Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Georgia: Approval of Revisions to the Georgia State Implementation Plan

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[GA-47-200002; FRL-6502-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Georgia:

Approval of Revisions to the Georgia State Implementation Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve the ground-level 1-hour ozone

attainment demonstration State implementation plan (SIP) for the

Atlanta nonattainment area submitted by the Georgia Environmental

Protection Division (GAEPD) on October 28, 1999, and supplemented on

November 23, 1999, provided the State follows through on certain

commitments discussed in this notice. The November 23 supplemental

information includes a clarification of the commitments discussed in

this notice and an updated shortfall calculation. The discussion in

this notice with respect to the shortfall is based on the supplemental

information. The November 22 submittal meets the completeness criteria

for parallel processing therefore EPA is proposing approval based on

this information as well as the October 28 submittal. We are also

proposing, in the alternative, to approve in part and disapprove in

part this demonstration, if EPA concludes that the motor vehicle

emissions budget submitted by the State is not consistent with

attainment and therefore inadequate, or the State does not fulfill

commitments to submit the rules to

[[Page 70479]]

achieve additional emission reductions, establish enforceable

requirements for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic

compound (VOC) reasonably available control technology (RACT) on major

sources outside the nonattainment area, and revise Georgia's low sulfur

fuel rule to address the enforcement and waiver issues in accordance

with EPA guidance. EPA is also proposing to approve revisions Georgia's

Rules for Air Quality and to extend the attainment date.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before February 14,

2000.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be addressed to: Scott M. Martin at the

EPA, Region 4 Air Planning Branch, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta,

Georgia 30303.

Copies of the State submittal are available at the following

addresses for inspection during normal business hours:

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Air Planning Branch, 61

Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.

Air Protection Branch, Georgia Environmental Protection Division,

Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 4244 International Parkway,

Suite 120, Atlanta, Georgia 30354. Telephone (404) 363-7000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Martin at (404) 562-9036.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This section provides background information

on attainment demonstration SIPs for the 1-hour ozone national ambient

air quality standard (NAAQS) and an analysis of the 1-hour ozone

attainment demonstration SIP submittal for the Atlanta nonattainment

area.

Table of Contents

I. Background Information

II. EPA's Review and Technical Information

III. Administrative Requirements

I. Background Information

A. What is the Basis for the State's Attainment Demonstration SIP?

1. CAA Requirements

The Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA) requires EPA to

establish national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or standards)

for certain widespread pollutants that cause or contribute to air

pollution that is reasonably anticipated to endanger public health or

welfare. CAA sections 108 and 109. In 1979, EPA promulgated the 1-hour

0.12 parts per million (ppm) ground-level ozone standard. 44 FR 8202

(Feb. 8, 1979). Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources.

Rather, emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile

organic compounds (VOCs) react in the presence of sunlight to form

ground-level ozone. NOX and VOC are referred to as

precursors of ozone.

An area exceeds the 1-hour ozone standard each time an ambient air

quality monitor records a 1-hour average ozone concentration above

0.124 ppm. An area is violating the standard if, over a consecutive

three-year period, more than three exceedances are expected to occur at

any one monitor. The CAA, as amended in 1990, required EPA to designate

as nonattainment any area that was violating the 1-hour ozone standard,

generally based on air quality monitoring data from the three-year

period from 1987-1989. CAA section 107(d)(4); 56 FR 56694 (Nov. 6,

1991). The CAA further classified these areas, based on the area's

design value, as marginal, moderate, serious, severe or extreme. CAA

section 181(a). Marginal areas were suffering the least significant air

pollution problems while the areas classified as severe and extreme had

the most significant air pollution problems. The design value is the

4th highest ozone value over the relevant 3 year period at the

violating monitor with the highest ozone levels.

The control requirements and dates by which attainment needs to be

achieved vary with the area's classification. Marginal areas are

subject to the fewest mandated control requirements and have the

earliest attainment date. Severe and extreme areas are subject to more

stringent planning requirements but are provided more time to attain

the standard. Serious areas were required to attain the 1-hour standard

by November 15, 1999 and severe areas are required to attain by

November 15, 2005 or November 15, 2007. The Atlanta ozone nonattainment

area is classified as serious and its attainment date was November 15,

1999. The area does not have three years of air quality data with three

or less expected exceedances at every monitor. The State has requested

an attainment date extension pursuant to the EPA policy discussed in

section I.A.3.

Under section 182(c)(2) and (d) of the CAA, serious and severe

areas were required to submit by November 15, 1994 demonstrations of

how they would attain the 1-hour standard and how they would achieve

reductions in VOC emissions of 9 percent for each three-year period

until the attainment year (rate-of-progress or ROP). (In some cases,

NOX emission reductions can be substituted for the required

VOC emission reductions.) Today, in this proposed rule, EPA is

proposing action on the attainment demonstration SIP submitted by the

GAEPD for the Atlanta ozone nonattainment area. EPA has already

approved the State's 9 Percent ROP plan for reductions from 1996-1999.

In addition, elsewhere in this Federal Register, EPA is today proposing

to take action on nine other serious or severe 1-hour ozone attainment

demonstration and, in some cases, ROP SIPs. The additional nine areas

are Greater Connecticut (CT), Springfield (Western Massachusetts) (MA),

New-York-North New Jersey-Long Island (NY-NJ-CT), Baltimore (MD),

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton (PA-NJ-DE-MD), Metropolitan Washington,

DC (DC-MD-VA), Milwaukee-Racine (WI), Chicago-Gary-Lake County (IL-IN),

and Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (TX).

In general, an attainment demonstration SIP includes a modeling

analysis component showing how the area will achieve the standard by

its attainment date and the control measures necessary to achieve those

reductions. Another component of the attainment demonstration SIP is a

motor vehicle emissions budget for transportation conformity purposes.

Transportation conformity is a process for ensuring that States

consider the effects of emissions associated with new or improved

federally-funded or regionally significant roadways on attainment of

the standard. As described in section 176(c)(2)(A), attainment

demonstrations necessarily include the estimates of motor vehicle

emissions that are consistent with attainment, which then act as a

budget or ceiling for the purposes of determining whether

transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to the attainment

SIP.

2. History and Time Frame for the State's Attainment Demonstration SIP

Notwithstanding significant efforts by the States, in 1995 EPA

recognized that many States in the eastern half of the United States

could not meet the November 1994 time frame for submitting an

attainment demonstration SIP because emissions of NOX and

VOCs in upwind States (and the ozone formed by these emissions)

affected these nonattainment areas and the full impact of this effect

had not yet been determined. This phenomenon is called ozone transport.

On March 2, 1995, Mary D. Nichols, EPA's then Assistant

Administrator for Air and Radiation, issued a memorandum to EPA's

Regional Administrators acknowledging the efforts made by States but

noting the remaining difficulties in making attainment demonstration

SIP

[[Page 70480]]

submittals.1 Recognizing the problems created by ozone

transport, the March 2, 1995 memorandum called for a collaborative

process among the States in the eastern half of the country to evaluate

and address transport of ozone and its precursors. This memorandum led

to the formation of the Ozone Transport Assessment Group

(OTAG)2 and provided for the States to submit the attainment

demonstration SIPs based on the expected time frames for OTAG to

complete its evaluation of ozone transport.

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

\1\ Memorandum, ``Ozone Attainment Demonstrations,'' issued

March 2, 1995. A copy of the memorandum may be found on EPA's web

site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.

\2\ Letter from Mary A. Gade, Director, State of Illinois

Environmental Protection Agency to Environmental Council of States

(ECOS) Members, dated April 13, 1995.

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

In June 1997, the OTAG concluded and provided EPA with

recommendations regarding ozone transport. The OTAG generally concluded

that transport of ozone and the precursor NOX is significant

and should be reduced regionally to enable States in the eastern half

of the country to attain the ozone NAAQS.

In recognition of the length of the OTAG process, in a December 29,

1997 memorandum, Richard Wilson, EPA's then Acting Assistant

Administrator for Air and Radiation, provided until April 1998 for

States to submit the following elements of their attainment

demonstration SIPs for serious and severe nonattainment areas: (1)

evidence that the applicable control measures in subpart 2 of part D of

title I of the CAA were adopted and implemented or were on an

expeditious course to being adopted and implemented; (2) a list of

measures needed to meet the remaining ROP emissions reduction

requirement and to reach attainment; (3) for severe areas only, a

commitment to adopt and submit target calculations for post-1999 ROP

and the control measures necessary for attainment and ROP plans through

the attainment year by the end of 2000 3; (4) a commitment

to implement the SIP control programs in a timely manner and to meet

ROP emissions reductions and attainment; and (5) evidence of a public

hearing on the State submittal.4 This submission is

sometimes referred to as the Phase 2 submission. Motor vehicle

emissions budgets can be established based on a commitment to adopt the

measures needed for attainment and identification of the measures

needed. Thus, State submissions due in April 1998 under the Wilson

policy should have included a motor vehicle emissions budget.

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

\3\ [Severe areas only] In general, a commitment for severe

areas to adopt by December 2000 the control measures necessary for

attainment and ROP plans through the attainment year applies to any

additional measures that were not otherwise required to be submitted

earlier. (For example, this memorandum was not intended to allow

States to delay submission of measures required under the CAA, such

as inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs or reasonable available

control technology (RACT) regulations, required at an earlier time.)

Thus, this commitment applies to any control measures or emission

reductions on which the State relied for purposes of the modeled

attainment demonstration or for ROP. To the extent [State] has

relied on a commitment to submit these measures by December 2000 for

the [name] nonattainment area, EPA is proposing a conditional

approval of the area's attainment demonstration. Some severe areas

submitted the actual adopted control measures and are not relying on

a commitment.

\4\ Memorandum, ``Guidance for Implementing the 1-Hour Ozone and

Pre-Existing PM 10 NAAQS,'' issues December 29, 1997. A copy of this

memorandum may be found on EPA's web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/

oarpg/t1pgm.html.

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

Building upon the OTAG recommendations and technical analyses, in

November 1997, EPA proposed action addressing the ozone transport

problem. In its proposal, the EPA found that current SIPs in 22 States

and the District of Columbia (23 jurisdictions) were insufficient to

provide for attainment and maintenance of the 1-hour standard because

they did not regulate NOX emissions that significantly

contribute to ozone transport. 62 FR 60318 (Nov. 7, 1997). The EPA

finalized that rule in September 1998, calling on the 23 jurisdictions

to revise their SIPs to require NOX emissions reductions

within the State to a level consistent with a NOX emissions

budget identified in the final rule. 63 FR 57356 (Oct. 27, 1998). This

final rule is commonly referred to as the NOX SIP Call.

3. Attainment Date Delays Due to Transport

On July 16, 1998, EPA's then Acting Assistant Administrator,

Richard Wilson, issued a guidance memorandum intended to provide

further relief to areas affected by ozone transport.5 The

memorandum recognized that many moderate and serious nonattainment

areas are affected by transported pollution from either an upwind area

in the same State with a higher classification and later attainment

date, and/or from an upwind area in another State that is significantly

contributing to the downwind area's nonattainment problem. The policy

recognized that some downwind areas may be unable to meet their own

attainment dates, despite doing all that was required in their local

area, because an upwind area may not have adopted and implemented all

of the controls that would benefit the downwind area through control of

transported ozone before the downwind area's attainment date. Thus, the

policy provided that upon a successful demonstration that an upwind

area has interfered with attainment and that the downwind area is

adopting all measures required for its local area 6 for

attainment but for this interference, EPA may grant an extension of the

downwind area's attainment date.7 Once an area receives an

extension of its attainment date based on transport, the area would no

longer be subject to reclassification to a higher classification and

subject to additional requirements for failure to attain by its

original attainment date provided it was doing all that was necessary

locally.

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

\5\ Memorandum, ``Extension of Attainment Dates for Downwind

Transport Areas,'' issued July 16, 1998. This memorandum is

applicable to both moderate and serious ozone nonattainment areas. A

copy of this policy may be found on EPA's web site at http://

www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.

\6\ Local area measures would include all of the measures within

the local modeling domain that were relied on for purposes of the

modeled attainment demonstration.

\7\ The policy provides that the area must meet four criteria to

receive an attainment date extension. In summary, the area must: (1)

be identified as a downwind area affected by transport from either

an upwind area in the same State with a later attainment date or an

upwind area in another State that significantly contributes to

downwind nonattainment; (2) submit an approvable attainment

demonstration with any necessary, adopted local measures and with an

attainment date that reflects when the upwind reductions will occur;

(3) adopt all local measures required under the area's current

classification and any additional measures necessary to demonstrate

attainment; and (4) provide that it will implement all adopted

measures as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than the date

by which the upwind reductions needed for attainment will be

achieved.

