Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; 2002 Base Year Emission Inventory, Reasonable Further Progress Plan, Contingency Measures, Reasonably Available Control Measures, and Transportation Conformity Budgets for the Baltimore 1997 8-Hour Moderate Ozone Nonattainment Area, 958-964 [2010-17]
Download as PDF
958
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 4 / Thursday, January 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
VOC (tpd)
NOX (tpd)
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
2.3 .............................................
7.9
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
In a March 27, 2009 Federal Register
affect small governments, as described
notice (74 FR 13433), EPA notified the
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
public that EPA found that the 2008
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
RFP MVEBs in the Cecil County 8-hour
ozone plan are adequate for
• Does not have Federalism
transportation conformity purposes. In
implications as specified in Executive
addition to the budgets being adequate
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
for transportation conformity purposes,
1999);
EPA found the procedures Maryland
• Is not an economically significant
used to develop the MVEBs to be
reasonable. The budgets are identical to regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
the projected 2008 on-road mobile
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
source emission inventories. Because
the 2008 RFP MVEBs are adequate for
• Is not a significant regulatory action
transportation conformity purposes and subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
the methods MDE used to develop them 28355, May 22, 2001);
are correct, the 2008 RFP budgets are
• Is not subject to requirements of
approvable.
Section 12(d) of the National
V. What Are EPA’s Conclusions?
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
EPA’s review of the 2002 base year
application of those requirements would
emissions inventory; the 2008 ozone
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
projected emission inventory; the 2008
RFP plan; RFP contingency measures;
• Does not provide EPA with the
Maryland’s RACM analysis; and 2008
discretionary authority to address, as
transportation conformity budgets
appropriate, disproportionate human
contained in MDE’s June 4, 2007 SIP
health or environmental effects, using
revision submittal for Cecil County fully practicable and legally permissible
addressed the CAA’s requirements.
methods, under Executive Order 12898
Therefore, EPA is proposing approval of
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
those elements of MDE’s June 4, 2007
In addition, this proposed rule
Cecil County 8-hour ozone plan. EPA is
pertaining to Cecil County’s 2002 base
soliciting public comments on the
year emissions inventory; 2008 ozone
issues discussed in this document.
projected emission inventory; 2008 RFP
These comments will be considered
plan; RFP contingency measures; RACM
before taking final action.
analysis; and 2008 transportation
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
conformity budgets does not have tribal
Reviews
implications as specified by Executive
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
required to approve a SIP submission
2000), because the SIP is not approved
that complies with the provisions of the to apply in Indian country located in the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations. state, and EPA notes that it will not
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
impose substantial direct costs on tribal
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
governments or preempt tribal law.
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
Environmental protection, Air
merely proposes to approve state law as
pollution control, Intergovernmental
meeting Federal requirements and does
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
not impose additional requirements
Reporting and recordkeeping
beyond those imposed by state law. For
requirements, Volatile organic
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
compounds.
action’’ subject to review by the Office
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
of Management and Budget under
Dated: December 23, 2009.
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
William C. Early,
• Does not impose an information
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
collection burden under the provisions
[FR Doc. 2010–15 Filed 1–6–10; 8:45 am]
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE 10—CECIL COUNTY 2008 RFP
MVEBS
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:23 Jan 06, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2009–0957; FRL–9100–9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; 2002 Base Year Emission
Inventory, Reasonable Further
Progress Plan, Contingency Measures,
Reasonably Available Control
Measures, and Transportation
Conformity Budgets for the Baltimore
1997 8-Hour Moderate Ozone
Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
a revision to the Maryland State
Implementation Plan (SIP) to meet the
2002 base year emissions inventory, the
reasonable further progress (RFP) plan,
RFP contingency measure, and
reasonably available control measure
(RACM) requirements of the Clean Air
Act (CAA) for the Baltimore moderate
1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
EPA is also proposing to approve the
transportation conformity motor vehicle
emissions budgets (MVEBs) and
associated with this revision. EPA is
proposing to approve the SIP revision
because it satisfies the emission
inventory, RFP, RACM, RFP
contingency measures, and
transportation conformity requirements
for areas classified as moderate
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) and demonstrates
further progress in reducing ozone
precursors. EPA is proposing to approve
the SIP revision pursuant to section 110
and part D of the CAA and EPA’s
regulations.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before February 8, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2009–0957 by one of the
following methods:
A. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. E-mail:
fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2009–0957,
Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director,
Office of Air Program Planning,
Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 4 / Thursday, January 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2009–
0957. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change, and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy
during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103. Copies of the State submittal are
available at the Maryland Department of
the Environment, 1800 Washington
Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore,
Maryland 21230.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:23 Jan 06, 2010
Jkt 220001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Maria A. Pino, (215) 814–2181, or by
e-mail at pino.maria@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
The following is provided to aid in
locating information in this document.
I. What Action is EPA Taking?
II. What is the Background for this Action?
III. What is EPA’s Evaluation of the Revision?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Action is EPA Taking?
EPA is proposing to approve a
revision to the Maryland SIP submitted
by the Maryland Department of the
Environment (MDE) on June 4, 2007 to
meet the emissions inventory and RFP
requirements of the CAA for the
Baltimore moderate 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area (NAA). EPA is
proposing to approve the 2002 base year
emissions inventory, the 15 percent RFP
plan and associated projected 2008
emission inventories, the contingency
measures for failure to meet 2008 RFP,
the RACM analysis, and the RFP 2008
MVEBs. The RFP plan demonstrates that
emissions will be reduced 15 percent for
the period of 2002 through 2008. The
volatile organic compound (VOC) MVEB
is 41.2 tons per day (tpd) and the
nitrogen oxides (NOX) MVEB is 106.8
tpd. EPA is proposing to approve the
SIP revision because it satisfies RFP,
contingency measure, RACM, RFP
transportation conformity, and
emissions inventory requirements for
areas classified as moderate
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS and demonstrates further
progress in reducing ozone precursors.
EPA is proposing to approve the SIP
revision pursuant to section 110 and
part D of the CAA and EPA’s
regulations.
II. What is the Background for this
Action?
In 1997, EPA revised the health-based
NAAQS for ozone, setting it at 0.08
parts per million (ppm) averaged over
an 8-hour time frame. EPA set the 8hour ozone standard based on scientific
evidence demonstrating that ozone
causes adverse health effects at lower
ozone concentrations and over longer
periods of time, than was understood
when the pre-existing 1-hour ozone
standard was set. EPA determined that
the 8-hour standard would be more
protective of human health, especially
children and adults who are active
outdoors, and individuals with a preexisting respiratory disease, such as
asthma.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
959
On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951), EPA
finalized its attainment/nonattainment
designations for areas across the country
with respect to the 8-hour ozone
standard. These actions became
effective on June 15, 2004. Among those
nonattainment areas is the Baltimore
moderate NAA. This NAA includes
Baltimore City and Anne Arundel,
Baltimore, Carroll, Harford, and Howard
Counties, all in Maryland.
These designations triggered the
CAA’s section 110(a)(1) requirement
that States must submit attainment
demonstrations for their nonattainment
areas to EPA by no later than three years
after the promulgation of a NAAQS.
Accordingly, EPA’s Phase 1 8-hour
ozone implementation rule (Phase 1
rule), published on April 30, 2004 (69
FR 23951), specifies that States must
submit attainment demonstrations for
their nonattainment areas to the EPA by
no later than three years from the
effective date of designation, that is, by
June 15, 2007.
Pursuant to the Phase 1 rule, an area
was classified under subpart 2 of the
CAA based on its 8-hour design value if
that area had a 1-hour design value at
or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour
design value in Table 1 of subpart 2).
Based on this criterion, the Baltimore
ozone NAA was classified under
subpart 2 as a moderate nonattainment
area.
