Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0083-1825
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2004-08-17T04:00Z

1
July
15,
2004
Request
to
Reclassify
the
Detroit­
Ann
Arbor
Area
to
Marginal
Nonattainment
for
Ozone
July
15,
2004
This
analysis
was
prepared
by
the
Michigan
Department
of
Environmental
Quality
(
MDEQ)
and
the
Southeast
Michigan
Council
of
Governments
(
SEMCOG).

The
MDEQ
and
the
SEMCOG,
the
designated
lead
local
agency
for
air
quality
planning
in
the
Detroit­
Ann
Arbor
(
Southeast
Michigan)
area,
jointly
prepared
this
document
supporting
a
request
for
reclassification
to
marginal
nonattainment
for
the
eight­
hour
ozone
standard.
Section
181(
a)(
4)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
states:

"
If
an
area
classified
under
paragraph
(
1)
(
Table
1)
would
have
been
classified
in
another
category
if
the
design
value
in
the
area
were
five
percent
greater
or
five
percent
less
than
the
level
on
which
such
classification
was
based,
the
Administrator
may,
in
the
Administrator's
discretion,
(
emphasis
added)
within
90
days
after
the
initial
classification,
by
the
procedure
required
under
paragraph
(
3),
adjust
the
classification
to
place
the
area
in
such
other
category.
In
making
such
adjustment,
the
Administrator
may
consider
the
number
of
exceedances
of
a
national
primary
ambient
air
quality
standard
for
ozone
in
the
area,
the
level
of
pollution
transport
between
the
area
and
other
affected
areas,
including
both
intrastate
and
interstate
transport,
and
the
mix
of
sources
and
air
pollutants
in
the
area."

This
request
is
made
considering
these
provisions
and
the
criteria
outlined
in
the
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency's
(
EPA's)
1991
criteria
for
evaluating
reclassifications,
which
is
referenced
in
the
final
rule
for
eight­
hour
ozone
designations
and
classifications.
In
order
to
meet
the
90­
day
provision
of
section
181(
a)(
4),
the
EPA
is
requiring
that
states'
reclassification
requests
be
submitted
by
July
15,
2004.
The
EPA
will
then
respond
to
reclassification
requests
by
September
15,
2004.

We
respectfully
submit
that
there
are
several
pieces
of
evidence
supporting
a
reclassification
to
marginal
nonattainment
that
are
compelling
and
provide
an
unequivocal
policy
basis
for
support
by
the
Administrator
of
the
EPA.

Clean
Air
Act:
Design
Value
within
Five
Percent
of
Another
Category
The
Clean
Air
Act
(
CAA)
allows
the
EPA
Administrator
to
reclassify
ozone
nonattainment
areas
to
an
adjacent
category
in
subpart
2
"
if
the
design
value
in
the
area
were
five
percent
greater
or
five
percent
less
than
the
level
on
which
such
classification
was
based."
The
Clean
Air
Act
directs
the
Administrator
to
consider
other
factors
in
making
this
adjustment
such
as
number
of
exceedances,
levels
of
transport,
and
the
mix
of
pollutants.
Further,
the
EPA
2
July
15,
2004
states
it
will
consider
other
factors
such
as
emission
reductions.
Accordingly,
there
are
several
relevant
pieces
of
information
we
ask
the
Administrator
to
consider
in
making
a
judgment
about
the
merits
of
this
reclassification
request.

Because
erroneous
conclusions
often
result
from
decisions
based
on
a
single
data
point,
we
begin
by
presenting
relevant,
long­
term
data
on
design
values
in
Southeast
Michigan.
Figure
1
displays
eight­
hour
ozone
design
values
from
1990­
2003.
For
twelve
consecutive
years
(
1991­
2002),
the
ozone
design
value
was
96
parts
per
billion
(
ppb)
or
less.
And,
for
each
of
three
consecutive
years
preceding
2003,
the
design
value
for
the
region
was
below
90
ppb,
a
level
that
the
EPA
would
have
used
to
assign
Southeast
Michigan
a
marginal
classification.
Thus
far
this
year
(
as
of
June
30,
2004),
there
are
no
peak
eight­
hour
averages
that
exceed
84
ppb
(
not
yet
validated).

