# Georgia's Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan for the Atlanta NonattainmentArea for the 1997 PM2.5 

# NAAQS 

# August 16, 2012

Prepared 

# by: 

# Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division Air Protection Branch

### Executive Summary This document contains Georgia's request under the Clean Air Act Amendments of (CAA) of 1990 that the Atlanta nonattainment area be redesignated to attainment with respect to the annual NationalAmbient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for PM2

_ 5 (1997 fine patiiculate matter standard, retained in 2006). The document also includes Georgia's plan to maintain attainment ofthe PM2

_ 5 standard in theAtlanta area. This request is based on three years, 2008-20l0, ofambient monitoring data showing attainment ofthe standard (15.0 Jlg/m3) consistent with the clean data policy memo (Stephen Page 12/14/2004); the implementation of permanent and enforceable reductions in PM2

_ 5 and 

### PM 25 precursor emissions; compliance with all applicable requirements; and the Atlanta Area Maintenance Plan with projections demonstrating maintenance ofthe standard through the year 2024.



### ii

### AtlantaPM2.s NonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenancePlan
TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary........................................................................................................................ ii 

### 1.

### 0 Introduction
................................................................................................................. I 1.1 Nonattainmeut Designation and Attainment Demonstration .......................................... 1 1.2 Redesignation Reqnest........................................................................................................4 1.3 Maintenance Plan................................................................................................................4 

### 2.0 Redesignation Request ................................................................................................. 5 2.1 Attainment ofthe Annual PM2.5 

### NAAQS ..........................................................................5 2.1.I Monitoring Network
.......................................................................................................................5 2. 1.2 Ambient PM 25 Data
........................................................................................................................ 8 2. I.3 Clean Data Determination
...............................................................................................................9 

### 2.2 Implementation Plan Under Section 110(1<) ......................................................................9 2.3 Permanent and Enforceable, and Other Reductions in Emissions .................................9 2.3. I Source Apportionment ofAmbient PM2.s ..................................................................................... I0 2.3.2 State Control Measures- Georgia
................................................................................................. 12 2.3.2.1 S02 and NO, Controls and S02 Limits
................................................................................ 14 2.3 .2.2 Smoke Management Plan
.....................................................................................................20 2.3.3 Federal Control Measures
.............................................................................................................22 2.3.3. I Clean Air Interstate Rule
......................................................................................................24 2.3.3.2 Tier 2 Vehicle Standards and Low-Sulfur Gasoline
.............................................................25 2.3.3.3 Heavy-Duty Gasoline and Diesel Highway Vehicles Standards & Ultra Low-Sulfur Diesel Rule
........................................................................................................................................25 2.3.3.4 Large Nomoad Diesel Engines Rule & Ultra Low-Sulfur Diesel Rule
................................26 2.3 .3.5 Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engines and Recreational Engines Standard
.......................26 2.3.3.6 NOx SIP Call in SmTounding States
.....................................................................................26 2.3.4 S02 Emissions Reductions in Upwind States
................................................................................27 

### 2.4 Section 110 and Part D Requirements .............................................................................29 

### 3.0 Maintenance 

### Plan...................................................................................................... 30 3.1 Maintenance Demonstration ............................................................................................30 3. I.I Attainment Year Emissions Inventory
..........................................................................................30 3. I.I.I Point Sources
........................................................................................................................3I 3. I.I .2 Nonpoint Sources
.................................................................................................................32 3.1.1.3 Omoad Mobile Sources
........................................................................................................33 3.I.I.4 Nomoad Mobile Sources
......................................................................................................34 3. I.I .5 Summary of2008 Emissions Inventory
...............................................................................35 3. I .2 Projected Emissions Inventories
...................................................................................................35 3.1.2.1 Methods and Projected Inventories
......................................................................................35 3.1.2.2 Point Sources
........................................................................................................................ 37 3.1.2.3 Nonpoint Sources
.................................................................................................................3 8 3.1.2.4 Onroad Mobile Sources
........................................................................................................40 3. 1.2.5 Nonroad Mobile Sources
......................................................................................................40 3.1.3 Emissions Projections Summary and Demonstration ofMaintenance ofAttainment..
.................42 3.1.4 Emissions Decreases
.....................................................................................................................43 3. I .5 Verification ofContinued Attainment..
.........................................................................................44
iii

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMaintenance Plan 3.2 ContingencyProvisions
.....................................................................................................44 3.2.1 Contingency Measure Triggers
.....................................................................................................44 3.2.2 Schedule and Procedure for Adoption and Implementation ofContingency Measures
................45 3.2.3 Contingency Measures
..................................................................................................................46 

### 4.0 Motor Vehicle Emissions Bmlget
............................................................................... 48 4.1 Pollntants
............................................................................................................................48 4.2 

### Methodology
.......................................................................................................................49 

### 4.3 MotorVehicle Emissions Budgets ami Safety Margius
..................................................50 

### 5.0 Conclusion
................................................................................................................. 51 6.0 References
.................................................................................................................. 54

iv

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance PMn

LIST OFFIGURES Figure 1-1. PM2• 5 NonattainmentAreas in Georgia
.........................................................................2 Figure2-1. Locations ofAtlantaAreaPM2• 5 Sampling Sites
..........................................................6 Figure2-2: Average factor contributions for 2003-04 attheAtlanta, Floyd County, and Macon STN sites usingPMF
.................................................................................................................10 Figure 2-3. Locations and 2007 EnergyProduction ofCoal-fired EGUFacilities in North Georgia
.......................................................................................................................................15 Figure2-4. S02 Emissions and Generation from North Georgia Coal-fired EGU Facilities, 2003

- 2010
..................................................................................................................................20 Figure 2-5. Trend ofAggregatecl Annual S02 Emissions in States with Downwind Contributions to GeorgiaPM2.5 Exceeding 0.15 )lg/m3

..........................................................29



### v

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan LIST OFTABLES Table 1-1. PM 2.5 

### Design Values forAtlanta Area Monitors 2001-2003
...........................................3 Table 2-1. AtlantaAreaPM 2.5 

### Data Collection Sites
........................................................................7 Table 2-2. Annual and 3-yearAverage AmbientPM2.5 

### Concentrations
.........................................8 Table 2-3. Average factor contributions toPM 2.5**(~g/m )**  

### for 2003-04 at theAtlanta, Floyd County, and Macon STN sites using PMF
............................................................................... ll 

### Table 2-4. Timetable ofStateMeasure Implementation
...............................................................13 Table 2-5. Annual S02 

### Emissions and Generation (106 

### MWh) from North Georgia Coal-fired EGU Facilities, 2003-2010
......................................................................................................18 Table 2-6. Timetable ofFederal MeasureImplementation
...........................................................23 Table 2-7. Annual S02 

### Emissions in States With Downwind Conti·ibutions to Georgia PM2.5 

### Exceeding 0.15 11g/m3

................................................................................................................

### 28 Table 3-1. 2008 Emissions Inventory Sources
................................................................................31 Table 3-2. Emissions by EGU facilities in 2008, 2017 and 2024
....................................................32 Table 3-3. Point SourceEmissions for 2008 (tons, annual)
...........................................................32 Table 3-4. Nonpoint Source Emissions for 2008 (tons, annual)
....................................................33 Table 3-5. LargestNonpointPM2.5 

### Emissions by Source Classification
......................................33 Table 3-6. Onroad Mobile Source Emissions for 2008 (tons, annual)
..........................................33 Table 3-7. Nonroad Mobile Source Emissions for 2008 (tons, annual)
........................................34 Table 3-8. Attainment-year (2008) Emissions Inventory (tons, annual)
......................................35 Table 3-9. Bases ofControl and Growth Factors for 2017 and 2024 Inventories
.......................36 Table 3-10. Pmjected Point Source Emissions (tons)
....................................................................38 Table 3-11. Projected Nonpoint SourceEmissions (tons)
..............................................................39 Table 3-12. Largest NonpointPM 2.5 

### Emissions by Source Classification, Year2024
.................39 Table 3-13. Projected Onroad Mobile Source Emissions (tons)
...................................................40 Table 3-14. Projected Nonroad Mobile Source Emissions (tons)
..................................................41 Table 3-15. Projected Emissions- Total ofAll Sectors (tons)
.......................................................42 Table 3-16. Emissions Decrease
.......................................................................................................43 Table 4-1. 2024 MotorVehicle Emissions, Emissions Budgets, and Safety Margins
..................50 Table 5-1. Summary ofProjected S02 

### Emissions- Total ofAll Sectors (tons)
...........................51 Table 5-2. Summary ofProjected NOx Emissions- Total ofAll Sectors (tons)
...........................52 Table 5-3. Summary ofProjected PM 2.5 

### Emissions- Total ofAll Sectors (tons)
........................52

VI

### AtlantaPM 2.5

### NonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan

LIST 

### ofAPPENDICES AppendixA SourceAppmtionment ofPM2.5 in Georgia Appendix B Georgia's Basic Smoke Management Plan and Memorandnm ofUnderstanding Appendix C EPD's Methodology for Emissions Projections [including interpolation calculations] Appendix C-1 EGU Control Schedules and Efficiencies -AtlantaNAA Appendix C-2 Summaty ofEGAS Derived SCC-Specific Growth Factors Appendix C-3 SummatyEmissions Inventoty for theAtlanta 

### PM 25 NonattainmentArea Appendix C-4 Analysis ofNomoadEmissions Appendix C-5 Nonroad Growth Factors and SEMAP Rail and CMV Factors Appendix C-6 Aircraft and Locomotive SCC-Specific Emissions, Growth and Control Factors Appendix C-7 MOVES Inputs, Documentation, and Outputs

viiAcronym AEO
AERR
AIRS AQS ARC CAA CAIR CARB
CERR
CFR 

### co CSAPR DNR
DOT EGAS
EGU EPA
EPD 

### AtlantaPM2.s NonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenancePlan

List ofAcronyms Meaning Acronym Meaning Annual Energy Outlook ERTAC Eastern Regional TechnicalAdvisory Committee Annual Emissions Repmting FGD Flue Gas Desulfmization Requirements Aerometric Information FR Federal Register Retrieval System Air Quality Subsystem FRM Federal Reference Method Atlanta Regional Commission GDOT Georgia Department ofTransportation CleanAirAct GFC Georgia Forestly Commission CleanAir Interstate Rule HC Hydrocarbon CaliforniaAir Resources Board HPMS Highway Performance Monitoring System Consolidated Emissions ICI Industrial and Commercial!Instit!Jtional Repmting Rule Code ofFederal Regulations MOU Memorandum ofUnderstanding Carbon Monoxide MOVES MotorVehicle Emissions Simulator Cross-stateAir Pollution Rule MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization Department ofNatural MVEB MotorVehicle Emissions Budget Resources Depmtment ofTransportation MWe MegawattElectrical Economic GrowthAnalysis MWh MegawattHours System Electric Generating Unit NAA NonattainmentArea Environmental Protection NAAQS National AmbientAir Quality Standard Agency Environmental Protection NCD NMIM County Database Division

viiiAcronym NEI NMIM
NTE NOx OAQPS
PM 

### PM2.s PMF Ppm RACM
RACT
RFP 

# sec AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenance Plan
Meaning Acronym Meaning National Emissions Inventory SCR Selective Catalytic Reduction National Mobile Inventory SEMAP Southeastern ModelingAnalysis Plan Model Not-To-Exceed SIP State Implementation Plan Nitrogen Oxides SMP Smoke Management Plan Office ofAir Quality 

# so2 Sulfur Dioxide Planning and Standards Patticulate Matter SOA Secondmy OrganicAerosols Fine Pmticulate Matter STN Speciated Trends Network Positive Matrix Factorization tpy tons peryear pmts per million 

# suv SpmtUtility Vehicle ReasonablyAvailable Control ULSD Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel Measures ReasonablyAvailable Control VISTAS Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Technology Association ofthe Southeast Reasonable Further Progress VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled Source Classification Code WRD Wildlife Resources Division

IX

## 1.0 Introduction AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan

This document contains the technical support for the Georgia Environmental Protection Division's (EPD's) request that the Atlanta nonattaimnent area be redesignated as an area attaining the 1997 annual fine pmiiculate matter (PM2.5) National AmbientAir Quality Standard (NAAQS) pursuant to Sections I07(d)(3)(D) and (E) ofthe Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended. This redesignation request was prepared in accordance with U.S. EPA Guidance issued in 1992 (memorandum dated September 4 ofthat year fi·om John Calcagni 1). 

### 1.1 NonattainmentDesignation and Attainment Demonstration In 2005, EPA designated four PM2.s nonattainment areas in Georgia: Atlanta, Chattanooga (which also includes pmis ofAlabama and Tennessee), Floyd County, and Macon. Figure 1-1 shows their locations. The Atlanta nonattainment area is located in the nmihwest quadrant of the state and is comprised oftwenty whole counties and two partial counties: Barrow, Batiow, Carroll, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Newton, Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding, Walton, Heard (paiiial), and Putnam (partial) [reference 70FR965].

1 "Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment", September 4, 1992, Jolm Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, OAQPS, USEPA. 1of54

### AtlantaPM 2.5

### NonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan

Figure 1-1. PM2.5 

### Nonattainment Areas in Georgia The part ofHeard County included in the nonattainment area is the northeast pmtion that extends north of 33 degrees 24 minutes (nmth) to the Carroll county border and east of 85 degrees 33 minutes (west) to the Coweta County border. The part of Putnam County included in the nonattainment area is the area described by U.S. Census 2000 block group identifier 13-237-9603-1. Coal-fired electric generating units are located in both ofthe pattial counties. EPA made initial designations ofnonattainment areas, including the Atlanta nonattainment area, for the 1997 annual PM 25 

### NAAQS on January 5, 2005 (70FR944), and amended the designations on AprilS, 2005 (70FR19844). 2001-2003 PM25 

### design values exceeded the standard at seven ofnine monitoring sites located within the boundaries ofthe nonattainment area. The highest design value was 18.0**~tg/m 3**  

### at the Fire Station No. 8 

### monitor located in Fulton Com1ty. The observed PM 2

_

5 

### design values at Atlanta's nonattainment area monitors violated the annual standard, as shown in Table 1-1 

### below.

2 

### of54

# I

I I I AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenancePlan
Table 1-1. 

