Appendix B 

EPA Approval of Georgia 

Gasoline Control Program 
63982 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 238 / Tuesday, December 11, 2001 / Proposed Rules

satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air

Act. Thus, the requirements of section

12(d) of the National Technology

Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995

(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This

proposed rule does not impose an

information collection burden under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Hydrocarbons, Intergovernmental

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,

Particulate matter, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur

oxides.

Dated: November 30, 2001.

A. Stanley Meiburg,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

[FR Doc. 01–30587 Filed 12–10–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[GA–47 –2; GA–55–2; GA–58–2–200208;

FRL–7116–2]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality State Implementation Plans;

Georgia: Control of Gasoline Sulfur

and Volatility

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to fully

approve a State Implementation Plan

(SIP) revision, submitted by the State of

Georgia through the Georgia

Environmental Protection Division

(GAEPD), establishing low-sulfur and

low-Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP)

requirements for gasoline distributed in

the 13-county Atlanta nonattainment

area and 32 surrounding attainment

counties. Georgia developed these fuel

requirements to reduce emissions of

nitrogen oxides ( NOX) and volatile

organic compounds (VOC) as part of the

State’s strategy to achieve the National

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)

for ozone in the Atlanta nonattainment

area. EPA is approving Georgia’s fuel

requirements into the SIP because these

fuel requirements are in accordance

with the requirements of the Clean Air

Act (the Act), and are necessary for the

Atlanta nonattainment area to achieve

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in a timely

manner.

DATES: Comments should be received on

or before January 25, 2002.

ADDRESSES: All comments should be

addressed to: Lynorae Benjamin at the

EPA, Region 4 Air Planning Branch, 61

Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia

30303–8960.

Copies of the State submittal(s) are

available at the following addresses for

inspection during normal business

hours: Environmental Protection

Agency, Region 4, Air Planning Branch,

61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia

30303–8960. Lynorae Benjamin, (404)

562–9040. Air Protection Branch,

Georgia Environmental Protection

Division, Georgia Department of Natural

Resources, 4244 International Parkway,

Suite 120, Atlanta, Georgia 30354.

Telephone (404) 363–7000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lynorae Benjamin, Air Quality

Modeling and Transportation Section,

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and

Toxics Management Division, Region 4,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth

Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–

8960. The telephone number is (404)

562–9040. Ms. Benjamin can also be

reached via electronic mail at

benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

following section provides the rationale

for EPA’s approval of the Georgia fuel

requirements into the SIP, as provided

in section 211(c)(4)(C) of the Act.

Georgia’s fuel requirements are being

implemented in two phases. The initial

phase requires the low-sulfur/low-RVP

gasoline sold in the 13-county Atlanta

nonattainment area and 12 surrounding

attainment counties during the

regulatory control period (June 1

through September 15) each year

through 2002. The second phase of the

Georgia fuel program expands the lowsulfur/low-RVP requirements to an

additional 20 attainment counties. The

program becomes a year-round program

in 2003, except that the RVP

requirement applies only during the

June 1 through September 15 control

period.

I. Analysis of State’s Submittal

What Did the State Submit?

On October 28, 1999, the State of

Georgia, through the GAEPD, submitted

an attainment demonstration for the 1-

hour ozone NAAQS for the Atlanta

nonattainment area for inclusion into

the Georgia SIP. This submittal included

a version of the low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel

regulations that has subsequently been

amended by the State, and submitted by

the State to EPA in revised form in

subsequent SIP revisions dated July 31,

2000, and August 21, 2001. The version

submitted on August 21, 2001, which is

the subject of this proposed rulemaking,

is the ‘‘Gasoline Marketing Rule,’’

provided in Georgia’s Rules for Air

Quality Control, Chapter 391–3–1.02(2)

(bbb).

On May 31, 2000, in support of its

request for SIP approval of the State fuel

regulations, GAEPD also submitted a

demonstration that, in accordance with

section 211(c)(4)(C) of the Act, the fuel

control is necessary to achieve a

NAAQS. On November 9, 2001, GAEPD

submitted an updated ‘‘necessity’’

demonstration which reflected the

revised motor vehicle emissions budget,

the request for an attainment date

extension from 2003 to 2004, and the

revised Partnership for a Smog Free

Georgia emissions calculations.

Does the State Submittal Meet the SIP

Approval Requirements Under Section

110?

The SIP submittals, including the rule

for Georgia’s low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel

control program, meet the requirements

outlined in section 110 and Part D of

Title I of the CAA amendments and 40

CFR part 51 (Requirements for

Preparation, Adoption and Submittal of

Implementation Plans). The current

version of the fuel rule was formally

adopted by the GAEPD Board on June

27, 2001, and became effective July 18,

2001.

How Does the Low-Sulfur/Low-RVP

Proposal Relate to Other SIP Activities

in the State?

As noted above, on October 28, 1999,

GAEPD submitted for EPA approval an

ozone attainment demonstration for the

Atlanta nonattainment area, which

relies upon a number of control

measures, including the low-sulfur/low

RVP fuel program, to support the

demonstration. On December 16, 1999,

EPA proposed to approve the October

28, 1999, attainment demonstration for

the Atlanta nonattainment area, as well

as the underlying rule revisions with the

exception of the Georgia fuel rule (the

subject of this proposed rulemaking)

(see 64 FR 70478). EPA’s proposed

approval was based on the condition

that the GAEPD satisfy certain

requirements.

Subsequently, the GAEPD submitted

revisions to the Atlanta attainment

demonstration on January 31, 2000, and

July 31, 2000, along with revisions to

State rules supporting the attainment

demonstrations. Those rule revisions

were proposed for approval on

December 18, 2000 (see 65 FR 79034).

No adverse comments were received

pertaining to any rule revisions.

On July 10, 2001, EPA granted final

approval to the rule revisions contained

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 238 / Tuesday, December 11, 2001 / Proposed Rules 63983

in the December 16, 1999, and

December 18, 2000, proposals (see 66

FR 35906). The final rule noted that

EPA action for the Atlanta attainment

demonstration would be taken in a

separate notice.

On July 17, 2001, GAEPD submitted

another revised attainment

demonstration. The attainment

demonstration continues to rely in part

on the expected emissions reductions

that will be achieved by the low-sulfur/

low-RVP fuel control being proposed for

SIP approval in this action. Based on the

revised Atlanta attainment

demonstration, submitted on July 17,

2001, EPA is currently proposing

approval for the Atlanta attainment

demonstration in a separate notice.

What are the Clean Air Act

Requirements?

This approval action is being taken

pursuant to section 110 of the Act. The

approval of the State’s fuel control

measure must also meet the

requirements of section 211(c)(4)(C).

Under this section of the Act, EPA may

approve a state fuel control into a SIP

if it is found that the control is

‘‘necessary’’ to achieve a NAAQS.

EPA’s August 21, 1997, Guidance on

Use of Opt-in to RFG and Low-RVP

Requirements in Ozone SIPs gives

further guidance on what EPA is likely

to consider in making a finding of

necessity. The guidance sets out four

issues to be analyzed:

1. The quantity of emission

reductions needed to achieve the

NAAQS;

2. Other possible control measures

and the reductions each would achieve;

3. The explanation for rejecting

alternatives as unreasonable or

impracticable;

4. A demonstration that reductions

are needed even after implementation of

reasonable and practicable alternatives,

and that the fuel control will provide

some or all of the needed reductions.

In this notice of proposed rulemaking

and associated Technical Support

Document (TSD), EPA addresses these

issues.

What Does the State’s Low-Sulfur/LowRVP Regulation Include?

The State’s low-sulfur/low-RVP

regulation includes two phases of fuel

controls that will eventually apply in

the 13-county Atlanta nonattainment

area and 32 surrounding attainment

counties. Described below are the

primary features of these phases of

control. The first phase of fuel controls

apply to the 13-county Atlanta

nonattainment area (highlighted in bold)

and 12 surrounding attainment counties

which include the following: Barrow,

Bartow, Butts, Carroll, Cherokee,

Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, Dawson,

DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth,

Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall, Haralson,

Henry, Jackson, Newton, Paulding,

Pickens, Rockdale, Spalding, and

Walton. The controls for the first phase

of the State’s program, effective through

2002, require that all gasoline sold

during the control period (June 1

through September 15) in these counties

contain a maximum RVP of 7.0 pounds

per square inch (psi) and maximum

volume-weighted seasonal average

sulfur level of 150 parts per million

(ppm) (by weight) and, effective April 1,

2001, a maximum per-gallon volumeweighted sulfur level of 500 ppm (by

weight). For ethanol blends meeting

specified conditions, Georgia’s

regulations limit RVP to a maximum of

8.0 psi.

