[Federal Register: April 12, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 69)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 17551-17555]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr12ap99-17]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[GA-42-1-9908a; FRL-6321-1]

Implementation Plan and Redesignation Request for the Muscogee County, Georgia Lead Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is simultaneously approving the lead state implementation plan (SIP) and redesignation request for the Muscogee County, Georgia, lead nonattainment area. Both plans dated September 28, 1998, were submitted by the State of Georgia for the purpose of demonstrating that the Muscogee County area has attained the lead National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).

DATES: This direct final rule is effective June 11, 1999 without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by May 12, 1999. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Kimberly Bingham at the EPA Region 4 address listed below. Copies of the material submitted by Georgia Environmental Protection Division (EPD) may be examined during normal business hours at the following locations: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Air Docket 6102), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington DC 20460. Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Center, Region 4 Air Planning Branch, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104. Georgia Environmental Protection Division, Air Protection Branch, 4244 International Parkway, Suite 120, Atlanta, Georgia 30354.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly Bingham, Regulatory Planning Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, Region 4, Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. The telephone number is (404)562-9038.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background--Lead SIP

Section 107(d)(5) of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA) provides for areas to be designated as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable with respect to the lead NAAQS. Governors are required to submit recommended designations for areas within their states. When an area is designated nonattainment, the state must prepare and submit a SIP pursuant to sections 110(a)(2) and 172(c) of the CAA showing how the area will be brought into attainment.

On January 6, 1992, EPA designated the portion of Muscogee County around the GNB, Inc., lead smelter and battery production facility as nonattainment for lead. This nonattainment designation was based on lead NAAQS violations from monitors located near the GNB facility that were recorded the first, second, and fourth quarter of the calendar year 1991.

On July 23, 1993, Georgia EPD submitted a lead SIP for attaining the NAAQS in the Muscogee County lead nonattainment area. EPA found the SIP to be inadequate because it did not meet the requirements of section 172(c) of the CAA and requested that Georgia EPD make the necessary corrections and submit supplemental information to address the deficiencies. To comply, Georgia EPD submitted a supplemental modeling demonstration for the base

[[Page 17552]]

year 1996. Significant changes in the emission sources occurred at the GNB lead facility rendering the modeling inappropriate for the 1993 SIP submittal and inapplicable for the redesignation request. Specifically, the 1996 modeling showed a relaxation of the limits, the addition of new emission sources, revised stack heights, deleted sources, and relocated sources not addressed in the 1993 SIP submittal. Even though the total facility emissions and maximum modeling impacts decreased somewhat, the inventory was not reflective of the 1993 SIP inventory and the SIP emission limits were relaxed. As a result, Georgia EPD requested that the 1993 lead SIP be withdrawn and replaced with the new lead SIP submittal and redesignation request dated September 28, 1998.

II. Analysis of the State Submittal

The 1998 SIP revision was reviewed using the criteria established by the CAA in section 110(a)(2). Section 172(c) of the CAA specifies the provisions applicable to areas designated as nonattainment for any of the NAAQS. EPA has also issued a General Preamble describing how EPA will review SIPs and SIP revisions submitted under Title I of the CAA, including those state submittals containing lead nonattainment area SIP requirements (see generally 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992)). Because the EPA is describing its interpretations here only in broad terms, the reader should refer to the General Preamble for a more detailed discussion of the interpretations of Title I advanced in today's approval and the supporting rationale (57 FR 13549, April 16, 1992).

A. Attainment Demonstration

Section 192(a) of the CAA requires that SIPs must provide for attainment of the lead NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable but not later than five years from the date of an area's nonattainment designation. The lead nonattainment designation for the Muscogee County area was effective on January 6, 1992; therefore, the latest attainment date permissible by statute would be January 6, 1997. The Muscogee County area has air quality data showing attainment of the lead NAAQS for the years 1992 through 1998 and to date for 1999, which meets the statutory requirement.

To demonstrate that the area will continue to be in attainment with the lead NAAQS, emission limits were obtained from the application of reasonable achievable control technologies (RACT) and workplace standards at the GNB facility. The emission limits were evaluated using air dispersion modeling. This modeling predicts the impact of emissions on the environment surrounding the facility and whether or not the area will attain the lead NAAQS. The modeling demonstration submitted by Georgia EPD for the GNB facility shows a predicted maximum ambient air lead concentration of 0.98 micro grams per cubic meter (g/ m³) which is below the NAAQS for lead of 1.5 (g/ m³)

B. Emissions Inventory

Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires that nonattainment plan provisions include a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of relevant pollutants in the nonattainment area. Because it is necessary to support an area's attainment demonstration, the emission inventory must be received with the SIP submission.

Georgia EPD submitted an emissions inventory for the base year 1996. The inventory identifies the secondary lead smelter owned and operated by GNB as the sole major source of lead emissions in the Muscogee County area when violations were recorded. The EPA is approving the emissions inventory because it is accurate and comprehensive, and provides a sufficient basis for determining the adequacy of the attainment demonstration for this area consistent with the requirements of the CAA.

C. Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) (Including Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT))

States with lead nonattainment areas must submit provisions to assure that RACM (including RACT) are implemented (see sections 172(c)(1)). Control measures have already been implemented at the GNB facility and include baghouses on several emissions points, environmental controls on blast furnaces, and improved lead related work practices and controls to minimize fugitive lead dust emissions. The control measures employed at the GNB facility were evaluated for reasonableness and technological and economical feasibility. EPA has determined that requirements for RACM (including RACT) have been met.

D. Other Measures including Emission Limitations, and Timetables

Pursuant to 172(c)(6) of the CAA, all nonattainment SIPs must contain enforceable emission limitations, other control measures, and schedules and timetables for compliance.

The emission limits for the GNB facility were submitted as a part of the lead SIP and used in the modeling study. The facility-wide emissions of lead for GNB are limited to 1.612 pounds per hour (lbs/ hr). Any relaxation of the emission limits which results in a computer modeling prediction of a maximum quarterly lead concentration off the GNB plant property exceeding 0.98 g/m³ will require a revision of this lead SIP.

The CAA also requires that nonattainment SIPs include other measures and schedules and timetables for compliance that may be needed to ensure the attainment of the relevant NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. Because the Muscogee County area has been attaining the lead NAAQS since 1992 and met the attainment date of January 6, 1997, it was not necessary to require other control measures or a schedule and timetable for compliance with the NAAQS.

E. Computer Modeling

Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA requires the use of air quality modeling to predict the effect on ambient air quality from any emissions of an air pollutant for which a NAAQS has been established. Therefore, Georgia EPD was required to submit a modeling demonstration with the lead SIP. Georgia EPD used the current long-term ISCLT3 and short-term ISCST3 models. The 1996 modeling results reveal that the maximum quarterly lead concentration was 0.98 g/m³ which is below the 1.5 g/m³ lead NAAQS. Furthermore, it is predicted that the maximum quarterly lead concentration in the year 2009, which is the required year for maintenance, shall be either at or below the 1996 value.

F. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)

The SIP must provide for RFP, defined in section 171(1) of the CAA as such reductions in emissions of the relevant air pollutant as are required by section 172(c)(2), or may reasonably be required by the Administrator for the purpose of ensuring attainment of the applicable NAAQS by the applicable date.

The EPA reviewed the attainment demonstration for the area to determine whether annual incremental reductions different from those provided in the SIP should be required in order to ensure attainment of the lead NAAQS. The EPA found that the emission controls which have been implemented at the GNB facility in response to the 1991 NAAQS violations, have resulted in swift improvement in air quality in the Muscogee County nonattainment area. Furthermore, the air quality monitoring data indicates no exceedances of the

[[Page 17553]]

lead NAAQS since 1991 and the modeling study predicts no future exceedances. Therefore, no additional incremental reductions in emissions are needed.

G. New Source Review (NSR)

Section 172(c)(5)of the CAA requires that the submittal include a permit program for the construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources. The federally approved Rule 391-3-1-.03-- subsection (8)(c) of the Georgia Rules for Air Quality Control identifies the current specific permitting requirements for nonattainment areas in the State of Georgia. The federally approved Rule 391-2-1-.02 subsection (7)--Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality will replace this rule once the Muscogee County lead nonattainment area is redesignated to attainment. An analysis of the redesignation request is discussed later in this document. This rule meets the requirements of the CAA.

H. Contingency Measures

As provided in section 172(c)(9) of the CAA, all nonattainment area SIPs that demonstrate attainment must include contingency measures. Contingency measures should consist of other available measures that are not part of the area's control strategy. These measures must take effect without further action by the state or EPA, upon a determination that the area has failed to meet RFP or attain the lead NAAQS by the applicable attainment date.

The Georgia lead SIP contains the following three contingency measures: (1) speed breaker control of truck speed and minimization of re-entrainment of fugitive dust on the roadway; (2) enclosure of the drum dump for the oxide vacuum system, smelter vacuum system, and fugitive baghouses to contain any lead dust generated during cleaning; and (3) connection of the discharge from both vacuum systems to baghouses to provide secondary filtration. The SIP provides that all three measures be implemented within 60 days after notification to GNB by Georgia EPD that the NAAQS has been violated in the Muscogee County area.

The EPA is approving the lead SIP for Muscogee County, Georgia because it meets the requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2) and 172(c) of the CAA.

III. Background and Analysis of the Redesignation Request

On February 23, 1994, Georgia EPD submitted a request to redesignate the Muscogee County area to attainment for lead. The EPA could not approve this request because it did not meet the requirements sets forth in the CAA for redesignation requests. Subsequently, Georgia EPD requested that EPA withdraw the 1994 redesignation request and approve the new request dated September 28, 1998.

Pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, five requirements must be met before a nonattainment area can be redesignated to attainment. The following describes how each of the five requirements has been achieved.