Furthermore,
the
highest
design
value
recorded
since
1991
was
in
2003.
This
was
the
result
of
an
unusual
episode
that
covered
large
sections
of
the
eastern
half
of
the
country
and
resulted
in
unusually
high
ozone
levels
in
Southeast
Michigan.
Figures
2
and
3
from
the
EPA's
AIRNow
website
show
the
large
geographic
area
affected
by
this
episode.
In
fact,
similar
ozone
levels
were
recorded
in
such
disparate
places
as
Port
Huron
and
the
Seney
National
Wildlife
Refuge,
a
federal
Class
1
area
in
Michigan's
Upper
Peninsula.
Figure
4
shows
the
ozone
monitoring
sites
in
Michigan,
and
Table
1
compares
eight­
hour
peak
averages
at
various
sites
in
the
region
with
the
Seney
site
on
June
25,
2003.
The
design
value
would
plummet
from
97
to
92
ppb
if
only
one
day
(
June
25)
in
that
multi­
day
episode
(
from
June
22
to
June
25)
was
not
in
the
database,
as
shown
in
Figure
5.
Therefore,
except
for
one
day
in
13
years,
the
design
value
in
Southeast
Michigan
would
be
96
ppb
or
less.
More
details
on
the
unrepresentative
nature
of
the
June
2003
episode
are
provided
in
a
subsequent
section.

In
the
final
eight­
hour
ozone
designation
rule,
published
on
April
30,
2004,
the
EPA
states
that
moderate
nonattainment
areas
with
an
eight­
hour
ozone
design
value
of
96
ppb
or
lower
(
from
2001
to
2003)
may
be
eligible
for
a
reclassification
to
marginal
nonattainment.
Southeast
Michigan's
eight­
hour
design
value
is
97
ppb.
However,
we
submit
that
a
design
value
of
97
ppb
is
within
the
five
percent
criteria.
The
ozone
implementation
rules
refers
to
the
criteria
set
in
CAA,
Section
181(
a)(
4)
which
provides
that
if
the
design
value
of
an
area
were
five
percent
less
or
more
than
the
design
value
on
which
the
classification
were
based,
the
Administrator
may
adjust
the
classification.
The
statutory
language
is
five
percent,
not
5.0
percent.
Monitoring
values
are
routinely
rounded
in
practice.
Rounding
conventions
would
dictate
that
5.49
is
the
practical
equivalent
of
5
percent
and
97
ppb
meets
this
criteria.

Further,
the
ozone
implementation
rule
does
not
list
the
upper
end
of
marginal
as
91
ppb
(
See
Table
2
in
the
appendix),
as
assumed
by
the
EPA
in
its
calculation
of
the
five
percent
reclassification
threshold,
and
its
resulting
determination
that
3
July
15,
2004
only
values
of
96
ppb
or
lower
are
within
five
percent
of
a
marginal
classification.
A
footnote*
in
the
new
8­
hour
ozone
classification
table,
indicates
that
marginal
nonattainment
areas'
design
values
range
from
85
ppb
and
up
to
"
but
not
including"
92
ppb.
An
8­
hour
ozone
design
value
of
some
value
less
than
92
and
greater
than
91
ppb
may
be
used
by
the
Administrator
in
the
five
percent
determination.
Accordingly,
using
a
value
of
five
percent
of
a
number
less
than
92,
added
to
the
lesser
value,
could
yield
97
ppb.
This
is
an
area
where
the
Administrator
could
apply
the
discretion
provided
to
him
under
the
law.

In
summary,
several
pieces
of
evidence
support
the
conclusion
that
Southeast
Michigan
meets
the
5
percent
reclassification
criterion.
They
include:
 
Design
values
were
96
ppb
or
less
for
12
consecutive
years
between
1991
and
2002;
 
The
design
values
for
the
3
years
preceding
the
June
2003
episode
(
2000,
2001,
2002)
were
all
below
90
ppb
and
would
have
automatically
resulted
in
a
marginal
classification;
 
The
June
2003
episode
was
an
unusual
event
(
more
detail
follows);
 
June
25,
2003,
is
the
single
day
over
13
years
driving
the
design
value
up
to
97
ppb.
 
Emissions
in
the
region
on
June
25,
2003,
had
minimal
impact
on
peak
ozone
levels.
 
The
regional
design
value
would
have
been
92
ppb
but
for
June
25,
2003;
and
 
A
design
value
of
97
ppb
still
meets
the
5
percent
criteria.

Unusualness
of
June
2003
Ozone
Episode
The
policy
implications
of
the
June
2003
ozone
episode
are
clear.
If
only
one
day
of
that
multi­
day
episode
was
excluded
(
June
25),
the
design
value
for
the
region
would
have
plummeted
to
92
ppb.
Thus,
this
episode
and
the
significant
change
it
produced
in
the
latest
3­
year
design
value,
directly
resulted
in
the
EPA's
determination
to
classify
the
region
as
moderate
instead
of
marginal
nonattainment.
In
other
words,
June
25,
2003,
is
the
single
day
over
a
13­
year
period
that
might
be
used
to
determine
if
Southeast
Michigan
merits
a
reclassification
to
marginal.
As
the
Administrator
is
empowered
in
the
Clean
Air
Act
to
consider
several
factors
in
responding
to
a
reclassification
petition,
this
section
puts
the
June
2003
ozone
episode
in
proper
context.