The second phase of fuel controls

apply to the aforementioned counties

and 20 additional attainment counties

surrounding the Atlanta nonattainment

area. These additional counties include:

Banks, Chattooga, Clarke, Floyd,

Gordon, Heard, Jasper, Jones, Lamar,

Lumpkin, Madison, Meriwether,

Monroe, Morgan, Oconee, Pike, Polk,

Putnam, Troup, and Upson. The fuel

controls for the second phase of the

State’s program are effective April 1,

2003. Under this phase of the State’s

program, the RVP requirement is

maintained and extended to the

additional counties but otherwise does

not change. The sulfur requirements,

however, become more stringent annual

averages. The maximum annual average

sulfur level allowed in gasoline is

reduced to 30 ppm (by weight); the pergallon limit is reduced to 150 ppm (by

weight). Effective June 1, 2004, the

seasonal per-gallon sulfur limit is

reduced to 80 ppm (by weight) during

the June 1 through September 15 control

period.

How Will the Program be Enforced?

EPA finds that the fuel rule contains

adequate enforcement provisions.

GAEPD will enforce the low-sulfur/lowRVP rule. Producers, importers,

terminals, pipelines, truckers, rail

carriers, and retail dispensing outlets

are subject to provisions of this rule.

Registration, recordkeeping, reporting,

and certification requirements are

included. GAEPD will conduct

sampling for the fuel program in

accordance with the ‘‘Methodology for

Randomized Sampling to Estimate Mean

Sulfur in Gasoline During a Specified

Ozone Season’’ (contained in Appendix

XXX of the attainment demonstration)

or by some EPA-approved modification

of this sampling plan. Samples, the

number to be determined in

coordination with GAEPD and EPA, will

be collected and analyzed for RVP and

sulfur throughout the control period.

Any sample that exceeds the limits

specified in the fuel rule will be

considered a violation and may require

an enforcement action. If an

enforcement action is warranted,

GAEPD would use one of two

approaches. Upon learning of a

violation, the GAEPD will issue a notice

of violation and negotiate a consent

order. If a consent order cannot be

negotiated, GAEPD will issue an

administrative order. Another provision

of the fuel rule provides that the

seasonal sulfur average will not exceed

140 ppm when the sulfur limit is 150

ppm. If the seasonal sulfur average

exceeds 140 ppm, GAEPD will require

100 percent terminal testing in lieu of

testing at the retail level for future

control periods. Also, when Georgia’s

sulfur requirement is reduced to 30

ppm, 30 ppm is the ‘‘trigger’’ that will

require 100 percent terminal testing in

lieu of testing at the retail level for

future control periods. Additional

commitments related to the enforcement

and implementation of the Georgia fuel

program are provided in the transmittal

letter for the November 9, 2001, fuel

control supplemental ‘‘necessity’’

demonstration.

Will the Low-Sulfur/Low-RVP Fuel

Control Program Provide Needed

Emission Reductions?

The State’s modeling for this

attainment demonstration shows that,

even with implementation of all

reasonable and practicable measures,

including the low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel

program, the design value for the

nonattainment area will just barely meet

the 1-hour ozone standard. Please refer

to the accompanying TSD for more

information about the photochemical

modeling and the weight-of-evidence

(WOE) analysis. Once fully

implemented, the low-sulfur/low-RVP

fuel program will provide 42.93 tons per

day (TPD) of NOX and 24.16 TPD of

VOC emission reductions. Thus, the

low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel program will

provide emissions reductions needed

for the Atlanta nonattainment area to

achieve the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.

On May 1, 1998, EPA released a staff

paper presenting EPA’s understanding

of the impact of gasoline sulfur on

emissions from motor vehicles and

exploring what gasoline producers and

automobile manufacturers could do to

reduce sulfur’s impact on emissions.

The staff paper noted that gasoline

sulfur degrades the effectiveness of

63984 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 238 / Tuesday, December 11, 2001 / Proposed Rules

catalytic converters and that high sulfur

levels in commercial gasoline could

affect the ability of future automobiles—

especially those designed for very low

emissions—to meet more stringent NOX

and VOC standards that are in use. The

paper also pointed out that sulfur

control will provide additional NOX

benefits by lowering emissions from the

current fleet of vehicles.

Lowering the RVP in gasoline reduces

VOC emissions, primarily through

reducing evaporative losses from

vehicle fuel tanks, lines, and carburetors

as well as losses from gasoline storage

and transfer facilities. To a lesser

degree, lowering RVP can also reduce

VOCs in vehicle exhaust.

Reducing these emissions in both the

nonattainment area and the surrounding

attainment areas will help address the

ozone problem in the Atlanta

nonattainment area. Specifically,

lowering NOX and VOC emissions

through the Atlanta low-sulfur/low-RVP

program will benefit the Atlanta

nonattainment area by reducing NOX

and VOCs emitted within the 13-county

nonattainment area, and by vehicles that

originate in the 32-county attainment

area and drive into the nonattainment

area. Please refer to the TSD for more

information on the commuting patterns

for the area.

Are There Any Reasonable and

Practicable Alternatives to Georgia’s

Fuel Program?

The State conducted thorough

analyses of potential non-fuel control

measures available for the Atlanta

nonattainment area. The attainment

demonstration for the Atlanta

nonattainment area contains a detailed

discussion of point and other source

controls that are required to help

achieve attainment of the 1-hour ozone

NAAQS in the Atlanta nonattainment

area. Many of these control measures

were analyzed in a study, ‘‘The Direct

Cost of Controlling NOX and VOC

emissions in Atlanta,’’ completed by the

Georgia State University on November

1, 1997. Following the completion of

this study, the State made its own

review of possible control measures,

including its review of ‘‘reasonably

available control measures’’ (RACM) as

required under the Act. The State’s

summary of its review of non-fuel

control measures is contained in

Attachment 3 to the November 9, 2001

‘‘necessity’’ demonstration, which is

available in the docket for this

rulemaking. The discussion below

briefly describes the State’s evaluation

of the reasonableness and practicability

of the non-fuel alternatives that are

potentially available after adopting

those control measures already included

in the revised attainment

demonstration. For more detail on the

control measures that have already been

included in the revised attainment

demonstration, and on the State’s

evaluation of remaining potential

alternatives, see the TSD for this

rulemaking.

Each potential control option was

evaluated according to: (1) The State’s

authority to implement controls; (2) the

amount of NOX reductions; (3) the

amount of VOC reductions; (4) whether

a similar control measure is already

being implemented; (5) the costeffectiveness of the controls; (6) whether

SIP credit has already been taken for the

measure; and (7) whether the measure

can be implemented by May 1, 2003

(since measures implemented after this

date cannot advance the 2004

attainment date).

GAEPD considered the following

source categories for additional VOC

and NOX control measures for the

purposes of evaluating the ‘‘necessity’’

of the fuel control measure: (for point

sources) furniture and fixtures

manufacturing facilities, food and

kindred products facilities, commercial

printing facilities, chemical products

facilities, rubber and plastic facilities,

paper and allied products facilities,

primary metal facilities, fabricated metal

products facilities, non-electrical

machinery facilities, electrical

equipment facilities, petroleum refining

facilities, asphalt and coating facilities,

air transportation facilities,

transportation equipment facilities,

stone, clay, and glass products facilities,

hydraulic cement facilities, and sewage

plants; (for area sources) auto

refinishing operations, surface cleaning

and preparation operations, solvent

degreasing operations, new residential

natural gas water heaters, certain

commercial and/or industrial watertube

and firetube boilers and pesticide

application; (for on-road mobile)

elimination of vehicle I/M waivers and

exemptions, transportation demand

management and vehicle usage

disincentives; (for nonroad mobile)

railroad switcher engines, specific

recreational vehicle types and/or

pleasure craft, and lawn and garden

equipment.

After further analysis of potential

controls on each of the above sources,

GAEPD concluded that it was not

reasonable or practicable to further

control these sources. Specifically, for

many of the sources listed above GAEPD

stated that the time required to

implement controls is unpredictable

because legislative action authorizing

such regulation by GAEPD would be

required, or the number of facilities and

potential discharge points affected by

these control measures would require a

tremendous increase in GAEPD

resources to implement and ensure

compliance.