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

A request from the State of Georgia for such an extension of the

attainment date for the Atlanta ozone nonattainment area to 2003 and

EPA's proposed response is discussed in this action.

4. Time Frame for Taking Action on Attainment Demonstration SIPs for 10

Serious and Severe Areas

The States generally submitted the SIPs between April and October

of 1998; some States are still submitting additional revisions as

described below. Under the CAA, EPA is required to approve or

disapprove a State's submission no later than 18 months following

submission. (The statute provides up to 6 months for a completeness

determination and an additional 12 months for approval or disapproval.)

The EPA believes that it is important to keep the process moving

forward in evaluating these plans and, as appropriate, approving them.

Thus, in today's Federal Register, EPA is proposing to take action on

the 10

[[Page 70481]]

serious and severe 1-hour ozone attainment demonstration SIPs (located

in 13 States and the District of Columbia) and intends to take final

action on these submissions over the next 6-12 months. The reader is

referred to individual dates in this document for specific information

on actions leading to EPA's final rulemaking on these plans.

5. Options for Action on a State's Attainment Demonstration SIP

Depending on the circumstances unique to each of the 10 area SIP

submissions on which EPA is proposing action today, EPA is proposing

one or more of these types of approval or disapproval in the

alternative. In addition, these proposals may identify additional

action that will be necessary from the State.

The CAA provides for EPA to approve, disapprove, partially approve

or conditionally approve a State's plan submission. CAA section 110(k).

The EPA must fully approve the submission if it meets the attainment

demonstration requirement of the CAA. If the submission is deficient in

some way, EPA may disapprove the submission. In the alternative, if

portions of the submission are approvable, EPA may partially approve

and partially disapprove, or may conditionally approve based on a

commitment to correct the deficiency by a date certain, which can be no

later than one year from the date of EPA's final conditional approval.

The EPA may partially approve a submission if separable parts of

the submission, standing alone, are consistent with the CAA. For

example, if a State submits a modeled attainment demonstration,

including control measures, but the modeling does not demonstrate

attainment, EPA could approve the control measures and disapprove the

modeling for failing to demonstrate attainment.

The EPA may issue a conditional approval based on a State's

commitment to expeditiously correct a deficiency by a date certain that

can be no later than one year following EPA's conditional approval.

Such commitments do not need to be independently enforceable because,

if the State does not fulfill its commitment, the conditional approval

is converted to a disapproval. For example, if a State commits to

submit additional control measures and fails to submit them or EPA

determines the State's submission of the control measures is

incomplete, the EPA will notify the State by letter that the

conditional approval has been converted to a disapproval. If the State

submits control measures that EPA determines are complete or that are

deemed complete, EPA will determine through rulemaking whether the

State's attainment demonstration is fully approvable or whether the

conditional approval of the attainment demonstration should be

converted to a disapproval.

Finally, EPA has recognized that in some limited circumstances, it

may be appropriate to issue a full approval for a submission that

consists, in part, of an enforceable commitment. Unlike the commitment

for conditional approval, such an enforceable commitment can be

enforced in court by EPA or citizens. In addition, this type of

commitment may extend beyond one year following EPA's approval action.

Thus, EPA may accept such an enforceable commitment where it is

infeasible for the State to accomplish the necessary action in the

short term.

B. What Are the Components of a Modeled Attainment Demonstration?

The EPA provides that States may rely on a modeled attainment

demonstration supplemented with additional evidence to demonstrate

attainment.8 In order to have a complete modeling

demonstration submission, States should have submitted the required

modeling analysis and identified any additional evidence that EPA

should consider in evaluating whether the area will attain the

standard.

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

\8\ The EPA issued guidance on the air quality modeling that is

used to demonstrate attainment with the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See U.S.

EPA, (1991), Guideline for Regulatory Application of the Urban

Airshed Model, EPA-450/4-91-013, (July 1991). A copy may be found on

EPA's web site at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/ (file name:

``UAMREG''). See also U.S. EPA, (1996), Guidance on Use of Modeled

Results to Demonstrate Attainment of the Ozone NAAQS, EPA-454/B-95-

007, (June 1996). A copy may be found on EPA's web site at http://

www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/ (file name: ``O3TEST'').

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

1. Modeling Requirements

For purposes of demonstrating attainment, the CAA requires serious

and severe areas to use photochemical grid modeling or an analytical

method EPA determines to be as effective. The photochemical grid model

is set up using meteorological conditions conducive to the formation of

ozone. Emissions for a base year are used to evaluate the model's

ability to reproduce actual monitored air quality values and to predict

air quality changes in the attainment year due to the emission changes

which include growth up to and controls implemented by the attainment

year. A modeling domain is chosen that encompasses the nonattainment

area. Attainment is demonstrated when all predicted concentrations

inside the modeling domain are at or below the NAAQS or at an

acceptable upper limit above the NAAQS permitted under certain

conditions by EPA's guidance. When the predicted concentrations are

above the NAAQS, an optional weight of evidence determination, which

incorporates but is not limited to other analyses such as air quality

and emissions trends, may be used to address uncertainty inherent in

the application of photochemical grid models.

The EPA guidance identifies the features of a modeling analysis

that are essential to obtain credible results. First, the State must

develop and implement a modeling protocol. The modeling protocol

describes the methods and procedures to be used in conducting the

modeling analyses and provides for policy oversight and technical

review by individuals responsible for developing or assessing the

attainment demonstration (State and local agencies, EPA Regional

offices, the regulated community, and public interest groups). Second,

for purposes of developing the information to put into the model, the

State must select air pollution days, i.e., days in the past with bad

air quality, that are representative of the ozone pollution problem for

the nonattainment area. Third, the State needs to identify the

appropriate dimensions of the area to be modeled, i.e., the domain

size. The domain should be larger than the designated nonattainment

area to reduce uncertainty in the boundary conditions and should

include large upwind sources just outside the nonattainment area. In

general, the domain is considered the local area where control measures

are most beneficial to bring the area into attainment. Fourth, the

State needs to determine the grid resolution. The horizontal and

vertical resolutions in the model affect the dispersion and transport

of emission plumes. Artificially large grid cells (too few vertical

layers and horizontal grids) may dilute concentrations and may not

properly consider impacts of complex terrain, complex meteorology, and

land/water interfaces. Fifth, the State needs to generate

meteorological data that describe atmospheric conditions and emissions

inputs. Finally, the State needs to verify that the model is properly

simulating the chemistry and atmospheric conditions through diagnostic

analyses and model performance tests. Once these steps are

satisfactorily completed, the model is ready to be used to generate air

quality

[[Page 70482]]

estimates to support an attainment demonstration.

The modeled attainment test compares model predicted 1-hour daily

maximum concentrations in all grid cells for the attainment year to the

level of the NAAQS. A predicted concentration above 0.124 ppm ozone

indicates that the area is expected to exceed the standard in the

attainment year and a prediction at or below 0.124 ppm indicates that

the area is expected to attain the standard. This type of test is often

referred to as an exceedance test. The EPA's guidance recommends that

States use either of two modeled attainment or exceedance tests for the

1-hour ozone NAAQS: a deterministic test or a statistical test.

The deterministic test requires the State to compare predicted 1-

hour daily maximum ozone concentrations for each modeled day

9 to the attainment level of 0.124 ppm. If none of the

predictions exceed 0.124 ppm, the test is passed.

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

\9\ The initial, ``ramp-up'' days for each episode are excluded

from this determination.

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

The statistical test takes into account the fact that the form of

the 1-hour ozone standard allows exceedances. If, over a three-year

period, the area has an average of one or fewer exceedances per year,

the area is not violating the standard. Thus, if the State models a

very extreme day, the statistical test provides that a prediction above

0.124 ppm up to a certain upper limit may be consistent with attainment

of the standard. (The form of the 1-hour standard allows for up to

three readings above the standard over a three-year period before an

area is considered to be in violation.)

The acceptable upper limit above 0.124 ppm is determined by

examining the size of exceedances at monitoring sites which meet the 1-

hour NAAQS. For example, a monitoring site for which the four highest

1-hour average concentrations over a three-year period are 0.136 ppm,

0.130 ppm, 0.128 ppm and 0.122 ppm is attaining the standard. To

identify an acceptable upper limit, the statistical likelihood of

observing exceedances of the ozone standard at various concentrations

is equated to the severity of the modeled day. The upper limit

generally represents the maximum ozone concentration observed at a

location on a single day and it would be the only reading above the

standard that would be expected to occur no more than an average of

once a year over a three-year period. Therefore, if the maximum ozone

concentration predicted by the model is below the acceptable upper

limit, in this case 0.136 ppm, then EPA might conclude that the modeled

attainment test is passed. Generally, exceedances well above 0.124 ppm

are very unusual at monitoring sites meeting the NAAQS. Thus, these

upper limits are rarely substantially higher than the attainment level

of 0.124 ppm.

2. Additional Analyses Where Modeling Fails To Show Attainment

When the modeling does not conclusively demonstrate attainment,

additional analyses may be presented to help determine whether the area

will attain the standard. As with other predictive tools, there are

inherent uncertainties associated with modeling and its results. For

example, there are uncertainties in some of the modeling inputs, such

as the meteorological and emissions data bases for individual days and

in the methodology used to assess the severity of an exceedance at

individual sites. The EPA's guidance recognizes these limitations, and

provides a means for considering other evidence to help assess whether

attainment of the NAAQS is likely. The process by which this is done is

called a weight of evidence (WOE) determination.

Under a WOE determination, the State can rely on and EPA will

consider factors such as other modeled attainment tests, e.g., a

rollback analysis; other modeled outputs, e.g., changes in the

predicted frequency and pervasiveness of exceedances and predicted

changes in the design value; actual observed air quality trends;

estimated emissions trends; analyses of monitored air quality data; the

responsiveness of the model predictions to further controls; and,

whether there are additional control measures that are or will be

approved into the SIP but were not included in the modeling analysis.

This list is not an exclusive list of factors that may be considered

and these factors could vary from case to case. The EPA's guidance

contains no limit on how close a modeled attainment test must be to

passing to conclude that other evidence besides an attainment test is

sufficiently compelling to suggest attainment. However, the further a

modeled attainment test is from being passed, the more compelling the

WOE needs to be.

The EPA's 1996 modeling guidance also recognizes a need to perform

a mid-course review as a means for addressing uncertainty in the

modeling results. Because of the uncertainty in long term projections,

EPA believes a viable attainment demonstration that relies on WOE needs

to contain provisions for periodic review of monitoring, emissions, and

modeling data to assess the extent to which refinements to emission

control measures are needed. The mid-course review is discussed in

Section C.6.

C. What Is the Frame Work for Proposing Action on the Attainment

Demonstration SIPs?

In addition to the modeling analysis and WOE support demonstrating

attainment, the EPA has identified the following key elements which

must be present in order for EPA to approve or conditionally approve

the 1-hour attainment demonstration SIPs. These elements are listed

below and then described in detail.

--CAA measures and measures relied on in the modeled attainment

demonstration SIP. This includes adopted and submitted rules for all

previously required CAA mandated measures for the specific area

classification. This also includes measures that may not be required

for the area classification but that the State relied on in the SIP

submission for attainment and ROP plans on which EPA is proposing to

take action today.

--NOx reductions affecting boundary conditions.

--Motor vehicle emissions budget. A motor vehicle emissions budget

which can be determined by EPA to be adequate for conformity purposes.

--Tier 2/Sulfur program benefits where needed to demonstrate

attainment. Inclusion of reductions expected from EPA's Tier 2 tailpipe

and low sulfur-in-fuel standards in the attainment demonstration and

the motor vehicle emissions budget.

--In certain areas, additional measures to further reduce emissions to

support the attainment test. Additional measures may be measures

adopted regionally such as in the Ozone Transport Region (OTR), or

locally (intrastate) in individual States.

--Mid-course review. An enforceable commitment to conduct a mid-course

review and evaluation based on air quality and emission trends. The

mid-course review would show whether the adopted control measures are

sufficient to reach attainment by the area's attainment date, or that

additional control measures are necessary.

1. CAA Measures and Measures Relied on in the Modeled Attainment

Demonstration SIP

The States should have adopted the control measures already

required under the CAA for the area classification. Since these 10

serious and severe areas need to achieve substantial reductions

[[Page 70483]]

from their 1990 emissions levels in order to attain, EPA anticipates

that these areas need all of the measures required under the CAA to

attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.

In addition, the State may have included control measures in its

attainment strategy that are in addition to measures required in the

CAA. (For serious areas, these should have already been identified and

adopted, whereas severe areas have until December 2000 to submit

measures necessary to achieve ROP through the attainment year and to

attain.) For purposes of fully approving the State's SIP, the State

will need to adopt and submit all VOC and NOx controls within the local

modeling domain that were relied on for purposes of the modeled

attainment demonstration.

