# + 2

(,1 1/,1(
Citation: 65 Fed. Reg. 6091 2000 Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Tue Dec 8 18:17:19 2009 -- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License -- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 26/Tuesday, February 8, 2000/Proposed Rules

and which could havebeen avoided by abandonment ofthe lease, or by commencement ofdevelopment operations, orby obtaining production. Section 1.612-3(c)(2) ofthe final regulations provides that since a delay rental is in the nature ofrent, it is ordinary income to the payee and not subject to depletion. The payor may at his election deduct the delay rental as an expense, or charge itto depletable capital account under section 266.

Section 263A was enacted subsequent to the issuance of § 1.612-3(c) ofthe final regulations. The uniform capitalization rules of section 263A generally require the capitalization ofall direct costs and certain indirect costs properly allocable to property produced by the taxpayer. Capitalization may be required even though production (development) has not yetbegun. §1.263A-2(a)(3)(ii). In some situations, a delayrental maybe required to be capitalized under section 263A. Accordingly, the proposed regulation clarifies that subsequent to the enactment of section 263A, the payor of
a delayrental may elect to expense currently the delayrental or charge it to depletable capital account under section 266 to the extent thatthe delay rental is not required tobe capitalized under section 263A and the regulations thereunder. Special Analyses

It hasbeen determined that this notice ofproposed rulemaking is not a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866. Therefore, a regulatory assessment is not required. It has alsobeen determined that section 553(b) ofthe Administrative Procedure Act (5U.S.C. chapter 5)does not apply to these regulations, and because the regulations do not impose acollection ofinformation on small entities, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required. Pursuant to section 7805(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, this notice ofproposed rulemaking will be submittedto the ChiefCounsel for Advocacy ofthe Small Business Administration for comment onits impact on smallbusiness. Comments andPublic Hearing

Before these proposed regulations are adopted as final regulations, consideration will be given to any written comments thatare submitted timely (a signed original and eight copies) to the IRS. The IRS and Treasury request comments on the clarity ofthe proposed regulations and theymay be made easier tounderstand. All comments will be made available for public inspection and copying. A public hearing has been scheduled for May 26, 2000, at 10 a.m. in room 2615, Internal Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC. Because of access restrictions, visitors will not be admitted beyond the Internal Revenue Building lobby more than 15 minutes before the hearing starts.

The rules of26 CFR 601.601(a)(3) apply to the hearing.

Persons that wish to present oral comments atthe hearing must submit written comments (a signed original and eight (8) copies) byMay 8, 2000. The outline oftopics to be discussed at the hearing must be received by May 5, 2000.

A period of10 minutes will be allotted for each person for making comments.

An agenda showing the scheduling of the speakers will be prepared after the deadline for receiving outlines has passed. Copies ofthe agenda will be available free ofcharge at thehearing. Drafting Information

The principal author ofthis proposed regulation isBrenda M. Stewart ofthe Office ofAssistant ChiefCounsel (Passthroughs and Special Industries), Internal Revenue Service. However, otherpersonnel from the IRS and Treasury Department participated in its development. List ofSubjects in 26 CFRPart1

Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Proposed Amendments tothe Regulations

Accordingly, 26 CFR part 1is proposed to be amended asfollows: PART 1-INCOME TAX

Paragraph1. The authority citation for part 1continues toread in part as follows:

Authority: 26U.S.C. 7805 * * * Par.2. In § 1.612-3, the second sentence ofparagraph (c)(2) is removed andtwo sentences are added in itsplace to read as follows: §1.612-3 Depletion;treatment of bonus and advanced royalty.

• * * * *

(c) * * * (2) * * *To the extent the delay rental isnot required tobe capitalized under section 263A and theregulations thereunder, thepayor may athis election deduct such amount or under section 266 and the regulations thereunder, charge it to depletable capital account. The second sentence of this paragraph (c)(2) applies to delay rentals paid with respectto leasing transactions entered into on or after the date these regulations are published as final regulations in the FederalRegister.

* * * * * RobertE.Wenzel, DeputyCommissioner ofInternal Revenue. [FR Doc. 00-2730 Filed2-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [CA-237-0221; FRL-6534-5] Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; CaliforniaSouth Coast AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA isproposing to approve a state implementation plan (SIP) revisionby the State ofCalifornia to provide for attainment ofthe ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) in the Los Angeles-South Coast AirBasin Area (South Coast). EPA isproposing to approve the SIP revision underprovisions ofthe Clean Air Act (CAA)regarding EPA action on SIP submittals, SIPs for national primary and secondary ambient air quality standards, andplan requirements for nonattainment areas. DATES: Comments must be received on orbefore March 9, 2000. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Dave Jesson (AIR-2), EPARegion IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105-3901, or jesson.david@epa.gov. The rulemaking docket for this notice is available for public inspection duringnormal business hours at EPA'sRegion IX office. A reasonable fee may be charged for copying parts ofthe docket.

Copies ofthe SIP materials are also available for inspection at the following locations: California Air Resources Board, 2020 L

Street, Sacramento, California South Coast Air Quality Management

District, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California The SIP materials are also electronically available at: http:// www.aqmd.gov/aqmp/ FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: DaveJesson at (415) 744-1288. 

### 6091

HeinOnline -- 65 Fed. Reg. 6091 2000Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 26/Tuesday, February 8, 2000/Proposed Rules

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This section provides background information on the South Coast ozone plan, applicable Clean Air Act requirements, and EPA's proposed action on the plan. Table ofContents I.Background

A. What is the ozone problem inthe South

Coast? B. What Clean Air Act requirements apply

to this plan? C. What action have we taken on previous

South Coast ozone plans? 1.Final approval ofthe 1994 ozone SIP 2. Proposed partial approval and partial

disapproval ofthe 1997 ozone revision 3. Final approval ofa 1999 State update to

the South Coast ozone SIP reflecting conclusion to the Public Consultative Process (PCP) and the implementation status ofCARB's control measures. D. What are the changes in thenew plan? 1.Control measure revisions 2. Technical revisions E. What further revisions are planned in

the future? II. Review of the Revised Ozone Plan

A. Didthe SCAQMD andCARB meet the

CAA procedural requirements? B. Do therevised baseline and projected

emissions inventories meetCAA requirements? C. Is the modeled attainment

demonstration consistent with modeling guidelines? D. Do the control measures meet CAA requirements? 1.What are the applicable CAA requirements? 2. How does therevised ozone plan address these requirements? a. Control measures already adopted b. Short- and intermediate-term control
measure commitments c. Long-term control measure commitments

3. Does the revised ozone plan meetthe

CAA requirements for control measures?
a. Short- and intermediate-termcontrol measure commitments b. Long-term control measure commitments E. Does theplan showreasonable further progress? 1.What are the applicable CAA

requirements? 2. How does therevised ozone plan

address these requirements? 3. Does the revised ozone plan meetthe

CAA requirements? F. Does theplan provide for attainment?

1.What are the applicable CAA

requirements? 2. How does therevised ozone plan

address these requirements? 3. Does the revised ozone plan meetthe

CAA requirements? G. Are the emissions budgets approvable?

1.Motor vehicle emissions budgets 2. General conformity emissions budgets H. What are the implications of ourproposed plan approval? III. Administrative Requirements A. Executive Order 12866 B. Executive Order 13045 C. Executive Order 13084 D. Executive Order 13132 E. Regulatory Flexibility Act F. Unfunded Mandates G. NationalTechnology Transfer and Advancement Act I. Background A. What is theozoneproblemin the South Coast?