Based on the State’s analysis of the

potentially available alternatives, we

agree that there are no reasonable or

practicable non-fuel control measures

available to the State to achieve the 1-

hour ozone NAAQS in a timely manner.

Individually, none of these controls

would supply enough emissions

reductions to displace the need for the

fuel measure. In order to replace the

needed VOC reductions provided by the

fuel measure, the State would need to

implement nearly all of the potential

controls which would require

substantial resources and may not be

possible in the time allowed, i.e., by

2004. Even if the State did adopt and

implement all of the potentially

available NOX control measures, the

State would not be able to replace the

needed NOX reductions provided by the

fuel measure. Compared to all of the

potentially available measures outlined

in the TSD, the low-sulfur/low-RVP

fuel, which has already been

implemented in its first phase, is the

most reasonable and practicable

measure available to reduce the

emissions from ozone precursors for the

Atlanta nonattainment area. Low-sulfur/

low-RVP fuel is readily available to the

State because it is also being provided

to the Birmingham, Alabama

nonattainment area. The benefits of this

fuel program are already being felt in

the Atlanta nonattainment area.

Proposed Action by EPA

EPA is proposing to approve Georgia’s

low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel program into

the SIP. The State has demonstrated

necessity as required by section

211(c)(4)(C) of the Act. Without the fuel

control program in both the

nonattainment area and in the

surrounding attainment areas, the

design values for the nonattainment area

will continue to exceed the 1-hour

ozone NAAQS. In the Atlanta

attainment demonstration, the State

examined control measures, not

previously implemented, and concluded

that, even with adoption of all

reasonable and practicable non-fuel

control measures, additional VOC and

NOX reductions in the area are

necessary to achieve the 1-hour ozone

NAAQS. The State further demonstrated

that the fuel control satisfies the

requirements of section 110 and will

supply reductions needed to achieve the

ozone NAAQS.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 238 / Tuesday, December 11, 2001 / Proposed Rules 63985

II. Administrative Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed

action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory

action’’ and therefore is not subject to

review by the Office of Management and

Budget. For this reason, this action is

also not subject to Executive Order

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May

22, 2001)). This proposed action merely

approves state law as meeting federal

requirements and imposes no additional

requirements beyond those imposed by

state law. Accordingly, the

Administrator certifies that this

proposed rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities under the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.).

Because this rule proposes to approve

pre-existing requirements under state

law and does not impose any additional

enforceable duty beyond that required

by state law, it does not contain any

unfunded mandate or significantly or

uniquely affect small governments, as

described in the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4).

This proposed rule also does not have

a substantial direct effect on one or

more Indian tribes, on the relationship

between the Federal Government and

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities between the

Federal Government and Indian tribes,

as specified by Executive Order 13175

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor

will it have substantial direct effects on

the States, on the relationship between

the national government and the States,

or on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government, as specified in

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,

August 10, 1999), because it merely

proposes to approve a state rule

implementing a federal standard, and

does not alter the relationship or the

distribution of power and

responsibilities established in the CAA.

This proposed rule also is not subject to

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,

April 23, 1997), because it is not

economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s

role is to approve state choices,

provided that they meet the criteria of

the CAA. In this context, in the absence

of a prior existing requirement for the

State to use voluntary consensus

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority

to disapprove a SIP submission for

failure to use VCS. It would thus be

inconsistent with applicable law for

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of

the CAA. Thus, the requirements of

section 12(d) of the National

Technology Transfer and Advancement

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not

apply. As required by section 3 of

Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729,

February 7, 1996), in issuing this

proposed rule, EPA has taken the

necessary steps to eliminate drafting

errors and ambiguity, minimize

potential litigation, and provide a clear

legal standard for affected conduct. EPA

has complied with Executive Order

12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by

examining the takings implications of

the rule in accordance with the

‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental

Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk

and Avoidance of Unanticipated

Takings’ issued under the executive

order.

This proposed approval of the Georgia

fuel control necessity demonstration

does not impose an information

collection burden under the provisions

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: November 30, 2001.

A. Stanley Meiburg,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

[FR Doc. 01–30588 Filed 12–10–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 62

[VT 022–1225b; FRL–7116–5]

Approval and Promulgation of State

Plans for Designated Facilities and

Pollutants: Vermont; Negative

Declaration

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the

Sections 111(d)/129 negative

declaration submitted by the Vermont

Agency of Natural Resources (ANR) on

June 5, 2001. This negative declaration

adequately certifies that there are no

existing commercial and industrial solid

waste incineration units (CISWIs)

located within the boundaries of the

state of Vermont.

DATES: EPA must receive comments in

writing by January 10, 2002.

ADDRESSES: You should address your

written comments to: Mr. Steven Rapp,

Chief, Air Permits Program Unit, Office

of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. EPA, One

Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAP),

Boston, Massachusetts 02114–2023.

Copies of documents relating to this

proposed rule are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the following location. The

interested persons wanting to examine

these documents should make an

appointment with the appropriate office

at least 24 hours before the day of the

visit.

Environmental Protection Agency, Air

Permits Program Unit, Office of

Ecosystem Protection, Suite 1100 (CAP),

One Congress Street, Boston,

Massachusetts 02114–2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John

Courcier, Office of Ecosystem Protection

(CAP), EPA-New England, Region 1,

Boston, Massachusetts 02203, (617)

918–1659, or by e-mail at

courcier.john@epa.gov. While the public

may forward questions to EPA via email, it must submit comments on this

proposed rule according to the

procedures outlined above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under

Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act, EPA

published regulations at 40 CFR part 60,

subpart B which require states to submit

control plans to control emissions of

designated pollutants from designated

facilities. In the event that a state does

not have a particular designated facility

located within its boundaries, EPA

requires that a negative declaration be

submitted in lieu of a control plan.

The Vermont ANR submitted the

negative declaration to satisfy the

requirements of 40 CFR part 60, subpart

B. In the Final Rules Section of this

Federal Register, EPA is approving the

Vermont negative declaration as a direct

final rule without a prior proposal. EPA

is doing this because the Agency views

this action as a noncontroversial

submittal and anticipates that it will not

receive any significant, material, and

adverse comments. A detailed rationale

for the approval is set forth in the direct

final rule. If EPA does not receive any

significant, material, and adverse

comments to this action, then the

approval will become final without

further proceedings. If EPA receives

adverse comments, the direct final rule

will be withdrawn and EPA will address

all public comments received in a

subsequent final rule based on this

proposed rule. EPA will not begin a

second comment period.

8200 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

SUMMARY: NARA is amending its

regulations on use of NARA research

rooms to add a policy on use of public

access personal computers

(workstations) in the research rooms.

These NARA-provided workstations

will provide researcher access to the

Internet. We are also clarifying that, in

research rooms where the plastic

researcher identification card is also

used with the facility’s security system,

we will issue a plastic card to

researchers who have a paper card from

another NARA facility. This rule will

affect researchers who use NARA

research facilities nationwide.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 25, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nancy Allard at telephone number 301–

713–7360, ext. 226, or fax number 301–

713–7270.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NARA

published a notice of proposed

rulemaking on September 7, 2001 at 66

FR 46752. The comment period ended

on November 6, 2001. NARA received

no public comments, and is issuing this

final rule without change.

The public access computers

described in § 1254.25 are being

installed in research and/or consultation

rooms in all NARA archival facilities,

including regional archives and

Presidential libraries, to provide

Internet access for research purposes,

such as access to NARA’s Archival

Information Locator (NAIL), and NAIL’s

successor, the Archival Research

Catalog (ARC). Computers designated

for public use provide Internet access

only. At least one of the public Internet

access workstations in each facility

complies with the Workforce

Investment Act of 1998, ensuring

comparable accessibility to individuals

with disabilities. Individual

accessibility requirements are addressed

on an as-needed basis. We encourage

people who require assistive technology

to notify the appropriate research room

at least two weeks in advance.

This rule is not a significant

regulatory action for the purposes of

Executive Order 12866 and has not been

reviewed by the Office of Management

and Budget. As required by the

Regulatory Flexibility Act, I certify that

this rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities because it applies only to

individuals conducting research on

NARA premises. This regulation does

not have any federalism or tribal

implications.