On November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71612),
as revised on June 8, 2007 (72 FR
31727), EPA published the Phase 2 final
rule for implementation of the 8-hour
standard (Phase 2 rule). The Phase 2
rule addressed the RFP control and
planning obligations as they apply to
areas designated nonattainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Among other things, the Phase 1 and
2 rules outline the SIP requirements and
deadlines for various requirements in
areas designated as moderate
nonattainment. The rules further require
that modeling and attainment
demonstrations, reasonable further
progress plans, reasonably available
control measures, projection year
emission inventories, motor vehicle
emissions budgets, and contingency
measures were all due by June 15, 2007
(40 CFR 51.908(a), (c)).
Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA and
EPA’s 1997 8-hour ozone
implementation rule (40 CFR 51.910)
require each 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area designated moderate
and above to submit an emissions
inventory and RFP Plan, for review and
approval into its SIP, that describes how
the area will achieve actual emissions
reductions of VOC and NOX from a
baseline emissions inventory.
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
960
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 4 / Thursday, January 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules
III. What is EPA’s Evaluation of the
Revision?
EPA’s analysis and findings are
discussed in this proposed rulemaking
and a more detailed discussion is
contained in the Technical Support
Document for this Proposal which is
available on line at https://
www.regulations.gov, Docket number
EPA–R03–OAR–2009–0957.
On June 4, 2007, Maryland submitted
a comprehensive plan for the Baltimore
NAA to address the CAA’s 8-hour ozone
attainment requirements that were
identified earlier (the Baltimore 8-hour
ozone plan). The SIP submittal included
an attainment demonstration plan, RFP
plans for 2008 and 2009, a RACM
analysis, contingency measures, on-road
VOC and NOX MVEBs, and the 2002
base year emissions inventory. These
SIP revisions were subject to notice and
comment by the public and the State
addressed the comments received on the
proposed SIPs. All sections of this SIP
submittal with the exception of the
attainment demonstration plan will be
discussed in this rulemaking. The
attainment demonstration plan sections
of this SIP submittal will be discussed
in a separate rulemaking.
A. Base Year Emissions Inventory
An emissions inventory is a
comprehensive, accurate, current
inventory of actual emissions from all
sources and is required by section
172(c)(3) of the CAA. For ozone
nonattainment areas, the emissions
inventory needs to contain VOC and
NOX emissions because these pollutants
are precursors to ozone formation. EPA
recommended 2002 as the base year
emissions inventory, and is therefore
the starting point for calculating RFP.
Maryland submitted its 2002 base year
emissions inventory on June 4, 2007. A
summary of the Baltimore NAA 2002
base year VOC and NOX emissions
inventories is included in Table 1,
below.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE 1—BALTIMORE NAA 2002
BASE YEAR VOC & NOX EMISSIONS
IN TONS PER DAY (TPD)
Emission source category
VOC
NOX
Point ..................................
Stationary Area .................
Non-Road Mobile ..............
On-Road Mobile ...............
Total (excluding
Biogenics) .....................
Biogenics ..........................
13.88
116.81
70.22
70.57
111.88
8.18
40.96
177.06
271.48
223.20
338.08
0
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:23 Jan 06, 2010
Jkt 220001
B. Adjusted Base Year Inventory and
2008 RFP Target Levels
The process for determining the
emissions baseline from which the RFP
reductions are calculated is described in
section 182(b)(1) of the CAA and 40 CFR
51.910. This baseline value is the 2002
adjusted base year inventory. Sections
182(b)(1)(B) and (D) require the
exclusion from the base year inventory
of emissions benefits resulting from the
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program
(FMVCP) regulations promulgated by
January 1, 1990, and the Reid Vapor
Pressure (RVP) regulations promulgated
June 11, 1990 (55 FR 23666). The
FMVCP and RVP emissions reductions
are determined by the State using EPA’s
on-road mobile source emissions
modeling software, MOBILE6. The
FMVCP and RVP emission reductions
are then removed from the base year
inventory by the State, resulting in an
adjusted base year inventory. The
emission reductions needed to satisfy
the RFP requirement are then calculated
from the adjusted base year inventory.
These reductions are then subtracted
from the adjusted base year inventory to
establish the emissions target for the
RFP milestone year (2008).
For moderate areas like the Baltimore
NAA, the CAA specifies a 15 percent
reduction in ozone precursor emissions
over an initial six year period. In the
Phase 2 Rule, EPA interpreted this
requirement for areas that were also
designated nonattainment and classified
as moderate or higher for the 1-hour
ozone standard. In the Phase 2 Rule,
EPA provided that an area classified as
moderate or higher that has the same
boundaries as an area, or is entirely
composed of several areas or portions of
areas, for which EPA fully approved a
15 percent plan for the 1-hour NAAQS,
is considered to have met the
requirements of section 182(b)(1) of the
CAA for the 8-hour NAAQS. In this
situation, a moderate nonattainment
area is subject to RFP under section
172(c)(2) of the CAA and shall submit,
no later than 3 years after designation
for the 8-hour NAAQS, a SIP revision
that meets the requirements of 40 CFR
51.910(b)(2). The RFP SIP revision must
provide for a 15 percent emission
reduction (either NOX and/or VOC)
accounting for any growth that occurs
during the six year period following the
baseline emissions inventory year, that
is, 2002–2008.
The Baltimore ozone NAA under the
1-hour ozone standard had the same
boundary as the Baltimore NAA under
the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. The
Baltimore nonattainment area under the
1-hour ozone standard was classified as
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
severe. EPA approved Maryland’s 15%
plan for the Baltimore severe ozone
nonattainment area on February 2, 2000
(65 FR 5252). Therefore, according to
the Phase 2 Rule, the RFP plan for the
Baltimore NAA may use either NOX or
VOC emissions reductions (or both) to
achieve the 15 percent emission
reduction requirement.
According to section 182(b)(1)(D) of
the CAA, emission reductions that
resulted from the FMVCP and Reid
Vapor Pressure RVP rules promulgated
prior to 1990 are not creditable for
achieving RFP emission reductions.
Therefore, the 2002 base year inventory
is adjusted by subtracting the VOC and
NOX emission reductions that are
expected to occur between 2002 and the
future milestone years due to the
FMVCP and RVP rules.
Maryland sets out its calculations for
the adjusted base year inventory and
2008 RFP target levels in Section 5 of
the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan.
Step 1. Calculate the Baltimore NAA
2002 anthropogenic base year inventory.
This is found in Table 5–1 of the
Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan, and
shown in Table 2, below.
TABLE 2—BALTIMORE NAA 2002 ANTHROPOGENIC BASE YEAR INVENTORY
[Ozone season tpd]
Source category
VOC
NOX
Point ..........................
Area ..........................
Non-Road .................
On-Road ...................
13.88
116.81
70.22
70.57
111.88
8.18
40.96
177.06
Total ...................
271.48
338.08
Step 2. Maryland calculated the noncreditable emission reductions between
2002 and 2008 by modeling its 2002 and
2008 motor vehicle emissions with all
post-1990 CAA measures turned off, and
calculating the difference. See, Table 3,
below.
TABLE 3—BALTIMORE NAA NONCREDITABLE EMISSION REDUCTIONS
[Ozone season tpd]
Source category
(i) 2002 On-Road ......
(ii) 2008 On-Road .....
Non-creditable Reductions (i)–(ii) ......
VOC
NOX
101.876
92.778
211.145
188.541
9.10
22.60
Step 3. Maryland’s calculations of the
Baltimore NAA 2002 VOC and NOX
inventories adjusted relative to 2008
and VOC and NOX target levels for 2008
are found in Table 5–4 and Appendix C
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 4 / Thursday, January 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules
961
of the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan, and
are summarized in Table 4, below.
