA’s Mobile 5.0b model with

assumptions that called for

implementation of a centralized, IM240

test with pressure and purge testing, and

a program start date of April 30, 1999.

EPA has determined that the enhanced

I/M program for the District’s portion of

the Washington, D.C. nonattainment

area does achieve the credited

reductions from enhanced I/M as soon

as practicable. The District’s enhanced

I/M program is a biennial, centralized,

test-only program network using EPA’s

IM240 test. EPA believes that the

District cannot accelerate the reductions

by initially requiring annual testing

because:

(1) Without additional testing stations

other requirements of the enhanced I/M

rule relating to motorist convenience

would suffer. Motorist convenience is

one important aspect that affects public

acceptance and effectiveness of the I/M

program.

(2) Additional infrastructure changes

(e.g., more testing equipment, enlarging

or building new testing stations, and the

hiring and training of additional

inspectors) to the enhanced I/M

program would not come on-line in time

to afford a substantial increase the

amount of reductions realized before

November 15, 1999.

(3) The cost effectiveness of the

program would be adversely affected

because the additional costs would not

result in a corresponding amount of

reductions.

Because the District’s revised

enhanced I/M program is designed to

meet EPA’s high-enhanced performance

standard, EPA believes that the

District’s program will achieve 3.8 tons

per day of reductions by 1999 credited

in the District’s 15% plan.

D. Target Level Emissions/Emission

Reductions Needs

The regional 15% plan calculates a

target level of emissions to meet the

15% reasonable further progress

requirement over the entire

nonattainment area. The regional 15%

plan contains a projection of emissions

growth from 1990 to 1996 and in effect

apportions among the three jurisdictions

the amount of creditable emission

reductions that each jurisdiction must

achieve in order for the entire

nonattainment area to achieve a 15%

reduction in VOC emissions net of

growth. Each jurisdiction then adopted

the regional plan, which identified the

amount of creditable emission

reductions which that jurisdiction must

achieve for the regional plan to get a

15% reduction accounting for any

growth. The regional plan calculated the

‘‘target level’’ of 1996 VOC emissions, in

accordance with applicable EPA

guidance.

EPA has interpreted section 182(b) of

the Act to require that the base year

VOC emission inventory be adjusted to

account for reductions in VOC

emissions that would have occurred

from the pre-1990 FMVCP and RVP

programs. To meet EPA’s applicable

guidance on this requirement, the

regional plan contains a calculation of

the reductions occurring between 1990

and 1996 from the pre-1990 Tier 0

FMVCP and RVP programs and the

result of subtracting these reductions

from the 1990 ROP inventory. The net

result of this calculation yielded the

1990 ‘‘adjusted base year inventory

adjusted to 1996.’’

The District’s 15% plan relies upon

reductions from the District’s revised,

enhanced I/M programs to achieve the

required 15% level as soon after

November 15, 1996 as practicable, but

not later than 1999. Under EPA’s

applicable guidance for 15% plans that

rely upon reductions from enhanced I/

M after 1996, the target level must also

incorporate the effects of the pre-1990

Tier 0 FMVCP on 1990 emissions due to

turnover in vehicles between 1996 and

1999. To meet EPA’s applicable

guidance on this requirement the

regional plan also contains a calculation

of the non-creditable reductions from

the pre-1990 Tier 0 FMVCP and RVP

programs between 1990 and 1999 and

the result of subtracting these

reductions from the 1990 ROP

inventory. The result of this calculation

yielded the 1990 ‘‘adjusted base year

inventory adjusted to 1999’’. The

difference between the 1990 ‘‘adjusted

base year inventory adjusted to 1996’’

and 1990 ‘‘adjusted base year inventory

adjusted to 1999’’ yields the ‘‘fleet

turnover correction’’ (FTC).

The next step is to calculate the base

1996 VOC target level of emissions. This

is eighty-five percent (85%) of the 1990

adjusted base year inventory for 1996.

