Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; Low Emission Vehicle Program, 50969-50973 [2012-20787]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 164 (Thursday, August 23, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50969-50973]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-20787]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2012-0511; FRL-9718-8]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Maryland; Low Emission Vehicle Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve several State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Maryland. These revisions 
pertain to adoption by Maryland of the California Low Emission Vehicle 
Program (LEV), or California Clean Car Program. The underlying Maryland 
regulations require all new 2011 and subsequent model year passenger 
cars, light trucks, and medium-duty vehicles having a gross vehicle 
weight rating (GVWR) of 14,000 pounds or less that are sold in Maryland 
to meet California emission standards.
    The Clean Air Act (CAA) contains authority by which other states 
may adopt new motor vehicle emissions standards that are identical to 
California's standards. Specifically, Maryland has adopted California's 
light and medium-duty new vehicle standards by reference, and then 
submitted these rules as part of the State's SIP revision to EPA. The 
Maryland Clean Car program has two objectives. The first is to reduce 
emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic 
compounds (VOCs), both of which are precursors to the formation of 
ground level ozone pollution, from new motor vehicles sold in Maryland. 
The second objective of the program is to reduce greenhouse gas 
emissions from new motor vehicles weighing under 10,000 pounds GVWR. 
Maryland submitted supplemental SIP revisions to modify its own program 
to match updates by California to its program and to harmonize with 
recently established Federal (and California) greenhouse gas and fuel 
economy standards promulgated by EPA applicable to 2012-2016 model year 
vehicles of the same vehicle types covered by Maryland's rules. This 
action is being taken under the CAA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 24, 
2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2012-0511 by one of the following methods:
    A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    B. Email: mastro.donna@epa.gov.
    C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2011-0511, Donna Mastro, Acting 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-
2012-0511. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change, and may be made available online 
at 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 www.regulations.gov or email. The 
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which 
means EPA will not know your

[[Page 50970]]

identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without 
going through www.regulations.gov, your email 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 
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 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: Brian Rehn, (215) 814-2176, or by 
email at rehn.brian@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. On December 20, 2007, the 
Maryland Department of the Environment submitted a revision 
(07-16) to its SIP for its Low Emission Vehicle Program, also 
referred to in this notice as the Maryland Clean Car Program. On 
November 12, 2010, Maryland submitted a revision to the 2007 SIP 
submittal (10-08) to amend its Clean Car Program rules to 
reflect changes made by California to its LEV regulations since the 
time they were originally adopted by Maryland. On June 22, 2011, 
Maryland submitted another SIP revision (11-05) consisting of 
another update to its Clean Car regulations to adopt additional changes 
made by California to the California LEV rules since Maryland last 
updated its rules and submitted them to EPA as part of the November 
2010 SIP submittal.

I. Description of the SIP Revisions
    A. Background
    1. Maryland's Air Quality With Respect to the Ozone NAAQS
    2. What are the relevant statutory and regulatory requirements 
for Federal and California vehicle emission standards?
    3. California's LEV Program
    4. California Greenhouse Gas Standards
    5. Federal Greenhouse Gas Vehicle Standards
    B. Maryland's Clean Car Program
    1. Overview--Maryland's Clean Car Program Rules
    2. Maryland's Clean Car Program SIP Revisions
    a. Maryland's December 2007 SIP Revision
    b. Maryland's November 2010 SIP Revision
    c. Maryland's June 2011 SIP Revision
II. Proposed EPA Action
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Description of the SIP Revision

