Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 56130-56132 [2011-23280]

Download as PDF 56130 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 176 / Monday, September 12, 2011 / Proposed Rules reviewing financial economic literature or conducting empirical studies? How can our review processes obtain and consider data and analyses that address the benefits of our rules in preventing fraud or other harms to our financial markets and in otherwise protecting investors? 5. What can the Commission do to modify, streamline, or expand its regulatory review processes? 6. How should the Commission improve public outreach and increase public participation in the rulemaking process? 7. Is there any other information that the Commission should consider in developing and implementing a preliminary plan for retrospective review of regulations? Please note that the Commission is not soliciting comment in this notice on specific existing Commission rules to be considered for review. Any comments regarding a currently pending Commission rule proposal, including proposed amendments to existing rules, should be directed to the comment file for the relevant rule proposal.5 We anticipate that any processes set forth in a Commission plan will reflect constraints imposed by limits on resources and competing priorities.6 Accordingly, the Commission encourages commenters to consider what additional steps, if any, beyond the Commission’s current review processes could be implemented effectively and efficiently in light of the Commission’s overall resource constraints and responsibilities. The Commission is issuing this request for information solely for information and program-planning purposes. The Commission will consider the comments submitted and may use them as appropriate in the preparation of a retrospective review plan but does not anticipate responding to each comment submitted. While responses to this request do not bind the Commission to any further actions, all submissions will be made publicly available on [sec.gov or regulations.gov]. emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS By the Commission. Dated: September 6, 2011. Elizabeth M. Murphy, Secretary. [FR Doc. 2011–23179 Filed 9–9–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8011–01–P 5 See https://www.sec.gov/rules/ submitcomments.htm. 6 Executive Order 13579 states that an agency’s plan should reflect ‘‘its resources and regulatory priorities and processes.’’ VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Sep 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 0476. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change, and may be 40 CFR Part 52 made available online at https:// www.regulations.gov, including any [EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0476; FRL–9462–8] personal information provided, unless Approval and Promulgation of Air the comment includes information Quality Implementation Plans; claimed to be Confidential Business Maryland; Section 110(a)(2) Information (CBI) or other information Infrastructure Requirements for the whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 1997 8-Hour Ozone and the 1997 and Do not submit information that you 2006 Fine Particulate Matter National consider to be CBI or otherwise Ambient Air Quality Standards protected through https:// www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The AGENCY: Environmental Protection https://www.regulations.gov Web site is Agency (EPA). an ‘‘anonymous access system’’ which ACTION: Proposed rule. means EPA will not know your identity SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve or contact information unless you submittals from the State of Maryland provide it in the body of your comment. pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA) If you send an e-mail comment directly sections 110(k)(2) and (3). These to EPA without going through https:// submittals address the infrastructure www.regulations.gov, your e-mail elements specified in CAA section address will be automatically captured 110(a)(2), necessary to implement, and included as part of the comment maintain, and enforce the 1997 8-hour that is placed in the public docket and ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) made available on the Internet. If you national ambient air quality standards submit an electronic comment, EPA (NAAQS) and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. recommends that you include your This proposed action is limited to the name and other contact information in following infrastructure elements which the body of your comment and with any were subject to EPA’s completeness disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA findings pursuant to CAA section cannot read your comment due to 110(k)(1) for the 1997 8-hour ozone technical difficulties and cannot contact NAAQS dated March 27, 2008 and the you for clarification, EPA may not be 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS dated October 22, able to consider your comment. 2008: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), Electronic files should avoid the use of (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M), or special characters, any form of portions thereof; and the following encryption, and be free of any defects or infrastructure elements for the 2006 viruses. PM2.5 NAAQS: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and Docket: All documents in the (M), or portions thereof. electronic docket are listed in the DATES: Written comments must be https://www.regulations.gov index. received on or before October 12, 2011. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA– i.e., CBI or other information whose R03–OAR–2010–0476 by one of the disclosure is restricted by statute. following methods: Certain other material, such as A. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow copyrighted material, is not placed on the on-line instructions for submitting the Internet and will be publicly comments. available only in hard copy form. B. E-mail: Publicly available docket materials are fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. available either electronically in https:// C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2010–0476, www.regulations.gov or in hard copy Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, during normal business hours at the Air Office of Air Program Planning, Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are 19103. available at the Maryland Department of D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslythe Environment, 1800 Washington listed EPA Region III address. Such Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21230. deliveries are only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours of operation, and FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: special arrangements should be made Marilyn Powers, (215) 814–2380, or by for deliveries of boxed information. e-mail at powers.marilyn@epa.gov. Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2011– SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\12SEP1.SGM 12SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 176 / Monday, September 12, 2011 / Proposed Rules I. Background On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS (62 FR 38856) and a new PM2.5 NAAQS (62 FR 38652). The revised ozone NAAQS is based on 8-hour average concentrations. The 8-hour averaging period replaced the previous 1-hour averaging period, and the level of the NAAQS was changed from 0.12 parts per million (ppm) to 0.08 ppm. The new PM2.5 NAAQS established a health-based PM2.5 standard of 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and a twenty-four hour standard of 65 μg/m3 based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. EPA strengthened the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS from 65 μg/m3 to 35 μg/m3 on October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144). Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit State Implementation Plans (SIPs) that provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of new or revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such NAAQS. In March of 2004, Earthjustice initiated a lawsuit against EPA for failure to take action against states that had not made SIP submissions to meet the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, i.e., failure to make a ‘‘finding of failure to submit the required SIP 110(a) SIP elements.’’ On March 10, 2005, EPA entered into a Consent Decree with Earthjustice that obligated EPA to make official findings in accordance with section 110(k)(1) of the CAA as to whether states have made required complete SIP submissions, pursuant to sections 110(a)(1) and (2), by December 15, 2007 for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and by October 5, 2008 for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA made such findings for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16205) and on October 22, 2008 (73 FR 62902) for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. These completeness findings did not include findings relating to: (1) Section 110(a)(2)(C) to the extent that such subsection refers to a permit program as 56131 required by part D Title I of the CAA; (2) section 110(a)(2)(I); and (3) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), which had been addressed by a separate finding issued by EPA on April 25, 2005 (70 FR 21147). Therefore, this action does not cover these specific elements. This action also does not include the portions of sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) as they pertain to the PSD permit program, and the portion of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) as it pertains to visibility. These portions of these elements will be addressed by separate actions. II. Summary of State Submittal Maryland provided multiple submittals to satisfy the section 110(a)(2) requirements that are the subject of this proposed action for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. The submittals shown in Table 1 address the infrastructure elements, or portions thereof, identified in section 110(a)(2) that EPA is proposing to approve. TABLE 1—110(a)(2) ELEMENTS, OR PORTIONS THEREOF, EPA IS PROPOSING TO APPROVE FOR THE 1997 OZONE AND PM2.5 NAAQS AND THE 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS FOR MARYLAND Submittal date 1997 8-Hour ozone 1997 PM2.5 July 27, 2007 ........................ November 30, 2007 .............. April 3, 2008 ......................... April 16, 2010 ....................... July 21, 2010 ........................ July 21, 2010 ........................ A, B, C, D(ii), E, F, G, H, J, K, L, M G .......................................................... .......................................................... .......................................................... .......................................................... A, B, C, D(ii), E, F, G, H, J, K, L, M G ...................................................... .......................................................... .......................................................... emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS EPA analyzed the above identified submissions and other related submissions. Based upon this analysis, EPA is proposing to make a determination that such submittals meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M), or portions thereof, for the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. A detailed summary of EPA’s review of and rationale for approving Maryland’s submittals may be found in the Technical Support Document (TSD) for this action, which is available online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket number EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0476. III. Proposed Action EPA is proposing to approve Maryland’s submittals that provide the basic program elements specified in the CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M), or portions thereof, necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:26 Sep 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 1997 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this notice and the related TSD. These comments will be considered before taking final action. IV. 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 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 2006 PM2.5 G A, B, C, D(ii), E, F, G, H, J, K, L, M Documentation showing public process was met. 