[Federal Register: August 2, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 148)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 42354-42363]
[DOCID:fr02au07-29]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

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

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

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

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

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

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2007-0548, by one of the following methods:
    (a) http://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for

submitting comments.
    (b) E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (c) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (d) Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2007-0548, Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    (e) Hand Delivery or Courier: Stacy Harder, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The
Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday,
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2007-0548. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information

provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through http://www.regulations.gov
 or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI

or otherwise protected. The http://www.regulations.gov Web site is an

``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through http://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be

automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm
.

    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
http://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some

information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in http://www.regulations.gov
 or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all
possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Stacy Harder of the Regulatory
Development Section at the Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms.
Harder's telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. She can also be reached
via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

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

I. What Proposed Actions Is EPA Taking?

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

rulemaking: (1) To redesignate the Macon Area to attainment for the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS; (2) to approve Georgia's 8-hour ozone maintenance
plan into the Georgia SIP, including the associated MVEBs; and (3) to
notify the public of the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the
Macon Area MVEBs.
    First, EPA is proposing to determine that the Macon Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone standard, and that the Macon Area has met the
requirements for redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
EPA is now proposing to approve a request to change the legal
designation of the Macon Area from nonattainment to attainment for the
8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    Second, EPA is proposing to approve Georgia's 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan for the Macon Area (such approval being one of the CAA
criteria for redesignation to attainment status). The maintenance plan
is designed to help keep the Macon Area in attainment for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS through 2020. Consistent with the CAA, the maintenance plan
that EPA is proposing to approve today also includes 2020 regional
MVEBs for NOX and VOCs. Therefore, EPA is proposing to
approve into the Georgia SIP the 2020 regional MVEBs that are included
as part of Georgia's maintenance plan. These regional MVEBs apply to
the entire Macon Area.
    Third, EPA is notifying the public of the status of EPA's adequacy
process for the newly-established 2020 MVEBs for the Macon Area. The
adequacy comment period for the Macon Area's 2020 MVEBs began on June
21, 2007, with EPA's posting of the availability of this submittal on
EPA's Adequacy Web site (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm
). The adequacy comment period for these MVEBs

closed on July 23, 2007. No adverse comments were received on this
submittal during the adequacy public comment period. Please see section
VIII of this rulemaking for further explanation of this process, and
for more details on the MVEBs.
    Today's notice of proposed rulemaking is in response to Georgia's
June 15, 2007, SIP submittal. The June 15, 2007, submittal requested
redesignation of the Macon Area, and included a SIP revision addressing
the specific issues summarized above, and the necessary elements for
redesignation described in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.

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

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

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

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

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

III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation?

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

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

IV. Why Is EPA Proposing These Actions?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

            Table 2.--Macon Area Emission Reductions Programs
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

regional MVEBs for the Macon Area closed on July 23, 2007. EPA did not
receive any comments or requests for the submittal.
    EPA intends to make its determination of the adequacy of the 2020
MVEBs for the Macon Area for transportation conformity purposes in the
final rulemaking on the redesignation of the Macon Area. If EPA finds
the 2020 MVEBs adequate and approves these MVEBs in the final
rulemaking action, the new MVEBs must be used for future transportation
conformity determinations. The new 2020 MVEBs, if found adequate and
approved in the final rulemaking, will be effective on the date of
publication of EPA's final rulemaking in the Federal Register. For
required regional emissions analysis years that involve the year 2019
or before, the area will continue to use the interagency consultation
group for this area to determine the appropriate interim test to use to
demonstrate conformity. For required regional emissions analysis years
that involve 2020 or beyond, the applicable budgets will be the new
2020 MVEBs. The 2020 MVEBs are defined in section VII of this
rulemaking.

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

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

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. Redesignation of an area to attainment under
section 107(d)(3)(e) of the CAA does not impose any new requirements on
small entities. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a
geographical area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements
on sources. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this proposed
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601 et seq.). Because this rule proposes to approve pre-existing
requirements under state law and does not impose any additional
enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it does not contain
any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4).
    This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not
have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified
in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action
merely affects the status of a geographical area, does not impose any
new requirements on sources, or allow a state to avoid adopting or
implementing other requirements and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA.
This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); because it is not economically
significant and because the Agency does not have reason to believe that
the rule concerns an environmental health risk or safety risk that may
disproportionately affect children.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission; to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Redesignation is an action that
affects the status of a geographical area but does not impose any new
requirements on sources. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) do not apply. This proposed rule does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

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

40 CFR Part 81

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

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

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

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P