During this rule making, the US EPA will also reexamine the NSR requirements applicable to existing non attainment areas, in order to address issues of fairness among existing and new non attainment areas. The transitional classification will be available for any area attaining the one-hour standard but not attaining the eight-hour standard at the time the US EPA promulgates the new rules.To encourage early planning and attainment for the eight-hour standard, the US EPA will make the transitional classification available to areas not attaining the eight-hour standard that will need additional local measures beyond the regional transport strategy, as well as to areas that are not affected by the regional transport strategy, provided they meet certain criteria. To receive the transitional classification, these areas must submit an attainment SIP prior to the designation and classification process in the year 2000. The SIP must demonstrate attainment of the eight-hour standard and provide for the implementation of the necessary emission reductions on the same time schedule as the regional transport reductions.By submitting these attainment plans earlier than would have otherwise been required, these areas would be eligible for the transitional classification and would achieve cleaner air much sooner than otherwise required.The majority of areas not attaining the one-hour standard have made substantial progress in evaluating their air quality problems and developing plans to reduce emissions of ozone-causing pollutants. These areas will be eligible for the transitional classification provided that they attain the one-hour standard by the year 2000, and comply with the appropriate provisions of section above depending upon which conditions they meet.For areas not eligible for transitional classification, their work on planning and control programs to meet the one-hour standard by their current attainment date should advance toward meeting the eight-hour standard.
While the additional local reductions that they will need to achieve the eight-hour standard must occur prior to their eight-hour attainment date , for virtually all areas the additional reductions needed to achieve the eight-hour standard can occur after the one-hour attainment date. This approach allows them to make continued progress toward attaining the eight-hour standard throughout the entire period,low round pots without requiring new additional local controls for attaining the eight hour standard until the one-hour standard is attained. These areas, however, will need to submit an implementation plan within three years of designation as non attainment for the new standard for achieving the eight-hour standard. Such a plan can rely in large part on measures needed to attain the one-hour standard. For virtually all of these areas, no additional local control measures beyond those needed to meet the requirements of Subpart 2, Part D of Title I, would be required to be implemented prior to their applicable attainment date for the one-hour standard. Non attainment areas that do not attain the one-hour standard by their attainment date would continue to make progress in accordance with the requirements of Subpart 2, and the control measures needed to meet progress requirements under Subpart 2 should generally be sufficient for meeting the control measure and progress requirements of Subpart 1, as well .After the 1973 OPEC oil embargo, Congress and the public became concerned about the increasing dependence of the U.S. on foreign oil. Since the price of petroleum products was controlled well below market levels, many individuals thought that conservation should be encouraged through the use of non-price mechanisms. In 1975, Congress enacted the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, which placed a particular emphasis on auto fuel economy since the greatest share of petroleum consumption was used by the automobile sector . “This legislation required that the corporate average fuel economy for new cars be raised gradually from 14.2 miles per gallon in model year 1974 to 27.5 miles per gallon by model year 1985” . From the early 1970s to the mid-80s, the average fuel economy of new domestic automobiles increased more than 100 percent .
Gains in CAFE were achieved by: 1) reducing the weight of automobiles, 2) improving engine and drive train efficiency, 3) reducing tire rolling resistance, and 4) improving the aerodynamics of design. Nevertheless, overall gasoline consumption by light-duty vehicles did not decline sharply and is now higher than ever before. There are several reasons why CAFE has not been a more effective instrument for reducing gasoline consumption. The four major factors influencing fuel consumption include: 1) more vehicles in the fleet, 2) more miles driven per vehicle. From 1985 to 1994, there was a 7.6 percentage point increase in the number of trucks and a 0.2 percentage point decrease in the number of passenger cars. The fuel economy of trucks was notably lower than passenger cars , p4-S, Table 4.4). This growth appears to have been driven mainly by demographics, vehicle prices, and consumer incomes. The second factor, average vehicle miles driven, has also risen, particularly for trucks. In addition, the shift in consumer preferences toward light trucks has had an important impact on gasoline consumption. The total number of vehicles miles traveled has been influenced by low gasoline prices. Not surprisingly, the price of gasoline also appears to affect the average miles per gallon through its influence on consumer preferences for more fuel-efficient vehicles and on the decisions of two car families to drive more fuel-efficient automobiles. Nevertheless, it is important to note that CAFE only directly improves miles per gallon of new vehicles. The overall impacts on the fuel economy of the entire fleet occurs very slowly, as older vehicles are retired. At present, the average fuel economy for the entire fleet is approximately 24 miles per gallon, which is about the same as in 1980. In an evaluation of the effects of CAFE on the nation’s fuel consumption, it is important to recognize two counterproductive effects of these standards. First, CAFE encourages increased driving because it lowers the cost of travel. Second, CAFE can encourage the retention of older, low-mileage vehicles because it adds to the costs of manufacturing new vehicles. Hence, these factors have the potential to inadvertently increase pollution because emissions increase proportionately with miles driven and more than proportionately with the age of the vehicles.