### PM2.s Design Values for Atlanta Area Monitors 2001-2003

# ~····;~~~j;;,:r:: ii ..·.•········• )·····(. ..·.·······<···········.··············.' 

# .....**·····~;,\** 

# ·Jti •. 

# }·\••··•··••··.

# ~.r'.....···<.i /.<' '' .···;·.·; 

### t 

### >. 

## i 

# t
. ........ •.• \ > . . i**~1\ii{P~sJ~~~~Iqe** 

# ..· {.

# zM.i-.fQO~**:CilM\i~)** ForestPark-Georgia 13-063-0091 Clayton 16.1 DOT Kennesaw-National 13-067-0003 Cobb 16.1 Guard Powder Springs- 13-067-0004 Cobb NA MaclandAquatic Center South DeKalb 

# I 13-089-0002 

# I DeKalb 

# I 15.7 Doraville 13-089-2001 DeKalb 16.1 E. Rivers School 13-121-0032 Fulton 16.3 Fire Station No. 8 13-121-0039 Fulton 18.0 Georgia Tech 

# I 13-121-0048 

# I Fulton 

# I NA* Gwinnett Tech 

# I 13-135-0002 

# I Gwinnett 

# I 15.6 Gainesville-Fair Street 13-139-0003 Hall 14.9 School Yorkville 

# I 13-223-0003 

# I Paulding 

# I 14.1 

## * The Georgia Tech monitorbegan operation in 2006 and stopped operation in 2008.

The State ofGeorgia prepared and submitted a 

### PM 25 attainment demonstration plan for the Atlanta Nonattainment At'ea to EPA Region 4 on July 6, 2010 (cover date is May 24, 2010). The plan was based on modeling of the effects of existing and planned control measures on air quality in the Atlanta area and demonstrated attainment ofthe standard by AprilS, 2010. Since EPA has determined that the area has met the clean data requirements and attained the standard prior to the attainment date (76FR 76620), the SIP requirements that the July 6, 2010 attainment demonstration was required to fulfill are suspended. The attainment demonstration plan has been withdrawn and will be replaced with this maintenance plan. Relieffrom the requirement to submit an attainment demonstration as well as Reasonable Further Progress (RFP), associated RACM, and contingency requirements upon clean data detennination is specified in 40 CPR I004(c) and also in a December 14, 2004 memo from Stephen D. Page ofU.S. EPA. 3 of54 

# I 

# I I I

### Atlanta

### PM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenancePlan 

### 1.2 RedesignationRequfSt This document contains Georgia's request that the Atlanta nonattaimnent area be redesignated to attaimnent with respect to the annual NAAQS for PM25 (1997 fine pmticulate matter standard, retained in 2006). Section 107(d) ofthe CAA states that an area can be redesignated to attainment if the following conditions are met: 1. The EPA has**dete~mined** that the NAAQS has been attained. 2. The applicable implementation plan has been fully approved by EPA under Section llO(k). 3. The EPA has dete1mined that the improvement in air quality is due to pennanent and enforceable reductions in emissions. 4. The state has met all applicable requirements for the area under Section 110 and PartD. 5. The EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan, including a contingency plan, for the area as required by CAA Section 175A. The suppmting documentation to show that the above conditions have been met is contained in Sections 2 and 3. EPA's approval ofthis document will satisfY the fifth condition. 

### 13 MaintenancePlan The maintenance plan (see above) has two required components under Section 175A:
• A demonstration ofmaintenance ofthe standard for at leastten years after redesignation; and • Contingency provisions for prompt correction ofanyfuture violations. Per EPA guidance/ the Atlanta area PM25 maintenance plm1 also includes the following elements:
• An attainmentyear emissions inventory (to support the maintenance demonstration); • A commitment to continued operation ofambient monitoring equipment in the area; and • Verification ofcontinued attainment. The maintenance plan is presented in Section 3.

2 "Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment", September 4, 1992, John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, OAQPS, USEPA 4 of54

### AtlantaPM 2.5

### NonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenancePlan


## 2.0 RedesignationRequest As noted in 

### Section 1.2 of this document, Section 107(d) of the CAA states that an area can be redesignated to attainment ifthe following conditions are met: 1. The EPA has determined that theNAAQS has been attained. 2. The applicable implementation plan has been fully approved by EPA under Section llO(k). 3. The EPA has determined that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions. 4. The state has met all applicable requirements for the area under Section 110 and Patt D. 5. The EPAhas fully approved a maintenance plan, including a contingency plan, for the area under CAA Section 175A. This section of the document includes supporting documentation for the following:
• Attainment ofthe annual PM25

### NAAQS based on ambient datafrom 2008 through 2010; • Approval byEPA ofthe implementation plan under Section llO(k); • Improvement of air quality with respect to 

### PM 25 

### is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions; and • The state has met all applicable requirements for the area under Section 110 and PattD. 

### 2.1 Attainment ofthe Annual PM2.5 

### NAAQS A monitoring site is in attainment of the annual 

### PM 25 

### standard when the annual standard design value is less than or equal to 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (f1g/m3) 

### per Appendix N of40 CFR Part 50. The annual standard design value is the 3-year average ofthe annual mean, which is, in turn, the average ofone year's 4-calendar-quatter averages. The data must be complete and qualityassured, consistent with 40 CFR Part 58 requirements and other relevant EPA guidance. Therefore, for a single site to meet the standard, the annual design value calculated from the previous three calendar years must be less than or equal to the standard. For a nonattainment area to achieve attainment, all monitoring sites in the nonattainment area must be in attainment. The Atlanta area design values, based on data from 2008 through 20I0 for each monitor, are less than 15.0 ftg/m3
, 

### which demonstrates attainment of the standard. The monitoring network and ambient

### PM 25 

### data are presented below. 2.1.1 Monitoring Network 

### There are currently ten active ambient 

### PM 25 

### FRM monitoring sites in the Atlanta nonattainment area, as shown in Table 2-1 and Figure 2-1. Providing adequate coverage ofthe nonattainment area, data from.these sites represent a neighborhood scale, which extends up to 4.0 kilometers from each monitor. The sites are considered to be patt ofthe State and Local AirMonitoring Stations (SLAMS) monitoring network, with the monitoring objective ofsampling for population exposure. The FRM monitors were installed in accordance with 40 CFR 58. The Fire Station No.8 (13-121-0039) PM2.5 

### FRM sampler, located in Fulton County, ran every three days fi·om 1121199 to 9/29/06. The sampler was shut down due to the potential effects ofbuilding ventilation stacks (used for fire engine exhaust) on measured PM25 

### levels and the proximity oftrees to the monitor, which violated siting criteria. The Georgia Tech sampler (13-121-0048) ratl from 5 of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMaintenancePlan 9/26/06 until 12/29/08 as an additional urban site until it was decided that the Fire Station No. 8 sampler would meet siting criteria if it were moved 20 feet from its original location. The Fire Station No.8 sampler was restarted on 12/2/08. One Speciated Trends Network (STN) monitor is located at the South DeKalb site (13-089-0002). The STN monitor has been collecting data since March 2, 2001. The sampling schedule ofthe STN monitor began as eveJy six days and ran on that schedule until March 26, 2001, when it changed to**eve~y** 

### three days.

# -~ \ \

# \.

. 

### ' 

### ·••••· Jiilvilkioso.,.ooo1 \**\::;o·t._~---** 

## \... _/\ *Note the Floyd County and Clarke County monitors are not in the Atlanta Nonattainmcnt Area. 

### Figure 2-1. Locations ofAtlanta Area PM2,5 

### Sampling Sites.

6 

### of54

## ..···.. ;>• L;



### .<:·:. 

## r.< ........ ••••••••••••

SiteName,

!
.... . . ···.



# · ...··.....·.··· ii

•• •••••••••••••••••••••• Fores! Park-Georgia DOT Kennesaw-National Guard Powder SpringsMacland Aquatic Center South DeKalb Doraville

E. Rivers School

Fire Station No. 8

Georgia Tech
Gwinnett Tech Gainesville-Fair Street School Yorkville 

### AtlantaPM2.s NonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMaintenance Plan


### Table 2-1. Atlanta Area PM2

### .s 

### Data Collection Sites
J 

### < •• 

# ! ················i······· 

# /i I>····· 

# \•.'> 

# .... .i
..··· ...... ·.······· 

### . .. ·.····· 

### .....· 

# ..

••••••••••••••••• • • ••

# •• ••••••••• •••••••••• •• • .... ·. 

# .. ·,.,·
.. 

## l lifA<t:Dilte

## c: StartDate""**]!;n~J)at~** • AQSc ·**<;ou~fY·** FRMData· FRMData
. •**Specj~tioJ1** Data SitelD

...,· .· .'·

# .....···· 1 ColJec!ioJi 

## . Collection ·· Collection

I • •.. • •·-··.;.··•••·.::. ·.·.·• ·.·••··•· ,> 

# !:
. . • ..· •...•

.. .··· ..·······.'··.·

. 

# .

# . ········· . 

## . 

# . '· . · ..·· 13-063-0091 Clayton January 9, 1999 13-067-0003 Cobb February 7, 1999 13-067-0004 Cobb February 5, 2003
13-089-0002 Dekalb January 22, 1999 October 1, 2000 13-089-2001 Dekalb January 1, 1999

13-121-0032 Fulton January 1, 1999

13-121-0039 Fulton January 21, 1999 Stopped on September 30, 2006 Restarted on December 2, 2008 13-121-0048 Fulton September 26, 2006 December 29,2008 13-135-0002 Gwinnett January 1, 2000 13-139-0003 Hall February 14, 1999 13-223-0003 Paulding January24, 1999 *EPA'sAir Quality System

7 of54 ·...
. 

### .•·**..~n\!** · ..., Date., Spedaii on Data Colledi • t:ln ·····•;·;
·.· 

# .

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenancePlan


### 2.1.2 Ambient PM2• 5 

### Data Table 2-2 shows the annual average PM 2.5 

### concentrations and the associated 3-year average that demonstrate attainment ofthe standard in the Atlanta area. The 2008-2010, 3-year design values for each monitor are below the standard of 15.0 J.lg/m3

. 

### The table includes annual averages from 2003 through 2010, demonstrating the downward trend in the measured ambient 

### PM 25 

### level in the nonattainment area. The concentrations provided in Table 2-2 for 2010 for each monitor show continued evidence that the area is meeting the standard. To date, the quality-assured annual averages for 2011 are not available. 

### Table 2-2. Annual and 3-yearAverage Ambient PM2.5 

### Concentrations

ForestPark-Georgia DOT (13-063-0091) Kennesaw-National Guard (13-067-0003) Powder Springs-Macland Aquatic Center (13-067- 0004) South DeKalb (13-089-0002) Doraville (13-089-2001) E. Rivers School (13-121- 0032) Fire StationNo. 8 (13-121- 0039) Georgia Tech (13-121-0048)* Gwinnett Tech (13-135-0002) Gainesville-Fair Street School (13-139-0003) Yorkville (13-223-0003) 16.0
16.0

15.2
15.0 15.4 16.1
17.7

16.2 14.7 13.8 16.8 16.6
15.8 16.3

15.2 15.5
16.1 15.5 15.5 15.8 16.1 15.9
17.6 17.0

16.1 16.1 14.0 14.5 13.4 14.6 16.7 15.3 13.7
16.5 15.3 13.5
15.8 14.5 13.1
15.4 14.8 12.7 14.5 15.1 13.1 15.4 15.7 13.0
18.4 7.6 15.1 15.5 14.3 16.9 14.2 12.4 13.8 13.4 ll.8 13.9 14.3 11.9 •The Georgta Techmomtor stopped operatiOn on December 29, 2008.

8 

### of54 ll.5 13.4 12.9
11.2 12.2 12.3

10.3 12.1 11.9
11.4 12.3 12.1 11.7 12.2 12.3 11.6 12.2 12.3
12.1 14.5 11.4

11.6 12.3 12.1 10.2 11.4 11.2 9.9 11.2 11.0 N/A
N/A

12.3
N/A N/A 13.0
13.6

12.5 11.9 11.6

### Atlanta

### PM2.sNonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenance Plan Because of data completeness issues at the Powder Springs, E. Rivers School, Fire Station #8/Georgia Tech, Gwinnett Tech, and Yorkville monitors for the 2007-2009 and 2008-20I0periods. EPA performed a qumierly maximum data substitution test using 40 CFR Pmi 50 Appendix N and the April 1999 Guideline on Data Handling Conventions for the PM NAAQS. The Fire Station #8 monitor was relocated to the Georgia Tech campus and was assigned a separate AQS number. It 

### was moved back to Fire Station #8 at the end of 2008 and resumed normal operation. There were no data completeness issues at either site during the times each site was operated. Further information on the data substitution used for the Atlanta area monitors can be found in the September 14, 2011, Federal Register notice (76 FR56701) and its cmresponding Technical Support Document. 

### 2.1.3 CleanDataDetermination On December 8, 2011, EPA promulgated its determination (76 FR 76620) that the Atlanta nonattaimnent area had attained the 1997 annual average 

### PM 25 

### National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). This determination was based upon quality-assured and certified ambient air monitoring data for the 2008-2010 period that showed design values below 15.0 f1g/m3 

### as indicated in Table 2-2. With the clean data determination, EPA suspended the requirements for the nonattainment area to submit an attainment demonstration, a reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, associated RACM and contingency measures. These requirements are suspended as long as the area continues to attain the standard. This final rule became effective on January 9, 2012. 

### 2.2 ImplementationPianUnderSectionllO(k) Section II

### O(k) of the CAA addresses EPA's actions on state implementation plan submittals (completeness, deadline for action byEPA, etc.). A September 4, 1992 memo from John Calcagni of EPA states the following: "The SIP for the area must be fully approved under section I I

### O(k), and must satisfY all requirements that apply to the area. It 

### should be noted that approval action on SIP elements and the redesignation request may occur simultaneously." The State of Georgia has prepared and submitted a 

### PM 25 

### attainment demonstration plan for the AtlantaNonattainmentArea. The plan was submitted for approval to EPA Region 4 on July 6, 2010. As discussed in Section I 

### .2 of this redesignation request and maintenance plan, the attainment demonstration, RFP, associated RACM, and contingency requirements that the July 6, 20 I

### 0 SIP revision was required to fulfill have been suspended. Therefore, the attainment demonstration has been withdrawn and substituted with submittal of this maintenance plan. There are no longer any Section 11O(k) requirements to be met. 

### 2.3 Permanent and Enforceable, and Other Reductions in Emissions In order for the nonattainment area to be redesignated to attainment, the State must demonstrate (and EPA must determine) that the improvement of aJUbient PM 2.5 

### concentrations during the years 2008 through 2010 is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions that were implemented following the nona!tainment design value period (2001-2003). This subsection contains Georgia EPD's demonstration that the improved air quality is due to permanent and enforceable emissions reductions. The elements ofthe demonstration described below are as follows: 9 

### of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan

• Source appmtionment, which links individual, observed ambient 

### PM 25 species to specific emissions sources;
• State control measures and associated emissions reductions;
• Federal control measures and associated emissions reductions; and
• Reductions in S02 emissions from upwind states. 

