[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 3 (Thursday, January 5, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 569-577]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-8221]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2005-ME-0006; A-1-FRL-8018-1]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Maine; 15% and 5% Emission Reduction Plans, Inventories, and 
Transportation Conformity Budgets for the Portland One and Eight Hour 
Ozone Nonattainment Areas

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) revisions submitted by the state of Maine. These revisions 
establish a 15% VOC emission reduction plan, and revised 1990 base year 
emissions inventory, for the Portland Maine one-hour ozone 
nonattainment area. Additionally, these revisions establish a 5% 
increment of progress emission reduction plan, 2002 base year 
inventory, and transportation conformity budget for the Portland Maine 
eight-hour ozone nonattainment area. The intended effect of this action 
is to propose approval of these plans as revisions to the Maine SIP. 
This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before February 6, 2006.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Regional Material in 
EDocket (RME) ID Number EPA-R01-OAR-2005-ME-0006 by one of the 
following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    2. Agency Web site: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ Regional Material 
in EDocket (RME), EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, 
will be replaced by an enhanced federal-wide electronic docket 
management and comment system located at http://www.regulations.gov. On 
November 28, 2005, when that occurs, you will be redirected to that 
site to access the docket EPA-R01-OAR-2005-ME-0006 and submit comments. 
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    3. E-mail: [email protected].
    4. Fax: 617-918-0661.
    5. Mail: ``RME ID Number EPA-R01-OAR-2005-ME-0006'' David Conroy, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 
One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023.
    6. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: David 
Conroy, Manager, Air Programs Branch, Office of Ecosystem Protection, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 
One Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Such 
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours 
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are 
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Regional Material in EDocket 
(RME) ID Number EPA-R01-OAR-2005-ME-0006. EPA's policy is that all 
comments received will be included in the public docket without change 
and may be made available online at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ 
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 through Regional Material in EDocket (RME), 
regulations.gov, or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI or 
otherwise protected. The EPA RME website and

[[Page 570]]

the federal regulations.gov website are ``anonymous access'' systems, 
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through RME or 
regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and 
included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and 
made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, 
EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information 
in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If 
EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot 
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your 
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, 
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
Regional Material in EDocket (RME) index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. 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 RME or in hard copy at Office of Ecosystem 
Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England 
Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA. EPA 
requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the 
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. 
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through 
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob McConnell, Air Quality Planning 
Unit, U.S. EPA Region 1, One Congress Street, Suite 1100-CAQ, Boston, 
MA 02114-2023, telephone number 617-918-1046, fax number 617-918-0046, 
e-mail [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information

A. How Can I Get Copies Of This Document and Other Related Information?

    In addition to the publicly available docket materials available 
for inspection electronically in Regional Material in EDocket, and the 
hard copy available at the Regional Office, which are identified in the 
ADDRESSES section above, copies of the state submittal and EPA's 
technical support document are also available for public inspection 
during normal business hours, by appointment at the Bureau of Air 
Quality Control, Department of Environmental Protection, Tyson 
Building, First Floor, Augusta Mental Health Institute Complex, 
Augusta, ME 04333-0017.

B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

    You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your 
comments:
    1. Explain your views as clearly as possible.
    2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
    3. Provide any technical information and/or data you used that 
support your views.
    4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you 
arrived at your estimate.
    5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
    6. Offer alternatives.
    7. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline 
identified.
    8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate 
regional file/rulemaking identification number in the subject line on 
the first page of your response. It would also be helpful if you 
provided the name, date, and Federal Register citation related to your 
comments.

II. Rulemaking Information

    Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to 
aid in locating information in this preamble.