List of Subjects in 36 CFR Part 1254

Archives and records.

For the reasons set forth in the

preamble, NARA amends part 1254 of

title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, as

follows:

PART 1254—AVAILABILITY OF

RECORDS AND DONATED

HISTORICAL MATERIALS

1. The authority citation for part 1254

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 44 U.S.C. 2101–2118; 5 U.S.C.

552; and E.O. 12600, 52 FR 23781, 3 CFR,

1987 Comp., p. 235.

2. Revise § 1254.6 to read as follows:

§ 1254.6 Researcher identification card.

(a) An identification card is issued to

each person who is approved to use

records other than microfilm. Cards are

valid for one year, and may be renewed

upon application. Cards are valid at

each facility, except as described in

paragraph (b) of this section. They are

not transferable and must be presented

if requested by a guard or research room

attendant.

(b) At the National Archives in

College Park and other NARA facilities

that issue and use plastic researcher

identification cards as part of their

security systems, paper researcher

identification cards issued at other

NARA facilities are not valid. In

facilities that use plastic researcher

identification cards, NARA will issue a

plastic card to replace the paper card at

no charge.

3. Add § 1254.25 to read as follows:

§ 1254.25 Rules for public access use of

the Internet on NARA-supplied personal

computers.

(a) Public access personal computers

(workstations) are available for Internet

use in all NARA research rooms. The

number of workstations varies per

location. These workstations are

intended for research purposes and are

provided on a first-come-first-served

basis. When others are waiting to use

the workstation, a 30-minute time limit

may be imposed on the use of the

equipment.

(b) Researchers should not expect

privacy while using these workstations.

These workstations are operated and

maintained on a United States

Government system, and activity may be

monitored to protect the system from

unauthorized use. By using this system,

researchers expressly consent to such

monitoring and the reporting of

unauthorized use to the proper

authorities.

(c) At least one Internet access

workstation will be provided in each

facility that complies with the

Workforce Investment Act of 1998,

ensuring comparable accessibility to

individuals with disabilities.

(d) Researchers may download

information to a diskette and print

materials, but the research room staff

will furnish the diskettes and paper.

Researchers may not use personally

owned diskettes on NARA personal

computers.

(e) Researchers may not load files or

any type of software on these

workstations.

Dated: February 15, 2002.

John W. Carlin,

Archivist of the United States.

[FR Doc. 02–4211 Filed 2–21–02; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7515–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[GA–47–2; GA–55–2; GA–58–2–200216;

FRL–7148–4]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality State Implementation Plans;

Georgia: Control of Gasoline Sulfur

and Volatility

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision,

submitted by the State of Georgia

through the Georgia Environmental

Protection Division (GAEPD),

establishing low-sulfur and low-Reid

Vapor Pressure (RVP) requirements for

gasoline distributed in the 13-county

Atlanta nonattainment area and 32

surrounding attainment counties.

Georgia developed these fuel

requirements to reduce emissions of

nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile

organic compounds (VOC) as part of the

State’s strategy to achieve the National

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)

for ozone in the Atlanta nonattainment

area. EPA is approving Georgia’s fuel

requirements into the SIP because these

fuel requirements are in accordance

with the requirements of the Clean Air

Act (the Act), and are necessary for the

Atlanta nonattainment area to achieve

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in a timely

manner.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is

effective on March 25, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State

submittal(s) are available at the

following addresses for inspection

during normal business hours:

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 4, Air Planning Branch, 61

Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2002 / Rules and Regulations 8201

Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia

30303–8960. Lynorae Benjamin, (404)

562–9040.

Air Protection Branch, Georgia

Environmental Protection Division,

Georgia Department of Natural

Resources, 4244 International Parkway,

Suite 120, Atlanta, Georgia 30354.

Telephone (404) 363–7000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lynorae Benjamin, Air Quality

Modeling and Transportation Section,

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and

Toxics Management Division, Region 4,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth

Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–

8960. The telephone number is (404)

562–9040. Ms. Benjamin can also be

reached via electronic mail at

benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

October 28, 1999, the State of Georgia,

through the GAEPD, submitted an

attainment demonstration for the 1-hour

ozone NAAQS for the Atlanta

nonattainment area for inclusion into

the Georgia SIP. This submittal included

a version of the low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel

regulations that has subsequently been

amended by the State, and submitted by

the State to EPA in revised form in

subsequent SIP revisions dated July 31,

2000, and August 21, 2001. The version

submitted on August 21, 2001, which is

the subject of this final rulemaking, is

the ‘‘Gasoline Marketing Rule,’’

provided in Georgia’s Rules for Air

Quality Control, Chapter 391–3–1.02(2)

(bbb).

On May 31, 2000, in support of its

request for SIP approval of the State fuel

regulations, GAEPD also submitted a

demonstration that, in accordance with

section 211(c)(4)(C) of the Act, the fuel

control is necessary to achieve a

NAAQS. On November 9, 2001, GAEPD

submitted an updated ‘‘necessity’’

demonstration which reflected the

revised motor vehicle emissions budget,

the request for an attainment date

extension from 2003 to 2004, and the

revised Partnership for a Smog Free

Georgia emissions calculations.

Specifically, the Georgia ‘‘necessity’’

demonstration submittals contain data

and analyses to support a finding under

section 211(c)(4)(C) that the State’s lowsulfur and low-RVP requirements are

necessary for the Atlanta nonattainment

area to achieve the ozone NAAQS. On

December 11, 2001, (66 FR 63982) EPA

published a notice of proposed

rulemaking (NPR) to approve the fuel

waiver request and fuel rule. That NPR

provides a detailed description of this

action and EPA’s rationale for proposed

approval. The public comment period

for this action ended on January 25,

2002. No comments, adverse or

otherwise, were received on EPA’s

proposal.

Final Action

EPA is approving Georgia’s lowsulfur/low-RVP fuel program into the

federally enforceable SIP because the

fuel requirements are in accordance

with the Act, are necessary for the

Atlanta nonattainment area to achieve

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in a timely

manner, and will supply some or all of

the reductions needed to achieve the

ozone NAAQS.

Administrative Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and

therefore is not subject to review by the

Office of Management and Budget. For

this reason, this action is also not

subject to Executive Order 13211,

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That

Significantly Affect Energy Supply,

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May

22, 2001). This action merely approves

state law as meeting Federal

requirements and imposes no additional

requirements beyond those imposed by

state law. Accordingly, the

Administrator certifies that this rule

will not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility

Act (5 U.S. C. 601 et seq.). Because this

rule approves pre-existing requirements

under state law and does not impose

any additional enforceable duty beyond

that required by state law, it does not

contain any unfunded mandate or

significantly or uniquely affect small

governments, as described in the

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(Public Law 104–4).

This rule also does not have tribal

implications because it will not have a

substantial direct effect on one or more

Indian tribes, on the relationship

between the Federal Government and

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities between the

Federal Government and Indian tribes,

as specified by Executive Order 13175

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2001). This

action also does not have Federalism

implications because it does not have

substantial direct effects on the States,

on the relationship between the national

government and the States, on the

relationship between the national

government and the States, or on the

distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government, as specified in

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,

August 10, 1999). This action merely

approves a state rule implementing a

Federal standard, and does not alter the

relationship or the distribution of power

and responsibilities established in the

CAA. This rule also is not subject to

Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of

Children from Environmental Health

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,

April 23, 1997), because it is not

economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s

role is to approve state choices,

provided that they meet the criteria of

the CAA. In this context, in the absence

of prior existing requirements for the

State to use voluntary consensus

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority

to disapprove a SIP submission for

failure to use VCS. It would thus be

inconsistent with applicable law for

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of

the CAA. Thus, the requirements of

section 12(d) of the National

Technology Transfer and Advancement

Act of 1195 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not

apply. This rule does not impose an

information collection burden under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Action of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

The Congressional Review Act, 5

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides

that before a rule may take effect, the

agency promulgating the rule must

submit a rule report, which includes a

copy of the rule, to each House of the

Congress and to the Comptroller General

of the United States. EPA will submit a

report containing this rule and other

required information to the U.S. Senate,

the U.S. House of Representatives, and

the Comptroller General of the United

States prior to publication of the rule in

the Federal Register. A major rule

cannot take effect until 60 days after it

is published in the Federal Register.

