This is a preliminary document prepared by a subgroup of the National and Regional Strategies Work Group as part of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) Subcommittee process. It is not an EPA document. This document has not been reviewed by the work group and is subject to further work group discussions. The issues and options for this topic are still being developed by members of this subgroup. No effort has been made to develop recommendations. Interested people should forward their comments to a member of the National and Regional Strategies Work Group.

Pre-SIP RFP Issue Paper

Date: March 28, 1997

Status: Preliminary Draft - Framing of Issues from Joint Work Group meeting (March 13 and 14, 1997) and conference calls (March 25 and 26, 1997).

Contacts: Nina Dougherty representing NRSWG, 801/581-8771, FAX 801/581-3632

Introduction:

This paper addresses issues associated with reasonable further progress (RFP) requirements during the pre-SIP phase for the proposed ozone and fine particulate (PM-fine) national ambient air quality and standards (NAAQS). Depending on the results of this issue paper it may apply to Phase I or Phase II implementation. The pre-SIP phase is defined as some period of time up to when the State Implementation Plan (SIP) has been approved by EPA. The areas covered by this paper include all areas that potentially violates or potentially contributes to a violation the new/revised standards for ozone and PM-fine. This paper does not address any changes to RFP for current nonattainment areas as described in the Interim Implementation Policy (IIP). Any comments concerning the IIP should be directed to EPA's IIP rule making process.

Note: The pre-SIP RFP issue is linked to the Reasonable Further Progress issue paper (March 20, 1997), the Reward and Sanctions issue paper (February 13, 1997), the Transportation Conformity issue paper (to be drafted), the Reasonable Further Progress Metrics paper written by Alan Krupnick (October 16, 1996), and the Reasonable Further Progress Requirements in the Areas of Influence (AOI)/Area of Violation (AOV) thought piece by Don Theiler (October 8, 1996). Readers are encouraged to refer to these papers for additional insight.

Background:

As currently defined in the Clean Air Act (CAA), three years of ambient data are required to designate an area as nonattainment for the NAAQS. After being designated as nonattainment for an ambient standard, the area has up to three years to develop and submit an implementation plan to bring the area into attainment with the standard. What is different between the new standard and the standards defined in the CAA is the reduction of ozone precursor (i.e., VOC) during the first six years as required by section 182. This period included the time that an area had to develop and implement its SIP. For the new proposed standards, no reductions are required by an area until after SIP approval.

It has been argued that some progress should be made during this time period. The IIP requires certain measures for existing ozone nonattainment areas that will remain in violation but does not apply to new areas violating the new NAAQS or areas impacting existing nonattainment areas that are not themselves designated nonattainment. It is recognized that several ongoing national programs will result in improved air quality -- these include the MACT and acid rain programs as well as national mobile source emission reductions and new rules promulgated pursuant to section 183 of the act (consumer products, etc)

Issues:

1.	When should an area be required to begin implementing emission reduction measures? What should be the pre-SIP RFP baseline date?

Option 1 - The NAAQS promulgation date.

Option 2 - The date the AOV's or nonattainment areas are proposed.

Option 3 - The date the AOV's or nonattainment areas are finalized.

Option 4 - The date of preliminary AOI designation.

Option 5 - The date of final AOI designation.

Option 6 - The dates the RAMPS are set up.

2.	Where should RFP apply?

Option 1 - Nationwide.

Option 2 - Within XX miles of monitored NAAQS violations.

Option 3 - AOVs, nonattainment areas and areas likely to violate the standard.

Option 4 - Preliminary AOI.

Option 5 - Final AOI.

3.	What will RFP be?

Option 1 - Nothing additional (IIP+MACT+ acid rain program, etc.)

Option 2 - National measures (EPA adopted measures)

Stationary sources (e.g., develop aggressive combustion rule for new and existing sources).

Mobile source (e.g., LEV, CARB diesel, heavy duty I/M, clean fuels).

Area source -- consumer products, architectural coatings.

Interpretation of PSD program to protect against emission increases from major sources. Protection of Class I areas and emissions offsets.

Interpretation of existing rules to protect against increases from mobile and area sources (e.g., transportation conformity).

Expand NSPS to existing sources under section 110.

Option 3 - State planning efforts.

Emission inventory development.

Modeling - Improvement of models.

Gather resources/hire people.

Tie State efforts to 105 grant money or CMAQ funds.

Option 4 - Encourage early reductions through an economic incentive program.

Option 5 - Extend IIP requirements to more areas (i.e., current reduction program under section 182 - 3 percent per year until attainment).

Option 6 - Require a substantial reduction from an early baseline date for initial State RFP requirements (e.g., 10 percent emission reduction from a 1997 baseline date - similar to the 15 percent VOC reduction required by the CAA). These reductions would not have to occur until after the SIP was adopted.

Option 7 - Require States to adopt and implement rules as expeditiously as possible that will result in emission reductions prior to designation of nonattainment status or area of violation status.

Option 8 - Time table requirements

Keep to schedule - Area can use national measures in RFP demonstration

Do not keep to schedule - Area cannot use national measures in RFP demonstration

4.	Authority for pre-SIP RFP.

Option 1 - PSD.

Option 2 - Section 110(a)(2)(H).

Option 3 - Section 126.

5.	Should PM, regional haze and ozone be treated the same or differently?

Option 1 - Yes, to have consistency.

Option 2 - No, because ozone has more information than PM/regional haze.