A. Background
B. 15% VOC Emission Reduction Plan
    1. Background
    2. Calculation of Required Reductions
    a. Step 1: 1990 Base Year Inventory
    b. Step 2: 1990 rate-of-progress inventory
    c. Step 3: Adjusted base year inventory
    d. Step 4: Calculation of required reductions
    e. Step 5: Determination of total expected reductions
    f. Step 6: Target level of emissions
    g. Step 7: Project emissions to target year
    3. Evaluation of Control Measures
    a. Point source controls
    b. Area source controls
    c. On-road mobile source controls
    d. Nonroad mobile source controls
    4. Contingency Measures
C. 5% Increment of Progress Plan
    1. Background
    2. 5% Increment of Progress Plan Requirements
    a. Step 1: Establish 2002 emissions baseline
    b. Step 2: Calculate 5% reduction
    c. Step 3: Project emissions to 2007
    d. Step 4: Determine emissions target
    e. Step 5: Compare 2007 to 2002 inventory
    3. Evaluation of Control Measures
    a. Chapter 130 solvent cleaning rule
    b. Chapter 151 AIM coatings rule
    c. Chapter 152 consumer and commercial products rule
    d. Chapter 153 mobile equipment repair and refinishing rule
D. Transportation Conformity Budgets

A. Background

    On June 9, 13, and 14, 2005, the Maine Department of Environmental 
Protection (DEP) submitted revisions to its State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) for ozone. These revisions consist of a 15% rate-of-progress 
(ROP) plan, a 5% increment of progress emission reduction plan, the 
associated base year emission inventories developed in support of these 
plans, and transportation conformity budgets for 2007 established by 
the 5% increment of progress plan. A public hearing on these SIP 
revisions was conducted by the state on April 21, 2005. This action 
proposes approval of these SIP revisions, and provides EPA's rationale 
for doing so.

B. 15% VOC Emission Reduction Plan

1. Background
    Section 182(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) as amended in 1990 
requires that moderate and above one hour ozone nonattainment areas 
develop plans to reduce area wide Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) 
emissions from a 1990 baseline by 15%. The plans were required to be 
submitted by November 15, 1993 and the reductions were required to be 
achieved within 6 years after enactment, meaning by November 15, 1996. 
The CAA also set limitations on the creditability of certain types of 
reductions. For example, states cannot take credit for reductions 
achieved by Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP) measures (new 
car emissions standards) that were already in place prior to the 1990 
amendments to the CAA, or for reductions due to controls on gasoline 
Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) that were promulgated prior to 1990.
    In 1991, EPA designated the Portland area, which includes all of 
Cumberland, Sagadahoc and York counties, as a nonattainment area for 
the one hour ozone standard, and classified the area as moderate. Maine 
is, therefore, subject to the 15% rate-of-progress (ROP) requirement. 
Maine submitted a final 15% ROP plan to EPA on July 25, 1995. However, 
air quality in the Portland area fluctuated above and below the one-
hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) after 1995.

[[Page 571]]

Pursuant to EPA policy,\1\ the Agency interpreted the Act not to 
require a 15% plan during times that the Portland area's air quality 
was better than EPA's one hour ozone NAAQS, and so EPA never approved 
the state's June 1995 plan into the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ May 10, 1995, guidance memorandum signed by John S. Seitz, 
Director of the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, which 
stated in part that ozone nonattainment areas subject to 15% ROP 
requirements that were meeting the ozone standard did not need to 
submit 15% ROP plans as long as the area continued to meet the 
standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Beginning in 2002, the Portland area has again been in violation of 
the one hour ozone standard, and so the 15% plan requirement is again 
pertinent for this area. In consultation with Maine DEP, it was 
determined that the state would revise the 15% plan submitted in 1995 
to reflect up-to-date emission estimation methodologies and control 
strategies. On June 9, 2005, the state submitted a revised, adopted 15% 
rate-of-progress plan for the Portland one-hour nonattainment area.
2. Calculation of Required Reductions
    a. Step 1: 1990 base year inventory.
    The first step in calculating the emission reductions needed to 
comply with the 15% VOC emission reduction requirement is to prepare a 
1990 base year emission inventory for VOCs. The EPA approved Maine's 
1990 base year inventory of ozone precursors on February 28, 1997 (62 
FR 9081). Some of the emission estimates contained within Maine's 
revised 15% plan submitted in June of 2005 were updated using improved 
methodologies that have arisen since the earlier inventory was 
prepared. The most significant revisions made occurred in the estimates 
for mobile sources. For the nonroad sector (excluding commercial 
marine, rail, and emissions from aircraft), Maine DEP's prior emission 
estimates were based on outdated studies conducted for EPA's then 
Office of Mobile Sources in 1991. Since that time, EPA has made 
numerous refinements to its emission estimation techniques for the 
diverse types of nonroad engines, and compiled them in a software 
program referred to as the Nonroad Model. Maine DEP used this tool to 
generate a revised 1990 emission estimate for this sector. 
Additionally, Maine DEP's originally approved 1990 emission estimate 
for on-road vehicles was based on EPA's Mobile 5a model. The state re-
calculated its 1990 emission estimate using the Mobile 6.2 version of 
the model, as that is the most current version. Maine also made changes 
to some of its emission estimates for stationary sources, as outlined 
in the support material submitted by the state with this SIP revision.
    Table 1 below compares the previously approved emission estimates 
to those in the state's revised 1990 inventory.