### 2.3.1 SourceApportionment ofAmbientPM2.5 Source apportionment of speciated ambient pollutant measurements is an impmtant tool for the prioritization of pollutant control strategies. Presented here are source-apportionment results for 2003-2004 speciated

### PM 25 measurements in theAtlanta, Floyd County, and Macon areas (Figure 2-2 and Table 2-3). The source-apportionment results are based onPositive MatrixFactorization (PMF), a factor analytic method that distinguishes correlation patterns among speciated PM2.5 measurements in a given location. More detailed information on source apportionment is presented inAppendixA. The similarities between the PMF results for the three sites show the regional nature of

### PM 25 . The major impacting factors at all sites are secondary sulfates, secondary organic aerosols (SOA), mobile sources, and biomass buming. The Atlanta area, as expected, has higher levels of mobile-source PM2.5, compared to Floyd County and Macon. On the other hand, these latter two sites exhibit higher levels ofsoil dust, and the Macon site exhibits a relatively high contribution ofLime/Minerals PM2 .5 . This is likely due to local sources inthe industrial area where the site is located.

12.0
"' 10.0 .§ Cl 

## " 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 Atlanta Floyd county Macon II Unspec. I!!ISOA D Sec. Nitrate ill Sec. Sulfate II Zn-rich



### Figure 2-2: Average factor contributions for 2003-04 atthe Atlanta, Floyd County, and Macon STN sites usingPMF 10 of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan

These results are useful for an assessment of control strategies. Secondary sulfate makes up approximately five pg/m3 

### (32%) of ambient PM25, 

### the largest contribution of all of the factors. SOAs make up the next largest contribution at 20%. The contribution of secondary nitrate is only one-fifth ofthe contribution ofsulfate. Contributions from all other source-categories were small in general, though the Macon and Rome sites seem to be affected by local sources related to lime/minerals processing and soil dustre-suspension. Secondmy sulfates are fmmed in the atmosphere from S02 

### emissions. As the sulfate fraction is the largest fraction ofambient 

### PM 25, 

### it is evident that controlling S02 

### emissions (generated primarily by coal-burning EGUs) would reduce 

### PM 25 

### levels throughout the state. Secondary nitrates are associated with NOx emissions Jiom combustion, primarily combustion in EGUs and in on-road mobile sources. SOAs are associated with biogenic emissions (natural emissions from living trees and other vegetation). It 

### is not practical to control biogenic emissions. Biomass burning generates elemental carbon (soot) and is associated with wildfires, prescribed buming, and wood-fired boilers. In addition to NOx. mobile sources generate elemental carbon.

Table 2-3. Average factor contributions to PM2.5 

### (llg/ m 3) 

### for 2003-04 at the Atlanta, Floyd County, and Macon STN sites using PMF Factor Atlanta Floyd Connty Macon Unspecified 2.32 2.97 1.81 SOA 2.55 3.46 3.81 Sec. Nitrate 0.99 1.05 0.74 Sec. Sulfate 4.82 5.10 4.67 Zn-rich 0,03 0.03 0.03 Cu-rich 0.07 0.03 0.02 Road-dust 0.12 0.13 0.11 Oil buming 0,03 0.04 0.04 Na-rich 0.43 0.42 0.33 Lime/Minerals 0.05 0.24 0.59 Soil 0.29 0.61 0.67 Biomass burning 1.06 1.31 1.50 Mobile sources 2.78 1.61 2.12 11 of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan 2.3.2 StateControlMeasures

- Georgia Based on source factor analysis, Georgia's control strategy is focused on the reduction ofemissions associated with secondary sulfates and nitrates, biomass burning, and mobile sources. Control of S02 

### is the most impmiant component of the strategy, as seconda1y sulfates make up the largest controllable contribution to ambient 

### PM 25. 

### State measures that target reduction ofthese emissions are: • S02 

### and NOx 

### controls on EGUs- Georgia Rule (sss);
• S02 

### limits on EGUs- Georgia Rule (uuu); and
• The Smoke Management Plan. Table 2-4 shows the timetable ofimplementation ofthese measures as well as the species controlled by each measure. The con-elation between the drop in 

### PM 25 

### annual averages and the implementation ofthe control measures, pmticularly Georgia Rule 391-3

### -l-.02(2)(sss), lends strong evidence that the improvements in air quality are a result of reduction in emissions and not a meteorologicallyinfluenced phenomenon. Detailed discussions of the measures are presented in the following subsections.

12 

### of54

### AtlantaPM 2.5

### NonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenancePlan

Table 2-4. Timetable ofState Measure Implementation**~.** 3 

### PMz.s ann. avg. ()lg/m ), 

### 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 AtlantaArea Mo11itors

. ForestPark'Georgia DOT 16.0 16.8 16.6 16.7 15.3 13.7 (13-063-0091) Kennesaw-National Guard 16.0 15.8 16.3 16.5 15.3 13.5 (13-067-0003) Powder Springs-Macland 15.2 15.2 15.5 15.8 14.5 13.1 Aquatic Center (13,067,0004) SouthDeKalb (13-089-0002) 15.0 16.1 15.5 15.4 14.8 12.7

. ··. ·. Doraville (13-089-2001) 15.4 15.5 15.8 14.5 15.1 13.1 E. Rivers School (13-121- 16.1 16.1 15.9 15.4 15.7 13.0 0032)

.

. .. Fire Station No.8 (13-121- 17.7 17.6 17.0 18.4 

## -- 7.6 0039) 

## -. Georgia Tech (13-121-0048)*


## -- 

# -- -- 15.1 15.5 14.3 Gwinnett Tech (13-135-0002) 16.2 16.1 16.1 16.9 14.2 12.4 Gainesville-Fair Street School 14.7 14.0 14.5 13.8 13.4 Jl.8 (13-139-0003) Yorkville (13-223-0003) 13.8 13.4 14.6 13.9 14.3 11.9**~** .

,;·

.

## .·······~·· . 

# .. •·

# .. .·····.· 

## · 

## .....•.. 2003 

# l';oo4i..z«ir{ 2()1!6 

# liQ!J? I

# zoo$**Y•~a""'~** 

# ..**~** );_;,**~·** ••••••••••

·.· 

## ·.·

. .

### .•........·····• ... 

### . .....•....

## · · ..·.·... ••• •••••••••••••

### ,................ ·**~·.··**... ·..•..•....

_

### ......··.. 

# ·-· . . Georgia Rule (sss) S0

## 2 ,N0x Georgia Rule (mm) 

## so2 2009 2010

Jl.5 13.4
11.2 12.2
10.3 12.1 11.4 12.3 11.7 12.2 11.6 12.2
12.1 14.5



## -- -- 11.6 12.3 10.2 11.4 9.9 11.2 

### 2iJo9 

# 1;9W

I ••.••••..••••• ••••.••-••.•·•·• 

## •. > 

# • • ••**~**
Smoke Management Plan PM, NO, 

# -· *The Georgia Tech monitor stopped operation onDecember29, 2008. **Controls were required onDecember 31, 2008, but were actually sta1ted up in the first halfofthe year.


### 13 of54

### AtlantaPM 2.5

### NonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan 2.3.2.1 S0 2 

### andNOx 

### Controls andS0 2 

### Limits Atmospheric secondary sulfate is formed from emissions of S02• Coal-fired EGUs are by far the most significant source ofS02 emissions in Georgia and in the Southeast. Georgia's Multipollutant Rule [391-3-l-.02(2)(sss)]requires flue gas desulfurization (FGD) and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) controls on the majority of coal-fired EGUs in Georgia. This state-enforceable rule was promulgated in 2007 for the purposes of lowering ozone and 

### PM 25 concentrations by controlling precursor emissions and for reducing mercury deposition. The FGD controls reduced S02 emissions rates from the affected emissions units by at least 95 percent and the SCR controls reduced NOx emissions rates by approximately 85 percent. The S02 and NOx controls were required in suppmt of EPA's CAIR rule, which was promulgated in 2005 and required statewide caps for NOx and S02 beginning in 2009 and 2010, respectively. The CAIRrule is discussed fmther in Section2.3.3. Georgia Rule (uuu), S02 Emissions from Electric Utility Steam Generating Units, is a companion rule to Rule (sss) and is both state and federally enforceable upon approval by EPA. Both ofthese rules were implemented in response to CAIR and require emissions reductions consistent with CAIR's original schedule slatting in 2009. The rule requires 95% reduction of S02 emissions from the majority ofGeorgia's coal-fired EGUs, with the requirement being phased in from 2010 through 2016. It requires 95% reduction of S02 emissions from three ofthe four EGUs at Plant Bowen by January I, 2010, and the fourth unit by January I, 2012, on both coal-fired EGUs at Plant Wansley by January 1, 2010, and both EGUs at Plant McDonough in 2012, and at the two largest EGUs at Plant Yates by 2015. 3 Ithas been well demonstrated that ambient secondary sulfate in a given location can be significantly affected by S02 emissions from distant sources. Therefore, secondmy sulfate in the Atlanta Area is due not only to S02 emissions from Plant Yates, Plant Wansley, and Plant Bowen, located inside the nonattainment area, but also to S02 emissions from other coal-fired EGUs in north Georgia. Plant McDonough has been completely converted to a combined cycle combustion turbine facility and is no longer a coal-fired facility. Figure 2-3 shows the locations ofthe coal-fired EGU facilities inthe northern halfofGeorgia as well as their respective energy production (in million megawatt-hours) in the year 2007. Plant Bowen was a close second to Plant Scherer in energy production and historically has been by far the highest S02-emitting facility in the state. Plant Scheret; which was first in Georgia in energy production, is located approximately 20 miles from the Atlanta nonattainment area. The facilities shown in the figure comprise seven ofthe ten coal-fired EGU facilities that were operated in Georgia in 2007. In 2007, the energy produced by the seven facilities made up 97 percent of the statewide energy production from coal-fired facilities.

3 One ofthe smaller EGUs at Plant Yates has an existing S02 scrubber that was required to achieve 90% S02 reduction by January I, 2010. 14 of54Tennessee

Alabama 

# I AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan

N. Carolina
S.Carolina



### Figure 2-3. Locations and 2007 EnergyProduction ofCoal-fil'ed EGUFacilities in North Georgia

15 

### of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMaintenancePlan

SCR Controls Required by Rule (sss) Rule (sss) requires SCR controls to be operated year-round, starting with six EGUs in 2008 and 2009. Of these six units, which include Bowen Units 2, 3, and 4; Wansley Units I and 2; and Hammond Unit 4; Bowen and Wansley's units are located in theAtlanta nonattailUllent area. The schedule for the operation ofSCRs on the remaining EGUs in theAtlanta NAA is as follows:
• Bowen Unit 1has been required to operate an SCRyear-round siuce June 2010.
• McDonough Unit 2 was required to operate an SCR year-round beginning in December 2011; however, the facility has been completely converted to a combined-cycle combustion turbine facility and is no longer a coal-fired facility.
• McDonough Unit I was required to operate an SCR year-round beginning in April 2012; however, the facility has been completely converted to a combined-cycle combustion turbine facility and is no longer a coal-fired facility.
• Plant Yates Units 6 and 7 are required to operate an SCR year-round beginning in June of 2015.
• Beginning in Januaty of2018, the remaining Units 2 through 5 at Plant Yates are required to be evaluated for additional mercury controls if the total annual heat input of those units combined exceeds 33,608,398 million Btu. Any additional required controls could contribute to reduced NOx and S02 emissions. Bowen Units 1, 2, 3, and 4; Wansley Units 1 and 2; and Hammond Unit 4 have NOx controls that were already in place and operating during the ozone control season by the end of2003. The Title V permit of each of these facilities has been amended to permit operation of the FGD and SCR controls. FGD Controls Required by Rule (sss) The required FGD control implementation date varies by EGU, starting on December 31, 2008. S02 controls were actually started on five units in May 2008. S02 controls were operating for the entire year of2009 as follows:
• Plant Hammond

- controls on 4 of4 units;
• Plant Bowen- controls on 2 of4 units; and
• PlantWansley- controls on 1 of2 units. S02 controls on a third unit at Plant Bowen and the second unit atPlantWansley began operation on April 1, 2009. Table 2-5 shows the annual S02 emissions for the coal-fired facilities in north Georgia for the period 2003 through 2010. The table also includes the electrical generation, a measure ofproduction, for the facilities for the same time period. This data is presented in graphical fonn in Figure 2-4.
16 of54

### AtlantaPM2.s NonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenance Plan
Comparing 2003 to 2010, S02 emissions were reduced by 60.2 percent while generation was down only by 

### 4.7 percent. These statistics provide clear evidence that the reduction in 

### PM2

### .s concentration is due to permanent and enforceable controls rather than to reduced generation.

17 of54Hammond

Bowen

Branch
McDonough

Scherer
Wansley**

Yates 

### AtlantaPM2.s NonattainmentArea RedesignationRequest andMaintenancePlan Table 2-5. Annual S02 

### Emissions and Generation 

### (106 

### MWh) from North Georgia Coal-fired EGU Facilities, 

### 2003- 2010



## so, (tpy) 35,900 37,700 39,500 40,600 47,800 12,500* 900* 2,427 generation 4.79 4.11 4.64 4.27 5.09 4.32 3.73 3.23 

## so, (tpy) 164,900 165,900 186,500 206,400 196,800 148,100* 54,800* 7,618 generation 21.9 21.9 23.3 23.7 24.0 23.4 22.9 24.7 

## so, (tpy) 64,800 70,I00 90,500 96,000 98,400 94,000 60,100 53,258 generation 8.28 7.97 10.3 10.8 10.9 10.7 6.82 6.09 

## so, (tpy) 23,900 22,700 27,700 28,800 28,500 24,300 15,900 17,115 generation 3.75 3.52 3.92 4.07 4.07 3.43 2.34 2.28 

## so, (tpy) 83,900 79,700 82,900 74,200 76,500 77,700 69,500 69,862 generation 21.3 24.6 25.5 24.5 26.5 25.7 24.3 24.5 

## so, (tpy) 94,000 99,000 101,500 96200 93,900 74,300* 7400* 2,343 generation 13.7 14 15.1 14.8 16.1 15.5 11.8 9.79 

## so, (tpy) 44,900 50,600 66,500 75,500 77,200 68,200 45,500 54,256 generation 6.73 6.22 7.37 7.49 8.10 7.37 4.90 6.06 TOTAL S02 Tons/yr 512,300 525,700 595,100 617,700 619,100 499,100 254,100 203,879 TOTAL Generation 106 MWh 80.45 82.32 90.13 89.6 94.76 90,42 76.79 76.65 Continued, next page.