In 1999 the South Coast had the largest number ofozone violations in the country, and trailed onlythe Houston area in terms ofthe peak ozone concentration.1 The South Coast in 1999 recorded 43 days with 1-hour levels at or above the 0.12parts per million (ppm)NAAQS for ozone. In 1998, the South Coast had the worst ozone levels in the nation, experiencing 12 days with Stage I smog alerts, when 1-hour concentrations reach 0.20 ppm. 2

Ozone causes serious health problems, particularly in children, by damaging lung tissue and sensitizing the lungs to other irritants. Even at very low levels, ozone can cause acute respiratory problems; aggravate asthma; cause temporary decreases in lung capacity of 15 to 20 percent in healthy adults, cause inflammation oflung tissue; lead to hospital admissions and emergency room visits; andimpair the body's immune system defenses, making people more susceptible to respiratory illnesses, including bronchitis and pneumonia. B. What CleanAirActRequirements Apply to thisPlan?

The CAAwas substantially amended in 1990 to establish new planning requirements and attainment deadlines for the NAAQS. Under CAA section 107(d)(1)(C) ofthe Act, areas designated nonattainment prior to enactment ofthe 1990 amendments, including the South

1.The 1999 airquality information is preliminary data from EPA's Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). For a description ofthe boundaries ofthe Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin, see 40 CFR 81.305. The nonattainment area includes all of Orange County and the more populated portions of Los Angeles, San Bernardino, and Riverside Counties.

2.In 1998, the areas withthe highest peak 1-hour

ozone concentrations were: South Coast .244 ppm, Houston .230 ppm, Southeast Desert (the area immediately to the east ofthe South Coast) .202 ppm, San Joaquin Valley .194 ppm, Ventura County .174 ppm, SanDiego County .164 ppm.An area exceeds the 1-hour ozone standard each time an ambient air qualitymonitor records a 1-hour average concentration above 0.124 ppm. Anarea is violating the standard if, overa consecutive 3-year period, more than 3 exceedances are expected to occur at any one monitor. Ground-level ozone is formed when emissions ofnitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs)react in the presence ofsunlight. NOx and VOCs are referred to as precursors ofozone. California air quality agencies generally use the term "reactive organic gas" (ROG)instead ofVOC. Coast, were designated nonattainment by operation oflaw.

Under CAA section 181(a), each
ozone area designated nonattainment under section 107(d)was also classified by operation oflaw as either marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme, based on air quality monitoring data. An ozone area with a design value at or above 0.280 ppm was classified as extreme. The South Coast was the only area so classified. Section 181(a) sets attainment deadlines for each class of
area. The attainment date for an extreme area is as expeditiously as practicable but no later thanNovember 15, 2010 (20 years after enactment ofthe CAA Amendments).

CAA section 172 contains general requirements applicable to SIPs for nonattainment areas. Section 182 sets out additional air quality planning requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. The most fundamental ofthese nonattainment area provisions applicable to the South Coast isthe requirement thatthe State submitby November 15, 1994, a SIP demonstrating howthe area would attain the ozone NAAQS by the CAA deadline andhow the area would achieve reductions of precursor emissions of 15 percent for the first 6 years and 9 percent for each 3-year period until attainment (rate-ofprogress or ROP). This demonstration mustbe based upon enforceable measures to expeditiously achieve emission reductions leadingto emissions at or below the level predicted to result in attainment throughout the nonattainment area.

We have issued a "General Preamble" describing our preliminary views on howwe intend to act on SIPs submitted underTitle Iofthe Act. See generally 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992). You should refer to the General Preamble for a more detailed discussion ofour interpretations ofTitle Irequirements. In thisproposed rulemaking action, we apply these policies to the South Coast ozone SIP submittal, taking into consideration the specific factual issues presented. C. WhatActionHavewe Taken on PreviousSouth CoastOzonePlans? 1.Final approval ofthe 1994 Ozone SIP

SCAQMD adopted an ozone plan on September 9, 1994, as part ofthe 1994 South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). The California Air Resources Board (CARB) supplemented the SCAQMD plan with State measures and submitted itas a proposed revision to the California SIP onNovember 15, 1994. OnJuly 10, 1996, CARB submitted 

### 6092

HeinOnline -- 65 Fed. Reg. 6092 2000Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 26/Tuesday, February 8, 2000/Proposed Rules

an extensive revision to the South Coast control measure adoption schedule to adjust for slippage in theplan's initial implementation. OnJanuary 8, 1997 (62 FR 1150), we finalized approval ofthe South Coast ozone plan, including the ozone portions ofthe 1994 South Coast AQMP, as amended in 1996, and the State measures ("1994 ozone SIP"). 3 The plan also contained "Federal measures," which the State wished us to adopt andimplement in order to reduce emissions from mobile sources. 4 2.Proposed Partial Approval andPartial Disapproval ofthe 1997 Ozone Revision

SCAQMD adopted a completely revised plan on November 15, 1996, and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted therevision on February 5, 1997. The 1997 revision was not federally required for ozone, but was adopted by SCAQMD to address, in a comprehensive and consistent fashion, federal and state requirements for particulate matter, carbon monoxide, andnitrogen dioxide (N02),and state requirements for an ozone plan update.

On January 12, 1999 (64 FR 1770), we proposed to findthat therevised plan met the CAA section 110(a)(1) procedural requirements for adoption following public notice and hearings. We also proposed to approve the baseline and projected emissions inventory updates under CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1).

Because CAA section 110(1) does not allow us to approve a SIP revision that interferes with any applicable CAA requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress or any other requirement ofthe Act, we proposed to disapprove the 1997 ozone plan as not meeting: (1)the control measure requirements ofCAA sections 172(c)(6), and 182(e)(5); (2)the attainment demonstration requirements ofCAA section 182(c)(2)(A); and (3)the quantitative milestones and reasonable further progress requirements ofCAA section 182(c)(2)(A).

3We approved some ofthe State and SCAQMID
measures in the plan earlier. See particularly 60 FR 43379 (August 21, 1995).

4In response to this "assignment," we established
a Public Consultative Process to identify the best options for achieving further emission reductions from mobile source controls, at least to the extent they are needed for attainment ofthe ozone NAAQS in the South Coast. In connection withthe establishment ofthis process, bothEPA and CARB made commitments regarding appropriate future emission reductions. Please see EPA's final approval ofthe 1994 ozone SIP for a discussion of the "Federal measures" and our rationale, at that time, for establishing the Public Consultative Process (62 FR 1152-5, 1184-6). See also section I.C.3 below.

5We approved the CO and N02 portions ofthe submittal on April 21, 1998 (63 FR 19661) and July 24, 1998 (63 FR 39747), respectively. Our proposed disapproval ofthese provisions was based on our findings that: (1) the control measures in the 1997 ozone plan were an impermissible relaxation ofthe 1994 ozone SIP, inasmuch asthe plan relaxed, abandoned, or postponed approximately 30 short-term SCAQMD measures, and did not show that this revision meets the expeditious attainment test; (2)the 1997 ozone plan was inconsistent with the intent ofCAA section 182(e)(5), in thatit increased, rather than reduced, the proportion of needed SCAQMD reductions that are assigned to conceptual, new-technology measures; (3)theplan relied on unlawful assignments to the Federal Government to achieve a portion ofthe reductions needed for attainment; and (4) the plan relied on commitments to adoptby the end of 1998 23 measures, ofwhich SCAQMD had adopted less than 10, and we may not approve a plan that is not being implemented. Since ourproposed action in this document is an action onboth the 1997 ozone plan andthe 1999 Amendment to it, we are withdrawing the January 12, 1999 proposed partial approval and partial disapproval ofthe 1997 ozone plan. Therefore, ifyou submitted comments on ourJanuary 12, 1999 proposal and believe thatthose comments arerelevant to ourproposed action onthe 1999 ozone plan, you will need toresubmit your comments within the public comment period for today's proposed action. 3.Final Approval ofa 1999 State Update tothe South Coast Ozone SIP OnJuly 23, 1999 (64 FR 39923), we approved an update to the South Coast 1994 ozone SIP, reporting on implementation ofCARB's control measures inthe 1994 SIP and the contribution from Federal mobile source controls undertaken as part ofthe Public Consultative Process. We also updated our own commitment and approved a new CARB commitment to adoptby December 31, 2001, control measures needed to achieve any additional reductions which are determined to be appropriate for CARB. Please consult this final approval document and our proposed approval (64 FR 30276, June 7, 1999) for more details onthe update, the "Federal measures," the Public Consultative Process onnational mobile
source measures, and our associated consent decree in Coalition forClean Air,etal.vs. SCAQMD, CARB, and USEPA, No. CV 97-6916 HLH (C.D. CA.). D. Whatarethe Changesin theNew Plan?

