2. What Guidance Has EPA Provided Regarding Ozone, PM2.5 and Regional Haze Interaction? As described in an earlier section of today's proposed rulemaking, States must develop ozone attainment demonstrations for many nonattainment areas. General criteria for attainment demonstrations are contained in 40 CFR part 51, appendix W ( i. e., `` EPA's Guideline on Air Quality Models''). EPA's May 1999 draft `` Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses in Attainment Demonstrations for the 8 Hour Ozone NAAQS'' provides a set of general requirements that an air quality model should meet to qualify for use in an attainment demonstration for the 8 hour ozone NAAQS. The draft guidance encourages States to integrate ozone control strategies with strategies designed later to attain the NAAQS for PM2.5 and to meet reasonable progress goals for regional haze. In addition, the draft guidance presents some modeling/ analysis principles to help States develop data bases and capabilities for considering joint effects of control strategies for ozone, PM2.5 and regional haze. Because emissions and meteorological conditions vary seasonally, the guidance recommends assessing the effects of an ozone control strategy on annual PM2.5 concentrations by estimating effects on mean PM2.5 for each season and using the resulting information to estimate annual impacts. Emission estimates for VOC, NOX, primary PM2.5 , sulfur dioxide and ammonia will be needed. In addition, the modeling should separately estimate the effects of the ozone strategy on the major components of PM2.5 : mass associated with sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon, elemental carbon, and all other species. We believe that this approach is adequate to ensure that the 8 hour ozone standard will be implemented by States in a way that allows an optimal mix of controls for ozone, PM2.5, and regional haze. Similarly, EPA's attainment demonstration guidance for PM2.5 and regional haze states that models intended to address secondary PM problems should also be capable of simulating ozone formation and transport ( January 2, 2001, `` Guidance for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for PM2.5 and Regional Haze''). The formation and transport of secondary PM are closely related to processes that are important in the formation and transport of ozone. Thus, it makes sense for programs designed to control ozone to be cognizant of programs to reduce PM2.5 and improve visibility and vice versa. The PM2.5 guidance suggests conducting a `` midcourse review'' of an approved PM2.5 plan to review changes in air quality resulting from implementation of plans to reduce PM2.5, regional haze, and ozone. ( EPA guidance on mid course review of attainment demonstrations is described earlier in today's proposed rulemaking.) We realize that in some cases development of control plans will be complicated by the need to assess the impact of the precursors of ozone, PM2.5, and regional haze. The question arises whether such areas may be provided more time to perform the more complicated analyses such that an effective multi pollutant strategy may be developed. However, the statute provides no express relief for these situations. Thus, the State is still responsible for developing and submitting demonstrations which show that each standard will be attained by the applicable date or dates provided.

3. What Is EPA Proposing?

Today, we propose to continue the policy of encouraging each State with an ozone nonattainment area which overlaps or is nearby a PM2.5 nonattainment area to take all reasonable steps to coordinate the required revisions for these nonattainment areas and meet reasonable progress goals for regional haze. Specifically, we encourage States conducting modeling analyses for ozone to separately estimate effects of a strategy on the following: mass associated with sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon, elemental carbon, and all other species. Q. What Emission Inventory Requirements Should Apply Under the 8 Hour Ozone NAAQS?

The Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule ( CERR) ( 67 FR 39602, June 10, 2002) has established basic emission inventory requirements. Specific SIP related inventory issues will be detailed in a guidance document. An important difference between inventories submitted in response to the CERR and SIP inventories is the issue of approvability. While it is likely that an inventory submitted under the CERR would be identical to the inventory submitted as part of a SIP, the SIP inventory will need to go through public hearing and formal approval by EPA as a SIP element. This public process can be combined with the public process the State undertakes for other SIP elements. The following discussion presents more details on the emission inventory. Emission inventories are critical for the efforts of State, local, and Federal agencies to attain and maintain the NAAQS that EPA has established for criteria pollutants including ozone. Pursuant to its authority under section 110 of title I of the CAA, EPA has long required States to submit emission inventories containing information regarding the emissions of criteria pollutants and their precursors. EPA codified these requirements in 40 CFR part 51, subpart Q in 1979 and amended them in 1987. The 1990 CAA Amendments revised many of the provisions of the CAA related to attainment of the NAAQS and the protection of visibility in mandatory Class I Federal areas ( certain national parks and wilderness areas). These revisions established new periodic emission inventory requirements applicable to certain areas that were designated nonattainment for certain pollutants. In the case of ozone, section 182( a)( 3)( A) required that States submit an emission inventory every 3 years for nonattainment areas beginning in 1995 for calendar year 1993. The inventory must include emissions of VOC, NOX, and carbon monoxide ( CO) for point, area, mobile ( on road and non road), and biogenic sources. In 1998, EPA promulgated the NOX SIP Call ( § 51.121) which calls on the affected States and the District of Columbia to submit SIP revisions providing for NOX reductions in order to reduce the amount of ozone and ozone precursors transported across State borders. As part of that rule, EPA established emissions reporting VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32854 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules 76 Although the United States Court of Appeals has remanded certain limited issues regarding the NOX SIP Call to the Agency, those issues do not include the reporting requirements. See Michigan v. EPA, 213 F. 3d 663 D. C. Cir. 2000) and Appalachian Power Co. v. EPA, 251 F. 3d 1026 ( D. C. Cir. 2001). requirements for States subject to the SIP Call. 76 In 2002, EPA promulgated the CERR. ( 67 FR 39602, June 10, 2002). The CERR consolidates the various emissions reporting requirements that already exist into one place in the CFR, establishes new reporting requirements for PM2.5 and its precursors and establishes new requirements for the statewide reporting of area source and mobile source emissions. The CERR establishes two types of required emission inventories:   Annual inventories, and   3 year cycle inventories. We anticipate that States will use data obtained through their current annual source reporting requirements ( annual inventories) to report emissions from larger point sources annually. States will need to get data from smaller point sources every 3rd year. States may also take advantage of data from emission statements that are available to States but not reported to EPA. New nonattainment areas for the 8 hour standard that are classified under subpart 2 will need to establish an emission statement program as specified under section 182( a)( 3)( B). We published guidance on emission statements in July 1992 titled, `` Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission Statement Program.'' As appropriate, States may use the emission statement data to meet their reporting requirements for point sources. We are interested in States' comments on their experience with the emission statement program and how the implementation of the emission statement program can be improved. States are also required to inventory area and mobile source emissions on a statewide basis for the 3 year cycle inventory. Mobile source emissions should be estimated by using the latest emissions models and planning assumptions available. The latest approved version of the MOBILE model ( MOBILE6 at the time of this proposed rulemaking, see 67 FR 4254, January 29, 2002) should be used to estimate emissions from on road transportation sources, in combination with the latest available estimates of VMT. EPA has issued a guidance memo titled `` Policy Guidance on the Use of MOBILE6 for SIP Development and Transportation Conformity'' dated January 18, 2002, that provides additional information on the use of the MOBILE6 model. The NONROAD model is currently available in draft form and can be used for initial estimates of off road mobile source emissions. We expect that the final version of the NONROAD model will be released in late 2004, which will not be in time for States to use it for their 2002 emission inventories, which are due June 1, 2004. However, by the time EPA's rulemaking on implementation of the 8 hour ozone standard is final and States need to begin preparing SIPs, a new draft version of NONROAD will have been released in connection with a planned proposal in early 2003 regarding regulation of certain non road engine categories. When the NONROAD model is final, States may choose to update their 2002 emission inventories using the final NONROAD model. By merging the information on point sources, area sources and mobile sources into a comprehensive emission inventory, State and local agencies may do the following:   Set a baseline for SIP development,   Measure their progress in reducing emissions,   Have a tool they can use to support future trading programs,   Answer public requests for information. Most importantly, States need these inventories to help nonattainment areas develop and meet SIP requirements to reach the NAAQS. In April 1999, we published `` Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards ( NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations,'' EPA   454/ R   99   006. We will be updating this guidance and are soliciting comment on several key points to be addressed in the revised document. These points are:   Section 182( a)( 1) requires that marginal and above ozone nonattainment areas submit an emission inventory 2 years after designation as nonattainment in 1990. For nonattainment areas classified under subpart 2 for the 8 hour ozone standard, we propose to interpret this to mean that an emission inventory would be required 2 years after designation ( i. e., in 2006 if EPA designates areas in 2004). The CERR requires comprehensive triennial emission inventories, beginning with the 2002 inventory year, regardless of an area's attainment status. Because these emission inventories will be available, we propose that the emission inventories required by the CERR are sufficient to meet the provisions of section 182( a)( 1).   In the past, there have been instances where portions of Tribal areas have been included in designated nonattainment areas, but when the baseline emission inventory was prepared, emissions from the Tribal lands were not included. This has had the effect of preventing the Tribes from generating emission reductions from existing sources to develop emission offsets, as well as impairing the ability of the State to model as accurately as possible. We are encouraging the States and Tribes to work together to ensure that the information used in developing the baseline emission inventory is inclusive of all emissions from the nonattainment area.   The emission inventory is used as a tracking metric by some programs such as emission trading, NSR offsets trading and RFP. This requires that a year is designated as a `` baseline'' year and used as the reference for the particular program. An external review draft of the emission inventory guidance titled `` Emission Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards ( NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations'' is available at: http:// www. epa. gov/ ttn/ chief/ eiinformation. html. Comments on this document are due at the same time as comments on this proposed rulemaking. However, the review of the emission inventory guidance is not part of this proposed rulemaking. Comments submitted on the emission inventory guidance should be identified as such and will not be docketed nor will a comment/ response summary of these comments be a part of the final 8 hour ozone implementation rule. Instructions on how to submit comments are included with the draft guidance document.

