[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 108 (Thursday, June 5, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30818-30820]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-14719]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MD 038-3009; FRL-5835-3]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Maryland; 15% Rate-of-Progress Plan and Contingency Measures--Cecil 
County Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: EPA proposes to approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
revision submitted by the State of Maryland for the Cecil County ozone 
nonattainment area to meet the 15 Percent Reasonable Further Progress 
Plan (RFP, or 15% plan), also known as rate-of-progress (ROP) 
requirements, of the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is proposing to approve 
Maryland's 15% plan for Cecil County because it meets the 15% plan 
requirements under the CAA, and is consistent with EPA policy and 
guidance. Emission reductions realized by Maryland's 15% plan for Cecil 
County are sufficient to fulfill Maryland's contingency measure 
obligation for the County. Therefore, EPA is also proposing approval of 
contingency measures for Cecil County, Maryland.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be postmarked by July 7, 
1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be mailed to David L. Arnold, Chief, 
Ozone/CO & Mobile Sources Section, Mailcode 3AT21, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency--Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, 
Pennsylvania 19107. Copies of the documents relevant to this action are 
available for public inspection during normal business hours at the 
Air, Radiation, and Toxics Division, Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107; 
the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, Environmental 
Protection Agency, 401 M. Street, SW., Washington, D.C. 20460; and the 
Maryland Department of the Environment, 2500 Broening Highway, 
Baltimore, Maryland 21224.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carolyn M. Donahue, (215) 566-2095, at 
the EPA Region III address above. Information may also be requested via 
e-mail at the following address: [email protected]. 
Please note that while information may be requested via e-mail, only 
written comments can be accepted for inclusion in the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA, as amended in 1990, requires ozone 
nonattainment areas classified as moderate and above to develop plans 
to reduce area-wide volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions by 15% 
from a 1990 baseline. These ``15% plans'' were to be submitted to EPA 
by November 15, 1993, with the reductions to occur by November 15, 
1996. The CAA also sets limitations on the creditability of certain 
control measures towards the ROP requirements. Specifically, states 
cannot take credit for reductions achieved by Federal Motor Vehicle 
Control Program (FMVCP) measures (i.e., new car emissions standards) 
promulgated prior to 1990; or for reductions resulting from regulations 
promulgated prior to 1990 to lower the volatility (i.e., Reid vapor 
pressure (RVP)) of gasoline. Furthermore, the CAA does not allow credit 
towards RFP for post-1990 corrections to vehicle inspection and 
maintenance programs (I/M) or corrections to Reasonably Available 
Control Technology (RACT) rules, as these programs were required to be 
in place prior to 1990.
    In addition, section 172(c)(9) of the CAA requires that contingency 
measures be included in the 15% plan, to be implemented if reasonable 
further progress is not achieved, or if the National Ambient Air 
Quality Standard (NAAQS) is not attained by the deadlines set forth in 
the CAA.

II. Maryland SIP Submittal for Cecil County

    In Maryland, three nonattainment areas are subject to the CAA's 15% 
ROP requirements. These are the Baltimore nonattainment area, the 
Maryland portion of the Metropolitan Washington, DC nonattainment area, 
and Cecil County, which is part of the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton 
nonattainment area. The Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) 
submitted revisions to its SIP for all three nonattainment area, which 
EPA received on July 12, 1995. EPA is taking action today only on 
Maryland's 15% plan submittal and contingency measures for Cecil 
County. The 15% plan submittals for the Maryland portion of the 
Metropolitan Washington, DC nonattainment area and the Baltimore 
nonattainment area will be the subjects of other rulemaking notices.

III. Analysis of SIP Revision

    Table 1 presents the calculations of the required reductions for 
the Cecil County nonattainment area 15% ROP plan.