SCAQMD adopted an amendment to the 1997 plan onDecember 10, 1999, to update the District's control measures and to address the deficiencies that formed thebasis for our proposed disapproval. The 1999 amendment adds new SCAQMD control measures, revises existing SCAQMD measures, and amends the reasonable further progress, attainment demonstration, and stationary source emissions budget portions ofthe 1997 plan. 6The 1999 amendment does not change the emission inventories, modeling, nonSCAQMD control measures, and the
non-ozone portions ofthe 1997 plan.In this proposed rulemaking, we refer to the 1997 plan as amended in 1999 as "the revised ozone plan." Ifwe approve this revised ozone plan, it will replace the 1994 ozone SIP except for that portion ofthe SIP that consists of State control measures and EPA's commitment. 1.Control Measure Revisions

The 1999 amendment adds commitments to adopt 8 short-term stationary source control measures, 4 of which are new control measures and 4 ofwhich implement portions ofthe 1997 plan's long-term control measures. The revised ozone plannow includes 26 short- and intermediate-term control
measures and 4 long-term measures. Along with 17 regulations adopted after the 1994 ozone SIP was submitted, these control measure commitments completely replace all SCAQMD control
measure commitments in the SIP and greatly reduce the amount ofthe attainment demonstration dependent upon long-term conceptual measures. SCAQMD long-term VOC control
measures inthe 1994 ozone SIP were assigned credit for a reduction of180 tpd; in the 1999 amendment, the longterm reductions amount to only 28 tpd. 7 Neither the 1997 plan nor the 1999 amendment changes the State control measures inthe 1994 ozone SIP.

6The "attainment demonstration" includes both the control measures and air quality modeling showing that the control measures are sufficient to reduce emissions to levels where violations ofthe NAAQS would not occur.The 1999 amendment does not change the modeling inthe 1997 plan, which we continue to find approvable, but does add

new control measures, thus allowing us to propose inthis document approval ofthe plan with respect to boththe control measure and the attainment demonstration requirements ofthe Act.

7Unless otherwise indicated, when we speak of emission reductions in this document we refer to reductions inthe attainment year (2010), net of growth. 

### 6093

HeinOnline -- 65 Fed. Reg. 6093 2000Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 26/Tuesday, February 8, 2000/Proposed Rules

2.Technical Revisions

Although SCAQMD did not revise the baseline emissions inventory included in the 1997 plan, the 1999 amendment revises the District's control measures portion ofthe plan, adding new measures and accelerating adoption and implementation dates ofmeasures in the 1997 plan. Since these changes amend the plan's scheduled emission reductions, the 1999 amendment revises the 1997 plan's stationary source emissions budgets for VOC and NOx. The 1999 amendment also presents new rate-of-progress calculations. E.WhatFurther RevisionsAre Planned in theFuture?

While the revised ozone plan represents more current and accurate information than was used in the 1994 ozone SIP, SCAQMD and CARB consider the new plan tobe an interim update. A comprehensive ozone plan revision is scheduled for adoption and submittal as a SIP revision in 2001. This future revision will use new emission inventories andmodeling, and it will include a revised control strategy if needed toprovide for expeditious attainment. II. Review ofthe Revised Ozone Plan A. DidSCAQMDandCARBMeet the CAA Procedural Requirements? SCAQMD has satisfied applicable requirements for reasonable public notice and hearing prior to adoption of the 1997 plan and the 1999 amendment. SCAQMD conducted public workshops andpublic hearings prior tothe adoption ofthe 1997 plan on November 15, 1996 (Governing Board Resolution No. 96-23), andbefore adoption ofthe 1999 amendment onDecember 10, 1999 (Governing Board Resolution 99-35). On January 23, 1997, CARB adopted the 1997 plan (Resolution No. 97-1) following public notice, and CARB submitted the plan to us on February 5, 1997. After public notice, CARB adopted the 1999 amendment at a public hearing onJanuary 27, 2000, and the State indicates its intent to submit the amendment promptly as a SIP revision. Assuming thatthe State makes this submittal, we believe thatthe submittal will have met the procedural requirements ofCAA sections 110(a) and (1). B. Do theRevisedBaselineand Projected EmissionsInventoriesMeet CAA Requirements?

As discussed in ourproposed approval ofthe emissions inventory in the 1997 plan (64 FR 1774-7), the revised and updated emissions inventory conforms to our guidance documents. Please see thatnotice for further details regarding the inventories, the socio-economic forecasts underlying the projected inventories, and our emissions inventory guidance documents. The 1999 amendment makes no changes to these inventory summaries, which are included in Chapter 3and Appendix III ofthe 1997 plan.

CARB hasprepared draft revisions to the motor vehicle emissions factors. Once the new factors are adopted bythe State, the responsible agencies will begin the process ofrevising the plan to reflect the new emissions data. The State has also recently prepared anew offroad mobile source emissions model, and local agencies are revising the regional growth and control effectiveness data. These updates and enhancements will improve emissions information for the comprehensive 2001 plan revision.

Because the methodologies used to prepare the inventories in the revised
ozone plan are acceptable, we propose to approve theplan revision with respect to the emissions inventory requirements ofCAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1). C.Is theModeledAttainment DemonstrationConsistentWith ModelingGuidelines?

The attainment demonstration in the revised ozone plan employs the Urban Airshed Model (UAM) withthe Carbon Bond IV mechanism. The UAM analysis uses 4 episodes in 1987, including a September 7-9 episode with apeak ozone concentration of0.33 ppm.

The 1994 ozone SIP analysis used a more severe episode, June 5-7, 1985, which had a peak concentration of0.36 ppm. For therevised ozone plan, SCAQMD modeled the 1985 episode but did not show attainment with all control measures, and the episode was dropped for purposes ofthe attainment demonstration. SCAQMD based its decision not touse the 1985 episode on the age ofthe episode andthe District's contention thatthe episode reflects meteorological conditions that rarely
occur in the area. This is consistent with our current modeling guidance.8

OnNovember 18, 1998, the SCAQMD submitted aweight ofevidence analysis for the June 1985 episode. 9A copy of this analysis has been placed in the docketfor this rulemaking. The analysis

8 Guidance on Use ofModeled Results to Demonstrate Attainment ofthe Ozone NAAQS, EPA-454/B-95-007 (1996).

9Letterfrom Barry R. Wallerstein, SGAQMD Executive Officer, to Felicia Marcus, Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, Attachment A. addresses our current modeling guidance and argues for elimination of the 1985 episode under a weight of evidence approach. Attachment B tothe SCAQMD correspondence addresses the acceptability ofthe remaining 4 episodes as a basis for an attainment demonstration. SCAQMD provides evidence thatthe episodes are representative ofthe types of meteorological episodes expected in the South Coast when high ozone concentrations occur. The evidence examines the episodes based on the deviation index (Horie CART analysis) and the Chu-Cox methodology for assessing episode frequency.