The following table presents a summary of the CAA requirements that

need to be met for each serious nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone

NAAQS. These requirements are specified in section 182 of the CAA.

Information on more measures that States may have adopted or relied on

in their current SIP submissions is not shown in the table. EPA will

need to take final action approving all measures relied on for

attainment, including the required ROP control measures and target

calculations, before EPA can issue a final full approval of the

attainment demonstration as meeting CAA section 182(c)(2) (for serious

areas) or (d) (for severe areas). With submittal of the attainment

demonstration on October 28, 1999, the State of Georgia has submitted

all of the requirements for a serious ozone nonattainment area.

CAA Requirements for Serious Areas

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

--New Source Review (NSR) for VOC and NOx, including an offset ratio of

1.2:1 and a major VOC and NOx source cutoff of 50 tons per year (tpy)

--Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) for VOC and NOx \1\

--Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) program for vehicles

--15 percent VOC emission reduction plans

--Emissions inventory

--Emission statements rule

--Attainment demonstration

--9 percent ROP plan through 1999

--Clean fuels program or substitute

--Enhanced monitoring Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations

(PAMS)

--Stage II vapor recovery

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

\1\ Unless the area has in effect a NOx waiver under section 182(f).

Atlanta is not such an area.

2. NOx Reductions Consistent With the Modeling Demonstration

The EPA completed final rulemaking on the NOx SIP call on October

27, 1998, which required States to address transport of NOx and ozone

to other States. To address transport, the NOx SIP call established

emissions budgets for NOx that 23 jurisdictions were required to show

they would meet through enforceable SIP measures adopted and submitted

by September 30, 1999. The NOx SIP call is intended to reduce emissions

in upwind States that significantly contribute to nonattainment

problems. The EPA did not identify specific sources that the States

must regulate nor did EPA limit the States' choices regarding where to

achieve the emission reductions. Subsequently, a three-judge panel of

the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an

order staying the portion of the NOx SIP call rule requiring States to

submit rules by September 30, 1999.

The NOx SIP call rule establishes budgets for the States in which 9

of the nonattainment areas for which EPA is proposing action today are

located. The 9 areas are: Greater Connecticut, Springfield MA, New

York-North New Jersey-Long Island (NY-NJ-CT), Baltimore MD,

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton (PA-NJ-DE-MD), Metropolitan Washington,

D.C. (DC-MD-VA), Atlanta GA, Milwaukee-Racine WI, and Chicago-Gary-Lake

County (IL-IN).

Emission reductions that will be achieved through EPA's NOx SIP

call will reduce the levels of ozone and ozone precursors entering

nonattainment areas at their boundaries. For purposes of developing

attainment demonstrations, States define local modeling domains that

include both the nonattainment area and nearby surrounding areas. The

ozone levels at the boundary of the local modeling domain are reflected

in modeled attainment demonstrations and are referred to as boundary

conditions. With the exception of Houston, the 1-hour attainment

demonstrations on which EPA is proposing action have relied, in part,

on the NOx SIP Call reductions for purposes of determining the boundary

conditions of the modeling domain. Emission reductions assumed in the

attainment demonstrations are modeled to occur both within the State

and in upwind States; thus, intrastate reductions as well as reductions

in other States impact the boundary conditions. Although the court has

indefinitely stayed the SIP submission deadline, the NOx SIP Call rule

remains in effect. Therefore, EPA believes it is appropriate to allow

States to continue to assume the reductions from the NOx SIP call in

areas outside the local 1-hour modeling domains. If States assume

control levels and emission reductions other than those of the NOx SIP

call within their State but outside of the modeling domain, States must

also adopt control measures to achieve those reductions in order to

have an approvable plan.

Accordingly, States in which the nonattainment areas are located

will not be required to adopt measures outside the modeling domain to

achieve the NOx SIP call budgets prior to the time that all States are

required to comply with the NOx SIP call. If the reductions from the

NOx SIP call do not occur as planned, States will need to revise their

SIPs to add additional local measures or obtain interstate reductions,

or both, in order to provide sufficient reductions needed for

attainment.

As provided in section 1 above, any controls assumed by the State

inside the local modeling domain 10 for purposes of the

modeled attainment demonstration must be adopted and submitted as part

of the State's 1-hour attainment demonstration SIP. It is only for

reductions occurring outside the local modeling domain that States may

assume implementation of NOx SIP call measures and the resulting

boundary conditions.

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

\10\ For the purposes of this document, ``local modeling

domain'' is typically an urban scale domain with horizontal

dimensions less than about 300 km on a side, horizontal grid

resolution less than or equal to 5 x 5 km or finer. The domain is

large enough to ensure that emissions occurring at 8 am in the

domain's center are still within the domain at 8 pm the same day. If

recirculation of the nonattainment area's previous day's emissions

is believed to contribute to an observed problem, the domain is

large enough to characterize this.

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

3. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget

The EPA believes that attainment demonstration SIPs must

necessarily estimate the motor vehicle emissions that will be produced

in the attainment year and demonstrate that this emissions level, when

considered with emissions from all other sources, is consistent with

attainment. The estimate of motor vehicle emissions is used to

determine the conformity of transportation plans and programs to the

SIP, as described by CAA section 176(c)(2)(A). For transportation

conformity purposes, the estimate of motor vehicle emissions is known

as the motor vehicle emissions budget. The EPA believes that

appropriately identified motor vehicle emissions budgets are a

necessary part of an attainment demonstration SIP. A SIP cannot

effectively demonstrate attainment unless it identifies the level

[[Page 70484]]

of motor vehicle emissions that can be produced while still

demonstrating attainment.

The EPA has determined that except for the Western MA (Springfield)

attainment demonstration SIP, the motor vehicle emission budgets for

all areas in today's proposals are inadequate or missing from the

attainment demonstration. Therefore, EPA is proposing to disapprove the

attainment demonstration SIPs for those nine areas if the States do not

submit motor vehicle emissions budgets that EPA can find adequate by

May 31, 2000.11 In order for EPA to complete the adequacy

process by the end of May, States should submit a budget no later than

December 31, 1999.12 If an area does not have a motor

vehicle emissions budget that EPA can determine adequate for conformity

purposes by May 31, 2000, EPA plans to take final action at that time

disapproving in full or in part the area's attainment demonstration.

The emissions budget should reflect all the motor vehicle control

measures contained in the attainment demonstration, i.e., measures

already adopted for the nonattainment area as well as those yet to be

adopted.

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

\11\ For severe areas, EPA will determine the adequacy of the

emissions budgets associated with the post-1999 ROP plans once the

States submit the target calculations, which are due no later than

December 2000.

\12\ A final budget is preferred; but, if the State public

hearing process is not yet complete, then the draft budget for

public hearing may be submitted. The adequacy process generally

takes at least 90 days. Therefore, in order for EPA to complete the

adequacy process no later than the end of May, EPA must have by

February 15, 2000, the final budget or a draft that is substantially

similar to what the final budget will be. The State must submit the

final budget by April 15, 2000.

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

The EPA is currently reviewing the motor vehicle emissions budgets

submitted by the GAEPD on October 28, 1999, for adequacy. Therefore EPA

is proposing in the alternative to disapprove in part the attainment

demonstration for the Atlanta area by May 31, 1999, if the submitted

motor vehicle emissions budgets are found to be inadequate by EPA. To

be found adequate, the emissions budget should reflect all the motor

vehicle control measures contained in the attainment demonstration,

i.e., measures already adopted for the nonattainment area as well as

those yet to be adopted.

4. Tier 2/Sulfur Program Benefits

The attainment date GAEPD has requested if before the

implementation of Tier 2 and therefore Tier 2 is not assumed for

attainment.

5. Additional Measures To Further Reduce Emissions

The EPA is proposing to find that the attainment demonstrations for

New York-North New Jersey-Long Island; Baltimore; Philadelphia-

Wilmington-Trenton; Houston; and Atlanta, even considering the Tier II/

Sulfur program reductions and the WOE, will not achieve attainment

without the application of additional emission control measures to

achieve additional emission reductions. Thus, for each of these areas,

EPA has identified specific tons per day emissions of NOX

and/or VOC that must be reduced through additional control measures in

order to demonstrate attainment and to enable EPA to approve the

demonstration. The need for additional emission reductions is generally

based on a lack of sufficient compelling evidence that the

demonstration shows attainment at the current level of adopted or

planned emission controls. This is discussed in detail below for the

Atlanta ozone nonattainment area. The method used by EPA to calculate

the amount of additional reductions is described in a technical support

document located in the record for this proposed rule. Briefly, the

method makes use of the relationship between ozone and its precursors

(VOC and NOX) to identify additional reductions that, at a

minimum, would bring the model predicted future ozone concentration to

a level at or below the standard. The relationship is derived by

comparing changes in either (1) the model predicted ozone to changes in

modeled emissions or (2) observed air quality to changes in actual

emissions.

The EPA is not requesting that States perform new photochemical

grid modeling to assess the full air quality impact of the additional

measures that would be adopted. Rather, as described above, one of the

factors that EPA can consider as part of the WOE analysis of the

attainment demonstration is whether there will be additional emission

reductions anticipated that were not modeled. Therefore, EPA will

consider the reductions from these additional measures as part of the

WOE analysis if the State adopts the measures or, as appropriate,

submits an enforceable commitment to adopt the measures.

As an initial matter, for areas that need additional reductions,

the State must submit a commitment to adopt additional control measures

to meet the level of reductions that EPA has identified as necessary

for attainment. For purposes of conformity, if the State submitted a

commitment, which has been subject to public hearing, to adopt the

control measures necessary for attainment and ROP through the area's

attainment date in conformance with the December 1997 Wilson policy,

the State will not need an additional commitment at this time. However,

the state will need to amend its commitment by letter to provide two

things concerning the additional measures.

First, the State will need to identify a list of potential control

measures (from which a set of measures could be selected) that when

implemented, would be expected to provide sufficient additional

emission reductions to meet the level of reductions that EPA has

identified as necessary for attainment. States need not commit to adopt

any specific measures on their list at this time, but if they do not do

so, they must identify sufficient additional emission reductions to

attain the standard with the submitted motor vehicle emissions budget.

These measures may not involve additional limits on highway

construction beyond those that could be imposed under the submitted

motor vehicle emissions budget. (See memorandum, ``Guidance on Motor

Vehicle Emissions Budgets in One-Hour Ozone Attainment

Demonstrations,'' from Merrylin Zaw-Mon, Office of Mobile Sources, to

Air Division Directors, Regions I-VI \13\.) States may, of course,

select control measures that do impose limits on highway construction,

but if they do so, they must revise the budget to reflect the effects

of specific, identified measures that were either committed to in the

SIP or were actually adopted. Otherwise, EPA could not conclude that

the submitted motor vehicle emissions budget would be providing for

attainment, and EPA could not find it adequate for conformity purposes.

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

\13\ Memorandum, ``Guidance on Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

in One-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstrations'', from Merrylin Zaw-

Mon, Office of Mobile Sources, to Air Division Directors, Regions I-

VI, issued November 3, 1999. A copy of this memorandum may be found

on EPA's web site at http://www.epa.gov/oms/transp/traqconf.htm.

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

Second, the letter should provide that the State will recalculate

and submit a revised motor vehicle emissions budget that includes the

effects, if any, of the measure or measures that are ultimately adopted

when those measures are submitted as SIP revisions should any of the

measures pertain to motor vehicles.

For purposes of approving the SIP, the State will need an

enforceable commitment that identifies the date by which the additional

measures will be submitted, identifies the percentage reductions needed

of VOC and NOX,

[[Page 70485]]

and provides that the State will recalculate and submit a revised motor

vehicle emissions budget that includes the effects, if any, of the

measure or measures that are ultimately adopted when these measures are

submitted as SIP revisions should any of the measures pertain to motor

vehicles. To the extent the State's current commitment does not include

one of the above items or to the extent that a State plans to revise

one of the above items in an existing commitment, the State will need a

new public hearing. For Atlanta, Georgia will need to submit their

adopted rules to achieve the additional reductions, as well as rules

for measures relied on in their demonstration but not yet adopted, to

EPA as a SIP revision to their attainment demonstration no later than

July 31, 2000 in order to allow EPA to promulgate its approval of the

revision by November 2000.

a. Guidance on Additional Control Measures. Much progress has been

made over the past 25 years to reduce VOC emissions and over the past 9

years to reduce NOX emissions. Many large sources have been

controlled to some extent through RACT rules or other emission

standards or limitations, such as maximum achievable control technology

(MACT), new source performance standards (NSPS) and the emission

control requirements for NSR--lowest achievable emissions rate (LAER)

and best achievable control technology (BACT). However, there may be

controls available for sources that have not yet been regulated as well

as additional means for achieving reductions from sources that have

already been regulated. The EPA has prepared a report to assist States

in identifying additional measures. This report is called ``Serious and

Severe Ozone Nonattainment Areas: Information on Emissions, Control

Measures Adopted or Planned and Other Available Control Measures''. The

purpose of this report is to provide information to State and local

agencies to assist them in identifying additional control measures that

can be adopted into their SIPs to support the attainment demonstrations

for the serious and severe nonattainment areas under consideration.