There
are
several
indicators
that
point
to
the
unusualness
of
this
episode.
First,
the
high
ozone
levels
in
2003
were
spread
to
a
large
area
of
the
eastern
United
States,
as
shown
in
the
EPA's
AIRNow
maps
in
Figure
2
and
3.
In
Michigan,
even
the
Upper
Peninsula's
Seney
National
Wildlife
Refuge,
a
federal
Class
1
__________________________________

*
This
"
but
not
including"
footnote
is
not
present
in
the
1­
hour
ozone
classification
table
contained
in
Section
181
of
the
CAA.
4
July
15,
2004
area,
experienced
an
eight­
hour
average
of
118
ppb,
a
level
close
to
the
123
ppb
monitored
in
Southeast
Michigan
at
Port
Huron
on
the
very
same
day.
At
New
Haven,
the
other
site
that
typically
records
peak
ozone
levels
in
the
region,
the
eight­
hour
average
only
differed
from
Seney
by
1
ppb,
as
shown
in
Table
1.

Second,
an
eight­
hour
average
of
123
ppb
is
unusually
high
for
Southeast
Michigan.
To
demonstrate,
the
eight­
hour
peak
ozone
values
at
all
sites
in
the
region
for
a
12­
year
period
were
ranked.
Table
3
shows
123
ppb
was
the
highest
eight­
hour
value
recorded
at
any
site
in
the
entire
region
over
the
past
12
years.

Third,
the
eight­
hour
peak
at
Tecumseh,
the
region's
rural,
upwind
site,
was
well
in
excess
of
the
standard
at
111
ppb
(
see
Table
4).
Peak
ozone
levels
were
recorded
downwind
of
Detroit
at
New
Haven
(
119
ppb)
and
Port
Huron
(
123
ppb).
Thus,
only
8­
12
ppb
of
the
peak
ozone
on
that
day
is
attributable
to
emissions
in
Southeast
Michigan.
Just
as
important,
the
111
ppb
at
the
Tecumseh
site
is
indicative
of
the
unusual
nature
of
the
episode
because
it
is
well
beyond
any
other
eight­
hour
average
for
that
site
back
to
1993.
This
is
supported
by
back
trajectory
analyses.
Figure
6
shows
that
the
eight­
hour
ozone
peak
of
111
ppb
at
Tecumseh
on
June
25,
2003,
was
caused
by
transport
from
the
south.
Figure
7
shows
that
this
air
mass
from
Tecumseh
passed
through
the
region
to
the
downwind
monitoring
sites.
In
other
words,
the
high
ozone
levels
at
Tecumseh
originated
outside
of
Southeast
Michigan
and
the
high
ozone
at
the
downwind
sites
had
little
to
do
with
emissions
in
the
region.

Table
1
shows
that
emissions
in
the
region
only
contributed
8­
12
ppb
to
peak
ozone
at
Port
Huron
(
the
difference
between
rural,
upwind
measurements
at
Tecumseh
and
downwind
at
New
Haven
and
Port
Huron).
And,
with
the
exception
of
Allen
Park
and
Linwood,
which
often
record
lower
levels
because
of
NOx
scavenging,
ozone
levels
in
the
region
were
consistently
close
to
the
111
ppb
at
Tecumseh.
Clearly,
transport
was
overwhelming
on
June
25,
2003,
and
emissions
in
the
region
contributed
little
to
the
extraordinarily
high
levels
of
ozone.
Nonetheless,
June
25,
2003,
is
the
single
day
in
13
years
that
drives
the
latest
3­
year
design
value
to
97
ppb
and
leads
to
the
EPA's
moderate
classification.
This
moderate
classification
results
in
the
automatic
imposition
of
control
measures
that
would
not
have
affected
the
outcome
of
that
episode
or
another
one
like
it.
Additional
supporting
evidence
is
that
the
episode
was
so
widespread
and
severe
to
have
resulted
in
comparable
levels
of
ozone
in
areas
with
precursor
emission
levels
approaching
zero
(
Seney).

