1. PUBLIC MEETING TO SECURE INPUT FOR PROPOSED 8-HOUR OZONE IMPLEMENTATION POLICY

2. Welcome ….. 1 st of 3 public meetings  Washington, DC ….. 3/5/02  Atlanta ……………. 3/7/02  Phoenix …………… 4/3/02 EPA here to get your thoughts and input Success: complete sharing of ideas and suggestions

3. How we plan to proceed …. structure of the sessions For the morning … two concurrent issue groups … 2 different rooms …intended for maximum interaction. Same groups repeated in the afternoon, so you can hear all topics but with only half the participants at a time. You can cover all topics … if you attend one group session in the morning, you can attend the other in the afternoon. The rooms will have signs posted indicating the issues being discussed. Each issue will only be discussed for approximately 20-30 minutes. For each issue, EPA lead staff will take about 5 minutes to summarize the issue and any options under consideration, leaving the remaining time for discussion by the participants. Later we’ll “count off 1-2" to divide up into the two groups for the morning session; then you can attend the other group in the afternoon.

4. The Group topics will be divided as follows:

7. EPA contractor will summarize the sessions (and tape record them) Availability of issue papers on the web prior to the meeting Ground rules for today ….  We’re here to listen; we aren’t trying to give opinions or address issues related to specific geographic situations  We’re not here to provide legal opinions. Written comments after the meeting are ok. Try to get them in within 30 days. Any questions? More procedural details ….

8. Send comments to EPA docket # A-2001-31 Mailing Address: Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center USEPA 401 M Street, SW Room M-1500 (Mail Code 6102) Washington, DC 20460

9. Now let’s spend time reviewing the background …

10. BACKGROUND EPA revised ozone standard July 1997; added 8-hr standard; indicated phase-out of 1-hr standard eventually. Initially announced implementation of 8-hr standard under less prescriptive “subpart 1" requirements of Clean Air Act, rather than the more prescriptive “subpart 2" requirements. Sued by a number of litigants in U.S. Court of Appeals for DC Circuit over the standard itself and EPA’s implementation approach. In May 1999, Court ruled CAA contained an “unconstitutional delegation of authority” to EPA and also ruled EPA’s implementation approach under subpart 1 was improper. EPA appealed to the Supreme Court.

11. BACKGROUND (continued) In February 2001, Supreme Court upheld constitutionality of the standard-setting process in the CAA, but ruled that EPA’s implementation approach was unlawful and that EPA could not ignore subpart 2 when implementing the 8-hr standard. Specifically …. The Court said:  “[D]oes subpart 2 provide for classifying nonattainment ozone areas under the revised standard? It unquestionably does.”  “Whereas Subpart 1 gives the EPA considerable discretion to shape nonattainment programs, Subpart 2 prescribes large parts of them by law. Compare 7502(c) and (d) with 7511a.”  “EPA may not construe the statute in a way that completely nullifies textually applicable provisions meant to limit its discretion”

12. BACKGROUND (continued) Supreme Court recognized gaps in the subpart 2 scheme, however, and left it to EPA to develop a reasonable resolution of the roles of subparts 1 and 2 in implementing a revised ozone standard. Court said …“It may well be... that some provisions of Subpart 2 are ill fitted to implementation of the revised standard.” Specifically noting:  “Using the old 1-hour averages of ozone levels, for example, as subpart 2 requires... would produce at best an inexact estimate of the new 8-hour averages.”  “To the extent the new ozone standard is stricter than the old one,... the classification system of Subpart 2 contains a gap, because it fails to classify areas whose ozone levels are greater than the new standard (and thus nonattaining) but less than the approximation of the old standard codified by Table 1.”  “Subpart 2's method for calculating attainment dates – which is simply to count forward a certain number of years from November 15, 1990... seems to make no sense for areas that are first classified under a new standard after November 15, 1990.”

13. BACKGROUND (continued) Currently developing options for addressing Supreme Court ruling and for other implementation issues. Seeking input from stakeholders and the public at large in several forums, including this public meeting. Limited discussions with representatives of State and local air pollution control agencies, with tribal representatives, and with representatives of governmental organizations. Today’s input will be used to develop a proposed rulemaking. New source review issues …. not be a topic for discussion at this meeting. EPA option papers … reflect preliminary Agency thoughts and ideas … have not been thoroughly analyzed for legal defensibility.

14. PRINCIPLES GUIDING EPA WHEN DEVELOPING IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH Provide incentives for expeditious attainment of 8-hour standard … avoid incentives for delay. Provide reasonable attainment deadlines. Have a basic, straightforward structure that can be communicated easily. Consistent with CAA and Supreme Court decision, provide flexibility to states and EPA on implementation approaches and control measures Emphasize national and regional measures to help areas come into attainment and, where possible, reduce the need for more expensive local controls. Provide a smooth transition from 1-hr O3 NAAQS to 8-hr O3 NAAQS implementation

15. SCHEDULE Propose rulemaking on the implementation approach in summer of 2002 … finalize the rule in mid-2003. During 2003 …. ask State/Tribes to update recommended designations … promulgate air quality designations in mid-2004. State implementation plans (SIPs) …. likely be due in the 2007 and 2008 time frame, with attainment dates ranging from 2007 to 2019 or longer. No plans to issue final designations of nonattainment areas until EPA issues a final implementation strategy for the standard.

16. Under Subpart 1 Under Subpart 2 Action 2003 2004 2005 2007 2007-2008 2007 2009* Same 2007* 2010* 2013* 2019-2021* Final rule on implementation of 8-hour ozone NAAQS Designation of 8-hour nonattainment areas Reinstate the NOx SIP call with respect to the 8-hour ozone NAAQS Complete new modeling for additional "coarse grid" states. Make additional SIP calls as results dictate. 8-hour ozone NAAQS SIP attainment demonstration submission date Compliance with full NOx SIP call budgets for 19 States (assumes EGU at 0.15 lbs/mm BTU) EGU compliance for any "newly added coarse grid" States Assess impact of reductions from NOx SIP Call Part D/Subpart 2 attainment date - marginal areas (3 years after designation)** Part D/Subpart 1 default attainment date** Part D/Subpart 2 attainment date - moderate areas (6 years after designation)** Part D/Subpart 2 attainment date - serious areas (9 years after designation)** Potential 5-year attainment date extension**,*** Part D/Subpart 2 attainment date - severe areas (15-17 years after designation)** 2007/2008 2014* Potential Schedule for Implementing the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS and Related Actions * Two, 1-year extensions are possible. **All potential attainment dates are "as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than" the dates presented. ***Based on severity of nonattainment & feasibility of control measures 12 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

17. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/rto/ozonetech/o3imp8hr/o3imp8hr.htm Information on the Web ….

18. And get started….