R. What Guidance Should Be Provided That Is Specific to Tribes? This section summarizes guidance for Tribes offered in various parts of this proposal. The TAR ( 40 CFR part 49), which implements section 301( d) of the CAA, gives Tribes the option of developing TIPs. Unlike States, Tribes are not required to develop implementation plans. Specifically, the TAR, adopted in 1998, provides for the Tribes to be treated in the same manner as a State in implementing sections of the CAA. EPA determined in the TAR that it was inappropriate to treat Tribes in a manner similar to a State with regard to specific plan submittal and implementation deadlines for NAAQSrelated requirements, including, but not limited to, such deadlines in CAA sections 110( a)( 1), 172( a)( 2), 182, 187, and 191. See 40 CFR 49.4( a). If a Tribe elects to do a TIP, we will work with the VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32855 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules Tribe to develop an appropriate schedule which meets the needs of each Tribe, and which does not interfere with the attainment of the NAAQS in other jurisdictions. The Tribe developing a TIP can work with the EPA Regional Office on the appropriateness of applying RFP and other SIP requirements that may or may not be appropriate for the Tribe's situation. The TAR indicates that EPA is ultimately responsible for implementing CAA programs in Indian country, as necessary and appropriate, if Tribes choose not to implement those provisions. For example, an unhealthy air quality situation in Indian country may require EPA to develop a FIP to reduce emissions from sources on the reservation. In such a situation, EPA, in consultation with the Tribe and in consideration of their needs, would work to ensure that the NAAQS are met as expeditiously as practicable. Likewise, if we determine that sources in Indian country could interfere with a larger nonattainment area meeting the NAAQS by its attainment date, we would develop a FIP for those sources in consultation with the Tribe, as necessary and appropriate. The TAR also provides flexibility for the Tribe in the preparation of a TIP to address the NAAQS. If a Tribe elects to develop a TIP, the TAR offers flexibility to Tribes to identify and implement   on a Tribe by Tribe, case by case basis   only those CAA programs or program elements needed to address their specific air quality problems. In its proposed Tribal rule, we described this flexible implementation approach as the `` modular approach.'' Each Tribe may evaluate the particular activities, including potential sources of air pollution within the exterior boundaries of its reservation ( or within nonreservation areas for which it has demonstrated jurisdiction), which cause or contribute to its air pollution problem. A Tribe may adopt measures for controlling only those sources or ozone precursor emissions, as long as the elements of the TIP are `` reasonably severable'' from the package of elements that can be included in a whole TIP. A TIP must include regulations designed to solve specific air quality problems for which the Tribe is seeking EPA approval, as well as a demonstration that the Tribal air agency has the authority from the Tribal government to develop and run their program, the capability to enforce their rules, as well as the resources to implement the program they adopt. In addition, the Tribe must receive an `` eligibility determination'' from EPA to be treated in the same manner as a State and to receive authorization from EPA to run a CAA program. We would review and approve, where appropriate, these partial TIPs as one step of an overall air quality plan to attain the NAAQS. A Tribe may step in later to add other elements to the plan, or EPA may step in to fill air quality gaps as necessary and appropriate. In approving a TIP, we would evaluate whether the plan interferes with the overall air quality plan for an area when Tribal lands are part of a multijurisdictional area. Because many of the nonattainment areas will include many jurisdictions, and in some cases both Tribal and State jurisdictions, it is important for the Tribes and the States to work together to coordinate their planning efforts. States need to incorporate Tribal emissions in their base emission inventories if Indian country is part of an attainment or nonattainment area. Tribes and States need to coordinate their planning activities as appropriate to ensure that neither is adversely affecting attainment of the NAAQS in the area as a whole.

S. What Are the Requirements for OTRs Under the 8 Hour Ozone Standard? Section 176A of subpart 1 provides the authority to establish interstate transport regions where transport of air pollutants from one or more States contributes significantly to a violation of a NAAQS in one or more other States. When a transport region is established, section 176A requires that a transport commission, comprised of representatives from the States in the transport region, also be established. The role of the transport commission is to assess the degree of interstate transport of the pollutant and precursors throughout the transport region and to evaluate strategies for mitigating the interstate pollution. Section 184 of subpart 2 establishes additional provisions for OTRs. Section 184( a) specifically established an OTR comprising 12 Northeast and Mid Atlantic States and the District of Columbia in order to address the longstanding problem of interstate ozone pollution in that region. The general provisions of section 176A apply to any OTR established under section 184. To date, the existing OTR is the only transport region for any pollutant that has been established and is subject to the section 176A requirements. Section 184( b) of subpart 2 sets forth specific VOC and NOX control requirements to be applied throughout the entire OTR, in both attainment and nonattainment areas, to reduce interstate pollution. These additional regional control requirements are part D NSR ( for VOC and NOX), RACT ( for VOC and NOX), enhanced vehicle I/ M, and Stage II vapor recovery ( for vehicle refueling) or a comparable measure. Some of these requirements duplicate requirements for ozone nonattainment areas that are classified under subpart 2. We believe the clearest legal interpretation of section 184 is that the current OTR and section 184 control requirements apply for purposes of the 8 hour standard. We believe that this interpretation would not result in any new control requirements for any area in the OTR because these control requirements are not associated with an area's designation or classification and already apply regionwide under the 1 hour ozone standard. Rather, these statutory obligations would remain in place for areas in the existing OTR. If a new OTR is established for purposes of the 8 hour standard pursuant to section 176A, that area would also be subject to the provisions and additional control requirements of section 184. Because all areas in the existing OTR, including attainment areas, are subject to part D NSR for NOX and VOC and a number of other control measures, areas in the OTR would not be able to take full advantage of either the transitional option proposed for NSR or the Agency's existing approach for early reductions, both of which are discussed elsewhere in this proposed rulemaking.

T. Are There Any Additional Requirements Related to Enforcement and Compliance? Section 172( c)( 6) requires nonattainment SIPs to `` include enforceable emission limitations, and such other control measures, means or techniques * * * as well as schedules and timetables for compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to provide for attainment * * *'' The current guidance, `` Guidance on Preparing Enforceable Regulations and Compliance Programs for the 15 Percent Rate of Progress Plans ( EPA   452/ R   93   005, June 1993)'' is relevant to rules adopted for SIPs under the 8 hour ozone NAAQS and should be consulted for purposes of developing appropriate nonattainment plan provisions under section 172( c)( 6). This document provides States with guidance on how to prepare enforceable stationary and mobile source regulations for their ROP plans. Developing clear, concise, enforceable rules and establishing strong compliance programs helps to ensure that the emissions reductions projected for specific control strategies are actually achieved. The document VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32856 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules 77 A description of the NCore can be found at the following Web site: http:// www. epa. gov/ ttnamtil/ files/ ambient/ monitorstrat/ sec4. pdf. 78 A description of the NCore level 2 stations can be found at the following Web site: http:// www. epa. gov/ ttnamtil/ files/ ambient/ monitorstrat/ sec4. pfd. 79 Since we anticipae that areas will be designated and classified on the same date, we will use the term `` designation'' to represent the date of designation and classification. identifies the minimum criteria and the information sources that we will use to evaluate the enforceability of regulations, and to determine compliance with Federal guidelines and regulations. States should follow the guidelines provided in this document as part of their quality assurance process involved in the development of control measures for their ROP plans and their attainment demonstrations.

U. What Requirements Should Apply to Emergency Episodes?

Currently, subpart H of 40 CFR part 51 specifies requirements for SIPs to address emergency air pollution episodes and for preventing air pollutant levels from reaching levels determined to cause significant harm to the health of persons. We anticipate proposing a separate rulemaking in the future to update portions of that rule. This separate rulemaking may be done in conjunction with revisions to the emergency episode rules that will address the PM2.5 NAAQS.