         Table 1.--Comparison of 1990 Emission Estimates (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Originally           June, 2005
       Source  category          approved emissions       emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Source..................                 9.65                 9.65
Area Source...................                31.8                 33.43
Non-road Mobile...............                 7.4                 18.08
On-Road Mobile................                49.87                63.31
Biogenic......................               197.6                197.6
                               ----------------------
    Total.....................               296.32               322.07
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During development of the revised 15% plan, Maine DEP and EPA 
ensured that the 1990 emission estimation methodologies matched the 
methods used to prepare its projected 2005 inventory to ensure that the 
same methods were used for both inventories. This was done to ensure 
that emission reduction credit was not taken due simply to changes in 
emission estimation technique.
    b. Step 2: 1990 rate-of-progress inventory.
    The second step involves excluding biogenic emissions and emissions 
included within the base year inventory which do not emanate from 
within the boundaries of the nonattainment area. Maine's base year 
inventory for the Portland nonattainment area did not include any 
emissions from sources outside of the area. Therefore, step 2 consists 
of simply subtracting the biogenic VOC component, producing a ``rate-
of-progress'' inventory of 124.47 tpsd.
    c. Step 3: Adjusted base year inventory.
    The third step in calculating the required emission reductions is 
to subtract the emission reductions that are not creditable toward the 
15% VOC emission reduction goal. The reductions which are not 
creditable include those which would have occurred even without passage 
of the 1990 CAA Amendments due to control programs already in place. 
The FMVCP and gasoline RVP standards are examples of such non-
creditable programs. Maine had no RVP reductions to account for since 
the state has been using gasoline that meets the required RVP maximum 
of 9.0 psi or lower since 1989, but did have to account for the non-
creditable FMVCP reductions. Maine included within the 15% plan the 
input and output MOBILE6.2 files documenting its determination of these 
reductions, which turned out to be 35.93 tpsd. Subtracting this amount 
from the rate-of-progress inventory calculated in step 2 of 124.47 tpsd 
yields 88.54 tpsd.
    d. Step 4: Calculation of required reductions.
    In this step, the adjusted base year inventory is multiplied by 15% 
to calculate the amount of the required 15% emission reduction: 88.54 * 
0.15 = 13.28 tpsd.
    e. Step 5: Determination of total expected reductions.
    The total expected reductions from the 1990 rate-of-progress 
inventory (calculated in step 2) include the 15% emission reduction 
calculated in step 4, and the emission reductions anticipated from the 
noncreditable programs as outlined in step 3. Additionally, emission 
reductions that occur between 1990 and 1996 due to corrections to pre-
existing (pre-1990) but deficient I&M programs and/or deficient RACT 
rules, though not eligible to count towards the 15% emission reduction 
requirement, still represent emission reductions that are expected to 
occur between 1990 and 1996. Maine did not have a pre-1990 I&M 
requirement, nor any ``RACT Fix-up'' obligations, and so the total 
expected emission reductions for the Portland nonattainment area are 
the