This report has been added to the record for this proposal.

In summary, the report provides information in four areas. First,

the report contains detailed information on ozone precursor emissions

of NOX and VOCs. This inventory data gives an indication of

where the major emissions are coming from in a particular geographic

area and may indicate where it will be profitable to look for further

reductions. Second, the report contains information on control measures

for emission sources of NOX and VOC (including stationary,

area and mobile source measures) for which controls may not have been

adopted by many jurisdictions. This would include many measures listed

among the control measures EPA considered when developing the

Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) for promulgation of the 8-hour ozone

NAAQS. Third, the report includes information on standards EPA has

issued for the NSPS and MACT programs as well as information on

alternative control techniques (ACT) documents. This may be useful to

States who may already specify RACT levels emission limits on existing

source categories to which NSPS and MACT for new sources apply, but

where the current RACT level of control for these existing sources do

not match the level specified in the NSPS or MACT standards for new

sources or sources which emit hazardous air pollutants. Finally, the

report includes information on the control measures not already covered

elsewhere that States have adopted, or have proposed to adopt at the

date of the report, into their SIPs. Comparison of information on

measures already adopted into other SIPs may help inform States about

reductions that may be available from their sources whose emissions are

currently not regulated.

Another source of information is the BACT and LAER determinations

that States have made for individual new sources. Information on BACT/

LAER determinations is available through EPA's RACT/BACT/LAER

Clearinghouse (RBLC) which may be accessed on EPA's web site on the

internet at the following address: www.epa.gov/ttn/catc/.

The ACT documents for VOC and NOX are valuable because

EPA has not issued control technique guidelines (CTGs) that specify the

level of RACT for several categories of sources. For some of these

source categories, EPA has prepared ACT documents which describe

various control technologies and associated costs for reducing

emissions. While States were required to adopt RACT for major sources

within these source categories, the ACT documents may identify an

additional level of control for regulated sources or may provide

control options for non-major sources within these source categories.

States are free to evaluate the various options given and use the

results to assist in formulating their own regulations. Consider in

evaluating where to require additional emission reductions.

The report lists the various sources EPA used to develop the lists

of additional measures. These sources include an EPA draft control

measure data base, State and Territorial Air Pollution Administrators

and the Association of Local Air Pollution Control Official's (STAPPA/

ALAPCO's) books ``Controlling Nitrogen Oxides under the Clean Air Act:

A Menu of Options'', and ``Meeting the 15-Percent Rate-of-Progress

Requirement Under the Clean Air Act: A Menu of Options'', California's

ozone SIP for the South Coast and various ACT documents.

There is one control approach which bears special mention because

it is broader in application than any one specific control measure. The

is the approach of ``cap and trade.'' In this approach, a cap is placed

on emissions, and existing sources are given emission allotments. Under

a declining cap, emissions would be decreased each year. Sources may

over-control and sell part of their allotments to other sources which

under-control. Overall, the percentage decrease in emissions is

maintained, but the reductions are made where they are most economical.

A cap and trade program has been in operation in the South Coast Air

Quality Management District in California since about 1992.

The State of Illinois has adopted a declining cap and trade

program. The Illinois program will set a cap on future emissions of

major sources in the Chicago area that in most cases is 12 percent

lower than baseline emissions. Illinois will issue a number of emission

allotments corresponding to the cap level and will require each source

to have VOC emissions at or below the level for which it holds emission

allotments. Trading of emission allotments will be allowed, so that

sources that reduce VOC emissions more than 12 percent may sell

emission allotments, and sources that reduce VOC emission less than 12

percent must buy emission allotments. The proposed reductions are

planned to begin in the next ozone season, May 2000.

In addition, EPA's draft economic incentives program (EIP) guidance

was proposed in September 1999. This encourages cost-effective and

innovative approaches to achieving air pollution goals through

emissions trading. Such an approach has been demonstrated to be

successful and cost-effective in reducing air pollution in EPA's acid

rain emissions trading program. These and other similar programs should

allow cost-effective implementation of additional control measures.

Finally, a reduction in VOC and NOX emissions can be

achieved through a

[[Page 70486]]

wide range of control measures. These measures range from technology

based actions such as retrofitting diesel trucks and buses, and

controlling ground service equipment at airports to activity based

controls such as increased use of transit by utilizing existing Federal

tax incentives, market and pricing based programs, and ozone action

days. States can also achieve emission reductions by implementing

programs involving cleaner burning fuels. The State of Texas is also

considering a rule to change the times during the day in which

construction can occur to reduce ozone precursor emissions during

periods when ozone formation is occurring. There are a wide range of

new and innovative programs beyond the few examples listed here. These

measures, if taken together, can provide for significant emission

reductions for attainment purposes. In addition, a variety of mobile

source measures could be considered as part of the commitment to meet

the need for additional emission reduction measures, without a specific

commitment to the measure and associated revision to the motor vehicle

emissions budget.

6. Mid-Course Review

A mid-course review (MCR) is a reassessment of modeling analyses

and more recent monitored data to determine if a prescribed control

strategy is resulting in emission reductions and air quality

improvements needed to attain the ambient air quality standard for

ozone as expeditiously as practicable but no later than the statutory

dates.

The EPA believes that a commitment to perform a MCR is a critical

element of the WOE analysis for the attainment demonstration on which

EPA is proposing to take action today. In order to approve the

attainment demonstration SIP for the serious areas requesting an

attainment date extension to a year prior to 2005, a review that occurs

at a midpoint prior to the attainment date would be impractical in

terms of timing. Therefore, for these areas, the State's commitment to

an MCR would be a commitment to perform an early attainment assessment

to be submitted by the end of the attainment year (e.g., 2003).

Therefore, the GAEPD has submitted a commitment to make such an

assessment for the Atlanta area.

D. In Summary, What Does EPA Expect To Happen With Respect to

Attainment Demonstrations for the Atlanta 1-Hour Ozone Nonattainment

Area?

The following table shows a summary of information describing what

EPA expects from States to allow EPA to approve the 1-hour ozone

attainment demonstration SIPs for Serious areas.

Summary Schedule of Future Actions Related To Attainment Demonstration

for the Atlanta Serious Nonattainment Area in Georgia

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

Required no later than: Action

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

12/31/99..................... State submits the following to EPA:

--motor vehicle emissions budget \1\

--Commitments \2\ to do the following:

--Submit in July 2000 measures for

additional emission reductions as

required in the attainment

demonstration test.

--Submit revised SIP & motor vehicle

emissions budget by July 2000 if

additional measures (due by July

2000) affect the motor vehicle

emissions inventory

--Perform an early attainment

assessment by November 15, 2003.

A list of potential control measures that

could provide additional emission

reductions needed to attain the standard

\3\

4/15/00...................... State submits in final any submissions

made in draft by 12/31/99.

Before EPA final rulemaking.. State submits enforceable commitments for

any above-mentioned commitments that may

not yet have been subjected to public

hearing.

7/31/00...................... --State submits final rules for

additional measures for emission

reductions as required in the attainment

demonstration test.

--State revises & submits SIP & motor

vehicle emissions budget if the

additional measures are for motor

vehicle emissions category

11/15/03..................... State submits early attainment assessment

(for attainment date of 2003 or earlier)

or mid-course review (for attainment

date after 2003)

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

\1\ Final budget preferable; however, if public process is not yet

complete, then a ``draft'' budget (the one undergoing public process)

may be submitted at this time with a final budget by 4/15/00. However,

if a final budget is significantly different from the draft submitted

earlier, the final budget must be submitted by 2/15/00 to accommodate

the 90 day processing period prior to the 5/31/00 date by which EPA

must find the motor vehicle emissions budget adequate. Note that the

budget can reflect estimated Tier 2 emission reductions--see

memorandum from Lydia Wegman and Merrylin Zaw-Mon, ``1-Hour Ozone

Attainment Demonstrations and Tier 2/Sulfur Rulemaking.''

\2\ If the public hearing as provided in the preamble text, the State

may clarify by letter an existing commitment, which has been subject

to public hearing, to submit the control measures needed for

attainment. If the State has not yet submitted such a commitment, the

State should adopt a commitment after public hearing. If the public

hearing process is not yet complete, then draft commitments may be

submitted at this time. The final commitment should be submitted no

later than 4/15/00.

\3\ State is not required to commit to adopt the specific measures

identified in the list. However, the list cannot include any measures

that place limits on highway construction unless a specific commitment

to those measures are made and the motor vehicle emission budget

reflects those measures.

E. What Are the Relevant Policy and Guidance Documents?

This proposal has cited several policy and guidance memoranda. The

EPA has also developed several technical documents related to the

rulemaking action in this proposal. Some of the documents have been

referenced above. The documents and their location on EPA's web site

are listed below; these documents will also be placed in the docket for

this proposal action.

Recent Documents

1. ``Guidance for Improving Weight of Evidence Through

Identification of Additional Emission Reductions, Not Modeled.'' U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and

Standards, Emissions, Monitoring, and Analysis Division, Air Quality

Modeling Group, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711. November 1999. Web

site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/. See file ADDWOE1H.

2. ``Serious and Severe Ozone Nonattainment Areas: Information on

[[Page 70487]]

Emissions, Control Measures Adopted or Planned and Other Available

Control Measures.'' Draft Report. November 3, 1999. Ozone Policy and

Strategies Group. U.S. EPA, RTP, NC.

3. Memorandum ``Guidance on Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in One-

Hour Attainment Demonstrations,'' from Merrylin Zaw-Mon, Office of

Mobile Sources, to Air Division Directors, Regions I-VI. November 3,

1999. Web site: http://www.epa.gov/oms/transp/traqconf.htm.

4. Memorandum from Lydia Wegman and Merrylin Zaw-Mon to the Air

Division Directors, Regions I-VI, ``1-Hour Ozone Attainment

Demonstrations and Tier 2/Sulfur/Sulfur Rulemaking.'' November 8, 1999.

Web site: http://www.epa.gov/oms/transp/traqconf.htm.

5. Draft Memorandum, ``1-Hour Ozone NAAQS--Mid-Course Review

Guidance.'' From John Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning

and Standards. Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/. See file

DR6MCR.

6. Memorandum, ``Guidance on Reasonably Available Control Measures

(RACM) Requirement and Attainment Demonstration Submissions for Ozone

Nonattainment Areas.'' John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality

Planning and Standards. November 30, 1999. Web site: http://

www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.

Previous Documents

1. U.S. EPA, (1991), Guideline for Regulatory Application of the

Urban Airshed Model, EPA-450/4-91-013, (July 1991). Web site: http://

www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/ (file name: ``UAMREG'').

2. U.S. EPA, (1996), Guidance on Use of Modeled Results to

Demonstrate Attainment of the Ozone NAAQS, EPA-454/B-95-007, (June

1996). Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/ (file name: ``O3TEST'').

3. Memorandum, ``Ozone Attainment Demonstrations,'' from Mary D.

Nichols, issued March 2, 1995. Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/

t1pgm.html.

4. Memorandum, ``Extension of Attainment Dates for Downwind

Transport Areas,'' issued July 16, 1998. Web site: http://www.epa.gov/

ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.

5. December 29, 1997 Memorandum from Richard Wilson, Acting

Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation ``Guidance for

Implementing the 1-Hour Ozone and Pre-Existing PM10 NAAQS.'' Web site:

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1pgm.html.

II. EPA's Review and Technical Information

A. Atlanta Serious 1-hour Ozone Nonattainment Area.

1. Background for Atlanta

a. Atlanta Nonattainment Status. The nonattainment classification

status of Atlanta was based on ambient air sampling measurements for

ozone made during 1987-1989. The ambient ozone sampling network from

which these measurements were gathered consisted of five (5) sites in

the Atlanta area. From these three years of data collected from five

monitors, it was determined that Atlanta should be classified as a

serious ozone nonattainment area based on an ozone design value of

0.162 ppm. This concentration falls in the design value range of 0.160-

0.180 ppm for serious nonattainment areas.

The CAA specified that the boundaries for ozone nonattainment areas

classified as serious or above would be automatically revised to

encompass the entire Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) unless the

State could demonstrate that such action would not be appropriate. The

MSA for Atlanta consisted of eighteen counties at the time designations

were made pursuant to the CAA.

