Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutIR 7265 INFORMAL REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS No. 7265 To the Mayor and Members of the City Council March 24, 1988 000, Subject: COMMENTS ON POST 87 STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Staff from Legal and Public Health have prepared comments on the Environmental Protection Agency's Post 87 State Implementation Plan as published in the November 24, 1987 Federal Register. Three major points in the plan which the staff wishes to call to your attention are listed below: A) Requiring the city to implement an additional 3 percent per year reduction of volatile organic compounds (VOC's); B) Implementation of sanctions as relating to the regional planning area which is presently proposed as the Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA); C) Percent control efficiencies for control measures have been reduced to 80 percent for stationary controls and 50 percent for Inspection/Maintenance anti-tampering and enhanced Inspection/Maintenance. Staff has requested EPA evaluate the feasability of implementing a time weighted average or one (1 ) hour maximum ozone standard. Staff will submit these comments along with others to EPA prior to March 28, 1988, unless otherwise directed by Council . A complete copy of the comments will be available upon request. ,7ouglas Harma City Manager 00p, LISSUED BY THE CITY MANAGER FORT WORTH, TEXAS COMMENTS ON POST 87 SIP REGULATIONS Pursuant to the notification of proposed policymaking by the EPA regarding State Implementation Plans and approval of Post-1987 Ozone abd Carbon Monoxide Plan Revisions for areas not attaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards as published in the November 24, 1987 issue of the Federal Register, the City of Fort Worth, Texas would like to make the following comments: The City of Fort Worth has made substantial and compelling efforts to revise the 1982 State Implementation Plan (SIP) which was recently resubmitted to EPA for approval . The SIP projects a near-term attainment date of 1991 . In our efforts to provide a SIP showing near-term attainment, stringent measures were included in the plan which will result in significant costs to industry and our citizenry. Having adopted all but the economically severe and nominally effective controls few options are left for adoption. The Post-1987 strategy presents several inequitable and untenable propositions. The three most troublesome areas are: a) the three percent (3%) rule, which would require an additional three percent per year reduction of volatile organic compounds (VOC's) ; b) the regional planning area which is presently proposed as the CMSA; and c) percent control efficiencies, which reduce to eighty percent (80%) the presumed efficiency of all stationary source control measures. a) The three percent rule as presently proposed presents significant compliance problems. Reductions resultant from Federal Regulations could not be included in the deduction count. Information from the Texas Air Control Board suggests that if national Aeid Vapor Pressure (RVP) controls are implemented, the current corrective SIP revision ,olould not meet the three percent local reduction requirement even though the SIP emonstrates, attainment in less than five years. Some suggestions to make the three percent standard more obtainable are as follows: 1 . All federal , state and local controls should be counted toward the reduction if an area cannot demonstrate attainment by 1992. 2. Areas implementing plans that demonstrate attainment by 1992 should not be required to implement the additional annual percentage reductions. In such areas the design value should not be a factor. 3. Enhanced I/M should not be required. Instead, it should be available as an option to be included in meeting the three precept annual reduction. 4. In areas adopting enhanced I/M, emission reductions from all vehicles within the MSA/CMSA should be included in the count toward meeting the performance level . 5. States should be able to continue accrual of credit toward the three percent reduction for a measure even if the measure is later implemented on a national level . Furthermore, newly implemented federal control measures should be creditable toward the three percent reduction. 6. In meeting reduction requirements, states should be able to use the expected reduction from the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP) . b) In addressing the issue of regional planning, there is concern about how potential sanctions may be implemented. Entire counties are included in SIP calls. If there are jurisdictions within the regional planning area which fail to implement required control measures, then sanctions ought only be imposed against those failing to comply. This approach would encourage cohesiveness in implementation of control measures by assuring an equal incentive for all jurisdictions to cooperate in regional efforts. Designation of attainment status should be granted to those counties which do not violate or are not in violation of the ozone standard. Furthermore, penalties should not be levied against attainment counties due to a neighboring county or counties in the same MSA/CMSA having nonattainment status. c) The proposed use of percent control efficiencies for stationary source control measures is lacking in adequate data to support its presumption. EPA proposes a uniform presumption of only eighty percent (80%) effectiveness for controls used on stationary sources. This is based on a study conducted by EPA Region 9 Office. There has been no extensive study conducted by an outside agency. A further assumption of only fifty percent (50%) efficiency is proposed for anti-tampering I/M programs. Again, there seems to be insufficient data to support such an assumption. The idea of crediting the efficiency of control measures is acceptable only if the measure of efficiency is based upon proven levels of efficiency for source control as determined by the state of the art equipment and technology used. Percent efficiency of controls should be based upon the best demonstrated engineering practices currently available commercially or on technical evaluations of individual program effectiveness. This form of evaluation works well with both stationary controls and anti-tampering and enhanced I/M programs. 