V. What Ambient Monitoring Requirements Will Apply Under the 8 Hour Ozone NAAQS?

Ozone monitoring data play an important role in designations, control strategy development, and related implementation activities. The ambient monitoring requirements are listed in 40 CFR part 58. We plan to modify these existing ozone monitoring requirements as part of the National Air Monitoring Strategy. These changes are being undertaken in a separate rulemaking effort. We plan to propose a national strategy introducing NCore ( national core monitoring sites) as a replacement for traditional national air monitoring stations/ State and local air monitoring stations ( NAMS/ SLAMS) monitoring currently codified at 40 CFR part 58. Part of the NCore network 77 would include the existing ozone monitoring sites that currently support the NAAQSrelated activities. The number and location of the original sites would likely be very similar to the current network. The regulatory modifications are expected to include ozone monitoring requirements based upon the population of an area and its historical/ forecasted ozone air quality values. In addition, we anticipate that we will include a requirement for measuring multiple air pollutants at select locations. The NCore sites are expected to include high sensitivity nitrogen oxide ( NO) and total reactive oxides of nitrogen ( NOy) measurements at locations across the nation to support the tracking of national emission strategy efforts such as the NOX SIP Call and, if created, a statute codifying the Clear Skies Bill, which addresses NOX reductions across the nation. Each State, local, and Tribal air monitoring agency is being asked to assess the adequacy of its air pollution monitoring networks, including those sites that measure ozone. We will work with these agencies to develop network plans to ensure approval of all network designs. On a local basis, there will be some relocation, addition and removal of ozone sites as a result of regional network assessments. The CAA requires that ozone precursor monitoring be conducted in any ozone nonattainment area classified as serious, severe, or extreme. We adopted regulations reflecting the statutory requirements in 40 CFR part 58 in 1994 as the Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations ( PAMS) program. Areas that would be designated under the 8 hour ozone NAAQS are not directly addressed in 40 CFR part 58 for ozone precursor monitoring. The PAMS monitoring will be retained in areas currently designated as 1 hour ozone serious, severe, and extreme nonattainment areas. The monitoring strategy regulation revisions will consider the possibility of reducing some of the sampling schedules. We also intend to promote the use of individually designed PAMS networks to address the very specific ozone and ozone precursor data needs in PAMS areas. The revised regulation will also cover all areas that are classified as serious or above for the 8 hour NAAQS. Once an area is bumped up to serious or above, it would be subject to the enhanced monitoring rule and would be required to develop appropriate PAMS plans. Where practical, PAMS stations should be incorporated into multi pollutant NCORE level 2 sites 78 that include NOy, meteorological and CO ( a good indicator of mobile emission measurements.) Alternative plans are recommended for 8 hour bump up areas. This will be reflected in the 40 CFR part 58 changes as well. W. When Will EPA Require 8 Hour Attainment Demonstration SIP Submissions?

1. Background The time for submission of attainment demonstration SIPs is linked to whether the requirements are specified under subpart 1 or subpart 2. In general, all areas designated nonattainment are subject to the planning requirements of subpart 1. However, if the area is subject to a more specific requirement under subpart 2, the subpart 2 planning obligation controls. As proposed elsewhere in the discussion concerning classification options, some, if not all, 8 hour ozone standard nonattainment areas will be subject to the subpart 2 planning obligations. Section 172( b) ( in subpart 1) provides that at the time EPA promulgates the designation of an area as nonattainment with respect to a NAAQS under section 107( d), the Administrator shall establish a schedule for submission of a plan that meets the CAA's requirements for nonattainment areas. This schedule may not extend beyond 3 years after the date of nonattainment designation. Under subpart 2 of the CAA, attainment demonstration SIP submission deadlines for areas designated nonattainment for the 1 hour ozone standard are linked to the date of enactment of the CAA Amendments, i. e., from November 15, 1990. This date is also the date by which most of these areas were designated and classified by operation of law. See CAA section 107( d)( 1)( C) and 181( a). Moreover, in subpart 1, Congress linked the time for SIP submission to the time of designations. See CAA section 172( b). Because such dates have long since passed, we believe that it is reasonable to tie the SIP submittal dates to the date of nonattainment designations and classifications for the 8 hour standard. 79 While the submission date for all SIP requirements in subpart 2 will be tied to the date of nonattainment designations, this section of the proposed rule discusses the requirement to submit an attainment demonstration. For purposes of the discussion here, we are assuming that designations will occur in 2004. Subpart 2 requires attainment demonstration submissions at different times depending on an area's classification. Section 182( a) does not require an attainment demonstration for marginal areas. Section 182( b)( A)( 1)

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32857 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules requires moderate areas to submit an attainment demonstration no later than 3 years after the date of enactment. Section 183( c)( 2) requires serious ( and higher classified) areas to submit an attainment demonstration no later than 4 years after date of enactment. As provided above, we propose to interpret these times to run from the date of an area's nonattainment designation. Despite the fact that the CAA's provisions for the timing of submission of attainment demonstration SIPs for subpart 1 areas differs from that of subpart 2 areas, we do not believe it is appropriate or desirable to require States to submit attainment demonstrations for areas designated nonattainment under the 8 hour standard at greatly different times. We recognize that photochemical grid modeling   required by the CAA for interstate moderate nonattainment areas, as well as serious and higherclassified areas   will be performed on large enough scales to address transport and will in most cases encompass a number of nonattainment areas. These numerous nonattainment areas may differ by classification ( some areas may be intrastate moderate areas, some interstate moderate areas, and others serious and above nonattainment areas). Some areas that may require attainment demonstrations may be subject to subpart 1 while others may be subject to subpart 2. Furthermore, the control strategies that may be modeled for all the areas in the modeling domain will likely be modeled simultaneously, especially if all the areas are located in a single State. Also, we believe that techniques for photochemical grid modeling, while they were more timeconsuming when the 1990 CAA Amendments were enacted, are now more standardized and less timeconsuming In light of this, we do not believe it is reasonable to defer submission of attainment demonstrations beyond 3 years after designation. The TAR, which implements section 301( d) of the CAA, gives Tribes the option of developing TIPs. Specifically, the TAR provides for the Tribes to be treated in the same manner as a State in implementing most of the CAA. However, in the TAR, EPA determined that it was inappropriate to treat Tribes in a manner similar to a State with regard to schedules. Therefore, Tribes are not required to submit a TIP, nor, if they choose to submit a TIP, are they required to submit a TIP in the same timeframe as the States. Where a Tribe chooses to develop a TIP, we will work with them to develop an appropriate schedule that meets the needs of the Tribe but does not interfere with timely attainment of the NAAQS on Tribal land or in other jurisdictions.

2. Option Being Proposed In light of the above discussion and rationale, we are proposing to require all nonattainment areas that are required to perform photochemical grid modeling   regardless of coverage under subpart 1 or 2 or regardless of classification under subpart 2   to submit an attainment demonstration within 3 years after designation. We believe this proposal would result in a closer synchronization of the 8 hour ozone and PM2.5 attainment demonstration SIP submittal dates. We discussed the integration of ozone and PM2.5 schedules at the three public meetings and numerous conference calls that were held with stakeholder groups. A majority of commenters were supportive of integrating the SIP attainment plan submission schedules for ozone and PM2.5 because integration would optimize control strategies, save time and planning resources, streamline deadlines, and maximize cost effectiveness, among other benefits. The PM2.5 standard is anticipated to be implemented under subpart 1 of the CAA, which requires a SIP submission by a date set by EPA, which can be no later than 3 years from designation. Since we are proposing that all 8 hour ozone nonattainment areas that are required to perform photochemical grid modeling submit their attainment demonstration SIPs within 3 years after nonattainment designation, this would result in a high degree of synchronization and thus allow comprehensive analyses that would evaluate controls to attain both air quality standards. As noted above, we are assuming for this proposed rulemaking that ozone designations will be promulgated in the 2004 timeframe; currently under TEA   21, designations for PM2.5 would occur beginning in 2004, and must be completed by the end of 2005. Thus, the later designated PM2.5 areas would not be required to submit their attainment demonstration SIPs until after the ozone SIPs are due. Additional discussion of the benefits of integrating the planning for both standards appears elsewhere in this proposed rulemaking.

VII. Proposal of Integrated Frameworks Using Various Options As noted above, we are presenting two possible integrated frameworks that comprise an option from each of the above implementation elements to illustrate how they may work in conjunction with each other. In addition to soliciting comment on the options presented for the individual elements, we are also soliciting comment on how the options can be grouped into an integrated implementation framework. The following frameworks should be considered illustrative of possible ways of combining the element options. For final rulemaking, however, we may develop a consolidated framework that uses a different combination of the options proposed above, based on comments received and other information that comes to light during the public comment period. We are proposing for comment two integrated frameworks:   Framework 1   an approach considered similar to traditional implementation,   Framework 2   an approach considered more flexible than traditional implementation. Table 5 illustrates how element options may be combined to form these two frameworks. Elements for which we are proposing only one option would be common to either framework. For elements for which we are proposing several options, only one option has been selected for purposes of illustrating the frameworks depicted below. In addition, there are several proposed elements where options are presented that only apply to areas that would be covered by subpart 1; these elements include RACT for subpart 1 areas and the NOX waiver requirement as it would apply to subpart 1 areas. These elements are not shown in Table 5 below, since they are only applicable to subpart 1 areas.

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32858 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules TABLE 5.   8 HOUR OZONE NAAQS IMPLEMENTATION ELEMENTS/ OPTIONS GROUPED INTO FRAMEWORKS FOR PROPOSAL [ This table only summarizes the options and approaches; the full description of the approach or option in the proposed rulemaking should be consulted]

Implementation element Framework 1 Framework 2 A. Will subpart 1 or subpart 2 govern classifications? Classify all areas under subpart 2 using 8 hour design values. ( Option 1) Areas with a 1 hour design value   0.121 ppm would be classified under subpart 2 using 8 hour design values. Areas with a 1 hour design value < 0.121 ppm would be covered under subpart 1. ( Option 2) B. Will areas under subpart 1 be classified? N/ A ................................................................... No classification. ( Option 1) C. When may the State treat measures that applied for purposes of the 1 hour standard as contingency measures, consistent with section 110( l). When the area attains the 8 hour ozone standard and is designated attainment. When the area achieves the level of the 1 hour standard.