The model performance for the 1987 episode shows ahigh systematic bias, e.g., ozone underprediction of44 percent for June 24, 40 percent for June 25, 47 percent for September 8, and 38 percent for September 9. SCAQMD showed thatthis underprediction is significantly reduced ifmotor vehicle VOC emissions are doubled, in which
case underprediction becomes 24 percent for June 24, 19 percent for June 25, 2percent for September 8, and 3 percent for September 9. CARB's draft revisionsto the motorvehicle factors support this inventory adjustment. Because the model performance falls within an acceptable range of accuracy after these adjustments to the inventory andbecause the modeling otherwise conforms to our guidance, we propose to approve the modeling analysis.

More accurate and comprehensive UAM analyses will soon be possible, based onthe Southern California Ozone Study (SCOS), forwhich an extensive field study was completed in the
summer of1997 and continued, in limited form, through the summer of 1998. SCAQMD andCARB intend to complete a new modeling analysis using updated emission inventories and SCOS modeling, as part ofa comprehensive
ozone SIP revision to be submitted in 2001. We strongly endorse this effort to update and enhance the technical foundation ofthe attainment demonstration. This revised SIP will be important to ensure that emission reduction target levels and control
measures are sufficient to provide for attainment withinthe South Coast, and to establish a technically improved basis for making adjustments to the control strategy to achieve efficient and expeditious attainment. 

### 6094

HeinOnline -- 65 Fed. Reg. 6094 2000Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 26/Tuesday, February 8, 2000/Proposed Rules

D.Dothe Control MeasuresMeet CAA Requirements? 1.What Are the Applicable CAA Requirements?

The CAArequires that SIPs include enforceable control measures sufficient to meetrate-of-progress milestones and provide thereductions needed for attainment by the applicable CAA deadline. Where itis infeasible for a state to accomplish the necessary regulatory adoption in the short term, we have recognized that this requirement can be satisfied, to some extent, by enforceable commitments to adoptregulations in the future, since these commitments can be enforced in courtby EPA or citizens. In view ofthe magnitude of reductions required in the South Coast andthe factthat SCAQMD and CARB have already adoptedin regulatory form
more stringent measures than are included in most other SIPs, we approved the 1994 ozone SIP despite its heavy reliance on commitments to adoptregulations. See 62 FR 1155-7, 1177-82. Over thepast 5years following adoption ofthe 1994 ozone SIP, SCAQMD rule adoptions and attainment demonstration revisions have reduced the dependence ofthe plan on SCAQMD commitments, which
now amount to 84 tpd ofVOC and NOx, compared to well over 400 tpdin the 1994 ozone SIP. 2.How Does the Revised Ozone Plan Address These Requirements?

a. Control Measures Already Adopted

Following submittal ofthe 1994 ozone SIP, SCAQMD adopted rules projected to reduce VOC emissions by over 150 tpdby 2010. These rules fulfillmany of the control measure commitments in both the 1994 and 1997 plans. The table below entitled "Table 1-SCAQMD Rules Adopted between November 1994 and September 1999" lists the rules with projected emission reduction levels. Ifthese levels are not actually achieved bythe rules, the SCAQMD enforceably commits to revise the rules or adopt newrules to provide for compensating reductions.10
TABLE 

### 1.-SCAQMD RULES ADOPTED BETWEEN NOVEMBER 

### 1994 AND SEPTEMBER 

### 1999

Control measure Rule No. Title Adoption Implementation dates 2010 reductions date in tpd VOC
CTS-C

........................ 1171 Solvent Cleaning Operations

......................... 1996 1999

.......................... 26.8 CTS-02H

.................... 1107 Metal Parts and Products

.............................. 1998 1999

.......................... 8.8 CTS-02M

................... 1145 Plastic, Rubber, Glass Coatings

.................... 1997 1998

.......................... 1.2 CTS-02N

.................... 1122 Solvent Degreasers

........................................ 1997 1999

.......................... 48.1 CTS-07

...................... 1113 Architectural Coatings-Phase I
.................... 1996 1998-2008

................ 14.8 CTS-07

...................... 1113 Architectural Coatings-Phase II
................... 1999 2002-06

.................... 16.5 CMB-02B

................... 1146.2 Small Boilers and Process Heaters
............... 1998 2000-06

.................... 4.2 NOx FUG-01

...................... 462 Organic Liquid Transfer

................................. 1995 1999

.......................... 0.8* FUG-02

...................... 1176 Sumps and Wastewater Separators

.............. 1996 1997

.......................... 5.0* PRC-03

...................... 1138 Restaurant Operations

................................... 1997 1999

.......................... 0.2 RFL-02

....................... 461 Gasoline Dispensing Facilities

....................... 1995 1998

......................... 3.7* 1104 Wood Flat Stock Coating Operations

............ 1998 2000

.......................... negligible 1136 Wood Products Coatings

............................... 1996 2005

.......................... 7.9* 1124 Aerospace Assembly and Component Manu- 1996 2002

.......................... 0.2* facturing Operations. 1130.1 Screening Printing Operations

....................... 1996 2003

.......................... 0.1* 1168 Adhesive Applications

.................................... 1998 2003

.......................... 1.3* CTS-07

...................... 1113 Architectural Coatings

.................................... 1999 2002-6

...................... 18.5* T

otal Reductions ...................... . ....... ................................................................. . . .................. .................................... 153.9

of VOC. T

otal Reductions ...................... . ....... ................................................................. . . .................. .................................... 4.2

of NOx. *Reductions incorporated in baseline inventory.

In addition tothese rules, SCAQMD also adopted 3rule revisions in October andNovember 1999, implementing plan
measures and contributing additional emission reductions as shown: CTS-02C (Phase 2)-Further Emission Reductions from Solvent Cleaning Operations (Rule 1171)-11 tpdVOC (withan additional 16 tpd subject totechnology assessment in the future); CTS-08-Further Emission Reductions from Industrial Coating and Solvent Operations (Rule 1130)-2 tpdVOC; and CMB-06-

10"The Districtis committed to adopt Table 2-1 measures unless these measures or a portion thereof are found infeasible and other substitute
measures that can achieve equivalent reductions in the same adoption/implementation timeframes are adopted. Findings ofinfeasibility will be made at
aregularly scheduled meeting of the District Board with proper public notification. For purposes ofSIP Emission Standards for New Commercial and Residential Water Heaters (Rule 1121)-7.6 tpd NOx. b. Short andIntermediate-term Control Measure Commitments

As discussed above, therevised ozone plan now includes commitments to adopt 26 short- andintermediate -term control measures. The plan describes each control measure in detail, identifying 1993 baseline emissions from the source category, projected 2006 and 2010 emissions, 2006 and 2010

commitment, infeasibility means the proposed control technology is notreasonably likely to be available by the implementation date inquestion,
or achievement ofthe emission reductions by that date is not cost effective. The District acknowledges that this commitment is enforceable under Section 304(f)of the federal CleanAir Act." 1999 Amendment, page 2-18. Table 2-1, which is emission reductions, control cost effectiveness, methods and technologies ofcontrol, rule compliance, implementation schedule, implementing agency, and control
measure history, including an explanation ofchanges in the measures in successive plan updates. The table labeled "Table 2-Short- and Intermediate-Term Control Measure Commitments" indicates for each control measure the dates ofrule adoption and implementation and the

labeled "Revised AQMP Short- and IntermediateTerm Control Measures, Implementing Agency, Adoption Date andImplementation Period," contains the complete list ofSCAQMD commitments for short- and intermediate-term control measures, as also shown inTable 2ofthis document. 

### 6095

HeinOnline -- 65 Fed. Reg. 6095 2000

### Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 26/Tuesday, February 8, 2000/Proposed Rules

emission reductions projected to occur by 2006 and 2010.