18 

### of54·
..

# ,,..... :···

. f1VI;.s**~~~~-.**l1Y!:·.(f1g/m3),
..•**At!~nta**Area.Monitors
. · ----'.;-_:-:_·_;--o:--_-/-
__ ,, . :.,::. -'/_,_:-:-:>:----::f_;:
___:_. ForestPark-Georgia DOT (13-063-0091) Kennesaw-National Guard (13-067-0003) Powder Springs-Macland Aquatic Center (13-067-0004) South DeKalb (13-089-0002) Doraville (13-089-2001) E. Rivers School (13-121-0032) Fire Station No. 8 (13-121-0039) Georgia Tech (13-121-0048) Gwinnett Tech (13-135-0002) Gainesville-Fair Street School (13-139-0003) Yorkville (13-223-0003) 

### AtlantaPM 2.5

### NonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMaintenance Plan

· ..·

# .. •··· 

# ..**I2~~;L·**
.20()4 ·.·.·.·••·· 2pos··
....•·•••·••• 

### .•2007 2006······················ 

### !··.·· ...•.••••..••.•. < ••.

# '.i•~.- <

# .·· ..

# , ..

• ••••••••••••••••• • 

# '(

# . .. ···•····.· ..........··.·.··· ... 

## ······ ... 16.0 16.8 16.6 16.7 15.3
16.0 15.8 16.3 16.5 15.3
15.2 15.2 15.5 15.8 14.5 15.0 16.1 15.5 15.4 14.8 15.4 15.5 15.8 14.5 15.1 16.1 16.1 15.9 15.4 15.7 17.7 17.6 17.0 18.4 

## --

-- -- -- 15.1 15.5 16.2 16.1 16.1 16.9 14.2 14.7 14.0 14.5 13.8 13.4 13.8 13.4 14.6 13.9 14.3 Source: EPA Clean Air Markets DIVISIOn 2008 

# .t . . ..··

.. 13.7
13.5
13.1 12.7 13.1 13.0 7.6 14.3 12.4 11.8 11.9 

### * S02 control, required by GeorgiaRule (sss), was operational on one or moreEGUs for partial orfull year **Doesnot include emissions from facility 1s gas-fired units

19 

### of54 zoq9 •. ..2010
.

.• i;
. \

..... · 11.5 13.4
11.2 12.2
10.3 12.1 11.4 12.3 11.7 12.2 11.6 12.2 12.1 14.5



# -- -- 11.6 12.3 10.2 11.4 9.9 11.2

### 700000 600000 500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 <:') 0 0 N 

### AtlantaPM 2.5

### NonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenancePhm

100 90 80 70 60 50 lliiiiiii!IS02 (tpy) 

### 40 -+-gen (million MWh) 

### 30 20 10 0 

# " 10 <D ,..__ co (J) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0**~** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N 

### Figure 2-4. 

### S02 Emissions and Generation from North Georgia Coal-fired EGU Facilities, 2003 - 2010 2.3.2.2 Smoke ManagementPlan 

### Foreshy and agriculture, two ofthe Georgia's most significant industries, utilize prescribed burning practices to suppmt production. Prescribed burning is the controlled application offire to existing vegetative fuels to accomplish planned land management objectives or to mitigate catastrophic wildfires. In 

### addition to managing forests and agricultural resources, prescribed burning helps protect lives and property by reducing accumulations of forest fuels and helps to sustain imperiled species and ecosystems. The Georgia General Assembly enacted the Georgia Prescribed Burning Act to authorize and promote the use of prescribed burning for community protection and for silvicultural, environmental, and wildlife purposes. Large prescribed burns can produce significant PM 25 

### emissions. These emissions, ifnot properly managed, can reach smoke-sensitive areas m1d have significant negative impacts on the air quality in these areas. Smoke-sensitive areas include Georgia's heavily-populated areas and PM2 .5 

### nonattainment areas. Without a prescribed burning program, there is a higher probability of catastrophic wildfires, which can threaten personal property and can have even higher negative impacts on air quality. To prevent negative air quality impacts from prescribed burning, Georgia DNR and the Georgia Forest1y Commission formulated and adopted Georgia's Basic Smoke Management Plan (SMP) dated April 

### 16, 2008. The plan was developed in accordance with EPA's "The h1terim Air Quality Policy on Wildland and Prescribed Fires" and the draft EPA guidance document, "Elements of a Smoke Management Program." The purpose ofthe SMP is to allow fire to function in its natural role in maintaining healthy wildland ecosystems while protecting public health and welfare by mitigating the impacts ofair pollutants from wildland and prescribed fires on air quality and visibility. The plan is a necessary component in determining Exceptional Events related to prescribed buming and is an element of Georgia's Regional Haze SIP. The Georgia Foreshy Commission (GFC), Georgia DNR's EPD, and Georgia DNR's Wildlife Resources Division (WRD) signed a Memorandum Of 

### 20 of

### 54

### AtlantaPM 2.5

### NonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenancePlan Understanding (MOU) to implement the SMP on April 16, 2008. The SMP and the MOU are included as Appendix B. The SMP identifies the following components that should be considered in the planning of prescribed burns:
• smoke mitigation,
• smoke dispersion evaluation,
• public notification, and
• air quality monitoring. Smoke mitigation, smoke dispersion evaluation, and air quality monitoring are important to mitigating the effects ofprescribed burns on air quality in smoke-sensitive areas. Smoke mitigation is accomplished by avoiding smoke-sensitive areas, performing burns under favorable smoke dispersion conditions, and managing the generation and release of emissions over time. Smoke dispersion evaluations are performed by GFC-certified prescribed fire managers and are supported by the GFC's full-time fire weather meteorologist. Air quality monitoring and forecasting, perfonned by Georgia EPD, provides impmtant air quality data to assist fire managers with their decisions on when to schedule prescribed burns. In addition to mitigating the impacts ofprescribed burns on air quality, the implementation ofa SMP has benefits with regard to the computation ofair quality design values. Design values are statistical measures of historical ambient pollutant concentrations that are compared to EPA's air quality standards to detennine ifattainment ofthe standard has been achieved. An atypical event, such as an unusually large forest fire, can produce PM2.5 

### emissions that will significantly increase ambient concentration measurements, and therefore design value computations, in a nonattainment area. EPA will allow the atypical ambient measurements to be excluded from the design value computation if the fire event is deemed to be an "exceptional event". In 

### order for a large fire to qualifY as an exceptional event, the EPA has stated that a state must demonstrate that a certified SMP was in place at the time of the event, or that the state must ensure that the burner employs basic smoke management practices. All outdoor buming is subject to enforcement through law enforcement officers ofGFC, DNR and local law enforcement. The enforcement authority is the Georgia Forest Fire Protection Act, as well as EPD's authority to enforce Federal and State air quality regulations and laws. In addition, GFC has the authority to void certification of certified prescribed bumers if investigation reveals that disregard for basic smoke management practices contributed to smoke intrusion into a smokesensitive area. This measure is State enforceable. It 

### is not necessary for the continued maintenance ofattainment in theAtlanta area. However, implementation ofthe SMP will suppmt the maintenance ofthe annual PM 25 

### NAAQS.

21 

### of54

### AtlantaPM 2.5

### NonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan

2.3.3 Federal ControlMeasures Federal control measures related to ambient 

### PM 25 are focused on the reduction of emissions associated with sulfates, nitrates, and direct PM. Federal measures that targeted reduction ofthese emissions between nonattainment designation and the clean data period are as follows: • CleanAirInterstate Rule/Cross State Air Pollution Rule; • Tier 2 Vehicle Standards; • Heavy-duty Gasoline and Diesel Highway Vehicles Standards and Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD) Rule; • Large Nonroad Diesel Engines Rule and ULSD Rule; • Non-Road Spark Ignition Engines and Recreational Engines Standard; and • NOx SIP Call in Surrounding States. All ofthe measures .were in place prior to 

### 2007, with the exception ofthe large nonroad diesel rule (effective in 

### 2008) and CAIR. Reductions associated with vehicles and engines will increase during the maintenance period as older engines are removed from service and replaced by new engines. Table 2-6 shows the timetable ofimplementation ofthese measures as well as the species controJled by each. The continuous drop in PM2.5 concentration from 

### 2005 through 

### 20I0 demonstrates that the improvement of air quality is due to the implementation of the control measures. Detailed discussions ofthe measures are presented in the following subsections.



### 22 of54PM,.s ann. avg. {flg/m3), Atlanta Area Monitors. ForestParkGeorgia DOT (13-063-0091)KennesawNational Guard (13- 067-0003)

. PowderSpringsMac1and Aquatic Center (13- 067-0004) South DeKa1b (13-089-0002) Doraville (13- 089-2001) E. Rivers .School (13- 121-0032) Fire Station No.8 (13-121- 0039) Georgia Tech (13-121-0048) Gwinnett Tech (13-135-0002)GainesvilleFair Street School (13- 139-0003) Yorkville (13- 223-0003) 

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMaintenance Plan

Table 2-6. Timetable ofFederalMeasure Implementation
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

16.0 16.8 16.6 16.7 15.3 13.7

16.0 15.8 16.3 16.5 15.3 13.5

15.2 15.2 15.5 15.8 14.5 13.1

15.0 16.1 15.5 15.4 14.8 12.7
15.4 15.5 15.8 14.5 15.1 13.1

16.1 16.1 15.9 15.4 15.7 13.0

17.7 17.6 17.0 18.4 

## -- 7.6



## -- -- -- 15.1 15.5 14.3
16.2 16.1 16.1 16.9 14.2 12.4

14.7 14.0 14.5 13.8 13.4 l1.8

13.8 13.4 14.6 13.9 14.3 11.9

23 of54 2009 2010



### . 11.5 13.4

11.2 12.2

10.3 12.1

11.4 12.3
11.7 12.2

11.6 12.2
]2.1 14.5



## -- -- 11.6 12.3

10.2 l1.4

9.9 11.2Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) Tier 2 vehicle standards Heavy Duty Engine Standard, first phase NOx*
NO, NO, 

## voc AtlantaPM2.s NonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenance Plan



## * also requires S02 controls after 2009

2.3.3.1 CleanAirInterstate Rule On May 12, 2005, the U.S. EPA promulgated the "Rule To Reduce Interstate Transpmt of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (CleanAir Interstate Rule)'' referred to as CAIR. This rule established the requirement for States to adopt mles limiting the emissions ofNO, and sulfur dioxide (S02) and a modelmle for the states to use in developing their mles. The purpose ofthe CAIR was to reduce interstate transport ofprecursors to fine patticulate and ozone. The CAIR mle applied to fossil-fuel-fired electric generation units (EGUs), including certain cogeneration units, with nameplate capacities of greater thatl 25 MWe. This rule set annual state caps for NO, and S02 in two phases, with the Phase I caps stmting in 2009 and 2010, respectively. Phase II caps for NOx a11d S02 were to become effective in 2015. 24 of54

### Atlanta

### PMz.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan As part ofthe CAIRrule, EPA determined that Georgia contributed significantly to downwind 

### PM 25 nonattainment areas and/or interfered with maintenance ofthe 

### PM 25 NAAQS (70 FR 25246-25250). Accordingly, a State CAIR rule [Georgia rule 391-3-1-.02(13)] was promulgated that, for the most part, mirrors the provisions ofthe federal rule. On July 11, 2008, the U.S. District Court ofAppeals in the District of Columbia vacated the Clean Air Interstate Rule and remanded it to EPA. A rehearing ofthe Court's decision was requested and granted. On December 23, 2008, the comi remanded CAIR to EPA without vacatur (i.e., the rule was still in place). EPA was directed to correct the deficiencies in CAIR that were identified in the comi's decision. To replace CAIR, EPA promulgated the final Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (76 FR 48208) on August 8, 2011. The Cross-state rule imposes restrictions on emissions ofNOx and S02 from states identified as having significant impacts on ozone and/or PM2

_ 5 NAAQS attainment or as interfering with maintenance ofthese same standards in downwind states. The requirements ofthe Cross-state Rule were to become effective in 2012 and 2014, which is beyond the 2008-to-2010 clean data period for the metro Atlanta area. However; on December 30, 2011, the U.S. Comi ofAppeals for the D.C Circuit Comi issued a ruling to stay CSAPR pendingjudicial review. Regardless ofthe timing of the transition fi·om CAIR to CSAPR, or the resulting comi-ordered interstate transpmi remedy, emissions of NOx and S02 have declined significantly and are expected to continue to decrease in the future due to the continuation ofCAIR and Georgia's own EGU emission rules.
2.3.3.2 Tier 2 Vehicle Standards andLow-Sulji1r Gasoline Federal Tier 2 vehicle standards will reduce NOx emissions from passenger vehicles. The standards require all passenger vehicles in a manufacturer's fleet, including light-duty trucks and sp01i utility vehicles (SUVs), to meet an average standard of0.07 grams ofNOx permile. Implementation began in 2004 and was completely phased in by 2007. The Tier 2 standards will also cover passenger vehicles over 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight rating (the larger pickup trucks and SUVs), which are not covered by the current Tier I regulations. For these vehicles, the standards were phased in begirming in 2008 with full compliance in 2009. The new standards require vehicles to be 77% to 95% cleaner than those on the road prior to implementation ofTier 2. The Tier 2 rule also reduced the sulfur content ofgasoline to 30 parts per million (ppm) stariing in January of2006. Sulfur occurs naturally in gasoline but interferes with the operation ofcatalytic converiers on vehicles resulting in higher emissions. Lower-sulfur gasoline is necessary to achieve the Tier 2 vehicle emission standards.
2.3.3.3 Heavy-Duty Gasoline andDiesel Highway Vehicles Standards & Ultra Low-Sulfiw Diesel Rule New U.S. EPA standards designed to reduce NOx and VOC emissions from heavy-duty gasoline and diesel highway vehicles (14001 pounds or more) began to take effect in 2004. A second phase of standards and testing procedures, which began in 2007, will reduce particulate matter from heavyduty highway engines and will also reduce highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 ppm to prevent damage to the emission control devices. The total program is expected to achieve a 90% reduction in pariiculate matter (PM) emissions and a 95% reduction in NOx emissions for these new engines using low sulfur diesel, compared to older engines using diesel with higher sulfur content. S02 emissions will also be reduced due to the lower fuel sulfur content.
25 of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan 2.3.3.4 Large NonroadDieselEngines Rule & Ultra Low-SuifitrDieselRule In May 2004, the U.S. EPA promulgated new rules for large nonroad diesel engines, such as those used in construction, agricultural, and industrial equipment, to be phased in between 2008 and 2014. The nonroad diesel mles also reduce the allowable sulfur in nonroad diesel fuel by over 99%. Prior to 2006, nonroad diesel fuel averaged about 3,400 ppm sulfur. The rule limits nonroad diesel sulfur content to 500 ppm in 2006 and 15 ppm in 2010. The combined engine and fuel rules would reduce NOx and PM emissions from large nonroad diesel engines by over 90%, compared to older engines using diesel with higher sulfur content. S02 emissions will also be reduced due to the lower fuel sulfur content. 2.3.3.5 NonroadLarge Spark-Ignition Engines andRecreationalEngines Standard This standard, effective in July 2003, regulates NOx, hydrocarbons (HC) and carbon monoxide (CO) for groups ofpreviously unregulated nonroad engines. The new standard applies to all new engines sold in the United States and impmted after these standards began and apply to large spark-ignition engines (forklifts and airpmt ground service equipment), recreational vehicles (off-highway motorcycles and all-terrain-vehicles), and recreational marine diesel engines. The regulation varies based upon the type ofengine or vehicle. The large spark-ignition engines contribute to ozone fonnation and ambient CO and PM levels in urban areas. Tier I ofthis standard was ·implemented in 2004 and Tier 2 started in 2007. Like the large spark-ignition engines, recreational vehicles contribute to ozone fonnation and ambient CO and PM levels. For the off-highway motorcycles and all-terrain-vehicles, model year 2006, the new exhaust emissions standard was phased-in by 50% and for model years 2007 and later at 100%. Recreational marine diesel engines over 37 kilowatts are used in yachts, cruisers, and other types of pleasure craft. Recreational marine engines contribute to ozone fmmation and PM levels, especially in marinas. Depending onthe size ofthe engine, the standard began phasing in during 2006. When all of the nonroad spark-ignition engines and recreational engines standards are fully implemented, an overall 72% reduction in HC, 80% reduction in NO"' and 56% reduction in CO emissions are expected by 2020. These controls will help reduce ambient concentrations of ozone, CO, and fine PM. 2.3.3.6 NO,, SIP Call in Suwounding States In October 1998, the U.S. EPA made a finding of significant contribution of NOx emissions from certain states and published a rule that set ozone season NOx budgets for the purpose of reducing regional transport of ozone (63 FR 573 56). This rule, referred to as the NO, SIP Call, called for ozone season controls to be put on utility and industrial boilers, as well as internal combustion engines in 22 states in the Eastern United States. A NOx emissions budget was set for each state and the states were required to develop rules that would allow the state to meet their budget. A NOx trading program was established, allowing sources to buy credits to meet their NOx budget as opposed to actually installing controls. The emission budgets were to be met by the beginning of 2004.

