[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 171 (Thursday, September 3, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46952-46953]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-23678]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 51
[FRL-6154-9; Docket No A-95-38
Notice of Availability of Additional Information Related to
Proposed Regional Haze Regulations; Solicitation of Comments
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On July 31, 1997, EPA published proposed revisions to State
implementation plan (SIP) requirements to address regional haze
visibility impairment in the Nation's most treasured national parks and
wilderness areas. The public comment period on those regulations closed
on December 5, 1997. The purpose of this notice is to provide the
public with an opportunity to comment on two specific issues for which
additional information became available after the close of the comment
period. The EPA is not reopening the comment period for any other
issues related to the proposed regional haze rule.
The first issue relates to the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport
Commission (Commission) and specific recommendations provided in a
recent letter from the Western Governors' Association (WGA). The second
issue relates to recent transportation legislation, Pub. L. 105-178,
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21), which
affects the timeframe for implementation of the regional haze program.
The EPA is making this information available for comment now so that
any public comments on these two issues may be considered before
publication of the final rule.
DATES: Written comments must be received by October 5, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Information related to the proposed regional haze rule is
available in EPA's Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center,
docket number A-95-38. The docket is located at the following address:
EPA Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center; 401 M Street SW;
Room M-1500 (Mail Code 6102); Washington, DC 20460; Attention: Docket
Number A-95-38. The docket is available for public inspection and
copying between 8:30 a.m. and 3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. A
reasonable fee may be charged for copying.
Three additional items related to this notice of availability can
be obtained from docket number A-95-38: the June 29, 1998 letter from
the WGA (signed by Governor Michael Leavitt of Utah) (item VIII-G-76),
the draft translation of the WGA's recommendations into regulatory
language by EPA (item VIII-I-02), and a copy of the TEA-21 legislation
provisions affecting the regional haze program (item VIII-I-01). The
above documents may also be downloaded from the Internet at: http://
www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1sn.html.
Comments on today's notice and the materials referenced herein
should be submitted (in duplicate if possible) to the address listed
above. Comments may also be submitted to EPA by electronic mail at the
following address: A-and-R-D[email protected]. Electronic comments
must be submitted as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special
characters and any form of encryption. Comments and data also will be
accepted on computer disk in WordPerfect 5.1 format or ASCII file
format. All comments and data in electronic form must be identified by
the docket number A-95-38. Electronic comments on this notice also may
be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rich Damberg (telephone 919-541-5592),
Mail Drop 15, EPA, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 27711. Internet address:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are providing the public with the
opportunity to comment on additional information related to the
regional haze rule proposed on July 31, 1997. We are requesting comment
only on these two issues, and we are not reopening the comment period
on any other issues related to the proposal.
I. Letter From the Western Governors' Association
In the notice of proposed rulemaking for the regional haze program,
we discussed extensively the June 1996 report from the Grand Canyon
Visibility Transport Commission, Recommendations for Improving Western
Vistas, 62 FR 41138, 41141-41143 (July 31, 1997). The EPA highlighted
the key recommendations developed by the Commission in a number of
areas, including those recommendations regarding stationary sources,
mobile sources, and prescribed fire. In concluding this section of the
notice we stated that EPA * * * seeks public comment on the manner it
has proposed to address the Commission's recommendations in this
rulemaking, and EPA requests alternative suggestions for addressing the
recommendations.'' (62 FR 41143).
On June 29, 1998, we received a letter from Governor Leavitt of
Utah, on behalf of the WGA, that specifically addresses how EPA should
treat the Commission's recommendations within the national rule. The
WGA developed the letter in conjunction with several stakeholders
involved in the Commission. The EPA was not a part of this process. In
his cover letter, Governor Leavitt specifically requested that EPA
reopen the public comment period for 30 days.
A key element of the WGA's recommendations is the proposal that if
the States in the Commission's transport region provide an acceptable
``Annex'' to EPA in 2000 outlining interim milestones for regional
SO2 reductions, then SIPs meeting the overall package of
recommended elements would assure reasonable progress and meet the
basic SIP requirements set forth under section 169A of the Clean Air
Act (CAA) (including a long-term strategy, best available retrofit
technology, and other measures as necessary). Given the detailed nature
of these new comments, and the fact that they were developed with broad
input, EPA is fulfilling Governor Leavitt's request to reopen the
comment period for the proposed rule. The EPA requests comments on all
aspects of the WGA letter, particularly on whether these
recommendations assure reasonable progress under the CAA and on how we
should use this new information in preparing our final rule.
In addition to the letter from the WGA, we are also providing, for
illustrative purposes, draft regulatory text that attempts to translate
the WGA recommendations into regulatory language. The regulatory
language, as drafted, would add a new section 51.309 to the regional
haze regulation. By providing this translation of the WGA letter into
draft regulatory text, EPA is providing the public with an example of
how these recommendations could be implemented under the SIP process.
The WGA believes its recommendations will assure reasonable progress
under
[[Page 46953]]
the regional haze program. The EPA is seeking public comment on whether
this translation accurately reflects the WGA recommendations, and on
whether a SIP incorporating these provisions would satisfy the basic
statutory requirements of section 169A as noted above.