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,

petitions for judicial review of this

action must be filed in the United States

Court of Appeals for the appropriate

circuit by April 23, 2002. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the

Administrator of this final rule does not

affect the finality of this rule for the

purposes of judicial review nor does it

extend the time within which a petition

for judicial review may be filed, and

shall not postpone the effectiveness of

such rule or action. This action may not

be challenged later in proceedings to

enforce its requirements. (See section

307(b)(2)).

8202 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2002 / Rules and Regulations

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons,

Incorporation by reference,

Intergovernmental relations, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Dated: February 4, 2002.

A. Stanley Meiburg,

Acting Regional Administrator,

Region 4.

Chapter I, title 40, Code of Federal

Regulations, is amended as follows:

PART 52—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52

continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart L—Georgia

2. Section 52.569 is removed and

reserved.

3. Section 52.570 is amended by:

a. Adding in the table to paragraph (c)

a new entry in numerical order for 391–

3–1–.02(2)(bbb); and

b. Adding two new entries 16 and 17

in numerical order to the table in

paragraph (e).

The additions read as follows:

§ 52.570 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

EPA APPROVED GEORGIA REGULATIONS

State citation Title/subject State effective date

EPA approval date Explanation

*******

391–3–1–.02(2)(bbb) .......................................... Gasoline Marketing Rule ................................... 07/18/01 2/22/02

*****

* * * * * * *

(e) * * *

EPA APPROVED GEORGIA NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS

Name of nonregulatory SIP provisionApplicable geographic or nonattainment area State submittal date/effective date EPA approval date

*******

16. Preemption Waiver Request

for Low-RVP, Low-Sulfur Gasoline Under Air Quality Control

Rule 391–3–1–.02(2)(bbb).

Atlanta Metropolitan Area ............. May 31, 2000 ................................ February 22, 2002

17. Technical Amendment to the

Georgia Fuel Waiver Request of

May 31, 2000.

Atlanta Metropolitan Area ............. November 9, 2001 ........................ February 22, 2002

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 02–4142 Filed 2–21–02; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 63

[AD–FRL–7148–7]

RIN 2060–AE34

National Emission Standards for

Hazardous Air Pollutants from Natural

Gas Transmission and Storage

Facilities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; technical correction.

SUMMARY: On June 17, 1999, we issued

the national emission standards for

hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP)

from Oil and Natural Gas Production

Facilities and the national emission

standards for hazardous air pollutants

from Natural Gas Transmission and

Storage Facilities (Oil and Gas

NESHAP). On June 29, 2001, we issued

technical corrections to clarify intent

and correct errors in the Oil and Gas

NESHAP. This technical correction will

correct an error that was made in the

technical correction for the Natural Gas

Transmission and Storage Facilities

NESHAP and will not change the level

of health protection the Natural Gas

Transmission and Storage Facilities

NESHAP provide or the basic control

requirements of the Natural Gas

Transmission and Storage Facilities

NESHAP. The NESHAP require new

and existing major sources to control

emissions of hazardous air pollutants

(HAP) to the level reflecting application

of the maximum achievable control

technology.

Section 553 of the Administrative

Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B),

provides that, when an agency for good

cause finds that notice and public

procedure are impractible, unnecessary,

or contrary to the public interest, the

agency may issue a rule without

providing notice and an opportunity for

public comment. We have determined

that there is good cause for making this

error correction without prior proposal

and opportunity for comment because

the change to the rule is a minor

technical correction, is noncontroversial

in nature, and does not substantively

change the requirements of the Natural

Gas Transmission and Storage Facilities

NESHAP. Thus, notice and public

procedure are unnessary. We find that

this constitutes good cause under 5

U.S.C. 553(b)(5).

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 22, 2002.

ADDRESSEES: Docket No. A–94–04

contains the supporting information

used in the development of this

rulemaking. The docket is located at the

U.S. EPA in room M–1500, Waterside

Mall (ground floor), 401 M Street SW.,

Washington, DC 20460, and may be

inspected from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.,

TECHNICAL SUPPORT DOCUMENT

ATLANTA FUEL STRATEGY 

AND WAIVER REQUEST

Section 211(c)(4)(A) of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (the Act) generally

preempts states from adopting controls respecting fuel characteristics or components that EPA

has controlled under section 211(c)(1). However, under section 211(c)(4)(C), EPA may approve

an otherwise preempted state fuel control measure into a state implementation plan (SIP) if we

find the control is necessary to achieve a National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)

because no other reasonable or practicable measures exist that would bring about timely

attainment. Georgia has requested a “waiver” from the preemption of 211(c)(4)(A) (i.e., has

asked EPA to approve its fuel control program into the SIP) because the State believes the fuel

control is necessary to assist the State in achieving the NAAQS for ozone in the Atlanta

nonattainment area. 

The State seeks SIP approval for low-Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) and low-sulfur fuel

controls which include two phases that will eventually apply in the 13-county Atlanta

nonattainment area and 32 surrounding attainment counties. The fuel control program is part of a

larger strategy (the Atlanta attainment demonstration SIP) to reduce ozone precursor emissions in

the Atlanta nonattainment area. The measure for success of the Atlanta nonattainment SIP

strategy is a lowering of modeled peak values in this nonattainment area.

Atlanta Low-Sulfur/Low-RVP SIP Approval Justification

I. BACKGROUND

A. What did the State submit?

On October 28, 1999, the State submitted for EPA approval a SIP revision with an ozone

attainment demonstration for the Atlanta non-attainment area which relied, in part, on the lowsulfur/low-RVP fuel regulations as one of the control measures helping to achieve attainment of

the ozone NAAQS. This submission included a version of the fuel regulations that has

subsequently been amended by the State, and submitted by the State in revised form in

subsequent SIP revisions dated July 31, 2000, and August 21, 2001. The version submitted on

August 21, 2001, which is the subject of this Technical Support Document (TSD), is the

“Gasoline Marketing Rule,” provided in Georgia’s Rules for Air Quality Control, Chapter 391-3-

1.02(2)(bbb).

On May 31, 2000, in support of its request for SIP approval of the State fuel regulations,

Georgia also submitted a demonstration that, in accordance with section 211(c)(4)(C) of the Act,

the fuel control is necessary to achieve a NAAQS. On November 9, 2001, Georgia submitted an

updated “necessity” demonstration which reflected the revised motor vehicle emissions budget,

the request for an attainment date extension from 2003 to 2004, and the revised emissions

calculations used in the report entitled, “Partnership for a Smog Free Georgia.”
2

B. What does the State’s low-sulfur/low-RVP regulation include?

The State’s low-sulfur/low-RVP regulation includes two phases of fuel controls that will

eventually apply in the 13-county Atlanta nonattainment area and 32 surrounding attainment

counties. Described below are the primary features of these phases of control. The first phase of

fuel controls apply to the 13-county Atlanta nonattainment area (highlighted in bold) and 12

surrounding attainment counties which include the following: Barrow, Bartow, Butts, Carroll,

Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, Dawson, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton,

Gwinnett, Hall, Haralson, Henry, Jackson, Newton, Paulding, Pickens, Rockdale, Spalding,

and Walton. The controls for the first phase of the State’s program, effective through 2002, 

require that all gasoline sold during the control period (June 1st through September 15th) in these

counties contain a maximum RVP of 7.0 pounds per square inch (psi) and maximum volumeweighted seasonal average sulfur level of 150 parts per million (ppm) (by weight) and, effective

April 1, 2001, a maximum per-gallon volume-weighted sulfur level of 500 parts per million

(ppm) (by weight). For ethanol blends meeting specified conditions, Georgia’s regulations limit

RVP to a maximum of 8.0 psi.

The second phase of fuel controls apply to the aforementioned counties and 20 additional

attainment counties surrounding the Atlanta nonattainment area. These additional counties

include: Banks, Chattooga, Clarke, Floyd, Gordon, Heard, Jasper, Jones, Lamar, Lumpkin,

Madison, Meriwether, Monroe, Morgan, Oconee, Pike, Polk, Putnam, Troup, and Upson. The

fuel controls for the second phase of the State’s program are effective April 1, 2003. Under this

phase of the State’s program, the RVP requirement is maintained and extended to the additional

counties but otherwise does not change. The sulfur requirements, however, become more

stringent annual averages. The maximum annual average sulfur level allowed in gasoline is

reduced to 30 ppm (by weight); the per-gallon limit is reduced to 150 ppm (by weight). Effective

June 1, 2004, the seasonal per-gallon sulfur limit is reduced to 80 ppm (by weight) during the

June 1- September 15 control period.