In establishing the final boundaries for the nonattainment area,

three main criteria were used to determine if certain counties should

be included or excluded for nonattainment purposes. These criteria

included: (1) Population density, urbanization, commuting patterns,

population increases, etc., (2) the ozone precursor emission density of

stationary sources and the density of mobile sources expressed as

vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and (3) meteorological factors, biogenic

vs. anthropogenic ozone precursor emissions and physical boundaries

that may influence movement of precursor pollutants. In addition to

evaluating these criteria, the State of Georgia also completed an

analysis of the Atlanta area using the Urban Airshed Model. Based on

the analysis, the State recommended that five counties in the MSA,

Barrow, Walton, Newton, Butts, and Spalding, be removed from the

nonattainment area. The EPA concurred with the recommendation from the

State (see 56 FR 56694).

b. Nonattainment Boundaries. The remaining 13 counties in the MSA

were designated as a serious ozone nonattainment area. The Atlanta

ozone nonattainment area consists of the following counties: Cherokee,

Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, Dekalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton,

Gwinnett, Henry, Paulding, and Rockdale. (See 40 CFR 81.311).

The Atlanta MSA currently consists of the counties listed above, as

well as the following seven counties: Barrow, Bartow, Carroll, Newton,

Pickens, Spalding, and Walton.

The October 28, 1999, submittal included a modeled attainment

demonstration, a weight of evidence analysis, a request to extend the

attainment date, a list of control measures previously approved,

regulations to implement control measures modeled but not previously

submitted, and commitments to achieve additional reductions needed for

attainment and to correct deficient regulations.

2. Description of Controls

The following controls are being implemented to satisfy

requirements of the CAA for serious areas and to achieve the emission

reductions modeled in the attainment strategy.

a. Controls that were in place by May 1, 1999:

--All specific control programs required for serious areas including

VOC and NOX RACT and enhanced I/M have been implemented.

--All elements of the 15 Percent Rate of Progress (ROP) plan, which

achieved 117.06 tons per day of VOC reduction by 1996 from the 1990

base. The controls implemented to achieve this reduction included,

among other things, the enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance

program (I/M), low reid vapor pressure (RVP) gasoline, Stage II

gasoline vapor recovery, a ban on open/slash/prescribed burning, and

reliance on Federal rules for architectural and industrial maintenance

coatings, auto body repair shops and new vehicle emissions. For further

information please see the Federal Register Notice taking final

approval action on the 15 percent ROP plan which was published on April

26, 1999, (64 FR 20186).

--All elements of the Post-1996 (9 percent) ROP plan, which achieved

50.10 tons per day of NOX reductions by 1999. The central

measures implemented to achieve these reductions included, among other

things, NOX RACT on major sources, and the enhanced vehicle

I/M program. For further information please see the Federal Register

Notice taking final approval action on the 9 percent ROP plan which was

published on March 18, 1999, (64 FR 13348).

--A rule lowering the sulfur content of gasoline sold in a 25-county

area in

[[Page 70488]]

and around metro-Atlanta during the ozone control season (May 1-

September 30). Gasoline sold in the 25-county area was regulated by

Phase 1 of the regulations beginning in 1999. The area subject to this

Georgia gasoline regulation in 1999 consists of the following 25

counties: Barrow, Bartow, Butts, Carroll, Cobb, Coweta, Clayton,

Cherokee, Dawson, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett,

Hall, Haralson, Henry, Jackson, Newton, Paulding, Pickens, Rockdale,

Spalding and Walton. Emissions of NOX and VOC were reduced

by 11.7 and 17.8 tons per day, respectively, in 1999. To achieve these

emission reductions, the volume-weighted average sulfur content of the

Phase 1 gasoline is limited to 150 ppm during the ozone control season.

--Modifications at Georgia Power Plants Yates and McDonough (both

located within the 13-county nonattainment area), for seasonal

application of natural gas technologies, reducing NOX

emissions by an average of 25.90 tons per day in 1999.

--A Partnership For A Smog-Free Georgia (PSG) Program has been put in

place to obtain voluntary actions from local businesses, governments,

schools, universities and the general public which reduce VOC and

NOX emissions by at least 13.0 and 8.6 tons per day,

respectively, during the summer season when ozone concentrations are

the highest.

b. Controls that are to be implemented by May 1, 2003: The

following control measures have been submitted for approval into the

SIP. These measures were included in the attainment modeling. EPA is

proposing to approve these regulations. Approval of the fuel and RACT

regulations is dependent upon GAEPD following through on the submitted

commitments to correct deficiencies in these rules. If not, EPA would,

in the alternative, disapprove the regulations.

--A rule further lowering the sulfur content of gasoline sold in a 45-

county area in and around metro-Atlanta during the ozone season.

Additional (Phase 2) regulation of Georgia gasoline to produce even

greater NOX reductions will require refinery modifications

which can not be completed to produce delivery of such gasoline by

1999. Therefore, Phase 2 requirements set to achieve additional

reductions in gasoline-powered vehicle exhaust will go into effect in

2003. To achieve the emission reductions, the volume-weighted average

sulfur content of this gasoline will be limited to 30 ppm by weight

with a 150 ppm per gallon maximum level established. This fuel will be

required year-round and is consistent with the recent EPA proposal for

a national fuel sulfur control program. The area subject to this Phase

2 Georgia gasoline regulation in 2003 will consist of the 25 counties

listed above and the following additional 20 counties: Banks,

Chattooga, Clarke, Floyd, Gordon, Heard, Jasper, Jones, Lamar, Lumpkin,

Madison, Meriwether, Monroe, Morgan, Oconee, Pike, Polk, Putnam, Troup,

and Upson. The expected NOX and VOC reductions from Phase 2

of the gasoline rule will be 23.99 and 30.50 tons per day,

respectively, in the 45-county area in 2003.

--Modifications at point sources with large electric utility steam

generating units, located in and near the nonattainment area and the

area of significant impact, reducing NOX emissions by about

183.45 tons per episode day in 2003.

--Modifications at three point sources with large NOX

emitting units other than electric utility steam generating units,

located in the 13 county area, reducing NOX emissions by

10.12 tons per day in 2003.

--Revised enhanced I/M requirements for the 13 county nonattainment

area providing additional NOX and VOC emission reductions of

11.34 and 13.17 tons per day, respectively, in 2003. To further reduce

mobile source emissions to attain and maintain the ozone standard,

GAEPD is revising the enhanced I/M program by implementing the

following changes: (1.) Annual rather than biennial testing for covered

vehicles; (2.) conversion of the Acceleration Simulation Mode (ASM)

test to a more stringent 2-mode ASM 2525/5015 test for older vehicles;

and (3.) The addition of an On Board Diagnostic (OBD) test for newer

vehicles. In addition, older vehicles are redefined as model years 1975

through 1995; newer vehicles are redefined as model years 1996 and

newer. Also, new vehicles up to three years old are exempted from

testing.

--New source permitting requirements for sources emitting greater than

or equal to 100 tons/year of NOX and VOC are expanded to

applicable point sources located in a 32 county area outside the

designated nonattainment area, providing NOX and VOC

emissions reductions of 12.4 and 0.2 tons per day, respectively, in

2003.

--RACT requirements are expanded to applicable point sources located in

a 32 county area outside the nonattainment area, providing

NOX and VOC reductions of 55.8 and 14.3 tons per day,

respectively, in 2003.

--A new rule to regulate NOX emissions from medium-sized new

boilers and other fuel-burning equipment in the Atlanta ozone

nonattainment area and the 32 county area outside the nonattainment

area, providing NOX emission reductions of 0.7 tons per day

in 2003.

--A new rule to regulate NOX emissions from new and existing

stationary engines and new stationary gas turbines used to generate

electricity (including peaking power). This regulation applies to such

facilities located in the Atlanta ozone nonattainment area and the 32

county area outside the designated nonattainment area and provides a

NOX reduction of at least 30 tons per day, within the 45-

county area, in 2003.

--National VOC and NOX control measures on on-road mobile,

off-road mobile, and area sources, including the national low emission

vehicle (NLEV) program, locomotive engine standards, phase 2

requirements for VOC consumer and commercial products, marine engine

standards, and phase 2 and 3 non-road diesel engine standards.

3. Conformity Budget

Based on projected VMT growth and additional control measures

identified for the 13-county Atlanta nonattainment area and used in the

attainment demonstration, the State submitted motor vehicle emission

budgets for 2003 of 224.13 and 132.21 tons per typical summer day

NOX and VOC, respectively.

These mobile budgets of 224.13 tons per day NOX and

132.12 tons per day VOC were derived from the most accurate model

available for predicting 2003 motor vehicle emissions. They represent

2003 VMT growth data projected from a state-of-the-art travel demand

model for the 13 counties and emission factors from EPA's MOBILE5b

emission factor model. The control measures identified and modeled for

mobile emissions used to establish these budgets, along with all other

control measures adopted or committed to in this plan, will result in

attainment of the 1-hour ozone air quality standard by 2003. The

revised conformity budget for NOX is 10 tons greater than

the budget contained in the 9 percent plan. The VOC budget is more

stringent than the one contained in the 15 percent plan. The change is

due to a model change from MOBILE5A to MOBILE5B

[[Page 70489]]

providing more accurate mobile source emissions.

The GAEPD has provided a clearly identified conformity budget for

which the Region has initiated a 90 day adequacy review process. The

public comment period began on November 3, 1999; however requests for

copies of the submittal were received and copies provided to the

requestor by November 18. As such, the comment period will continue for

30 days until December 17, 1999. (Memorandum, ``Conformity Guidance on

Implementation of March 2, 1999 Conformity Court Decision,'' from Gay

MacGregor, Director, Regional and State Programs Division, Office of

Mobile Sources, issued May 14, 1999, to Regional Air Division

Directors.)

In accordance with EPA policy, because the attainment demonstration

identifies additional emission reductions needed for attainment, as

described below, the Region cannot find the motor vehicle emissions

budgets adequate for conformity purposes unless the State commits to

adopt measures that will achieve the necessary additional reductions,

and identifies a menu of possible measures (e.g., busses, clean fuels,

vehicle inspection and maintenance, stationary source controls) that

could achieve the emission reductions without requiring additional

limits on highway construction. The GAEPD has stated that if the

additional short term reductions necessary for attainment include

reductions from onroad mobile source categories, these emission

reductions will be achieved without requiring additional limits on

highway construction. EPA preliminarily concludes that these budgets

are adequate. However, a final decision on adequacy will be made after

the close of the public comment period on adequacy.

4. Reductions

The emission reductions assumed in the modeling analysis for the

Atlanta nonattainment area are summarized in the following table.

Ozone Attainment Demonstration SIP Reductions

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

2003 NOX 2003 VOC

Control measure 1999 NOX 1999 VOC reduction reduction

reduction (TPD) reduction (TPD) (TPD) (TPD)

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

Georgia gasoline.............................. 11.7 17.8 23.54 30.50

Large electric utility steam generators \1\... 25.9 0 201.48 0

Partnership for a Smog Free Georgia........... 0 0 8.56 13.02

Large NOX units in 13 Co. NAA................. 0 0 18.83 0

Changes in Enhanced I/M in 13 Co. ............... ............... 11.34 13.17

nonattainment area...........................

Expanded new source review rule............... 0 0 22.67 0.2

Expanded RACT rules........................... 0 0 100.13 14.3

New boilers & fuel burning equip.............. 0 0 0.67 0

Stationary engines & gas turbines............. 0 0 30.00 0

0.15 lb/MMBtu NOX SIP Call limit.............. 0 0 195.75 0

National LEV program.......................... 0 0 12.73 8.66

Locomotive engine standards................... 0 0 4.88 0.03

Consumer/commercial products II............... 0 0 0 13.82

Marine engine standards....................... 0 0 0 1.25

Nonroad diesel eng. stand. II & III........... 0 0 7.13 12.97

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

Total................................. 37.6 17.8 637.71 107.92

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

\1\ Reduction estimates are in terms of episode day instead of typical ozone season day emissions.

5. Description of Modeling

The CAA requires that serious and above ozone nonattainment areas

perform photochemical grid modeling to help determine the level of

emission reductions of VOC and NOX necessary to attain the

1-hour ozone standard. The GAEPD fulfilled this requirement primarily

through the application of the Urban Airshed Model, Variable Grid

Version (UAM-V). The UAM-V model is suitable for evaluating the air

quality effects of emission control scenarios because it accounts for

the spacial and temporal variations in emissions and emission

reactivity. The UAM-V model, used in the modeling demonstration for the

Atlanta area, is approved for use in the attainment demonstration by

the EPA and was applied to the Atlanta area consistent with EPA

modeling guidance. Approval for the use of the UAM-V model was granted

after GAEPD successfully performed a model comparison of the UAM-IV

model, the EPA regulatory model, with UAM-V. The modeling domain for

the attainment demonstration consists of two nested grids. The inner

grid, or fine grid, is a 40 by 40 grid with each grid being 4 by 4 km.