Table 1.--Calculation of Required Reductions for Maryland's 15% Plan for
                   the Cecil County Nonattainment Area                  
                             [Tons per day]                             
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                        
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) 1990 Base Year Inventory.....................................   19.0
(2) Adjustments for FMVCP/RVP....................................    2.4
(3) 1990 Adjusted Base Year Inventory [(1)-(2)]..................   16.6
(4) 15% Reduction Requirement [0.15 x (3)].......................   2.49
(5) Expected Emissions Growth 1990-1996..........................    0.7
(6) 3% Contingency Measures [0.03 x (3)].........................   0.49
(7) Total Emissions Reductions Required [(4)+(5)+(6)]............   3.68
(8) Total Reduction Claimed by Maryland from Creditable Measures.   4.72
------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. 1990 Base Year Emissions Inventory

    The baseline from which states must determine the required 
reductions for 15% planning is the 1990 VOC base year emissions 
inventory. The inventory is broken down into several emissions source 
categories: stationary, area, on-road mobile sources, and off-road 
mobile sources. This emissions total is the basis for calculating 
emissions growth and the required 15% emissions reduction from the 
adjusted base year inventory. The 1990 adjusted base year inventory is 
derived from the 1990 base year inventory minus FMVCP/RVP reductions, 
RACT corrections and I/M corrections. Pursuant to the CAA, Maryland did 
not take credit for post-1990 RACT corrections or post-1990 I/M 
corrections because these programs were to be in place prior to 1990. 
Maryland submitted a formal SIP revision containing their official 1990 
base year emission inventory on March

[[Page 30819]]

21, 1994. EPA approved this inventory in a notice published in the 
Federal Register on September 27, 1996 (61 FR 50715).
    In its 15% plan for Cecil County, the State of Maryland submitted a 
1990 base year inventory totaling 18.9 TPD. However, the approved 1990 
base year inventory for Cecil County, Maryland, is 19.0 TPD. This 
discrepancy is not critical to the rest of Maryland's 15% plan 
calculations because it is not large enough to significantly change the 
15% required emissions reduction calculated for the area (a difference 
of 0.015 TPD). EPA believes that this discrepancy arose due to rounding 
differences in Maryland's 15% plan and base year emissions inventory 
calculations. EPA will continue using the approved total of 19.0 TPD as 
the 1990 base year inventory for Cecil County throughout this action.

B. Growth in Emissions Between 1990 and 1996

    EPA has interpreted the CAA (57 FR 13507, April 16, 1992) to 
require that RFP towards attainment of the ozone standard must be 
obtained after offsetting any growth expected to occur during that 
period. Therefore, to meet the 15% requirement, a state must implement 
measures achieving sufficient emissions reductions to offset projected 
growth in emissions, in addition to a 15% reduction of VOC emissions. 
Thus, an estimate of VOC emissions growth from 1990 to 1996 is 
necessary for demonstrating RFP. Growth is calculated by multiplying 
the 1990 base year inventory by acceptable forecasting indicators. 
Growth must be determined separately for each source, or by source 
category, since different source categories typically grow at different 
rates. EPA's inventory preparation guidance recommends the following 
indicators in order of preference: Product output, value added, 
earnings, and employment. Population can also serve as a surrogate 
indicator.
    Maryland's 15% plan for Cecil County contains growth projections 
for point, area, on-road mobile, and non-road mobile source categories. 
Maryland determined the growth projection for Cecil County using the 
U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) growth 
factors and industrial earnings as an indicator. EPA has determined 
that the growth projections for each of the categories in Cecil County 
is approvable. For a detailed description of the growth methodologies 
used by the State, please refer to EPA's Technical Support Document 
(TSD) prepared for this action.