0"00""-urthermore, periodic review should ensure current data on efficiency levels. With specific reference to enhanced I/M programs, decentralized computerized programs for .4wafety inspections are for our purposes preferable to centralized programs. Citizen acceptance and compliance are not easily obtained in a centralized program. The use 6T national averages to determine the effectiveness of I/M programs is less than fair and perhaps inappropriate in light of the disparity between the good programs and the poorly managed, poorly maintained programs. A more appropriate effectiveness percentage could be derived from using the best existing programs as models. Poor programs could be improved to meet performance levels set by the model programs. The City of Fort Worth understands the reason behind the current standard for ozone being set at . 12ppm. However, it is difficult to understand the approach of classifying an area as non-attainment when such as area exceeds the standard so infrequently. The approach of evaluating a time-weighted average and a I hour maximum limit should be evaluated. The City of Fort Worth expresses reservations about the legal authority of the EPA to propose and enforce this proposed Post-1987 strategy, enforce SIP calls and impose sanctions without prior extension, reenactment or amendment to the Clean Air Act (CCA). We further question the tenuous basis of appearance that an area contributes to nonattainment problems in nearby areas as competent legal authority to expand EPA Jurisdiction to attainment areas not previously subject to EPA supervision. -2- 001*1 In addressing national standards, we support additional federal support or control 00'vasures to provide uniformity and cost effective controls. Specifically. regulations reqiring Reid Vapor Pressure and onboard cannisters should be promulgated immediately and simultaneously to achieve the greatest overall effect. More stringent emission standards should be adopted for light duty trucks. Accordingly, emissions projected in attainment demonstrations should not be used as enforceable mass emissions caps because of the potential to deter economic growth. The states should be able to determine other means of emission increase offsets. National regulation of many products could prove to be advantageous. Large scale distribution and marketing regulations act as an incentive to find and develop low VOC content products. Such massive production reqirements would result in improved air quality for all areas and be more acceptable than stringent regulation proffered on a piece meal basis. In implementing sanctions highway construction grants should not be restricted if the proposed construction would create and provide for better traffic flow and decreased mobile source emissions. If the EPA is required to provide a SIP in an area which fails to submit a SIP or fails to provide an acceptable SIP, the EPA plan should follow the same constraints placed upon state SIP's. EPA's stated belief that it should interpret the promulgation time set forth in section 110 (c) as not commencing unless and until the relevant sanctions have failed to induce a state to make reasonable efforts to develop its own corrective SIP, is falacious. There is in that section no indication whatsoever that EPA may first take a wait and see attidude before acting. The congressional intent was clearly for EPA to step in ..,a■han do what was necessary to meet the requirements of the Act. Making specific comments to the requests on page 45049 of the Federal Register, the -4�0,ity of Fort Worth responds as follows: With reference to footnote three (3) it appears clear from the language used in section 110 (a) (2) the necessary requirements needed to obtain approval of a SIP. Section 110 (a) (3) specifically addresses revisions to SIP's and as such, should be the authority used by EPA in requiring revisions, assuming EPA has the legal authority without an extension amendment or reenactment of the Clean Air Act. To interpret section 110 (a) (2) to apply to "post-Part D" SIP revisions is clearly inaccurate. The authority for revisions is section 110 (a) (3). In footnote four (4), EPA has solicited comment on whether it should apply the rationale, for making redesignation decisions, of Bethlehem Steel Corp. v. EPA, 723 E. 2d 1034 (7th Cir. 1983) to states not under Seventh Circuit jurisdiction. Clearly this is a legal question which can only be determined by comparing similar cases to the particular jurisdiction in question. An analysis of the decisions of courts in other circuits will provide the necessary guidance. Clearly if there are no other similar Circuit court decisions, the Seventh Circuit has set a precedent, whether or not it is binding is left to the Judiciary to determine. -3- Op The City of Fort Worth is sincere in its efforts to continue to cooperate with and support the EPA in its efforts to resolve the problems with the Clean Air Act and its implementation. We have made substantial and compelling efforts on behalf of our citizenry to assure air quality for the health and welfare of our citizens. We will continue to implement and enforce practical , reasonable and effective measures to reduce air pollutants to protect the public health. We hope that our comments will be viewed as constructive and that we can continue to work with the EPA to create a healthful environment for all of our citizens. Prepared by: Richard Hay & D'Metria Benson City of Fort Worth Fort Worth, Texas 76107 lwm 40-0111 -4-