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); E:\FR\FM\12SEP1.SGM 12SEP1 56132 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 176 / Monday, September 12, 2011 / Proposed Rules • 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 methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this proposed rule, pertaining to Maryland’s section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, 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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: August 11, 2011. W.C. Early, Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III. [FR Doc. 2011–23280 Filed 9–9–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2011–0733; FRL–9462–2] Revisions to the California State Implementation Plan, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS AGENCY: EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from polyester resin operations. We are approving a local rule that regulates SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:10 Sep 09, 2011 Jkt 223001 these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action. In a separate interim final action published in the Rules section in today’s Federal Register, we are deferring related CAA sanctions that would otherwise apply to the SJVUAPCD. Any comments must arrive by October 12, 2011. ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA–R09– OAR–2011–0733, by one of the following methods: 1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions. 2. E-mail: steckel.andrew@epa.gov. 3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. Instructions: All comments 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 Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. https://www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. 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. Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are available electronically at https:// www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed at https://www.regulations.gov, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. DATES: PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Grounds, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–3019, grounds.david@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. Table of Contents I. The State’s Submittal A. What rule did the State submit? B. Are there other versions of this rule? C. What is the purpose of the submitted rule revisions? II. EPA’s Evaluation and Action A. How is EPA evaluating the rule? B. Does the rule meet the evaluation criteria? C. EPA Recommendations to Further Improve the Rule D. Public Comment and Final Action III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. The State’s Submittal A. What rule did the State submit? By letter dated July 22, 2011, CARB submitted to EPA on behalf of SJVUAPCD a proposed rule, with request for parallel processing.1 See June 22, 2011 letter to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, from James N. Goldstene, Executive Officer, CARB. Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this proposal with the rule title. TABLE 1—RULE SUBMITTED BY CALIFORNIA FOR PARALLEL PROCESSING Local agency Rule No. SJVUAPCD 4684 Rule title Polyester Resin Operations. CARB’s July 22, 2011 parallel processing request includes the District Notice of Public Hearing to be held on August 18, 2011 and the amended District Rule 4684. SJVUAPCD amended Rule 4684 on June 16, 2011. Due to procedural issues with the local public notification process, SJVUAPCD readopted these amendments on August 18, 2011 and expects CARB to submit them to EPA soon. EPA is granting CARB’s request that EPA ‘‘parallel process’’ our review and propose action on the rule. All of the relevant documents are available for 1 Under EPA’s ‘‘parallel processing’’ procedure, EPA proposes rulemaking action concurrently with the State’s proposed rulemaking. If the State’s proposed rule is changed, EPA will evaluate that subsequent change and may publish another notice of proposed rulemaking. If no significant change is made, EPA will publish a final rulemaking on the rule after responding to any submitted comments. Final rulemaking action by EPA will occur only after the rule has been fully adopted by California and submitted formally to EPA for incorporation into the SIP. See 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. E:\FR\FM\12SEP1.SGM 12SEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 176 (Monday, September 12, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56130-56132]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-23280]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2010-0476; FRL-9462-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Maryland; Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-
Hour Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve submittals from the State of 
Maryland pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA) sections 110(k)(2) and 
(3). These submittals address the infrastructure elements specified in 
CAA section 110(a)(2), necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce 
the 1997 8-hour ozone and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS. This proposed action is limited to the 
following infrastructure elements which were subject to EPA's 
completeness findings pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(1) for the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS dated March 27, 2008 and the 1997 PM2.5 
NAAQS dated October 22, 2008: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), 
(F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M), or portions thereof; and the 
following infrastructure elements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS: 
110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and 
(M), or portions thereof.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 12, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2010-0476 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-2010-0476, 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 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-
2011-0476. 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, Baltimore, Maryland 21230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marilyn Powers, (215) 814-2380, or by 
e-mail at powers.marilyn@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 56131]]

