[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29537-29538]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12607]



[[Page 29537]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9153-6]


Draft Transportation Conformity Guidance for Quantitative Hot-
spot Analyses in PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>10</INF> Nonattainment and 
Maintenance Areas

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Availability; Request for Public Comment.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing the availability of a draft transportation 
conformity guidance document for public comment. Once finalized, this 
guidance would help state and local agencies complete quantitative 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>10</INF> hot-spot analyses for project-
level transportation conformity determinations of certain highway and 
transit projects. A hot-spot analysis includes an estimation of 
project-level emissions, air quality modeling, and a comparison to the 
relevant national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>10</INF> nonattainment and maintenance 
areas. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) is EPA's federal 
partner in implementing the transportation conformity regulation, and 
EPA coordinated with DOT on the development of this draft guidance.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 19, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons may obtain a copy of the draft guidance 
from EPA's Office of Transportation and Air Quality Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/olicy.htm
    EPA will accept comments as follows:
    E-mail: Comments can be sent electronically to the following e-mail 
address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6b3b2603041f181b041f46080406060e051f182b0e1b0a450c041d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="feaeb396918a8d8e918ad39d9193939b908a8dbe9b8e9fd0999188">[email protected]</span></a>
    Mail: Comments sent by mail should be addressed to Meg Patulski, 
State Measures and Conformity Group, Transportation and Regional 
Programs Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 
Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 48105.
    Fax: Comments can also be faxed to the attention of Meg Patulski at 
(734) 214-4052.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Meg Patulski, State Measures and 
Conformity Group, Transportation and Regional Programs Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 2000 Traverwood Drive, Ann Arbor, MI 
48105, e-mail address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6f1f0e1b1a031c040641020a082f0a1f0e41080019"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a0d0c1d4d5ccd3cbc98ecdc5c7e0c5d0c18ec7cfd6">[email protected]</span></a>, telephone number: (734) 
214-4842, fax number: (734) 214-4052.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The contents of this notice are listed in 
the following outline:

I. What Is Transportation Conformity?
II. Background on the Draft Guidance
III. What Is in the Draft Guidance?
IV. Request for Comments

I. What Is Transportation Conformity?

    Transportation conformity is required under Clean Air Act (CAA) 
section 176(c) (42 U.S.C. 7506(c)) to ensure that transportation plans, 
transportation improvement programs (TIPs) and federally supported 
highway and transit projects are consistent with (``conform to'') the 
purpose of the state air quality implementation plan (SIP). Conformity 
to the purpose of the SIP means that transportation activities will not 
cause or contribute to new air quality violations, worsen existing 
violations, or delay timely attainment of the relevant national ambient 
air quality standard(s) (NAAQS) or any interim milestones. 
Transportation conformity applies to areas that are designated 
nonattainment and those areas redesignated to attainment after 1990 
(``maintenance areas'') for transportation-related criteria pollutants: 
Carbon monoxide (CO), ozone, nitrogen dioxide (NO<INF>2</INF>) and 
particulate matter (PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>10</INF>).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 40 CFR 93.102(b)(1) defines PM<INF>2.5</INF> and 
PM<INF>10</INF> as particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than 
or equal to a nominal 2.5 and 10 micrometers, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's transportation conformity rule (40 CFR Parts 51 and 93) 
establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether 
transportation activities conform to the SIP. EPA first promulgated the 
transportation conformity rule on November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188) and 
has subsequently published several amendments.