C. Creditable Emission Control Strategies in the 15% Plan

    The specific measures adopted (either through state or federal 
rules) for the Cecil County nonattainment area are addressed, in 
detail, in the State's 15% plan for Cecil County. The control measures 
described below are creditable towards the 15% requirements of the CAA. 
EPA agrees with the emission reductions projected in the state 
submittal for the following measures:
1. Seasonal Open Burning Ban
    Maryland submitted amendments to its open burning regulation,
    COMAR 26.11.07, on July 12, 1995. These amendments institute a ban, 
during the peak ozone season, on the practice of burning for the 
disposal of brush and yard waste as a method of land clearing. On 
January 31, 1997, EPA's direct final approval of these revisions into 
the Maryland SIP was signed.
    This ban on open burning, affecting Cecil County (part of the 
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Trenton severe nonattainment area), will result 
in a reduction of VOC emissions. The State of Maryland claimed 4.4 tons 
VOC per day (TPD) emissions reductions from the seasonal open burning 
ban in Cecil County. Maryland assumed 100% rule effectiveness to attain 
this emission reduction. However, the State did not submit any 
documentation substantiating why the default value of 80% rule 
effectiveness should not be applied to this measure.
    Rule effectiveness is an estimate of how effectively a rule is 
implemented, and is used as a percentage of total available reductions 
from a control measure. Pursuant to EPA guidance, control measures are 
subject to a rule effectiveness adjustment, unless clearly documented 
reasons as to why they should not be subjected are included in the 
submittal. Therefore, the State of Maryland can claim 3.52 TPD 
emissions reductions from the seasonal open burning ban in Cecil County 
(80% of 4.4 TPD).
2. Consumer and Commercial Products National Rule
    Section 183(e) of the Act required EPA to conduct a study of VOC 
emissions from consumer and commercial products and to compile a 
regulatory priority list. EPA is then required to regulate those 
categories that account for 80% of the consumer product emissions in 
ozone nonattainment areas. Group I of EPA's regulatory schedule lists 
24 categories of consumer products to be regulated by national rule, 
including personal, household, and automotive products. EPA intends to 
issue a final rule covering these products in the near future. EPA 
policy allows states to claim up to a 20% reduction of total consumer 
product emissions towards the ROP requirement. Maryland claimed a 20% 
reduction or the equivalent reduction of 0.1 TPD from their 1996 
projected uncontrolled consumer and commercial products emissions in 
its 15% plan for Cecil County. EPA has determined that this 0.1 TPD 
reduction is creditable in the 15% plan.
3. Stage I
    Stage I Vapor Recovery is a measure that controls gasoline vapor 
emissions at gasoline dispensing facilities that result from unloading 
gasoline from a delivery vessel (tank truck) into a stationary storage 
vessel (storage tank). The vapors displaced in the storage tank by the 
liquid gasoline are retrieved into the tank truck and transported back 
to the refinery. EPA has approved Maryland's Stage I regulation into 
the Maryland SIP (60 FR 2018). From this type of control measure, 
Maryland claimed 0.8 TPD emission reductions in the 15% plan for Cecil 
County. EPA has determined that these 0.8 TPD are creditable toward the 
15% plan.
4. Autobody Refinishing
    EPA is in the process of adopting a national rule to control 
emissions from coatings used in auto body refinishing operations.
    These coatings are typically used by industry and small businesses, 
or by vehicle owners. VOC emissions emanate from the evaporation of 
solvents used in the coating process. Although there are various 
avenues of VOC control in the autobody finishing process, the national 
rule targets the formulation of the surface coatings. In a November 24, 
1994 memo, EPA set forth policy on the creditable reductions to be 
assumed from the national rule for autobody refinishing. That memo 
stipulated that a 37% reduction from current emissions, and allowed for 
the assumption of 100% rule effectiveness (presuming the coating 
application instructions were being followed). Rule penetration is also 
assumed to be 100%. Thus, a 37% emission reduction claimed by Maryland 
is allowable.
    Maryland claimed a 45% emission reduction from autobody refinishing 
in the Cecil County 15% plan from a state autobody refinishing 
regulation. However, this rule has yet to be approved into the SIP. 
Therefore, only

[[Page 30820]]

a 37% reduction, or 0.14 TPD, from autobody refinishing is allowable in 
the Maryland 15% plan for Cecil County.
5. Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings 
Reformulation
    EPA is required to promulgate, by March 1997, a national rule for 
reducing emissions from architectural coatings--including interior and 
exterior paints, etc. In a policy memo dated March 22, 1995, EPA 
provided guidance on expected reductions and creditability from the 
national architectural coatings rule (61 FR 32729). Cecil County claims 
an emissions reduction of 0.2 TPD from AIM reformulation. However, EPA 
cannot allow 0.2 TPD because rule effectiveness was not applied to this 
control measure. Therefore, only 0.16 TPD (0.2 TPD x 80% rule 
effectiveness) can be credited to Cecil County's 15% plan.
    As shown above, the 15% required reductions (2.49 TPD) and the 
expected emissions growth from 1990 to 1996 (0.7 TPD) for Cecil County 
are realized by the 4.72 TPD total emission reductions from open 
burning, stage I, consumer and commercial products, autobody 
refinishing, and AIM coatings.