I. Background

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS (62 
FR 38856) and a new PM2.5 NAAQS (62 FR 38652). The revised 
ozone NAAQS is based on 8-hour average concentrations. The 8-hour 
averaging period replaced the previous 1-hour averaging period, and the 
level of the NAAQS was changed from 0.12 parts per million (ppm) to 
0.08 ppm. The new PM2.5 NAAQS established a health-based 
PM2.5 standard of 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/
m\3\) based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5 
concentrations, and a twenty-four hour standard of 65 [mu]g/m\3\ based 
on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. 
EPA strengthened the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS from 65 [mu]g/m\3\ 
to 35 [mu]g/m\3\ on October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144).
    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires States to submit State 
Implementation Plans (SIPs) that provide for the implementation, 
maintenance, and enforcement of new or revised NAAQS within three years 
following the promulgation of such NAAQS. In March of 2004, 
Earthjustice initiated a lawsuit against EPA for failure to take action 
against states that had not made SIP submissions to meet the 
requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
and PM2.5 NAAQS, i.e., failure to make a ``finding of 
failure to submit the required SIP 110(a) SIP elements.'' On March 10, 
2005, EPA entered into a Consent Decree with Earthjustice that 
obligated EPA to make official findings in accordance with section 
110(k)(1) of the CAA as to whether states have made required complete 
SIP submissions, pursuant to sections 110(a)(1) and (2), by December 
15, 2007 for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and by October 5, 2008 for the 
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA made such findings for the 1997 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS on March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16205) and on October 22, 2008 (73 
FR 62902) for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. These completeness 
findings did not include findings relating to: (1) Section 110(a)(2)(C) 
to the extent that such subsection refers to a permit program as 
required by part D Title I of the CAA; (2) section 110(a)(2)(I); and 
(3) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), which had been addressed by a separate 
finding issued by EPA on April 25, 2005 (70 FR 21147). Therefore, this 
action does not cover these specific elements.
    This action also does not include the portions of sections 
110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) as they pertain to the PSD permit 
program, and the portion of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) as it pertains 
to visibility. These portions of these elements will be addressed by 
separate actions.

II. Summary of State Submittal

    Maryland provided multiple submittals to satisfy the section 
110(a)(2) requirements that are the subject of this proposed action for 
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 
NAAQS. The submittals shown in Table 1 address the infrastructure 
elements, or portions thereof, identified in section 110(a)(2) that EPA 
is proposing to approve.

Table 1--110(a)(2) Elements, or Portions Thereof, EPA Is Proposing to Approve for the 1997 Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS
                                      and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS for Maryland
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Submittal date               1997 8-Hour ozone             1997 PM2.5                2006 PM2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 27, 2007....................  A, B, C, D(ii), E, F, G,
                                    H, J, K, L, M.
November 30, 2007................  G
April 3, 2008....................  .........................  A, B, C, D(ii), E, F, G,  ........................
                                                               H, J, K, L, M.
April 16, 2010...................  .........................  G.......................  G
July 21, 2010....................  .........................  ........................  A, B, C, D(ii), E, F, G,
                                                                                         H, J, K, L, M
July 21, 2010....................  .........................  ........................  Documentation showing
                                                                                         public process was met.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA analyzed the above identified submissions and other related 
submissions. Based upon this analysis, EPA is proposing to make a 
determination that such submittals meet the requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and 
(M), or portions thereof, for the 1997 8-hour ozone and 
PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. A detailed 
summary of EPA's review of and rationale for approving Maryland's 
submittals may be found in the Technical Support Document (TSD) for 
this action, which is available online at https://www.regulations.gov, 
Docket number EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0476.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve Maryland's submittals that provide the 
basic program elements specified in the CAA sections 110(a)(2)(A), (B), 
(C), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M), or portions 
thereof, necessary to implement, maintain, and enforce the 1997 8-hour 
ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 
EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this 
notice and the related TSD. These comments will be considered before 
taking final action.

IV. 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);

[[Page 56132]]

     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 methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed rule, pertaining to Maryland's section 
110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone and 
PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, 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, Nitrogen dioxide, 
Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: August 11, 2011.
W.C. Early,
Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2011-23280 Filed 9-9-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.