Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; 2011 Base Year Inventory for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard for the Baltimore, Maryland Nonattainment Area, 39365-39369 [2018-16992]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Rules and Regulations understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and rates each agency’s responsiveness to small business. If you wish to comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1– 888–REG–FAIR (1–888–734–3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or action of the Coast Guard. sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES C. Collection of Information This rule will not call for a new collection of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132, Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order 13132. Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes, please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section above. E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:49 Aug 08, 2018 Jkt 244001 their discretionary regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere in this preamble. F. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Directive 023–01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves the establishment of a safety zone surrounding a fireworks display on Milwaukee Harbor in Lake Michigan. It is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph L[60(a)] of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01–001–01, Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. G. Protest Activities The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters. Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or security of people, places or vessels. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 2. Add § 165.T09–0724 to read as follows: ■ PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 39365 § 165.T09–0724 Safety Zone; Discovery World Fireworks, Milwaukee Harbor, Milwaukee WI. (a) Location. All navigable waters within a 100-yard radius of 43°01.980′ N, 087°53.580 W. (b) Effective and enforcement period. This rule is effective and will be enforced from 9 p.m. through 11 p.m. on August 11, 2018. (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in § 165.23 of this part, entry into, transiting, or anchoring within this safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or a designated on-scene representative. (2) This safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may be permitted by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or a designated on-scene representative. (3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan is any Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or petty officer who has been designated by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan to act on his or her behalf. (4) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety zone must contact the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or an on-scene representative to obtain permission to do so. The Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or an on-scene representative may be contacted via VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given permission to enter or operate in the safety zone must comply with all directions given to them by the Captain of the Port Lake Michigan or an on-scene representative. Dated: July 24, 2018. Thomas J. Stuhlreyer, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Lake Michigan. [FR Doc. 2018–17069 Filed 8–8–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0396; FRL–9981– 96—Region 3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; 2011 Base Year Inventory for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard for the Baltimore, Maryland Nonattainment Area Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM 09AUR1 39366 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Rules and Regulations The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state implementation plan (SIP) revision for the 2011 base year inventory for the Baltimore, Maryland moderate nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The State of Maryland submitted the emission inventory through the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) to meet the nonattainment requirements for moderate ozone nonattainment areas for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is approving the 2011 base year emissions inventory for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS as a revision to the Maryland state implementation plan (SIP) in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA). DATES: This final rule is effective on September 10, 2018. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0396. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business information (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 through https:// www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Rehn, (215) 814–2176, or by email at rehn.brian@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES SUMMARY: I. Background On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised ozone NAAQS of 0.08 ppm, averaged over eight hours. 62 FR 38855. This 8-hour ozone NAAQS was determined to be more protective of public health than the previous 1979 1hour ozone NAAQS. See 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). In 2008, EPA revised the 8-hour ozone NAAQS from 0.08 to 0.075 ppm. See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).1 On May 21, 2012, the Baltimore, Maryland area was designated as moderate nonattainment for the 2008 81 On October 1, 2015, EPA strengthened the 8hour ozone NAAQS to 0.070 ppm. See 80 FR 65292 (October 16, 2015). This rulemaking addresses the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and does not address the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:49 Aug 08, 2018 Jkt 244001 hour ozone NAAQS. 77 FR 30088. The designation of the Baltimore, Maryland area as moderate nonattainment was effective July 20, 2012. The Baltimore, Maryland nonattainment area is comprised of Anne Arundel County, Baltimore County, Baltimore City, Carroll County, Harford County, and Howard County. Under section 172(c)(3) of the CAA, Maryland is required to submit a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutants in its moderate nonattainment area. On October 3, 2017 (82 FR 46010 and 82 FR 45997), EPA simultaneously published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) and a direct final rule (DFR) for the State of Maryland approving the SIP revision. EPA received adverse comments on the rulemaking and withdrew the DFR prior to the effective date of December 4, 2017. In this final rulemaking, EPA is responding to the comments submitted on the proposed revision to the Maryland SIP and is approving Maryland’s 2011 base year emissions inventory for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis Under CAA section 172(c)(3), states are required to submit a comprehensive, accurate, and current account of actual emissions from all sources (point, nonpoint, nonroad, and onroad) in the nonattainment area. CAA section 182(a)(1) and (b) requires that areas designated as nonattainment and classified as moderate submit an inventory of all sources of ozone precursors no later than 2 years after the effective date of designation. On December 30, 2016, MDE submitted a formal revision (SIP #16– 16) to its SIP. The SIP revision consists of the 2011 base year inventory for the Baltimore, Maryland nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In accordance with EPA’s requirements for ozone SIP planning, ‘‘Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements,’’ MDE selected 2011 for its base year emissions inventory. See 80 FR 12263 (March 6, 2015). MDE’s 2011 base year inventory includes emissions estimates covering the general source categories of stationary point, area (nonpoint), quasipoint, nonroad mobile, onroad mobile, and Marine-Air-Rail (M–A–R). EPA reviewed Maryland’s 2011 base year emission inventory’s results, procedures, and methodologies for the Baltimore, Maryland moderate PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 nonattainment area and found them to meet the applicable requirements for approval under sections 110, 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) and (b) of the CAA. Other specific requirements of Maryland’s 2011 base year emissions inventory for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the rationale for EPA’s proposed action are explained in the prior direct final rule (DFR) and its accompanying NPR and will not be restated here. EPA received public comments on the NPR that will be addressed in section III of this rulemaking. III. Response to Comments During the comment period, EPA received several anonymous comments on this rulemaking. EPA is responding to the comments submitted specific to this action on the proposed revision to the Maryland SIP. All other comments received were not specific to this action and thus are not addressed here. Comment 1: The Commenter claims Maryland assumed Stage II controls were in effect even though the State has ‘‘exercised enforcement discretion for new and existing sources effectively eliminating all reductions from any [Stage II] controls.’’ Commenter provides a memorandum from MDE’s Air & Radiation Management Administration (ARMA) titled ‘‘Stage II Vapor Recovery Systems—Enforcement Discretion Policy (March 20, 2014).’’ Response 1: EPA notes that Maryland’s 2011 base year emissions inventory analysis for the 2008 ozone NAAQS was performed for calendar year 2011 using 2011 emissions data. Maryland continued to implement and enforce the Stage II program prior to issuance of MDE’s enforcement policy on March 6, 2014, suspending state enforcement of the program from that time forward. Maryland intended to subsequently repeal the Stage II rule and to submit to EPA a SIP revision to remove the program from the SIP. Maryland submitted a SIP revision to EPA to remove the Stage II program from the SIP on August 28, 2017. However, the Stage II program was in operation and was being enforced in 2011. Therefore, EPA believes Maryland correctly estimated its 2011 emission inventory to include the Stage II program as an implemented, enforceable emission control measure. Therefore, EPA finds Maryland correctly estimated its emissions inventory to reflect Stage II as a control measure in place in the 2011 base year inventory period. Comment 2: Commenter claims that the emissions calculations for ‘‘Open Burning—Land Clearing’’ uses an ozone E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM 09AUR1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Rules and Regulations sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES season of only 92 days, which is not even half of the full ozone season. Response 2: Maryland chose to use the peak ozone period of June to August (92 days) for the ‘‘Open Burning—Land Clearing’’ emissions calculations as their ozone season.2 Under EPA’s ‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations (July 2017),’’ the state shall ‘‘select the representative months and work week days to include in the calculation of the ozone season day emissions. The temporal basis for these emissions should be representative of the conditions leading to nonattainment, as recommended by the state.’’ 3 EPA finds that Maryland’s calculations in the 2016 SIP submittal comply with the current guidance in choosing to select June to August as the ozone season for the ‘‘Open Burning— Land Clearing’’ emissions calculations, as Maryland states these months are typically peak ozone season. Comment 3: Maryland assumed that ‘‘commercial and industrial sources only operated 6 days a week instead of 7.’’ Commenter notes that ‘‘nothing in Maryland prevents businesses from operating 7 days a week and so Maryland should have used 7 days a week.’’ Response 3: While Commenter is not specific as to which commercial and industrial sources are of concern, EPA’s Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP) guidance (May 2001) provides flexibility in the operation days. For example, the guidance for solvent cleaning operations states, ‘‘Daily variations may apply for some of the industries. Some industries operate seven days per week, others only five days. Some industries are likely to operate two or three shifts per day, others may only have one.’’ Therefore, ‘‘the default value of uniform activity through the year is six days per week.’’ 4 EPA finds that Maryland performed the calculations in accordance with the EIIP guidance.5 Comment 4: Commenter claims Maryland’s inspection and maintenance (I/M) program is improperly represented in the emission modeling parameters selected by Maryland in the Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES) 2 See EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0396–0005, page 109. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/ 2017-07/documents/ei_guidance_may_2017_final_ rev.pdf, page 72. 4 See https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/ 2015-08/documents/iii06fin.pdf, page 6.3–9. 5 See https://www.epa.gov/air-emissionsinventories/air-emissions-inventory-improvementprogram-eiip for all EIIP technical reports. 3 See VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:49 Aug 08, 2018 Jkt 244001 modeling used to estimate the highway mobile source emissions portion of the emission inventory, which are used to calculate emissions benefits from the I/M program. The commenter claims MOVES parameters for I/M program coverage incorrectly included an I/M program motorist compliance rate of over 96% when the state is known to ‘‘have a large number of (vehicle) failures that never return to get rechecked.’’ Additionally, the commenter states that ‘‘Maryland allows for almost 6 months of extensions after first testing and finding a problem that has to be fixed. This means that if a car is failing in the second half of the year it is possible to have a violating vehicle for the rest of the year meaning compliance is not achieved.’’ Commenter would like EPA to require Maryland to use actual I/M data collected by the Maryland program to be used to set the I/M program parameters of the MOVES model instead of MOVES default parameters as this would reduce the reductions attributed to the I/M program and change the area’s overall emissions inventory. Response 4: The I/M program motorist compliance rate is represented by the number of complying vehicles (i.e., vehicles with a confirmed final I/M test outcome, either passing the test or receiving a waiver from doing so) divided by the number of vehicles subject to testing in the area × 100. Maryland collects statistics for its Vehicle Emissions Inspection Program (VEIP) on an ongoing basis, and per a requirement of the federal requirements for I/M programs, annually reports program summary data to EPA for the prior calendar year. For purposes of the 2011 base year inventory, the relevant I/M annual report from Maryland to EPA was submitted on August 15, 2012, representing calendar year 2011.6 For 2011, MDE reported that a total of 1,562,895 vehicles were tested under the VEIP program. Of these, 1,424,557 vehicles initially passed and 138,338 vehicles failed the VEIP test. Of the initial failures, 14,442 ultimately received a test ‘‘waiver’’ outcome after spending money for repairs up to a limit established by the VEIP program (but still not passing a test). Therefore, a total of 1,438,99 out of 1,562,895 vehicles received some form of final VEIP test outcome (either a passing test or a waiver) by the end of calendar year 2011, for a 92% compliance rate. However, Maryland calculated an 6 See Maryland’s I/M annual report for calendar year 2011, dated July 2012, as submitted to EPA from MDE via letter to Brian Rehn from Marcia Ways, dated July 15, 2012. PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 39367 overall 97% I/M program motorist compliance rate for the 2011 calendar year, when taking into account vehicles that received legally granted compliance extensions, but received a final outcome by the following July.7 Maryland’s 2011 I/M report tracks outcomes for these delayed compliance vehicles from the end of 2011 through July 2012 and factors them into an adjusted compliance rate for calendar year 2011. In doing so, MDE has attempted to account for many of the initially failing vehicles in the 2011 calendar year that did not receive a final I/M test outcome by the end of 2011. Taking into account these late complying vehicles, as well as vehicles that were identified as having been scrapped or relocated outside the I/M program area, MDE’s calculated motorist compliance rate reached 96%, very near to the compliance rate assumed by MDE in the MOVES modeling performed to support the 2011 base year emission inventory.8 EPA finds that the MDE made a reasonable estimate of I/M program motorist compliance rate for its base year inventory. Based on our review of statereported 2011 I/M program data, EPA disagrees with the Commenter that the I/M program motorist compliance rate assumed by MDE for the base year inventory was not achieved in practice. See 40 CFR part 51.351(12). Comment 5: Commenter requests that EPA fully evaluate all calculations to ensure Maryland has used the proper methodologies and assumptions. Response 5: EPA has reviewed the stationary point source, area source, highway mobile, and nonroad mobile source sector emissions estimates for the 2011 base year inventory and is satisfied that MDE has followed the appropriate guidelines and used the latest available information to support its base year inventory estimates. EPA has reviewed the 2011 base year inventory for the Baltimore, Maryland moderate nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and finds that Maryland has followed the guidance for a base year inventory submission. IV. Final Action EPA is approving the Maryland SIP revision which includes the 2011 base year inventory for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the Baltimore, Maryland moderate nonattainment area because the inventory was prepared in accordance with requirements in sections 110, 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) and 7 See Maryland’s July 2012 IM Annual Report to EPA, dated July 2012, pages 4–17 for further details on MD’s motorist compliance rate, based on actual 2011 I/M program data. 8 See EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0396–0005, page 261. E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM 09AUR1 39368 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Rules and Regulations (b) of the CAA and its implementing regulations including 40 CFR 51.915. After receipt of adverse public comment on our prior direct final rule, EPA published an action to withdrawal the direct final rule (82 FR 66611, November 22, 2017). This withdrawal occurred prior to the effective date for the direct final action, preventing 40 CFR 52.1075(r) from being added to the SIP through the direct final action. With this final rule, EPA is now adding 40 CFR 52.1075(r) to Maryland’s SIP. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements 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 approves state law as meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action: • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); • is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866. • 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 rule 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. B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). C. Petitions for Judicial Review Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 9, 2018. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action approving Maryland’s 2011 base year inventory for the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS for the Baltimore, Maryland moderate nonattainment area may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: July 26, 2018. Cecil Rodrigues, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart V—Maryland 2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an entry for ‘‘2011 Base Year Emissions Inventory for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard’’ at the end of the table to read as follows: ■ § 52.1070 * Identification of plan. * * (e) * * * * * EPA APPROVED NON-REGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY MATERIAL sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES Name of nonregulatory SIP revision Applicable geographic area * * 2011 Base Year Emissions Inventory for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard. VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:49 Aug 08, 2018 State submittal date * * Baltimore, Maryland 2008 Ozone Moderate Nonattainment Area. Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4700 12/30/2016 Sfmt 4700 EPA approval date Additional explanation * * 8/9/2018 [Insert Federal Register citation]. * See § 52.1075(r). E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM 09AUR1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 3. Section 52.1075 is amended by adding paragraph (r) to read as follows: ■ § 52.1075 Base year emissions inventory. * * * * * (r) EPA approves as a revision to the Maryland state implementation plan the 2011 base year emissions inventory for the Baltimore, Maryland moderate nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards submitted by the Maryland Department of the Environment on December 30, 2016. The 2011 base year emissions inventory includes emissions estimates that cover the general source categories of stationary point, quasipoint, area (nonpoint), nonroad mobile, onroad mobile, and Marine-Air-Rail (M– A–R). The inventory includes actual annual emissions and typical summer day emissions for the months of May through September for the ozone precursors, VOC and NOX. [FR Doc. 2018–16992 Filed 8–8–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 81 [EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0918; FRL–9981–95– OAR] Air Quality Designations for the 2012 Primary Annual Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for Areas in Florida Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is establishing initial air quality designations for the 2012 primary annual fine particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for the remaining undesignated areas in the state of Florida. When the EPA designated the majority of areas in the country for this NAAQS in December 2014 and March 2015, the EPA deferred initial area designations for certain areas, including all of the Florida, because the EPA could not determine using available data whether the areas were meeting or not meeting the NAAQS. In August 2016, the EPA designated most of the state of Florida (62 of 67 counties). Following the August 2016 designation action, two areas (five counties) in Florida remained undesignated. The EPA could not determine at that time whether the areas were meeting or not meeting the NAAQS. Florida has now submitted complete, quality-assured, sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:49 Aug 08, 2018 Jkt 244001 and certified air quality monitoring data for the period 2015–2017 for the areas identified in this action. Based on these data, the EPA is designating the remaining five counties as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2012 primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS. DATES: This final rule is effective on September 10, 2018. ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0918. All documents in the docket are listed in the index at https://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business Information 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 the docket or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, William Jefferson Clinton West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744 and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566–1742. In addition, the EPA has established a website for the rulemakings to initially designate areas for the 2012 primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS at: https:// www.epa.gov/particle-pollutiondesignations. This website includes the EPA’s final PM2.5 designations actions, as well as state and tribal initial recommendation letters, the EPA’s modification letters, technical support documents, responses to comments and other related technical information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general questions concerning this action, please contact: Carla Oldham, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Policy Division, C539–04, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone (919) 541– 3347, email at oldham.carla@epa.gov. The Region 4 contact is Madolyn Sanchez, U.S. EPA, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960, telephone (404) 562–9644, email at sanchez.madolyn@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On December 14, 2012, the EPA promulgated a revised primary annual PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 39369 PM2.5 NAAQS to provide increased protection of public health from fine particle pollution (78 FR 3086; January 15, 2013). In that action, the EPA strengthened the primary annual PM2.5 standard from 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) to 12.0 mg/m3, which is attained when the 3-year average of the annual arithmetic means does not exceed 12.0 mg/m3. Section 107(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7407(d), governs the process for initial area designations after the EPA establishes a new or revised NAAQS. Under CAA section 107(d), each governor is required to, and each tribal leader may, if they so choose, recommend air quality designations to the EPA by a date that cannot be later than 1 year after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. The EPA considers these recommendations as part of its duty to promulgate the area designations and boundaries for the new or revised NAAQS. If, after careful consideration of these recommendations, the EPA believes that it is necessary to modify a state’s recommendation and intends to promulgate a designation different from a state’s recommendation, the EPA must notify the state at least 120 days prior to promulgating the final designation and the EPA must provide the state an opportunity to demonstrate why any proposed modification is inappropriate. These modifications may relate either to an area’s designation or to its boundaries. On December 18, 2014, the Administrator of the EPA signed a final action promulgating initial designations for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS for the majority of the United States, including areas of Indian country (80 FR 2206 FR; January 15, 2015). In that action, the EPA also deferred initial area designations for certain areas where available data, including air quality monitoring data, were insufficient to determine whether the area met or did not meet the NAAQS, but where forthcoming data were likely to result in complete and valid air quality data sufficient to determine whether these areas meet the NAAQS. Accordingly, the EPA stated that it would use the additional time available as provided under section 107(d)(1)(B) of the CAA to assess relevant information and subsequently promulgate initial designations for the identified areas through a separate rulemaking action or actions. The deferred areas included the entire state of Tennessee, except three counties in the Chattanooga area; several areas in the state of Georgia, including two neighboring counties in E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM 09AUR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 154 (Thursday, August 9, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 39365-39369]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16992]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0396; FRL-9981-96--Region 3]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Maryland; 2011 Base Year Inventory for the 2008 8-Hour Ozone National 
Ambient Air Quality Standard for the Baltimore, Maryland Nonattainment 
Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