This number represents what the

emissions inventory should have been

in 1996 if the 15% target level in order

to achieve the 15% reduction. To

account for the effects on VOC

emissions due to the Tier 0 FMVCP

between 1996 and 1999 the FTC is

subtracted from the base 1996 VOC

target level of emissions to yield the

final, corrected 1996 VOC target level of

emissions. The emission reduction

needs to achieve the target level is just

the difference between the 1996

projected uncontrolled inventory and

the final, corrected 1996 VOC target

level. Table 2, below, summarizes the

calculations for the 1996 VOC target

level for the entire Washington, D.C.

ozone nonattainment area.

TABLE 2.—REQUIRED REDUCTIONS FOR THE WASHINGTON, D.C. AREA’S 15% PLAN

[In tons of VOC per day]

Item District of

Columbia Maryland Virginia

Washington

D.C. area

totals

Washington, D.C. Area Target Level Calculation

1 1990 ROP Inventory ................................................................................................... 60.3 241.7 226.5 528.7

2 1990 Adjusted Base Year Inventory adjusted to 1996 ............................................... 51.2 215.1 196.8 463.1

3 1990 Adjusted Base Year Inventory adjusted to 1999 ............................................... 49.9 210.9 193.3 454.1

4 FTC Adjustment (Line 2 minus Line 3) ...................................................................... 1.3 4.2 3.5 9.0

5 Base 1996 target Level = 85% of Line 2 (0.85 × Line 2) ........................................... 43.5 182.8 167.3 393.6

6 Final, Corrected 1996 Regional Target Level (Line 5 minus Line 4) ......................... 42.2 178.6 163.8 384.6

7 Projected 1996 Uncontrolled Emissions ..................................................................... 48.5 234.7 219.4 502.4

8 Required Regional Emission Reductions (Line 8 minus Line 7)* .............................. .................... .................... .................... 117.8

9 Apportioned State Emission Reductions* ................................................................... 8.5 57.5 51.7 117.7
36582 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 129 /Tuesday, July 7, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

TABLE 2.—REQUIRED REDUCTIONS FOR THE WASHINGTON, D.C. AREA’S 15% PLAN—Continued

[In tons of VOC per day]

Item District of

Columbia Maryland Virginia

Washington

D.C. area

totals

10 Total Reductions Claimed in the District’s 15% Plan ............................................... 9.2 N/A N/A ....................

* The small discrepancy between values is due to rounding the apportioned emission reductions to the nearest tenth.

The emission reductions required to

meet the 15% reasonable further

progress requirement equals the

difference between the projected 1996

emissions under the current control

strategy (‘‘the 1996 uncontrolled

emissions’’) and the target level. This

amount reflects a 15% reduction from

the adjusted base year inventory and

any reductions necessary to offset

emissions growth projected to occur

between 1990 and 1996. The

Washington, D.C. area’s regional VOC

target level is 384.8 tons per day. EPA

has determined that this regional target

level and emission reduction needs for

the Metropolitan Washington, D.C.

nonattainment area have been properly

calculated in accordance with EPA

guidance.

E. Control Strategies in the District’s

15% Plan

The specific measures adopted (either

through state or federal rules) are

addressed, in detail, in the District’s

15% plan. The following is a brief

description of each control measure that

the District has claimed credit for in the

submitted 15% plan, as well as the

results of EPA’s review of the use of that

strategy towards the Act’s rate-ofprogress requirement.

