[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 148 (Thursday, August 2, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42354-42363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-14983]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R04-OAR-2007-0548-200728; FRL-8449-4]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and 
Designations of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Georgia: 
Redesignation of the Macon 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to 
Attainment for Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On June 15, 2007, the State of Georgia, through the Georgia 
Environmental Protection Division (EPD), submitted a request to 
redesignate the Macon 8-hour ozone nonattainment area to attainment for 
the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS); and to 
approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision containing a 
maintenance plan for the Macon Area. The Macon 8-hour ozone area is 
comprised of Bibb County, and a portion of Monroe County located in 
middle Georgia (hereafter referred to as the ``Macon Area''). In this 
action, EPA is proposing to approve Georgia's 8-hour ozone 
redesignation request for the Macon Area. Additionally, EPA is 
proposing to approve the 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Macon 
Area, including the regional motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) 
for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic compounds 
(VOCs). This proposed approval of Georgia's redesignation request is 
based on EPA's determination that Georgia has demonstrated that the 
Macon Area has met the criteria for redesignation to attainment 
specified in the Clean Air Act (CAA), including the determination that 
the entire Macon 8-hour ozone nonattainment area has attained the 8-
hour ozone standard. In this action, EPA is also describing the status 
of its transportation conformity adequacy determination for the new 
regional MVEBs for 2020 that are contained in the 8-hour ozone 
maintenance plan for the Macon Area.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 4, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2007-0548, by one of the following methods:
    (a) http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    (b) E-mail: [email protected].
    (c) Fax: (404) 562-9019.
    (d) Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2007-0548, Regulatory Development Section, 
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    (e) Hand Delivery or Courier: Stacy Harder, Regulatory Development 
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management 
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only 
accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The 
Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2007-0548. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI 
or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an 
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public 
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development 
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management 
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all 
possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's 
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 
p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Stacy Harder of the Regulatory 
Development Section at the Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. 
Harder's telephone number is (404) 562-9042. She can also be reached 
via electronic mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What Proposed Actions Is EPA Taking?
II. What Is the Background for EPA's Proposed Actions?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation?
IV. Why Is EPA Proposing These Actions?
V. What Is the Effect of EPA's Proposed Actions?
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Request?
VII. What Are the Proposed Regional MVEBs for the Macon Area?
VIII. What Is the Status of EPA's Adequacy Determination for MVEBs 
for the Year 2020 for the Macon Area?
IX. Proposed Action on the Redesignation Request and Maintenance 
Plan SIP Revision Including Proposed Approval of the 2020 MVEBs
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Proposed Actions Is EPA Taking?

    EPA is proposing to take three related actions which are summarized 
below and described in greater detail throughout this notice of 
proposed

[[Page 42355]]

rulemaking: (1) To redesignate the Macon Area to attainment for the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS; (2) to approve Georgia's 8-hour ozone maintenance 
plan into the Georgia SIP, including the associated MVEBs; and (3) to 
notify the public of the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the 
Macon Area MVEBs.
    First, EPA is proposing to determine that the Macon Area has 
attained the 8-hour ozone standard, and that the Macon Area has met the 
requirements for redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. 
EPA is now proposing to approve a request to change the legal 
designation of the Macon Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 
8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    Second, EPA is proposing to approve Georgia's 8-hour ozone 
maintenance plan for the Macon Area (such approval being one of the CAA 
criteria for redesignation to attainment status). The maintenance plan 
is designed to help keep the Macon Area in attainment for the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS through 2020. Consistent with the CAA, the maintenance plan 
that EPA is proposing to approve today also includes 2020 regional 
MVEBs for NOX and VOCs. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 
approve into the Georgia SIP the 2020 regional MVEBs that are included 
as part of Georgia's maintenance plan. These regional MVEBs apply to 
the entire Macon Area.
    Third, EPA is notifying the public of the status of EPA's adequacy 
process for the newly-established 2020 MVEBs for the Macon Area. The 
adequacy comment period for the Macon Area's 2020 MVEBs began on June 
21, 2007, with EPA's posting of the availability of this submittal on 
EPA's Adequacy Web site (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm). The adequacy comment period for these MVEBs 
closed on July 23, 2007. No adverse comments were received on this 
submittal during the adequacy public comment period. Please see section 
VIII of this rulemaking for further explanation of this process, and 
for more details on the MVEBs.
    Today's notice of proposed rulemaking is in response to Georgia's 
June 15, 2007, SIP submittal. The June 15, 2007, submittal requested 
redesignation of the Macon Area, and included a SIP revision addressing 
the specific issues summarized above, and the necessary elements for 
redesignation described in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.

II. What Is the Background for EPA's Proposed Actions?

    Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather, 
emissions of NOX and VOCs react in the presence of sunlight 
to form ground-level ozone. NOX and VOCs are referred to as 
precursors of ozone. The CAA establishes a process for air quality 
management through the NAAQS.
    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard 
of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). This new standard is more stringent 
than the previous 1-hour ozone standard. Under EPA regulations at 40 
CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the 3-year 
average of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average 
ambient air quality ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 
ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). (See, 69 FR 23857 
(April 30, 2004) for further information.) Ambient air quality 
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet a data completeness 
requirement. The ambient air quality monitoring data completeness 
requirement is met when the average percent of days with valid ambient 
monitoring data is greater than 90 percent, and no single year has less 
than 75 percent data completeness as determined in Appendix I of part 
50. Specifically, section 2.3 of 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, 
``Comparisons with the Primary and Secondary Ozone Standards'' states:

    ``The primary and secondary ozone ambient air quality standards 
are met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the 3-year 
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average 
ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. The number of 
significant figures in the level of the standard dictates the 
rounding convention for comparing the computed 3-year average annual 
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration with 
the level of the standard. The third decimal place of the computed 
value is rounded, with values equal to or greater than 5 rounding 
up. Thus, a computed 3-year average ozone concentration of 0.085 ppm 
is the smallest value that is greater than 0.08 ppm.''