TABLE 4—BALTIMORE NAA 2008 RFP TARGET LEVEL CALCULATIONS
[Ozone season tpd]
Description
Formula
A. 2002 Rate-Of Progress Base Year Inventory ...................................................................................
B. FMVCP/RVP Reductions Between 2002 And 2008 .........................................................................
C. 2002 Adjusted Base Year Inventory Relative To 2008 ....................................................................
D. RFP Reductions Totaling 15% .........................................................................................................
E. Emissions Reductions Required Between 2002 & 2008 ..................................................................
F. Target Level for 2008 ........................................................................................................................
..................
..................
A¥B ........
..................
C * D ........
C¥E ........
C. Projected Inventories and
Determination of RFP
Maryland describes its methods used
for developing its 2008 projected VOC
and NOX inventories in Section 4.0 and
Appendix B of the Baltimore 8-hour
ozone plan. Projected uncontrolled and
controlled 2008 VOC and NOX
emissions are found in Appendix C of
the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. EPA
reviewed the procedures Maryland used
to develop its projected inventories and
found them to be reasonable.
Projected controlled 2008 emissions
for the Baltimore NAA are summarized
in Table 4–3 of the Baltimore 8-hour
ozone plan. The data from Table 4–3 is
presented below, in Table 5, below.
TABLE 5—BALTIMORE NAA 2008 PROJECTED CONTROLLED VOC & NOX
EMISSIONS (TPD)
VOC
emissions
(tpd)
NOX
emissions
(tpd)
Point ..........................
Area ..........................
Non-road ...................
Mobile .......................
15.63
108.17
54.21
41.23
122.64
8.43
39.60
106.84
Total ...................
219.25
277.50
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Emission source
category
To determine if 2008 RFP is met in
the Baltimore NAA, the total projected
controlled emissions must be compared
to the target levels calculated in the
previous section of this document. As
shown below in Table 6, the total VOC
and NOX emission projections meet the
2008 emission targets. Therefore, the
2008 RFP in the Baltimore NAA is
demonstrated.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:23 Jan 06, 2010
Jkt 220001
VOC
271.48
9.10
262.38
8
20.99
241.39
NOX
338.08
22.60
315.48
7
22.08
293.40
TABLE 6—DETERMINATION OF WHETH- engines, and reformulated gasoline used
ER RFP IS MET IN 2008 IN THE in non-road motor vehicles and
equipment. Maryland used the
BALTIMORE NAA
NONROAD model to calculate emission
reductions from these non-road
Description
measures. EPA reviewed the procedures
that MDE used to develop its projected
inventories, including the use of the
A. Total 2008 ProNONROAD model, and found them to
jected Controlled
Emissions ..............
219.25
277.50 be reasonable. Maryland calculated the
non-road mobile 2008 emission
B. Target Level for
2008 ......................
241.39
293.40 reductions to be 17.89 tpd VOC and 6.74
RFP met if A < B ......
(1)
(1) tpd NOX.
1 Yes.
The other measures that Maryland
used to meet RFP in the Baltimore NAA
D. Control Measures and Emission
are railroad engine standards (Tier 2),
Reductions for RFP
the consumer and commercial products
The control measure Maryland took
rule (Phase I), the architectural and
credit for in order to meet the RFP
industrial (AIM) coatings rule, and the
requirement in the Baltimore NAA are
portable fuel containers rule (Phase I).
described in Section 6.0 of the
In the Technical Support Document
Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. Maryland
(TSD) for this action, EPA evaluates
used a combination of on-road mobile,
each of these measures and calculated
non-road mobile, and area source
the projected 2008 emission for each
control measures to meet the RFP
measure. For details, please refer to
requirement for the Baltimore NAA.
EPA’s TSD.
The on-road mobile measures
The tier 2 railroad engine standards
Maryland used to meet 2008 RFP in the
for newly manufactured and
Baltimore NAA include enhanced
remanufactured diesel-powered
vehicle inspection and maintenance
locomotives and locomotive engines
(enhanced I/M), Tier I vehicle emission
took effect in 2000. EPA calculated 2008
standards and new Federal evaporative
emission reductions from railroad
test procedures (Tier I), reformulated
engine to be 1.37 tpd NOX.
gasoline, the national low emission
A Federal measure requires
vehicle (NLEV) program, and the
reformulation of AIM coatings, which
Federal heavy-duty diesel engine
are field-applied coatings used by
(HDDE) rule. Maryland calculated the
emission reductions for 2008 RFP using industry, contractors, and homeowners
to coat houses, buildings, highway
the MOBILE model for these on-road
surfaces, and industrial equipment for
mobile measures. EPA reviewed the
procedures that MDE used to develop its decorative or protective purposes.
projected inventories, including the use Maryland’s AIM rule was effective on
March 29, 2004. EPA calculated 2008
of the MOBILE model, and found them
emission reductions from Maryland’s
to be reasonable. Maryland calculated
AIM rule to be 6.02 tpd VOC.
the on-road mobile 2008 emission
The phase I commercial and
reductions to be 42.45 tpd VOC and
consumer products rule requires the
59.10 tpd NOX.
The non-road measures Maryland
reformulation of certain consumer
used to meet 2008 RFP in the Baltimore products to reduce their VOC content.
NAA include non-road small gasoline
Maryland’s consumer products rule was
engines, non-road diesel engines (Tier I
effective on August 18, 2003. EPA
and Tier II), marine engine standards,
calculated 2008 emission reductions
emission standards for large spark
from Maryland’s consumer and
PO 00000
VOC
emissions
(tpd)
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
NOX
emissions
(tpd)
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
962
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 4 / Thursday, January 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules
commercial products rule to be 3.70 tpd
VOC.
The phase I portable fuel containers
rule introduces performance standards
for portable fuel containers and spouts,
and is intended to reduce emissions
from storage, transport and refueling
activities. Maryland’s portable fuel
container rule was effective on January
21, 2002. EPA calculated 2008 emission
reductions from Maryland’s portable
fuel containers rule to be 8.13 tpd VOC.
Table 7 summarizes the emission
reductions that Maryland claimed in the
Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan to meet
RFP in the Baltimore NAA. For certain
control measures, the 2008 projected
emission reductions calculated by EPA
differ from the 2008 projected emission
reductions that MDE is taking credit for
in the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. The
total 2008 projected emission reductions
calculated by EPA are greater than the
emission reductions claimed by MDE in
the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan.
Therefore, the emission reductions
claimed in the Baltimore 8-hour ozone
plan are approvable.
TABLE 7—CONTROL MEASURES AND implementation of such measures,
2008 EMISSION REDUCTIONS IN THE additional emission reductions of at
least 3 percent of the adjusted 2002
BALTIMORE
Control measure
On-road Mobile
Measures ..............
Non-road Model ........
Railroads (Tier 2) ......
OTC—Consumer
Products Phase 1
OTC—AIM Coatings
OTC—Portable Fuel
Containers Phase
1 ............................
Total ...................
VOC
(tpd)
NOX
(tpd)
42.45
17.89
0.00
59.10
6.74
1.18
3.70
6.03
0.00
0.00
6.71
0.00
76.78
67.02
E. Contingency Measures
Section 172(c)(9) of the CAA requires
a State with a moderate or above ozone
nonattainment area to include sufficient
additional contingency measures in its
RFP plan in case the area fails to meet
RFP. The same provision of the CAA
also requires that the contingency
measures must be fully adopted control
measures or rules. Upon failure to meet
an RFP milestone requirement, the State
must be able to implement the
contingency measures without any
further rulemaking activities. Upon
baseline emissions must be achieved.
For more information on contingency
measures, see the April 16, 1992
General Preamble (57 FR 13512) and the
November 29, 2005 Phase 2 8-hour
ozone implementation rule (70 FR
71612).
