[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 241 (Thursday, December 16, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70478-70496]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-31719]


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

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