WPC($ vnǠMe~,:DxKNY߅^ŭ?FeV.@\fX,]s6E TUˁ9.Ł;{XYg)7/)ii=zȤz&@tG'j{ZeP,pW?C^5`$Q'ۣ,RӢ_ i@/_"ArXCU},@$[ofrv @?ʗ:U q)ab˟88" z%;8rm,=Ȱł5, {G 5#UN % 0: 05 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0] 0? 0 0 0 0 0| 0L 0 0 0 0 0} 0U 0* 0 0 0 0<` 0z 0Y 0go 0 1U! 7 " 1U*" 7 "U,"U>" 1u" 72j#^ #w#4### m##U@#HP LaserJet 2100 Series PCL 6,,,,0(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularX($USUS.,2J+M 0_level1  X 2( ` hp x 223  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2G+M 0_level2   /%` ` hp x /23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2D+M 0_level3   ," hp x ,23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2A+M 0_level4  ` ) hp x )23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2>+M 0_level5   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2;+M 0_level6   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  28+M 0_level7  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  25+M 0_level8   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  22+M 0_level9    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  2JM 0_levsl1  X 2( ` hp x 223  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levsl2   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levsl3   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levsl4  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levsl5   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levsl6   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levsl7  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levsl8   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  22M 0_levsl9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  2JM 0_levnl1  X 2( ` hp x 223   5+ ` hp x 5  2GM 0_levnl2   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  2DM 0_levnl3   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  2AM 0_levnl4  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  2>M 0_levnl5   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  2;M 0_levnl6   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  28M 0_levnl7  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  25M 0_levnl8   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  22M 0_levnl9    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  <:Default Para2$$0Level 1  XXX  64Hypertext    <+ :Outline001_123  ..<Zl :Outline002_1XXXA) $ShrutiA23  XXXS*\  `&Times New RomanSXXXA) $ShrutiA..XXXS*\  `&Times New RomanS$$$$$$$$(359=AEIMQ1%$(359=AEIMQ2 ' $Shruti\  `&Times New Roman3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)+i)֠?, @*,#3|xU(9 Z(Times New Roman !USUS.,  _4X<XXX  8*<*XXdd81/31/02DRAFT     EPAPROPOSESREMOVINGPORTIONOFMICHIGAN    FROMSECTION126 RULE t       FACTSHEET L    TODAYSACTION  $ t  %$$$$$$$$$(83+TheEnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)isproposingtoremoveaportionofthestateof  L  MichiganfromrequirementsofEPAsrulegrantingozonereductionpetitionsfiledunder  8  Section126oftheCleanAirAct,byfournortheasternstates. $  EPAfinalizedtherule,knownastheSection126 Rule,inDecember1999.Itrequireslarge   utilitiesandlargeindustrialboilersandturbineslocatedin12statesandtheDistrictofColumbia   toreducenitrogenoxides(_NOx_)emissions.Theemissionreductionsrequiredintheruleare   necessarytohelpthepetitioningstates(Connecticut,Massachusetts,NewYork,and p Pennsylvania)meetEPAsnationalairqualitystandardsforozone(1hour).  \ EPAisproposingthisminorrevisiontotheSection126Ruleincoordinationwithanother 4 proposedrulethatalsoaddressestheregionaltransportofozone.ThatruleisknownastheNOx  p SIPCall.InresponsetoadecisionfromtheU.S.CourtofAppealsfortheDistrictofColumbia  \ Circuit,EPAisproposingtoremoveportionsoffourstates,includingaportionofMichigan, H fromtheNOxSIPCallrequirements. 