[[Page 572]]

sum of reductions from steps 3 and 4: 35.93 + 13.28 = 49.21 tpsd.
    f. Step 6: Target level of emissions.
    The target level of emissions for 1996 is obtained by subtracting 
the total required reductions (step 5) from the 1990 rate-of-progress 
inventory (step 2). For the Portland area this yields: 124.47-49.21 = 
75.26 tpsd.
    g. Step 7: Project emission to target year.
    The original 15% plans required by the CAA were required to be 
submitted to EPA in 1993. These plans were to include emission 
projections to 1996, the year by which the 15% emission reductions were 
to be achieved. Due to the circumstances described above, Maine DEP's 
revised 15% plan could not conceivably demonstrate that a 15% emission 
reduction occurred from 1990 levels by 1996, as that year has passed. 
Once a statutory deadline has passed and has not been replaced by a 
later one, it is reasonable to require the plan to comply with the act 
``as soon as possible.'' See Delaney v. EPA, 898 F.2d 687, 691 (9th 
Circuit, 1990). EPA has interpreted this requirement to be ``as soon as 
practicable.'' Upon consultation between EPA and Maine DEP, EPA 
determined that 2005 is the most suitable year by which Maine's revised 
15% analysis must demonstrate the 15% reduction. Accordingly, an 
estimate of emissions in 2005 was needed.
    Although an estimate of 2005 emission was needed, the most current 
inventory available to Maine DEP was its 2002 inventory, and so an 
estimate of growth in emissions from 2002 to 2005 was used to complete 
the 15% VOC emission reduction demonstration. This was accomplished by 
taking the 2002 inventory and multiplying it by growth factors which 
estimate growth from 2002 to 2005. Growth factors specific to each 
source category were used since the sources typically grow at different 
rates. For example, Maine used growth factors obtained from the Bureau 
of Economic Analysis (BEA) via a tool they developed called the 
Economic Growth Analysis System (EGAS) to project most of the point and 
area source emissions growth from 2002 to 2005.
    Once emissions were projected to 2005, a review was made to see if 
any controls not in existence in 2002 became effective by 2005. If so, 
the state reduced emissions to account for the controls, as will be 
described in section II.B. of this document. Maine DEP did not use the 
emission reductions generated pursuant to its adoption of area source 
VOC rules developed by the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) in its 15% 
plan, i.e., Maine's projected 2005 emission estimates do not reflect 
emission reductions from these measures. Maine DEP did use reductions 
from these measures to meet its 5% plan emission reductions 
requirements as is explained in Section C. of this document.
    Table 2 below compares Maine's projected, controlled 2005 emissions 
for the Portland nonattainment area with its 1990 emission estimates:

           Table 2.--Comparison of 1990 and 2005 VOC Emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        2005 projected,
    Emission source category        1990 base year        controlled
                                       emissions           emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................                9.65               *4.32
Area............................               33.43                24.7
Off-road Mobile.................               18.08               15.75
On-road Mobile..................               63.31               23.48
                                 ---------------------
    Total.......................              124.47              68.25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Includes 0.82 tpsd in VOC offsets awarded to Spinnaker Coating.

    The CAA Section 182(b)(1)(A) language regarding the 15% VOC 
emission reduction requirement states that this reduction must occur, 
``accounting for any growth in emissions after the year in which the 
CAAA of 1990 were enacted.'' EPA interprets this passage to mean any 
growth in emission levels between 1990 and 1996 must also be offset so 
that by 1996, emission levels will be truly 15% lower than they were in 
1990. In actuality, emission levels will be reduced by more than 15% in 
the evaluation year because other required reductions, such as those 
from pre-enactment FMVCP, will also be occurring as described above.
    Maine's projected, controlled 2005 inventory for the Portland area 
totals 68.25 tpsd. This is considerably lower than the target level of 
emissions of 75.26 calculated in step 6. Maine DEP has therefore shown 
that emissions have been reduced by 15% from 1990 levels, after 
accounting for growth, and not counting the non-creditable reductions 
from the FMVCP program.
3. Evaluation of control measures.
    a. Point source controls.
    Maine DEP's revised 15% plan analysis shows that VOC emissions from 
point sources fell 5.33 tpsd (55%) between 1990 and 2005. Table 3 below 
summarizes the control programs that affected this decrease in 
emissions.