A. Background

1. Maryland's Air Quality With Respect to the Ozone NAAQS
    Under the 1990 CAA, eleven counties (and the City of Baltimore) in 
Maryland were classified as nonattainment under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 
These counties were distributed across three nonattainment areas: the 
Baltimore severe nonattainment area (Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, 
Harford, and Howard Counties, and the City of Baltimore); the Maryland 
portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA serious nonattainment area 
(Calvert, Charles, Frederick, Montgomery, and Prince George's 
Counties), which was later reclassified to severe; and the Maryland 
portion of the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton, PA-NJ-MD-DE severe 
nonattainment area (Cecil County). EPA revoked the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, 
effective June 15, 2005 (see EPA's final rule entitled ``Identification 
of Ozone Areas for Which the 1-Hour Standard Has Been Revoked'' 
published in the August 3, 2005 Federal Register, 70 FR 4470). At the 
time EPA revoked the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, none of these Maryland 
counties had been redesignated to attainment.
    Effective June 15, 2004, these same eleven Maryland counties (and 
the City of Baltimore) were designated by EPA as nonattainment with 
respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Under the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS, these Maryland counties were again part of three separate 
nonattainment areas (distributed in the same means as the former 1-hour 
ozone standard) albeit with slightly different area names and 
classifications: The Baltimore, MD moderate nonattainment area; the 
Washington, DC-MD-VA moderate nonattainment area; and Philadelphia-
Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE moderate nonattainment area.
    Upon designation, each of these three nonattainment areas had 
attainment dates no later than June 2010. On February 28, 2012, EPA 
determined that the Washington area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS by its June 15, 2010 attainment date (77 FR 11739).
    EPA issued a 1-year attainment date extension (i.e., from June 2010 
to June 2011) for the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City 1997 8-hour 
ozone nonattainment area, via a final rule published in the January 21, 
2011 Federal Register (76 FR 3840). On March 26, 2012, EPA determined 
that the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City area attained the 1997 
8-hour ozone NAAQS by its June 15, 2011 attainment date (77 FR 17341).
    EPA issued a 1-year attainment date extension (i.e., from June 2010 
to June 2011) for the Baltimore 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, 
via a final rule published in the March 11, 2011 Federal Register (76 
FR 13289). On February 1, 2012, EPA made a determination that (based on 
certified ambient air quality monitoring data from 2008-2010) the 
Baltimore area did not attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by its June 
15, 2011 attainment date. As a result, the Baltimore area was 
reclassified from moderate to serious 8-hour ozone nonattainment for 
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Consequently, Maryland must submit SIP 
revisions for the Baltimore area to meet CAA serious ozone 
nonattainment requirements by September 2012.
    On May 21, 2012, EPA designated the same eleven Maryland counties 
(and the City of Baltimore) as nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS (77 FR 30088). The Washington area and Maryland portion of the 
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City area were classified as marginal 
and the Baltimore area was classified as moderate nonattainment under 
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
2. What are the relevant statutory and regulatory requirements for 
Federal and California vehicle emission standards?
    Vehicles sold in the United States are required by the CAA to be 
certified to meet U.S. Federal emission standards or to meet 
California's emission standards. States are forbidden from adopting 
their own standards, but may adopt California's emission standards for 
which EPA has granted a waiver of preemption.

[[Page 50971]]