This grid includes approximately 43 counties in the northern part of

the State of Georgia. The vertical structure of this domain consists of

five layers. The top of the modeling domain is 2200 m agl (above ground

level). The outer portion of the nested grids is much larger than the

fine grid, and extends approximately 80km in all directions beyond the

fine grid into Alabama, Tennessee, and North and South Carolina. Each

coarse grid cell size is 8 by 8 km. The overall domain size is

approximately 320 x 320 km. By including these additional grid cells,

boundary condition information for the nested, urban grid is simulated

in the coarse grid rather than estimated by the user. The top of the

coarse grid modeling domain is the same as the top of the fine grid

modeling domain (2200 m agl).

The GAEPD modeled three ozone episode days, July 31, 1987, August

1, 1987, and July 8, 1988. These episodes were chosen to: (1) Represent

the meteorological regimes that were most conducive to the formation of

ozone in the Atlanta area, and (2) exhibit pervasive exceedances of the

ozone standard in the ozone monitoring network. The three episodes

included two days with the highest exceedances that have been monitored

in the Atlanta nonattainment area. The modeling inputs were developed

in a technically and scientifically sound manner such that acceptable

model performance was achieved within prescribed statistical levels

recommended by EPA. The same base year meteorological inputs for each

episode day were combined with 2003 attainment year projected emission

inventories to simulate the benefits of various emission control

scenarios to bring the area within the local modeling domain into

attainment.

[[Page 70490]]

The boundary conditions for the coarse grid domain for the 2003

attainment simulation of the July 1988 episode were derived from OTAG

modeling for the Run 5 sensitivity simulation. Run 5 emissions most

closely represent the emission budgets in the original NOX

SIP Call final rule. A comparison of ozone concentrations predicted by

Run 5 and those predicted using the EPA default values of 40 ppb ozone

for all boundary grids produced peak concentrations that differed by

only one ppb. Thus, the OTAG Run 5 boundary conditions yield about the

same effect as EPA default boundary conditions. Since the 1987 episode

is a stagnant episode, the differences in boundary conditions are

considered less critical than for the 1988 episode. Therefore, EPA

default boundary conditions are used in the control strategy modeling

for the 1987 episode. The GAEPD further reduced emissions in the coarse

grid by applying emission limits consistent with the NOX SIP

Call to specific power plants.

The 2003 Atlanta control strategy contains regulations that will be

implemented both inside the 13-county nonattainment area and in the

remaining counties of the fine grid. The UAM-V simulation of the

control strategy predicts modeled ozone peaks (ppb) of 164.3 (8/31/87),

132.9 (8/1/87), and 154.2 (7/8/88), each of which exceeds the model

exceedance test of 124 ppb. The GAEPD applied the statistical

attainment test per the EPA guidance, ``On Use of Modeled Results to

Demonstrate Attainment of the Ozone NAAQS (EPA, 1996).'' This test is

also not passed. Of the three benchmarks comprising the statistical

test, only benchmark three is passed. Benchmark one is failed because

more than one exceedance of 124 ppb occurs in a subregion of the fine

grid. Benchmark two is failed because the predicted (modeled) daily

maximum ozone concentrations for the three episode days exceed the

maximum exceedance limit allowed by the statistical test. On July 31,

1987, the allowed maximum exceedance is 130 ppb, which is 34.3 ppb

lower than the modeled peak concentration for this day. The two

remaining episodes have exceedance limits of 124 ppb. The third

benchmark is passed since the combined reduction in grid-cell hours for

the three episodes of 85% exceeds the 80% benchmark limit. Since the

two attainment tests are failed, a WOE analysis can be used to

determine whether the area will, in fact, attain.

The 2003 control strategy simulations indicate that ozone levels in

the Atlanta area will be significantly reduced if all currently

proposed controls are implemented. Even though the statistical

attainment test and the modeling exceedance test are not satisfied,

there are several reasons to believe that Atlanta will attain the

standard in 2003 through a Weight of Evidence (WOE) analysis. The WOE

for the Atlanta SIP includes: (a) An estimate of additional reductions

needed for attainment, calculated without the use of additional

photochemical grid modeling, (b) EPA's modeling of the NOX

SIP Call reductions; (c) estimates of the future design value using the

Relative Reduction Factor (RRF) analysis, and (d) consideration of the

additional NOX reductions from sources or programs that were

not modeled in the 2003 control strategy but are either subject to an

emission reduction regulation or a voluntary program.

The first WOE analysis involves the use of information from the

photochemical grid modeling and ambient air quality monitoring to

estimate additional levels of emission reductions needed for attainment

of the 1-hour NAAQS for ozone. GAEPD used EPA's Method 1 technique to

identify the additional percentage reduction in NOX and VOC

from the 1996 emissions, needed for attainment. This analysis

strengthens the weight of evidence and accounts for high modeled peaks

by estimating the additional measures that at a minimum bring the model

estimated future ozone design value to 124 ppb or below. The method is

based on the assumption that the relationship between ozone and its

precursors (VOC and NOX) can be calculated. A detailed

discussion of the steps used in Method 1 to calculate the additional

emission reductions needed for attainment is provided in the technical

support document (TSD) which can be obtained from the Regional Office

staff contact. GAEPD's application of this procedure estimates that

additional reductions of 3.71 percent NOX and 3.71 percent

VOC are needed. Per EPA guidance, the State has the flexibility to

substitute NOX reductions for VOC and VOC for

NOX. Adequate supporting documentation for the basis of any

substitution must be submitted to EPA along with the adopted

regulation.

Where modeling demonstrates substantial improvements in model

predicted ozone peaks when emission reductions are applied in counties

adjacent to the nonattainment area, the area for control may be

extended to include these adjacent counties. However, if controls on

source emissions from adjacent counties are used to meet the shortfall,

the source's emissions must be included in the total emissions for the

base case and the percentage emission reductions of NOX and

VOC (i.e., shortfall) need to be recalculated. Before EPA can grant

final approval of this SIP and extend the attainment date for the 1-

hour ozone NAAQS, the GAEPD must: (1) Provide revised calculations for

the shortfall calculations if sources outside of the nonattainment area

are being controlled as well as documentation for any substitution, and

(2) submit as a revision to the SIP, fully adopted regulations for

controlling those sources necessary to achieve the additional emission

reductions. The GAEPD has committed to identify and adopt regulations

for the sources that will be controlled to address the additional

tonnage of NOX and VOC emission reductions that are needed

for attainment estimated in this WOE and to implement these control

measures by May 1, 2003. The additional reductions identified by this

method, considered along with other weight of evidence presented in the

technical analyses for the attainment demonstration, indicate the area

will attain the 1-hour ozone standard by 2003. GAEPD submitted a menu

of options that include, but is not limited to, expansion of enhanced

I/M, open burning, NSR and RACT; on-road mobile controls such as heavy

duty I/M, diesel controls, and market based incentives; off-road mobile

controls including diesel fuels, locomotive I/M, airport controls,

construction equipment and lawn and garden equipment; area sources, and

point sources including additional utility controls.

The second WOE analysis involves the use of a regional rollback

design value analysis developed by EPA. In July of 1998, EPA

recommended the use of a methodology that uses the results from

modeling performed to support EPA's NOX SIP Call

Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPR). This methodology

uses the SNPR modeling results in a manner that better replicates the

monitored attainment test. The monitored attainment test requires that

the ozone design value recorded at each monitor in the nonattainment

area be less than 125 ppb. The design value for a monitor is the fourth

highest 1-hour ozone average concentration measured over a period of

three years. The highest design value for all of the monitors in a

network becomes the design value for the nonattainment area. The SNPR

modeling was used by EPA to estimate the amount of ozone reduction

achieved after regional NOX controls are in place. The ozone

reduction estimate was determined by examining modeled ozone

[[Page 70491]]

concentrations from three episodes (1991, 1993 and 1995) in the 1995-

1996 base year period and the 2007 control case and then constructing

county-specific reduction factors. Reduction factors were then applied

to county-specific design values for the 1994-1996 time period. The

resulting ozone concentrations were then compared to the current 1-hour

ozone standard (124 ppb) to determine the likelihood of a particular

county reaching attainment after the NOX SIP call controls

are in place. Results from this exercise and a summary document

containing the adjusted design values resulting from EPA's analysis for

all of the counties with ozone monitors in the 22 state area affected

by the NOX SIP Call and a complete description of this

procedure can be found in the Region 4 TSD. The results of EPA's

rollback analysis indicate attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for all

counties in the Atlanta nonattainment area.

The third WOE analysis uses air quality modeling results to

estimate a design value in 2003 at each ozone monitor and EPA's draft

8-hour ozone modeling guidance (``Use of Models and Other Analyses In

Attainment Demonstrations for the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS, EPA-454/R-99-004

(1999)'') to develop a local relative reduction factor (RRF). If the

future design value at or below 124 ppb is predicted using this local

rollback test, then the results provide further WOE that the Atlanta

area will achieve the 1-hour ozone NAAQS by the end of 2003. A 2003

ozone design value that is less than 124 ppb is estimated at every

monitor in the Atlanta nonattainment area except the Confederate Avenue

monitor and for the design value that is predicted using the daily

maximum concentration in the domain, which is 127 ppb. Although

progress will be made towards attainment according to this test, the

two design values that remain above the standard indicate that

additional emission reduction measures are required as indicated in the

first WOE analysis.

The fourth WOE analysis involves consideration of the additional

NOX reductions from sources or programs that were not

modeled in the 2003 control strategy but are either subject to an

emission reduction regulation or a voluntary program. Specifically, a

rule has been adopted and submitted to EPA that regulates the use of

stationary gas turbines and stationary engines for electricity

generation. The rule significantly curtails the use of such units.

These sources were not specifically modeled because their emissions are

episodic. The emissions from these units occur during the summer when

the potential for ozone formation is high. The NOX

reductions from this rule are expected to be 30 tpd. A sensitivity

analysis of these low-level source emissions indicates that

NOX reductions of 30 tpd will reduce ozone concentrations by

approximately 10 ppb.

A voluntary program that was not fully modeled is the Partnership

for a Smog-Free Georgia (PSG) which is a proactive and innovative

approach to reducing ozone in the metro-Atlanta area. It is

specifically aimed at reducing the number of days when ozone levels are

high, thus reducing the health and environmental risks associated with

such high levels. PSG focuses on collective and individual actions to

change or reduce emissions from the mobile and area source categories.

These include changes in vehicle volumes and traffic patterns by

promoting alternative commuting options, and other actions that involve

operational and maintenance activities. The model assumed the

reductions from the PSG program to be only 3 percent of the baseline

emissions reductions needed for attainment in the 13 county

nonattainment area as allowed by EPA guidance. Pursuant to that

guidance, SIPs may not include for emission reduction credit more than

3 percent of the baseline reductions from voluntary measures. However,

GAEPD expects larger emission reductions. GAEPD estimates that as much

as a 20 percent reduction in vehicle miles traveled can be achieved

through the program, which would result in a 35 tons/day decrease in

on-road mobile source NOX emissions in the 13 county

nonattainment area. Based on results from sensitivity runs on mobile

sources in the 13 counties, a NOX reduction of 11.6 tons/day

results in a 4 ppb decrease in the peak ozone concentration for the

July 31, 1987 episode. Assuming a linear relationship, the 29.75 tons/

day (85 percent of the 35 tpd, since 3 percent of the reduction in VMT

has already been modeled) mobile source decrease from the PSG program

would result in a 10.3 ppm decrease in ozone. Since this emission

reduction would be achieved throughout the 13 county area, it is

expected that both the Confederate Avenue monitoring Site and the Peak

Area would be at or below the ozone standard with the highest being the

Confederate Avenue Site with a design value of 124 ppb ozone. Finally,

the benefit of the PSG does not occur only within the 13 county ozone

nonattainment area boundaries. The effect of the program will be to

reduce VMT for motorists outside the area through car pooling and other

alternate means of travel and work practices. Therefore, this program

will achieve emission reductions that will reduce ozone concentrations

beyond that predicted by the modeled 2003 control scenario. However,

these additional reductions may not receive emission reduction credit

towards demonstrating attainment in the SIP.

6. Rule Revisions

a. Description of Major Revisions to Rules for Air Quality: The

October 28, 1999, attainment demonstration submittal included several

regulations that will reduce emissions of NOX and VOC in the

Atlanta modeling domain. EPA is proposing to approve the revisions to

Georgia's Rules for Air Quality Control Chapter 391-3-1 described

below:

Rule 391-3-1-.01 subsection (nnnn), relating to the definition of

``Procedures For Testing and Monitoring Sources of Air Pollutants'' is

being amended.