TABLE 2-SHORT-AND INTERMEDIATE-TERM CONTROL MEASURE COMMITMENTS (IN TONS PER SUMMER DAY OF VOC OR 

### (NOx))

Control measure No. Control measure title Implementing agency Adoption Implementation Emission reductions date date2006 2010

CTS-02(P2)

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

CTS-02E

.................... CTS-020

................... CTS-07(P 3)

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

CTS-08

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

CTS-09

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

FUG-03

...................... FUG-04

...................... FUG-05

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

FUG-06

......................
RFL-02(P2)

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

CMB-06
.....................
PRC-03(P2)

............... PRC-06

...................... MSC-01

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

MSC-03

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

WST-01

..................... WST-02

..................... WST-03

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

WST-04

..................... FSS-04

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

FLX-01
....................... Further Emission Reductions from Solvent Cleaning OperationsRule 1171*. Emission Reductions from Adhesives-Rule 1168. Emission Reductions from Solvent Usage-Rule 442*. Further Emission Reductions from

Architectural Coatings and Cleanup Solvents-Rule 1113. Further Emission Reductions from

Industrial Coating and Solvent Operations (Phases 1and 2)*. Further Emission Reductions from

Large Solvent and Coating Sources (Phases 1 and 2). Further Emission Reductions from

Floating Roof Tanks-Rule 463. Further Emission Reductions from

Fugitive Sources-Rule 1121. Further Emission Reductions from

Large Fugitive VOC Sources (Phases 1,2, and 3)*. Control of Methanol Emissions

from Refinery Hydrogen Plan Vents. Further Emission Reductions from

Gasoline Dispensing Facilities-Rule 461. Emission Standards for New

Commercial and Residential Water Heaters-Rule 1121. Further Emission Reductions from

Restaurant Operations. Further Emission Reductions from

Industrial Processes*. Promotion of Lighter Color Roofing and Road Materials and Tree Planting Programs. Promotion of Catalyst-Surface

Coating Technology Programs.
Emission Reductions from Livestock Waste. Emission Reductions from

Composting. Emission Reductions from Waste

Burning (implemented through MOUs). Disposal of Materials Containing

Volatile Organic Compounds. Emission Charges of $5,000 per

Ton of VOC for Stationary Sources Emitting over 10 Tons per Year. Intercredit Trading Program
......... SCAQMD

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

SCAQMD/CAR B
....... SCAQMD

................... SCAQMD

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

SCAQMD

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

SCAQMD

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

SCAQMD

................... SCAQMD

................... SCAQMD

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

SCAQMD

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

SCAQMD/CAR B2000

SCAQMD

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

SCAQMD

................... SCAQMD

................... SCAQMD/Loc al Govt

SCAQMD

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

SCAQMD

................... SCAQMD

................... SCAQMD/Local Fire

Agencies.
SCAQMD

................... SCAQMD

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

SCAQMD

................... 1999 2002
.................

2000 2007-2008 .......
2000 2002 .................
2003 2006-2008 .......

2002 2004-2008 ....... 2003 2005-2008 .......
2000 2003-2004 ....... 2002 2005-2006 ....... TBD

2001 2002 2003 2000 TBD
..................

2003-2006 ....... 2004-2007 ....... 2005-2008 ....... 2001-2003 .......

2000 2001-2002 .......

1999 2002-2005 .......

2000
2001 2001 (new) 2003 (retr ofit). 2004-2007 ....... TBD TBD
..................

TBD TBD
..................

2002 2004 .................
2004-2006 .......
2002 .................

2000 12002 ................. TBD
..................

TBD 

### ITBD
..................

T

otalReductions ofV OC
.......................................................................................................................................... T

otalReductions of N Ox .......................................................................................................................................... 11.0

1.3
1.0
9.8

5.0

4.0

3.0
TBD

1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8

2.0

(7.6)

0.9
3.0
Air quality benefit from

lowering ambient temperature Conversion of ambient

ozone and CO into Oxygen and CO 2 3.3 3.3
TBD TBD
Air quality benefit but no emission reduction
0.7 0.8
TBD TBD

Promotion of advanced

pollution control technology 26.8 48.1

3.6 7.6 *SCAQMD commits to achieve the reductions shown but identifies a potential for greater emission reductions from these control measures (Table 2-4, 1999 Amendment). Any reductions achieved from these measures beyond the amount of the commitment will reduce the long-term measure commitment, shown in Table 4, below. 6096

HeinOnline -- 65 Fed. Reg. 6096 2000Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 26/Tuesday, February 8, 2000/Proposed Rules
SCAQMD commits to meetthe Recognizing that such control strategy Amendment, pp. 2-18 and 2-19). This adoption dates, implementation dates, adjustments may be necessary andthat complementary commitment is shown and emission reduction targets, unless a development and implementation of below in the table titled "Table 3- measure, in whole or in part, is regulations may achieve actual emission Emission Reduction Commitments." In determined to be infeasible. Should that reductions that donot match those order to ensure expeditious progress, be the case, SCAQMD commits to projected, SCAQMD included in the SCAQMD commits to achieve these achieve equivalent reductions on the revised plan an additional enforceable emission reductions even ifcontrol
same schedule through substitute commitment to achieve emission measures are determined to be controls. reduction targets in future years (1999 infeasible.
TABLE 3.-EMISSION REDUCTION COMMITMENTS [In tons per day for 2010 Planning Inventory.]
Based on adoption date Based on implementation Year date* VOC NOx VOC NOx

1999
................................................................................................................. 11.0 7.6
........................ . ....................... 2000
................................................................................................................. 10.0
........................ . ....................... . . ...................... 2001 ................................................................................................................. 4.0 ........................ .................. ..... ..

...................... 2002

................................................................................................................. 9.3

........................ 14.8

........................ 2003

................................................................................................................. 13.8

........................ 0.9

........................ 2004
................................................................................................................. ....................... . ... . . . . . . . ..... 7.3

........................ 2005
................................................................................................................. . ....................... . . .............. ........ ........................ . ......... ...... ......... 2006
................................................................................................................. ....................... . ... . . . . . . . ..... 4.0

........................ 2007
................................................................................................................. ....................... . ... . . . . . . . ..... 4.0

........................ 2008
................................................................................................................. . ........................ . ........................ 17.1
........................ T otal

......................................................... ............................................. 48.1 7.6 48.11 7
. *Represents the final, full implementation date; typically, a rule contains multiple implementation dates.

The 1999 amendment provides the recent knowledge. This is to assure that emission reduction commitments following clarification on the the same "currency" is used in associated with the controlmeasures in "currency" that will be used in measuring progress as was used in the revised ozone plan. determining emission reduction designing the AQMP. This will provide The new or amended controlmeasure progress under the revised ozone plan: afair and equitable measurement of commitments inthe revised ozone plan "For purpose oftracking the progress in progress. Therefore, whether progress is emission reductions, thebaseline measured by emission reductions orby commitentcont a e emissions for the year 2010 planning remaining emissions for a source commitments contained in the 1994 inventory (summer inventory for ozone) category provides no material ozone SIP. These measures are listed in in the 1997 AQMP will be used, difference." (Page 2-16) We propose to the table below labeled "Table 4- regardless ofany subsequent new acceptthe use ofthis approach for Measures Deleted from the 1994 Ozone inventory information that reflects more determinations ofcompliance with SIP."