D. 1. How will the 15 percent VOC ROP requirement apply? All areas classified as moderate or above for the 8 hour NAAQS must achieve a 15 percent reduction in VOC emissions for the first 6 years after the base year ( 2002). ( Option 1) A moderate area that already achieved a 15 percent VOC reduction for the 1 hour ozone standard would be considered to have met the 15 percent requirement already and may instead implement RFP consistent with section 172( c). An area classified as serious or above that already achieved a 15 percent VOC reduction would be considered to have met the 15 percent requirement so it could choose to achieve an average of three percent per year of VOC or NOX reductions for the 6 year period. ( Option 2) D. 2. What is the baseline year for the emission inventory used for RFP/ ROP? All areas would use a 2002 baseline year for preparation of the emissions inventory.

D. 3. What restrictions on creditable measures for RFP/ ROP under the 8 hour standard ( subpart 2 areas only) will apply? All emissions reductions that occur after the baseline emissions inventory year from post 1990 Federal measures and any other measures would be creditable for ROP/ RFP, except those specifically prohibited in section 182( b)( 1)( D). D. 4. What will RFP be for areas classified under subpart 1?. N/ A ................................................................... a. Areas with attainment dates 3 years or less after designation. As with marginal areas, those areas would not be subject to a separate RFP requirement. b. Areas with attainment dates between 3 to 6 years after designation. No separate RFP demonstration required except RFP would be met if a State demonstrates emissions reductions needed for attainment would be achieved by the attainment date. ( Option 1) c. Areas with attainment dates beyond 6 years after designation. The RFP plan submission would be due with the attainment demonstration within 3 years after designation and would need to provide for certain increments of reductions from the baseline emission year out to the attainment year, proportionate to the time between the base year and the attainment year. ( Option 1) D. 5. How would the 8 hour ROP requirement fit with the 1 hour ROP requirement? The area would develop new baseline and new ROP emission reduction targets for the 8 hour standard for the entire area and could drop the 1 hour standard target for any periods that overlap with an 8 hour RFP period. E. What's the RACT requirement for areas covered under subpart 1?. N/ A ................................................................... If the area is able to demonstrate attainment of the standard as expeditiously as practicable with emission control measures in the SIP, then RACT will be met, and additional measures would not be required as being reasonably available. ( Option 2) F. What will be the NSR requirement? .............. Status quo approach for all areas   areas subject to NSR obligations for their 8 hour classifications under subpart 2. ( Option 1) Three options which could be implemented in conjunction with each other: Status quo approach for all areas ( subpart 1 areas get subpart 1 NSR, subpart 2 areas get subpart 2 NSR) ( Option 1); AND A more flexible NSR program ( i. e., allowing a pool of offsets, more flexible technology control requirement) for areas that submit early SIPs (`` transitional'' NSR program) ( Option 2);

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32859 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules 80 If a Compact area had air quality meeting the 8 hour standard for the period on which Continued TABLE 5.   8 HOUR OZONE NAAQS IMPLEMENTATION ELEMENTS/ OPTIONS GROUPED INTO FRAMEWORKS FOR PROPOSAL   Continued [ This table only summarizes the options and approaches; the full description of the approach or option in the proposed rulemaking should be consulted]

Implementation element Framework 1 Framework 2 AND A CADC program, which would allow a more flexible NSR program for areas that adopt CADC provisions. ( Option 3)

VIII. Other Considerations A. Will EPA Be Contemplating Incentives for Areas That Want To Take Early Action for Reducing Ozone Under the 8 Hour Standard? This section discusses the extent to which we are providing incentives for areas that wish to voluntarily expedite the path to cleaner air by initiating early planning and control actions for reducing ground level ozone prior to EPA's designations for the 8 hour ozone NAAQS. State, local and Tribal air pollution control agencies have continued to express a need for added flexibility in implementing the 8 hour ozone NAAQS, including incentives for taking action sooner than EPA requires for reducing ground level ozone. We are encouraging localities to make decisions that will achieve clean air sooner than otherwise is mandated by the CAA. Early planning and early implementation of control measures that improve air quality will likely accelerate protection of public health. We issued our policy on early planning on November 14, 2002. We are not proposing action on this approach in this rulemaking and, therefore, we are not requesting comment on this issue.

1. What Are the Ozone Flex Guidelines for the 1 Hour Ozone NAAQS? In June 2001 we announced the `` Ozone Flex Guidelines'' program ( Ozone Flex), which supports and rewards innovative, voluntary, local strategies to reduce ground level ozone. Ozone Flex is a framework for local communities to develop voluntary solutions for areas concerned about potential future nonattainment of the 1 hour ozone standard. Ozone Flex is intended to achieve emissions reductions and avoid future nonattainment problems in those areas designated attainment for the 1 hour standard. While this program is only available to areas to address the 1 hour ozone standard, it also recognizes that areas may secure emissions reductions and public health benefits toward attaining the 8 hour ozone standard prior to EPA's designation of areas. These voluntary measures may be creditable to future planning efforts for the 8 hour standard, to the extent allowed by the CAA and EPA guidance or rules. Any emissions reductions targeted for a period after the base year would provide `` credit'' for a State, local, or Tribal area in any future plan. Emission reduction credits toward meeting RFP are discussed elsewhere in this proposed rulemaking.

2. What Is the `` Early Action Compact'' for Implementing the 8 Hour Ozone NAAQS? Following EPA's issuance of the `` Ozone Flex Guidelines'' for continued attainment of the 1 hour standard, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality ( TCEQ) encouraged EPA to consider additional incentives for early planning towards achieving the 8 hour ozone NAAQS. On March 20, 2002, the TCEQ submitted to EPA the Protocol for Early Action Compacts Designed to Achieve and Maintain the 8 hour Ozone Standard ( Protocol). The Protocol was designed to achieve emissions reductions and clean air sooner than would otherwise be required under the CAA for implementing the 8 hour ozone NAAQS. The TCEQ proposed that the Protocol would be formalized by `` Early Action Compact'' agreements ( Compacts) primarily developed by local, State and Federal ( EPA) officials. The principles of the Compacts are the following:   Early planning, implementation, and emissions reductions leading to expeditious attainment and maintenance of the 8 hour ozone standard;   Local control of the measures employed, with broad based public input;   State support to ensure technical integrity of the early action plan;   Formal incorporation of the early action plan into the SIP;   Designation of all areas as attainment or nonattainment in April 2004, but, for Compact areas, deferral of the effective date of the nonattainment designation and/ or designation requirements so long as all Compact terms and milestones continue to be met; and   Safeguards to return areas to traditional SIP attainment requirements should Compact terms be unfulfilled ( e. g., if the area fails to attain in 2007), with appropriate credit given for reduction measures already implemented. Under this approach, an early, voluntary 8 hour air quality plan would be developed through an Early Action Compact agreement for each area that approaches or monitors exceedances of the 8 hour standard and that is designated attainment for the 1 hour ozone standard. This approach would also apply to maintenance areas for the 1 hour ozone standard to the extent such areas continue to maintain that standard. One hour ozone maintenance areas are areas that were previously designated nonattainment for the 1 hour ozone standard, but were redesignated to attainment pursuant to section 107( d)( 3)( E) and subject to the requirements of section 175A of the CAA. Under a Compact, the local area would commit to develop a SIP based on recent emission inventories and air quality modeling demonstrating attainment of the 8 hour standard by 2007. In addition, the area would identify additional local controls beyond Federal and State requirements, which would be implemented by 2005. According to the Protocol, we would recognize the local area's commitment to early, voluntary action by designating the area nonattainment in April 2004 ( at the time of national designations for all areas of the country), but deferring the effective date of the nonattainment designation for participating Compact areas that are monitoring a violation of the 8 hour ozone standard, so long as all terms and milestones of the Compact continue to be met, including submission of the early action SIP revision no later than December 31, 2004.80 We circulated the Protocol to VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32860 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules designations are based, we would designate the area as attainment without a deferred effective date. 81 Additional Options Considered for `` Proposed Rule to Implement the 8 Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard.'' U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, March 2003. numerous organizations for review and comment. A copy of the revised Protocol is available in the docket for this proposed rulemaking.