As of August 1, 1999, the definition of the GAEPD's Procedures For

Testing and Monitoring Sources of Air Pollutants has been updated to

incorporate certain changes and additions. Procedures for testing and

for certain monitoring relating to new rules for NOX from

fuel burning equipment and for gas turbines and engines have been added

to the manual. Other revisions include the addition of procedures for

determining compliance with Rule 391-3-1.02(2)(kkk) relating to VOC

emissions from aerospace manufacturing and rework facilities, changes

to rules for gasoline marketing relating to testing and reporting

procedures to clarify the time frames for certain requirements,

addition of the requirements under the Federal New Source Performance

Standards for Boilers and Industrial Furnaces (40 CFR 60, subpart Db)

pertaining to reporting and record keeping, and typographical

corrections. Additionally, appendix H is added to provide procedures

for calculating VOC emissions from fiber-reinforced plastics

manufacturing processes.

Rule 391-3-1-.02, subparagraph (2)(ii) relating to ``VOC Emissions

from Surface Coating of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products'' is

being amended. This rule is amended to exempt aerospace manufacturing

and rework facilities from the rule. The rule is also being modified in

order to keep Rule (ii) consistent with the most current Architectural

Aluminum Manufacture's Association (AAMA) standard in place.

The current rule only exempts the surface coating of airplane

exteriors.

[[Page 70492]]

Rule (ii) is no longer applicable to aerospace sources because the

State has previously submitted a new rule limiting VOC emissions from

aerospace manufacturing and rework facilities that meets EPA

requirements. In order to keep Rule (ii) consistent with the current

AAMA standard, subparagraph 5.(xiii) has been modified to state that

the coatings must satisfy the requirements of the most recent AAMA

publication (number AAMA 605.2). This will prevent the standard that is

stated in Rule (ii) from becoming out dated.

Rule 391-3-1-.02 subsection (2)(tt), relating to ``VOC Emissions

from Major Sources,'' is being amended. The coverage of the rule is

being expanded beyond the existing 13 counties to include affected VOC

sources located in the additional counties of Banks, Barrow, Bartow,

Butts, Carroll, Chattooga, Clarke, Dawson, Floyd, Gordon, Hall,

Haralson, Heard, Jackson, Jasper, Jones, Lamar, Lumpkin, Madison,

Meriwether, Monroe, Morgan, Newton, Oconee, Pickens, Pike, Polk,

Putnam, Spalding, Troup, Upson, and Walton (additional 32 counties).

Emissions from these counties have been determined to affect ozone

formation in the metro-Atlanta area.

By May 1, 2003, RACT will be required on all VOC sources with VOC

emissions in excess of 100 tons per year, that are located in the 32

additional counties. Sources in these counties that were in operation

on or before October 1, 1999, will be required to submit a

demonstration of appropriate RACT for controlling their VOC emissions.

The GAEPD has committed to revise the rule to meet all EPA requirements

prior to final approval. See discussion under commitments for full

approval below.

Rule 391-3-1-.02 subsection (2)(vv), relating to ``Volatile Organic

Liquid Handling and Storage'' is being amended to expand the coverage

of the rule to include affected VOC sources located in the 32

additional counties because the emissions from these counties have been

determined to affect ozone formation in the metro-Atlanta area.

By May 1, 2003, the RACT under this regulation will be required on

all volatile organic liquid handling and storage facilities with VOC

emissions in excess of 100 tons per year, that are located in the

additional 32 counties. Sources in these counties that were in

operation on or before October 1, 1999, will be required to comply by

May 1, 2003 and sources that began operation after October 1, 1999,

will be required to comply upon startup.

Rule 391-3-1-.02 subsection (2)(yy) relating to ``Nitrogen Oxide

Emissions from Major Sources'' is being amended. The coverage of the

rule is being expanded to include affected sources of NOX

located in the 32 additional counties because the emissions from these

counties have been determined to affect ozone formation in the metro-

Atlanta area.

By May 1, 2003, RACT will be required on all NOX sources

with emissions in excess of 100 tons per year, that are located in the

32 additional counties. Sources in these counties that were in

operation on or before October 1, 1999, will be required to submit a

demonstration of appropriate RACT for controlling their NOX

emissions. The GAEPD has committed to revise the rule to meet all EPA

requirements prior to EPA's final approval of the attainment

demonstration. See discussion under commitments for full approval

below.

Rule 391-3-1-.02 subsection (2)(bbb) relating to Gasoline Marketing

is being amended to make several changes which include addition,

clarification, and deletion. Product documentation must clearly

indicate gasoline which complies with the requirements of the fuel

rule. Effective April 1, 2003, twenty counties (Banks, Chattooga,

Clarke, Floyd, Gordon, Heard, Jasper, Jones, Lamar, Lumpkin, Madison,

Meriwether, Monroe, Morgan, Oconee, Pike, Polk, Putnam, Troup, and

Upson) will be added to the area covered by the fuel rule. Subsection

2.(iii), covering the 1998 RVP period, is deleted in its entirety

because the rule is revised to clarify that calendar year pool

averaging for sulfur content is for the RVP period, i.e., June 1 to

September 15 of each year. Beginning April 1, 2003, the 30 ppm sulfur

standard is applied year-round with a 150 ppm sulfur per gallon cap;

for purposes of compliance with this annual averaging requirement, the

program year is April 1 through March 31. The limits on olefins and

aromatic hydrocarbons are deleted because for compliance purposes,

importers will report based on the sampling and testing conducted at

the refinery level only. Clarification is provided to carriers

regarding the area of coverage. Subsection 9 relating to future rule

evaluation and recommendations is deleted due to the completion of the

required evaluation and recommendations.

Rule 391-3-1-.02 subsection (2)(ccc) relating to ``VOC Emissions

from Bulk Mixing Tanks'' is being amended to expand the coverage of the

rule to the additional 32 counties because the emissions from these

counties have been determined to affect ozone formation in the metro-

Atlanta area.

By May 1, 2003, Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) will

be required on all VOC facilities with VOC emissions in excess of 100

tons per year from bulk mixing tanks located in the additional 32

counties. This rule change sets the level for RACT for bulk mixing

tanks at facilities in these additional counties at the same level as

for the existing nonattainment counties. Sources in these counties that

were in operation on or before October 1, 1999, will be required to

comply by May 1, 2003 and sources that began operation after October 1,

1999, will be required to comply upon startup.

Rule 391-3-1-.02 subsection (2)(ddd) relating to ``VOC Emissions

from Offset Lithography'' is being amended to expand the coverage of

the rule to include affected VOC sources located in the additional 32

counties because the emissions from these counties have been determined

to affect ozone formation in the metro-Atlanta area.

By May 1, 2003, RACT will be required on all offset lithography

operations with VOC emissions in excess of 100 tons per year, that are

located in the additional 32 counties. This rule revision sets the

level for RACT for offset lithography operations at facilities in these

additional counties at the same level as for the existing nonattainment

counties. Sources in these counties that were in operation on or before

October 1, 1999, will be required to comply by May 1, 2003 and sources

that began operation after October 1, 1999, will be required to comply

upon startup.

Rule 391-3-1-.02 subsection (2)(eee) relating to ``VOC Emissions

from Expanded Polystyrene Products Manufacturing'' is being amended to

expand the coverage of the rule to include affected VOC sources located

in the additional 32 counties because the emissions from these counties

have been determined to affect ozone formation in the metro-Atlanta

area.

By May 1, 2003, RACT will be required on all expanded polystyrene

products manufacturing facilities with VOC emissions in excess of 100

tons per year, that are located in the additional 32 counties. This

rule change sets the level for RACT for expanded polystyrene products

manufacturing operations at facilities in these additional counties at

the same level as for the existing nonattainment counties. Sources in

these counties that were in operation on or before October 1, 1999,

will be required to comply by May 1, 2003 and sources that began

operation

[[Page 70493]]

after October 1, 1999, will be required to comply upon startup.

Rule 391-3-1-.02 subsection (2)(hhh) relating to ``Wood Furniture

Finishing and Cleaning Operations'' is being amended to expand the

coverage of the rule to include affected VOC sources located in the

additional 32 counties because the emissions from these counties have

been determined to affect ozone formation in the metro-Atlanta area.

By May 1, 2003, RACT will be required on all wood furniture

finishing and cleaning operations with VOC emissions in excess of 100

tons per year, that are located in the 32 additional counties listed

above. This rule change sets the level for RACT for wood finishing and

cleaning operations at facilities in these additional counties at the

same level as for the existing nonattainment counties. Sources in these

counties that were in operation on or before October 1, 1999, will be

required to comply by May 1, 2003 and sources that began operation

after October 1, 1999, will be required to comply upon startup.

Rule 391-3-1-.02 subsection (2)(jjj) relating to ``NOX

Emissions from Electric Utility Steam Generating Units'' is being

amended to expand the coverage of the rule to include affected coal-

fired electric utility steam generating units in the counties of

Bartow, Heard and Floyd and to include a lower average NOX

emissions limit for all affected units. The emissions from these

sources have been determined to affect ozone formation in the metro-

Atlanta area.

Effective May 1, 2003, the NOX emissions from all

affected units will be limited to the equivalent of 0.15 lb/million

Btu. Compliance with this emission level will be determined in the

following manner. Each source has been assigned a specific emission

limit. If the actual emission rate from each source is less than its

limit, then all affected sources will be deemed in compliance. If the

actual emission rate from any source is greater than its limit, then

compliance would be demonstrated by showing that the actual Btu-

weighted average emission rate for all affected sources is less than

the limit in subsection 3(ii) of the rule. The unit specific emission

limits have been determined such that their potential Btu-weighted

average does not exceed the limit in subsection 3(ii). The compliance

period will be based on a 30-day rolling average beginning May 1 and

ending September 30 of each year.

Rule 391-3-1-.02, subparagraph (2)(kkk) relating to the ``VOC

Emissions from Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Facilities'' is being

added to be consistent with federal requirements that will limit VOC

emissions from aerospace manufacturing and rework facilities. This rule

is based on the Aerospace Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) Document

which was published by the US EPA on March 24, 1998. This CTG is

intended to supersede potential applicability of the Miscellaneous

Metal Parts CTG RACT requirements for manufacturing and rework

operations of aerospace vehicles and components.

This rule establishes separate VOC limitations for primers,

topcoats, various specialty coatings, type I maskants, and type II

maskants. The rule also requires that all affected aerospace facilities

utilize coating application techniques and work practice standards that

will lower VOC emissions. This rule will apply to all aerospace

manufacturing and rework facilities that have potential VOC emissions

greater than 25 tons per year, that are in the metro-Atlanta

nonattainment area, and 100 tons per year, that are in the additional

32 counties.

Rule 391-3-1-.02 is being amended by adding a new subsection

(2)(lll) relating to ``NOX Emissions from Fuel-burning

Equipment.'' This rule will regulate NOX emissions from new

boilers and other fuel-burning equipment whose heat input capacity is

equal to or greater than 10 million Btu/hr and less than or equal to

250 million Btu/hr in a 45 county area in and around Atlanta including

the 13 county ozone nonattainment area and the additional 32 counties.

This rule is effective in all 45 counties because these emissions have

been determined to affect ozone formation in the metro-Atlanta area.

NOX emissions from affected boilers installed or

modified in the 45 county area on and after May 1, 1999 will be limited

to 30 parts per million at 3 percent oxygen. The limit will apply

during the period from May 1 through September 30 of each year. The

compliance date for this rule is May 1, 2000.

Rule 391-3-1-.02 is being amended by adding a new subsection

(2)(mmm) relating to ``NOX Emissions from Stationary Gas

Turbines and Stationary Engines used to Generate Electricity.'' This

rule will regulate NOX emissions from new stationary gas

turbines and new and existing stationary engines that are located in a

45 county area in and around Atlanta, including the 13 county ozone

nonattainment area and the 32 additional counties. This rule is

effective in all 45 counties because these emissions have been

determined to affect ozone formation in the metro-Atlanta area.

NOX emissions from affected stationary gas turbines

installed or modified in the 45 county area on or after January 1, 1999

and before October 1, 1999 will be limited to 42 parts per million at

15 percent oxygen, with a compliance date of May 1, 2000.

NOX emissions from affected stationary gas turbines

installed or modified in the 45 county area on or after October 1, 1999

will be limited to 30 parts per million at 15 percent oxygen, with

compliance required upon startup. NOX emissions from

affected stationary engines installed or modified in the 45 county area

on or after April 1, 2000 will be limited to 80 parts per million at 15

percent oxygen and compliance will be required upon startup. Affected

stationary engines in the 45 county area that are in operation before

April 1, 2000 will have to comply with a NOX emissions limit

of 160 parts per million at 15 percent oxygen by no later than May 1,

2003. The limits in this rule will apply during the period from May 1

through September 30 of each year.