TABLE 4.-MEASURES DELETED FROM THE 1994 

### OZONE SIP
Control measure No. Control measure title
CTS-A

.................................. CTS-C
.................................. CTS-D
.................................. CTS-E

.................................. CTS-F

.................................. CTS-G
................................. CTS-H
.................................. CTS-I

................................... CTS-J

.................................. CTS-K
.................................. CTS-L

.................................. CTS-07

................................ FUG-01

................................ FUG-02

................................ FUG-04

................................ RFL-02
................................. RFL-03
................................. CMB-02F
............................. CMB-05
............................... PRC-02

................................ PRC-03

................................ WST-01

............................... WST-03

............................... WST-04

............................... Electronic Components Solvent Cleaning Marine/Pleasure Craft Coatings Adhesives Motor Vehicle Non-Assembly Coating Paper/Fabric/Film Coatings Metal Parts/Product Coatings Graphic Arts/Screen Printing Wood Products Coatings, Aerospace/Component Coatings Automotive Assembly Operations Architectural Coatings Organic Liquid Transfer Active Draining of Liquid Products Fugitive Emissions of VOCs Gasoline Dispensing Facilities Pleasure-Boat Fueling Operations Internal Combustion Engines Clean Stationary Fuels Bakeries Restaurant Operations Livestock Waste Waste Burning Disposal of Materials Containing VOCs 

### 6097

HeinOnline -- 65 Fed. Reg. 6097 2000Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 26/Tuesday, February 8, 2000/Proposed Rules

TABLE 4.-MEASURES DELETED FROM THE 

### 1994 OZONE 

### SIP-Continued
Control measure No. Control measure title
ISR-01

................................. Special Events Centers ISR-02

................................. Shopping Centers ISR-03

................................. Registration and Commercial Vehicles ISR-04

................................. Airport Ground Access ISR-05

................................. Trip Reduction for Schools ADV-CTS-02

....................... Advanced Technology-Coatings

Appendix A ofthe 1999 Amendment implemented if the long-term measures In addition, the 1999 Amendment presents SCAQMD's reasons for do not achieve planned reductions. includes SCAQMD commitments to replacing these control measures. None ofthe long-term measures in the submit semi-annual progress reports on revised ozone plan are scheduled for meeting the District's commitments, and c. Long-Term Control Measure implementation during the period to hold annual workshops on 1990-2000, andthe plan meets CAA identifying new controls to minimize, Section 182(e)(5) ofthe Act allows an requirements for ROP without reliance and potentially eliminate, reliance on extreme ozone nonattainment area onthe long-term measures, which are long-term measures. additional time, if necessary, beyond the needed only for attainment. The revised November 15, 1994 ozone SIP submittal ozone plan identifies additional Because ofSCAQMD's success in deadline, to develop, adopt, and submit measures beyond those credited with accelerating long-term control measures,
some ofthe specific regulations and reductions toward ROP or attainment, to there remain in the revised ozone plan programs needed to achieve attainment, be scheduled for adoption and only 28 tpd ofVOC assigned to this The CAA allows us to approve plans implementation in the future. The plan special category of measures, which is based on long-term measures if the State also provides a range of additional authorized for extreme ozone areas demonstrates that the measures are not emission reductions from several ofthe under CAA section 182(e)(5). The table needed to meet ROP requirements short- and intermediate-term measures entitled "Table 5-Long-Term Control during the first 10 years and if the State that may contribute additional emission Measures" displays SCAQMD's longhas submitted enforceable commitments reductions creditable against all or part term measure commitments in the to adopt contingency measures to be ofthe long-term measure commitments. revised ozone plan.
TABLE 5-LONG-TERM CONTROL MEASURES [2010 VOC reduction in tons per summer day]

Control measure Title Adoption date Implementation Emission date reductions
ADV-CLNG

................ Solvent Cleaning and Degreasing Operations

................................. 2003-4

............. 2005
................. 16 ADV-CTS

................... Miscellaneous Industrial Coating and Solvent Operations

............... 2003-5

............. 2006-10
........... 6 ADV

- FUG

.................. Fugitive Emissions

............................................................................ 2003-5

............. 2006- 10
........... 5 ADV-PRC

................... Industrial Process Operations

........................................................... 2003-5

............. 2006-10
........... 1

Totalreductions ...... . .......... .................................................................................... ............. ........................... ........................... 28

3.Does the revised ozone plan meet the CAA requirements for control measures?

a. Short- and intermediate-term control measure commitments

In ourproposed action on the 1997 ozone plan, we proposed to disapprove the near-term control measures because: (1) SCAQMD had already failed to adopt many ofthe measures bythe scheduled date; (2)the control measures represented an impermissible relaxation ofthe 1994 ozone SIP; and (3)the SIP included unlawful assignments of control measures to the Federal government (64 FR 1775-7). SCAQMD has remedied the first deficiency and is currently on schedule with regard to the commitments in the revised ozone plan. The recently adopted rules and the short-and intermediate-term control measure commitments, as revised in the 1999 Amendment, cure the second deficiency by accelerating emission reduction progress beyond the level set outin the 1997 plan andthereby eliminating our concern regarding backsliding from the 1994 ozone SIP. The third deficiency was remedied by ourrecent rulemaking concluding the Public Consultative Process (64 FR 39923, July 23, 1999).

We now propose to approve, under CAA section 110(k)(3), the enforceable SCAQMD commitments to adopt and implement the short-and intermediateterm control measures, andto implement those measures that have already been adoptedin regulatory form, bythe dates specified to achieve the emission reductions shown above in Tables 1, 2, and 3. We are proposing to assign credit to these measures for purposes ofthe attainment demonstration in the revised ozone plan. We propose to approve SCAQMD's commitment to achieve the overall emission reduction schedule in Table 3,which provides the basis for allowing alternative or revised measures to substitute for those identified in Table 2,so long as SCAQMD continues to meetthe Table 3 schedule for adopting andimplementing regulations to achieve specific levels ofemissions reduction.Finally, we propose to approve the deletion ofthe 31 control
measures fromthe 1994 ozone SIP, listed above in Table 4. b. Long-Term Measure Commitments

In ourproposed action on the 1997 ozone plan, we proposed to disapprove the long-term control measures because the 1997 planincreased the proportion ofreductions assigned to the long-term category, and webelieved that CAA section 182(e)(5) did not authorize us to approve SIP revisions thatpostpone SIP 6098

HeinOnline -- 65 Fed. Reg. 6098 2000Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 26/Tuesday, February 8, 2000/Proposed Rules

commitments in the near-term and shift the balance ofthe SIP toward more distant and less specific commitments (64 FR 1777). The revised ozone plan remedies this deficiency by dramatically reducing the emission reductions assigned to this category.

We therefore propose to approve, as meeting CAA section 182(e)(5), the SCAQMD commitments to adopt and implement the long-term control
measures in Table 4, and we propose to assignthe emission reductions from these measures to the attainment demonstration in the revised ozone plan. Asmentioned above, however, SCAQMD may satisfy allor apart ofits long-term control measure obligations by adopting near-and intermediate-term control measures that achieve more emission reductions than assigned to these measures in Table 2. E.Doestheplanshowreasonable further progress? 1.What are the applicable CAA requirements?

CAA sections 182(c)(2) and (e) require that extreme area ozone SIPs include quantitative milestones that are to be achieved every 3years until attainment, andthat demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP) toward attainment by the applicable date. CAA section 171(a) of the Act defines RFP as "such annual incremental reductions in emissions of the relevant air pollutant as are required by this part or may reasonably be required bythe Administrator for the purpose ofensuring attainment ofthe applicable national ambient airquality standard bythe applicable date."

For ozone areas classified as serious
or above, section 182(c)(2) requires that the SIP must provide for reductions in ozone-season, weekday VOC emissions ofat least 3percent per year net of growth averaged over each consecutive 3-year period beginning in 1996 until the attainment date. Thisis in addition to the 15 percent reduction over the first 6-yearperiod required by CAA section 182(b)(1) for areas classified as moderate and above. 2.How Does the Revised Ozone Plan Address These Requirements?