             Table 3.--Point Source Controls for VOC Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Rule
      Point source category         implementation     Federal approval
                                         date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 129 (Surface Coating)...  May 31, 1995......  June 17, 1994, (59
                                                       FR 31154).
Chapter 130 (Solvent Degreasers)  May 31, 1995......  June 17, 1994, (59
                                                       FR 31154).
Chapter 134 (Non-CTG Sources)...  May 31, 1995......  April 18, 2000,
                                                       (65 FR 20749).
Bulk Terminal Emission Limit....  May 31, 1996......  October 15, 1996,
                                                       (61 FR 53636).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additional information on each of these regulations is available in 
the Federal Register notice that contains EPA's approval of them.
    VOC offsets: Maine DEP's revised 15% plan indicates that one source 
in the Portland area, Spinnaker Coatings in Westbrook, applied for and 
obtained VOC offset credits in the amount of 213 tons which could be 
used (emitted) in the future. To account for this, Maine DEP translated 
these emissions into

[[Page 573]]

what could be emitted during a typical summer day, (0.82 tons), and 
added that value to its projected 2005 (and 2007 for its 5% plan) 
emission estimate from point sources.
    b. Area source controls.
    Maine DEP's revised 15% plan analysis shows that VOC emissions from 
area sources fell 8.73 tpsd (26%) between 1990 and 2005, despite the 
growth that occurred in population and other activity indicators. The 
discussion below summarizes the area source control programs that 
caused this change in emissions.
    Stage I: Maine has adopted and submitted to EPA a Stage I vapor 
recovery regulation that limits VOC emissions from the filling of 
underground storage tanks at gasoline stations. The rule applies to 
facilities with through-puts that exceed 10,000 gallons per month. 
Chapter 118 of the state's VOC control regulations entitled ``Gasoline 
Dispensing Facilities Vapor Control'' was submitted to EPA on July 11, 
1994, and approved as a revision to the Maine SIP within a Federal 
Register notice published on June 29, 1995 (60 FR 33730). The state 
projects that VOC emissions will be reduced by 1.35 (52%) tpsd by this 
program between 1990 and 2005.
    Stage II: Maine has adopted and submitted to EPA a Stage II vapor 
recovery regulation that limits VOC emissions from vehicle refueling 
activity in the Portland nonattainment area. Chapter 118 of the state's 
VOC control regulations entitled ``Gasoline Dispensing Facilities Vapor 
Control'' was submitted to EPA on July 26, 1995, and approved as a 
revision to the Maine SIP within a Federal Register notice published on 
October 15, 1996 (61 FR 53636). The rule is applicable to gasoline 
stations with throughputs greater than 1,000,000 gallons per year. 
Maine used EPA's Mobile 6.2 program to calculate emission reductions 
from all of the state's on-road mobile source control programs 
simultaneously, and therefore a separate amount of emission reduction 
credit from the Stage II program is not reported in the state's 15% 
SIP.
    Cutback asphalt: Maine has adopted and submitted to EPA a cutback 
asphalt regulation (Chapter 131) that prohibits the use of cutback 
asphalt for most applications during the ozone season. Maine adopted 
this rule on January 6, 1993, and submitted it to EPA as a revision to 
the state's SIP. EPA approved the rule as part of the state's SIP 
within a Federal Register notice dated June 17, 1994 (59 FR 31154). The 
state determined that emissions were reduced by 7.33 tpsd (95%) between 
1990 and 2005 due to this control program.
    Architectural and industrial maintenance (AIM) coatings: Emission 
reductions were taken from the Architectural and Industrial Maintenance 
(AIM) surface coating emission source category due to a federal rule 
that required such coatings be reformulated to emit less VOCs. In a 
memo dated March 22, 1995, EPA provided guidance on the expected 