In
summary,
we
have
been
able
to
verify
that
ozone
levels
were
unusual
during
that
time
frame.
Section
181(
a)(
4)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
specifically
empowers
the
Administrator
to
consider
impacts
of
transport,
such
as
just
described,
in
making
a
decision
on
reclassification.
Due
to
the
impact
of
transport
on
June
25,
2003,
using
that
day
as
a
basis
for
mandating
the
control
strategy
requirements
that
accompany
a
moderate
classification
is
inappropriate.
The
EPA
has
a
history
of
recognizing
that
certain
monitoring
data
could
lead
to
faulty
regulatory
5
July
15,
2004
applications.
We
submit
this
is
one
such
circumstance
and
request
the
Administrator
use
his
discretion
and
consider
the
impact
of
June
25,
2003,
on
this
reclassification
decision.

This
situation
is
analogous
to
when
State
Implementation
Plans
(
SIPs)
were
being
prepared
in
response
to
the
Clean
Air
Act
Amendments
of
1990.
Ozone
levels
in
the
summer
of
1988
were
also
extraordinarily
high,
making
modeling
demonstrations
of
attainment
unrealistic
and
unachievable;
i.
e.,
requiring
massive
precursor
emission
reductions.
Nonetheless,
many
states,
including
Michigan,
were
able
to
achieve
attainment
of
the
ozone
NAAQS
with
more
modest
emission
reductions.
(
As
indicated
later,
a
recent
circuit
court
ruling
upholds
and
reinforces
the
EPA's
ability
to
go
beyond
air
quality
modeling
results
and
consider
"
weight
of
evidence"
in
making
attainment
related
decisions.
Also,
according
to
the
EPA's
February
19,
2004,
document
on
Early
Action
Compact
(
EAC)
areas1,
weight
of
evidence
procedures
can
be
used
for
an
EAC
area's
attainment
test.)

Section
181
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
specifically
empowers
the
Administrator
to
consider
"
the
level
of
pollution
transport
between
the
area
and
other
affected
areas,
including
both
intrastate
and
interstate
transport"
in
making
reclassification
decisions.
Accordingly,
we
respectfully
request
that,
in
making
his
decision,
the
Administrator
weigh
the
evidence
showing
that
emissions
in
the
region
contributed
less
than
10
percent
to
peak
ozone
levels
on
the
single
day
in
13
years
driving
the
design
value
up
to
97
ppb
resulting
in
an
automatic
moderate
classification
for
Southeast
Michigan.
In
addition,
we
ask
the
Administrator
to
consider
the
June
2003
episode
in
conjunction
with
the
other
relevant
evidence
presented
in
the
remainder
of
this
support
document.

Expected
Emissions
Reductions:
On­
Road
Mobile
Sources
Table
5
was
prepared
by
SEMCOG
to
demonstrate
the
expected
reductions
in
vehicle
emissions
expected
in
Southeast
Michigan
over
the
next
few
years.
These
data
were
prepared
using
EPA's
latest
Mobile
model,
Mobile
6.2,
using
SEMCOG's
local
transportation
data
inputs
and
travel
projections.
These
figures
demonstrate
that
vehicle
emissions
of
the
two
main
ozone
precursors:
volatile
organic
compounds
(
VOC)
and
nitrogen
oxides
(
NOx)
will
decline
by
40
percent
and
37
percent,
respectively,
between
2002
and
2007,
even
after
accounting
for
increasing
levels
of
travel.
Moreover,
the
declining
trend
will
continue
well
into
2010,
reaching
reductions
of
54
percent
for
both
pollutants.

To
address
modeling
uncertainties,
SEMCOG
projected
the
emissions
impact
of
doubling
the
rate
of
growth
in
travel.
Results,
in
Figures
8
and
9,
show
this
decline
will
occur
even
if
SEMCOG's
forecasted
growth
in
travel
was
doubled!
These
reductions
are
due
to
the
Tier
2
emission
standards,
heavy­
duty
emission
1
February
19,
2004.
Frequently
Asked
Questions
on
eight­
hour
Ozone
Early
Action
Compacts­­
Volume
2:
Weight
of
Evidence
6
July
15,
2004
standards,
lower
sulfur
fuel,
more
durable
emission
control
systems,
and
a
higher
than
typical
rate
of
fleet
turnover
in
Southeast
Michigan's
automotive
hub.

Assuming
the
region
was
targeting
a
15
percent
reduction
in
VOC
emissions
as
is
required
for
moderate
areas,
and
assuming
that
2002
mobile
source
emissions
represent
about
30
percent
of
the
entire
inventory,
a
reduction
of
88
tons
per
day
would
need
to
be
achieved.
2
The
reduction
of
71
tons
per
day
in
mobile
source
emissions
represents
a
considerable
fraction
of
that
needed
reduction.

