resulted in the development of the attached MCR technical guidance. A methodology other than the
one developed from the public consultative process would need to be approved in advance by EPA.
The attached technical guidance contains three basic steps: (1) perform an administrative test
(e.g., demonstrate whether the appropriate emission limits were adopted and implemented); (2) analyze
available air quality, meteorology, emissions and modeling data and document findings; and (3)
document conclusions regarding whether progress toward attainment is being made using a weight of
evidence determination (which may or may not include new modeling analyses).
In the December 16, 1999, notices of proposed rulemaking, EPA did not request that States
commit in advance to adopt new control measures as a result of the MCR process. Based on the
MCR, if EPA determines additional control measures are needed for attainment, EPA would determine
whether additional emission reductions are necessary from the State or States in which the
nonattainment area is located or upwind States, or both. The EPA would then require the appropriate
State or States to adopt and submit the new measures within a specified period. The rulemaking
proposals noted that EPA anticipated that these findings would be made as calls for SIP revisions under
section 110(k)(5) and, therefore, the period for submission of the measures would be no longer than 18
months after the EPA finding.
A. Overall Process and Timing
The basic MCR process has several steps:
1. At the mid-course period, the State performs an assessment of progress toward attainment using
available data. The attached technical document provides guidance on various analyses that can be
used in a MCR. Table 1 below provides a summary of the analyses that EPA highly recommends be
included in this assessment, together with additional analyses that the State may want to consider. The
State also performs an “administrative” test, which includes several determinations, such as whether the
necessary emission limits have been adopted and implemented.
2. Using this information, the State determines whether sufficient progress is being made toward
attainment. The State may rely on a weight of evidence demonstration in which a number of factors
may be considered, such as fluctuations due to meteorology or impacts of transported ozone and
precursors. These results are presented to EPA for review.
3. The EPA evaluates the MCR and determines whether sufficient progress is being made.
4. If EPA determines that sufficient progress is not being made, EPA may call for a SIP revision that
includes either or both of the following:
n1201 - n1202 - n1203 - n1204 - n1205 - n1206 - n1207 - n1208 - n1209 - n1210 - n1211 - n1212 - n1213 - n1214 - n1215 - n1216 - n1217 - n1218 - n1219 - n1220 - n1221 - n1222 - n1223 - n1224 - n1225 - n1226 - n1227 - n1228 - n1229 - n1230 - n1231 - n1232 - n1233 - n1234 - n1235 - n1236 - n1237 - n1238 - n1239 - n1240 - n1241 - n1242 - n1243 - n1244 - n1245 - n1246 - n12247 - n1248 - n1249 - n1250
castellano: DISPER CUSTIC DESCAR RADIA italiano:
deutsch: DIS CUS DES RAD
castellano: DIS CUS DES RAD english: DIS CUS DES RAD
português: DIS CUS DES RAD italiano: DIS CUS DES RAD
français: DIS CUS DES RAD