D. Contingency Measures

    Ozone areas classified as moderate or above must include in their 
submittal, under section 172(c)(9) of the CAA, contingency measures to 
be implemented if RFP is not achieved or if the standard is not 
attained by the applicable date. The General Preamble to Title I, (57 
FR 13498) states that the contingency measures should, at a minimum, 
ensure that an appropriate level of emissions reduction progress 
continues to be made if attainment or RFP is not achieved and 
additional planning by the state is needed. Therefore, EPA interprets 
the CAA to require states with moderate and above ozone nonattainment 
areas to include sufficient contingency measures in the ROP plan, so 
that upon implementation of such measures, additional emissions 
reductions of up to 3% of the adjusted base year inventory (or a lesser 
percentage that will make up the identified shortfall) would be 
achieved in the year after the failure has been identified. However, 
the emissions reduction in Maryland's 15% plan for Cecil County exceed 
the required 15% by more than 3% of the required emissions reduction; 
thus, EPA considers the contingency measures requirement adequately 
addressed through the plan's total emissions reduction. Therefore, 
Maryland does not need to address contingency measures for Cecil County 
as a separate emissions reduction requirement. The needed emission 
reduction for the Cecil County ROP plan is the sum of the required 15% 
reduction, the expected emission growth from 1990 to 1996, and the 3% 
contingency reduction, totaling 3.68 TPD. This emissions reduction 
total can be fulfilled through the creditable control measures for 
Cecil County, which achieve a 4.72 TPD emission reduction.

IV. Proposed Action

    EPA has evaluated the Maryland 15% plan submittal for Cecil County 
for consistency with the CAA, EPA regulations, and EPA policy. The RFP 
progress submittal will achieve enough reductions to meet the 15% 
requirements of section 182(b)(1) of the CAA, as well as the additional 
3% as contingency measures under 172(c)(9) of the CAA. EPA is proposing 
full approval of Maryland's 15% plan and contingency measures for Cecil 
County under section 110(k)(3) and Part D of the CAA.
    Nothing in this proposed rule should be construed as permitting or 
allowing or establishing a precedent for any future request for 
revision to any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to 
any SIP shall be considered separately in light of specific technical, 
economic, and environmental factors and in relation to relevant 
statutory and regulatory requirements.
    This proposed approval for the Maryland 15% plan for the Cecil 
County nonattainment area has been classified as a Table 3 action for 
signature by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published 
in the Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as 
revised by a July 10, 1995 memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant 
Administrator for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and 
Budget has exempted this action from E.O. 12866 review.
    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA 
must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
any proposed or final rule on small entities (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). 
Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, 
and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
50,000.
    SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Act 
do not create any new requirements, but simply approve requirements 
that the state is already imposing. Therefore, because the federal SIP-
approval of Maryland's 15% plan and contingency measures for Cecil 
County does not impose any new requirements, EPA certifies that it does 
not have a significant impact on any small entities affected. Moreover, 
due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the CAA, 
preparation of a regulatory flexibility analysis would constitute 
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The 
CAA forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. 
Union Electric Co. v. US EPA, 427 US 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 
U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

Unfunded Mandates

    Under sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 
1995, EPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed 
or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in 
estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector; or to 
state, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate.
    EPA has determined that the approval action proposed does not 
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 
million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the 
aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves pre-
existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new 
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or 
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
    The Regional Administrator's decision to approve or disapprove the 
SIP revision pertaining to the Maryland 15% plan and contingency 
measures for the Cecil County nonattainment area will be based on 
whether it meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) (A)-(K) and part 
D of the Clean Air Act, as amended, and EPA regulations in 40 CFR part 
51.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
Intergovernmental regulations, Reporting and recordkeeping, Ozone, 
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: April 9, 1997.
A.R. Morris,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-14719 Filed 6-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P