    Section 209 of the CAA prohibits states from adopting or enforcing 
standards relating to the control of emissions from new motor vehicles 
or new motor vehicle engines. However, EPA may waive that prohibition 
to any state that adopted its own vehicle emission standards prior to 
March 30, 1966. As California was the only state to do so, California 
has authority under the CAA to adopt its own motor vehicle emissions 
standards. California must demonstrate to EPA that its newly adopted 
standards will be ``* * * in the aggregate, at least as protective of 
public health and welfare as applicable Federal standards.'' EPA then 
must grant a waiver of preemption for California's standards, unless 
the demonstration fails to meet specific requirements set forth in 
section 209 of the CAA applicable to such a waiver demonstration.
    Section 177 of the CAA authorizes other states to adopt 
California's standards in lieu of Federal vehicle standards, provided 
the state adopting California's standards does so at least two years 
prior to the model year in which they become effective and that EPA has 
issued a waiver of preemption to California for such standards.
    In February 2000, EPA adopted the second tier of Federal motor 
vehicle standards enacted under the 1990 CAA, via a final rule 
published in the Federal Register on February 10, 2000 (65 FR 6698). 
These standards, referred to as the Tier 2 Federal emission standards 
(or Tier 2 standards) were phased in beginning with the 2004 model 
years, except in states that had formally adopted California's emission 
standards in lieu of the Federal standards.
3. California's LEV Program
    In 1990, California's Air Resources Board (CARB) adopted its first 
generation of LEV standards applicable to light and medium duty 
vehicles. California's vehicle emission standards program is referred 
to as the California Low Emissions Vehicle Program (CA LEV), or simply 
as the LEV program. These LEV standards were phased-in beginning in 
model year 1994 through model year 2003. California adopted a second 
generation of CA LEV standards, known as LEV II, in 1999. LEV II was 
phased-in beginning with model year 2004 through model year 2010. EPA 
granted a Federal preemption waiver for California's LEV II program on 
April 22, 2003 (68 FR 19811).
    In December 2000, CARB modified the LEV II program to take 
advantage of some elements of the Federal Tier 2 regulations to ensure 
that only the cleanest vehicle models would continue to be sold in 
California. In 2006, CARB adopted technical amendments to its LEV II 
program that amended the evaporative emission test procedures, onboard 
refueling vapor recovery and spitback test procedures, exhaust emission 
test procedures, and vehicle emission control label requirements. These 
technical amendments align each of California's test procedures and 
label requirements with its Federal counterpart, in an effort to 
streamline and harmonize the California and Federal programs and to 
reduce manufacturer testing burdens and increase in-use compliance. On 
July 30, 2010, EPA published a notice in the Federal Register 
confirming that CARB's 2006 technical amendments are within-the-scope 
of existing waivers of preemption for CARB's LEV II program (75 FR 
44948).
    Under California's LEV II program, each vehicle manufacturer must 
show that their overall fleet for a given model year meets the 
specified phase-in requirements according to the fleet average non-
methane hydrocarbon requirement for that year. The fleet average non-
methane hydrocarbon emission limits become progressively lower each 
model year. The LEV II program requires auto manufacturers to include a 
``smog index'' label on each vehicle sold, which is intended to inform 
consumers about the amount of pollution coming from that vehicle 
relative to other vehicles.
    In addition to the LEV II requirements, California requires that 
minimum percentages of passenger cars and the lightest light-duty 
trucks marketed in California by a large or intermediate volume 
manufacturer meet Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) standards, hereafter 
referred to as a ZEV program or ZEV mandate.
4. California Greenhouse Gas Vehicle Standards
    California adopted Assembly Bill 1493 (A.B. 1493), into law in July 
2002, which required CARB to develop and adopt greenhouse gas (GHG) 
emissions standards for light-duty vehicles. A.B. 1493 directed CARB to 
consider cost-effectiveness, technological capability, economic 
impacts, and flexibility for manufacturers in meeting the standard.
    In August 2004, CARB approved GHG emissions standards for light-
duty vehicles. CARB's standards regulated GHG emissions associated with 
vehicle operation, air conditioning operation and maintenance, and 
production of vehicle fuel. The standards apply to noncommercial light-
duty passenger vehicles manufactured for model years 2009 and beyond. 
The standards, specified in terms of carbon dioxide (CO2) 
equivalent emissions, apply to vehicles in two size classes: passenger 
cars and small light-duty trucks with a loaded vehicle weight rating of 
3,750 pounds or less and to heavy light-duty trucks with a loaded 
vehicle weight rating greater than 3,750 pounds and a GVWR less than 
8,500 pounds. The CO2 equivalent emission standard for heavy 
light trucks includes noncommercial passenger trucks between 8,500 
pounds and 10,000 pounds GVWR. The September 2005 CARB regulations set 
near-term standards (to be phased in between 2009 and 2012) and mid-
term standards (to be phased in between 2013 and 2016). After 2016, the 
CARB GHG emissions standards are fixed.
    Since CARB's adoption of GHG standards, at least thirteen other 
states (including Maryland) have also elected to adopt CARB's GHG 
standards (in conjunction with CA LEV standards) under the authority of 
section 177 of the CAA. In June 2009, EPA granted California's request 
for a waiver of preemption for its GHG standards, which was published 
in the July 8, 2009 Federal Register (74 FR 32744). Upon issuance of 
this waiver, California and other states that adopted California's 
standards were permitted to proceed to implement California's 
standards.
    In January 2012, CARB approved a new emissions-control program for 
model years 2017 through 2025. The program combines the control of 
smog, soot and global warming gases and requirements for greater 
numbers of ZEV vehicles into a single package of standards called LEV 
III, or Advanced Clean Cars. EPA has not yet granted a waiver for 
California's standards for model year 2017 and beyond.
5. Federal Greenhouse Gas Vehicle Standards
    EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 
established a national program to improve fuel economy of and to reduce 
GHG from light-duty motor vehicles, via a final rule published in the 
May 7, 2010 Federal Register (88 FR 25324). This rule affects new 
passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium duty passenger vehicles 
sold in model years 2012 through 2016. Under this national program, 
adopted in coordination with California, automobile manufacturers face 
a single set of national emissions standards that will meet both 
Federal and California emissions requirements. California enacted 
several actions to allow manufacturers to meet a single set of 
standards under the national GHG rules, allowing for compliance with 
California requirements through