3. What is EPA's Response to the Texas `` Early Action Compact?'' In a letter dated June 19, 2002, from Gregg Cooke, Administrator, Region 6, to Robert Huston, Chairman, TCEQ, EPA endorsed the principles outlined in the Protocol. The Protocol was subsequently revised on December 11, 2002, based on comments from EPA. Upon the completion of Compacts by December 31, 2002 in areas that meet the requirements of the Protocol ( including 1 hour maintenance areas), we intend to honor the commitments established in these agreements. Any control measures identified by a Compact area must be submitted to EPA for approval as a SIP revision. In a proposed settlement with nine environmental groups, we agreed to designate areas for the 8 hour ozone standard by April 15, 2004. This deadline gives States and Tribes ample time to update their recommendations by April 15, 2003 for nonattainment area boundaries. EPA lodged the proposed consent decree on November 13, 2002 with the U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Also on November 14, 2002, we issued a guidance memorandum outlining the new designations schedule, requirements for designating Tribal areas, and discussing the impact of the designation schedule on areas that are developing early action compacts. ( Memorandum dated November 14, 2002, from Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Assistant Administrator, to EPA Regional Administrators.) We have entered into early action compacts with a number of areas of the country. As a result, we will designate all areas of the country either attainment or nonattainment in April 2004 ( including Compact areas). At that time, we plan to propose to defer the effective date of the nonattainment designation for participating Compact areas that are monitoring a violation of the 8 hour ozone standard, provided all terms of the agreement continue to be met, including timely completion of all Compact milestones. However, as the Compacts were signed prior to the 2004 designations process, the Agency cannot prejudge the outcome of designations. Consequently, States are advised that if EPA determines that any portion of a compact area should become part of an 8 hour ozone nonattainment area, that portion would no longer be eligible for participation in the Early Action Compact, and the effective date of the nonattainment designation for that portion of the Compact would not be deferred. Also, as noted above, this proposed rulemaking does not propose to establish attainment/ nonattainment designations, nor does it address the principles that will be considered in the designation process, nor does it take comment on the Early Action Compact program.

4. Did EPA Consider Other Options for Incentives for Areas That Take Early Actions for Reducing Ozone? We did consider another option, which is discussed in a separate document available in the docket. 81 5. What Is the Difference Between the Early Action Compact Program and the Transitional NSR Program? Appendix D of this proposed rulemaking contains a table comparing the two programs. It should be noted that areas that may be initially eligible for the Early Action Compact but that become ineligible later may still be eligible for the transitional NSR program.

B. Clarification of How the Transition from 1 Hour to 8 Hour Standard Will Work for Early Action Compact Areas, for Conformity, and for NSR and PSD Appendix E presents a table that describes our interpretation of the applicability of conformity and traditional NSR and PSD under the various potential transition scenarios. This table is included for informational purposes only and does not constitute part of the proposed rule. It is intended only to inform comment on the proposal itself. As discussed elsewhere in this preamble, we are proposing options for how areas will transition from the 1 hour standard to the 8 hour standard. Under one of the options, we would revoke the 1 hour standard 1 year after the effective date of the 8 hour designations. For Early Action Compact areas, the nonattainment designation for the 8 hour ozone standard is promulgated, but the effective date of that designation is deferred as long as the area continues to meet compact milestones. These milestones are described in the Holmstead memorandum referenced earlier. Shortly after December 2007 ( i. e., by April 2008), we intend to make a determination of whether the area attained the 8 hour ozone standard. For all Compact areas, under the transition option described earlier in this paragraph, we would revoke the 1 hour standard for these areas 1 year after the effective date of the designation of attainment or nonattainment for the 8 hour standard. Therefore, on the 1 year effective date of the determination we make in April 2008, which will include the designation of Compact areas, the 1 hour standard would be revoked ( in approximately May or June of 2009).

C. How Will EPA's Proposal Affect Funding Under the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement ( CMAQ) Program? Depending on the specific characteristics of a nonattainment area, revocation of the 1 hour ozone standard will have varying effects on some Federal transportation program funds apportioned to the States through a formula established by the TEA   21. The TEA   21 establishes eligibility for the CMAQ program transportation funds for nonattainment and maintenance areas, designated under section 107( d) of the CAA ( 42 U. S. C. 7407( d)), provided the area is, or was, classified in accordance with CAA sections 181, 186, and 188. Eligibility, in part, establishes an area's ability to use CMAQ funding. Areas designated nonattainment after December 31, 1997 are also eligible, but without regard to classification. The amount of CMAQ funds available to States for use in nonattainment and maintenance areas is set at levels authorized by TEA   21. The funds are apportioned to States through the statutory formula contained in section 104( b) of title 23. The formula is based on a State's weighted population, which takes into account the classifications of ozone and CO nonattainment and maintenance areas, and the population in such areas. The formula does not account for PM nonattainment areas. As we revoke the 1 hour ozone standard under implementation of the new 8 hour ozone NAAQS, changes regarding the designation and classification of these nonattainment and maintenance areas, will change the amount of CMAQ funds apportioned to each State under the current apportionment formula, and thus available to these areas. Some States with 1 hour ozone nonattainment and maintenance areas will lose CMAQ funding while others may gain without a statutory change. The changes in funding will depend on how much a State's weighted population changes because of the revocation.

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32861 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules 82 U. S. EPA, Cost, Emission Reduction, Energy, and Economic Impact Assessment of the Proposed Rule Establishing the Implementation Framework for the 8 hour, 0.08ppm Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, prepared by the Innovative Strategies and Economics Group, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, April 24, 2003. Furthermore, after revocation any 1 hour ozone nonattainment or maintenance area that is not also designated nonattainment under the 8 hour or the existing CO or PM   10 standards will lose the ability to spend CMAQ funding. Since 1 hour ozone designations will no longer be in force, the authorized ability to use CMAQ funds under 23 U. S. C. 149( b) will be limited to existing CO and PM   10 nonattainment and maintenance areas and areas designated after December 31, 1997, such as those designated under the 8 hour standard. Finally, nonattainment areas designated under the 8 hour ozone standard would all be eligible for CMAQ funding, but the formula for determining the amount of funds apportioned to the States would only take into account the areas that are classified pursuant to CAA sections 181, 186, and 188. Areas designated but not classified under the 8 hour standard would not be included in the apportionment formula, and States with such areas will not receive any CMAQ funding because of those areas. As noted elsewhere in this proposal, EPA is requesting comment on various concepts for classifying nonattainment areas under the 8 hour standard. We are aware that apportionment of CMAQ funds is calculated yearly and varies according to changing population, and severity of air pollution. The TEA   21 is due for reauthorization in October, 2003, and adjustments to the CMAQ eligibility criteria and apportionment formula may be possible. We understand the importance of CMAQ funding to States and nonattainment areas and are prepared to work with DOT and Congress to minimize the unintended impact of the 8 hour ozone NAAQS, on those funds.

D. Are There Any Environmental Impact Differences Between the Two Major Classification Options Being Proposed? Both of the major classification options being proposed would result in attainment by an expeditious attainment date. However, the EPA analysis of costs of the options notes that they do not necessarily have the same environmental impact. The subpart 2 only option is more expensive for some of the 10 areas analyzed in the cost analysis   largely because subpart 2 ROP requires more emissions reductions, and it requires these reductions by 2008, 2 years earlier than the attainment date of 2010 that is assumed for the analysis areas. This would result in an earlier air quality benefit. We have not performed air quality modeling to determine the increment of air quality benefit from the subpart 2 only option compared to the option under which some areas are covered under subpart 1.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Upon promulgation of the NAAQS, the CAA requires EPA to designate areas as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. The CAA then specifies requirements for areas based on the designation. This proposed rule fleshes out the statutory requirements that non attainment areas are obligated to meet. In some instances, the statute is ambiguous regarding the statutory obligations that apply   thus we are proposing various options that we believe are consistent with the ambiguous language of the statute. One option attempts to provide a flexible and least cost approach for States to apply to the sources that States may choose to regulate. The other option follows a more traditional statutory interpretation. 82 A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review Under Executive Order 12866 ( 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency must determine whether the regulatory action is `` significant'' and, therefore, subject to Office of Management and Budget ( OMB) review and the requirements of the Executive Order. The Order defines `` significant regulatory action'' as one that is likely to result in a rule that may: ( 1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $ 100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or Tribal governments or communities; ( 2) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency; ( 3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or ( 4) Raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.'' Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been determined that this rule is a `` significant regulatory action'' because it raises novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates. As such, this action was submitted to OMB for review. Changes made in response to OMB suggestions or recommendations will be documented in the public record.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act This action does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U. S. C. 3501 et seq.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act The Regulatory Flexibility Act generally requires an Agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act or any other statute unless the Agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's proposed rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: ( 1) A small business that is a small industrial entity as defined in the U. S. Small Business Administration ( SBA) size standards. ( See 13 CFR 121.); ( 2) a governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and ( 3) a small organization that is any not forprofit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field. After considering the economic impacts of today's proposed rule on small entities, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This proposed rule will not impose any requirements on small entities. Rather, this rule interprets the obligations established in the CAA for States to submit implementation plans in order to attain the 8 hour ozone NAAQS.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 ( UMRA), Public Law 104   4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with `` Federal mandates'' that may result in expenditures to State, local,