A. Attainment of the Lead NAAQS

The EPA requires eight consecutive quarters or 2 calendar years of air quality monitoring data showing attainment to justify a redesignation to attainment. To demonstrate that the Muscogee County area is in attainment with the NAAQS for lead, Georgia EPD included air quality data for the years 1992-1998 in the submittal. The data has been quality assured, and can be found in EPA's Aerometric Information Retrieval System. This monitoring data which covers over 25 consecutive quarters without an exceedance, is adequate to demonstrate attainment of the lead NAAQS.

Modeling is also required to redesignate an area to attainment. The EPA believes that the modeling analysis included in the 1998 lead SIP also being approved in this document satisfies this requirement. Georgia EPD will continue to monitor the air quality of the Muscogee County area to verify continued maintenance of the lead NAAQS.

B. Section 110(k) SIP Approval

The SIP for the area must be fully approved under section 110(k) and must satisfy all requirements that apply to the area. Approval actions on SIP elements and the redesignation request may occur simultaneously as in the case of this lead SIP and redesignation request. The SIP elements for the lead SIP were discussed previously in the ``Analysis of the State Submittal'' section of this document. The EPA has determined that the approval of the lead SIP for the Muscogee County area meets the requirements of section 110(k).

C. Permanent and Enforceable Improvement in Air Quality

A state must be able to reasonably attribute the improvement in air quality to permanent and enforceable emission reductions. The implementation of RACM (including RACT) by the GNB facility provides enforceable and permanent emission reductions needed to attain and maintain the lead NAAQS. This is evidenced by the area having more than 25 consecutive quarters of clean air quality data. Furthermore, the modeling study shows that the area will remain in attainment through the year 2009. Subsequently, EPA has determined that there is a permanent and enforceable improvement in the air quality in Muscogee County.

D. Compliance With Sections 110(a)(2) and Part D of the CAA

To be redesignated to attainment, section 107(d)(3)(E) requires that an area must have met all applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2) and Part D of the CAA. The EPA has determined that the lead SIP for the Muscogee County area of Georgia meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) and Part D of the CAA and is approving the submittal in this document. A detailed explanation of the requirements can be found in the ``Analysis of the State Submittal'' section of this document.

E. Maintenance Plan

Section 175(A) of the CAA requires states that submit a redesignation request to include a maintenance plan to ensure that the attainment of NAAQS for any pollutant is maintained. The plan must demonstrate continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least ten years after the approval of a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the redesignation, states must submit a revised maintenance plan demonstrating attainment for the ten years following the initial ten year period. To provide for the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain such contingency measures as the Administrator deems necessary to assure that a state will promptly correct any violation of the standard that occurs after redesignation. The contingency provisions are to include a requirement that a state will implement all measures for controlling the air pollutant concerned that were contained in the SIP prior to redesignation.

Georgia EPD demonstrated that the lead SIP also being approved in this action is adequate to maintain compliance with the lead NAAQS for at least ten years. The EPA agrees that the lead SIP satisfies the requirements of section 175(A) of the CAA to show maintenance of the lead NAAQS. The control measures and lead emission limits included in the SIP have been implemented at the GNB facility to ensure the continued attainment of the lead NAAQS. The modeling demonstration supporting the lead SIP shows maintenance of the lead standard through 2009, meeting the requirement to show maintenance for ten years. The lead SIP also includes contingency

[[Page 17554]]

measures that will take effect if a violation of the lead NAAQS occurs. Since these measures were not implemented to attain the lead NAAQS, they can be used as contingency measure for maintenance. Georgia EPD has committed to submit a demonstration of maintenance for an additional ten years within eight years of approval of the redesignation request.

IV. Final action

EPA is approving the lead SIP and redesignation of the Muscogee County lead nonattainment area to attainment because the submittal meets the requirements of the CAA as discussed in this document. The EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective June 11, 1999 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by May 12, 1999.

If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this rule will be effective on June 11, 1999 and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Order 12875

Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected State, local and tribal governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''

Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875 do not apply to this rule.

C. Executive Order 13045

Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.

This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.

D. Executive Order 13084

Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''

Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create any new requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

F. Unfunded Mandates

Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA must select the most cost-effective

[[Page 17555]]

and least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a ``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

H. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by June 11, 1999. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Lead, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relation, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 81

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

Dated: March 18, 1999.

Michael V. Peyton, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

Chapter I, title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart L--Georgia

2. Section 52.570 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(45) to read as follows:

Sec. 52.570 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(45) The State of Georgia submitted a lead SIP for the Muscogee County lead nonattainment area dated September 28, 1998.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

State Implementation Plan for Lead Columbus, Georgia Muscogee County, Requirements for the GNB facility that were adopted on September 28, 1998.

(ii) Other material. None.

* * * * *

PART 81--[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations

2. In Sec. 81.311, the attainment status table for lead is amended by revising the designation type and date entry for Muscogee County (part).

Sec. 81.311 [Amended]