While
a
15
percent
plan
was
not
previously
implemented
in
Southeast
Michigan
because
of
redesignation
to
attainment
of
the
one­
hour
ozone
standard,
a
low
vapor
pressure
fuel
was
implemented
as
a
contingency
measure
and
results
in
emission
reductions
of
approximately
9
tons
per
day
(
see
Table
6).
Thus,
80
of
the
88
tons
per
day
needed
to
achieve
a
15
percent
reduction
are
in
place.

Tables
7
and
8
show
the
additional
reductions
that
might
be
expected
from
a
vehicle
testing
program
that
is
an
automatic
requirement
in
moderate
areas.
This
information
is
presented
to
give
perspective
on
how
it
would
impact
future
episodes
of
the
type
experienced
in
June
2003.

As
indicated
earlier,
these
reductions
are
not
of
a
magnitude
to
have
had
any
major
impact
on
ozone
levels
of
the
type
experienced
on
June
25,
2003.
For
example,
emissions
from
all
sources
in
the
region
on
that
day
only
contributed
8­
12
ppb
to
the
peak
ozone
in
the
region.
Furthermore,
emission
levels
in
the
Seney
area
with
an
eight­
hour
average
of
118
ppb
are
likely
to
have
been
at
least
an
order
of
magnitude
less
than
emissions
in
Southeast
Michigan.
We
request
the
Administrator
consider
this
fact
when
evaluating
whether
a
moderate
or
marginal
classification
is
more
appropriate
for
Southeast
Michigan.

Even
though
these
major
reductions
in
precursor
emissions
are
occurring,
SEMCOG
has
hired
a
contractor
to
evaluate
the
additional
benefits
of
a
wide
range
of
cleaner
fuels.
The
MDEQ
and
the
SEMCOG
will
assess
these
results
and
determine
the
appropriateness
of
implementing
a
fuels
measure
in
the
region
and
Michigan's
other
nonattainment
areas
as
it
relates
to
both
attainment
and
maintenance
issues.
This
evaluation
will
include
an
assessment
of
fuelrelated
benefits
from
reduced
intrastate
transport.

Finally,
on­
road
mobile
source
reductions
of
a
similar
magnitude
will
be
achieved
in
upwind
regions.

2
Because
the
2002
inventory
was
not
available
at
the
time
of
this
submittal,
the
2002
on­
road
mobile
inventory
was
estimated
to
be
about
30
percent
of
the
total
NOx
and
VOC
inventory.
This
was
determined
by
using
Southeast
Michigan's
Ozone
Maintenance
Plan
Revision
(
submitted
to
EPA
in
December
2003),
and
gauging
the
decreasing
trend
in
on­
road
mobile
source
emissions
between
2000
and
2002.
7
July
15,
2004
Expected
Emissions
Reductions:
Point
Sources
The
point
source
component
of
the
region's
total
inventory
continues
to
decline.
Between
1999
and
2002,
point
source
NOx
emissions
decreased
by
37,534
tons/
year
and
point
source
VOC
emissions
decreased
by
4,148
tons/
year.
3
Most
importantly,
the
offset
provisions
are
tie­
barred
to
the
nonattainment
designation
preventing
any
increases
or
expansions
from
major
sources.

Furthermore,
the
levels
of
manufacturing
have
declined
in
just
the
past
few
years.
Data
for
the
SEMCOG
region
from
the
North
American
Industrial
Classification
System
of
the
U.
S.
Census
Bureau
show
that
between
March
2000
and
March
2004,
approximately
81,620
manufacturing
jobs
have
been
lost
in
Southeast
Michigan.
We
present
this
information
merely
as
anecdotal
evidence
that
manufacturing
levels
have
declined.
Even
if
the
manufacturing
sector
fully
recovers,
the
offset
provisions
require
net
decreases
in
emissions
and
improvements
in
air
quality
prior
to
permit
issuance.

Point
source
emissions
of
NOx
are
projected
to
decline
significantly
in
Southeast
Michigan
due
to
the
implementation
of
the
EPA's
NOx
SIP
call
rule­
making.
Table
9
shows
that
NOx
emissions
from
these
sources
are
expected
to
decline
by
85
percent
between
2000
and
2007.
Further,
the
compliance
date
for
the
SIP
call
is
May
31,
2004,
well
before
2007.
Note
that
the
quote
below
demonstrates
how
this
rule­
making
is
replete
with
references
to
the
ozone
reduction
benefits
it
would
provide
for
both
one­
hour
and
eight­
hour
attainment.