To meet the requirements for
contingency emission reductions, EPA
allows States to use NOX emission
reductions to substitute for VOC
emission reductions in their
contingency plans. However, MDE
chose to use only VOC reductions to
meet the contingency measure
requirement in the Baltimore NAA.
MDE discusses its Baltimore NAA
contingency measures for failure to meet
RFP in Section 10.2 of the Baltimore 8hour ozone plan. MDE calculated the
contingency VOC reduction for the
Baltimore NAA as shown in Table 8,
below. The RFP contingency
requirement may be met by including in
the RFP plan a demonstration of 18
percent VOC & NOX RFP. The
additional 3 percent reduction above the
15 percent requirement must be
attributed to specific measures.
TABLE 8—BALTIMORE NAA 2008 RFP CONTINGENCY MEASURE TARGET LEVEL CALCULATIONS
Formula
A. 2002 Rate-Of Progress Base Year Inventory ...................................................................................
B. FMVCP/RVP Reductions Between 2002 And 2008 .........................................................................
C. 2002 Adjusted Base Year Inventory Relative To 2008 ....................................................................
D. RFP Reductions Totaling 15% .........................................................................................................
E. RFP Emissions Reductions Required Between 2002 & 2008 .........................................................
F. Contingency Percentage ...................................................................................................................
G. Contingency Emission Reduction Requirements .............................................................................
H. Contingency Measure Target Level for 2008 ...................................................................................
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Description
..................
..................
A¥B ........
..................
C * D ........
..................
C * F ........
C¥E¥G ..
To determine if Maryland met the
three percent contingency measure
requirement for the Baltimore NAA, the
total projected controlled emissions
must be compared to the contingency
measure target levels calculated above.
As shown below in Table 9, the total
VOC and NOX emission projections
meet the 2008 contingency measure
targets. Therefore, MDE has met the
contingency measure requirement for
the Baltimore NAA.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:23 Jan 06, 2010
Jkt 220001
VOC
271.48
9.10
262.38
8
20.99
3.00
7.87
233.52
NOX
338.08
22.60
315.48
7
22.08
0.00
0.00
293.40
TABLE 9—EVALUATION OF THE BALTI- practicable for each nonattainment area.
MORE NAA 2008 RFP CONTIN- Specifically, section 172(c)(1) states the
following: ‘‘In general—Such plan
GENCY MEASURE REQUIREMENT
provisions shall provide for the
implementation of all reasonably
Description
available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable (including
A. Total 2008 Prosuch reductions in emissions from
jected Controlled
Emissions ..............
219.25
277.50 existing sources in the area as may be
obtained through the adoption, at a
B. Contingency
minimum, of reasonably available
Measure Target
Level for 2008 .......
233.52
293.40 control technology) and shall provide
Contingency measure
for attainment of the national primary
requirement met if
ambient air quality standards.’’
1)
1)
A < B .....................
(
(
Furthermore, in EPA’s Phase 2 Rule,
1 Yes.
EPA describes how States must include
a RACM analysis with their attainment
F. RACM Analysis
demonstration (70 FR 71659). The
purpose of the RACM analysis is to
Pursuant to section 172(c)(1) of the
CAA, States are required to implement
determine whether or not reasonably
all RACM as expeditiously as
available control measures exist that
PO 00000
VOC
(tpd)
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
NOX
(tpd)
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 4 / Thursday, January 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules
would advance the attainment date for
nonattainment areas. Control measures
that would advance the attainment date
are considered RACM and must be
included in the SIP. RACM are
necessary to ensure that the attainment
date is achieved ‘‘as expeditious as
practicable.’’ RACM is defined by the
EPA as any potential control measure
for application to point, area, on-road
and non-road emission source categories
that meets the following criteria:
• The control measure is
technologically feasible.
• The control measure is
economically feasible.
• The control measure does not cause
‘‘substantial widespread and long-term
adverse impacts.’’
• The control measure is not ‘‘absurd,
unenforceable, or impracticable.’’
• The control measure can advance
the attainment date by at least one year.
MDE addresses the RACM
requirement in Section 7.0 and
Appendix E of the Baltimore 8-hour
ozone plan. To meet the RACM
requirement, Maryland must
demonstrate that it has adopted all
RACM necessary to move the Baltimore
NAA toward attainment as
expeditiously as practicable and to meet
all RFP requirements. As demonstrated
above in Sections C and D of this
document, Maryland has met the RFP
requirements for the Baltimore NAA.
MDE used two independently
developed lists of potential control
measures for its RACM analysis. The
first list consists of the RACM analysis
performed for the Washington, DC
NAA’s 8-hour ozone plan. The second
list of measures was developed by the
Baltimore Metropolitan Council (BMC)
with MDE in 2006. These measures are
evaluated in Appendices E–1 and E–2 of
the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan.
EPA has reviewed MDE’s RACM
analysis in the TSD for this action. MDE
evaluated all source categories that
could contribute meaningful emission
reductions, and evaluated an extensive
list of potential control measures. MDE
considered the time needed to develop
and adopt regulations and the time it
would take to see the benefit from these
measures. EPA concurs with MDE’s
conclusion that there are no RACM that
would have advanced the moderate area
attainment date of 2010 for the
Baltimore NAA. Therefore, MDE’s
RACM analysis in the Baltimore 8-hour
ozone plan is approvable.
G. Transportation Conformity Budgets
Transportation conformity is required
by CAA section 176(c). EPA’s
conformity rule requires that
transportation plans, programs and
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:23 Jan 06, 2010
Jkt 220001
projects conform to State air quality
implementation plans and establishes
the criteria and procedure for
determining whether or not they do.
Conformity to a SIP means that
transportation activities will not
produce new air quality violations,
worsen existing violations, or delay
timely attainment of the national
ambient air quality standards.
States must establish VOC and NOx
MVEBs for each of the milestone years
up to the attainment year and submit
the mobile budgets to EPA for approval.
Upon adequacy determination or
approval by EPA, States must conduct
transportation conformity analysis for
their Transportation Improvement
Programs (TIPs) and long range
transportation plans to ensure highway
vehicle emissions will not exceed
relevant MVEBs.
MDE discusses transportation
conformity in Section 8.0 of the
Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. MDE
describes the methods it used to
calculate the 2008 mobile emissions
inventory in Appendix F of the
Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. The
Baltimore NAA MVEB for the 2008 RFP
is based on the projected 2008 mobile
source emissions accounting for all
mobile control measures. The MVEBs
for the 2008 RFP are shown in Table 10,
below.
TABLE 10—BALTIMORE NAA 2008
RFP MVEBS
VOC (tpd)
NOX (tpd)
41.2 ...........................................
106.8
In a March 27, 2009 Federal Register
notice (74 FR 13433), EPA notified the
public that EPA found that the 2008
RFP MVEBs in the Baltimore 8-hour
ozone plan are adequate for
transportation conformity purposes. In
addition to the budgets being adequate
for transportation conformity purposes,
EPA found the procedures Maryland
used to develop the MVEBs to be
reasonable. The budgets are identical to
the projected 2008 on-road mobile
source emission inventories. Because
the 2008 RFP MVEBs are adequate for
transportation conformity purposes and
the methods MDE used to develop them
are correct, the 2008 RFP budgets are
approvable.