[[Page 39366]]

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state 
implementation plan (SIP) revision for the 2011 base year inventory for 
the Baltimore, Maryland moderate nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour 
ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The State of 
Maryland submitted the emission inventory through the Maryland 
Department of the Environment (MDE) to meet the nonattainment 
requirements for moderate ozone nonattainment areas for the 2008 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS. EPA is approving the 2011 base year emissions inventory 
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS as a revision to the Maryland state 
implementation plan (SIP) in accordance with the requirements of the 
Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: This final rule is effective on September 10, 2018.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0396. All documents in the docket are listed on 
the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, 
some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business 
information (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 through 
https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in 
the For Further Information Contact section for additional availability 
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Rehn, (215) 814-2176, or by 
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised ozone NAAQS of 0.08 
ppm, averaged over eight hours. 62 FR 38855. This 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
was determined to be more protective of public health than the previous 
1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). In 2008, 
EPA revised the 8-hour ozone NAAQS from 0.08 to 0.075 ppm. See 73 FR 
16436 (March 27, 2008).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On October 1, 2015, EPA strengthened the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
to 0.070 ppm. See 80 FR 65292 (October 16, 2015). This rulemaking 
addresses the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and does not address the 2015 
8-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On May 21, 2012, the Baltimore, Maryland area was designated as 
moderate nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 77 FR 30088. 
The designation of the Baltimore, Maryland area as moderate 
nonattainment was effective July 20, 2012. The Baltimore, Maryland 
nonattainment area is comprised of Anne Arundel County, Baltimore 
County, Baltimore City, Carroll County, Harford County, and Howard 
County. Under section 172(c)(3) of the CAA, Maryland is required to 
submit a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual 
emissions from all sources of the relevant pollutants in its moderate 
nonattainment area.
    On October 3, 2017 (82 FR 46010 and 82 FR 45997), EPA 
simultaneously published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) and a 
direct final rule (DFR) for the State of Maryland approving the SIP 
revision. EPA received adverse comments on the rulemaking and withdrew 
the DFR prior to the effective date of December 4, 2017. In this final 
rulemaking, EPA is responding to the comments submitted on the proposed 
revision to the Maryland SIP and is approving Maryland's 2011 base year 
emissions inventory for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis

    Under CAA section 172(c)(3), states are required to submit a 
comprehensive, accurate, and current account of actual emissions from 
all sources (point, nonpoint, nonroad, and onroad) in the nonattainment 
area. CAA section 182(a)(1) and (b) requires that areas designated as 
nonattainment and classified as moderate submit an inventory of all 
sources of ozone precursors no later than 2 years after the effective 
date of designation.
    On December 30, 2016, MDE submitted a formal revision (SIP #16-16) 
to its SIP. The SIP revision consists of the 2011 base year inventory 
for the Baltimore, Maryland nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS. In accordance with EPA's requirements for ozone SIP 
planning, ``Implementation of the 2008 National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan Requirements,'' MDE 
selected 2011 for its base year emissions inventory. See 80 FR 12263 
(March 6, 2015). MDE's 2011 base year inventory includes emissions 
estimates covering the general source categories of stationary point, 
area (nonpoint), quasi-point, nonroad mobile, onroad mobile, and 
Marine-Air-Rail (M-A-R).
    EPA reviewed Maryland's 2011 base year emission inventory's 
results, procedures, and methodologies for the Baltimore, Maryland 
moderate nonattainment area and found them to meet the applicable 
requirements for approval under sections 110, 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) 
and (b) of the CAA.
    Other specific requirements of Maryland's 2011 base year emissions 
inventory for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the rationale for EPA's 
proposed action are explained in the prior direct final rule (DFR) and 
its accompanying NPR and will not be restated here. EPA received public 
comments on the NPR that will be addressed in section III of this 
rulemaking.