"
The
EPA
projects
that
these
regional
NOx
reductions
will
bring
the
vast
majority
of
all
new
ozone
nonattainment
areas
into
attainment
with
the
eight­
hour
ozone
standard
without
having
to
implement
more
costly
local
controls.
It
will
also
help
reduce
ozone
levels
in
the
remaining
nonattainment
areas
east
of
the
Mississippi
River.
4"

In
summary,
emissions
reductions
of
NOx
from
implementation
of
the
SIP
call
between
2000
and
2007
are
estimated
to
be
288
tons
per
day.
An
additional
157
tons
per
day
will
be
achieved
from
on­
road
mobile
sources
between
2002
and
2007.
As
with
mobile
sources,
similar
degrees
of
NOx
reductions
are
expected
in
upwind
areas.

Expected
Emissions
Changes:
Area
Sources
The
only
tool
available
at
this
time
for
estimating
area
source
emissions
is
the
EPA's
EGAS
model.
A
new
version
of
the
EGAS
model,
which
is
expected
to
3
Point
source
emission
estimates
obtained
from
EPA's
Final
1999
National
Emissions
Inventory
(
NEI)
and
EPA's
Preliminary
2002
NEI
for
the
7­
county
SEMCOG
region.
(
Livingston,
Macomb,
Monroe,
Oakland,
St.
Clair,
Washtenaw,
and
Wayne
Counties)
4
EPA
Fact
Sheet:
Final
Rule
for
Reducing
Regional
Transport
of
Ground­
Level
Ozone
(
Smog)
and
Two
Related
Proposals.
September
24,
1998.
8
July
15,
2004
address
some
of
the
limitations
of
the
current
model,
will
be
available
in
the
fall
for
developing
better
area
source
emission
estimates
for
the
SIP.

In
addition,
the
MDEQ
is
working
with
the
LADCO
(
Lake
Michigan
Air
Directors'
Consortium)
on
a
project
to
develop
more
accurate
local
area
source
emission
estimates
for
the
SIP.
The
LADCO
has
hired
a
contractor
to
assist
in
this
effort
and
to
provide
guidance
to
the
LADCO
states
on
developing
local
area
source
emission
estimates
for
the
SIP.
The
results
of
this
work
will
be
ready
by
fall
2004.

Expected
Emissions
Changes:
Non­
road
Sources
No
non­
road
mobile
emission
estimates
are
available
for
this
report.
The
only
tool
available
is
the
EPA's
NONROAD
model,
which
is
based
on
national
default
data.
Like
the
work
for
area
sources,
the
MDEQ
is
working
with
the
LADCO
to
improve
this
component
of
the
inventory
based
on
local
data.
Specifically,
the
LADCO
is
developing
updated
activity,
equipment
population,
and
temporal
emission
profiles
for
the
following
categories:
construction
equipment,
agricultural
equipment,
marine
vessels,
and
recreational
vessels.
More
accurate
non­
road
mobile
emission
estimates
will
be
developed
for
the
SIP.

All
the
most
up­
to­
date
inventory
information
will
be
included
in
the
June
15,
2005,
submittal
(
see
"
Commitment
to
control
measures"
section)
and
will
be
used
in
formulating
a
control
strategy.

Attainment
by
2007
The
EPA's
1991
reclassification
guidance,
which
is
referenced
in
the
final
eighthour
rule,
stipulates
that
a
request
for
reclassification
be
accompanied
by
evidence
demonstrating
that
the
area
will
be
able
to
attain
by
the
earlier
date
specified
by
the
lower
classification,
which
is
marginal
in
this
case.
However,
the
Clean
Air
Act
is
silent
on
this
issue.
We
ask
the
EPA
to
consider
that
initial
marginal
classifications
were
not
based
on
a
state's
submitted
evidence
that
attainment
by
2007
was
achievable.
Thus,
reclassification
should
not
hinge
so
much
on
evidence
of
attainment
by
2007,
so
much
as
the
state's
commitment
to
attain
by
2007.
Such
a
commitment
is
contained
at
the
end
of
this
reclassification
request
with
interim
milestones
leading
to
a
SIP
submittal
in
2007.