V. What are EPA’s Conclusions?
EPA’s review of the 2002 base year
emissions inventory; the 2008 ozone
projected emission inventory; the 2008
RFP plan; RFP contingency measures;
Maryland’s RACM analysis; and 2008
transportation conformity budgets
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
963
contained in MDE’s June 4, 2007 SIP
revision submittal for the Baltimore
NAA fully addressed the CAA’s
requirements. Therefore, EPA is
proposing approval of those following
elements of MDE’s June 4, 2007
Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. EPA is
soliciting public comments on the
issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely proposes to approve State law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by State law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
964
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 4 / Thursday, January 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule
pertaining to the Baltimore NAA’s 2002
base year emissions inventory; 2008
ozone projected emission inventory;
2008 RFP plan; RFP contingency
measures; RACM analysis; and 2008
transportation conformity budgets does
not have Tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because
the SIP is not approved to apply in
Indian country located in the State, and
EPA notes that it will not impose
substantial direct costs on Tribal
governments or preempt Tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 23, 2009.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2010–17 Filed 1–6–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
48 CFR Parts 928, 931, 932, 933, 935,
936, 937, 941, 942, 949, 950, 951, and
952
RIN 1991–AB88
Acquisition Regulation: Subchapter
E—General Contracting Requirements,
Subchapter F—Special Categories of
Contracting, and Subchapter G—
Contract Management
Department of Energy.
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy
(DOE) is proposing to amend the
Department of Energy Acquisition
Regulation (DEAR) Subchapters E—
General Contracting Requirements, F—
Special Categories of Contracting, and
G—Contract Management to make
changes to conform to the FAR, remove
out-of-date coverage, and to update
references. DOE will separately propose
rules for changes to parts 927 and 945,
respectively. Today’s proposed rule
does not alter substantive rights or
obligations under current law.
DATES: Written comments on the
proposed rulemaking must be received
on or before close of business February
8, 2010.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:23 Jan 06, 2010
Jkt 220001
This proposed rule is
available and you may submit
comments, identified by DEAR:
Subchapters E, F, and G and RIN 1991–
AB88, by any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail to:
DEARrulemaking@hq.doe.gov. Include:
DEAR: Subchapters E, F and G and RIN
1991–AB88 in the subject line of the
message.
• Mail to: U.S. Department of Energy,
Office of Procurement and Assistance
Management, MA–611, 1000
Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20585. Comments by email are encouraged.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Barbara Binney at (202) 287–1340 or by
e-mail, barbara.binney@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
I. Background
II. Section-by-Section Analysis
III. Procedural Requirements
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under Executive Order 12988
C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act
D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act
E. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act
F. Review Under Executive Order 13132
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 13211
J. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
K. Approval by the Office of the Secretary
of Energy
I. Background
The objective of this action is to
update the existing Department of
Energy Acquisition Regulation (DEAR).
Subchapters E, F, and G have sections
that need to be updated to conform to
the FAR. None of the proposed changes
are substantive or of a nature to cause
any significant expense for DOE or its
contractors.
II. Section-by-Section Analysis
Changes are proposed to DEAR parts
928, 931, 932, 933, 935, 936, 937, 941,
942, 949, 950, 951, and 952. No changes
are proposed for DEAR parts 927, 929,
930, 934, 938, 939, 940, 943, 944, 945,
946, 947, and 948.
DOE proposes to amend the DEAR as
follows:
1. Section 932.501–2 is amended in
paragraph (a)(3) to reflect current
procedures to state that all requests for
unusual progress payments shall be sent
to the DOE or the NNSA Senior
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Procurement Executive to approve or
deny.
2. Subpart 932.6 is amended to update
the DEAR to conform with FAR subpart
32.6 which was revised by Federal
Acquisition Circular 2005–027 effective
October 18, 2008.
3. Section 935.010 is amended by
revising paragraphs (c) and (d). The
report process has been changed to an
electronic submission using the DOE
Energy Link System (E-Link) at https://
www.osti.gov/elink. The contracting
officer shall require the contractors to
use E-Link to submit an announcement
record with each report.
4. Part 936 redesignates 936.202 to
936.202–70.
5. Part 937 is revised to add a new
subpart, Subpart 937.2—Advisory and
Assistance Services and section 937.204
Guidelines for determining availability
of personnel. Sections 937.204(a), (b),
(d) and (e) are added to conform to FAR
37.204 to provide the DOE guidelines
for determining availability of sufficient
personnel with the requisite training
and capabilities to perform the
evaluation or analysis of proposals. It
also clarifies the DOE officials
responsible for making the
determinations prescribed at FAR
37.204 (a), (b), (d) and (e).
6. Section 941.201–70 is amended to
update the DOE Order reference by
removing the remainder of the sentence
after the second ‘‘FAR’’ and adding in
its place ‘‘part 41 and the Department of
Energy (DOE) Order 430.2B,
Departmental Energy, Renewable Energy
and Transportation Management, or its
successor.’’
7. Section 942.803 is amended at
paragraph (c) by removing ‘‘as discussed
in 942.70 Audit Services’’ which is no
longer a subpart.
8. Section 949.101 is revised to add
‘‘Senior’’ before ‘‘Procurement
Executive.’’ to conform the use of the
Procurement Executive title with the
FAR.
9. Subpart 949.5 is removed and
reserved. There is no longer a need for
a DEAR termination clause for
Architect-Engineer contracts.
10. Section 951.102 paragraph (e)(4) is
amended to remove the ‘‘(iii)’’ in the
paragraph numbering.
11. Section 952.247–70 is amended to
remove repetitive language.
12. The rule text is amended as noted
in the table at paragraph 16, by
removing ‘‘FAR’’ or ‘‘FAR part’’ and
adding ‘‘48 CFR’’ or ‘‘48 CFR part’’ or
by updating other CFR citations. Section
931.205–47(h)(1) is amended by
changing the capitalization of the word
‘‘part’’ in two places. Section 952 has
E:\FR\FM\07JAP1.SGM
07JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 4 (Thursday, January 7, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 958-964]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-17]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2009-0957; FRL-9100-9]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maryland; 2002 Base Year Emission Inventory, Reasonable Further
Progress Plan, Contingency Measures, Reasonably Available Control
Measures, and Transportation Conformity Budgets for the Baltimore 1997
8-Hour Moderate Ozone Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Maryland State
Implementation Plan (SIP) to meet the 2002 base year emissions
inventory, the reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, RFP contingency
measure, and reasonably available control measure (RACM) requirements
of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the Baltimore moderate 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area. EPA is also proposing to approve the transportation
conformity motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) and associated with
this revision. EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision because it
satisfies the emission inventory, RFP, RACM, RFP contingency measures,
and transportation conformity requirements for areas classified as
moderate nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS) and demonstrates further progress in reducing
ozone precursors. EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision pursuant
to section 110 and part D of the CAA and EPA's regulations.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before February 8, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2009-0957 by one of the following methods:
A. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. E-mail: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2009-0957, Cristina Fernandez, Associate
Director, Office of Air Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such
[[Page 959]]
deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2009-0957. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online
at https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the
State submittal are available at the Maryland Department of the
Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland
21230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maria A. Pino, (215) 814-2181, or by
e-mail at pino.maria@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
The following is provided to aid in locating information in this
document.
I. What Action is EPA Taking?
II. What is the Background for this Action?
III. What is EPA's Evaluation of the Revision?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Action is EPA Taking?
EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Maryland SIP
submitted by the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) on June
4, 2007 to meet the emissions inventory and RFP requirements of the CAA
for the Baltimore moderate 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area (NAA).
EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 base year emissions inventory, the
15 percent RFP plan and associated projected 2008 emission inventories,
the contingency measures for failure to meet 2008 RFP, the RACM
analysis, and the RFP 2008 MVEBs. The RFP plan demonstrates that
emissions will be reduced 15 percent for the period of 2002 through
2008. The volatile organic compound (VOC) MVEB is 41.2 tons per day
(tpd) and the nitrogen oxides (NOX) MVEB is 106.8 tpd. EPA
is proposing to approve the SIP revision because it satisfies RFP,
contingency measure, RACM, RFP transportation conformity, and emissions
inventory requirements for areas classified as moderate nonattainment
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and demonstrates further progress in
reducing ozone precursors. EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision
pursuant to section 110 and part D of the CAA and EPA's regulations.
