[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 69 (Monday, April 12, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17551-17555]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-8944]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[GA-42-1-9908a; FRL-6321-1]
Implementation Plan and Redesignation Request for the Muscogee
County, Georgia Lead Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is simultaneously approving the lead state implementation
plan (SIP) and redesignation request for the Muscogee County, Georgia,
lead nonattainment area. Both plans dated September 28, 1998, were
submitted by the State of Georgia for the purpose of demonstrating that
the Muscogee County area has attained the lead National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS).
DATES: This direct final rule is effective June 11, 1999 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by May 12, 1999. If
adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public
that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Kimberly Bingham at the EPA Region
4 address listed below. Copies of the material submitted by Georgia
Environmental Protection Division (EPD) may be examined during normal
business hours at the following locations:
Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Air Docket 6102), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington DC 20460.
Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Center, Region 4 Air
Planning Branch, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104.
Georgia Environmental Protection Division, Air Protection Branch, 4244
International Parkway, Suite 120, Atlanta, Georgia 30354.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly Bingham, Regulatory Planning
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, Region 4, Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal
Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. The telephone
number is (404)562-9038.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background--Lead SIP
Section 107(d)(5) of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA)
provides for areas to be designated as attainment, nonattainment, or
unclassifiable with respect to the lead NAAQS. Governors are required
to submit recommended designations for areas within their states. When
an area is designated nonattainment, the state must prepare and submit
a SIP pursuant to sections 110(a)(2) and 172(c) of the CAA showing how
the area will be brought into attainment.
On January 6, 1992, EPA designated the portion of Muscogee County
around the GNB, Inc., lead smelter and battery production facility as
nonattainment for lead. This nonattainment designation was based on
lead NAAQS violations from monitors located near the GNB facility that
were recorded the first, second, and fourth quarter of the calendar
year 1991.
On July 23, 1993, Georgia EPD submitted a lead SIP for attaining
the NAAQS in the Muscogee County lead nonattainment area. EPA found the
SIP to be inadequate because it did not meet the requirements of
section 172(c) of the CAA and requested that Georgia EPD make the
necessary corrections and submit supplemental information to address
the deficiencies. To comply, Georgia EPD submitted a supplemental
modeling demonstration for the base
[[Page 17552]]
year 1996. Significant changes in the emission sources occurred at the
GNB lead facility rendering the modeling inappropriate for the 1993 SIP
submittal and inapplicable for the redesignation request. Specifically,
the 1996 modeling showed a relaxation of the limits, the addition of
new emission sources, revised stack heights, deleted sources, and
relocated sources not addressed in the 1993 SIP submittal. Even though
the total facility emissions and maximum modeling impacts decreased
somewhat, the inventory was not reflective of the 1993 SIP inventory
and the SIP emission limits were relaxed. As a result, Georgia EPD
requested that the 1993 lead SIP be withdrawn and replaced with the new
lead SIP submittal and redesignation request dated September 28, 1998.
II. Analysis of the State Submittal
The 1998 SIP revision was reviewed using the criteria established
by the CAA in section 110(a)(2). Section 172(c) of the CAA specifies
the provisions applicable to areas designated as nonattainment for any
of the NAAQS. EPA has also issued a General Preamble describing how EPA
will review SIPs and SIP revisions submitted under Title I of the CAA,
including those state submittals containing lead nonattainment area SIP
requirements (see generally 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR
18070 (April 28, 1992)). Because the EPA is describing its
interpretations here only in broad terms, the reader should refer to
the General Preamble for a more detailed discussion of the
interpretations of Title I advanced in today's approval and the
supporting rationale (57 FR 13549, April 16, 1992).
A. Attainment Demonstration
Section 192(a) of the CAA requires that SIPs must provide for
attainment of the lead NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable but not
later than five years from the date of an area's nonattainment
designation. The lead nonattainment designation for the Muscogee County
area was effective on January 6, 1992; therefore, the latest attainment
date permissible by statute would be January 6, 1997. The Muscogee
County area has air quality data showing attainment of the lead NAAQS
for the years 1992 through 1998 and to date for 1999, which meets the
statutory requirement.