III. Response to Comments

    During the comment period, EPA received several anonymous comments 
on this rulemaking. EPA is responding to the comments submitted 
specific to this action on the proposed revision to the Maryland SIP. 
All other comments received were not specific to this action and thus 
are not addressed here.
    Comment 1: The Commenter claims Maryland assumed Stage II controls 
were in effect even though the State has ``exercised enforcement 
discretion for new and existing sources effectively eliminating all 
reductions from any [Stage II] controls.'' Commenter provides a 
memorandum from MDE's Air & Radiation Management Administration (ARMA) 
titled ``Stage II Vapor Recovery Systems--Enforcement Discretion Policy 
(March 20, 2014).''
    Response 1: EPA notes that Maryland's 2011 base year emissions 
inventory analysis for the 2008 ozone NAAQS was performed for calendar 
year 2011 using 2011 emissions data. Maryland continued to implement 
and enforce the Stage II program prior to issuance of MDE's enforcement 
policy on March 6, 2014, suspending state enforcement of the program 
from that time forward. Maryland intended to subsequently repeal the 
Stage II rule and to submit to EPA a SIP revision to remove the program 
from the SIP. Maryland submitted a SIP revision to EPA to remove the 
Stage II program from the SIP on August 28, 2017. However, the Stage II 
program was in operation and was being enforced in 2011. Therefore, EPA 
believes Maryland correctly estimated its 2011 emission inventory to 
include the Stage II program as an implemented, enforceable emission 
control measure. Therefore, EPA finds Maryland correctly estimated its 
emissions inventory to reflect Stage II as a control measure in place 
in the 2011 base year inventory period.
    Comment 2: Commenter claims that the emissions calculations for 
``Open Burning--Land Clearing'' uses an ozone