F. Fully Creditable Emission Control

Strategies

EPA is granting full credit to the

District of Columbia’s 15% plan SIP

with reductions from the following six

measures:

1. Reformulated Gasoline (RFG)

Section 211(k) of the Act requires

that, beginning January 1, 1995, only

reformulated gasoline be sold or

dispensed in ozone nonattainment areas

classified as severe or above. Gasoline is

reformulated to reduce combustion byproducts and to produce fewer

evaporative emissions. Section 211(k)(6)

allows other nonattainment areas to

‘‘opt-in’’ to the program. The District

submitted a request to opt-in to the

reformulated gasoline program, which

EPA approved on April 1, 1992 (57 FR

11677). The District claims a reduction

of 1.1 tons per day from their 1996

projected uncontrolled on-road mobile

source emissions using EPA’s Mobile

5.0b emission factor model to determine

the emission benefit. EPA has reviewed

the District’s calculation of the benefits

for this measure and finds the amount

of reduction the District claims is

reasonable and acceptable.

2. Off-Road Use of Reformulated

Gasoline

The use of reformulated gasoline will

also result in reduced emissions from

off-road engines such as outboard

motors for boats and lawn mower

engines, commonly used in summer

months. The District claims a reduction

of 0.1 tons per day from their 1996

projected uncontrolled off-road mobile

source emissions. The District used

guidance provided on August 18, 1993

by EPA’s Office of Mobile Sources on

the VOC emission benefits for non-road

equipment which are in a

nonattainment area that uses Federal

Phase I RFG. The District has correctly

used the guidance to compute the VOC

emission reductions for this measure.

The EPA agrees with this projected

reduction in the District’s 15% plan and

the 0.1 tons per day emission benefit

resulting from this measure are

creditable.

3. Post 1990 Federal Motor Vehicle

Control Program (FMVCP Tier 1) and

Detergent Additives

EPA promulgated a national rule

establishing ‘‘new car’’ standards for

1994 and newer model year light-duty

vehicles and light-duty trucks on June 5,

1991 (56 FR 25724). Since the standards

were adopted after the Clean Air Act

was amended in 1990, the resulting

emission reductions are creditable

toward the 15 percent reduction goal.

On November 1, 1994, EPA

promulgated a national rule establishing

Federal standards for detergent

additives for gasoline as required by the

Act (59 FR 54706). This regulation

requires, beginning January 1, 1995, that

gasoline sold nationwide contain

additives to prevent accumulation of

deposits in engines and fuel systems.

Preventing such deposits maintains the

efficiencies of engine systems and

reduces VOC emissions resulting from

engine efficiency degradation.

The District claimed a reduction of

1.5 tons per day from the Tier 1 Federal

Motor Vehicle Control Program and the

Gasoline Detergent Additive Rule using

EPA’s Mobile 5.0b emission factor

model to determine the emission

benefits. EPA has reviewed the District’s

methodology used in calculating of the

benefits for this measure and finds the

amount of reduction that the District

claims is reasonable and acceptable.

EPA believes this measure and the 1.5

tons per day emission benefit is fully

creditable in the District’s 15% plan.

4. Architectural and Industrial

Maintenance Coatings (AIM)

Emission reductions have been

projected for AIM coatings due to the

expected promulgation by the EPA of a

national rule. VOC emissions emanate

from the evaporation of solvents used in

the coating process. In EPA’s most

recent policy memorandum on AIM

credits, ‘‘Update on the Credit for the 15

Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans for

Reductions from the Architectural and

Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings

Rule’’, dated March 7, 1996, EPA

allowed states to claim a 20% reduction

of total AIM emissions from the national

rule. The District claimed a 20%

reduction in AIM emissions under its

15% plan, which is a reduction of 1.6

tons per day from their 1996 projected

uncontrolled AIM coating emissions. In

the March 7,1996 memorandum, EPA

allowed states to continue to claim a

20% reduction of total AIM emissions

from the national rule in their 15%

plans although the emission reductions

were not expected to occur until April

1997. As a result of legal challenges to

the proposed national rule, EPA has

negotiated a compliance date of no

earlier than January 1, 1998. If the final

rule does not provide the amount of

credit indicated in the memorandum

that states can claim in their 15% plans,

the District is responsible for developing

measures to make up the shortfall. With

this caveat, EPA believes use of

emissions reductions from EPA’s

expected national AIM rule is

acceptable towards the 15% plan target.