[[Page 50972]]

compliance with federal standards--resulting in a harmonized approach 
to emissions control.
    EPA and NHTSA issued a joint proposal in the December 1, 2011 
Federal Register (76 FR 74854) to further reduce greenhouse gas 
emissions and to improve fuel economy of new light- and medium-duty 
vehicles sold beyond the 2016 model year. This proposed rule would 
extend the National Program beyond 2016 by tightening GHG and CAFE 
standards between model years 2017 and 2025.

B. Maryland's Clean Car Program

1. Overview--Maryland's Clean Car Program Rules
    In order to address ambient air quality in the state, Maryland's 
legislature adopted and the Governor signed the Maryland Clean Cars Act 
of 2007, purpose of which was to implement the California's LEV 
program. This statute compelled the adoption by the Maryland Department 
of Environment of a final rule in November 2007 to implement 
California's LEV standards. This rule established a new Maryland 
regulatory chapter COMAR 26.11.34, entitled ``Low Emission Vehicle 
Program.''
    The regulation requires all 2011 and newer model year passenger 
cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty vehicles having a GVWR of 
14,000 pounds or less that are sold as new cars or are transferred in 
Maryland to meet the applicable California emissions standards. For 
purposes of the Maryland Clean Car Program, transfer means to sell, 
import, deliver, purchase, lease, rent, acquire, or receive a motor 
vehicle for titling or registration in Maryland. The purpose of the 
program is to achieve two air quality objectives. The first is to 
reduce emissions of NOx and VOCs, which are ground-level ozone 
precursor pollutants. The LEV program reduces emissions in a similar 
manner to the Federal Tier 2 program by use of declining fleet average 
non-methane organic gas (NMOG) emission standards, applicable to each 
vehicle manufacturer each year. Separate fleet average standards are 
not established for NOx, carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM), 
or formaldehyde as these emissions are controlled as a co-benefit of 
the NMOG fleet average (fleet average values for these pollutants are 
set by the certification standards for each set of California 
prescribed certification standards.) These allowable sets of standards 
range from LEV (the least stringent standard set) to ZEVs (the most 
stringent standard set). In between these fall: Ultra-Low Emission 
Vehicles (ULEV), Super-Ultra Low Emission Vehicles (SULEV), Partial 
Zero Emission Vehicles (PZEV), and Advanced Technology-Partial Zero 
Emission Vehicles (AT-PZEV). Each manufacturer may comply by selling a 
mix of vehicles meeting any of these standards, as long as their sales-
weighted, overall average of the various standard sets meets the 
overall fleet average and ZEV requirements.
    The second objective of the program is to reduce GHG emissions. To 
further both objectives, Maryland adopted California's ZEV program 
requirements, which serve as a means to promote advanced technology 
vehicles that are cleaner than traditional gasoline- and diesel-powered 
vehicles. The GHG standards were to phase-in between model year 2009 
and 2016; however, recently passed Federal GHG standards began to be 
phased-in beginning with model year 2012. The GHG program also uses a 
fleet average compliance method, similar in methodology to that of the 
NMOG fleet average for the LEV program. Overall compliance is 
demonstrated by showing that the entire fleet of vehicles produced by 
each manufacturer (as distributed within the allowable standard sets) 
meets the specified fleet average NMOG and GHG standards.
    California has reached an agreement with EPA to allow compliance 
with the Federal GHG standards as a compliance option for California's 
standards, between 2012 and 2016. Both the LEV and GHG standards for 
model year 2012-2016 light and medium duty vehicles are already in 
effect in Maryland.
2. Maryland's Clean Car Program SIP Revisions
a. Maryland's December 2007 SIP Revision
    Maryland proposed adoption of its new regulations .01 to .14 under 
a new chapter, COMAR 26.11.34, entitled ``Low Emission Vehicle 
Program'' in the Maryland Register on August 31, 2007. The regulations 
were adopted on November 19, 2007, and became state effective on 
December 17, 2007. Maryland formally submitted a SIP revision for the 
Maryland Clean Car Program to EPA on December 20, 2007. This SIP 
revision contained Maryland's incorporation of California's LEV program 
regulations, which results in a declining fleet average standard (for 
each vehicle manufacturer) for both NMHC and GHGs, applicable to new 
model year 2011 and newer light-duty vehicles and trucks and medium-
duty vehicles. Maryland's regulations established initial NMOG credit 
balances for manufacturer credit account balances to reconcile the 
schedule of the Maryland program to that of the earlier California 
program and to provide parity for manufacturers between Maryland and 
California at the onset of the Maryland program. Maryland's regulations 
in the 2007 SIP revision submittal also included ZEV program 
requirements for Maryland and established ZEV credit account balances 
to provide parity between California and Maryland with respect to the 
timing of Maryland's ZEV program. Finally, the 2007 SIP submittal 
contains general regulatory compliance provisions that extend 
California-defined rights to compliance with California's standards in 
Maryland.
b. Maryland's November 2010 SIP Revision
    Subsequently, Maryland submitted a SIP revision on November 12, 
2010 to submit updates made by the State to its LEV Program rule. 
Specifically, this SIP submittal includes changes made by Maryland to 
regulation .02 Incorporation by Reference under COMAR 26.11.34. This 
regulatory revision was adopted by Maryland on October 16, 2009 and 
became effective in Maryland on November 16, 2009. The purpose of the 
SIP revision including this rule revision was to update Maryland's 
incorporation by reference to be consistent with changes made by 
California to its LEV rules. Since the time that Maryland initially 
adopted California's rules in 2007, California had updated its rules to 
streamline its evaporative emissions requirements, to amend its on-
board diagnostics and emissions warranty provisions, to amend its in-
use vehicle recall provisions, to amend its smog label requirements, 
and to revise its ZEV methodology and credit accounting system. 
Although the changes made by California (and the resulting changes made 
by Maryland to its incorporation of California's rules by reference) 
are minimal, they are important for purposes of making sure Maryland's 
rules are consistent with those of California, in compliance with the 
requirements for adoption of California standards by other states, 
pursuant to section 177 of the CAA. These changes serve primarily to 
achieve consistency between Maryland's and California's rules, for 
purposes of maintaining parity of Maryland's rules with those of 
California.
c. Maryland's June 2011 SIP Revision
    Maryland again submitted a SIP revision submittal on June 22, 2011 
to