II. What is the Background for this Action?
In 1997, EPA revised the health-based NAAQS for ozone, setting it
at 0.08 parts per million (ppm) averaged over an 8-hour time frame. EPA
set the 8-hour ozone standard based on scientific evidence
demonstrating that ozone causes adverse health effects at lower ozone
concentrations and over longer periods of time, than was understood
when the pre-existing 1-hour ozone standard was set. EPA determined
that the 8-hour standard would be more protective of human health,
especially children and adults who are active outdoors, and individuals
with a pre-existing respiratory disease, such as asthma.
On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951), EPA finalized its attainment/
nonattainment designations for areas across the country with respect to
the 8-hour ozone standard. These actions became effective on June 15,
2004. Among those nonattainment areas is the Baltimore moderate NAA.
This NAA includes Baltimore City and Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll,
Harford, and Howard Counties, all in Maryland.
These designations triggered the CAA's section 110(a)(1)
requirement that States must submit attainment demonstrations for their
nonattainment areas to EPA by no later than three years after the
promulgation of a NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA's Phase 1 8-hour ozone
implementation rule (Phase 1 rule), published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR
23951), specifies that States must submit attainment demonstrations for
their nonattainment areas to the EPA by no later than three years from
the effective date of designation, that is, by June 15, 2007.
Pursuant to the Phase 1 rule, an area was classified under subpart
2 of the CAA based on its 8-hour design value if that area had a 1-hour
design value at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour design value in
Table 1 of subpart 2). Based on this criterion, the Baltimore ozone NAA
was classified under subpart 2 as a moderate nonattainment area.
On November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71612), as revised on June 8, 2007 (72
FR 31727), EPA published the Phase 2 final rule for implementation of
the 8-hour standard (Phase 2 rule). The Phase 2 rule addressed the RFP
control and planning obligations as they apply to areas designated
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Among other things, the Phase 1 and 2 rules outline the SIP
requirements and deadlines for various requirements in areas designated
as moderate nonattainment. The rules further require that modeling and
attainment demonstrations, reasonable further progress plans,
reasonably available control measures, projection year emission
inventories, motor vehicle emissions budgets, and contingency measures
were all due by June 15, 2007 (40 CFR 51.908(a), (c)).
Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA and EPA's 1997 8-hour ozone
implementation rule (40 CFR 51.910) require each 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area designated moderate and above to submit an emissions
inventory and RFP Plan, for review and approval into its SIP, that
describes how the area will achieve actual emissions reductions of VOC
and NOX from a baseline emissions inventory.
[[Page 960]]
III. What is EPA's Evaluation of the Revision?
EPA's analysis and findings are discussed in this proposed
rulemaking and a more detailed discussion is contained in the Technical
Support Document for this Proposal which is available on line at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA-R03-OAR-2009-0957.
On June 4, 2007, Maryland submitted a comprehensive plan for the
Baltimore NAA to address the CAA's 8-hour ozone attainment requirements
that were identified earlier (the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan). The SIP
submittal included an attainment demonstration plan, RFP plans for 2008
and 2009, a RACM analysis, contingency measures, on-road VOC and
NOX MVEBs, and the 2002 base year emissions inventory. These
SIP revisions were subject to notice and comment by the public and the
State addressed the comments received on the proposed SIPs. All
sections of this SIP submittal with the exception of the attainment
demonstration plan will be discussed in this rulemaking. The attainment
demonstration plan sections of this SIP submittal will be discussed in
a separate rulemaking.
A. Base Year Emissions Inventory
An emissions inventory is a comprehensive, accurate, current
inventory of actual emissions from all sources and is required by
section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. For ozone nonattainment areas, the
emissions inventory needs to contain VOC and NOX emissions
because these pollutants are precursors to ozone formation. EPA
recommended 2002 as the base year emissions inventory, and is therefore
the starting point for calculating RFP. Maryland submitted its 2002
base year emissions inventory on June 4, 2007. A summary of the
Baltimore NAA 2002 base year VOC and NOX emissions
inventories is included in Table 1, below.
Table 1--Baltimore NAA 2002 Base Year VOC & NOX Emissions in Tons per
Day (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission source category VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point................................................. 13.88 111.88
Stationary Area....................................... 116.81 8.18
Non-Road Mobile....................................... 70.22 40.96
On-Road Mobile........................................ 70.57 177.06
Total (excluding Biogenics)........................... 271.48 338.08
Biogenics............................................. 223.20 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Adjusted Base Year Inventory and 2008 RFP Target Levels
The process for determining the emissions baseline from which the
RFP reductions are calculated is described in section 182(b)(1) of the
CAA and 40 CFR 51.910. This baseline value is the 2002 adjusted base
year inventory. Sections 182(b)(1)(B) and (D) require the exclusion
from the base year inventory of emissions benefits resulting from the
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP) regulations promulgated
by January 1, 1990, and the Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) regulations
promulgated June 11, 1990 (55 FR 23666). The FMVCP and RVP emissions
reductions are determined by the State using EPA's on-road mobile
source emissions modeling software, MOBILE6. The FMVCP and RVP emission
reductions are then removed from the base year inventory by the State,
resulting in an adjusted base year inventory. The emission reductions
needed to satisfy the RFP requirement are then calculated from the
adjusted base year inventory. These reductions are then subtracted from
the adjusted base year inventory to establish the emissions target for
the RFP milestone year (2008).
For moderate areas like the Baltimore NAA, the CAA specifies a 15
percent reduction in ozone precursor emissions over an initial six year
period. In the Phase 2 Rule, EPA interpreted this requirement for areas
that were also designated nonattainment and classified as moderate or
higher for the 1-hour ozone standard. In the Phase 2 Rule, EPA provided
that an area classified as moderate or higher that has the same
boundaries as an area, or is entirely composed of several areas or
portions of areas, for which EPA fully approved a 15 percent plan for
the 1-hour NAAQS, is considered to have met the requirements of section
182(b)(1) of the CAA for the 8-hour NAAQS. In this situation, a
moderate nonattainment area is subject to RFP under section 172(c)(2)
of the CAA and shall submit, no later than 3 years after designation
for the 8-hour NAAQS, a SIP revision that meets the requirements of 40
CFR 51.910(b)(2). The RFP SIP revision must provide for a 15 percent
emission reduction (either NOX and/or VOC) accounting for
any growth that occurs during the six year period following the
baseline emissions inventory year, that is, 2002-2008.
The Baltimore ozone NAA under the 1-hour ozone standard had the
same boundary as the Baltimore NAA under the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard. The Baltimore nonattainment area under the 1-hour ozone
standard was classified as severe. EPA approved Maryland's 15% plan for
the Baltimore severe ozone nonattainment area on February 2, 2000 (65
FR 5252). Therefore, according to the Phase 2 Rule, the RFP plan for
the Baltimore NAA may use either NOX or VOC emissions
reductions (or both) to achieve the 15 percent emission reduction
requirement.
According to section 182(b)(1)(D) of the CAA, emission reductions
that resulted from the FMVCP and Reid Vapor Pressure RVP rules
promulgated prior to 1990 are not creditable for achieving RFP emission
reductions. Therefore, the 2002 base year inventory is adjusted by
subtracting the VOC and NOX emission reductions that are
expected to occur between 2002 and the future milestone years due to
the FMVCP and RVP rules.
Maryland sets out its calculations for the adjusted base year
inventory and 2008 RFP target levels in Section 5 of the Baltimore 8-
hour ozone plan.
Step 1. Calculate the Baltimore NAA 2002 anthropogenic base year
inventory. This is found in Table 5-1 of the Baltimore 8-hour ozone
plan, and shown in Table 2, below.