Rule 391-3-1-.02 subsection (6) relating to ``Specific Monitoring''

is being amended by adding a new subsection (a)2.(xii) which requires

affected sources to install and operate continuous emissions monitoring

systems for NOX and for oxygen or an approved alternative.

The affected sources are those subject to the new rules for boilers

(rule 391-3-1.02(2)(III)).

A requirement to install and operate monitors in order to determine

initial compliance and track on going compliance with the above rule

for boilers with a maximum design heat input capacity equal to or

greater than 100 million BTU has been added. The rule allows, as an

alternative, the use of predictive emissions monitoring systems for

certain fuels.

Rule 391-3-1-.03 subsection (6)(b)11 relating to ``Stationary

Engines'' is being amended to narrow the group of stationary engines

that are not required to obtain air quality permits.

Stationary engines with a rated capacity of 300 kilowatts or

greater that are used for emergency and/or peaking power and that are

located in a 45 county area in and around Atlanta would no longer be

exempt from air quality permitting.

Rule 391-3-1-.03, paragraph (8)(c)(9) relating to ``Permit

Requirements'' is being amended to correct a typographical error.

Federal regulation 40 CFR, Part 52, Appendix S is referenced in

this

[[Page 70494]]

regulation. It was incorrectly listed as Part 51.

Rule 391-3-1-.03, paragraph (8)(c)(13) relating to ``Permit

Requirements'' is being amended to remove obsolete requirements.

This paragraph, relating to specific nonattainment New Source

Review, contains requirements relating to internal offsets. Internal

offsets are only germain to states which have a ``dual source''

definition of stationary source. Georgia has a ``plantwide'' definition

of stationary source. Therefore, requirements related to internal

offsets have been removed.

Rule 391-3-1-.03, subsection (8)(c) is being amended by adding a

new section (14) relating to ``Additional Provisions for Areas

Contributing to the Ambient Air Level of Ozone in the Metropolitan

Atlanta Ozone Nonattainment Area.'' The purpose of this section is to

clarify the specific nonattainment new source review (NSR) requirements

that will apply to sources locating in the 32 additional counties.

New ``major'' sources (any source with the potential to emit at

least 100 tons per year of VOC or NOX) or any source

undergoing physical change or change in the method of operation which

results in a net increase of 40 tons or more of VOC or NOX

(major modification) and located in one of the 32 additional counties

is subject to modified nonattainment NSR requirements. Sources subject

to these provisions in the 32 additional counties are required to meet

control requirements consistent with Best Available Control Technology

(BACT) instead of Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER) which is

required in the 13 county nonattainment area. The installation of air

pollution control equipment or other emission reduction technologies

are not considered modifications if they are determined to be

environmentally beneficial and do not increase capacity, and a 1 to 1

emission offset is obtained. Projects outside the nonattainment for

which complete applications were received prior to the proposal of the

NSR program area are exempt from the NSR provisions.

Rule 391-3-1-.03 subsection (8)(e) relating to ``Permit

Requirements'' is being amended to require those sources in the

additional 32 counties to comply with new source permitting

requirements because the emissions from these counties have been

determined to affect ozone formation in the metro-Atlanta area.

This rule identifies the 32 additional counties where the rule will

apply and requires new or modified stationary sources in the counties

to comply with the requirements of section (c). This rule will apply to

new or modified stationary sources emitting 100 tons per year or more

of volatile organic compounds or nitrogen oxides.

b. Description of Major Revisions to the Inspection and Maintenance

Rules. The EPA is proposing to approve the revisions to Georgia's Rules

for Enhanced Inspection and Maintenance Chapter 391-3-20 described

below:

Rule 391-3-20-.01 relating to ``Definitions'' is being amended to

change or delete definitions related to biennial testing, to modify the

definition of ASM to include a dual-mode ASM test for older vehicles,

to update the reference to the Federal I/M regulations, to define the

term ``Waiver,'' and to renumber the definitions.

The ASM test requirement is modified to require a dual-mode ASM

2525/5015 test, effective January 1, 2002. The definitions of ``Off-

Year Inspection'' and ``Regular Inspection'' are deleted since they are

not relevant after the change to an annual program. The term ``Waiver''

is defined. The Federal I/M regulations, as of July 1, 1999, are

referenced. Other clarifications are made.

Rule 391-3-20-.03 paragraph (4) relating to ``Covered Vehicles;

Exemptions'' is being amended to extend the exemption period for new

vehicles.

Effective January 1, 2001, new vehicles are exempt from testing

until the test year three years following the model year of the

vehicle.

7. Commitments for Full Approval

The GAEPD has submitted the following commitments which must be met

in order for final action to be taken to approve the attainment

demonstration and grant the attainment date extension request.

a. NOX and VOC RACT. The GAEPD has committed to submit

rules requiring the implementation of NOX and VOC RACT in

the 32 additional counties for sources with emissions in excess of 100

tons per year. The GAEPD commits that it will address all EPA concerns

regarding NOX and VOC RACT on a time frame consistent with

final SIP approval by November 2000.

b. Early Assessment. The GAEPD has committed to complete an early

assessment as discussed under Midcourse Review, item 6 above.

c. Georgia Fuel Rule. EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance

Assurance (OECA) has raised numerous enforceability issues regarding

the current Georgia Fuel Rule. The GAEPD has committed to revise its

rule, as necessary, to satisfactorily address the monitoring and

enforceability issues prior to the calendar year 2000 ozone season but

not later than May 1, 2000.

d. Additional Reductions. The GAEPD has committed to identify and

adopt regulations for sources that will be controlled to achieve the

additional tonnage of NOX and VOC emission reductions that

are needed for attainment. Georgia has committed to submit these

control measures to EPA before July 2000, and to implement them by May

1, 2003. The GAEPD and EPA have used EPA's Method 1 to calculate the

level of additional reductions needed for attainment as discussed in

the description of modeling (above).

8. Attainment Date Extension Request

The GAEPD October 28, 1999, submittal includes a request to extend

the attainment date for the Atlanta ozone nonattainment area pursuant

to guidance issued by EPA on March 23, 1999. The State is requesting

that the attainment date be extended to 2003. For EPA to grant such an

extension the GAEPD must meet the criteria as describe in Section

I.A.3. Attainment Date Delays due to Transport of this notice. The

GAEPD will have satisfied all these requirements once they have met all

the commitments outlined above. Therefore, the EPA is proposing to

extend the attainment date for the Atlanta nonattainment area to

November 15, 2003, on the condition that all the commitments are met.

9. What Are the Consequences of State Failure?

This section explains the CAA consequences of State failure to meet

the time frames and terms described generally in this notice. The CAA

provides for the imposition of sanctions and the promulgation of a

federal implementation plan if States fail to submit a required plan,

submit a plan that is determined to be incomplete or if EPA disapproves

a plan submitted by the State. (We are using the phrase ``failure to

submit'' to cover both the situation where a State makes no submission

and the situation where the State makes a submission that we find is

incomplete in accordance with section 110(k)(1)(B) and 40 CFR part 51,

Appendix V.) For purposes of sanctions, there are no sanctions clocks

in place based on a failure to submit. Thus, the description of the

timing of sanctions, below, is linked to a potential disapproval of the

State's submission.

a. What are the CAA's provisions for sanctions? If EPA disapproves

a required SIP, such as the attainment demonstration SIPs, section

179(a)

[[Page 70495]]

provides for the imposition of two sanctions. The first sanction would

apply 18 months after EPA disapproves the SIP if the State fails to

make the required submittal which EPA proposes to fully or

conditionally approve within that time. Under EPA's sanctions

regulations, 40 CFR 52.31, the first sanction would be 2:1 offsets for

sources subject to the new source review requirements under section 173

of the CAA. If the State has still failed to submit a SIP for which EPA

proposes full or conditional approval 6 months after the first sanction

is imposed, the second sanction will apply. The second sanction is a

limitation on the receipt of Federal highway funds. EPA also has

authority under section 110(m) to a broader area, but is not proposing

to take such action today.

b. What are the CAA's FIP provisions if a State fails to submit a

plan? In addition to sanctions, if EPA finds that a State failed to

submit the required SIP revision or disapproves the required SIP

revision EPA must promulgate a FIP no later than 2 years from the date

of the finding if the deficiency has not been corrected. The attainment

demonstration SIPs on which EPA is taking action today were originally

due in November 1994. However, through a series of policy memoranda,

EPA recognized that States had not submitted attainment demonstrations

and were constrained to do so until ozone transport had been further

analyzed. As provided in the Background, above, EPA provided for States

to submit the attainment demonstration SIPs in two phases. In June

1996, EPA made findings that ten States and the District of Columbia

had failed to submit the phase I SIPs for nine nonattainment areas. 61

FR 36292 (July 10, 1996). In addition on May 19, 1997, EPA made a

similar finding for Pennsylvania for the Philadelphia area. 62 FR

27201.

In July 1998, several environmental groups filed a notice of

citizen suit, alleging that EPA had outstanding sanctions and FIP

obligations for the serious and severe nonattainment areas on which EPA

is proposing action today. These groups filed a lawsuit in the Federal

District Court for the District of Columbia on November 8, 1999.

III. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from review under Executive Order 12866, entitled

``Regulatory Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Order 13045

Executive Order 13045, entitled ``Protection of Children from

Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23,

1997), applies to any rule that the EPA determines (1) is

``economically significant,'' as defined under Executive Order 12866,

and (2) the environmental health or safety risk addressed by the rule

has a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action

meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health

or safety effects of the planned rule on children and explain why the

planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and

reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.

This proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because

it does not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health

and safety risks.

C. Executive Order 13084

Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is

not required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects

the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes

substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the

Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct

compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is

unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a

separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a

description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with

representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature

of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the

regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop

an effective process permitting elected and other representatives of

Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in

the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or

uniquely affect their communities.'' Today's rule does not

significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal

governments. This action does not involve or impose any requirements

that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the requirements of section

3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.

D. Executive Order 13132

Executive Order 13132, Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999),

revokes and replaces Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875

(Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132

requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful

and timely input by State and local officials in the development of

regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies

that have federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive Order

to include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on the

States, on the relationship between the national government and the

States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may

not issue a regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes

substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not required by

statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to

pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State and local

governments, or EPA consults with State and local officials early in

the process of developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not

issue a regulation that has federalism implications and that preempts

State law unless the Agency consults with State and local officials

early in the process of developing the proposed regulation.

This rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States,

on the relationship between the national government and the States, or

on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various

levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR

43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely approves a State rule

implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or

the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean

Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do

not apply to this rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency

to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to

notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies

that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental

jurisdictions. This proposed rule will not have a significant impact on

a substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under

section 110 and subchapter I, part D of

[[Page 70496]]

the Clean Air Act do not create any new requirements but simply approve

requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the

Federal SIP approval does not create any new requirements, I certify

that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities. Moreover, due to the nature of

the Federal-State relationship under the Clean Air Act, preparation of

a flexibility 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 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 State-

enforceability. Moreover, EPA's disapproval of the submittal does not

impose any new requirements. Therefore, I certify that such a

disapproval action will not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities because it would not remove

existing requirements nor would it substitute a new Federal

requirement.

The EPA's alternative proposed disapproval of the State request

under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Act would not affect

any existing requirements applicable to small entities. Any pre-

existing Federal requirements would remain in place after this

disapproval. Federal disapproval of the State submittal does not affect

State-enforceability. Moreover EPA's disapproval of the submittal would

not impose any new Federal requirements. Therefore, I certify that the

proposed disapproval would not have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

F. 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

annual 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 proposed approval action does not

include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual 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.

Sections 202 and 205 do not apply to the proposed disapproval

because the proposed disapproval of the SIP submittal would not, in and

of itself, constitute a Federal mandate because it would not impose an

enforceable duty on any entity. In addition, the Act does not permit

EPA to consider the types of analyses described in section 202 in

determining whether a SIP submittal meets the CAA. Finally, section 203

does not apply to the proposed disapproval because it would affect only

the State of Georgia, which is not a small government.

G. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing

technical standards when developing new regulations. To comply with

NTTAA, the EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards''

(VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies

unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise

impractical.

EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to this action. Today's

action does not require the public to perform activities conducive to

the use of VCS.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: November 29, 1999.

John H. Hankinson, Jr.,

Regional Administrator, Region 4.

[FR Doc. 99-31719 Filed 12-15-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P