26 of54

### AtlantaPM2.s NonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenancePlan 

### 2.3.4 S01 

### Emissions Reductions in Upwind States As noted previously, secondary sulfate concentrations in a given location can be significantly affected by S02 emissions from distant sources. During the period of2003 through 2009, S01 emissions fium coal-fired electric generation facilities upwind ofGeorgia have been significantly reduced. EPApromulgated the Cross-StateAir Pollution Rule (76 FR48208) on August 8, 2011, and projected future emissions to supportthe rulemaking. Modeling in support ofthe Cross-State Rule has established linkages between emissions fi·om upwind states and ambient 

### PM 25 concentrations in downwind receptor states. EPA's projections indicate that 2012 emissions for thebase case (which disallows reductions from existing or future CAIR controls) from ten upwind states will contribute 0.15 f!g/m3 (1% ofthe 1997 annual PM 2

_ 5 standard) or more to ambientPM2

_ 5 concentrations in Georgia's 2012 projected nonattainment area (Atlanta). The ten states are Alabama, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and West Virginia. [Source: Appendix D oftheAir Quality Modeling Final Rule Teclmical Support Document, June 2011, docket item EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4140.] Table 2-7 shows the S02 emissions trends 11-om coal-firedEGU facilities in the ten upwind states during the period 2003 through 2009. The total S02 emissions from the ten states dropped approximately 15 percent fi·om 2003 to 2007 and over 50 percent from 2003 to 2009. The trend of aggregated S02 emissions from these states is presented in Figure 2-6.

27 of54

### AtlantaPM 2.5

### NonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan
Table 

### 2-7. Annual 802 

### Emissions in States With Downwind Contributions to Georgia 

### PMz.s Exceeding 0.15 )lg/m3

.··· 

### State 2003 2005 2007 2009

. ... AL 458,622 460,072 447,189 277,972 IL 365,333 326,632 272,571 229,364 IN 804,829 870,812 714,529 413,726 

### KY 529,559 500,224 379,837 252,002 NC 462,041 500,936 370,826 110,948 OH 1,175,905 1,085,485 954,646 600,687 PA 967,185 985,508 951,186 573,618 

## sc 203,956 217,386 172,726 97,941 TN 339,536 266,081 237,231 108,042 

## wv 539,858 467,082 371,996 174,583 

### TOTAL 5,846,824 5,680,218 4,872,738 2,838,883 Source: EPA Clean Air Markets Division, Acid Rain Program EPD understands thatthe emissions reductions inthe upwind states are not permanent and enforceable reductions in Georgia. However, we believe thatthe reductions provide further evidence that the reduced 

### PM 25 levels in Georgia dul'ing the period 2008-20I0 are due to S02 emissions reductions achieved both within and outside Georgia. The majority ofupwind reductions is due to state rules or consent orders requil'ing reduced S02 emissions. With the promulgation ofthe CrossStateAirPollution Rule, itis highly unlikely that these reductions will be reversed in the future. (It should be noted that onDecember 30, 2011, the U.S. Court ofAppeals for the D.C Circuit Court issued a ruling to stay CSAPR, pendingjudicial review. Regardless ofthe timing ofthe transition from CAIRto CSAPR, orthe resulting court-ordered interstate transpmt remedy, emissions ofS02 from upwind states have declined significantly and are expected to continue to decrease in the future.)

28 of54

# "' AtlantaPM2.s NonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenancePlan
7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 

### § 4,000,000 

## lliil! Upwind States 

## I 

# ""' "' 3,000,000 0 

# "' 2,000,000 1,000,000 0 2003 2005 2007 2009 

### Figure 2-5. Trend ofAggregated Annual S02 

### Emissions in States with Downwind Contributions to Georgia PM2.5 

### Exceeding 0.15 )tg/m3 

### 2.4 Section 110andPartD

### Requiremenls Section 110 of the CAA contains the requirements for state implementation plans (SIPs). The purpose of a SIP is to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of national primary ambient air quality standards. Part D, Subpmt I, of CAA Title I (Sections 171 to 1 79) contains general requirements for areas that have been designated nonattainment. As stated in Section 1.1 ofthis maintenance plan, the Atlanta area was designated as nonattainment for the 1997 annual fine PM standard in April of2005. Georgia EPD submitted a PM2.5 nonattainment plan for the Atlanta area per Title I Pmt D. With the determination that the Atlanta nonattainment area has attained the 1997 annual fine PM standard (Section 2.1.3), the area is no longer subject to the nonattainment provision ofCAA Section 110 and PartD requirements for demonstrating attainment, RFP, associated RACM and contingency for areas designated as nonattainment with the NAAQS. Therefore, the nonattainment plan was subsequently withdrawn. All other Section 110 and Part D requirements pe1taining to the Atlanta area have previously been approved or are cmTently subject to approval by EPA.

29 of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMaintenance Plan 

## 3.0 Maintenance Plan Section 175A of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 defines the general framework of a maintenance plan. The core provisions of Section 175A are a quantitative demonstration of maintenance ofthe standard (PM2.5 in this case) and contingency provisions for prompt adoption of corrective measures ifattainment is not maintained. Per guidance from EPA,4 this maintenance plan includes a method to verify continued attainment to support the maintenance demonstration. Per the same guidance, this plan also includes a plan to use the ambient monitoring network for verification ofcontinued attainment m; ifapplicable, for triggering contingency provisions. 

### 3.1 Maintenance Demonstration Section I75A ofthe CAA requires a state that is requesting redesignation to submit a revision to its SIP which provides for maintenance ofthe applicable standard for a minimum of I0 years after the redesignation date. Section 107(d)(3)(D) provides EPA up to 18 months from receipt ofa complete submittal to process a redesignation request. Therefore, Georgia EPD is providing a demonstration ofmaintenance through the year 2024. There are two generally-accepted methodologies for demonstrating maintenance. Under the first method, an emissions inventory is compiled for one ofthe three years which are used to show clean (i.e., attaining) ambient data (see Section 2.1). This year is the baseline or attainment year. Emissions projections are formulated for the final year of the maintenance period and for intennediate years. If each ofthe projected emission levels is less than the emission level for the attainment yem; maintenance of the standard is demonstrated. This assumes that ambient concentrations will remain below the standard if future annual emissions are kept below the inventoried emissions in the chosen attainment yem·. Under the second maintenance demonstration method, air quality modeling is used to project ambient pollutant concentrations and annual design values for the final year and inte1mediate years. Ifall ofthe modeled, rolling 3-year averages ofthe annual design values are below the standard, maintenance is demonstrated. Georgia EPD has adopted the method ofcomparing attainment year emissions to projected emissions for this maintenance plan. This approach has been used inthe previous maintenm1ce plans submitted by EPD and approved by EPA. The following sections discuss the attainment year inventory, the projected inventories, and verification ofcontinued attainment. 

### 3.1.1 Attainment YearEmissions Inventory Georgia EPD has selected 2008 as the year for the attainment year emissions inventory. 2008 is one ofthe tlu·ee years (2008-2010) on which the Atlanta area's clean data detennination is based. Most ofthe 2008 base-year emission inventmy was obtained from the National Emissions Inventory 2008 Version 1.5 (NEI2008, http://www.epa.gov/ttnchiel/net/2008inventory.html). The following emissions sectors are included in the inventory;

4 "Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment", September 4, 1992, John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality ManagementDivision, OAQPS, USEPA 30 of54

### AtlantaPM2.s NonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMaintenance Plan

• Point sources (EGU and non-EGU), • Nonpoint somces (including fire), • Onroad mobile sources, and • Nonroad mobile somces (including marine vessels, aircraft, and rail). The data sources for the attainment-year emissions inventories are summarized in Table 3-1. Additional details on the data somces and inventory methods are presented in the following subsections and in Appendix C.


### Table 3-1. 2008 Emissions Inventory Sources 

## ..•..·· . <

. .· · .. ··.····· ..·

### .... · 

## ... ·... ···...···.··

Em,s$i()IIS.§ource 1 . Inventory**§Qllrc~**·.·.....•....
•. ···•···· ·

# S~ctor ·········•··..•··. . .. ··.·•·.···· ·.... '•

..·.. 

### . 

## . Point-EGU NEI2008 Version 1.5 Point- non-EGU NEI2008 Version 1.5 Non point NEI2008 Version 1.5 Omoad Mobile ARC MOVES2010 Nomoad Mobile NEI2008 Version 1.5

3.1.1.1 PointSources Point sources captmed in the inventory include stationary sources whose actual emissions equal or exceed I00 tons per year ofS02, NOx. orpatiiculate matter. Emissions from point somces have been calculated for EGU and non-EGU sources. EGU Point Sources: The nonattainment m·ea has six EGU facilities located within its boundaries that repmi their emissions for the emissions inventmy. Three facilities, Doyle Generating (AIRS No. 29700041), MPC Generating (AIRS No. 29700040), and Walton County Power (AIRS No. 29700042) operate natural gas-fired combustion turbines and fall below the reporting threshold for the emission inventory, thus they have never repmied emissions to the Division. Table 3-2 summarizes emissions from each EGU located in the nonattainment area that is required to repmi its emissions for the emission inventmy.

31 of54Facility Site Name 

### AtlantaPM2.s NonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenance Plan
Table 3-2. Emissions by EGU facilities in 2008, 2017 and 2024 AIRSID 2008 2017 SOz NOx PMzs SOz NOx PMzs 2024 S02 NOx Chattahoochee EnergyFacility 14900006 5 97 89 4 86 79 5 103 GA Power Company -PlantBowen 01500011 149,015 25,360 2,003 8,781 7,763 1,219 9,123 8,066 GA Power Company -PlantBranch 23700008 93,982 20,194 445 4,972 3,740 236 5,166 3,885 GA Power Company -Plant McDonough/ Atkinson 06700003 24,330 3,489 202 25 451 283 29 536 GA Power Company -Plant Wansley 14900001 74,956 14,625 1,866 4,086 4,116 1,069 4,246 4,299 GA Power Company

- Plant Yates 07700001 68,208 12,413 333 30,648 6,557 285 31,844 6,813 Total 410,496 76,177 4,937 48,517 22,713 3,171 50,414 23,702 

### Non-EGU Point Sources: 2008 emissions of 

### SOz, NO" and 

### PM 25 

### from EGU and non-EGU facilities are presented in Table 3- 3. Chemical Products Corporation in Bmtow Cmmty is the largest source of S02 

### emissions from non-EGU point sources in the Atlanta Area, while Owens Corning Insulating Systems LLC, is the largest source of

### PM, 5 

### emissions from non-EGU point somces. Table 3-3. Point Source Emissions for 2008 (tons, annual) Pollutant EGU Non-EGU Total Point 

### ' · .. 

# so, 410,496 2,982 413,478 NOx 76,177 4,608 80,785 PM,.s 4937 700 5637
The 2008 point source inventory is based on the National Emissions Inventmy (NEI) repmts for reporting year 2008. Emissions from sources that repmted for 2008 were generally used as reported. See Appendices C and C-1 for more details on the development ofthe 2008 point source emissions inventmy. 