C. How does the low-sulfur/low-RVP proposal relate to other SIP activities in the state?

As noted above, on October 28, 1999, Georgia submitted an attainment demonstration

for the Atlanta nonattainment area, which relies upon many control measures, including the

low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel program to support the demonstration. On December 16, 1999, EPA 

to approve the October 28, 1999 attainment demonstration for the Atlanta nonattainment area, as

well as the underlying rule revisions with the exception of the Georgia fuel rule (the subject of

this TSD.) (64 FR 70478) EPA’s approval was based on the condition that the GAEPD

satisfy certain requirements . 

Subsequently, the GAEPD submitted revisions to the Atlanta attainment demonstration

on January 31, 2000, and July 31, 2000 along with revisions to State rules supporting the

attainment demonstrations. Those rule revisions were for approval on December 18, 2000. (65

FR 79034) No adverse comments were received pertaining to any rule revisions. 
3

On July 10, 2001, EPA granted final approval to the rule revisions contained in the

December 16, 1999, and December 18, 2000 proposals. (66 FR 35906) The final rule noted that

EPA action for the Atlanta attainment demonstration would be taken in a separate notice. 

On July 17, 2001, Georgia submitted another revised attainment demonstration. The

attainment demonstration continues to rely in part on the expected emissions reductions that will

be achieved by the low-sulfur/ low-RVP fuel control now being for SIP approval. Based on the

July 17th revised Atlanta attainment demonstration, EPA is currently proposing approval for the

Atlanta attainment demonstration in a separate action from the action being taken on the fuel

control.

D. What is EPA proposing?

In this action we are proposing to approve the low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel control program

into the Georgia SIP pursuant to section 110 of the Act. The approval of a fuel control measure

preempted under 211(c)(4)(A) must also meet the requirements of section 211(c)(4)(C). Under

this section we may approve such a fuel control measure into a SIP if we can find that this fuel

control is “necessary” to achieve a NAAQS. A fuel control is “necessary” if no other measures

that would bring about timely attainment exist, or if other measures exist and are technically

feasible, but are unreasonable or impracticable.

The EPA guidance used to review a state’s submittal for a fuel control “necessity”

demonstration is the August 21, 1997, Guidance on Use of Opt-in to RFG and Low-RVP

Requirements. This guidance sets out four issues to be analyzed: 

1. The quantity of emissions reductions needed to achieve the NAAQS;

2. Other possible control measures and the reductions each would achieve;

3. The explanation for rejecting alternatives as unreasonable or impracticable; and

4. A demonstration that reductions are needed even after implementation of all

reasonable and practicable alternatives, and that the fuel control will provide some or all

of the needed reductions.

In the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) and this technical support document, we address

these issues in a slightly different fashion. First, we explain the way in which the State’s lowsulfur/low-RVP fuel program will help the Atlanta nonattainment area achieve the NAAQS. 

Second, we review the reasonableness and practicability of non-fuel control alternatives. Finally,

we show that with the implementation of all reasonable and practicable control measures

including the proposed low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel controls, the Atlanta nonattainment area may be

able to just attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 

II. NECESSITY JUSTIFICATION 

A. How does Georgia’s low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel requirement, in the 13-county Atlanta
4

nonattainment area and the 32-county surrounding attainment area, reduce ozone and emissions

of NOX and VOC, and thus benefit the Atlanta nonattainment area?

Lowering the sulfur and RVP of gasoline reduces NOx and VOC emissions, respectively. 

Lowering the sulfur in gasoline reduces NOx emissions by minimizing the degradation of

catalytic converters for vehicles currently in use. Lowering the RVP in gasoline reduces VOC

emissions, primarily through reducing evaporative losses from vehicle fuel tanks, lines, and

carburetors as well as losses from gasoline storage and transfer facilities. To a lesser degree, 

low RVP gasoline also reduces the VOCs in vehicle exhaust . 

Reducing these emissions in both the nonattainment area and the surrounding attainment

areas will help address the ozone problem in the Atlanta nonattainment area. Specifically,

lowering NOx and VOC emissions through the Atlanta low-sulfur/low-RVP program will benefit

the Atlanta nonattainment area by reducing NOx and VOCs emitted within the nonattainment

area by vehicles that refuel in the 13-county nonattainment area, and by vehicles that originate in

the 32-county attainment areas and drive into the nonattainment area. 

Without these controls, gasoline sulfur and RVP levels would differ from area to area. 

The Atlanta nonattainment area would receive gasoline with sulfur levels in excess of 300 ppm

and an RVP of up to 7.8 psi during the summer months. The 32-county surrounding attainment

area subject to these controls would receive gasoline with a sulfur levels in excess of 300 ppm

and an RVP of up to 9.0 psi during the summer months. The State, based on modeling results

using EPA’s Complex Model, estimates that the proposed low-sulfur/low-RVP program for the

Atlanta nonattainment area alone will reduce NOx emissions from motor vehicles by at least 11.3

percent and VOC emissions from motor vehicles by at least 4.4 percent. In the attainment

counties, the modeling results from EPA’s Complex Model estimate that the proposed lowsulfur/low-RVP program will reduce NOx emissions from motor vehicles in those counties by at

least 12.3 percent and VOC emissions by 27.8 percent. After applying these percentages to

emissions factors from Mobile 5b runs, Georgia calculates that the combined benefit of the lowsulfur/low-RVP fuel program will result in an estimated 24.16 TPD of NOx emission reductions

and an estimated 42.93 TPD of VOC emission reductions for the Atlanta modeling domain.

Georgia has shown that there is significant commuting between the attainment and

nonattainment areas, and therefore, many of the vehicles driving and emitting in the

nonattainment area are likely to have refueled in the surrounding attainment counties. The State

submitted data in the May 31, 2000, fuel control necessity demonstration, showing commuting

patterns into the nonattainment area from surrounding attainment counties. The following Table

shows the number of counties contributing commuters to the Atlanta nonattainment area and the

percent of population in the county commuting based on the 1990 census data. We believe it is

reasonable to conclude that the areas with the heaviest amount of commuting to and from the

Atlanta nonattainment area are the areas where requiring the low-sulfur/low-RVP gasoline will

significantly benefit the Atlanta nonattainment area.
5

Table 1. Commuter contribution to the Atlanta nonattainment area

Attainment County Percent of county population commuting

into nonattainment area 

Banks 6

Barrow 38

Bartow 29

Butts 37

Carroll 25

Chattooga 1

Clarke 4

Dawson 52

Floyd 3

Gordon 3

Hall 16

Haralson 17

Heard 25

Jackson 11

Jasper 18

Jones 1

Lamar 16

Lumpkin 12

Madison 3

Meriwether 25

Monroe 9

Morgan 10

Newton 47

Oconee 4

Pickens 35
6

Pike 28

Polk 12

Putnam 4

Spalding 31

Troup 5 

Upson 4

Walton 4

B. Are there any reasonable and practicable alternatives to the low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel 

program? 

The State conducted thorough analyses of potential non-fuel control measures to help

achieve attainment of the ozone NAAQS in the Atlanta nonattainment area, and the attainment

demonstration contains a long list of point and other source controls that are or will be required

for this purpose. Many of these control measures were identified and analyzed in a study, “Direct

Cost of Controlling NOx and VOC Emissions in Atlanta,” completed by the Georgia State

University on November 1, 1997, and which is available in the docket for this rulemaking. 

Following the completion of this study, the State made its own review of possible control

measures, including its review of “reasonably available control measures” (RACM) as required

under the Act. The State’s summary of its review is contained in Attachment 3 to the November

9, 2001 “necessity” demonstration, which is available in the docket for this rulemaking. This

section of the TSD reviews the controls that have been adopted and evaluates the reasonableness

and practicability of the non-fuel alternatives that are potentially available.

1. Ozone control measures that have been adopted or proposed.

Table 2 includes a list of all local non-fuel control measures that have been or will be

adopted and are included in the revised attainment demonstration, together with the emission

reductions expected to be obtained from those measures in 2004.