To demonstrate that the area will continue to be in attainment with
the lead NAAQS, emission limits were obtained from the application of
reasonable achievable control technologies (RACT) and workplace
standards at the GNB facility. The emission limits were evaluated using
air dispersion modeling. This modeling predicts the impact of emissions
on the environment surrounding the facility and whether or not the area
will attain the lead NAAQS. The modeling demonstration submitted by
Georgia EPD for the GNB facility shows a predicted maximum ambient air
lead concentration of 0.98 micro grams per cubic meter (g/
m3) which is below the NAAQS for lead of 1.5 (g/
m3)
B. Emissions Inventory
Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires that nonattainment plan
provisions include a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of
actual emissions from all sources of relevant pollutants in the
nonattainment area. Because it is necessary to support an area's
attainment demonstration, the emission inventory must be received with
the SIP submission.
Georgia EPD submitted an emissions inventory for the base year
1996. The inventory identifies the secondary lead smelter owned and
operated by GNB as the sole major source of lead emissions in the
Muscogee County area when violations were recorded. The EPA is
approving the emissions inventory because it is accurate and
comprehensive, and provides a sufficient basis for determining the
adequacy of the attainment demonstration for this area consistent with
the requirements of the CAA.
C. Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) (Including Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT))
States with lead nonattainment areas must submit provisions to
assure that RACM (including RACT) are implemented (see sections
172(c)(1)). Control measures have already been implemented at the GNB
facility and include baghouses on several emissions points,
environmental controls on blast furnaces, and improved lead related
work practices and controls to minimize fugitive lead dust emissions.
The control measures employed at the GNB facility were evaluated for
reasonableness and technological and economical feasibility. EPA has
determined that requirements for RACM (including RACT) have been met.
D. Other Measures including Emission Limitations, and Timetables
Pursuant to 172(c)(6) of the CAA, all nonattainment SIPs must
contain enforceable emission limitations, other control measures, and
schedules and timetables for compliance.
The emission limits for the GNB facility were submitted as a part
of the lead SIP and used in the modeling study. The facility-wide
emissions of lead for GNB are limited to 1.612 pounds per hour (lbs/
hr). Any relaxation of the emission limits which results in a computer
modeling prediction of a maximum quarterly lead concentration off the
GNB plant property exceeding 0.98 g/m3 will require
a revision of this lead SIP.
The CAA also requires that nonattainment SIPs include other
measures and schedules and timetables for compliance that may be needed
to ensure the attainment of the relevant NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date. Because the Muscogee County area has been attaining
the lead NAAQS since 1992 and met the attainment date of January 6,
1997, it was not necessary to require other control measures or a
schedule and timetable for compliance with the NAAQS.
E. Computer Modeling
Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA requires the use of air quality
modeling to predict the effect on ambient air quality from any
emissions of an air pollutant for which a NAAQS has been established.
Therefore, Georgia EPD was required to submit a modeling demonstration
with the lead SIP. Georgia EPD used the current long-term ISCLT3 and
short-term ISCST3 models. The 1996 modeling results reveal that the
maximum quarterly lead concentration was 0.98 g/m3
which is below the 1.5 g/m3 lead NAAQS.
Furthermore, it is predicted that the maximum quarterly lead
concentration in the year 2009, which is the required year for
maintenance, shall be either at or below the 1996 value.
F. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)
The SIP must provide for RFP, defined in section 171(1) of the CAA
as such reductions in emissions of the relevant air pollutant as are
required by section 172(c)(2), or may reasonably be required by the
Administrator for the purpose of ensuring attainment of the applicable
NAAQS by the applicable date.
The EPA reviewed the attainment demonstration for the area to
determine whether annual incremental reductions different from those
provided in the SIP should be required in order to ensure attainment of
the lead NAAQS. The EPA found that the emission controls which have
been implemented at the GNB facility in response to the 1991 NAAQS
violations, have resulted in swift improvement in air quality in the
Muscogee County nonattainment area. Furthermore, the air quality
monitoring data indicates no exceedances of the
[[Page 17553]]
lead NAAQS since 1991 and the modeling study predicts no future
exceedances. Therefore, no additional incremental reductions in
emissions are needed.
