This is a preliminary document prepared for the Base Programs Analyses and Policies Work Group as part of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) Subcommittee process. It is not an EPA document. It is subject to work group discussion. Interested persons should forward their comments to a member of the Base Programs Analyses and Policies Work Group or to the contact person shown below.

BASE PROGRAMS ANALYSIS AND PROGRAMS WORKGROUP

ATTAINMENT DATES AD HOC SUB-WORKGROUP

October 28, 1996 meeting

The Attainment Dates Ad Hoc Sub-workgroup met on October 28, 1996 in Dallas, Texas to address the issue of , to the degree possible, developing a consensus position with regard to an attainment dates recommendation to be presented to the Coordination Workgroup and the FACA Subcommittee during their November, 1996 meetings. The Sub-workgroup composed of Steve Pezda, Conrad Schneider, and Herb Williams, after cooperative discussion, came to agreement on the following recommendation for future development of an attainment dates recommendation.

1.	There is a need to know the level of the standard(s) to design an attainment dates recommendation.

2.	We suggest moving the attainment dates recommendation until after the level of the standard(s) is proposed (Phase II).

3.	The time during the interim will be used to identify concepts or elements upon which consensus, as defined by the Subcommittee in its October 24, 1996 Principles for Developing Issue Papers and Presentations to the Subcommittee, can be reached and upon which an attainment dates recommendation can be built after the level of the standard(s) is known.

4.	The following is a list of concepts or elements which will be considered for inclusion in an attainment dates recommendation. The following list is not presented in any order of priority and should not be limited to the included concepts where others are appropriate to be considered.

a.	DATE CERTAIN AS A DRIVER - There needs to be a an externally imposed date for attainment as a driver for states and areas to be required to complete the planning process and implement those plans.

b.	INTERIM DATES - There may need to be some specific dates established for the various components of the attainment planning, implementation and assessment process.

c.	AOV/AOI APPROACH - The Area of Violation and Area of Influence approach should be included in the attainment dates recommendation.

d.	REASONABLE PLANNING CYCLE - A reasonable planning cycle including consideration of adequate time for the planning, rule adoption, implementation, and assessment (monitoring) portions of the planning process.

e.	TIMING OF initiation - The timing for the trigger of the planning process should be determined (ie: initiation upon promulgation of the new NAAQS, upon AOV designation, upon what?)

f.	FLEXIBILITY - The recommendation should provide for flexibility for those areas that plan, adopt, and implement attainment demonstration program but fail to achieve the standards in spite of their "good faith" efforts. Such flexibility should include opportunities for extensions of the attainment date among other options.

g.	SCALED/TARGETED CONSEQUENCES - There should be requirements to achieve all of the components of the planning process with specific consequences for failure to complete each phase of the planning function. The consequences should be directed to the specific activities they are intended to address. The consequences should also be scaled for the activity they are intended to address, such as:

More significant consequences for failure to plan, adopt, implement and assess progress.

There should not be punishment associated with failure to achieve the appropriate standard(s) if all planning and implementation components have been completed. Any consequences for failure to attain under these circumstances should only be directed to the development and implementation further plans and strategies to attain the standards.

h.	TARGETED RFP - The recommendation should include a requirement for targeted reasonable further progress in reduction of ambient monitored levels of the pollutants.

i.	PLANNED REDUCTIONS - The recommendation should include a requirement for planned emissions reductions.

j.	ACHIEVABILITY - The recommendation should allow consideration of achievability of the new NAAQS for the different areas recognizing that depending on the stringency (level and form) of the standards they will probably be more readily achievable in some areas and may even be extremely difficult to achieve in other areas.

l.	ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR FLEXIBILITY - Specific criteria for eligibility for the flexibility provisions (ie: extension) should be included.

m.	CONTINGENCY MEASURES - Contingency measures to ensure progress or provide consequences should be included as and where appropriate in the recommendation.

n.	MID-CYCLE REVIEWS - Mid-cycle (possibly multiple) reviews and adjustments as warranted should be required including additional measures or delaying/deleting measures as the reviews indicate are appropriate.

o.	INCENTIVES (SAFE HARBOR) - Incentives for early attainment and/or early reductions should be included such as a "Safe Harbor" concept.

p.	END-OF-CYCLE REVIEW - End-of-cycle review and assessment should be required to affirm status/progress, develop further plans (maintenance, additional attainment extension eligibility, further attainment demonstration, etc.)

q.	INTEGRATION - To the degree possible, any attainment dates recommendation should take into consideration an integrated approach to the new NAAQS and regional haze rules.

r.	PUBLIC EXPECTATIONS - Should the attainment dates recommendation take into consideration potential public expectations such as a shorter attainment date that may result in failure to attain as compared to a longer attainment date with greater likelihood of attainment at the end?

s.	COST/BENEFITS - Should an attainment dates recommendation consider the relative costs and benefits of a shorter attainment date with potentially less assurance of attainment compared to a longer attainment date with greater likelihood of attainment at the end?

t.	TRANSPORT - Since transport, both intra and inter-regional, is to some extent being considered in the development of the new NAAQS and the associated implementation plans should it also be included in an attainment dates recommendation?

u.	MET. CONDITIONS - Since provisions to address anomalous ambient levels resulting from unusual meteorological conditions, natural events and international transport are being discussed for consideration in the development of the new NAAQS and associated implementation plans should they also be included in an attainment dates recommendation?