Table 2. Ozone Attainment Demonstration SIP Reductions

Non-Fuel Control Measures

2004

NOx

Reduction

(TPD)

2004

VOC

Reduction

(TPD)

Large electric utility steam generators1

289.83 0

Partnership for a SMOG Free Georgia 4.28 6.51

Large NOx units in 13 Co. NAA 18.83 0

Changes in Enhanced I/M 12.25 11.33
7

Expanded new source review rule 20.94 0

New boilers & fuel burning equip. 0.67 0

Stationary engines & gas turbines 30.00 0

National LEV program 18.19 9.07

Locomotive engine standards 4.88 0.03

Consumer/commercial products II 0 13.82

Marine engine standards 0 1.25

Nonroad diesel engine standard II & III 7.13 12.97

Open Burning 7.79 41.68

Combustion Turbines 3.14 0

Electric Generating Units 44.63 0

486.30 121.22

1Reduction estimates are in terms of episode day instead of typical ozone season day emissions.

2. Assessment of other non-fuel measures that could potentially be adopted 

In addition to those control measures listed above and for the purpose of the Atlanta

attainment demonstration, GAEPD evaluated a long list of potential controls for adoption, as

listed on tables 3 and 4 below.

Each control option was evaluated according to: 1) the State’s authority to implement

controls; 2) the amount of NOx reductions; 3) the amount of VOC reductions; 4) whether a

similar control measure is already being implemented; 5) the cost-effectiveness of the controls;

6) whether SIP credit has already been taken for the measure; and 7) whether the measure can be

implemented by May 1, 2003 (since measures implemented after this date cannot advance the

2004 attainment date).

Table 3. VOC Remaining Measures

Source Category

VOC

Reductions

(TPD)

Reason For Rejecting Measure

Point Sources (13-county area only)

Reformulated coatings, automated

equipment cleaning devices, &

incinerators for furniture & fixtures

manufacturing facilities.

2.62 Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Incinerators for specific operations for 17.31* Number of facilities and potential
8

food & kindred products facilities. discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Incinerators for specific operations for

commercial printing facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Incinerators for specific operations for

chemical products facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Incinerators for specific operations for

rubber & plastic facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Incinerators for specific operations for

paper & allied products facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Incinerators for specific operations for

fabricated metal products facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Incinerators for specific operations for

non-electrical machinery facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Incinerators for specific operations for

electrical equipment facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Incinerators for specific operations for

petroleum refining facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and
9

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Incinerators for specific operations for air

transportation facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Incinerators & capture systems for

transportation equipment facilities.

7.18 Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Incinerators & scrubber systems for

stone, clay, & glass products facilities.

0.29 Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Source reduction for discharges to

sewage plants

0.01 Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the thousands and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Point Sources Sub-total 27.41

Area Sources (13-county area only)

Automated equipment cleaning devices

for auto refinishing coating guns.

2.62 Number of facilities and/or properties 

affected by the control measures number

in the thousands and would require

increased resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

High volume and low pressure auto

refinishing coating spray systems.

1.63 Number of facilities and/or properties 

affected by the control measures number

in the thousands and would require

increased resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.
10

SCAQMD surface cleaning rule 1122. 2.60 Number of facilities and/or properties 

affected by the control measures number

in the thousands and would require

increased resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

Low VOC content auto refinishing

surface preparation products.

0.66 Number of facilities and/or properties 

affected by the control measures number

in the thousands and would require

increased resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

Elimination of Solvent Degreasing 5.00 Number of facilities and/or properties 

affected by the control measures number

in the thousands and would require

increased resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

Limits on pesticide application during the

ozone season

1.00 Number of facilities and/or properties 

affected by the control measures number

in the thousands and would require

increased resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

Area Sources Sub-total 13.51

Onroad Mobile Sources (13-county area only)

Zero I/M waivers and exemptions 1.54 Measure would require legislative action

and would unlikely be successful.

because of potential environmental

justice issues.

Congestion Pricing / Tolls; Gasoline tax

increase ($0.50 per gallon,

Mileage/Emission based registration fees

($40-$400 annually; VMT fee (0.02 per

mile); Pay-as-you drive auto insurance

($0.50/gal)*

1.32 Measure would require legislative action.

The new requirements would appear to

be new “taxes/fees” or unacceptable

intrusion into individual rights and would

have little or no legislative support.

Trip reduction ordinances 0.05 Measure would require legislative action.

The new requirements would appear to

be new “taxes/fees” or unacceptable

intrusion into individual rights and would

have little or no legislative support.

Onroad Mobile Sources Sub-total 2.91

Other Source (13-county area only)

Ban gasoline ATVs, Minibikes, Off-road

motorcycles and golf carts during ozone

0.92 Measure would require legislative action.

The new requirements would appear to

be new “taxes/fees” or unacceptable

intrusion into individual rights and would

have little or no legislative support.

Replacement of pleasure crafts 0.32 Measure would require legislative action.

The new requirements would appear to

be new “taxes/fees” or unacceptable
11

intrusion into individual rights and would

have little or no legislative support.

Lawn mowers and Small Lawn and

Garden equipment (Phase II)

6.69 Measure would require legislative action.

The new requirements would appear to

be new “taxes/fees” or unacceptable

intrusion into individual rights and would

have little or no legislative support.

Other Sub-total 7.93

Total for All Sources 51.76

* Indicate these measures have been grouped together for determining VOC reductions.

Table 4. NOx Remaining Measures

Source Category

NOx

Reductions

(TPD)

Reason For Rejecting Measure

Point Sources (13-county area only)

Oxy-firing (OF) in combustion processes

for glass & glassware manufacturing.

2.73 Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the hundreds and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Energy recovery in combustion processes

for glass & glassware manufacturing.

0.11 Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the hundreds and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Low NOx burners (LNB) for combustion

equipment at primary metal facilities.

2.01* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the hundreds and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Low NOx burners (LNB) for combustion

equipment at transportation equipment

facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the hundreds and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Low NOx burners (LNB) for combustion

equipment at paperboard mill facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the hundreds and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.
12

Low NOx burners (LNB) for combustion

equipment at asphalt & coating facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the hundreds and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Low NOx burners (LNB) for combustion

equipment at hydraulic cement facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the hundreds and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Low NOx burners (LNB) for combustion

equipment at air transportation facilities.

* Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the hundreds and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Over fire air (OFA) for combustion

equipment at primary metal industry

facilities.

0.25** Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the hundreds and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Over fire air (OFA) for combustion

equipment at transportation equipment

facilities.

** Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the hundreds and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Over fire air (OFA) for combustion

equipment at paperboard mill facilities.

** Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the hundreds and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Over fire air (OFA) for combustion

equipment at air transportation facilities.

** Number of facilities and potential

discharge points affected by the control

measures number in the hundreds and

would require increased resources to

implement the new regulations and

ensure compliance.

Point Sources Sub-total 5.09

Area Sources (13-county area only)

A 0.09 lb/mmBtu NOx limit for new

residential natural gas water heaters.

0.07 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new
13

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for commercial distillate fielderected watertube boiler)

0.01 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for commercial distillate packaged

watertube boiler)

0.03 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for commercial distillate firetube

boiler)

0.09 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for commercial residual packaged

watertube boiler)

0.01 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for commercial residual firetube

boiler)

0.03 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for industrial distillate field-erected

watertube boiler)

0.04 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for industrial distillate packaged

watertube boiler)

0.10 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for industrial distillate firetube

boiler)

0.39 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for industrial residual field-erected 0.02 Number of commercial facilities and/or
14

watertube boiler) residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for industrial residual packaged

watertube boiler)

0.07 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for industrial residual firetube

boiler)

0.18 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for commercial natural gas fielderected watertube boiler)

0.13 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for commercial natural gas

packaged watertube boiler)

0.32 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for industrial natural gas fielderected watertube boiler)

0.55 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LEA (for industrial natural gas packaged

watertube boiler)

1.32 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

LNB (for industrial residual firetube

boiler)

0.54 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

RBs (for industrial natural gas fielderected watertube boiler)

2.45 Number of commercial facilities and/or

residential properties affected by the

control measures number in the
15

thousands and would require increased

resources to implement the new

regulations and ensure compliance.

Area Sources Sub-total 13.51

Onroad Mobile Sources (13-county area only)

Zero I/M waivers and exemptions 0.63 Measure would require legislative action

and would unlikely be successful.

because of potential environmental

justice issues.

Congestion Pricing / Tolls; Gasoline tax

increase ($0.50 per gallon,

Mileage/Emission based registration fees

($40-$400 annually; VMT fee (0.02 per

mile); Pay-as-you drive auto insurance

($0.50/gal)***

2.19*** Measure would require legislative action.