Therefore, the 1.6 tons per day are an

acceptable credit claim in the District’s

15% plan.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 129 /Tuesday, July 7, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 36583

5. Consumer and Commercial Products

Section 183(e) of the Act required

EPA to conduct a study of VOC

emissions from consumer and

commercial products and to compile a

regulatory priority list. EPA is then

required to regulate those categories that

account for 80% of the consumer

product emissions in ozone

nonattainment areas. Group I of EPA’s

regulatory schedule lists 24 categories of

consumer products to be regulated by

national rule, including personal,

household, and automotive products.

EPA intends to issue a final rule

covering these products in the near

future. EPA policy allows states to claim

up to a 20% reduction of total consumer

product emissions towards the

reasonable further progress requirement.

The District claimed a 20% reduction or

the equivalent reduction of 0.6 tons per

day from their 1996 projected

uncontrolled consumer and commercial

products emissions in its 15% plan. For

the reasons discussed above under the

AIM rule, EPA believes the 0.6 tons per

day projected reduction in the District’s

15% plan is creditable. Again, if this

final rule does not provide the amount

of credit indicated in the memorandum

that states can claim in their 15% plans,

the District is responsible for developing

measures to make up the shortfall.

6. Automobile Refinishing

EPA is in the process of adopting a

national rule to control VOC emissions

from solvent evaporation through

reformulation of coatings used in auto

body refinishing processes. These

coatings are typically used by industry

and small businesses, or by vehicle

owners. VOC emissions emanate from

the evaporation of solvents used in the

coating process. In a November 29, 1994

memorandum, ‘‘Credit for the 15

Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans for

Reductions from the Architectural and

Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coating

Rule and the Autobody Refinishing

Rule,’’ EPA set forth policy on the

creditable reductions to be assumed

from the national rule for auto body

refinishing. That memorandum allowed

for a 37% reduction from current

emissions with an assumption of 100%

rule effectiveness (presuming the

coating application instructions were

being followed). The District’s approach

was consistent with EPA’s guidance to

determine the creditable emissions from

this rule and claimed a reduction of 0.5

tons per day from their 1996 projected

uncontrolled auto body emissions in its

15% plan. For the reasons discussed

above under the AIM rule, the EPA

believes the 0.5 tons per day projected

reduction in the District’s 15% plan is

creditable. Again, if this final rule does

not provide the amount of credit

indicated in the memorandum that

states can claim in their 15% plans, the

District is responsible for developing

measures to make up the shortfall.

G. Conditionally Creditable Emission

Control Strategies

EPA is conditionally granting credit to

the District’s 15% plan SIP with

reductions from the District’s enhanced

vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/

M) Program. The District claimed a total

of 3.8 tons per day credit for this

measure. In the 15% plan, the District

evaluated the I/M program using EPA’s

Mobile 5.0b emission factor model with

a program start date of April 30, 1999.

The effect of the April 30, 1999 start

date was factored by interpolating the

results of two runs of EPA’s Mobile 5.0b

emission factor model. The first run

used assumptions that called for

implementation of a centralized, testonly, IM240 test with pressure and

purge testing and an anti-tampering

program inspection. The second run

used assumptions that reflected

implementation of the District’s 1990

program which was a centralized, testonly using an idle test. The District used

the same highway network model that

was used to determine the 1990 base

year inventory, and the adjusted base

year inventories, and the 1996 on-road

VOC emissions budget used for

transportation conformity purposes.

EPA has determined that the I/M

program for the District’s portion of the

Washington, D.C. nonattainment area

does achieve reductions from I/M as

soon as practicable for the reasons

discussed previously in this notice

under ‘‘Enhanced Vehicle Inspection

and Maintenance (I/M) Program.’’ The

District’s I/M program is a biennial,

centralized, test-only program network

using EPA’s IM240 test.