### 3.1.1.2 Nonpoint Sources Nonpoint sources captured in the inventmy include stationmy sources whose emissions levels of S02, 

### NO" and particulate matter are each less than 100 tons per year. Emissions estimates for nonEGU point sonrces in 2008 were obtained from NEI2008 Version 1.5. The 2008 nonpoint source emissions for the Atlanta area are presented in Table 3-4. The largest contributors to S02 

### emissions were coal-fired and residual-oil-fired industrial boilers. The largest contributors to NOx 

### emissions were industrial wood-fired boilers and Class I diesel railroad line haul locomotives. The largest contributors to 

### PM 25 

### emissions were industrial wood-fired boilers and road dust from unpaved roads.
32 of54 PM, 94 1,267

245 336 1,119

297 3,358

### AtlantaPM 2.5

### NonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMaintenance Plan
Emissions from fires in 2008 were also obtained from NEI2008 Version 1.5 and are shown in Table 3-4. These estimates were provided by Georgia Environmental Protection Division as part of the AERR2008 submission (GeorgiaAir Protection Branch, 20II). This inventmy was developed using 2008 burned-area data and buming permit data provided by Georgia Forestty Commission, and the same method as used for the VISTAS2002 fire inventmy. Table 3-4. Nonpoint Source Emissions for 2008 

### (tons, annual) Pollutant Nonpoint Fire Total (excluding .fire) Nonpoint 

## so, 10,203 34 10,237 NOx 20,992 201 21,193 PM 2.5 

### 34,921 765 35,686 The 2008 level of PM25 

### emissions fi·om nonpoint sources, excluding fire, was 34,921 tons. This quantity accounted for over 50 percent oftotal PM2.5 

### emissions in the Atlanta area. The top three nonpoint source classifications for PM 2.5 

### emissions were industrial wood-fired boilers, dust from unpaved roads, and dust from paved roads (see Table 3-5).
Table 3-5. Largest Nonpoint PM25 

### Emissions by Source Classification 

## sec Description 2008PM,.s (tons) 2102008000 Stationmy Fuel Comb /Industrial /Wood /Total: 12,192.03 All Boiler Types 2296000000 Unpaved Roads /All Unpaved Roads /Total: 10,421.06 Fugitives 2294000000 Paved Roads 

### I All Paved Roads /Total: Fugitives 2627.17 3.1.1.3 OnroadMobile Sources 

### U.S. EPA's MOVES20IOa mobile source emissions model was run in inventory mode to generate 2008 on-road mobile source emissions of S02, 

### NO" and PM25• 

### The 2008 omoad mobile source emissions for the Atlanta area are presented in Table 3-6. Table 3-6. Onroad Mobile Source Emissions for 2008 

### (tons, annual) Pollutant Onroad Emissions 

## so, 725.14 NOx 128,954.56 PM25 

### 4,661.88

33 of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMftintenancePlan
The following non-default inputs to the MOVES model were used: registration distribution by age, • vehicle population,
• vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and
• hourly temperature and relative humidity. SO, NOx and PM2.s 

### emissions from onroad mobile sources in 2008 and 2024 were developed by the Atlanta Regional Commission using MOVES20IOa. MOVES was nm 

### separately for two groups of twenty nonattainment counties in Atlanta in inventory mode. The two groups of counties have different 

### JIM program requirements, and they are the Atlanta 13-county area and the Atlanta 7- county area. Average 2008 annual daily meteorological inputs were used. Best available local data were used for MOVES inputs such as vehicle population, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by source types, road type distribution, speed distributions, ramp fractions, hourly VMT fractions and age distribution. Since there is no public road in the nonattainment part ofHeard County, MOVES was not nm 

### for Heard County. MOVES was run for whole county of Putnam, and the emissions in the partial nonattainment area were calculated using human population fraction. Local vehicle population and VMT were used for the Putnam County inputs. Please refer to the document "MOVES-Based Mobile Source Emissions Modeling for the Atlanta Nonattainment Area" provided by the Atlanta Regional Commission in

### Appendix C-7 for more detailed information. 

### 3.1.1.4 NonroadMobile Sources The nonroad sector is comprised ofnonroad engines included in EPA's NONROAD model, such as recreational marine and land-based vehicles, farm, construction and industrial machinery, and lawn and garden equipment. This sector also includes engines not modeled in NONROAD, specifically aircraft, commercial marine vessels, and locomotives. Emissions from aircrafts and locomotives in 2008 were obtained from NEI2008 Version 1.5 (http://www.epa.gov/ttnchiel/net/2008inventoty.html). Emissions fi·om yard locomotives were not included in the NEI2008, and were obtained from Eastern Regional Technical Advisoty Committee (ERTAC) separately. There were no emissions from commercial marine vessels in theAtlanta PM2.s 

### nonattainment area. Table 3-7. Nonroad Mobile Source Emissions for 2008 (tons, annual) Pollutant Nouroad- Aircraft Locomotive Total except air and 

### Nonroad rail 

## so, 474 1,142 59 1675 NOx 24,616 10,189 5794 40,599 

### PM 25 

### 2351 293 183 2827

34 of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMaintenancePlan
3.1.1.5 Summary of2008Emissions InventOJy The total 2008 Atlanta nonattainment area emissions of S02, NO"' and PM 2.5 are presented for each source sector in Table 3-8. The majority of S02 emissions, by fat; are from point sources. The majority of NOx emissions are from point and onroad mobile sources. The majority of PM 25 emissions are from nonpoint and point sources. Table 3-8. Attainment-year (2008) Emissions Inventory (tons, annual) Pollutant
.. Plllnt•.· .. Point··.· Point. ··•·.· N9np()irit (>j\roa£1 Noriroad I'·····Totaii.
•••• TIJtal• .EGU I•'**Non~·** 

# ······.··.·.·····i i.< Mobile 1 Mobile, 

# ---\ ...· •.·.·•·.·. .· 

# '\<
. . < < 

# · ..·< ..· EGU
.. ·.·.···•·. ·.·.....•... · 

### .... 

# so, 413,478 410,496 2,982 10,237 725 1,675 426,115 NOx 80,785 76,177 4,608 21,193 128,955 40,599 271,531 PM25 5,637 4,937 700 35,686 4,662 2,827 48,811

3.1.2 Projected Emissions Inventories As discussed previously, Georgia EPD is providing a demonstration ofmaintenance through the year 2024 (the maintenance year). Emissions projections to suppmt maintenance through 2024 have been prepared for the years 2017 and 2024. In addition, emissions have been calculated by interpolation for the years 2014 and 2020. Emissions for these additional years provide additional reference points for periodic assessment of maintenance of the standard. Maintenance period emissions controls, projection methods, and projected inventories are discussed in the remainder of this subsection. 3.1.2.1 Methods andProjectedInventories Projected emissions inventories are calculated by applying applicable control and growth factors to the 2008 emissions ofindividual sources or source categories. The control and growth factors may apply for some or all of the years 2008 (year following attainment inventmy) through 2024 (out year). The bases used to determine these factors are summarized in Table 3-9.

35 of54

### AtlantaPM 2.5

### NonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenancePlan

Table 

### 3-9. Bases ofControl and 

### Growth Factors for 2017 and 2024 Inventories**.~:::.;z** 

## ',•b 

# , r

, ,·**iJ~~i1l8rN'** 

# ,**~·** 

# .·': ' ? · ..··•·

# ~· ' .···.··.

# "'·.~•.

# ~ 

# {**;~'1 f'{}('~Wf** **[~;;,·;,·p!'[)\",{;'\•''! t?ccc%~~t;ft"a~**  'jj.liSiS. •·· 

# ::'"' 

# ,, j";;. 

# .,.:l'· r,•.i'') ··•···· 

## o''3/ii**!~i,l;'i'1''·** 

## ;. !.·• Point-EGU Implementation of GA Rule (sss) Coal consumption forecasts in 2010 for S02 and NO, controls; VISTAS Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 2012 projection inventmy Point- non-EGU Regulatmy review

- no additional EGAS growth factors by SCC and county controls defined at this time for 2017 and 2024. Nonpoint Regulatory review

- no additional EGAS growth factors by SCC for 2017 controls defined at this time and 2024. Nonpoint- fire No additional controls anticipated No growth anticipated Onroad Mobile MOVES inventory mode 

### (PM25, MOVES inventmy mode 

### (PM 25, NO, NO, S02) for 2024. All known SOz) for 2024. Vehicle population growth Federal controls. from human population projections. Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) growth from Georgia DOT. Nonroad Mobile NM1M2008 NM1M2008 Nonroad Mobile SEMAP (Feehan) control factors SEMAP (Feehan) growth factors by SCC 

### -marine, by 

## sec for 2017 and 2024 for 2017 and 2024 aircraft, and rail

The pollutants whose emissions are projected are SOz, NO, and direct PM2.5• As with the attairnnent inventory, emissions from the following sectors are projected: • Point sources (EGU and non-EGU), • Nonpoint sources (including fire), • Onroad mobile sources, and • Nonroad mobile sources (includingmarine vessels, aircraft, and rail). The projected inventories are presented in the following subsections. The methods used to develop the emissions projections are presented in more detail in Appendix C.

36 of54

### 3.1.2.2 PointSources EGU Point Sources: 

### AtlantaPM 2 ,5 

### NonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenancePlan

EGU point source emissions in 2017 and 2024 were estimated using growth factors and control factors. Growth factors were calculated based on coal consumption for the southeastem region in the Energy Information Administration's AE020I0 repmi. The control factors varied with pollutants. The S02 control factor associated with Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) was assumed to be 95% according to VISTAS 2012 Projection Emissions Inventmy. The NOx control factor associated with Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) was assumed to be 82.5% according to VISTAS 2012 Projection Emissions Inventmy. The 

### PM 25 control factor associated with FGD was assumed to be 50% according to Table 5.4-1 on page 5.4-24 of the EPA document "Stationaty Source Control Techniques Document for Fine Particulate Matter" (EC/R Incorporated, 1998). When FGD or SCR controls were already operated fully or partially at a unit during year 2008, the control factors were only applied to uncontrolled emissions in 2008. These periods were identified using CAMD hourly CEM data for NOx and S02 emissions and heat inputs. Days without control operation were identified as those days on which the ratio ofNOx or S02 emissions to heat input exceeded 0.00004 lbs/mmBtu according to correlation analysis results. In addition, NOx emissions during the period from October I, 2008, to December 31, 2008, fi·om Plant Bowen Unit 3 were projected to futlll'e years using a different method, since the actual NOx control efficiency in this period was approximately 60% according to hourly CEM data analysis. Such NOx emissions were first adjusted to reflect before control emissions and then apply the 82.5% NOx emissions control factor for futlll'e year emissions projection. The S02 control factor due to Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) was assumed to be 95% according to the VISTAS 2012 Projection Emissions Inventory (see Appendices C and C-6). In 2008, Plant McDonough operated two coal-fired EGUs (Units 1 and 2) with a combined generating capacity of 530 

### MW. Due to the requirements specified in Georgia's Rule 391-3-1-.02(2)(sss) for EGU controls, Georgia Power shut down Unit 2 by the fourth quarter of2011 and Unit 1 by the second quarter of 2012. Unit 2 was replaced with two gas-fired combined cycle blocks (Blocks 4 and 5), and Unit 1 was be replaced by one gas-fired, combined cycle block (Block 6). Each block consists of two generating units, with each unit consisting ofa combustion turbine and a duct burner. The combined generation capacity ofthe three blocks (six units) is 840 MW. Two ofthe six combustion turbines are permitted to burn distillate oil (0.0015 %sulfur) up to 1000 hours/year each. NOx emissions from each unit are controlled by an SCR and a !ow-NOx burner. As noted in Subsection 2.3.3, EPA promulgated CSAPR in 20ll, but the rule was stayed later in the year. When the rule was promulgated, Georgia was identified as a covered state and, therefore, would have been required to comply with statewide allocations of S02 and/or 

### NOx emissions fi·om covered EGUs starting in 2012. The future ofthe rule is not known at this time; therefore, the rule's requirements have not been incorporated into the emissions projections presented here. Any further reductions that may ultimately be required by the Cross-State Rule will only strengthen the case for maintenance ofthe NAAQS as documented in this plan. Forecasts ofNOx emissions fi·om McDonough's Blocks 4, 5, and 6 were calculated by assuming that actual rolling 12-month emissions will be 75% of the permitted limits. It was assumed that the duration ofoperation for these gas-fired units will not push 

### NOx emissions beyond 75% oftheir 12- month permit caps. Itwas also assumed that the two affected combustion turbines would burn oil for 500 hours per year each. Growth factors were calculated for McDonough-Atkinson using the same fuel consumption approach that is described above, subject to the constraint that annual emissions cannot rise above the permitted 12-month limits.
37 of54

### AtlantaPM 2.5

### NonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenancePlan Projected EGU point source emissions are presented in Table 3-10. The projections show a dramatic reduction in S02emissions as well as significant reductions in NOx and PM2 . 5 emissions. Emissions levels for 2014 were calculated by linear interpolation between 2008 and 2017. Emissions levels for 2020 were calculated by linear interpolation between 2017 and 2024. 

### Table 3-10. Projected Point Source Emissions (tons) Pollutant 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 (attainment)

. EGU



## so, 410,496 169,056 48,517 49,331 50,414 NOx 76,177 40,517 22,713 23,138 23,702 PM2 .s 4,937 3,759 3,171 3,251 3,358 Non-EGU



## so, 2,982 3,115 3,181 3,270 3,389 NOx 4,608 4,972 5,154 5,397 5,721 PM2.s 700 781 822 868 930 TotalPoint



## so, 413,478 172,170 51,697 52,601 53,803 NOx 80,785 45,489 27,867 28,535 29,423 PM25 5,637 4,541 3,993 4,120 4,288

Non-EGU Point Sources: Projected non-EGU point source emissions for each facility in 2017 aud 2024 can be found in Appendix C-3. The emissions for 2017 and 2024 were estimated using SCC-specific and countyspecific growth factors generated with EPA's Economic GrowthAnalysis System Version 5.0 (EGAS 5.0). Appendix C-2 contains the SCC-specific growth factors for the Atlanta area. The projections show moderate increases in emissions of all three pollutants. No additional future controls can be defined for non-EGU point sources at this time. Emissions levels for 2014 aud 2020 were calculated by interpolation as described above and can be found in Appendix C. Projected total point source emissions (sum ofEGU and non-EGU) are shown in Table 3-10. The projections show dramatic decreases in emissions ofS02 as well as moderate decreases in emissions ofNOx and PM2.s· 

### 3.1.2.3 Nonpoint Sources Nonpoint source emissions, excluding fire, in future years 2017 and 2024 were estimated using SCCand county-specific growth factors generated with EGAS 5.0. Appendix C-2 contains the SCC38 of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintemmce Plan specific growth factors for the Atlanta area. No additional future controls can be defined for these sources at this time. Projections ofnonpoint source emissions are presented in Table 3-11. Emissions from fire in future years 2017 and 2024 were assumed to be the same as 2008 emissions. The projections show a small increase in emissions ofS0 2 as well as moderate increases in emissions ofNOx and 

### PM 25• 

### Table 3-11. Projected Nonpoint SourceEmissions (tons) Pollutant 

### 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024

.. (attainment) Nonpoint (excludinf!fire)



## so, 10,203 10,523 10,683 10,850 ll,073 NOx 20,992 23,330 24,498 25,716 27,337 

### PM 25 34,921 39,287 41,467 43,307 45,755 Fire



## so, 34 34 34 34 34 NOx 201 201 201 201 201 PM 2

_

5 768 765 765 765 765 TotalNonpoint



## so, 10,237 10,557 10,717 10,884 ll,107 NOx 21,193 23,531 24,698 25,916 27,537 

### PM 25 35,686 40,052 42,232 44,072 46,520
The top three nonpoint source classifications for 2024 PM2

_ 5 emissions are industrial wood-fired boilers, dust from unpaved roads, and dust from paved roads (see Table 3-12). Projected PM2.5 emissions from these th1·ee somce classifications make up over 70 percent oftotal projected 

### PM 25 emissions.
Table 3-12. Largest 

### N onpoint PM2

_ 5 Emissions by Source Classification, Year 2024 

## sec Description 2024PM 2.s _· (tons)

. ·"• 2102008000 Stationmy Fuel Comb /Industrial /Wood /Total: 15,972 All BoilerTypes 2296000000 Unpaved Roads /All Unpaved Roads /Total: 13,652 Fugitives 2294000000 Paved Roads 

### I All Paved Roads /Total: Fugitives 3442
39 of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan
3.1.2.4 OnroadMobile Sources EPD ran U.S. EPA's MOVES2010a mobile source emissions model in inventory mode to generate 2024 onroad mobile source emissions of SO, NO, and PM25• Intermediate year emissions were generated by interpolating between 2008 and 2024. The following non-default inputs to the model were used:
• Vehicle age distribution,
• average speed distribution,
• vehicle population,
• vehicle miles traveled (VMT),
• road type distribution,
• ramp fraction, and
• hourly temperature and relative humidity. The vehicle age distribution was based on R.L. Polk & Co. registration data. MOVES 2010 defaults were used for Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicle Class 8B. Person population growth projections for the Atlanta metropolitan area were used to calculate the 2024 vehicle population. The 2024 annual VMT were calculated by Georgia DOT using travel demand model outputs and HPMS counts, as well as speed distribution, road-type distribution, and ramp fraction. Temperature and humidity inputs were assumed to be the same as year 2008. The projected onroad mobile source emissions levels are presented in Table 3-13. Onroad emissions ofall t!u·ee pollutants trend downward significantly during the maintenance period. The trend in S02 is ofless importance since onroad mobile sources emit vety little S02• For a detailed discussion on howthe onroad mobile emission inventorywas developed, seeAppendices C, C-3, and C-4.