    The CAA required EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that 
was violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the three most recent 
years of ambient air quality data. The Macon 8-hour ozone nonattainment 
area was designated using 2001-2003 ambient air quality data. The 
Federal Register document making these designations was signed on April 
15, 2004, and published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857). The CAA 
contains two sets of provisions--subpart 1 and subpart 2--that address 
planning and control requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. (Both 
are found in title I, part D.) Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as 
``basic'' nonattainment) contains general, less prescriptive, 
requirements for nonattainment areas for any pollutant--including 
ozone--governed by a NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to as 
``classified'' nonattainment) provides more specific requirements for 
certain ozone nonattainment areas. Some 8-hour ozone nonattainment 
areas are subject only to the provisions of subpart 1. Other 8-hour 
ozone nonattainment areas are also subject to the provisions of subpart 
2. Under EPA's Phase 1 8-hour ozone implementation rule (69 FR 23857) 
(Phase 1 Rule), signed on April 15, 2004, and published April 30, 2004, 
an area was classified under subpart 2 based on its 8-hour ozone design 
value (i.e., the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily 
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations), if it had a 1-hour design 
value at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour design value in Table 1 
of subpart 2). All other areas are covered under subpart 1, based upon 
their 8-hour ambient air quality design values.
    On April 30, 2004, EPA designated the Macon Area as a ``basic'' 8-
hour ozone nonattainment area (see, 69 FR 23857, April 30, 2004). On 
June 15, 2007, when Georgia submitted its final redesignation request, 
the Macon Area was classified under subpart 1 of the CAA, and was 
obligated to meet only the subpart 1 requirements.
    Various aspects of EPA's Phase 1 8-hour ozone implementation rule 
were challenged in court. On December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of 
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (DC Circuit Court) vacated 
EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule for the 8-hour Ozone Standard (69 FR 
23951, April 30, 2004). South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. 
(SCAQMD) v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (DC Cir. 2006). On June 8, 2007, in 
response to several petitions for rehearing, the DC Circuit Court 
clarified that the Phase 1 Rule was vacated only with regard to those 
parts of the Rule that had been successfully challenged. Therefore, the 
Phase 1 Rule provisions related to classifications for areas currently 
classified under subpart 2 of title I, part D of the CAA as 8-hour 
nonattainment areas, the 8-hour attainment dates and the timing for 
emissions reductions needed for attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
remain effective. The June 8th decision left intact the Court's 
rejection of EPA's reasons for implementing the 8-hour standard in 
certain nonattainment areas

[[Page 42356]]

under subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2. By limiting the vacatur, the 
Court let stand EPA's revocation of the 1-hour standard and those anti-
backsliding provisions of the Phase 1 Rule that had not been 
successfully challenged. The June 8th decision reaffirmed the December 
22, 2006, decision that EPA had improperly failed to retain measures 
required for 1-hour nonattainment areas under the anti-backsliding 
provisions of the regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New Source Review 
(NSR) requirements based on an area's 1-hour nonattainment 
classification; (2) Section 185 penalty fees for 1-hour severe or 
extreme nonattainment areas; and (3) measures to be implemented 
pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, on the 
contingency of an area not making reasonable further progress toward 
attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for failure to attain that NAAQS. 
The June 8th decision clarified that the Court's reference to 
conformity requirements for anti-backsliding purposes was limited to 
requiring the continued use of 1-hour motor vehicle emissions budgets 
until 8-hour budgets were available for 8-hour conformity 
determinations, which is already required under EPA's conformity 
regulations. The Court thus clarified that 1-hour conformity 
determinations are not required for anti-backsliding purposes.
    This section sets forth EPA's views on the potential effect of the 
Court's rulings on this proposed redesignation action. For the reasons 
set forth below, EPA does not believe that the Court's rulings alter 
any requirements relevant to this redesignation action so as to 
preclude redesignation, and do not prevent EPA from proposing or 
ultimately finalizing this redesignation. EPA believes that the Court's 
December 22, 2006, and June 8, 2007, decisions impose no impediment to 
moving forward with redesignation of the Macon Area to attainment. Even 
in light of the Court's decisions, redesignation is appropriate under 
the relevant redesignation provisions of the CAA and long-standing 
policies regarding redesignation requests.
    With respect to the 8-hour standard, the Court's ruling rejected 
EPA's reasons for classifying areas under subpart 1 for the 8-hour 
standard, and remanded that matter to the Agency. Consequently, it is 
possible that this Area could, during a remand to EPA, be reclassified 
under subpart 2. Although any future decision by EPA to classify this 
area under subpart 2 might trigger additional future requirements for 
the area, EPA believes that this does not mean that redesignation of 
the area cannot now go forward. This belief is based upon (1) EPA's 
long-standing policy of evaluating redesignation requests in accordance 
with the requirements due at the time the request is submitted; and (2) 
consideration of the inequity of applying retroactively any 
requirements that might in the future be applied.
    First, at the time the redesignation request was submitted, the 
Macon Area was classified under subpart 1 and was obligated to meet 
only subpart 1 requirements. Under EPA's long-standing interpretation 
of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA to qualify for redesignation, states 
requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant SIP 
requirements that came due prior to the submittal of a complete 
redesignation request. September 4, 1992, Calcagni Memorandum 
(``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to 
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 
Management Division). See also, Michael Shapiro Memorandum, September 
17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 1995) (Redesignation of 
Detroit-Ann Arbor, Michigan). See, Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 
(7th Cir. 2004), which upheld this interpretation. See, e.g. also, 68 
FR 25418, 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St. Louis, 
Missouri).
    Moreover, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new 
SIP requirements that were not applicable at the time the request was 
submitted. The DC Circuit Court has recognized the inequity in such 
retroactive rulemaking, (See, Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F.3d 63 (DC 
Cir. 2002)), in which the Court upheld a district court's ruling 
refusing to make retroactive an EPA determination of nonattainment that 
was past the statutory due date. Such a determination would have 
resulted in the imposition of additional requirements on the area. The 
Court stated, ``Although EPA failed to make the nonattainment 
determination within the statutory time frame, Sierra Club's proposed 
solution only makes the situation worse. Retroactive relief would 
likely impose large costs on the States, which would face fines and 
suits for not implementing air pollution prevention plans in 1997, even 
though they were not on notice at the time.'' Id. at 68. Similarly, 
with regard to Georgia's redesignation request, it would be unfair to 
penalize the Macon Area by applying to it for purposes of 
redesignation, additional SIP requirements under subpart 2 that were 
not in effect at the time it submitted its redesignation request.
    As noted earlier, in 2005, the ambient ozone data for the Macon 
Area indicated no further violations of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, using 
data from the 3-year period of 2003-2005 to demonstrate attainment. As 
a result, on June 15, 2007, Georgia requested redesignation of the 
Macon Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The redesignation 
request included three years of complete, quality-assured ambient air 
quality data for the ozone seasons (March 1st until October 31st) of 
2003-2005, indicating that the 8-hour ozone NAAQS has been achieved for 
the entire Macon Area. Under the CAA, nonattainment areas may be 
redesignated to attainment if sufficient, complete, quality-assured 
data is available for the Administrator to determine that the area has 
attained the standard and the area meets the other CAA redesignation 
requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E).

III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation?

    The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment 
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA 
allows for redesignation providing that: (1) The Administrator 
determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the 
Administrator has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for 
the area under section 110(k); (3) the Administrator determines that 
the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable 
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable 
SIP and applicable Federal air pollutant control regulations and other 
permanent and enforceable reductions; (4) the Administrator has fully 
approved a maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of 
section 175A; and, (5) the state containing such area has met all 
requirements applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the 
CAA.
    EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for 
the Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990, on April 
16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April 28, 
1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on processing 
redesignation requests in the following documents:
    1. ``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations,'' 
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, Director, Technical Support Division, June 
18, 1990;
    2. ``Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon 
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, 
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;

[[Page 42357]]

    3. ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) 
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon 
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
    4. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to 
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the 
``Calcagni Memorandum'');
    5. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response 
to Clean Air Act (ACT) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, 
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
    6. ``Technical Support Documents (TSD's) for Redesignation of Ozone 
and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G. T. 
Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;
    7. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas 
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and 
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On 
or After November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, 
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17, 
1993;
    8. ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for 
Ozone and CO Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, 
Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, November 30, 1993;
    9. ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas 
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D. 
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14, 
1994; and
    10. ``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and 
Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone 
National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Memorandum from John S. Seitz, 
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 1995.

IV. Why Is EPA Proposing These Actions?

    On June 15, 2007, Georgia requested redesignation of the Macon 8-
hour ozone nonattainment area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone 
standard. EPA's evaluation indicates that Georgia has demonstrated that 
the Macon Area has attained the standard and has met the requirements 
for redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is 
also announcing the status of its adequacy determination for the 2020 
regional MVEBs, which is relevant to the requested redesignation.

V. What Is the Effect of EPA's Proposed Actions?

    EPA's proposed actions establish the basis upon which EPA may take 
final action on the issues being proposed for approval today. Approval 
of Georgia's redesignation request would change the official 
designation of the Macon Area for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS found at 40 
CFR part 81. Approval of Georgia's request would also incorporate into 
the Georgia SIP, a plan for the Macon Area for maintaining the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS in the area through 2020. This maintenance plan includes 
contingency measures to remedy future violations of the 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS. The maintenance plan also establishes regional MVEBs for the 
year 2020 of 7.8744 tpd for VOCs and 14.7712 tpd for NOX, 
for the Macon Area. Approval of Georgia's maintenance plan would also 
result in approval of the regional MVEBs. Additionally, EPA is 
notifying the public of the status of its adequacy determination for 
the 2020 regional MVEBs, pursuant to 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1).

VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Request?

    EPA is proposing to make the determination that the Macon Area has 
attained the 8-hour ozone standard, and that all other redesignation 
criteria have been met for the Macon Area. The basis for EPA's 
determination for the area is discussed in greater detail below.

Criteria (1)--The Macon Area Has Attained the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Macon Area has attained the 
8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area may be considered to be 
attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as 
determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of part 50, 
based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured 
air quality monitoring data. To attain this standard, the 3-year 
average of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone 
concentrations measured at each monitor within an area over each year 
must not exceed 0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding convention described in 
40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, the standard is attained if the design 
value is 0.084 ppm or below. The data must be collected and quality-
assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the EPA Air 
Quality System (AQS). The monitors generally should have remained at 
the same location for the duration of the monitoring period required 
for demonstrating attainment.
    EPA reviewed ozone monitoring data from the ambient ozone 
monitoring station in the Macon Area for the ozone season from 2003-
2005. This data has been quality assured and is recorded in AQS. The 
fourth high average for 2003, 2004, and 2005, and the 3-year average of 
these values (i.e., design values), are summarized in Table 1 below. 
The 2006 data continues to demonstrate attainment.

        Table 1.--Annual 4th Max High and Design Value Concentration for 8-hour Ozone for the Macon Area
                                             (In parts per million)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   4th Highest value  (ppm)                 3-year average
                Site name                -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             2003       2004       2005       2006      2003-2005     2004-2006
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Macon SE................................     0.081      0.086      0.082      0.077         0.083         0.082
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, the design value for an area is the highest 
design value recorded at any monitor in the area. Therefore, the design 
value for the Macon Area is (0.083) ppm, which meets the standard as 
described above. As discussed in more detail below, Georgia has 
committed to continue monitoring in this area in accordance with 40 CFR 
part 58. The data submitted by Georgia provides an adequate 
demonstration that the Macon Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

[[Page 42358]]

Criteria (2)--Georgia Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) for 
the Macon Area and Criteria (5)--Has Met All Applicable Requirements 
Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA

    Below is a summary of how these two criteria were met.
    EPA has determined that Georgia has met all applicable SIP 
requirements for the Macon Area under section 110 of the CAA (general 
SIP requirements). EPA has also determined that the Georgia SIP 
satisfies the criterion that it meet applicable SIP requirements under 
part D of title I of the CAA (requirements specific to subpart 1 basic 
8-hour ozone nonattainment areas) in accordance with section 
107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has determined that the SIP is fully 
approved with respect to all applicable requirements in accordance with 
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these determinations, EPA 
ascertained which requirements are applicable to the area and that if 
applicable, they are fully approved under section 110(k). SIPs must be 
fully approved only with respect to applicable requirements.
    a. The Macon Area has met all applicable requirements under section 
110 and part D of the CAA. 
    The September 4, 1992, Calcagni Memorandum (see ``Procedures for 
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum 
from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, 
September 4, 1992) describes EPA's interpretation of section 
107(d)(3)(E). Under this interpretation, to qualify for redesignation, 
states requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the 
relevant CAA requirements that come due prior to the submittal of a 
complete redesignation request. See also, Michael Shapiro Memorandum, 
(``SIP Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for Redesignation to 
Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide NAAQS On or After November 
15, 1992,'' September 17, 1993), and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 
1995) (redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, Michigan). Applicable 
requirements of the CAA that come due subsequent to the area's 
submittal of a complete redesignation request remain applicable until a 
redesignation is approved, but are not required as a prerequisite to 
redesignation. See, section 175A(c) of the CAA; Sierra Club, 375 F.3d 
537 (7th Cir. 2004); see also, 68 FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) 
(redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri).
    General SIP requirements. Section 110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA 
delineates the general requirements for a SIP, which include 
enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means, or 
techniques, provisions for the establishment and operation of 
appropriate devices necessary to collect data on ambient air quality, 
and programs to enforce the limitations. General SIP elements and 
requirements are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of title I, part A of 
the CAA. These requirements include, but are not limited to, the 
following: Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after 
reasonable public notice and hearing; provisions for establishment and 
operation of appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air 
quality; implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the 
implementation of part C requirements (Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration (PSD)) and provisions for the implementation of part D 
requirements (NSR permit programs); provisions for air pollution 
modeling; and provisions for public and local agency participation in 
planning and emission control rule development.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to 
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air 
quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA has 
required certain states to establish programs to address the transport 
of air pollutants (NOX SIP Call, Clean Air Interstate Rule 
(CAIR)). EPA has also found, generally, that states have not submitted 
SIPs under section 110(a)(1) to meet the interstate transport 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). However, the section 
110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a state are not linked with a particular 
nonattainment area's designation and classification in that state. EPA 
believes that the requirements linked with a particular nonattainment 
area's designation and classifications are the relevant measures to 
evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The transport SIP 
submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a state 
regardless of the designation of any one particular area in the state. 
Thus, we do not believe that the CAA's interstate transport 
requirements should be construed to be applicable requirements for 
purposes of redesignation.
    In addition, EPA believes that the other section 110 elements not 
connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked with an 
area's attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes 
of redesignation. The area will still be subject to these requirements 
after the area is redesignated. The section 110 and part D 
requirements, which are linked with a particular area's designation and 
classification, are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a 
redesignation request. This approach is consistent with EPA's existing 
policy on applicability (i.e., for redesignations) of conformity and 
oxygenated fuels requirements, as well as with section 184 ozone 
transport requirements. See, Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final 
rulemakings (61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 
1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, 
May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, 
December 7, 1995). See also, the discussion on this issue in the 
Cincinnati, Ohio redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and in the 
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19, 2001).
    EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area's 
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. 
Any section 110 requirements that are linked to the part D requirements 
for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are not yet due, since, as 
explained below, no part D requirements for 8-hour standard became due 
prior to submission of the redesignation request. Therefore, as 
discussed above, for purposes of redesignation, they are both not 
considered applicable requirements. Nonetheless, EPA notes it has 
previously approved provisions in the Georgia SIP addressing section 
110 elements under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (70 FR 34660, June 15, 2005). 
EPA believes that the section 110 SIP approved for the 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS is also sufficient to meet the requirements under the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS (as well as satisfying the issues raised by the D.C. 
Circuit Court in the SCAQMD case).
    Part D requirements. EPA has also determined that the Georgia SIP 
meets applicable SIP requirements under part D of the CAA since no 
requirements became due prior to the submission of the area's 
redesignation request. Sections 172-176 of the CAA, found in subpart 1 
of part D, set forth the basic nonattainment requirements applicable to 
all nonattainment areas.
    Section 182 of the CAA, found in subpart 2 of part D, establishes 
additional specific requirements depending on the area's nonattainment 
classification. Subpart 2 is not applicable to the Macon Area.
    Part D, subpart 1 applicable SIP requirements. For purposes of 
evaluating this redesignation request,

[[Page 42359]]

the applicable part D, subpart 1 SIP requirements for all nonattainment 
areas are contained in sections 172(c)(1)-(9). A thorough discussion of 
the requirements contained in section 172 can be found in the General 
Preamble for Implementation of title I (57 FR 13498). No requirements 
applicable for purposes of redesignation under part D became due prior 
to the submission of the redesignation request, and therefore none are 
applicable to the area for purposes of redesignation. For example, the 
requirements for an attainment demonstration that meets the 
requirements of section 172(c)(1) are not yet applicable, nor are the 
requirements for Reasonably Achievable Control Technology (RACT) and 
Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) (section 172(c)(1)), 
reasonable further progress (RFP) (section 172(c)(2)), and contingency 
measures (section 172(c)(9)).
    In addition to the fact that no part D requirements applicable for 
purposes of redesignation became due prior to submission of the 
redesignation request and therefore are not applicable, EPA believes it 
is reasonable to interpret the conformity and NSR requirements as not 
requiring approval prior to redesignation.
    Section 176 Conformity Requirements. Section 176(c) of the CAA 
requires states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that 
Federally supported or funded projects conform to the air quality 
planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to determine 
conformity applies to transportation plans, programs and projects 
developed, funded or approved under title 23 of the United States Code 
(U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity) as 
well as to all other Federally supported or funded projects (general 
conformity). State conformity revisions must be consistent with Federal 
conformity regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and 
enforceability that the CAA required the EPA to promulgate.
    EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP 
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the 
redesignation request under section 107(d) because state conformity 
rules are still required after redesignation and Federal conformity 
rules apply where state rules have not been approved. See, Wall, 265 
F.3d 426 ((upholding this interpretation). See also, 60 FR 62748 
(December 7, 1995, Tampa, Florida.)
    EPA has also determined that areas being redesignated need not 
comply with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to 
redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the 
standard without a part D NSR program in effect since PSD requirements 
will apply after redesignation. The rationale for this view is 
described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator 
for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled ``Part D New 
Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas Requesting 
Redesignation to Attainment.'' Georgia has demonstrated that the area 
will be able to maintain the standard without a part D NSR program in 
effect, and therefore, Georgia need not have a fully approved part D 
NSR program prior to approval of the redesignation request. Georgia's 
PSD program will become effective in the Macon Area upon redesignation 
to attainment. See, rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467-
12468, March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorraine, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 
20469-70, May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 23, 
2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 1996). Thus, 
the Macon Area has satisfied all applicable requirements for purposes 
of redesignation under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
    b. The area has a fully approved applicable SIP under section 
110(k) of the CAA. 
    EPA has fully approved the applicable Georgia SIP for the Macon 
Area (including Bibb and a portion of Monroe County) under section 
110(k) of the CAA for all requirements applicable for purposes of 
redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a 
redesignation request, see Calcagni Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern 
Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 
1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426, plus any additional measures it may approve 
in conjunction with a redesignation action. See, 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 
2003) and citations therein. Following passage of the CAA of 1970, 
Georgia has adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully approved at 
various times, provisions addressing the various 1-hour ozone standard 
SIP elements applicable in Macon, Georgia (70 FR 34660, June 15, 2005).
    As indicated above, EPA believes that the section 110 elements not 
connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked to the 
area's nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for 
purposes of redesignation. EPA also believes that since the part D 
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation did not become 
due prior to submission of the redesignation request, they also are 
therefore not applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.

Criteria (3)--The Air Quality Improvement in the Macon Area Is Due to 
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting From 
Implementation of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control 
Regulations and Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions

    EPA believes that Georgia has demonstrated that the observed air 
quality improvement in the Macon Area is due to permanent and 
enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of 
the SIP, Federal measures, and other state adopted measures. 
Additionally, new emissions control programs for fuels and motor 
vehicles will help ensure a continued decrease in emissions throughout 
the region.

            Table 2.--Macon Area Emission Reductions Programs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery for Light-Duty Vehicles.
Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings.
Automobile Refinishing.
The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP);
 the majority of which are also VOCs.
Phase II Acid Rain Program for NOX.
Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Control
 Requirements.
Regional NOX SIP Call.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Notably, no credit specific emission reduction is being claimed in 
the SIP for the NOX SIP Call reductions although this 
program has resulted in measurable emissions reductions.

Criteria (4)--The Area Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant 
to Section 175A of the CAA

    In its request to redesignate the Macon Area to attainment, EPD 
submitted a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after the effective date of 
redesignation to attainment.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance 
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. 
Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment of 
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after the Administrator 
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the 
redesignation, the State of Georgia must submit a revised

[[Page 42360]]

maintenance plan which demonstrates that attainment will continue to be 
maintained for the 10 years following the initial 10-year period. To 
address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance 
plan must contain such contingency measures, with a schedule for 
implementation as EPA deems necessary to assure prompt correction of 
any future 8-hour ozone violations. Section 175A of the CAA sets forth 
the elements of a maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from 
nonattainment to attainment. The Calcagni Memorandum provides 
additional guidance on the content of a maintenance plan. The Calcagni 
Memorandum explains that an ozone maintenance plan should address five 
requirements: the attainment emissions inventory, maintenance 
demonstration, monitoring, verification of continued attainment, and a 
contingency plan. As is discussed more fully below, Georgia's 
maintenance plan includes all the necessary components and is 
approvable as part of the redesignation request.
b. Attainment Emissions Inventory
    Georgia selected 2005 as ``the attainment year'' for the Macon Area 
for the purposes of demonstrating attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 
This attainment inventory identifies the level of emissions in the area 
which is sufficient to attain the 8-hour ozone standard. Georgia began 
development of this attainment inventory by first developing a baseline 
emissions inventory for the Macon Area. The year 2003 was chosen as the 
base year for developing a comprehensive ozone precursor emissions 
inventory for which projected emissions could be developed for 2005, 
2008, 2011, 2014, 2017, and 2020. Non-road mobile emissions estimates 
were based on the EPA's NONROAD2005 model. On-road mobile source 
emissions were calculated using EPA's MOBILE6.2 emission factors model. 
The 2005 VOCs and NOX emissions, as well as the emissions 
for other years, for the Macon Area were developed consistent with EPA 
guidance, and are summarized in Tables 3 and 4 in the following 
subsection.
c. Maintenance Demonstration
    The June 15, 2007, final submittal includes a maintenance plan for 
the Macon Area. This demonstration:
    (i) Shows compliance and maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard 
by providing information to support the demonstration that current and 
future emissions of VOCs and NOX remain at or below 
attainment year 2005 emissions levels. The year 2005 was chosen as the 
attainment year because it is one of the most recent three years (i.e., 
2003, 2004, and 2005) for which the Macon Area has clean air quality 
data for the 8-hour ozone standard.
    (ii) Uses 2005 as the attainment year and includes future emission 
inventory projections for 2005, 2008, 2011, 2014, 2017, and 2020.
    (iii) Identifies an ``out year,'' at least 10 years after the time 
necessary for EPA to review and approve the maintenance plan. Per 40 
CFR part 93, MVEBs were established for the last year (2020) of the 
maintenance plan. See, section VII below.
    (iv) Provides the following actual and projected emissions 
inventories for the Macon nonattainment Area. See, Tables 3 and 4.

                                     Table 3.--Macon Area Emissions of VOCs
                                              [Tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Source category           2003        2005        2008        2011        2014        2017        2020
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-EGU.....................      5.4752      4.9767      4.2290      4.1672      4.4484      4.7295      4.8890
EGU.........................      1.0197      0.9818      0.9249      0.9060      0.9060      0.9060      0.9060
Area........................     16.7094     16.6437     16.5452     17.1532     18.1145     19.0758     19.1643
Mobile*.....................     16.1605     14.7602     12.6598     10.5215      8.3645      6.6906      5.2581
Nonroad.....................      4.5063      4.4556      4.3797      4.1626      3.8751      3.5875      3.1884
                             -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...................     43.8711     41.8180     38.7385     36.9105     35.7084     34.9894     33.4058
                             ===================================================================================
Safety Margin**.............         N/A      2.0531      5.1326      6.9606      8.1627      8.8817     10.4653
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Calculated using MOBILE 6.2.
**After assigning 2.6163 TPD of the 2020 VOCs safety margin to the MVEB, the revised 2020 safety margin will be
  7.8490 TPD.


                                                           Table 4.--Macon Area NOX Emissions
                                                                  [Tons per summer day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Source category                             2003         2005         2008         2011         2014         2017         2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-EGU......................................................       5.9471       5.6213       5.1325       5.0792       5.2435       5.4079       5.5590
EGU..........................................................      74.9781      67.7887      57.0046      53.4099      53.4099      53.4099      53.4099
Area.........................................................       1.5008       1.5136       1.5328       1.5641       1.6013       1.6385       1.6609
Mobile*......................................................      18.4512      16.8661      14.4883      11.8974       9.2000       7.2225       5.6051
Nonroad......................................................       4.1467       3.9555       3.6687       3.3229       2.9475       2.5722       2.1246
                                                              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total....................................................     105.0239      95.7452      81.8270      75.2734      72.4022      70.2509      68.3595
                                                              ==========================================================================================
Safety Margin**..............................................          N/A       9.2787      23.1969      29.7505      32.6217      34.7730      36.6644
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Calculated using MOBILE 6.2.
**After assigning 9.1661 TPD of the 2020 NOX safety margin to the MVEB, the revised 2020 safety margin will be 27.4983 TPD.

    A safety margin is the difference between the attainment level of 
emissions (from all sources) and the projected level of emissions (from 
all sources) in the maintenance plan. The attainment level of emissions 
is the

[[Page 42361]]

level of emissions during one of the years in which the area met the 
NAAQS. Georgia has decided to allocate a portion of the available 
safety margin to the regional 2020 MVEBs for NOX and VOCs 
for the Macon Area, and has calculated the safety margin in its 
submittal. See, Tables 3 and 4 above. This allocation and the resulting 
available safety margin for the Macon Area are discussed further in 
section VII of this rulemaking.
d. Monitoring Network
    There are currently two monitors measuring ozone in the Macon Area. 
Only one of the monitors was in place during the 2003-2005 monitoring 
period. The second monitor was installed and began collecting data for 
the 2005 ozone season. Georgia has committed in the maintenance plan to 
continue operation of these monitors in compliance with 40 CFR part 58, 
and has addressed the requirement for monitoring.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
    Georgia has the legal authority to enforce and implement the 
requirements of the ozone maintenance plan for the Macon Area. This 
includes the authority to adopt, implement and enforce any subsequent 
emissions control contingency measures determined to be necessary to 
correct future ozone attainment problems.
    Georgia will track the progress of the maintenance plan by 
performing future reviews of actual emissions for the area using the 
latest emissions factors, models and methodologies. For these periodic 
inventories Georgia will review the assumptions made for the purpose of 
the maintenance demonstration concerning projected growth of activity 
levels. If any of these assumptions appear to have changed 
substantially, Georgia will re-project emissions.
f. Contingency Plan
    The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a 
violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. Section 175A of 
the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include such contingency 
measures as EPA deems necessary to assure that the state will promptly 
correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The 
maintenance plan should identify the contingency measures to be 
adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and implementation, and 
a time limit for action by the state. A state should also identify 
specific indicators to be used to determine when the contingency 
measures need to be implemented. The maintenance plan must include a 
requirement that a state will implement all measures with respect to 
control of the pollutant that were contained in the SIP before 
redesignation of the area to attainment in accordance with section 
175A(d).
    In the June 15, 2007, submittal, Georgia affirms that all programs 
instituted by the State and EPA will remain enforceable, and that 
sources are prohibited from reducing emissions controls following the 
redesignation of the Macon Area. In the submittal, if there is a 
measured violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Macon Area, 
contingency measures would be adopted and implemented as expeditiously 
as possible, but no later than eighteen to twenty four months after the 
triggering event. The proposed schedule for these actions would be as 
follows:
     Six months to perform a comprehensive analysis;
     Three months to identify potential sources for reductions;
     Three months to identify applicable control measures;
     Three months to initiate a stakeholder process;
     Three months to draft SIP regulations; and
     Six months to initiate the rulemaking process. This step 
would include the time required to hold a public comment period, 
hearing, and board adoption, and submit the final plans to EPA. This 
process may be initiated simultaneous with drafting the regulations.
    Georgia will consider one or more of the following contingency 
measures to re-attain the standard.
     RACM for all sources of NOX
     RACT for all existing point sources of NOX
     Expansion of RACM/RACT to area(s) of transport within the 
State
     Mobile Source Measures
     Additional NOX reduction measures yet to be 
identified
    EPA has concluded that the maintenance plan adequately addresses 
the five basic components of a maintenance plan: attainment inventory, 
maintenance demonstration, monitoring network, verification of 
continued attainment, and a contingency plan. The maintenance plan SIP 
revision submitted by Georgia for the Macon Area meets the requirements 
of section 175A of the CAA and is approvable.

VII. What Are the Proposed Regional MVEBs for the Macon Area?

    Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times, 
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone areas. These 
control strategy SIPs (reasonable further progress SIPs and attainment 
demonstration SIPs etc.) and maintenance plans create MVEBs for 
criteria pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from 
cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, an MVEB is established for the 
last year of the maintenance plan. The MVEB is the portion of the total 
allowable emissions in the maintenance demonstration that is allocated 
to highway and transit vehicle use and emissions. See, 40 CFR 93.101. 
The MVEB serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area's planned 
transportation system. The MVEB concept is further explained in the 
preamble to the November 24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (58 
FR 62188). The preamble also describes how to establish the MVEB in the 
SIP and revise the MVEB.
    Georgia, after interagency consultation with the transportation 
partners for the Macon Area, has elected to develop regional MVEBs for 
NOX and VOCs for this entire area. Georgia is developing 
these MVEBs, as required, for the last year of its maintenance plan 
(2020). The MVEBs reflect the total on-road emissions for 2020, plus an 
allocation from the available VOCs and NOX safety margin. 
Under 40 CFR 93.101, the term safety margin is the difference between 
the attainment level (from all sources) and the projected level of 
emissions (from all sources) in the maintenance plan. The safety margin 
can be allocated to the transportation sector; however, the total 
emissions must remain below the attainment level. These MVEBs and 
allocation from the safety margin were developed in consultation with 
the transportation partners and were added to account for uncertainties 
in population growth, changes in model VMT and new emission factor 
models. The regional MVEBs for the Macon Area are defined in Table 5, 
below.

                       Table 5.--Macon Area MVEBs
                             [Tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 2020*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX.........................................................     14.7712
VOCs........................................................     7.8744
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes an allocation for the available NOX and VOCs safety margins.

    As mentioned above, Georgia has chosen to allocate a portion of the 
available safety margin to the 2020 MVEBs. This allocation is 9.1661 
tpd for NOX and 2.6163 tpd for VOCs. The 2020 regional MVEBs 
are derived as follows for NOX: (5.6051 tpd for total mobile

[[Page 42362]]

emissions) + (9.1661 tpd from available safety margin) = 14.7712 tpd; 
and for VOCs: (5.2581 tpd for total mobile emissions) + (2.6163 tpd 
from available safety margin) = 7.8744 tpd. Thus, the remaining safety 
margin in 2020 is 27.4983 tpd for NOX and 7.8490 tpd for 
VOCs.
    Through this rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve the 2020 
regional MVEBs for NOX and VOCs for the Macon Area because 
EPA has determined that the Area maintains the 8-hour ozone standard 
with the emissions at the levels of the budgets. As mentioned above, 
these MVEBs are regional MVEBs for the entire Macon Area. Once the new 
regional MVEBs for the Macon Area (the subject of this rulemaking) are 
approved or found adequate (whichever is done first), they must be used 
for future conformity determinations. As is discussed in greater detail 
below, EPA is also announcing the status of its adequacy determination 
for the proposed 2020 MVEBs for the Macon Area pursuant to 40 CFR 
93.118(f)(1).

VIII. What Is the Status of EPA's Adequacy Determination for MVEBs for 
the Year 2020 for the Macon Area?

    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation projects, such 
as the construction of new highways, must ``conform'' to (i.e., be 
consistent with) the part of the State's air quality plan that 
addresses pollution from cars and trucks. ``Conformity'' to the SIP 
means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality 
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of 
the NAAQS. If a transportation plan does not ``conform,'' most new 
projects that would expand the capacity of roadways cannot go forward. 
Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and 
procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity of such 
transportation activities to a SIP. The regional emissions analysis is 
one, but not the only, requirement for implementing transportation 
conformity. Transportation conformity is a requirement for 
nonattainment and maintenance areas. Maintenance areas are areas that 
were previously nonattainment for a particular NAAQS but have since 
been redesignated to attainment with a maintenance plan for that NAAQS.
    When reviewing submitted ``control strategy'' SIPs or maintenance 
plans containing MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find the MVEB contained 
therein ``adequate'' for use in determining transportation conformity. 
Once EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate for 
transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB can be used by state and 
Federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation 
projects ``conform'' to the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the 
Clean Air Act.
    EPA's substantive criteria for determining ``adequacy'' of an MVEB 
are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The process for determining 
``adequacy'' consists of three basic steps: public notification of a 
SIP submission, a public comment period, and EPA's adequacy finding. 
This process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP MVEBs was 
initially outlined in EPA's May 14, 1999, guidance, ``Conformity 
Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999, Conformity Court 
Decision.'' This guidance was finalized in the Transportation 
Conformity Rule Amendments for the ``New 8-Hour Ozone and 
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and 
Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity 
Rule Amendments--Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule 
Change,'' on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). EPA follows this guidance and 
rulemaking in making its adequacy determinations.
    Georgia's maintenance plan submission contained new regional MVEBs 
for VOCs and NOX for the Macon Area for the year 2020. The 
availability of the Georgia SIP submission with the Macon MVEBs was 
available for public comment on EPA's adequacy Web site on June 21, 
2007, at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm. The EPA public comment period on adequacy of the 2020 
regional MVEBs for the Macon Area closed on July 23, 2007. EPA did not 
receive any comments or requests for the submittal.
    EPA intends to make its determination of the adequacy of the 2020 
MVEBs for the Macon Area for transportation conformity purposes in the 
final rulemaking on the redesignation of the Macon Area. If EPA finds 
the 2020 MVEBs adequate and approves these MVEBs in the final 
rulemaking action, the new MVEBs must be used for future transportation 
conformity determinations. The new 2020 MVEBs, if found adequate and 
approved in the final rulemaking, will be effective on the date of 
publication of EPA's final rulemaking in the Federal Register. For 
required regional emissions analysis years that involve the year 2019 
or before, the area will continue to use the interagency consultation 
group for this area to determine the appropriate interim test to use to 
demonstrate conformity. For required regional emissions analysis years 
that involve 2020 or beyond, the applicable budgets will be the new 
2020 MVEBs. The 2020 MVEBs are defined in section VII of this 
rulemaking.

IX. Proposed Actions on the Redesignation Request and the Maintenance 
Plan SIP Revision Including Proposed Approval of the 2020 MVEBs

    EPA is now proposing to make the determination that the Macon Area 
has met the criteria for redesignation from nonattainment to attainment 
for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Further, EPA is proposing to approve 
Georgia's redesignation request for the Macon Area. After evaluating 
Georgia's SIP submittal requesting redesignation, EPA has determined 
that it meets the redesignation criteria set forth in section 
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA believes that the redesignation request 
and monitoring data demonstrate that the Macon Area has attained, and 
will continue to maintain the 8-hour ozone standard.
    EPA is also proposing to approve the June 15, 2007, SIP revision 
containing Georgia's 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Macon Area. 
The maintenance plan includes regional MVEBs for 2020 for 
NOX and VOCs, among other requirements. EPA is proposing to 
approve the 2020 MVEBs for the Macon Area, because the maintenance plan 
demonstrates that expected emissions for all other source categories 
will continue to maintain the 8-hour ozone standard.
    Further, as part of today's action, EPA is describing the status of 
its adequacy determination for the 2020 MVEBs in accordance with 40 CFR 
93.118(f)(1). Within 24 months from the effective date of EPA's 
adequacy finding for the MVEBs, or the publication date for the final 
rule for this action, the transportation partners will need to 
demonstrate conformity to these new MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e) 
as effectively amended by section 172(c)(2)(E) of the CAA as added by 
the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act--A 
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), which was signed into law on August 10, 
2005.

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and 
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and 
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive 
Order

[[Page 42363]]

13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This 
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. Redesignation of an area to attainment under 
section 107(d)(3)(e) of the CAA does not impose any new requirements on 
small entities. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a 
geographical area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements 
on sources. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this proposed 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 
601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-existing 
requirements under state law and does not impose any additional 
enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain 
any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(Pub. L. 104-4).
    This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because 
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian 
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian 
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive 
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not 
have Federalism implications because it does 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). This action 
merely affects the status of a geographical area, does not impose any 
new requirements on sources, or allow a state to avoid adopting or 
implementing other requirements and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. 
This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); because it is not economically 
significant and because the Agency does not have reason to believe that 
the rule concerns an environmental health risk or safety risk that may 
disproportionately affect children.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this 
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State 
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to 
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission; to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Redesignation is an action that 
affects the status of a geographical area but does not impose any new 
requirements on sources. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) do not apply. This proposed rule does not impose an information 
collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, 
Wilderness areas.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: July 25, 2007.
J.I. Palmer, Jr.,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
 [FR Doc. E7-14983 Filed 8-1-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P