[[Page 39367]]

season of only 92 days, which is not even half of the full ozone 
season.
    Response 2: Maryland chose to use the peak ozone period of June to 
August (92 days) for the ``Open Burning--Land Clearing'' emissions 
calculations as their ozone season.\2\ Under EPA's ``Emissions 
Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze 
Regulations (July 2017),'' the state shall ``select the representative 
months and work week days to include in the calculation of the ozone 
season day emissions. The temporal basis for these emissions should be 
representative of the conditions leading to nonattainment, as 
recommended by the state.'' \3\ EPA finds that Maryland's calculations 
in the 2016 SIP submittal comply with the current guidance in choosing 
to select June to August as the ozone season for the ``Open Burning--
Land Clearing'' emissions calculations, as Maryland states these months 
are typically peak ozone season.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0396-0005, page 109.
    \3\ See https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-07/documents/ei_guidance_may_2017_final_rev.pdf, page 72.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 3: Maryland assumed that ``commercial and industrial 
sources only operated 6 days a week instead of 7.'' Commenter notes 
that ``nothing in Maryland prevents businesses from operating 7 days a 
week and so Maryland should have used 7 days a week.''
    Response 3: While Commenter is not specific as to which commercial 
and industrial sources are of concern, EPA's Emission Inventory 
Improvement Program (EIIP) guidance (May 2001) provides flexibility in 
the operation days. For example, the guidance for solvent cleaning 
operations states, ``Daily variations may apply for some of the 
industries. Some industries operate seven days per week, others only 
five days. Some industries are likely to operate two or three shifts 
per day, others may only have one.'' Therefore, ``the default value of 
uniform activity through the year is six days per week.'' \4\ EPA finds 
that Maryland performed the calculations in accordance with the EIIP 
guidance.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-08/documents/iii06fin.pdf, page 6.3-9.
    \5\ See https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/air-emissions-inventory-improvement-program-eiip for all EIIP technical 
reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 4: Commenter claims Maryland's inspection and maintenance 
(I/M) program is improperly represented in the emission modeling 
parameters selected by Maryland in the Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator 
(MOVES) modeling used to estimate the highway mobile source emissions 
portion of the emission inventory, which are used to calculate 
emissions benefits from the I/M program. The commenter claims MOVES 
parameters for I/M program coverage incorrectly included an I/M program 
motorist compliance rate of over 96% when the state is known to ``have 
a large number of (vehicle) failures that never return to get 
rechecked.'' Additionally, the commenter states that ``Maryland allows 
for almost 6 months of extensions after first testing and finding a 
problem that has to be fixed. This means that if a car is failing in 
the second half of the year it is possible to have a violating vehicle 
for the rest of the year meaning compliance is not achieved.'' 
Commenter would like EPA to require Maryland to use actual I/M data 
collected by the Maryland program to be used to set the I/M program 
parameters of the MOVES model instead of MOVES default parameters as 
this would reduce the reductions attributed to the I/M program and 
change the area's overall emissions inventory.
    Response 4: The I/M program motorist compliance rate is represented 
by the number of complying vehicles (i.e., vehicles with a confirmed 
final I/M test outcome, either passing the test or receiving a waiver 
from doing so) divided by the number of vehicles subject to testing in 
the area x 100. Maryland collects statistics for its Vehicle Emissions 
Inspection Program (VEIP) on an ongoing basis, and per a requirement of 
the federal requirements for I/M programs, annually reports program 
summary data to EPA for the prior calendar year. For purposes of the 
2011 base year inventory, the relevant I/M annual report from Maryland 
to EPA was submitted on August 15, 2012, representing calendar year 
2011.\6\ For 2011, MDE reported that a total of 1,562,895 vehicles were 
tested under the VEIP program. Of these, 1,424,557 vehicles initially 
passed and 138,338 vehicles failed the VEIP test. Of the initial 
failures, 14,442 ultimately received a test ``waiver'' outcome after 
spending money for repairs up to a limit established by the VEIP 
program (but still not passing a test). Therefore, a total of 1,438,99 
out of 1,562,895 vehicles received some form of final VEIP test outcome 
(either a passing test or a waiver) by the end of calendar year 2011, 
for a 92% compliance rate. However, Maryland calculated an overall 97% 
I/M program motorist compliance rate for the 2011 calendar year, when 
taking into account vehicles that received legally granted compliance 
extensions, but received a final outcome by the following July.\7\ 
Maryland's 2011 I/M report tracks outcomes for these delayed compliance 
vehicles from the end of 2011 through July 2012 and factors them into 
an adjusted compliance rate for calendar year 2011. In doing so, MDE 
has attempted to account for many of the initially failing vehicles in 
the 2011 calendar year that did not receive a final I/M test outcome by 
the end of 2011. Taking into account these late complying vehicles, as 
well as vehicles that were identified as having been scrapped or 
relocated outside the I/M program area, MDE's calculated motorist 
compliance rate reached 96%, very near to the compliance rate assumed 
by MDE in the MOVES modeling performed to support the 2011 base year 
emission inventory.\8\ EPA finds that the MDE made a reasonable 
estimate of I/M program motorist compliance rate for its base year 
inventory. Based on our review of state-reported 2011 I/M program data, 
EPA disagrees with the Commenter that the I/M program motorist 
compliance rate assumed by MDE for the base year inventory was not 
achieved in practice. See 40 CFR part 51.351(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Maryland's I/M annual report for calendar year 2011, 
dated July 2012, as submitted to EPA from MDE via letter to Brian 
Rehn from Marcia Ways, dated July 15, 2012.
    \7\ See Maryland's July 2012 IM Annual Report to EPA, dated July 
2012, pages 4-17 for further details on MD's motorist compliance 
rate, based on actual 2011 I/M program data.
    \8\ See EPA-R03-OAR-2017-0396-0005, page 261.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 5: Commenter requests that EPA fully evaluate all 
calculations to ensure Maryland has used the proper methodologies and 
assumptions.
    Response 5: EPA has reviewed the stationary point source, area 
source, highway mobile, and nonroad mobile source sector emissions 
estimates for the 2011 base year inventory and is satisfied that MDE 
has followed the appropriate guidelines and used the latest available 
information to support its base year inventory estimates. EPA has 
reviewed the 2011 base year inventory for the Baltimore, Maryland 
moderate nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and finds 
that Maryland has followed the guidance for a base year inventory 
submission.