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32862 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $ 100 million or more in any 1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt the least costly, most cost effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least costly, most cost effective or least burdensome alternative if the Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation why that alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including Tribal governments, it must have developed under section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must provide for notifying potentially affected small governments, enabling officials of affected small governments to have meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and informing, educating, and advising small governments on compliance with the regulatory requirements. EPA has determined that this rule does not contain a Federal mandate that may result in expenditures of $ 100 million or more for State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or the private sector in any 1 year. The estimated administrative burden hour and costs associated with implementing the 8 hour, 0.08 ppm NAAQS were developed upon promulgation of the standard and presented in Chapter 10 of U. S. EPA 1997, Regulatory Impact Analyses for the Particulate Matter and Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, Innovative Strategies and Economics Group, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC, July 16, 1997. The estimated costs presented there for States in 1990 dollars totaled $ 0.9 million. The corresponding estimate in 1997 dollars is $ 1.1 million. Should the more traditional classification option be adopted as the implementation framework, these costs may increase modestly, but would not reach $ 100 million. Thus, today's rule is not subject to the requirements of section 202 and 205 of the UMRA. The CAA imposes the obligation for States to submit SIPs to implement the 8 hour ozone NAAQS; in this rule, EPA is merely fleshing out those requirements. However, even if this rule did establish a requirement for States to submit SIPs, it is questionable whether a requirement to submit a SIP revision would constitute a Federal mandate in any case. The obligation for a State to submit a SIP that arises out of section 110 and part D of the CAA is not legally enforceable by a court of law, and at most is a condition for continued receipt of highway funds. Therefore, it is possible to view an action requiring such a submittal as not creating any enforceable duty within the meaning of section 421( 5)( 9a)( I) of UMRA ( 2 U. S. C. 658( a)( I)). Even if it did, the duty could be viewed as falling within the exception for a condition of Federal assistance under section 421( 5)( a)( i)( I) of UMRA ( 2 U. S. C. 658( 5)( a)( i)( I)). In the proposal, EPA has determined that this proposed rule contains no regulatory requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small governments, including Tribal governments. Nonetheless, EPA carried out consultations with governmental entities affected by this rule.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism Executive Order 13132, entitled `` Federalism'' ( 64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' `` Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that have `` substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' This proposed rule does not have federalism implications. It will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132. As described in section D, above ( on UMRA), EPA previously determined the costs to States to implement the 8 hour ozone NAAQS to be approximately $ 1 million. While this proposed rule considers options not addressed at the time the NAAQS were promulgated, the costs for implementation under these options would rise only marginally. This rule fleshes out the statutory obligations of States in implementing the 8 hour ozone NAAQS. Finally, the CAA establishes the scheme whereby States take the lead in developing plans to meet the NAAQS. This proposed rule would not modify the relationship of the States and EPA for purposes of developing programs to implement the NAAQS. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this proposed rule. Although section 6 of Executive Order 13132 does not apply to this rule, EPA actively engaged the States in the development of this proposed rule. EPA held regular calls with representatives of State and local air pollution control agencies. EPA also held three public hearings at which it described the approaches it was considering and provided an opportunity for States and various other governmental officials to comment on the options being considered. In the spirit of Executive Order 13132, and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between EPA and State and local governments, EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule from State and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments Executive Order 13175, entitled `` Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' ( 65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure `` meaningful and timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory policies that have tribal implications.'' This proposed rule does not have `` Tribal implications'' as specified in Executive Order 13175. This proposed rule concerns the implementation of the 8 hour ozone standard in areas designated nonattainment for that standard. The CAA provides for States and Tribes to develop plans to regulate emissions of air pollutants within their jurisdictions. The proposed regulations flesh out the statutory obligations of States and Tribes that develop plans to implement the 8 hour ozone NAAQS. The TAR gives Tribes the opportunity to develop and implement CAA programs such as the 8 hour ozone NAAQS, but it leaves to the discretion of the Tribe whether to develop these programs and which programs, or appropriate elements of a program, they will adopt. This proposed rule does not have Tribal implications as defined by Executive Order 13175. It does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian Tribes, since no Tribe has implemented a CAA program to attain the 8 hour ozone NAAQS at this time. Furthermore, this proposed rule does not affect the relationship or VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32863 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian Tribes. The CAA and the TAR establish the relationship of the Federal government and Tribes in developing plans to attain the NAAQS, and this proposed rule does nothing to modify that relationship. Because this proposed rule does not have Tribal implications, Executive Order 13175 does not apply. Assuming a Tribe is implementing such a plan at this time, while the proposed rule would have Tribal implications upon that Tribe, it would not impose substantial direct costs upon it, nor would it preempt Tribal law. As provided above, EPA has determined that the total costs for implementing the 8 hour ozone by State, local, and Tribal governments is approximately $ 1 million in all areas designated nonattainment for the standard. The percentage of Tribal land that will be designated nonattainment for the 8 hour ozone standard is very small. For Tribes that choose to regulate sources in Indian country, the costs would be attributed to inspecting regulated facilities and enforcing adopted regulations. Although Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this proposed rule, EPA consulted with Tribal officials in developing this proposed rule. EPA has encouraged Tribal input at an early stage. EPA supports a national `` Tribal Designations and Implementation Work Group'' which provides an open forum for all Tribes to voice concerns to EPA about the designation and implementation process for the 8 hour ozone standard. These discussions have given EPA valuable information about Tribal concerns regarding implementation of the 8 hour ozone NAAQS. The work group sends issue summaries and suggestions for addressing them to the newly formed National Tribal Air Association, who in turn will send them to Tribal leaders. EPA has encouraged Tribes to participate in the national public meetings held to take comment on early approaches to the proposed rule. Several Tribes made public comments at the April 2002 public meeting in Tempe, Arizona. Furthermore, EPA will send individualized letters to all federally recognized Tribes about this proposal and will give Tribal leaders the opportunity for consultation. EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed rule from Tribal officials. G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks Executive Order 13045: `` Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks'' ( 62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any rule that ( 1) is determined to be `` economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866, and ( 2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. The proposed rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because the Agency does not have reason to believe the environmental health risks or safety risks addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children. Nonetheless, we have evaluated the environmental health or safety effects of the 8 hour ozone NAAQS on children. The results of this evaluation are contained in 40 CFR part 50, National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone, Final Rule ( 62 FR 38855   38896; specifically, 62 FR 38854, 62 FR 38860 and 62 FR 38865).

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use This proposed rule is not a `` significant energy action'' as defined in Executive Order 13211, `` Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' ( 66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Information on the methodology and data regarding the assessment of potential energy impacts is found in Chapter 6 of U. S. EPA 2002, Cost, Emission Reduction, Energy, and Economic Impact Assessment of the Proposed Rule Establishing the Implementation Framework for the 8 Hour, 0.08 ppm Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard, prepared by the Innovative Strategies and Economics Group, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, N. C. April 24, 2003.

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act Section 12( d) of the National Technology Transfer Advancement Act of 1995 ( NTTAA), Public Law No. 104   113, section 12( d) ( 15 U. S. C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus standards ( VCS) in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical standards ( e. g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS. This proposed rulemaking does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA is not considering the use of any VCS. EPA will encourage the States and Tribes to consider the use of such standards, where appropriate, in the development of the implementation plans.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low Income Populations Executive Order 12898 requires that each Federal agency make achieving environmental justice part of its mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionate high and adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and activities on minorities and low income populations. EPA believes that this proposed rule should not raise any environmental justice issues. The health and environmental risks associated with ozone were considered in the establishment of the 8 hour, 0.08 ppm ozone NAAQS. The level is designed to be protective with an adequate margin of safety. The proposed rule provides a framework for improving environmental quality and reducing health risks for areas that may be designated nonattainment.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Particulate matter, Transportation, Volatile organic compounds.

Authority: 42 U. S. C. 7408; 42 U. S. C. 7410; 42 U. S. C. 7501   7511f; 42 U. S. C. 7601( a)( 1).

Dated: May 14, 2003. Christine Todd Whitman, Administrator.

X. Appendices Note: The following appendices will not appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32864 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules Appendix A Comparison of Subpart 1 & 2 Requirements This is only an outline of the general requirements of subparts 1 and 2 and should not be relied on for regulatory purposes.

Element Subpart 1 Subpart 2 Classification Requirement Attainment Dates: For all areas, attainment should occur as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than specified timeframe. Up to 5 years after nonattainment designation; may extend up to 10 years based on specified considerations. Marginal ........................................ 3 years from CAA Amendments enactment.

Moderate ...................................... 6 years from CAA Amendments enactment. Serious ......................................... 9 years from CAA Amendments enactment. Severe 15 ..................................... 15 years from CAA Amendments enactment. Severe 17 ..................................... 17 years from CAA Amendments enactment. Extreme ........................................ 20 years from CAA Amendments enactment. RFP ................................................. `` Annual incremental emissions reductions''. Marginal ........................................ None.

Moderate ...................................... 15% VOC reduction from baseline within 6 years of enactment Serious ......................................... Moderate req't plus 9% VOC/ NOX reductions for years 7   9 after CAA Amendments enactment. Severe 15 ..................................... Serious req't plus 9% VOC/ NOX for years 9   15 after CAA Amendments enactment. Severe 17 ..................................... Serious req't plus 9% VOC/ NOX for years 9   17 after CAA Amendments enactment. Extreme ........................................ Severe req't plus 9% VOC/ NOX for years 9   20 after CAAA enactment Milestone Compliance Determination Not required as such; contingency measures supposed to be implemented upon failure to meet RFP. Marginal/ moderate ....................... No further requirement.

Serious & above ........................... Requires milestone compliance demonstration to be made following milestone; failing area must elect one of the following: 1. bump up. 2. implement contingency measures 3. economic incentive. Attainment demonstration submission EPA sets date which can be no later than 3 years after designation Marginal ........................................ None.