Because the District’s revised I/M

program is designed to meet EPA’s highenhanced performance standard and

will implement the same number of

testing cycles between start-up and

November 1999 as that modeled for

credit in the 15% plan, EPA believes

that the District’s program will achieve

the claimed 3.8 tons per day of

reductions by 1999. EPA has also

determined that the credits from the

enhanced I/M program were determined

in accordance with applicable EPA

guidance.

However, section 182(b)(2)(D)

requires that EPA grant credit for

measures approved into the SIP.

Because EPA’s approval of the District’s

enhanced I/M SIP is conditioned upon

the District meeting the April 30, 1999

start date, EPA can only approve the

reduction credits claimed from

enhanced I/M conditioned upon the

District meeting the April 30, 1999 start

date.

H. Reasonable Further Progress

Table 3 below summarizes the

proposed creditable measures from the

District’s 15% plan for the Washington,

D.C. area.

TABLE 3.—CREDITABLE REDUCTIONS IN THE DISTRICT’S 15 PERCENT PLAN FOR THE WASHINGTON, D.C. AREA

[Tons VOC per day]

CREDITABLE REDUCTIONS

Tier 1 FMVCP and gasoline Detergent Additive Rule ................................................................................................................................. 1.5

Reformulated Gasoline:

On-Road ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 1.1

Off-Road ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.1

Auto Refinishing ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 0.5

AIM ............................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1.6

Consumer/Commercial Products ................................................................................................................................................................. 0.6

Sub-Total Creditable ............................................................................................................................................................................. 5.4

CONDITIONALLY CREDITABLE REDUCTIONS

Enhanced Inspection & Maintenance .......................................................................................................................................................... 3.8
36584 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 129 /Tuesday, July 7, 1998 /Rules and Regulations

TABLE 3.—CREDITABLE REDUCTIONS IN THE DISTRICT’S 15 PERCENT PLAN FOR THE WASHINGTON, D.C. AREA—

Continued

[Tons VOC per day]

Sub-Total Conditionally Creditable ....................................................................................................................................................... 3.8

Total Fully and Conditionally Creditable Reductions ........................................................................................................................... 9.2

The District’s 15% plan SIP revision

contains reductions of 9.2 tons per day

which exceeds the District’s needs of 8.5

tons per day. Of these 9.2 tons per day

EPA is proposing to fully credit the

District of Columbia’s 15% plan SIP

with 5.4 tons per day of reductions and

credit the 15% plan SIP with 3.8 tons

per day conditioned the District meeting

the conditioned listed in the June 2,

1998 conditional approval of the

enhanced I/M testing program.

I. Transportation Conformity Budgets

Under EPA’s transportation

conformity rule the 15% plan is a

control strategy SIP. This plan

establishes a budget of 133.7 tons per

day of VOC emissions for on-road

mobile sources throughout the entire

Metropolitan Washington, D.C. ozone

nonattainment area and does not

establish a budget for nitrogen oxides

(NOX) emissions. However, on

November 3, 1997 the District of

Columbia submitted a complete, SIP

revision which included reasonable

further progress plan to achieve a nine

percent reduction in VOC and NOX

emissions after 1996 (post-1996 plan).

This November 3, 1997 SIP revision also

established a VOC budget for 1999 of

123.3 tons per day for on-road mobile

sources for the entire Metropolitan

Washington, D.C. ozone nonattainment

area and also establishes a NOX budget

for 1999. Under the conformity rule,

EPA believes that the VOC and NOX

budgets established by the November 3,

1997 post-1996 plan are currently the

controlling budgets for conformity

determinations for 1999 and later years.

The next conformity determination in

the Washington, D.C. area will consider

only 1999 and later years. The budget in

the post-1996 plan specifically

addresses the 1999 reasonable further

progress milestone year whereas the

15% plan establishes a budget for the

prior reasonable further progress

milestone year of 1996. The time period

for the budget in the 15% plan has

passed. The post-1996 plan also

establishes more stringent VOC budget

than the 15% plan.