G. New Source Review (NSR)
Section 172(c)(5)of the CAA requires that the submittal include a
permit program for the construction and operation of new and modified
major stationary sources. The federally approved Rule 391-3-1-.03--
subsection (8)(c) of the Georgia Rules for Air Quality Control
identifies the current specific permitting requirements for
nonattainment areas in the State of Georgia. The federally approved
Rule 391-2-1-.02 subsection (7)--Prevention of Significant
Deterioration of Air Quality will replace this rule once the Muscogee
County lead nonattainment area is redesignated to attainment. An
analysis of the redesignation request is discussed later in this
document. This rule meets the requirements of the CAA.
H. Contingency Measures
As provided in section 172(c)(9) of the CAA, all nonattainment area
SIPs that demonstrate attainment must include contingency measures.
Contingency measures should consist of other available measures that
are not part of the area's control strategy. These measures must take
effect without further action by the state or EPA, upon a determination
that the area has failed to meet RFP or attain the lead NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date.
The Georgia lead SIP contains the following three contingency
measures: (1) speed breaker control of truck speed and minimization of
re-entrainment of fugitive dust on the roadway; (2) enclosure of the
drum dump for the oxide vacuum system, smelter vacuum system, and
fugitive baghouses to contain any lead dust generated during cleaning;
and (3) connection of the discharge from both vacuum systems to
baghouses to provide secondary filtration. The SIP provides that all
three measures be implemented within 60 days after notification to GNB
by Georgia EPD that the NAAQS has been violated in the Muscogee County
area.
The EPA is approving the lead SIP for Muscogee County, Georgia
because it meets the requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2) and
172(c) of the CAA.
III. Background and Analysis of the Redesignation Request
On February 23, 1994, Georgia EPD submitted a request to
redesignate the Muscogee County area to attainment for lead. The EPA
could not approve this request because it did not meet the requirements
sets forth in the CAA for redesignation requests. Subsequently, Georgia
EPD requested that EPA withdraw the 1994 redesignation request and
approve the new request dated September 28, 1998.
Pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, five requirements must
be met before a nonattainment area can be redesignated to attainment.
The following describes how each of the five requirements has been
achieved.
A. Attainment of the Lead NAAQS
The EPA requires eight consecutive quarters or 2 calendar years of
air quality monitoring data showing attainment to justify a
redesignation to attainment. To demonstrate that the Muscogee County
area is in attainment with the NAAQS for lead, Georgia EPD included air
quality data for the years 1992-1998 in the submittal. The data has
been quality assured, and can be found in EPA's Aerometric Information
Retrieval System. This monitoring data which covers over 25 consecutive
quarters without an exceedance, is adequate to demonstrate attainment
of the lead NAAQS.
Modeling is also required to redesignate an area to attainment. The
EPA believes that the modeling analysis included in the 1998 lead SIP
also being approved in this document satisfies this requirement.
Georgia EPD will continue to monitor the air quality of the Muscogee
County area to verify continued maintenance of the lead NAAQS.
B. Section 110(k) SIP Approval
The SIP for the area must be fully approved under section 110(k)
and must satisfy all requirements that apply to the area. Approval
actions on SIP elements and the redesignation request may occur
simultaneously as in the case of this lead SIP and redesignation
request. The SIP elements for the lead SIP were discussed previously in
the ``Analysis of the State Submittal'' section of this document. The
EPA has determined that the approval of the lead SIP for the Muscogee
County area meets the requirements of section 110(k).
C. Permanent and Enforceable Improvement in Air Quality
A state must be able to reasonably attribute the improvement in air
quality to permanent and enforceable emission reductions. The
implementation of RACM (including RACT) by the GNB facility provides
enforceable and permanent emission reductions needed to attain and
maintain the lead NAAQS. This is evidenced by the area having more than
25 consecutive quarters of clean air quality data. Furthermore, the
modeling study shows that the area will remain in attainment through
the year 2009. Subsequently, EPA has determined that there is a
permanent and enforceable improvement in the air quality in Muscogee
County.