[[Page 50973]]

submit updates made by the state to its LEV Program rule. Specifically, 
this SIP revision includes changes made by Maryland to regulation .02 
Incorporation by Reference under COMAR 26.11.34. This regulatory 
revision was adopted by Maryland on April 14, 2011 and became effective 
in Maryland on May 16, 2011. The purpose of the SIP revision including 
this rule revision was to update Maryland's incorporation by reference 
to be consistent with changes made by California to its LEV rules. 
Since the time that Maryland initially adopted California's rules in 
2007, California had updated its rules to: improve on-board diagnostic 
and emission standards for testing vehicles; adopt standards for 
testing plug-in hybrid electric vehicle conversions; and to adopt the 
national GHG emissions standards framework agreement between the EPA, 
NHTSA, and CARB. Although the changes made by California (and the 
resulting changes made by Maryland to its incorporation of California's 
rules by reference) are minimal, they are important for purposes of 
making sure Maryland's rules are consistent with those of California, 
in compliance with the requirements for adoption of California 
standards by other states, per section 177 of the CAA. These changes 
serve primarily to achieve consistency between Maryland's and 
California's rules, for purposes of maintaining parity of Maryland's 
rules with those of California.

II. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve three Maryland SIP revisions submitted 
to EPA adopting the Maryland Clean Car Program. Maryland adopted 
California's LEV and ZEV programs, in addition to California's GHG 
emissions standards for light-duty passenger vehicles and trucks and 
medium-duty vehicles. Maryland initially submitted the first of these 
three SIP revisions on December 20, 2007. Maryland subsequently 
submitted the second of these three SIP revisions to EPA on November 
12, 2010, to amend its 2007 SIP revision. Maryland then submitted a SIP 
revision on June 22, 2011, to amend its earlier SIP revisions. EPA is 
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document. 
These comments will be considered before taking final action.

III. 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 methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed rule to approve Maryland's Clean Car 
Program 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, Carbon monoxide, 
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: August 08, 2012.
W.C. Early,
Acting Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2012-20787 Filed 8-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P