4 BecausetheSection126Ruleisbasedonmanyofthesameanalysesandinformationusedinthe   NOxSIPCall,EPAisproposingtoremovethesection126requirementsforsourceslocatedin  theportionofMichiganthattheAgencyproposestoremovefromtheNOxSIPCall.  EPAdoesnotexpectthisproposaltoaffectanyexistingfacilities,becausetheAgencyhasnot l identifiedanyfacilitiesintheportionofMichiganthatwouldbeexcludedfromtherule. X  However,newsourcesintheaffectedportionofMichiganalsowouldnotbesubjecttotherule. D! Intodaysaction,EPAisalsoproposingtorevisethedefinitionof applicablerequirementfor #l! itsoperatingpermitprograms.Thisrevisionwouldrequireafacilitytoincludetherequirements $X" oftheSection126Ruleinitsoperatingpermit. $D #  BACKGROUND&CHRONOLOGY '#&  NOxemissionsfromfacilitiesinupwindstatesmaycontributetogroundlevelozonepollution )$( (smog)indownwindstates.Wheninhaled!evenatverylowlevels!groundlevelozonecan |*%) causeacuterespiratoryproblems,aggravateasthma,reducelungcapacity,inflamelungtissue, h+&* andimpairthebodysimmunesystem. T,'+ ЇSection126oftheCleanAirActgivesastatetheauthoritytoaskEPAtosetemissionslimitsfor  specificsourcesofairpollutioninotherstatesthatsignificantlycontributetothepetitioning  statesairqualityproblems.  In1997,eightnortheasternstatesfiledpetitionswithEPAtoreducethetransportofgroundlevel ` ozone.TheeightstatesareConnecticut,Maine,Massachusetts,NewHampshire,NewYork, L  Pennsylvania,RhodeIsland,andVermont.Thepetitionsidentified30statesplustheDistrictof 8  Columbiaascontainingsourcesthatsignificantlycontributetoozonetransport. $ t ЀThepetitioningstatesaskedEPAtofindthatcertainutilitiesandothersourcesof_NOx_  L  significantlycontributetotheirozoneproblems.  8  InSeptember1998,EPAissuedthe_NOx_ԀSIPCallruleaspartofitseffortstoreduceunhealthy   airintheeasternhalfofthecountry.Theoriginalrulerequired22statesandtheDistrictof   Columbiatoreduce_NOx_Ԁemissionsthatcrossstateboundaries,forminggroundlevelozonein   downwindstates.EPAwassuedoverthe_NOx_ԀSIPCallrule.   OnDec.17,1999,EPApartiallyapprovedthesection126petitionsfromConnecticut, \ Massachusetts,NewYork,andPennsylvaniaunderthenationalairqualitystandardforozone(1 H hour).Thisactionrequires392facilitiestoreduceannualemissionsbyatotalofnearly510,000 4 tonsfrom2007levels.Thefacilitiesarelocatedin:Delaware;theDistrictofColumbia;Indiana;  p Kentucky;Maryland;Michigan;NorthCarolina;NewJersey;NewYork;Ohio;Pennsylvania;  \ Virginia;andWestVirginia. H Eachaffectedfacilitywillparticipateinafederal_NOx_Ԁemissionscapandtradeprogramthatis   beingadministeredbyEPA.Acapandtradeprogramisthemostcosteffectiveapproachto   reducinginterstateozonetransportbycontrolling_NOx_Ԁemissions.  Thetradingprogramsetsemissionreductionrequirementsforthesourcesidentifiedinthe  section126petitionsandwillallowthosesourcestotradeemissionallowances.Sourcesmay l mustimplementcontrolsoruseemissionallowancestoachievetheirrequired_NOx_Ԁemission X  reductions. D! OnMarch3,2000,theU.S.CourtofAppealsfortheD.C.Circuitissuedarulinglargely #l! upholdingthe_NOx_ԀSIPCall.ThecourtremandedafewissuestoEPA,oneofwhichwasthe $X" inclusionofcertainportionsofGeorgiaandMissouriintheSIPCallrule.Uponexaminingthe $D # courtsreasoningforremandingtheportionsofthosetwostates,EPAdeterminedthatportionsof %0!$ MichiganandAlabamaalsoshouldnotbesubjecttothe_NOx_ԀSIPCallrule. EPAisissuinga &"% separateproposaltoremoveportionsofallfourStatesfromthe_NOx_ԀSIPCall. ' #&  +(#38%$$$$$$$$$ '(83+ +(#38'i %$$$$$$$$$(83+  X,'+ FORMOREINFORMATION   Todownloadthetextoftheproposedrule,gotoEPA'sWorldWideWebsiteatthefollowing  addresses:_"  http://www.epa.gov/oarpg/ramain.html__"  _Ԁor_"  http://www.epa.gov/ttn/rto/126__"  _Ԁ. t Forgeneralinformationonthisaction,contactCarlaOldhamofEPA'sOfficeofAirQuality L  PlanningandStandardsat(919)5413347. 8     +(#38%$$$$$$$$$p #X<XX4X<=#