J. Summary

EPA’s review of this material

indicates that the District’s 15% plan

SIP revision meets the requirements of

the Act and applicable EPA guidance.

EPA is conditionally approving the

District of Columbia’s SIP revision for a

15% reduction in VOC emissions,

which was submitted on April 16, 1998.

EPA is approving this rule without

prior proposal because the Agency

views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in the proposed

rules section of this Federal Register

publication, EPA is publishing a

separate document that will serve as the

proposal to approve the SIP revision

should adverse or critical comments be

filed. This rule will be effective

September 8, 1998 without further

notice unless the Agency receives

adverse comments by August 6, 1998.

If EPA receives such comments, then

EPA will publish a document

withdrawing the final rule and

informing the public that the rule did

not take effect. All public comments

received will then be addressed in a

subsequent final rule based on the

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a

second comment period on the

proposed rule. Only parties interested in

commenting on this action should do so

at this time. If no such comments are

received, the public is advised that this

rule will be effective on September 8,

1998 and no further action will be taken

on the proposed rule.

III. Final Action

EPA is conditionally approving the

revision to the District of Columbia SIP

submitted on April 16, 1998 consisting

of its 15% plan. EPA’s approval is

conditioned upon the District meeting

the April 30, 1999 start date committed

to and contained in its November 27,

1997 enhanced I/M SIP revision

submittal. The conversion from

conditional approval to full approval or

to disapproval will be dependent upon

whether or not the District meets the

start date of April 30, 1999 committed

to in the enhanced I/M SIP revision. If

the District starts the enhanced I/M

testing program on or before April 30,

1999, then any final conditional

approval shall convert to a full approval

of the SIP revision. If the District fails

to fully implement enhanced I/M testing

in the District by April 30, 1999, EPA

would notify the District by letter that

the condition has not been met and that

any final conditional approval has

converted to a disapproval, and the

clock for imposition of sanctions under

section 179(a) of the Act would start as

of the date of the letter. Subsequently,

a notice would be published in the

Federal Register announcing that the

15% plan SIP revision has been

disapproved.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for revision to any state

implementation plan. Each request for

revision to the state implementation

plan shall be considered separately in

light of specific technical, economic,

and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

IV. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13045

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has exempted this regulatory

action from E.O. 12866 review.

The final rule is not subject to E.O.

13045, entitled ‘‘Protection of Children

from Environmental Health Risks and

Safety Risks,’’ because it is not an

‘‘economically significant’’ action under

E.O. 12866.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and government entities

with jurisdiction over populations of

less than 50,000. Conditional approvals

of SIP submittals under section 110 and

subchapter I, part D of the CAA do not

create any new requirements but simply

approve requirements that the State is

already imposing. Therefore, because

the Federal SIP approval does not

impose any new requirements, EPA

certifies that it does not have a

significant impact on any small entities

affected. Moreover, due to the nature of

the Federal-State relationship under the

CAA, preparation of a flexibility
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 129 /Tuesday, July 7, 1998 /Rules and Regulations 36585

analysis would constitute Federal

inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its

actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA,

427 U.S. 246, 255–66 (1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

If the conditional approval is

converted to a disapproval under

section 110(k), based on the State’s

failure to meet the commitment, it will

not affect any existing state

requirements applicable to small

entities. Federal disapproval of the state

submittal does not affect its stateenforceability. Moreover, EPA’s

disapproval of the submittal does not

impose a new Federal requirement.

Therefore, EPA certifies that this

disapproval action does not have a

significant impact on a substantial

number of small entities because it does

not remove existing requirements nor

does it substitute a new federal

requirement.

C. Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(‘‘Unfunded Mandates Act’’), signed

into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must

prepare a budgetary impact statement to

accompany any proposed or final rule

that includes a Federal mandate that

may result in estimated costs to State,

local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate; or to private sector, of $100

million or more. Under section 205,

EPA must select the most cost-effective

and least burdensome alternative that

achieves the objectives of the rule and

is consistent with statutory

requirements. Section 203 requires EPA

to establish a plan for informing and

advising any small governments that

may be significantly or uniquely

impacted by the rule. EPA has

determined that the approval action

promulgated does not include a Federal

mandate that may result in estimated

costs of $100 million or more to either

State, local, or tribal governments in the

aggregate, or to the private sector. This

Federal action approves pre-existing

requirements under State or local law,

and imposes no new requirements.

Accordingly, no additional costs to

State, local, or tribal governments, or to

the private sector, result from this

action.

D. Submission to Congress and the

General Accounting Office

The Congressional Review Act, 5

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides

that before a rule may take effect, the

agency promulgating the rule must

submit a rule report, which includes a

copy of the rule, to each House of the

Congress and to the Comptroller General

of the United States. EPA will submit a

report containing this rule and other

required information to the U.S. Senate,

the U.S. House of Representatives, and

the Comptroller General of the United

States prior to publication of the rule in

the Federal Register. This rule is not a

‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.

804(2).

E. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of

this action must be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the

appropriate circuit by September 8,

1998. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of

this final rule does not affect the finality

of this rule for the purposes of judicial

review nor does it extend the time

within which a petition for judicial

review may be filed, and shall not

postpone the effectiveness of such rule

or action. This action regarding

approval of the District of Columbia’s

15% plan SIP revision may not be

challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Ozone.

Dated: June 23, 1998.

Thomas Voltaggio,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

40 CFR part 52, subpart J of chapter

I, title 40 is amended as follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for Part 52

continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart J—District of Columbia

2. Section 52.473 is amended by

designating the existing paragraph as (a)

and adding paragraph (b) to read as

follows:

§ 52.473 Conditional Approval.

* * * * *

(b) EPA is conditionally approving as

a revision to the District of Columbia

State Implementation Plan the 15

Percent Rate of Progress Plan for the

District of Columbia’s portion of the

Metropolitan Washington, D.C. ozone

nonattainment area, submitted by the

Director of the District of Columbia

Department of Public Health on April

16, 1998. EPA’s approval is conditioned

upon the District meeting the April 30,

1999 start date committed to and

contained in its November 27, 1997

enhanced I/M SIP revision submittal.

The conversion from conditional

approval to full approval or to

disapproval will be dependent upon

whether or not the District meets the

start date of April 30, 1999 committed

to in the enhanced I/M SIP revision. If

the District starts the enhanced testing

program on or before April 30, 1999,

then any final conditional approval

shall convert to a full approval of the

SIP revision. If the District fails to fully

implement enhanced I/M testing in the

District by April 30, 1999, EPA would

notify the District by letter that the

condition has not been met and that this

final conditional approval has converted

to a disapproval, and the clock for

imposition of sanctions under section

179(a) of the Act would start as of the

date of the letter. Subsequently, a notice

would be published in the Federal

Register announcing that the 15% plan

SIP revision has been disapproved.

[FR Doc. 98–17966 Filed 7–6–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[OH115–2; FRL–6120–7]

Approval and Promulgation of

Maintenance Plan Revisions; Ohio

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: The United States

Environmental Protection Agency

(USEPA) is finalizing a May 21, 1998,

proposal to approve an Ohio State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to

remove the air quality triggers from each

of the following Ohio maintenance area

contingency plans: Canton (Stark

County), Cleveland (Lorain, Cuyahoga,

Lake, Ashtabula, Geauga, Medina,

Summit and Portage Counties),

Columbus (Franklin, Delaware and

Licking Counties), Steubenville

(Jefferson County), Toledo (Lucas and

Wood Counties), Youngstown

(Mahoning and Trumbull Counties) as

well as Clinton County, Columbiana

County and Preble County.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action will be

effective on July 7, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents

relevant to this action are available for

inspection during normal business

hours at the following location: