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, 42354-42363 [E7-14983]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
42354
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 148 / Thursday, August 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Dated: July 25, 2007.
J.I. Palmer, Jr.,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. E7–15055 Filed 8–1–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
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
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
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 8hour 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 8hour 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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:57 Aug 01, 2007
Jkt 211001
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2007–0548, by one of the
following methods:
(a) https://www.regulations.gov:
Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
(b) E-mail: Harder.Stacy@epa.gov.
(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 https://
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 https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://
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 https://
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
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
https://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 https://
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 harder.stacy@epa.gov.
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
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 148 / Thursday, August 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
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 8hour 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 (https://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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:57 Aug 01, 2007
Jkt 211001
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 3year 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 8hour 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—
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42355
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 8hour 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
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
42356
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 148 / Thursday, August 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
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 1hour 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 8hour 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 antibacksliding 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:57 Aug 01, 2007
Jkt 211001
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 longstanding 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
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 8hour 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;
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 148 / Thursday, August 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
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).
42357
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)
Site name
3-year average
2003
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Macon SE ................................................................................................
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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:15 Aug 01, 2007
Jkt 211001
2004
2005
2006
2003–2005
2004–2006
0.081
0.086
0.082
0.077
0.083
0.082
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
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
demonstration that the Macon Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
42358
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 148 / Thursday, August 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
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,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:57 Aug 01, 2007
Jkt 211001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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,
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 148 / Thursday, August 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:57 Aug 01, 2007
Jkt 211001
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
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42359
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 LightDuty 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
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
42360
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 148 / Thursday, August 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
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
c. Maintenance Demonstration
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.
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 ................................................................
EGU .......................................................................
Area ........................................................................
Mobile* ...................................................................
Nonroad .................................................................
5.4752
1.0197
16.7094
16.1605
4.5063
4.9767
0.9818
16.6437
14.7602
4.4556
4.2290
0.9249
16.5452
12.6598
4.3797
4.1672
0.9060
17.1532
10.5215
4.1626
4.4484
0.9060
18.1145
8.3645
3.8751
4.7295
0.9060
19.0758
6.6906
3.5875
4.8890
0.9060
19.1643
5.2581
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]
2003
2005
2008
2011
2014
2017
2020
Non-EGU ..................................................
EGU .........................................................
Area ..........................................................
Mobile* .....................................................
Nonroad ...................................................
5.9471
74.9781
1.5008
18.4512
4.1467
5.6213
67.7887
1.5136
16.8661
3.9555
5.1325
57.0046
1.5328
14.4883
3.6687
5.0792
53.4099
1.5641
11.8974
3.3229
5.2435
53.4099
1.6013
9.2000
2.9475
5.4079
53.4099
1.6385
7.2225
2.5722
5.5590
53.4099
1.6609
5.6051
2.1246
Total ..................................................
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Source category
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:57 Aug 01, 2007
Jkt 211001
emissions (from all sources) and the
projected level of emissions (from all
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
sources) in the maintenance plan. The
attainment level of emissions is the
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 148 / Thursday, August 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
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.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:57 Aug 01, 2007
Jkt 211001
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 8hour 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
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42361
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 onroad 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 ............................................
VOCs ..........................................
14.7712
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
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
42362
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 148 / Thursday, August 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:57 Aug 01, 2007
Jkt 211001
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:
https://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
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 8hour 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
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 148 / Thursday, August 2, 2007 / Proposed Rules
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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:57 Aug 01, 2007
Jkt 211001
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
LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION
45 CFR Part 1626
Restrictions on Legal Assistance to
Aliens
Legal Services Corporation.
Termination of Rulemaking and
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: LSC is terminating a
rulemaking it initiated in 2001 to
consider broad revisions to its
regulation on restrictions on legal
assistance. Contemporaneously, LSC is
initiating a new rulemaking to consider
a proposal of limited scope to amend
section 1626.10(a) of this regulation to
permit LSC grant recipients to provide
legal assistance to otherwise financially
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
42363
eligible citizens of the Federated States
of Micronesia, the Republic of the
Marshall Islands and the Republic of
Palau legally residing in the United
States.
The open rulemaking published
on September 10, 2001 (66 FR 46977) is
terminated as of August 2, 2007.
Comments on this NPRM are due on
September 4, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Written comments on the
NPRM may be submitted by mail, fax or
e-mail to Mattie Cohan, Senior Assistant
General Counsel, Office of Legal Affairs,
Legal Services Corporation, 3333 K
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20007;
202–295–1624 (ph); 202–337–6519 (fax);
mcohan@lsc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mattie Cohan, Senior Assistant General
Counsel, 202–295–1624 (ph);
mcohan@lsc.gov.
DATES:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Termination of Open Rulemaking
The LSC Board of Directors identified
45 CFR Part 1626 as an appropriate
subject for rulemaking on January 27,
2001. On June 30, 2001, the LSC
President and the Chair of the
Operations and Regulations Committee
made a determination to proceed with
the initiation of a Negotiated
Rulemaking to consider amendments to
Part 1626. In accordance with the LSC
Rulemaking Protocol, LSC published a
notice in the Federal Register formally
soliciting suggestions for appointment
to the Negotiated Rulemaking Working
Group from the regulated community,
its clients, advocates, the organized bar
and other interested parties (66 FR
46977, September 10, 2001). After
receiving submissions of interest, a
Working Group was appointed. Each
organization which timely requested to
participate was appointed to the
Working Group. The Working Group
met three times without coming to
consensus on several issues.
Subsequently, work on the 2001
rulemaking was deferred in 2003 by the
previous Board of Directors pending the
appointment and confirmation of the
present Board. No further action on the
rulemaking has been taken since that
time.
During the past several years as LSC
has considered its rulemaking agenda,
neither Management nor recipients have
suggested reinitiating work on this
broad rulemaking. As such, LSC is of
the opinion that consideration of broad
revision of Part 1626 is no longer
necessary or appropriate. Accordingly,
with the publication of this notice LSC
is terminating the open rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\02AUP1.SGM
02AUP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 148 (Thursday, August 2, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42354-42363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing 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) https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
(b) E-mail: Harder.Stacy@epa.gov.
(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
https://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 https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://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 https://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 https://www.epa.gov/
epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
https://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 https://
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 harder.stacy@epa.gov.
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 (https://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: https://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 monitor