The revised ozone plan shows reductions consistent with the 3percent peryear rate ofprogress requirement for 1997-1999 and 2000-2002 through use ofVOC emission reductions from currently adopted regulations. For 2003-2005, 2006-2008, and 2009-2010 milestone periods, however, the plan does not have enough creditable VOC reductions to meet the milestones, and must substitute NOx reductions, as allowed by CAA section 182(c)(2)(C). As shownbelow in the table entitled "Table 6-Rate-of-Progress Plan," NOx substitution accounts for 3.6 percent of the required 9 percent reduction between 2003-2005; 8.5 percent between 2006-2008; and 0.5 percent between 2009-2010.
TABLE 6.-RATE-OF-PROGRESS PLAN [Emissions Rounded to Nearest Ton per Day]

1999 2002 2005 2008 2010 VOC NO,, VOC NOx VOC NOx VOC NOx VOC NOx Adjusted

1990 Base Year ..........1527 1472 1515 1472 1510 1472 1509 1472 1509 1472 Required Percent Reduction
...... 24 0 9 0 5.4 3.6 0.5 8.5 0.5 8.5 Required Reductions

.... 367 0 136 0 82 53 8 125 8 81 Emissions

Target
....... 1161 1472 1012 1472 926 1419 917 1294 909 1213 Emissions

(Adopted Rules)

....... 982 956 946 859 918 797 913 764 909 751 Emissions

(Counting Reductions from Commitments)

.. 939 935 826 815 708 695 587 609 414 530

The 1999 Amendment significantly increases VOC reductions in all interim milestone years, compared to the 1997
ozone plan. 3.Does the Revised Ozone Plan Meet the CAA Requirements?

As shownby Table 6, the revised
ozone plan meets the ROP requirements based entirely on fully adopted regulations. Taking into account reductions from SCAQMD and CARB enforceable commitments, implementation ofthe plan should result in reductions in excess ofthe minimum ROP requirement (compare the last line in Table 6 to the emissions target for each milestone year). This is appropriate, giventhe enormous reductions required for this area to reach attainment.

Compliance with the milestone and RFP provisions ofthe Act requires that all ofthe creditable emission reductions be approved as enforceable parts ofthe SIP (General Preamble, April 16, 1992, at 57 FR 13517). Because we proposed to disapprove the control measure provisions in the 1997 ozone plan, we also proposed to disapprove the plan with respect to the CAA section 182(c)(2) quantitative milestone and reasonable further progress requirements. As discussed above, however, we nowpropose to approve the control measures in the revised
ozone plan, and therefore propose to approve the new plan as meeting the quantitative milestone andRFP requirements ofCAA section 182(c)(2). 

### 6099

HeinOnline -- 65 Fed. Reg. 6099 2000

### Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 26/Tuesday, February 8, 2000/Proposed Rules

F. Doesthe PlanProvide for Attainment? 1.What are the Applicable CAA Requirements?

CAA sections 182(c)(2)(A) and (e) require that ozone SIPs for areas classified as extreme demonstrate attainment ofthe ozone NAAQS by the applicable deadline-in the case ofthe South Coast, as expeditiously as practicable but not later than November 15, 2010. CAA section 181(a)(1). The demonstration must be based upon photochemical grid modeling or any other analytical method determined to be atleast as effective. 2.How Does the Revised Ozone Plan Address These Requirements?

As discussed above, the modeling approach in the revised ozone plan is consistent with our modeling guidelines. The modeling analysis shows that attainment ofthe ozone NAAQS will require reducing ozone precursors to the following summer day levels: 413 tpdVOC and 530 tpdNOx. These levels are frequently called the "carrying capacity" ofthe area. The enforceable emission reductions in the revised ozone plan will reduce 2010 baseline emissions to these attainment levels, as shown in the table entitled "Table 7-Ozone Attainment Demonstration."
TABLE 7.-OZONE ATTAINMENT DEMONSTRATION [In tons per summer day] VOC NO× 1990 baseline emissions
.......... 1733 1472 2010 baseline emissions (assuming reductions from all rules adopted as of 9/96)

...... 839 727 Plan reductions from baseline
.. 426 197 2010 emissions assuming reductionsfrom plan implementation
..................................... 4

13 530 Carrying capacity

...................... 413 530 Percent reduction from 1990

baseline emissions

................ 76% 64%
3.Does the Revised Ozone Plan Meet the CAA Requirements?

The revised ozone plan includes enforceable measures and commitments that will achieve the ozone precursor reductions needed to reach attainment,
as established in amodeling analysis consistent with our guidelines. Moreover, the stringent new measures, aggressive implementation schedules, and accelerated progress in the revised ozone plan alsomeet the expeditious attainment requirement ofCAA section 181(a). We therefore propose to approve the attainment demonstration under CAA section 182(c)(2). G. Are theemissionsbudgets approvable? 1.Motor vehicle emissions budgets

Attainment demonstration submittals must specifythe maximum motor vehicle emissions allowed in the attainment year and demonstrate that this emissions level, when considered with emissions from all other sources, is consistent with attainment. In order for
us to findthe budget adequate and approvable, the submittal must meet the conformity adequacy requirements of40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and be approvable under allpertinent SIP requirements.

The motor vehicle emissions caps defined by this and other plans when they are approved into the SIP are used to determine the conformity of transportation plans, programs, and projects to the SIP, as described by CAA section 176(c)(2)(A). Formore detail on this part ofthe conformity requirements
see 40 CFR 93.118. Fortransportation conformity purposes, the cap onmotor vehicle emissions is known as the motor vehicle emissions budget. The budget must reflect all ofthe motor vehicle control measures contained in the attainment demonstration (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(v)).

The motor vehicle emissions budgets in the revised ozone plan for 2010 are 80.7tpd VOC and 277.8 tpdNOx. These budgets were developed using the State's EMFAC7G motor vehicle emissions factors. We propose to approve the budgets as consistent with all ofthe adequacy criteria of40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), including consistency with the 2010 baseline emissions inventory, the motor vehicle controlmeasure emission reductions used in the attainment demonstration, andthe reductions needed for attainment. In the near future, CARB is expected to issue refinements to the emissions factors for use in transportation conformity determinations. The refinements would more accurately reflect emission reductions associated with the State's motor vehicle inspection andmaintenance (I/M) program and other motorvehicle controls." These refinements must be usedin conformity determinations, in accordance with our transportation conformity regulations, which require
use ofthe most current and accurate information (40 CFR 93.110(e), 122(a)(2)). Subsequent budgets will reflect these changes and any new or modified control measures. 2.General Conformity Emissions Budgets

CAA section 176(c)(1) provides that "No department, agency, or instrumentality ofthe Federal Government shall engage in, support in any way or provide financial assistance for, license orpermit, or approve any activity which does not conform to an implementation plan
.... "This provision establishes requirements for "general conformity," as distinct from "transportation conformity," discussed above.12 General conformity must be based onthe mostrecent estimates of emissions in the federally approved SIP.

The revised ozone plan establishes
new emissions budgets forROP milestoneyears for each source category. The budgets appear in Table 4-9 ofAppendix V ofthe 1997 ozone revision, and are modified byTable 2- 6 ofthe 1999 Amendment, which reduces the stationary source VOC emissions consistent with the new and accelerated SCAQMD controlmeasures in the 1999 Amendment. The emissions budgets as revised by the 1999 Amendment appear belowin the table entitled "Table 8-Emissions Budgets by Milestone Year."

"The updated emission reductions which, among other things, would reflect more accurately the I/Mprogram as compared to the 1994 submittal,
are necessary in the case ofI/Mto account fora legislative change to the program in 1997.

12Formore details on the general conformity requirements, you should consult 40 CFR 51.850- 51.860 and 40 CFR part 93. 