The new requirements would appear to

be new “taxes/fees” or unacceptable

intrusion into individual rights and would

have little or no legislative support.

Trip reduction ordinances 0.05 Measure would require legislative action.

The new requirements would appear to

be new “taxes/fees” or unacceptable

intrusion into individual rights and would

have little or no legislative support.

Onroad Mobile Sources Sub-total 2.87

Nonroad Mobile Sources (13-county area only)

Liquefied natural gas dual fuel for

railroad switchers.

3.05 Decisions affecting railroad switching

activities and operations often extend

beyond local and state boundaries

because of a practice of relocation of

equipment on an as needed basis. 

Relocation of equipment is determined

exclusively by the constantly changing

needs of a flexible and adaptable

transportation network.

Incentives for turnover of 2 and 4-cycle

engines

1.27 Measure would require legislative action

or incentives. The new requirements

would result in significant potential costs

for the incentives or would appear to be

an unacceptable intrusion into individual

rights and would therefore have little or

no legislative support.

Ban gasoline ATVs, Minibikes, Off-road

motorcycles and golf carts during ozone

0.01 Measure would require legislative action

or incentives. The new requirements

would result in significant potential costs

for the incentives or would appear to be

an unacceptable intrusion into individual

rights and would therefore have little or

no legislative support.

Nonroad Mobile Source Sub-total 4.33

Total for All Sources 

 18.66
16

* Indicate these measures have been grouped together for determining NOx reductions.

** Indicate these measures have been grouped together for determining NOx reductions.

*** Indicate measures that have an overlap in emissions reductions, so the measure with the

highest Nox reduction was the one used to calculate the remaining measure.

As noted in tables 3 and 4 above regarding the analysis of each of the above sources,

GAEPD concluded that it was not reasonable or practicable to further control these sources. 

Specifically, for many of the sources listed above GAEPD stated that the time required to

implement controls is unpredictable because legislative action authorizing such regulation by

GAEPD would be required, or the number of facilities and potential discharge points affected by

these control measures would require a tremendous increase in GAEPD resources to implement

and ensure compliance. 

Based on the State’s analysis of the potentially available alternatives, we agree that there

are no reasonable or practicable non-fuel control measures available to the State to achieve the 1-

hour ozone NAAQS in a timely manner. Individually, none of these controls would supply

enough emissions reductions to displace the need for the fuel measure. In order to replace the

needed VOC reductions provided by the fuel measure, the State would need to implement nearly

all of the potential controls which would require substantial resources and may not be possible in

the time allowed, i.e., by 2004. Even if the State did adopt and implement all of the potentially

available NOx control measures, the State would not be able to replace the needed NOx

emissions reductions provided by the fuel measure. Compared to all of the potentially available

measures outlined in this TSD, the low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel, which has already been

implemented in its first phase, is the most reasonable and practicable measure available to reduce

the emissions from ozone precursor emissions for the Atlanta nonattainment area. The lowsulfur/low-RVP fuel is readily available to the State because it is also being provided to the

Birmingham nonattainment area. The benefits of this fuel program are already being felt in the

Atlanta nonattainment area.

C. Is the low-RVP/low-sulfur fuel control program necessary for achieving the NAAQS?

The revised attainment demonstration uses a combination of photochemical grid

modeling and a weight-of-evidence (WOE) analysis to show that implementation of the

reasonable and practicable control measures listed above, including the low sulfur/low-RVP

program, should just bring the Atlanta nonattainment area into attainment of the 1-hour ozone

NAAQS. Modeling conducted by the State to support the attainment demonstration specifically

included the fuel control program, which is estimated to provide 24.16 tons per day NOx

emission reductions and 42.93 tpd VOC emission reductions. The results of this modeling

suggest that, even with the implementation of all these controls, the ozone modeled peak value

for the area may still exceed the 1-hour ozone standard. It is only by applying the WOE analysis

that the State can demonstrate attainment, so it is clear that the emissions reductions from all of

the modeled control measures, including the fuel control program, are necessary to help achieve

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the Atlanta nonattainment area. More information on how this
17

analysis was performed is contained in the TSD, Atlanta Serious Ozone Nonattainment Area 1-

Hour Oxone Attainment Demonstration, November 2001. This TSD was prepared in support of

the NPRM for the attainment demonstration, and is available in the docket for this NPRM. 

III. SIP APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS UNDER SECTION 110

The Georgia SIP submittals, including the fuel rule for Georgia’s low-sulfur/low-RVP

fuel control program and subsequent revisions, meet the requirements outlined in section 110 and

Part D of Title I of the CAA amendments and 40 CFR Part 51 (Requirements for Preparation,

Adoption and Submittal of Implementation Plans). The current version of the fuel rule was

formally adopted by the GAEPD Board on June 27, 2001, and became effective July 18, 2001.

On July 17, 2001, the State of Georgia, through the GAEPD, submitted an attainment

demonstration for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for the Atlanta nonattainment area for inclusion into

the Georgia SIP. This submittal is a revision to previous SIP revisions submitted on October 28,

1999, January 31, 2000, and July 31, 2000. The State fuel regulations were originally submitted

for SIP approval on October 28, 1999. These regulations were subsequently amended by the

State, and the revised regulations were submitted for SIP approval on July 31, 2000. Additional

revisions to the State regulations, to further address implementation and enforcement issues, are

included in an August 21, 2001 SIP revision. This proposed rulemaking only takes action on the

“Gasoline Marketing Rule,” provided in Georgia’s Rules for Air Quality Control, as amended

and submitted for approval with the August 21, 2001, submittal. The specific citation for the

rule is Chapter 391-3-1.02 (2) (bbb). Action on the remainder of the August 21, 2001 submittal

will be taken in a separate notice. 

GAEPD will enforce the low-sulfur/low-RVP rule. Producers, importers, terminals,

pipelines, truckers, rail carriers, and retail dispensing outlets are subject to provisions of this rule. 

Registration, recordkeeping, reporting, and certification requirements are included. GAEPD will

conduct sampling for the fuel program in accordance with the “Methodology for Randomized

Sampling to Estimate Mean Sulfur in Gasoline During a Specified Ozone Season” (contained in

Appendix XXX of the attainment demonstration) or by some EPA-approved modification of this

sampling plan. Samples, the number to be determined in coordination with GAEPD and EPA,

will be collected and analyzed for RVP and sulfur throughout the control period. Any sample

that exceeds the limits specified in the fuel rule (i.e., 7.0 psi, and 150 ppm sulfur or 30 ppm

sulfur when applicable – with the consideration of the allowable margin of error), will be

considered a violation and may require an enforcement action. If an enforcement action is

warranted, GAEPD would use one of two approaches. Upon learning of a violation, the GAEPD

will issue a notice of violation and negotiate a consent order. If the consent order cannot be

negotiated, GAEPD will issue an administrative order. Another provision of the fuel rule

provides that the seasonal sulfur average will not exceed 140 ppm when the sulfur limit is 150

ppm. If the seasonal sulfur average exceeds 140 ppm, GAEPD will require 100 percent terminal

testing in lieu of testing at the retail level for future control periods. Also, when Georgia’s sulfur

requirement is reduced to 30 ppm, 30 ppm is the ‘trigger’ that will require 100 percent terminal
18

testing in lieu of testing at the retail level for future control periods. Additional commitments

related to the enforcement and implementation of the Georgia fuel program are provided in the

transmittal letter for the November 9, 2001 fuel control supplemental “necessity” demonstration.

CONCLUSION

Georgia’s low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel program will provide needed NOx and VOC

emissions reductions for the Atlanta ozone nonattainment area. Without the program, the design

values for the nonattainment area will continue to exceed the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. In the

Atlanta attainment demonstration, the State examined control measures, not previously

implemented, and concluded that, even with adoption of all reasonable and practicable non-fuel

control measures, additional VOC and NOx reductions in the area are necessary to achieve the 1-

hour ozone NAAQS. The State further demonstrated that the fuel control satisfies the

requirements of section 110 and will supply reductions needed to achieve the ozone NAAQS.

The State has therefore demonstrated that the low-sulfur/low-RVP fuel control program is

necessary to help the Atlanta nonattainment area achieve the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and should

be approved into the SIP in accordance with sections 110 and 211(c)(4)(C) of the Act.