Table 2--Baltimore NAA 2002 Anthropogenic Base Year Inventory
[Ozone season tpd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point............................................. 13.88 111.88
Area.............................................. 116.81 8.18
Non-Road.......................................... 70.22 40.96
On-Road........................................... 70.57 177.06
---------------------
Total......................................... 271.48 338.08
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 2. Maryland calculated the non-creditable emission reductions
between 2002 and 2008 by modeling its 2002 and 2008 motor vehicle
emissions with all post-1990 CAA measures turned off, and calculating
the difference. See, Table 3, below.
Table 3--Baltimore NAA Non-Creditable Emission Reductions
[Ozone season tpd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) 2002 On-Road.................................. 101.876 211.145
(ii) 2008 On-Road................................. 92.778 188.541
Non-creditable Reductions (i)-(ii)................ 9.10 22.60
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 3. Maryland's calculations of the Baltimore NAA 2002 VOC and
NOX inventories adjusted relative to 2008 and VOC and
NOX target levels for 2008 are found in Table 5-4 and
Appendix C
[[Page 961]]
of the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan, and are summarized in Table 4,
below.
Table 4--Baltimore NAA 2008 RFP Target Level Calculations
[Ozone season tpd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description Formula VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. 2002 Rate-Of Progress Base ............. 271.48 338.08
Year Inventory.
B. FMVCP/RVP Reductions ............. 9.10 22.60
Between 2002 And 2008.
C. 2002 Adjusted Base Year A-B.......... 262.38 315.48
Inventory Relative To 2008.
D. RFP Reductions Totaling ............. 8 7
15%.
E. Emissions Reductions C * D........ 20.99 22.08
Required Between 2002 & 2008.
F. Target Level for 2008..... C-E.......... 241.39 293.40
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Projected Inventories and Determination of RFP
Maryland describes its methods used for developing its 2008
projected VOC and NOX inventories in Section 4.0 and
Appendix B of the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. Projected uncontrolled
and controlled 2008 VOC and NOX emissions are found in
Appendix C of the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. EPA reviewed the
procedures Maryland used to develop its projected inventories and found
them to be reasonable.
Projected controlled 2008 emissions for the Baltimore NAA are
summarized in Table 4-3 of the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. The data
from Table 4-3 is presented below, in Table 5, below.
Table 5--Baltimore NAA 2008 Projected Controlled VOC & NOX Emissions
(tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC NOX
Emission source category emissions emissions
(tpd) (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point............................................. 15.63 122.64
Area.............................................. 108.17 8.43
Non-road.......................................... 54.21 39.60
Mobile............................................ 41.23 106.84
---------------------
Total......................................... 219.25 277.50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To determine if 2008 RFP is met in the Baltimore NAA, the total
projected controlled emissions must be compared to the target levels
calculated in the previous section of this document. As shown below in
Table 6, the total VOC and NOX emission projections meet the
2008 emission targets. Therefore, the 2008 RFP in the Baltimore NAA is
demonstrated.
Table 6--Determination of Whether RFP Is Met in 2008 in the Baltimore
NAA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC NOX
Description emissions emissions
(tpd) (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Total 2008 Projected Controlled Emissions...... 219.25 277.50
B. Target Level for 2008.......................... 241.39 293.40
RFP met if A < B.................................. (\1\) (\1\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Yes.
D. Control Measures and Emission Reductions for RFP
The control measure Maryland took credit for in order to meet the
RFP requirement in the Baltimore NAA are described in Section 6.0 of
the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. Maryland used a combination of on-road
mobile, non-road mobile, and area source control measures to meet the
RFP requirement for the Baltimore NAA.
The on-road mobile measures Maryland used to meet 2008 RFP in the
Baltimore NAA include enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance
(enhanced I/M), Tier I vehicle emission standards and new Federal
evaporative test procedures (Tier I), reformulated gasoline, the
national low emission vehicle (NLEV) program, and the Federal heavy-
duty diesel engine (HDDE) rule. Maryland calculated the emission
reductions for 2008 RFP using the MOBILE model for these on-road mobile
measures. EPA reviewed the procedures that MDE used to develop its
projected inventories, including the use of the MOBILE model, and found
them to be reasonable. Maryland calculated the on-road mobile 2008
emission reductions to be 42.45 tpd VOC and 59.10 tpd NOX.
The non-road measures Maryland used to meet 2008 RFP in the
Baltimore NAA include non-road small gasoline engines, non-road diesel
engines (Tier I and Tier II), marine engine standards, emission
standards for large spark engines, and reformulated gasoline used in
non-road motor vehicles and equipment. Maryland used the NONROAD model
to calculate emission reductions from these non-road measures. EPA
reviewed the procedures that MDE used to develop its projected
inventories, including the use of the NONROAD model, and found them to
be reasonable. Maryland calculated the non-road mobile 2008 emission
reductions to be 17.89 tpd VOC and 6.74 tpd NOX.
The other measures that Maryland used to meet RFP in the Baltimore
NAA are railroad engine standards (Tier 2), the consumer and commercial
products rule (Phase I), the architectural and industrial (AIM)
coatings rule, and the portable fuel containers rule (Phase I). In the
Technical Support Document (TSD) for this action, EPA evaluates each of
these measures and calculated the projected 2008 emission for each
measure. For details, please refer to EPA's TSD.
The tier 2 railroad engine standards for newly manufactured and
remanufactured diesel-powered locomotives and locomotive engines took
effect in 2000. EPA calculated 2008 emission reductions from railroad
engine to be 1.37 tpd NOX.
A Federal measure requires reformulation of AIM coatings, which are
field-applied coatings used by industry, contractors, and homeowners to
coat houses, buildings, highway surfaces, and industrial equipment for
decorative or protective purposes. Maryland's AIM rule was effective on
March 29, 2004. EPA calculated 2008 emission reductions from Maryland's
AIM rule to be 6.02 tpd VOC.
The phase I commercial and consumer products rule requires the
reformulation of certain consumer products to reduce their VOC content.
Maryland's consumer products rule was effective on August 18, 2003. EPA
calculated 2008 emission reductions from Maryland's consumer and
[[Page 962]]
commercial products rule to be 3.70 tpd VOC.
The phase I portable fuel containers rule introduces performance
standards for portable fuel containers and spouts, and is intended to
reduce emissions from storage, transport and refueling activities.
Maryland's portable fuel container rule was effective on January 21,
2002. EPA calculated 2008 emission reductions from Maryland's portable
fuel containers rule to be 8.13 tpd VOC.
Table 7 summarizes the emission reductions that Maryland claimed in
the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan to meet RFP in the Baltimore NAA. For
certain control measures, the 2008 projected emission reductions
calculated by EPA differ from the 2008 projected emission reductions
that MDE is taking credit for in the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. The
total 2008 projected emission reductions calculated by EPA are greater
than the emission reductions claimed by MDE in the Baltimore 8-hour
ozone plan. Therefore, the emission reductions claimed in the Baltimore
8-hour ozone plan are approvable.
Table 7--Control Measures and 2008 Emission Reductions in the Baltimore
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Control measure VOC (tpd) NOX (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-road Mobile Measures........................... 42.45 59.10
Non-road Model.................................... 17.89 6.74
Railroads (Tier 2)................................ 0.00 1.18
OTC--Consumer Products Phase 1.................... 3.70 0.00
OTC--AIM Coatings................................. 6.03 0.00
OTC--Portable Fuel Containers Phase 1............. 6.71 0.00
---------------------
Total......................................... 76.78 67.02
------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Contingency Measures
Section 172(c)(9) of the CAA requires a State with a moderate or
above ozone nonattainment area to include sufficient additional
contingency measures in its RFP plan in case the area fails to meet
RFP. The same provision of the CAA also requires that the contingency
measures must be fully adopted control measures or rules. Upon failure
to meet an RFP milestone requirement, the State must be able to
implement the contingency measures without any further rulemaking
activities. Upon implementation of such measures, additional emission
reductions of at least 3 percent of the adjusted 2002 baseline
emissions must be achieved. For more information on contingency
measures, see the April 16, 1992 General Preamble (57 FR 13512) and the
November 29, 2005 Phase 2 8-hour ozone implementation rule (70 FR
71612).