Moderate ...................................... Due 3 years after CAA Amendments enactment. Serious ......................................... Due 4 years from CAA Amendments enactment. Severe .......................................... Due 4 years from CAA Amendments enactment. Extreme ........................................ Due 4 years from CAA Amendments enactment. NSR and RACT major source applicability 100 TPY ....................................... Marginal ........................................ 100 TPY Moderate ...................................... 100 TPY Serious ......................................... 50 TPY Severe .......................................... 25 TPY Extreme ........................................ 10 TPY NSR offsets ..................................... > 1 to 1 .......................................... Marginal ........................................ 1.1 to 1 Moderate ...................................... 1.15 to 1 Serious ......................................... 1.2 to 1 Severe .......................................... 1.3 to 1 Extreme ........................................ 1.5 to 1 VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 22: 28 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32865 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules Element Subpart 1 Subpart 2 Classification Requirement NSR permits .................................... Permits required ........................... All ................................................. Construction permits for new or modified major stationary sources pre 1990 permit program corrections. Bump up to higher classification ..... NA ................................................ All except severe & extreme ........ Required to bump up to higher classification if area doesn't meet attainment date. NOX control for RACT ..................... No specificity ................................ Moderate & above; all areas in OTC. Requirements under this subpart for major stationary VOC sources ( NSR & RACT) also apply to all major NOX sources, unless EPA approves NOX waiver. NOX control for NSR ....................... No specificity ................................ Marginal & above. Emission inventory .......................... Required in nonattainment area; no express requirement for updates or emission statements. All ................................................. Comprehensive emissions inventory within 2 years of enactment update every 3 years ( until area attains). Provision for submission to State of annual emissions statements from VOC and NOX stationary sources. RACM/ RACT ................................... General requirement for RACM including RACT. Marginal & above ......................... Pre 1990 RACT fix up.

Moderate & above ........................ RACT for all CTG sources and all other major sources. I/ M ................................................... Nothing specified .......................... Marginal ........................................ Pre 1990 corrections to previously required I& M programs immediately upon CAA Amendments enactment. Moderate ...................................... Basic I& M. Serious & above ........................... Enhanced I& M within 2 years of CAA Amendments enactment. Conformity ( transportation and general Required ....................................... All ................................................. No additional specificity.

Stage II vapor recovery ( VOC) ....... Not specified ................................ Moderate & above ........................ Stage II for gas stations within 2 years. Consequences of failure to attain ... EPA to specify additional requirements up to 10 more years to attain. Marginal, moderate and serious .. Bump up for failure to attain.

Severe and extreme ..................... Fee system; continued ROP; possible stricter NSR major source cut offs. Maintenance .................................... Requirement for maintenance plans for areas redesignated from nonattainment to attainment All ................................................. No additional specificity.

Contingency measures ................... Required for failure to make RFP or attainment. All ................................................. Required for failure to meet ROP milestones or attain. Enhanced ( ambient) monitoring ( PAMS). Not specified ................................ Marginal and moderate ................ Not specified.

Serious & above ........................... Ambient ozone precursor monitoring ( VOC and NOX). VMT demonstration and transportation control measures ( TCMs) if needed. Not specified ................................ Marginal and moderate ................ Not specified.

Serious & above ........................... Demonstration of whether current aggregate vehicle mileage, emissions, congestion levels are consistent with attainment demo. Clean fuels program ........................ Not specified ................................ Marginal and moderate ................ Not specified. Serious & above ........................... Certain percentage of fleet vehicles for 1998 and higher to be clean vehicles and use alternative fuels ( if needed).

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32866 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules Element Subpart 1 Subpart 2 Classification Requirement Reformulated Gasoline required under section 211( k)( 10)( D), which requires the use of reformulated gasoline in 9 covered areas, and areas that are bumped up to Severe under section 181( d)). Not specified ................................ Marginal, moderate & serious ...... Not specified.

Severe & above ........................... Prohibition of sale of gas that has not been reformulated to be less polluting. TCMs to offset growth in VMT emissions. Not specified ................................ Marginal, moderate & serious ...... Not specified.

Severe & above ........................... Enforceable transportation control strategies and TCMs to offset any emissions growth due to VMT growth. Clean Fuels for Boilers ................... Not specified ................................ Marginal, moderate, serious & severe Not specified.

Extreme areas .............................. Use of clean fuels or advanced technology for certain boilers that emit more than 25 TPY of NOX. TCMs during heavy traffic hours ..... Not specified ................................ Marginal, moderate, serious & severe Not specified.

Extreme areas .............................. Option to have TCMs during periods of heavy traffic that reduce use of high polluting or heavyduty vehicles. New Technologies ........................... Not specified ................................ Marginal, moderate, serious & severe Not specified.

Extreme areas .............................. New or future technologies for emissions reductions.

APPENDIX B.   ` ` APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS'' UNDER SUBPART 2 Element Classification Requirement RFP .................................................................... Moderate .......................................................... 15% VOC reduction from baseline within 6 years of enactment. Serious ............................................................. Moderate req't plus 9% VOC/ NOX reductions for years 7   9 after CAA Amendments enactment Severe 15 ......................................................... Serious req't plus 9% VOC/ NOX for years 9   15 after CAA Amendments enactment. Severe 17 ......................................................... Serious req't plus 9% VOC/ NOX for years 9   17 after CAA Amendments enactment. Extreme ............................................................ Severe req't plus 9% VOC/ NOX for years 9   20 after CAA Amendments enactment. Milestone Compliance Determination ................. Serious & above .............................................. Requires milestone compliance demonstration to be made following milestone; failing area must elect one of the following: 1. bump up. 2. implement contingency measures. 3. economic incentive. NSR and RACT major source applicability ........ Marginal ........................................................... 100 TPY Moderate .......................................................... 100 TPY Serious ............................................................. 50 TPY Severe .............................................................. 25 TPY Extreme ............................................................ 10 TPY NSR offsets ........................................................ Marginal ........................................................... 1.1 to 1 Moderate .......................................................... 1.15 to 1 Serious ............................................................. 1.2 to 1 Severe .............................................................. 1.3 to 1 Extreme ............................................................ 1.5 to 1 NSR permits ....................................................... All ..................................................................... Construction permits for new or modified major stationary sources pre 1990 permit program corrections. NOX control for RACT ........................................ Moderate & above; all areas in OTC ............... Requirements under this subpart for major stationary VOC sources ( NSR & RACT) also apply to all major NOX sources, unless EPA approves NOX waiver.

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32867 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules APPENDIX B.   ` ` APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS'' UNDER SUBPART 2   Continued Element Classification Requirement NOX control for NSR .......................................... Marginal & above ............................................. RACM/ RACT ...................................................... Marginal & above ............................................. Pre 1990 RACT fix up. Moderate & above ........................................... RACT for all CTG sources and all other major sources. I/ M ....................................................................... Marginal ........................................................... Pre 1990 corrections to previously required I& M programs immediately upon CAA Amendments enactment. Moderate .......................................................... Basic I& M. Serious & above .............................................. Enhanced I& M within 2 years of CAA Amendments enactment. Stage II vapor recovery ( VOC) ........................... Moderate & above ........................................... Stage II for gas stations within 2 years. Maintenance ....................................................... All ..................................................................... No additional specificity. Enhanced ( ambient) monitoring ( PAMS) ........... Serious & above .............................................. Ambient ozone precursor monitoring ( VOC and NOX). VMT demonstration and transportation control measures ( TCMs) if needed. Serious & above .............................................. Demonstration of whether current aggregate vehicle mileage, emissions, congestion levels are consistent with attainment demo. Clean fuels program ........................................... Serious & above .............................................. Certain percentage of fleet vehicles for 1998 and higher to be clean vehicles and use alternative fuels ( if needed). Reformulated Gasoline* ..................................... Severe & above ............................................... Prohibition of sale of gas that has not been reformulated to be less polluting. TCMs to offset growth in VMT emissions .......... Marginal, moderate & serious .......................... Not specified. Severe & above ............................................... Enforceable transportation control strategies and TCMs to offset any emissions growth due to VMT growth Clean Fuels for Boilers ....................................... Extreme areas .................................................. Use of clean fuels or advanced technology for certain boilers that emit more than 25 TPY of NOX. TCMs during heavy traffic hours ........................ Extreme areas .................................................. Option to have TCMs during periods of heavy traffic that reduce use of high polluting or heavy duty vehicles. New Technologies .............................................. Extreme areas .................................................. New or future technologies for emission reductions

* Required under section 211( k)( 10)( D), which requires the use of reformulated gasoline in 9 covered areas, and areas that are bumped up to Severe under section 181( d).

APPENDIX C.   COMPARISON OF TRANSITIONAL NSR AND EARLY ACTION COMPACT PROGRAMS Program elements Transitional new source review ( NSR) 8 hour Early action compact Eligibility * .............................   Meet 1 hr standard ......................................................   Must be 8 hr nonattainment ........................................   Must be covered under Subpart 1 ** ...........................   Must have monitoring data meeting 1 hr standard.   Must be designated attainment for 1 hr standard.

Initiation Date ....................... Submit attainment demonstration by designations date ( 4/ 15/ 04). Signed compact by 12/ 31/ 02.