### Table 3-13. Pmjected Onroad Mobile Source Emissions (tons) Pollutant 

### 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024.

(tons)· 

### (attainment)

.. 

### sol 725 629 581 533 469 NOx 128,955 93,806 76,258 58,675 35,272 PM25 4662 3529 2963 2397 1642 

### 3.1.2.5 NonroadMobile Sources Projections ofnonroad emissions in 2017 and 2024, excluding air and rail sources, were calculated using NMIM2008 with the same meteorological inputs as for 2008. Defaults in NMIM 2008 were used for other inputs.
40 of54

### AtlantaPM 2

### .sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenancePlan

Growth factors for all aircraft engine and airport-related SCCs were based on landing and take-off operation (LTO) projections available fi·om the Federal Aviation Administration's Terminal Area Forecasts (FAA, 

### 2010). Growth rates for military aircraft were held constant at 

### 2008 levels. No control factors were applied to aircraft emissions. Growth factors for freight rail sector emissions were based on fuel consumption forecasts. For passenger and commuter rail, growth factors were developed from national forecasts ofintercity rail diesel consumption and commuter rail diesel consumption. Control factors were based on U.S. EPA's locomotive engine regulatory impact analysis and associated emission factor guidance. The nonroad mobile source emissions projections are presented in Table 

### 3-14. Total emissions of NOx and 

### PM 25 

### trend downward significantly during the maintenance period while S02 

### emissions slightly increase. For a detailed discussion on how the nonroad mobile emissions projections were developed, seeAppendix C.


### Table3-14. Projected Nonroad Mobile Source Emissions (tons)
Pollutant 2008 

### 2014*

# ~---~**~~~----+--:2~4,-;-; 6>** **J~ 6r.**  PM 25 

### 2351**-7#//~** 

## so, 1142**~ 1-~** **NC8x~---l-----,1~ o,,~118=-u,9w.%'i**  

### PM, 5 

### 293 

## so,_ NOx
Total



## so,
*' 59 5794

183

1675 40 ')QQ**~.** llo 2014 and 2020 , aircraft and 

### 1516 14 ORii



### 21.@_

### emiss~::;y for total



### 41 of

### 54 

### 2017 2020* 2024**~** 

### 3_7_ 14,240 10,252

1687**~** 

### 1288
1401

### ~

# .0
1668 12,557**~Y/~__.1"-'4,,c:..:....:....j974** 

### 347 404

1437 1553 30,835 29,747**1~7** 3 

### 3072 63

1708 ?R ?QR



### Jill_

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan

3.1.3 EmissionsProjections Summary andDemonstration ofMaintenance ofAttainment The consolidated emissions projections for all Atlanta nonattainment area sources are presented in Table 3-15. Emissions of 802 

### and NOx drop significantly from 2008 to 2024. This is a reflection of the implementation of the majority of state and federal controls during the first half of the maintenance period. Overall, emissions of802 

### and NOx 

### are projected to decline by 84.3 percent and 55.6 percent, respectively, overthe course ofthe maintenance period. Emissions of 

### PM 25 

### rise slightly from 2008 through 2017 and then once again from 2017 through 2024. This is a reflection of an increase in nonpoint source emissions that is partially offset by reductions fi·om point sources. The overall rise in 

### PM 25 

### is 11.1 percent ofattainment year emissions. Therefore, further evaluation is needed to judge whether the increase in 

### PM 25 

### emissions, in combination with the decreases in 802 

### and NOxemissions, is likely to provide for maintenance ofthe standard. Table 3-15. ProjectedEmissions- Total ofAll Sectors (tons) Pollutant (tons) 

### 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 % 

### change, (attainment) ·. 

### 2008-2024 SOz 426,115 184,873 64,433 65,572 67,088 84.3 NOX 

### 271,531 196,912 159,659 142,873 120,530 55.6 

### PM 25 

### 48,811 50,482 51,316 52,556 54,205 -11.1
Each ofthe three pollutants is characterized by a different relationship between emissions and air quality. Therefore, simply summing the emissions ofthe pollutants does not provide a meaningful indicator ofthe combined air quality impact ofthese emission changes. A more appropriate indicator is the percentage change in emissions for each emitted pollutant, weighted according to the air quality impact for each. For this pmpose, Georgia EPD examined speciation data available fi·om the EPA Air Explorer Web site for 2007-2009 for the DeKalb County monitor (13-089-0002). The 3-year average ofthis data suggests that ambient 

### PM 25 

### in Atlanta consists of approximately 40.7 percent sulfate; 1.2 percent nitrate; 50.1 percent organic patticulate (which consists of directly-emitted primary organic matter and atmospherically formed secondary organic aerosol); 4.2 percent miscellaneous inorganic patticulate (sometimes labeled "crustal particles"); and 3.7 percent other types ofparticulate matter. Therefore, using a conservative assumption that all of the organic particulate is primary organic matter, direct 

### PM 25 

### species make up 54.3 percent (sum of50.1 and 4.2) ofthe total ambient

### PM 25 . 

### Georgia EPD used a conservative approach that assumes that the full ambient concentration of organic particulate matter plus miscellaneous inorganic patticulate matter will vary in accordance with changes in total nonattainment area emissions ofdirect PM2.5• 

### This analysis thus assumes that the direct 

### PM 25 

### component ofambient PM 2.5 

### will increase by the 11.1 percent projected increase in direct 

### PM 25 

### emissions. This approach was used by U.S. EPA in its evaluation and approval ofthe annual PM2.5 

### redesignation request for the Evansville, Indiana, nonattainment area (see 76 FR29695 and 76 FR 59527). 42 of54

### AtlantaPM 2

### .sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan

h1 the Atlanta analysis, the baseline concentration is conservatively assumed to be 15.0 flg/m3

. Direct 

### PM 25 is estimated to contribute 54.3 percent, or 8.1**~Lg/m ,**  of the 15.0**~Lg/m •**  Georgia EPD's assessment assumes that the projected increase in direct PM2.s emissions will cause a corresponding 11.1 percent increase in ambient concentrations of PM2.5, which would suggest an increase in the ambient concentration ofthe direct PM2.s component by 0.905**~Lg/m .**  However, Georgia EPD believes that this potential increase will be fully offset by a greater decrease in sulfate and nitrate concentrations. The precise decrease in sulfate and nitrate concentrations is a complicated result of emissions reductions not just in Atlanta, but also in many other pa1ts of the Eastern United States. Modeling conducted byEPA for the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) estimated that future Atlanta concentrations with the final CSAPR in place (12.99 f!g/m3) would be 2.01**~Lg/111 3**  below the standard (2014 Remedy Average case*). fu addition, the emissions reductions that have already occmTed have brought the maximum measured Atlanta concentrations to 13.6**~Lg/m 3**  (as shown in Table 2-2). Therefore, the 0.905**~Lg/m 3**  increase in the components associated with direct PM2.5 would not be expected to yield concentrations above the standard. That is, GA EPD believes that maintenance of the annual PM2.5 standard is demonstrated despite the small projected increase in direct PM2

_ 5 emissions. *Air Quality Modeling Final Transp01t Rule Technical Suppmt Document, docket item EPA-HQOAR-2009-0491-4140. 3.1.4 Emissions Decreases An emissions surplus represents the degree ofimprovement (reduction) in 2024 emissions compared to the attainment year (2008) emissions. The surpluses are shown in Table 3-16 for each pollutant. A positive surplus reflects an emissions decrease fi"Om the attainment year to 2024. The negative surplus for PM2

_ 5 reflects a projected increase in emissions. A portion of the NOx surplus will be allotted to the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget as a safety margin (see Section 4). 

### Table 3-16. 

### Emissions Decrease

Pollutant Surplus Emissions* 2008 to 2024 (tons) 

## so, 359,028 NOx ** 151,001 

### PM2.s ** -5394 

## * Surplus = (2008 emissions level)

- (2024 emissions level) **These quantities do not reflect allotment to Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget

43 of54

### AtlantaPM2.s NonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMaintenance Plan

3.1.5 Verification ofContinued Attainment Items 5.c and 5.d ofthe September 4, 1992 EPA guidance memo outline requirements for verification ofcontinued attainment. Verification ofcontinued attainment is accomplished through operation of the ambient PM2.5 

### monitoring network and through periodic updates of the area's emissions inventory. The location and operation ofEPD's FRM monitors in the Atlanta area are described in Section 2.1 ofthis plan. During the maintenance period, EPD will continue to operate federal reference monitors in the Atlanta area per the requirements of40 CFRPart 58. The Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) was promulgated by EPA on June 10, 2002. The CERR was replaced by the Annual Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR) rule on December 17, 2008. The most recent triennial inventmy for Georgia was compiled for 2008. The larger point sources of air pollution will continue to submit data on their emissions on an annual basis as required by the AERR. Emissions Ji'om the rest ofthe point sources, the nonpoint source pmtion, and the onroad and nonroad mobile sources continue to be quantified on a 3-year cycle. The inventory will be updated and maintained on a 3-year cycle. As required by the AERR, the next overall emissions inventory will be compiled for 2011. 

### 3.2 Contingency Provisions Section 175A(d) of the Clean Air Act requires that the maintenance plan include provisions for contingency measures that would promptly be implemented to correct a violation ofthe standard, should this occur, after redesignation of an area as an attainment area. The measures may include rules or other measures that are not yet effective, but EPD agrees to adopt and implement, as expeditiously as practicable, when required by this plan. The minimum requirement for contingency provisions is the implementation ofall measures that were contained in the SIP for the area (i.e., the nonattainment plan) before the redesignation. In 

### addition, EPA guidance (John Calcagni memo dated September 4, 1992) specifies the following petiaining to contingency provisions in the maintenance plan:
• identification of additional measures that would be considered for implementation should a violation occur; • identification oftriggers for the implementation ofadditional contingency measures; and • a schedule and procedure for adoption and implementation ofadditional measures (with time limit). 3.2.1 ContingencyMeasure Triggers Section 175A(d) of the Clean Air Act Amendments requires that the maintenance plan include provisions for contingency measures that would promptly be implemented by the state to correct any violation ofthe annual PM 2.5

### NAAQS after redesignation ofan area as an attainment area. A Jist of potential contingency measures that could be considered for future implementation in such an event should also be included in the maintenance plan. EPD has developed a contingency plan for the Atlanta PM2.5 

### maintenance area. Contingency measures are intended to provide further emission reductions in the event that violations of the NAAQS occur after redesignation to attainment. Consistent with this plan, EPD agrees to adopt and
44 of54

### AtlantaPM 2

### .sNonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestcmdMaintenancePlan implement, as expeditiously as practicable, the necessary corrective actions in the event that violations of the standard occur within the maintenance area after redesignation to attainment. Contingency measures as described belowwould be adopted and implemented within 24 months ofa contingency trigger unless EPD has demonstrated that technical or economic feasibility warranted a period longer than 24 months. EPD will use actual ambient monitoring and emissions inventmy data as the indicators to determine whether contingency measures would be implemented. In accordance with 40 CFR Part 58, ambient monitoring data that indicates a violation of the annual 

### PM 25 NAAQS will begin the process to implement these contingency measures according to the protocols identified below. The contingency plan provides for corrective responses should the NAAQS be violated or ifemissions in the Atlanta maintenance area increase significantly above current levels. Tier I. A Tier 1 trigger is activated when any one of the following conditions occurs:
• the previous calendar year's aunual average 

### PM 25 concentration exceeds the standard by 1.5 ug/m3 or more; • the annual average 

### PM 25 concentration in each of the previous two consecutive calendar years exceeds the standard by 0.5 ug/m3 or more; • the total maintenance area S02 emissions in the most recent NEI exceeds the corresponding attainment-year inventmy by more than 10.0 percent; and • the total maintenance area 

### PM25 emissions in the most recent NEI exceeds the corresponding attainment-year inventory bymore than 30.0 percent. EPD will conduct an evaluation as expeditiously as practicable to determine ifthe trend is likely to continue. Ifit is determined that additional emission reductions are necessary, EPD will adopt and implement anyrequired measures in accordance with Section 3.2.2. The 

### PM 25 trigger concentrations described above apply to the PM2.5 federal reference monitors in the maintenance area. EPD will evaluate a Tier I condition, ifit occurs, as expeditiously as practicable to determine the cause(s) ofthe ambient 

### PM 25 or emissions inventory increase and to determine ifa Tier II condition (see below) is likely to occur. Tier II. A Tier II trigger is activated when any violation ofthe annual 

### PM 25 NAAQS at any FRM ambient monitoring station in the Atlanta maintenance area is recorded, based on quality-assured monitoring data. In this event, EPD will conduct a comprehensive study to determine the cause(s) of the ambient 

### PM 25 increase and to determine if the increase is likely to continue and will implement any required measures as expeditiously as practicable, taking into consideration the ease ofimplementation and the technical and economic feasibility ofselected measures. 3.2.2 Schedule and ProcedureforAdoption and ImplementationofContingencyMeasures EPD will, in the event of I) 

### a Tier II trigger condition or 2) a Tier I condition in which EPD has determined that a Tier II condition is likely to occur, conduct a comprehensive study to determine whether or not contingency measures are required for the maintenance ofthe PM2.5 standard. The study will attempt to determine whether the trigger condition is due to local emissions, emissions from elsewhere, or a combination ofthe previous. The comprehensive analysis, based on qualityassured ambient data, will examine:

45 of54

### Atlanta

### PM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan

• the severity ofthe trigger condition; • the meteorological conditions (in the case of an ambient concentration trigger) associated with the trigger condition; • potential contributing local emissions sources; • potential contributing emissions resulting fi-om regional or long-range transpmt; • the geographic applicability ofpossible contingency measures; • emission trends, including implementation timelines of potential control measures; • timelines of"on-the-books" (adopted) measures that are not yet fully implemented [e.g., GeorgiaRule (sss) and Rule (uuu) S02 controls]; and • current and recently-identified control technologies. The comprehensive study will be completed and submitted to EPA as expeditiously as practical but no later than nine months after the Tier I or Tier IItrigger is activated. IfEPD determines, through the comprehensive study, that contingency measures are required for maintenance ofthe standard, the appropriate corrective measures will be adopted and implemented within I 8 to 24 months after the Tier I or II trigger occurs. These control measures which will continue to produce substantial reductions in fine pmticulate matter and its precursors in excess of what is relied upon in this maintenance plan, include the Georgia Multipollutant Rule, which is described in Section 

### 2.3.2.1 of this maintenance plan, as well as diesel engine retrofit, replacement, and repowering programs and truck stop electrification programs which are currently being implemented by Georgia EPD. Ifthe study determines that additional measures are required, rules will be adopted no later thm1 18 months following the date on which the Tier I or Tier IItrigger is activated. Selection ofmeasures will take into consideration the ease ofimplementation as well as technical and economic feasibility. If it is determined that adoption and implementation of a rule will take longer than 24 months following the trigger date, EPD will submit for EPA's approval a revised schedule for the development and adoption ofcontingency measures. 3.2.3 ContingencyMeasures Ifthe analysis required above determines emissions from the local area are contributing to the trigger condition, EPD will evaluate those measures as specified in Section 

### I72 of the CAA for control options as well as other available measures. If a new measure/control is already promulgated and scheduled to be implemented at the federal or state level, a11d that measure/control is determined to be adequate, additional local controls may be unnecessmy. Under Section 175A(d), the minimum requirement for contingency measures is the implementation ofall measures that were contained in the SIP before the redesignation. Currently, all such measures are in effect for the Atlanta NAA; however, an evaluation of those measures, such as RACT, can be performed to determine those measures are adequate or up-to-date. h1 addition to those identified in Section 

### 3.2.2, contingency measure(s) will be selected from the following types ofmeasures or fi·om any other measure deemed appropriate m1d effective atthe time the selection is made:
• ReasonablyAvailable Control Measures (RACM) for sources ofS02 and PM 25 ; • ReasonablyAvailable Control Technology (RACT) for point sources ofS02 and PM2

### .s; • Expansion ofRACM/RACTto area(s) oftranspmtwithin the State; • Mobile source measures; and • Additional S02 and/or PM2

### .s reduction measures yet to be identified.
46 of54

### AtlantaPM 2

### .sNonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenancePlan
Any resulting contingency measure(s) will be based upon cost effectiveness, emission reduction potential, economic and social considerations, ease and timing of implementation, and other appropriate factors. Adoption ofadditional control measures is subject to necessary administrative and legal processes. EPD will solicit input fi'om interested and affected persons (stakeholders) in the area prior to selecting appropriate contingency measures. No contingency measure will be implemented without providing the opportunity for full public participation. This process will include issuance ofnotices, an opportunity for public hearing, and othermeasures required by Georgia law.

47 

### of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenance Plan 

## 4.0 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget The transpmtation conformity rule (40CFR93.100- 40CFR93.129) ensures that projects and plans funded by the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal TransitAdministration conform to air quality SIPs and maintenance plans. In the case ofa NAAQS maintenance plan, the rule requires a motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB) to be established for the last year ofthe plan's maintenance period. The rule, at 40CFR93.124(a), describes a motor vehicle emissions budget as "
...the implementation plan's estimate offuture [motor vehicle] emissions." Such budgets establish caps on motor vehicle emissions; projected emissions from transpottation plans and programs must be equal to or less than these caps for a positive conformity determination to be made. Transpmtation conformity determinations are required for non-exempt federally-funded highway and transit projects before they are funded and approved and for transpmtation plans and transpmtation improvement programs. 

### 4.1 Pollutants For the Atlanta area, MVEBs will be set for direct PM2.5 

### and NOx only. 40 CFR Patts 93.119(f)(7) through (10) identify the 

### PM 25 

### pollutants which must be analyzed for transpmtation conformity purposes. These patts ofthe rule are listed below: 

### §119(/)(7)- PM 1 .5 in PM1.s areas; 

### §119(/)(8)

- Reentrainedroaddust in PM. 5 areas only 

## if the EPA [EnvironmentalProtectionAgency} RegionalAdministrator or the director ofthe State air agency has made afinding that emissions from reentrained road dust within the area are a significant contributor to the PM. 5 nonattainment problem andhas so notifiedthe MPO andDOT[Department of1i·ansportationj; 

### §119(/)(9)- NOx [nitrogen oxides} in PM1.s areas, unless the EPA RegionalAdministrator and the director ofthe State air agency have made afinding that emissions of NO,from within the area are not a significant contributor to the P M1

_ 5 nonattainmentproblem and has so notified the MPO and DOT; and 

### §119(/)(10)- VOC, S01 and/or ammonia in PM 1 .5 areas 

## ifthe EPA RegionalAdministrator or the director of the State air agency has made a finding that any of suchprecursor emissionsjrmn within the area are a significant contributor to the PM1.5 nonattainmentproblem and has so notified the MPO andDOT. 

### Primary, or direct, 

### PM 25 

### emissions must be considered for all transportation conformity regional emissions analyses. For the Atlanta area, NOx must also be considered since EPA has not approved Georgia EPD's finding that NOx is not a significant contributor to the 

### PM 25 

### nonattainment problem in the Atlanta area. None of the other pollutants identified (reentrained road dust, VOC, and ammonia) above have been detetmined by EPA or Georgia EPD to be significant contributors to PM nonattainment in the Atlanta area. 

### S02 

### from coal combustion is significant, but levels of 

### S02 

### emissions from mobile sources are very low and, therefore, not significant for transportation confonnity purposes. 48 of54

### 4.2 Methodology 

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan

In preparation ofthis Atlanta area PM 25 

### Maintenance Plan, EPD worked closely with the Georgia Depattment ofTransportation (GDOT) and the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) to develop the estimates ofmobile source emissions for the Atlanta nonattainment area. ARC is the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the Atlanta area. Mobile source inventories for 2024 were developed using the latest available planning assumptions, the most recent travel demand model, EPA's latest motor vehicle emission factor model, and vehicle population and age distributions developed from registration data obtained fi·om R.L. Polk & 

### Company. The methodology used to calculate the highway mobile source emissions on which the 2024 MVEBs are based is discussed below. Emissions fi·om motor vehicles were estimated as a sum ofproducts ofvehicle activity measures and vehicle emissions factors. Vehicle activity measures (e.g. vehicle miles traveled, or VMT) are determined fi·om a county-specific travel demand model. Vehicle emissions factors are determined from a motor vehicle emissions model. See Appendices C-7 for more details on the development of the travel demand model and the detennination ofemissions factors. The MOVES20IOa motor vehicle emission model was used to calculate 2024 emission factors with all currently-known 2024 mobile source control rules in place. The MOVES model was run in Inventmy Mode. The emission factors reflect all federal controls, e.g., the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program including Tier I and (beginning with 2006 models) Tier 2 tailpipe standards; and the National Low Emission Vehicle program. MOVES201 Oa produces three sets ofemission factors perrun:
• rate per distance; o rate per vehicle; and • rate perprofile. Ofthese three types ofemission factors, the first is multiplied by VMT, and the second two factors are multiplied by vehicle population. Note that rate-per-profile emissions (i.e., vapor venting) are not applicable to PM2

_ 5 

### modeling. The ARC travel demand model is developed and maintained by GDOT. Inputs to the model are socioeconomic data and the highway network that consists of roadway segments (links) and intersections (nodes). Outputs include vehicle activity, number oftrips, vehicle population, and other data. The use ofa county-specific travel demand model for transportation conformity calculations is consistent with the transpottation conformity rule at 40CFR93.122(b) and (d), which requires a network-based travel model emissions estimation methodology if the use of such procedures has been the previous practice of the MPO. The use of such a methodology has been the previous practice ofARC. Section 93.105(b) of the Transportation Conformity Rule and Sections 106(g) and 106(h) of Georgia's transpottation conformity SIP require interagency consultation for SIP development. Accordingly, a detailed listing of the procedures and planning assumptions used for the regional emissions analysis supporting development ofthe MVEB was presented to the Atlanta interagency consultation committee for review and was approved on August 26, 2011. The assumptions used to 49 of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea RedesignationRequest andMaintenance Pkm develop Atlanta's conforming Long Range Transpmtation Plan and Transpmiation Improvement Program were also used to develop the network and emissions for this maintenance plan MVEB.
4.3 MotorVehicleEmissionsBudgets audSafetyMargins The projected 2024 on-road motor vehicle emissions for direct 

### PM 25 

### and NOx are 1642 and 35,272 tons, respectively. A budget for S02 

### is not required. On-road emissions ofS02 

### are considered to be "de-minimis" 

### (70FR 24283); therefore, no budget is necessary. The on-road mobile emissions, emissions budgets, and safety margins are presented in Table 4-1. A safety mm·gin is necessmy to accommodate the variabilities or worst-case scenarios that can occur due to future planning assumptions. The worst-case daily motor vehicle emiSSIOns projection for 

### PM 25 

### is 38.9 percent above the projected 2024 on-road emissions. In a worst-case scenario, the needed annual safety margin for the MVEB would be 639.0 tons resulting in an overall MVEB of2,281.2 tons per year. The worst-case daily motor vehicle emissions projection for NOx is 26.0 percent above the projected 2024 on-road emissions. In a worst-case scenario, the needed annual safety margin for the MVEB would be 9,157.7 tons resulting in an overall MVEB of44,429 tons per year.
Table 4-1. 2024 MotorVehicle Emissions, Emissions Budgets, and Safety Margins

.. 

### Pollutant. Projected 2024 Safety Margin Safety Margin MVEB with Safety On-Road Allotted toMVEB Allotted to Margin (tons) Emissions 

### (%) MVEB(tons) (tons) 

### PM 25 

### 1642 39 639 2281 NOx 35,272 26 9158 44,429

50 of54

## 5.0 Conclusion AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMaintenancePlan

Section 107(d) of the CAA states that an area can be redesignated to attainment if the following conditions are met: I. The EPA has detennined that theNAAQS has been attained. 2. The applicable implementation plan has been fully approved by EPA under Section IIO(k). 3. The EPA has determined that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions. 4. The state has met all applicable requirements for the area under Section II0 and Patt D. 5. The EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan, including a contingency plan, for the area as required by CAA Section 175A.


### Table 

### 5-1. Summary ofProjected S02 

### Emissions- Total ofAll Sectors (tons)
2008 

### 2014 2017 2020 2024 Source 

### attainment (tons) (tons) (tons) (tous) (tons)

. 

### Point

- total 413,478 172,170 51,697 52,601 53,803 Area- total 10,237 10,557 10,717 10,884 11,107 Non-road

- total 1,675 1,516 1,437 1,553 1,708 Onroad 725 629 581 533 469 Total 426,115 184,873 64,433 65,572 67,088

51 of54

### AtlantaPM2.sNonattainmentArea Redesignation Request andMaintenance Plan

Table 

### 5-2, Summary ofProjected

### NOx Emissions- Total ofAll Sectors (tons)

.. 

### 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 

### Source attainment .(tons) (tons) (tons) (tons) (tons)

. 

### Point

- total 80,785 45,489 27,867 28,535 29,423 

### Nonpoint- total 21,193 23,531 24,698 25,916 27,537 

### Non-mad -total 40,599 34,086 30,835 29,747 28,298 

### Onmad 128,955 93,806 76,258 58,675 35,272 

### Onroad Safety Margin 9,158 

### Total 271,531 196,912 159,659 142,873 129,688



### Table 

### 5-3. Summary ofProjectedPM2.5 

### Emissions- Total ofAll Sectors (tons) 

### 2008 2014 2017 2020 2024 

### Source attainment (tons) (tons) (tons) (tons) (tons)

. 

### Point

- total 5,637 4,541 3,993 4,120 4,288 

### Nonpoint- total 35,686 40,052 42,232 44,072 46,520 

### Non-road -total 2,827 2,360 2,127 1,967 1,755 

### Onroad 4,662 3,530 2,963 2,397 1,642 

### Onroad Safety Margin 639 

### Total 48,811 50,482 51,316 52,556 54,844

52 of54

### Atlanta

### PM2.sNonattainmentArea RedesignationRequestandMaintenance Plan
The supporting documentation to show that the above conditions have been met for the Atlanta area is contained in this document. Based on the 2008-2010 monitored design value for the Atlanta nonattainment area, EPA has published in the Federal Register its final rule that the nonattainment area has attained the 1997 annual average PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The maintenance demonstration in this document shows that, based on comparison of projected emissions to attainment year emissions, emissions are expected to stay at or below levels commensurate with attaining air quality through the year 2024 as illustrated by Tables 5-1, 5-2 and 5-3 above. Analysis was presented to demonstrate that the standard will be maintained despite a small, projected increase in direct PM 2.5 emissions. This document also contains provisions for contingency measures should emissions levels or ambient concentrations rise unexpectedly. EPA's concurrence that the improvement in the Atlanta area's air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions and EPA's approval ofthis document will satisfY Items 3 and 5 above. Therefore, Georgia EPD requests that tbeAtlanta area be redesignated fi·om nonattainment to attainment with respect to the 1997 annual NAAQS for fine pmticulate matter. In addition, 2024 MVEBs have been presented for onroad mobile emissions ofdirect PM2.s and NOx. These emissions budgets are required by EPA's transportation conformity rule as tools for ensuring conformance of highway and transit plans with air quality SIPs and maintenance plans.

53 of54

## 6.0 References Atlanta

### PM2.s NonattainmentArea Redesignation RequestandMaintenance Plan

State ofGeorgia, Rules forAir Quality Control, Chapter 391-3-1, Effective September 13, 2011. US Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2010,April 2010. USEPA, Air Quality Modeling Final [Cross-state Air Pollution] Rule Technical Support Document, June 201 I, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4140. USEPA, "Approval, and Promulgation ofAir Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana; Redesignation ofthe Evansville Area to Attainment ofthe Fine Particulate Matter Standard'; proposed mle, 76 FR 29695. USEPA, "Clean DataPolicy for the Fine Patticle NationalAmbientAir Quality Standards," Memorandum fi·om Stephen Page, December 14, 2004. USEPA, "Determination ofAttaining Data for the 1997 Annual Fine Patticulate Standard; Atlanta, Georgia, Final Rule"; 76 FR76620. USEPA, "Federal Implementation Plans: Interstate Transport ofFine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction ofSIPApprovals" [a.k.a. "Cross-StateAirPollution Rule"]; finalmle, 76 FR48208. USEPA, National Emissions Inventmy: Inventory Years 2005, and 2008. USEPA, "Procedures for Processing Requests to RedesignateAreas to Attainment," Memorandum fi·om John Calcagni, September 14, 1992.

54 of54