To meet the requirements for contingency emission reductions, EPA
allows States to use NOX emission reductions to substitute
for VOC emission reductions in their contingency plans. However, MDE
chose to use only VOC reductions to meet the contingency measure
requirement in the Baltimore NAA. MDE discusses its Baltimore NAA
contingency measures for failure to meet RFP in Section 10.2 of the
Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. MDE calculated the contingency VOC
reduction for the Baltimore NAA as shown in Table 8, below. The RFP
contingency requirement may be met by including in the RFP plan a
demonstration of 18 percent VOC & NOX RFP. The additional 3
percent reduction above the 15 percent requirement must be attributed
to specific measures.
Table 8--Baltimore NAA 2008 RFP Contingency Measure Target Level
Calculations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description Formula VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. 2002 Rate-Of Progress Base ............. 271.48 338.08
Year Inventory.
B. FMVCP/RVP Reductions ............. 9.10 22.60
Between 2002 And 2008.
C. 2002 Adjusted Base Year A-B.......... 262.38 315.48
Inventory Relative To 2008.
D. RFP Reductions Totaling ............. 8 7
15%.
E. RFP Emissions Reductions C * D........ 20.99 22.08
Required Between 2002 & 2008.
F. Contingency Percentage.... ............. 3.00 0.00
G. Contingency Emission C * F........ 7.87 0.00
Reduction Requirements.
H. Contingency Measure Target C-E-G........ 233.52 293.40
Level for 2008.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To determine if Maryland met the three percent contingency measure
requirement for the Baltimore NAA, the total projected controlled
emissions must be compared to the contingency measure target levels
calculated above. As shown below in Table 9, the total VOC and
NOX emission projections meet the 2008 contingency measure
targets. Therefore, MDE has met the contingency measure requirement for
the Baltimore NAA.
Table 9--Evaluation of the Baltimore NAA 2008 RFP Contingency Measure
Requirement
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description VOC (tpd) NOX (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Total 2008 Projected Controlled Emissions...... 219.25 277.50
B. Contingency Measure Target Level for 2008...... 233.52 293.40
Contingency measure requirement met if A < B...... (\1\) (\1\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Yes.
F. RACM Analysis
Pursuant to section 172(c)(1) of the CAA, States are required to
implement all RACM as expeditiously as practicable for each
nonattainment area. Specifically, section 172(c)(1) states the
following: ``In general--Such plan provisions shall provide for the
implementation of all reasonably available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable (including such reductions in emissions
from existing sources in the area as may be obtained through the
adoption, at a minimum, of reasonably available control technology) and
shall provide for attainment of the national primary ambient air
quality standards.'' Furthermore, in EPA's Phase 2 Rule, EPA describes
how States must include a RACM analysis with their attainment
demonstration (70 FR 71659). The purpose of the RACM analysis is to
determine whether or not reasonably available control measures exist
that
[[Page 963]]
would advance the attainment date for nonattainment areas. Control
measures that would advance the attainment date are considered RACM and
must be included in the SIP. RACM are necessary to ensure that the
attainment date is achieved ``as expeditious as practicable.'' RACM is
defined by the EPA as any potential control measure for application to
point, area, on-road and non-road emission source categories that meets
the following criteria:
The control measure is technologically feasible.
The control measure is economically feasible.
The control measure does not cause ``substantial
widespread and long-term adverse impacts.''
The control measure is not ``absurd, unenforceable, or
impracticable.''
The control measure can advance the attainment date by at
least one year.
MDE addresses the RACM requirement in Section 7.0 and Appendix E of
the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. To meet the RACM requirement, Maryland
must demonstrate that it has adopted all RACM necessary to move the
Baltimore NAA toward attainment as expeditiously as practicable and to
meet all RFP requirements. As demonstrated above in Sections C and D of
this document, Maryland has met the RFP requirements for the Baltimore
NAA.
MDE used two independently developed lists of potential control
measures for its RACM analysis. The first list consists of the RACM
analysis performed for the Washington, DC NAA's 8-hour ozone plan. The
second list of measures was developed by the Baltimore Metropolitan
Council (BMC) with MDE in 2006. These measures are evaluated in
Appendices E-1 and E-2 of the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan.
EPA has reviewed MDE's RACM analysis in the TSD for this action.
MDE evaluated all source categories that could contribute meaningful
emission reductions, and evaluated an extensive list of potential
control measures. MDE considered the time needed to develop and adopt
regulations and the time it would take to see the benefit from these
measures. EPA concurs with MDE's conclusion that there are no RACM that
would have advanced the moderate area attainment date of 2010 for the
Baltimore NAA. Therefore, MDE's RACM analysis in the Baltimore 8-hour
ozone plan is approvable.
G. Transportation Conformity Budgets
Transportation conformity is required by CAA section 176(c). EPA's
conformity rule requires that transportation plans, programs and
projects conform to State air quality implementation plans and
establishes the criteria and procedure for determining whether or not
they do. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will
not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or
delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards.
States must establish VOC and NOx MVEBs for each of the milestone
years up to the attainment year and submit the mobile budgets to EPA
for approval. Upon adequacy determination or approval by EPA, States
must conduct transportation conformity analysis for their
Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) and long range
transportation plans to ensure highway vehicle emissions will not
exceed relevant MVEBs.
MDE discusses transportation conformity in Section 8.0 of the
Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. MDE describes the methods it used to
calculate the 2008 mobile emissions inventory in Appendix F of the
Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. The Baltimore NAA MVEB for the 2008 RFP is
based on the projected 2008 mobile source emissions accounting for all
mobile control measures. The MVEBs for the 2008 RFP are shown in Table
10, below.
Table 10--Baltimore NAA 2008 RFP MVEBs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC (tpd) NOX (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
41.2....................................................... 106.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In a March 27, 2009 Federal Register notice (74 FR 13433), EPA
notified the public that EPA found that the 2008 RFP MVEBs in the
Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan are adequate for transportation conformity
purposes. In addition to the budgets being adequate for transportation
conformity purposes, EPA found the procedures Maryland used to develop
the MVEBs to be reasonable. The budgets are identical to the projected
2008 on-road mobile source emission inventories. Because the 2008 RFP
MVEBs are adequate for transportation conformity purposes and the
methods MDE used to develop them are correct, the 2008 RFP budgets are
approvable.
V. What are EPA's Conclusions?
EPA's review of the 2002 base year emissions inventory; the 2008
ozone projected emission inventory; the 2008 RFP plan; RFP contingency
measures; Maryland's RACM analysis; and 2008 transportation conformity
budgets contained in MDE's June 4, 2007 SIP revision submittal for the
Baltimore NAA fully addressed the CAA's requirements. Therefore, EPA is
proposing approval of those following elements of MDE's June 4, 2007
Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. EPA is soliciting public comments on the
issues discussed in this document. These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely proposes to approve State law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible
[[Page 964]]
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule pertaining to the Baltimore NAA's
2002 base year emissions inventory; 2008 ozone projected emission
inventory; 2008 RFP plan; RFP contingency measures; RACM analysis; and
2008 transportation conformity budgets does not have Tribal
implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian
country located in the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose
substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: December 23, 2009.
William C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2010-17 Filed 1-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P