In drafting the regulatory language, we have attempted to
incorporate all of the WGA's recommendations for specific regulatory
requirements into regulatory text except for the recommendation to
include a ``binding commitment'' on EPA to ``fully consider'' certain
national mobile source measures. While we are not expressing a position
on this recommendation, we are unsure of how or whether the regulatory
structure of the regional haze proposal can incorporate this provision,
and we request comment on how and whether this should be done.
The WGA letter contains numerous suggestions for preamble
discussions to accompany the final regional haze rule. These preamble
suggestions include clarifications of the rationale for certain
conclusions, explanations to clarify WGA's regulatory language
suggestions, and discussions of a number of WGA's suggested policy
interpretations for implementation of the final rule. At this time, the
EPA has not drafted specific preamble language in reaction to these
suggestions. We do, however, request comment on the concepts and
suggestions that WGA recommends that EPA include in the preamble to the
final rule.
The WGA letter, and the regulatory language are available for
review in the docket as items VIII-G-76 and VIII-I-02, respectively. In
addition, these items are on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/
oarpg/t1sn.html.
II. TEA-21 Legislation
In the proposed rule, we stated our intent to coordinate SIP
revisions for regional haze with the schedule for SIP revisions under
the new PM2.5 standard (see 62 FR 41151). The proposed rule
also required States to submit a SIP revision with basic planning
provisions and commitments within 12 months, consistent with the
requirements of section 169B of the CAA. For States with
PM2.5 nonattainment areas, the proposal required States to
submit control strategies at the same time as PM2.5 control
strategies (62 FR 41159).
On June 9, 1998, the President signed the TEA-21. Section
4102(c)(2) of the TEA-21 revises the timing requirements for submission
of SIPs for the visibility program. However, TEA-21 is consistent with
the desire expressed by EPA in the notice of proposed rulemaking to
harmonize the visibility program with the PM2.5 program.
Section 4102(c)(2) reads as follows:
(2) For any area designated as nonattainment for the July 1997
PM2.5 national ambient air quality standard in accordance
with the schedule set forth in this section, notwithstanding the
time limit prescribed in paragraph (2) of section 169B(e) of the
Clean Air Act, the Administrator shall require State implementation
plan revisions referred to in such paragraph (2) to be submitted at
the same time as State implementation plan revisions referred to in
section 172 of the Clean Air Act implementing the revised national
ambient air quality standard for fine particulate matter are
required to be submitted. For any area designated as attainment or
unclassifiable for such standard, the Administrator shall require
the State implementation plan revisions referred to in such
paragraph (2) to be submitted 1 year after the area has been so
designated. The preceding provisions of this paragraph shall not
preclude the implementation of the agreements and recommendations
set forth in the Grand Canyon Visibility Transport Commission Report
dated June 1996.
The Conference Report accompanying TEA-21 explains the provisions
affecting the visibility program. The Conference Report states:
The Conferees recognize that the Regional Haze regulation has
not been finalized and the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is still considering the views of various
stakeholders. The Conferees agree with EPA's public statements that
the schedule for the State Implementation Plan due pursuant to
section 169B(e)(2) of the Clean Airport [sic] Act should be
harmonized with the Schedule for State Implementation Plan
submissions required for PM2.5 ambient air quality
standard promulgated in July, 1997.
As required by Congress, we intend to incorporate the deadlines
contained in the TEA-21 into the final regional haze rule. The TEA-21
provision requires specific deadlines for regional haze SIP submissions
within 1 year after an ``area'' is designated as attainment or
unclassified for PM2.5, and at the same time that
PM2.5 SIPs are due for ``areas'' that are designated as
nonattainment for PM2.5.
There is one potential area of concern with the TEA-21 provisions
for which we seek public comment. While the deadlines and statement of
intent are generally clear, the TEA-21 legislation does not address the
deadlines that would apply for a regional planning effort that
incorporated both attainment and nonattainment areas. While certain
Class I areas may be affected only by emissions from attainment and/or
unclassified areas, we do not believe that Congress intended to inhibit
regional planning efforts by requiring area-by-area submittals
(sometimes within a single State) when both attainment and
nonattainment areas are included. We believe that this result would not
be consistent with the nature of the regional haze problem, which, as
noted in the preamble to the proposed rulemaking, aims to address
pollutants which can travel hundreds of miles. Additionally, we do not
believe that this result would be consistent with the expressed intent
of Congress to harmonize regional haze planning efforts with those for
PM2.5. Accordingly, we intend to incorporate an optional
approach into the final rule which will allow States to first submit
SIP revisions which commit to specific integrated regional planning
efforts but which do not set forth control strategies. Under this
approach, States committing to regional planning would have coordinated
deadlines for regional haze control strategies for unclassifiable,
attainment and nonattainment areas within a single planning region. We
recognize that this approach could have the effect of delaying control
strategy plan submittal dates for some areas, but we believe that such
an option will support effective coordination between the
PM2.5 and regional haze programs and is consistent with the
statement of congressional intent. Accordingly, we request comment on
this interpretion of TEA-21.
III. Where To Send Comments
Please send comments directly to Docket A-95-38 at the address
previously provided and specify that they are in response to this
notice. Comments will be forwarded from the Air Docket to the
appropriate EPA staff.
Dated: August 26, 1998.
Lydia Wegman,
Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.
[FR Doc. 98-23678 Filed 9-2-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-U