The National Environmental Policy Act is one of the most significant pieces of environmental legislation in U.S. history. Passed by Congress in 1969 and signed into law in 1970, NEPA requires federal agencies to consider the environmental consequences of their actions before executing them. In preparing and passing NEPA, Congress recognized “the profound impact of man’s activity on the interrelations of all components of the natural environment, particularly the profound influences of population growth, high-density urbanization,plastic pots 30 liters industrial expansion, resource exploitation, and new and expanding technological advances”. The language of NEPA recognizes the importance of several things: 1) preserving the environment for future generations; 2) maintaining the safety, health, productivity, and well being of the American people; 3) using the products and materials of the natural environment of the country without diminishing them to the point of destruction; and 4) maintaining a balance between the growing population of the U.S. and the country’s natural resources . NEPA requires all agencies of the federal government to assess the possible adverse environmental impacts of proposed actions and legislation. NEPA applies to actions where FHWA, FTA, or agencies delegated the authority for such decisions have control over project approval. Consequently, NEPA applies to many of the projects to which conformity applies . If a federally proposed project has the potential to yield a significant environmental impact, compliance with the NEPA mandates is accomplished through the preparation of an environmental impact Statement . Under NEPA, all EISs must include: 1) a detailed Statement on the environmental impact of the proposed action; 2) a description of any adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented; 3) a discussion of alternatives to the proposed action; 4) a treatment of the relationship between local short-term uses of the environment and long-term productivity of the area; and 5) a discussion of any irreversible commitments of resources to be involved in a proposed action ) . In Title II of NEPA, Congress established the Council on Environmental Quality as the administering agency of the Act. NEPA required that CEQ develop a set of regulations for implementing the NEPA mandates. These Regulations are contained at 40 CFR Parts 1500 to 1508. Under the CEQ regulations, federal agencies are required to adopt procedures to ensure that applicable project-related decisions are made in accordance with the policies and purposes of the Act. The US DOT’s FHWA and FTA NEPA regulations are contained at 23 CFR Part 771 .In response to many air pollution problems, California adopted the California Clean Air Act in 1988 . California enacted the legislation in recognition of the fact that most urban areas of the State had not attained federal ambient air quality standards by the federal deadline of August 31, 1988. The CCAA directed the development and implementation of California’s own program to attain the ambient air quality standards at the earliest practicable date. Although a significant portion of the CCAA focuses on attainment of ambient standards in air pollution control districts, the statute directs the CARB to reduce emissions of motor vehicles .
The CCAA added a new section to the Health and Safety Code, Section 43000.5, which States: “the State board should take immediate action to implement both short- and long-range programs of across-the-board reductions in vehicular emissions which can be relied upon by the districts in the preparation of their attainment plans or plan revisions”. The CCAA also amended Section 43013, which added a subsection authorizing standards for specific types of motor vehicles and related equipment. “The State Board may adopt and implement motor vehicle emissions standards, in-use performance standards, and motor vehicle fuel specifications for the control of air contaminants and sources of air pollution which the State board has found to be necessary, cost-effective, and technologically feasible to carry out the purposes of this division” . Finally, the CCAA enacted Section 43018. Section 43018 States that the State Board shall try to achieve the maximum degree of emission reduction in mobile and vehicle emissions to meet the State standards. Section 43018 States that the Board shall take whatever actions are necessary, no later than January 1, 1992, to attain a reduction in the emissions of HC and NOx by December 31, 2000. The Board must also achieve maximum feasible reductions in particulates, CO, and toxic air contaminants. Section 43018 establishes that the Board must adopt standards that result in cost-effective control measures on all motor vehicles and motor vehicle fuels. Finally, Section 43018 “…establishes a specific timetable for the Board to conduct workshops and rule making hearings for specific regulations regarding motor vehicles and motor vehicle fuels.”In summary, the California legislators enacted the CCAA as a result of the State’s recognition of its air pollution problems and its inability to meet the federal ambient air quality standards in many urban areas by August 1988. The Act is ambitious and far-reaching in its goals and objectives. For the first time, a vehicle and its fuel would be treated as a system that would have to meet exhaust emission standards. This integrated approach, based on performance of the vehicle/fuel system, provides flexibility and encourages the vehicle and fuel industries to work together to develop the least polluting and most cost-effective vehicle and fuel technologies. Hence, California was the first State to adopt the most stringent vehicle emissions legislation. It is important to note that California legislators had established these goals and standards prior to enactment of the federal CAA 1990. Although the California regulations were already in place, the CAA of 1990 require the introduction of clean-fuel cars in California beginning in 1996. The CAA of 1990 also provides a voluntary “opt-in” provision that allows other States to adopt the California standards . California is the only State that can set higher emission standards than the federal government; after California has established higher standards other States can then adopt them.