II. Background on the Draft Guidance

    The conformity rule includes a specific requirement that certain 
transportation projects be analyzed for local air quality impacts (a 
``hot-spot'' analysis), in addition to other conformity requirements. 
In its March 10, 2006 final rule (71 FR 12468), EPA stated that 
quantitative PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>10</INF> hot-spot analyses 
would not be required until EPA releases hot-spot modeling guidance and 
an appropriate motor vehicle emissions model is available to conduct 
such hot-spot analyses.\2\ For projects where a hot-spot analysis is 
required, the conformity rule requires a qualitative PM hot-spot 
analysis until EPA releases guidance on how to conduct quantitative PM 
hot-spot analyses and announces in the Federal Register that these 
requirements are in effect (40 CFR 93.123(b)). In addition, today's 
draft PM hot-spot modeling guidance is being released for public 
comment to comply with EPA's obligations under a settlement 
agreement.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EPA's new motor vehicle emissions model, MOVES2010, was 
released in December 2009 and is capable of performing project-level 
emissions analyses from on-road sources. MOVES2010 will be approved 
for use in quantitative PM hot-spot analyses in areas outside of 
California when this draft guidance is finalized.
    \3\ In May 2006, the Environmental Defense Fund, Natural 
Resources Defense Council, and Sierra Club challenged the March 2006 
final rule (Environmental Defense et al. v. Environmental Protection 
Agency, No. 06-1164 (DC Cir.)). On May 19, 2007, petitioners and EPA 
entered into a settlement agreement in which EPA agreed to publish a 
Federal Register notice announcing the availability of the draft 
guidance for public comment for a period of at least 30 days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In keeping with the commitment EPA made in its March 2006 final 
rule (71 FR 12502), this draft guidance was developed in coordination 
with DOT (Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit 
Administration) and with several transportation conformity stakeholder 
groups. In addition, EPA also worked with the California Air Resources 
Board (CARB) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) 
to develop the portions of the guidance relating to the use of CARB's 
EMFAC2007 model in California.

III. What Is in the Draft Guidance?

    The draft PM hot-spot modeling guidance describes conformity 
requirements for quantitative PM hot-spot analyses; provides technical 
guidance on estimating project emissions using EPA's MOVES2010 model, 
California's EMFAC2007 model, and other methods; and outlines how to 
apply air quality dispersion models for quantitative PM hot-spot 
analyses. The draft guidance also discusses how to calculate design 
values for comparison to each PM NAAQS, as well as how to determine 
which air quality modeling receptors may or may not be appropriate for 
PM hot-spot analyses.\4\ The draft guidance also describes how the 
interagency consultation process should be used to develop quantitative 
hot-spot analyses in PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>10</INF> nonattainment 
and maintenance areas. In addition, the draft guidance includes other 
resources and examples to assist in conducting quantitative PM hot-spot 
modeling analyses. However, the draft

[[Page 29538]]

guidance does not change transportation conformity rule requirements 
for hot-spot analyses, such as what types of projects are subject to 
hot-spot analyses. EPA notes that the guidance, once finalized, would 
help implement existing requirements in the CAA and conformity rule and 
is not a regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ EPA stated in the March 2006 final rule that the PM hot-spot 
modeling guidance would ``consider how projects of air quality 
concern are predicted to impact air quality at existing and 
potential PM<INF>2.5</INF> monitor locations which are appropriate 
to allow the comparison of predicted PM<INF>2.5</INF> concentrations 
to the current PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards, based on PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
monitor siting requirements (40 CFR Part 58).'' (71 FR 12471)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Request for Comments

    EPA is seeking comment on all aspects of the draft PM hot-spot 
modeling guidance. In particular, EPA is seeking comments on the 
following:
    (1) Does the draft guidance provide sufficient information on how 
to configure and run MOVES2010 and EMFAC2007 at the project level?
    (2) Do the air quality modeling sections of the draft guidance and 
references to other existing documents provide sufficient detail for 
air quality modelers to conduct PM hot-spot analyses using AERMOD or 
CAL3QHCR?
    (3) Is there sufficient information in the draft guidance to 
calculate design values and determine appropriate receptors? If not, 
what additional information is necessary?
    (4) Are there issues that the draft guidance does not address that 
should be addressed in the final guidance or in other EPA efforts?
    (5) What types of outreach, training, and other technical 
assistance would be helpful in implementing the final guidance?
EPA encourages those submitting comments to provide specific details 
and/or examples wherever possible.

    Dated: May 17, 2010.
Margo Tsirigotis Oge,
Director, Office of Transportation and Air Quality.
[FR Doc. 2010-12607 Filed 5-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>