Other Dates ..........................   All measures must be implemented by 12/ 31/ 05 ........   Projected attainment of 8 hr standard by April 2007 ..   Submit progress reports every 6 months beginning 6/ 03.   Describe planned measures by 6/ 16/ 03.   Submit local plan to State by 3/ 31/ 04.   Submit SIP to State by 12/ 31/ 04.   Implement all measures by 12/ 31/ 05.   Submit progress report to certify continued implementation & air quality improvements.   Area must attain 8 hr standard by 12/ 31/ 07. Benefits ................................   BACT instead of LAER ( cite NSR workshop manual)   No required emission offsets .......................................   Deferred effective date of nonattainment designation.   Implies no NSR or conformity.   Implementation of measures earlier than required by CAA ( early reductions in emissions). Consequences ..................... If 2007 attainment date is missed, State must submit by April 2007 a Part D NSR plan, which meets requirements under sec. 51.165 ( i. e., traditional nonattainment NSR).   Nonattainment designation becomes effective soon after failure to meet milestone.   Nonattainment requirements must be met ( NSR, conformity RACT, etc) if missed milestone.

* Areas not eligible for Early Action Compact may still be eligible for transitional NSR. ** Areas in the Ozone Transport Region are not eligible for transitional NSR because they are not covered under Subpart 1 for purposes of NSR applicability.

APPENDIX D.   GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS ACT .................. Alternative control techniques VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32868 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules APPENDIX D.   GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS   Continued BACT ................ Best available control technology bump up ........... Reclassify to higher classification CAA .................. Clean Air Act CAAA ................ 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments CADC ............... Clean Air Development Community CASAC ............. Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee CERR ............... Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule CFR .................. Code of Federal Regulations CO .................... Carbon monoxide Compacts ......... Early Action Compact Agreements CSA .................. Clear Skies Act CTGs ................ Control techniques guidelines DOT .................. Department of Transportation EPA .................. Environmental Protection Agency FACA ................ Federal Advisory Committee Act FIPs .................. Federal implementation plans FMVCP ............. Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program GAM ................. Generalized additive models HAPs ................ Hazardous air pollutants HEI .................... Health Effects Institute LAER ................ Lowest achievable emission rate MACT ............... Maximum achievable control technology MCR ................. Mid course review MPO ................. Metropolitan Planning Organization NAAQS ............. National Ambient Air Quality Standards NAMS ............... National Air Monitoring Stations NCore ............... National Core Monitoring Sites NMMAPS .......... National Morbidity, Mortality, and Air Pollution Study NOX .................. Nitrogen oxides NOy ................... Reactive oxides of nitrogen NO2 ................... Nitrogen dioxide NSCR ............... Non selective catalytic reduction NSR .................. New source review NTTAA .............. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act of 1995 OH .................... Hydroxyl OMB ................. Office of Management and Budget OTAG ............... Ozone Transport Assessment Group OTC .................. Ozone Transport Commission OTR .................. Ozone Transport Region Ozone Flex ....... Ozone Flex Guidelines Program PAMS ............... Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations PM .................... Particulate matter PM2.5 ................. Fine particle ppm ................... Parts per million Protocol ............ Protocol for Early Action Compacts designed to achieve and maintain the 8 hour ozone standard PSD .................. Prevention of significant deterioration RACM ............... Reasonably available control measures RACT ................ Reasonably available control technology RFP .................. Reasonable further progress ROP .................. Rate of progress RPOs ................ Regional Planning Organizations SBA .................. Small Business Administration SIPs .................. State implementation plans SLAMS ............. State and Local Air Monitoring Stations TAR .................. Tribal Authority Rule TCEQ ................ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality TCMs ................ Transportation control measures TEA   21 ............. Transportation Equity Act for the Twenty first Century TIP .................... Tribal implementation plan TSP ................... Total suspended particulates UMRA ............... Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 VCS .................. Voluntary consensus standards VMT .................. Vehicle miles traveled VOC .................. Volatile organic compound VT ..................... Vehicle trips VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 20: 45 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32869 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules APPENDIX E.   APPLICATION OF CONFORMITY, NEW SOURCE REVIEW AND PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION UNDER VARIOUS TRANSITION CASES If an area's 1 hr situation is: And its 8 hr situation is: How would conformity apply? How would traditional 1 NSR/ PSD apply?

Designated Attainment ( never been nonattainment Designated Attainment Under 1 hr std: Conformity does not apply .... Under 1 hr std: PSD continues to apply until the 1 hr standard is revoked.

Under 8 hr std: Conformity does not apply .... Under 8 hr std: PSD applies ( Note: PSD applies as long as area is attainment for the 8 hr std.) Designated Nonattainment Under 1 hr std: Conformity does not apply .... Under 1 hr std: PSD applies until the 1 hr standard is revoked ( but nonattainment NSR requirements for 8 hr std. would tend to override). Under 8 hr std: Conformity applies 1 year after the effective date of designation ( 2005). Under 8 hr std: ( 1) NSR under 40 CFR appendix S applies before SIP ( containing § 51.165( a) NSR program) is approved by EPA. ( 2) Nonattainment NSR under § 51.165 applies after SIP approval Early Action Compact ( EAC). Under 1 hr std: Conformity does not apply .... Under 8 hr std: Assuming all milestones are met, conformity would not apply through 2007. If the area is violating in 2007, its nonattainment designation would become effective 4/ 15/ 2008, and conformity would apply 1 year later ( 4/ 15/ 2009). If area not violating in 2007, the area would be designated attainment, and no conformity would apply. Under 1 hr std: PSD continues to apply to EAC areas until the 1 hr standard is revoked. Under 8 hr std: Assuming all milestones are met, PSD would apply through 2007.2 If the area is violating in 2007, it would become subject to nonattainment NSR. If area is not violating in 2007, the area would be designated attainment, and PSD continues to apply Designated Nonattainment Designated Attainment Under 1 hr std: Conformity applies until 1 year after the effective date of the area's designation under the 8 hr standard ( 2005). Under 1 hr std: Nonattainment NSR applies until it is no longer an `` applicable requirement ( see proposal on anti backsliding). Under 8 hr std: Conformity does not apply .... Under 8 hr std: PSD applies. 3 Designated Nonattainment Under 1 hr std: Conformity applies until 1 year after the effective date of the area's designation under the 8 hr standard ( 2005). Under 8 hr std: Conformity would apply 1 year after the effective date of the area's designation ( 2005). Under 1 hr std: Nonattainment NSR continues to apply until it is no longer an `` applicable requirement'' ( see proposal on anti backsliding). Under 8 hr std: ( 1) Nonattainment NSR under appendix S applies until the nonattainment NSR SIP ( containing § 51.165( a) NSR program is approved by EPA; ( 2) Nonattainment NSR applies under § 51.165 after SIP approval. ( EAC: Not eligible) Designated attainment with Maintenance Plan. Designated Attainment Under 1 hr std: Conformity applies until 1 year after the effective date of the area's designation under the 8 hr standard ( 2005). Under 8 hr std: Conformity does not apply .... Under 1 hr std: PSD applies until 1 hr std. is revoked. Under 8 hr std: PSD applies.

VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 22: 28 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2 32870 Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 105 / Monday, June 2, 2003 / Proposed Rules APPENDIX E.   APPLICATION OF CONFORMITY, NEW SOURCE REVIEW AND PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION UNDER VARIOUS TRANSITION CASES   Continued If an area's 1 hr situation is: And its 8 hr situation is: How would conformity apply? How would traditional 1 NSR/ PSD apply?

Designated Nonattainment Under 1 hr std: Conformity applies until 1 year after the effective date of the area's designation under the 8 hr standard ( 2005). Under 8 hr std: Conformity would apply 1 year after the effective date of the area's designation under the 8 hr standard ( 2005). Under 1 hr std: PSD applies until the 1 hr standard is revoked. Under 8 hr std: ( 1) NSR under 40 CFR appendix S applies before SIP ( containing § 51.165( a) NSR program) is approved by EPA; ( 2) Nonattainment NSR under § 51.165 applies after SIP approval. Early Action Compact Under 1 hr std: 1 hour conformity applies until 1 year after the effective date of the area's designation under the 8 hr standard ( 4/ 15/ 2009, or earlier if the area misses an EAC milestone). Under 8 hr std: Assuming all milestones are met, conformity would not apply through 2007. If the area is violating in 2007, its nonattainment designation would become effective 4/ 15/ 2008 and conformity would apply 1 year later ( 4/ 15/ 2009). If area not violating in 2007, the area would be designated attainment, and no conformity would apply. Under 1 hr std: PSD continues to apply until the 1 hr standard is revoked. Under 8 hr std: Assuming all milestones are met, PSD would apply through 2007.2 If the area is violating in 2007, it would become subject to nonattainment NSR. If area is not violating in 2007, the area would be designated attainment, and PSD continues to apply.

1 Traditional NSR is nonattainment NSR under 40 CFR part 51, either § 51.165 or appendix S. 2 PSD applies even if the attainment designation under the 8 hr standard is not yet effective. 3 Generally, nonattainment NSR requirements would supersede most PSD requirements. However, note that in specific instances PSD may mandate additional analyses, such as preconstruction monitoring or analysis of impacts on Class I areas.

[ FR Doc. 03   13240 Filed 5   30   03; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560   50   P VerDate Jan< 31> 2003 22: 28 May 30, 2003 Jkt 200001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\ FR\ FM\ 02JNP2. SGM 02JNP2