D. Compliance With Sections 110(a)(2) and Part D of the CAA
To be redesignated to attainment, section 107(d)(3)(E) requires
that an area must have met all applicable requirements of section
110(a)(2) and Part D of the CAA. The EPA has determined that the lead
SIP for the Muscogee County area of Georgia meets the requirements of
section 110(a)(2) and Part D of the CAA and is approving the submittal
in this document. A detailed explanation of the requirements can be
found in the ``Analysis of the State Submittal'' section of this
document.
E. Maintenance Plan
Section 175(A) of the CAA requires states that submit a
redesignation request to include a maintenance plan to ensure that the
attainment of NAAQS for any pollutant is maintained. The plan must
demonstrate continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least
ten years after the approval of a redesignation to attainment. Eight
years after the redesignation, states must submit a revised maintenance
plan demonstrating attainment for the ten years following the initial
ten year period. To provide for the possibility of future NAAQS
violations, the maintenance plan must contain such contingency measures
as the Administrator deems necessary to assure that a state will
promptly correct any violation of the standard that occurs after
redesignation. The contingency provisions are to include a requirement
that a state will implement all measures for controlling the air
pollutant concerned that were contained in the SIP prior to
redesignation.
Georgia EPD demonstrated that the lead SIP also being approved in
this action is adequate to maintain compliance with the lead NAAQS for
at least ten years. The EPA agrees that the lead SIP satisfies the
requirements of section 175(A) of the CAA to show maintenance of the
lead NAAQS. The control measures and lead emission limits included in
the SIP have been implemented at the GNB facility to ensure the
continued attainment of the lead NAAQS. The modeling demonstration
supporting the lead SIP shows maintenance of the lead standard through
2009, meeting the requirement to show maintenance for ten years. The
lead SIP also includes contingency
[[Page 17554]]
measures that will take effect if a violation of the lead NAAQS occurs.
Since these measures were not implemented to attain the lead NAAQS,
they can be used as contingency measure for maintenance. Georgia EPD
has committed to submit a demonstration of maintenance for an
additional ten years within eight years of approval of the
redesignation request.
IV. Final action
EPA is approving the lead SIP and redesignation of the Muscogee
County lead nonattainment area to attainment because the submittal
meets the requirements of the CAA as discussed in this document. The
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency
views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should adverse
comments be filed. This rule will be effective June 11, 1999 without
further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by May 12,
1999.
If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this rule will be effective on June 11, 1999 and no
further action will be taken on the proposed rule.
V. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled
``Regulatory Planning and Review.''
B. Executive Order 12875
Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local
or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by
consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected State, local and tribal
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these
entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875
do not apply to this rule.
C. Executive Order 13045
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is
determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O.
12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA
has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children.
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on
children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered
by the Agency.
This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not involve
decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.
D. Executive Order 13084
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve
or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under
section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create
any new requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is
already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not
create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the
Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
F. Unfunded Mandates
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate;
or to private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective
[[Page 17555]]
and least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the
rule and is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203
requires EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising any small
governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs of
$100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in
the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves
pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a
``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
H. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 11, 1999. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Lead,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relation, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: March 18, 1999.
Michael V. Peyton,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
Chapter I, title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as
follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart L--Georgia
2. Section 52.570 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(45) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.570 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(45) The State of Georgia submitted a lead SIP for the Muscogee
County lead nonattainment area dated September 28, 1998.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
State Implementation Plan for Lead Columbus, Georgia Muscogee
County, Requirements for the GNB facility that were adopted on
September 28, 1998.
(ii) Other material. None.
* * * * *
PART 81--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations
2. In Sec. 81.311, the attainment status table for lead is amended
by revising the designation type and date entry for Muscogee County
(part).
Sec. 81.311 [Amended]
Georgia--Lead
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Classification
Designated Area -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Type Date Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Muscogee County (part)--That portion June 11, 1999 Attainment
of the county which includes a
circle with a radius of 2.3
kilometers with the GNB, Inc., lead
smelting and battery production
facility in the center.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 99-8944 Filed 4-9-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