Nonetheless,
the
following
section
includes
information
supporting
the
feasibility
of
achieving
attainment
by
2007.
We
request
the
Administrator
consider
this
information
as
further
evidence
that
a
marginal
classification
is
truly
more
appropriate
for
Southeast
Michigan.
9
July
15,
2004
Modeling
Results:
EPA
Modeling
During
formulation
and
finalization
of
the
ozone
transport
rulemaking5,
the
EPA
stated
its
position
about
the
merits
of
reducing
both
one­
hour
and
eight­
hour
ozone
levels.
More
recently,
the
Technical
Support
Document
for
the
Interstate
Air
Quality
Rule
(
Air
Quality
Modeling
Analysis,
EPA,
January
2004,
69
FR
4566)
contained
modeling
information
relevant
to
this
request.
Table
10
shows
a
table
that
was
excerpted
from
that
document.
It
shows
EPA's
nonattainment
projections
for
a
base
case
scenario,
i.
e.,
expected
benefits
that
would
accrue
in
2010
from
implementation
of
measures
in
the
Clean
Air
Act
and
the
ozone
transport
rulemaking.
Specifically,
all
of
Southeast
Michigan
is
projected
to
be
in
attainment
under
this
base
case
scenario.

The
forecasted
benefits
in
the
EPA's
2010
modeling
are
understated
because
mobile
source
emissions
are
most
likely
overestimated.
As
noted
earlier,
the
vehicle
fleet
in
Southeast
Michigan
turns
over
faster
than
average.
To
demonstrate,
Table
11
shows
the
impact
of
fleet
turnover
in
the
region
on
emission
rates.
For
example,
emission
rates
for
VOCs
in
2010
are
41
percent
lower
than
the
emission
rate
that
is
based
on
the
EPA's
national
default
vehicle
registration
data.

Discontinuity
I
n
the
EPA's
1991
guidance
for
reclassification
requests,
an
area
must
show
that
the
"
reclassification
does
not
result
in
an
illogical
or
excessive
discontinuity
relative
to
surrounding
areas."
In
other
words,
a
"
donut
hole"
cannot
be
created
where
the
area
would
be
surrounded
by
areas
at
a
higher
classification.

This
would
not
occur
in
Southeast
Michigan.
All
adjacent
nonattainment
areas
to
Southeast
Michigan
are
Subpart
1
nonattainment
areas.

Other
Considerations
There
are
several
other
factors
we
request
the
EPA
consider
in
determining
the
merits
of
a
reclassification
to
marginal
nonattainment.

1.
Early
attainment:
Moderate
areas
have
until
2010
to
comply
with
the
new
ozone
standard.
Marginal
areas
must
comply
by
2007.
By
granting
this
request,
the
EPA
helps
keep
Michigan
on
a
path
to
improve
air
quality
sooner.
Specifically,
controls
will
be
in
place
ahead
of
the
applicable
schedule
for
moderate
areas,
or
marginal
areas
not
making
the
early
submittal
commitments
contained
in
this
request.

5
Federal
Register,
October
27,
1998.
Volume
63,
Number
207,
p.
57355­
57404.
Known
as
the
"
NOx
SIP
Call."
10
July
15,
2004
2.
Continued
mobile
source
reductions:
In
order
to
help
assure
continued
air
quality
improvement,
SEMCOG
has
forecasted
mobile
source
emissions
to
2025.
As
shown
in
Figure
8,
both
NOx
and
VOC
emissions
will
decline
so
significantly,
they
will
represent
a
fraction
of
today's
emission
levels.

3.
Ozone
Action:
The
MDEQ
and
the
SEMCOG
are
active
partners
in
the
highly
successful
Ozone
Action
program.
Our
latest
survey
shows
that
over
90
percent
of
the
respondents
now
recognize
the
Ozone
Action
program.
6
More
importantly,
the
majority
of
residents
are
taking
steps
to
curb
emissions
on
declared
Ozone
Action
days.
As
the
EPA
knows,
the
exact
emission
reduction
benefits
of
this
program
cannot
be
calculated,
but
contribute
to
improved
air
quality.
We
commit
to
continued
implementation
and
support
for
this
program.

Consideration
of
All
Evidence
The
MDEQ
and
the
SEMCOG
recognize
the
uncertainties
inherent
in
emission
modeling,
dispersion
modeling,
and
modeling
future
activity
levels.
As
reflected
in
a
recent
court
decision,
so
does
the
EPA.
7
Accordingly,
rather
than
deciding
on
any
single
factor,
we
request
the
Administrator
holistically
consider
all
the
evidence
presented
in
this
analysis
that
supports
a
policy
decision
to
reclassify
Southeast
Michigan
to
marginal
nonattainment.
That
evidence
includes:

 
The
unusualness
of
the
June
2003
episode,
most
notably
June
25,
2003;
 
Less
than
10
percent
of
the
ozone
on
the
worst
day
in
13
years,
the
same
day
contributing
to
the
higher
than
usual
design
value,
is
attributable
to
emissions
from
the
region.
Therefore,
subjecting
the
area
to
the
requirements
of
moderate
areas
because
of
this
episode
would
be
inappropriate;
 