### 6100

HeinOnline -- 65 Fed. Reg. 6100 2000Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 26/Tuesday, February 8, 2000/Proposed Rules

TABLE 8.-EMISSIONS BUDGETS BY MILESTONE YEAR [In tons per day] Stationary Onroad Nonroad Total Year VOC NO× VOC NO× VOC NO× VOC NO×

1999

................................................................. 435.2 115.7 354.0 526.8 137.3 292.6 938.6 935.1 2002

................................................................. 402.4 96.7 273.1 447.1 125.1 270.7 826.1 814.5 2005

................................................................. 334.4 91.4 206.0 369.1 116.6 234.0 707.6 694.5 2008

................................................................. 305.1 91.4 145.4 310.1 106.7 209.2 587.4 609.0 2010

................................................................. 267.6 88.3 80.7 277.8 65.1 164.3 413.6 530.4

Final approval oftherevised ozone plan would establish these budgets for purposes ofgeneral conformity under CAA section 176(c)(1), replacing the budgets in the 1994 ozone SIP. Thus, projects requiring general conformity determinations may be able to show that emissions from theproject are specifically included in therevised ozone plan's attainment demonstration (see,40 CFR 93.158(a)(1)). H. Whatarethe implicationsof EPA's proposed planapproval? Ifwe finalize theproposed approval oftherevised ozone plan, this plan would replace and supersede the 1994 ozone SIP with the exception ofthe State control measures for mobile sources, consumer products, and pesticides, and EPA's commitment. These State measures remain unchanged from those approved as part ofthe 1994
ozone SIP. Final approval would also setnew emissions budgets for purposes ofconformity.

Our final approval would also make enforceable the SCAQMD commitments to adopt and implement the control measures and regulations listed above in Tables 1, 2, and 5, to achieve the specified emissions reductions, computed consistently with the assumptions in theplan's emissions inventory. Similarly, final plan approval would make enforceable the SCAQMD commitment to achieve the overall emission reduction schedule in Table 3, andthis would create the possibility of SCAQMD control measure adjustments and substitutions under the approved SIP, so long as the emission reduction obligations ofTable 3are met.13

As discussed in section I.E. above, GARB and SCAQMD intend to adopt and submit a comprehensive revision to the ozone plan in 2001. This new plan will use an entirely new UAM attainment analysis, updated and corrected baseline and projected emissions information, and updates to the control measures toreflect the

13Once a substitute control measure hasbeen adopted as aregulation and submitted as a SIP revision, we will undertake formal rulemaking, with opportunity for public comment, on the regulation. current status ofthe measures and any changes to the measures thatmay be required to meet the emission reduction needs in the new attainment demonstration or to ensure that the SIP emission reduction commitments are met. We strongly support the timely completion ofthis new comprehensive revision to refine and enhance the technical foundations ofthe attainment demonstration and update the control measures, as necessary. III. Administrative Requirements A. Executive Order12866

The Office ofManagement andBudget (OMB) has exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review. B. Executive Order13132

Executive Order 13132, entitled Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces Executive Orders 12612, Federalism and 12875, Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership. Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure "meaningful and timely inputby State and local officials in the development ofregulatory policies that have federalism implications." "Policies that have federalism implications" is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations thathave "substantial direct effects onthe States, onthe relationship between the national government and the States, or onthe distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels ofgovernment." Under Executive Order 13132, EPAmay not issue a regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and thatis not required by statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costsincurred by State and local governments, orEPA consults with State andlocal officials early in the process ofdeveloping the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation thathas federalism implications and thatpreempts State law unless the Agency consults with State and local officials early inthe process ofdeveloping the proposed regulation.

This proposed rule will nothave substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution ofpower and responsibilities among the various levels ofgovernment, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because itmerely approves a state rule implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution ofpower and responsibilities established inthe Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section 6ofthe Executive Order donot apply tothis rule. C.Executive Order13045

Executive Order 13045, entitled Protection ofChildren from Environmental HealthRisks and Safety Risks (62FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1)is determined tobe "economically significant" as defined underE.O. 12866, and (2)concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPAhas reason to believe mayhave a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency. This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because itis does not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks. D.Executive Order13084

Under Executive Order 13084, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, EPA may notissue a regulation thatis not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the communities of Indian tribal governments, andthat imposes substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the 

### 6101

HeinOnline -- 65 Fed. Reg. 6101 2000Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 26/Tuesday, February 8, 2000/Proposed Rules

Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those governments. IfEPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to provide tothe Office of Management and Budget, in a separately identified section ofthe preamble to the rule, a description ofthe extent ofEPA's prior consultation with representatives ofaffected tribal governments, a summary ofthe nature oftheir concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue theregulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other representatives ofIndian tribal governments "to provide meaningful andtimely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly oruniquely affect their communities." Today's rule does not significantly oruniquely affect the communities ofIndian tribal governments. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) ofE.O. 13084 do not apply tothis rule. E.Regulatory FlexibilityAct The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency to conduct aregulatory flexibility analysis ofany rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies thatthe rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include smallbusinesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on asubstantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create any new requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not create any new requirements, I certify thatthis action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities. Moreover, due to the nature ofthe Federal-State relationship under the Clean Air Act, preparation offlexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. UnionElectricCo., v. U.S. EPA,427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2). F. UnfundedMandates

Under Section 202 ofthe Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of1995 ("Unfunded Mandates Act"), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPAmust prepare abudgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed orfinal rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; orto private sector, of $100 million ormore. Under Section 205, EPA must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives oftherule and is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments that may be significantly oruniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval actionpromulgated does not include a Federal mandate thatmay result in estimated annual costs of $100 million ormore to either State, local, ortribal governments in the aggregate, orto the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under State orlocal law, and imposes
no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional coststo State, local, ortribal governments, orto the private sector, result from this action. G. NationalTechnology Transferand AdvancementAct Section 12 ofthe National Technology Transfer andAdvancement Act (NTTAA)of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing technical standards when developing new regulations. To comply with NTTAA, the EPAmust consider anduse "voluntary consensus standards" (VCS) ifavailable and applicable when developing programs and policies unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.

EPA believes thatVCS are inapplicable to this proposed action. Today's proposed action does not require the public toperform activities conducive tothe use ofVCS. List ofSubjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental regulations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 etseq. Dated: January 28, 2000. Nora L. McGee, ActingRegional Administrator, RegionIX. [FR Doc. 00-2827 Filed 2-7-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 62 [Docket No. NH040-7167b; FRL-6532-3] Approval and Promulgation of State Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants: New Hampshire; Plan for Controlling Emissions From Existing Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve the Sections 111(d)/129 State Plan submittedby the NewHampshire Department ofEnvironmental Services (DES) onJune 2, 1999. This State Plan is for carrying out and enforcing provisions that are at least as protective as the Emissions Guidelines (EG) applicable to certain existing Hospital/ Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerator (HMIWI)units in accordance with sections 111 and 129 ofthe Clean Air Act. The NewHampshire DES submitted the Plan to satisfy certain Federal Clean Air Act requirements. In the Final Rules Section ofthe Federal Register, EPA is approving the New Hampshire State Plan submittal as a direct final rule without aprior proposal. EPAis doing thisbecause the Agency views this action as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates that itwill not receive any significant, material, and adverse comments. A detailedrationale for the approval is set forth inthe direct final rule elsewhere in this Federal Register. IfEPA does not receive any significant, material, and adverse comments to this action, then the approval will become final without further proceedings. If EPAreceives adverse comments, the direct final rule willbe withdrawn and EPAwill address all public comments received in a subsequent final rule based onthis proposed rule. EPA will notbegin a second comment period. DATES: EPA must receive comments in writing byMarch 9, 2000. ADDRESSES: You should address your written comments to: Mr. Brian Hennessey, Acting Chief,Air Permits Unit, Office ofEcosystem Protection, U.S. EPA, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAP),Boston, Massachusetts 02114-2023.

Copies ofdocuments relating to this proposed rule are available for public inspection duringnormal business hours at the following locations. The 

### 6102

HeinOnline -- 65 Fed. Reg. 6102 2000