IV. Final Action

    EPA is approving the Maryland SIP revision which includes the 2011 
base year inventory for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the Baltimore, 
Maryland moderate nonattainment area because the inventory was prepared 
in accordance with requirements in sections 110, 172(c)(3) and 
182(a)(1) and

[[Page 39368]]

(b) of the CAA and its implementing regulations including 40 CFR 
51.915.
    After receipt of adverse public comment on our prior direct final 
rule, EPA published an action to withdrawal the direct final rule (82 
FR 66611, November 22, 2017). This withdrawal occurred prior to the 
effective date for the direct final action, preventing 40 CFR 
52.1075(r) from being added to the SIP through the direct final action. 
With this final rule, EPA is now adding 40 CFR 52.1075(r) to Maryland's 
SIP.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    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 approves state law as meeting federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866.
     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 rule 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.

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by October 9, 2018. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor 
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may 
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or 
action.
    This action approving Maryland's 2011 base year inventory for the 
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the Baltimore, Maryland moderate 
nonattainment area may not be challenged later in proceedings to 
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: July 26, 2018.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart V--Maryland

0
2. In Sec.  52.1070, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an 
entry for ``2011 Base Year Emissions Inventory for the 2008 8-Hour 
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard'' at the end of the table 
to read as follows:


Sec.  52.1070   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                            EPA Approved Non-Regulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Material
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Name of non- regulatory SIP        Applicable           State
            revision               geographic area   submittal date   EPA approval date   Additional explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
2011 Base Year Emissions         Baltimore,              12/30/2016  8/9/2018 [Insert    See Sec.   52.1075(r).
 Inventory for the 2008 8-Hour    Maryland 2008                       Federal Register
 Ozone National Ambient Air       Ozone Moderate                      citation].
 Quality Standard.                Nonattainment
                                  Area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 39369]]


0
3. Section 52.1075 is amended by adding paragraph (r) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.1075   Base year emissions inventory.

* * * * *
    (r) EPA approves as a revision to the Maryland state implementation 
plan the 2011 base year emissions inventory for the Baltimore, Maryland 
moderate nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient 
air quality standards submitted by the Maryland Department of the 
Environment on December 30, 2016. The 2011 base year emissions 
inventory includes emissions estimates that cover the general source 
categories of stationary point, quasi-point, area (nonpoint), nonroad 
mobile, onroad mobile, and Marine-Air-Rail (M-A-R). The inventory 
includes actual annual emissions and typical summer day emissions for 
the months of May through September for the ozone precursors, VOC and 
NOX.

[FR Doc. 2018-16992 Filed 8-8-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.