Historical
monitoring
data
show
that
the
regional
design
value
for
12
consecutive
years
was
96
ppb
or
less.
Absent
June
25,
2003,
the
design
value
for
the
last
three
years
would
plummet
to
92
ppb;
 
Mobile
source
emissions
will
decline
by
as
much
as
40
percent
between
2002
and
2007
and
are
projected
to
continue
declining
through
2025
(
see
Figure
10);
 
The
EPA
predicted
attainment
for
Southeast
Michigan
by
2010
based
on
implementation
of
Clean
Air
Act
controls
already
being
phased
in
and
the
NOx
SIP
call
rule.
Mobile
emissions
in
that
analysis
were
likely
overestimated;
and
 
More
importantly,
Michigan
is
committing
to
implement
additional
control
measures
necessary
for
attainment
and
to
early
identification
and
legal
authority
for
implementation
(
see
following
section).

6
SEMCOG
Quality
of
Life
Survey.
2002.
7
United
States
Court
of
Appeals
for
the
Second
Circuit
(
Docket
No.
02­
4107)
on
May
19,
2004.
11
July
15,
2004
With
respect
to
interpreting
modeling
results,
the
ability
of
the
EPA
to
take
a
weight
of
evidence
approach
was
recently
reinforced
by
the
U.
S.
Court
of
Appeals
(
referenced
above).
The
Court
clarified
that
the
EPA
could
consider
a
variety
of
factors
in
addition
to
modeling
results
in
evaluating
the
merits
of
a
SIP
attainment
demonstration.
Also,
the
EPA
recognized
the
merits
of
a
weight
of
evidence
approach
in
its
criteria
for
implementing
Early
Action
Compacts.
And,
as
previously
indicated,
other
marginal
classifications
were
not
premised
on
a
state
demonstrating
attainment
by
2007,
the
same
year
the
SIP
is
due.
To
remedy
the
dilemma
posed
by
the
same
deadline
for
the
SIP
submittal
and
attainment,
Michigan
commits
to
the
early
submittals
outlined
below.

Commitment
to
Control
Measures
The
State
of
Michigan
is
committed
to
early
compliance
and
maintenance
of
the
ozone
standard.
As
such,
Michigan
commits
to
the
implementation
of
control
measures
necessary
to
achieve
and
maintain
the
ozone
standard.
The
MDEQ
and
the
SEMCOG
are
working
with
a
task
force
with
broad
 
based
representation
to
evaluate
the
merits
of
several
emission
reduction
alternatives.
This
includes
a
special
study
to
quantify
the
benefits
of
a
wide
range
of
fuels.

The
fact
that
the
SIPs
are
due
on
the
same
date
attainment
is
required
for
marginal
areas
poses
a
dilemma.
In
order
to
address
this
dilemma
and
consistent
with
the
policy
approach
in
Early
Action
Compacts,
Michigan
commits
to
interim
milestones
in
advance
of
a
2007
SIP
submittal
should
the
EPA
grant
a
marginal
classification
for
Southeast
Michigan.
Specifically,
Michigan
commits
to
the
following
schedule,
which
will
result
in
emission
reductions
and
cleaner
air
earlier
than
under
the
current
moderate
classification.

1.
June
2005
 
Identification
of
additional
controls
By
June
2005,
the
MDEQ
will
submit
to
the
EPA,
Region
5
an
analysis
of
various
emission
control
strategies.
In
order
to
account
for
the
uncertainty
of
predictive
models,
Michigan
commits
to
additional
control(
s).
The
results
of
the
analysis,
evaluation
of
alternatives,
and
details
of
the
control
strategy,
including
an
air
quality
assessment,
will
be
in
this
submittal.

2.
June
2006
 
Adoption
of
rules/
laws
Following
the
June
2005
submittal,
the
MDEQ
will
expeditiously
pursue
the
necessary
rules
and/
or
legislative
authority
to
implement
the
control
strategy
for
submittal
to
the
EPA
by
June
2006.
12
July
15,
2004
3.
June
2007
 
Submittal
of
SIP
The
complete
SIP
package
will
be
submitted
by
June
2007
as
specified
for
marginal
nonattainment
areas.
However,
reclassification
based
on
this
request
places
the
state
on
a
track
for
implementation
of
controls
more
expeditiously
than
for
either
moderate
areas
or
marginal
areas,
both
of
which
are
not
required
to
make
any
such
commitments
prior
to
June
2007.