reductions from the national rulemaking on AIM coatings, stating that 
emissions would be reduced by 20%. The state determined that despite 
growth in this sector between 1990 and 2005, emissions were reduced by 
0.46 tpsd (9%) in the Portland nonattainment area due to this federal 
rule.
    Automobile refinishing: A November 29, 1994, EPA guidance 
memorandum specifies that states can assume a 37% control level for 
this source category due to a National rule. The state projects that 
between 1990 and 2005, the net effect of activity growth and 
implementation of the federal rule reduced emissions by 0.12 tpsd (20%) 
in the Portland nonattainment area.
    Consumer products: On June 22, 1995, EPA issued a guidance 
memorandum regarding the regulatory schedule for consumer and 
commercial products which indicated that states that have not adopted 
their own consumer and commercial products rule could take emission 
reduction credit from a pending national consumer and commercial 
products rulemaking. After re-calculating its base year emission 
estimate to account for updated guidance as mentioned earlier in this 
document, the state applied the recommended control level of 12.5% and 
determined that between 1990 and 2005, emissions from this sector 
actually rose by 0.19 tpsd (4%) as population growth overwhelmed the 
reductions from the federal rule.
    c. On-road mobile source controls.
    Maine DEP identified and modeled within its Mobile 6.2 runs a 
number of state and federal motor vehicle emission and fuel control 
programs that reduce emissions in the state. These control programs are 
discussed below. Region 1 has confirmed that Maine correctly modeled 
these programs together to calculate the overall emission reduction 
benefit from them.
    Low RVP gasoline program: On June 26, 1991 the state submitted a 
letter from the Governor requesting that Maine participate in the 
reformulated fuels program. This request was published in the Federal 
Register on September 10, 1991, 56 FR 46119. However, Maine 
subsequently rescinded its participation in this program and replaced 
it with its Chapter 119 rule, a low RVP program which limits the RVP of 
gasoline sold in the 7 southern most Maine counties, including all of 
the Portland 1-hour area, to a level no greater than 7.8 from May 1 to 
September 15 of each year. This regulation was submitted to EPA and 
approved into the state's SIP on March 6, 2002 (67 FR 10099).
    Motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I&M) program: Maine state 
regulations include an I&M program which has minimal requirements. In 
Cumberland county, the program requires a check of gas cap fitting 
adequacy. Additionally, an anti-tampering program checks for any 
modification to exhaust catalysts exists in Portland, Sagadahoc, and 
York counties. Maine adopted its automobile inspection and maintenance 
program on July 9, 1998, and submitted it to EPA as a revision to the 
state's SIP. EPA approved the program into the state's SIP in a Federal 
Register notice published on January 10, 2001 (66 FR 1875).
    Tier I federal motor vehicle control program: The EPA promulgated 
standards for 1994 and later model year light-duty vehicles and light-
duty trucks (56 FR 25724, June 5, 1991). Since the standards were 
adopted after the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990, the resulting 
emission reductions are creditable toward the 15 percent reduction 
goal.
    California low emission vehicle program: Chapter 127 of the Maine 
DEP Air rules is entitled ``New Motor Vehicle Emission Standards,'' 
began phasing in during 2001, and requires the sale of motor vehicles 
meeting California certification standards contained within Title 13 of 
the California Code of Regulations pertaining to emission standards for 
motor vehicles. Maine submitted this rule to EPA as a revision to the 
state's SIP on February 25, 2004. EPA approved the program into the 
Maine SIP in a final rule published in the Federal Register on April 
28, 2005 (70 FR 21959).
    Onboard vapor recovery systems: This is a federal program required 
by section 202(a)(6) of the 1990 CAAA. For passenger cars, the onboard 
control requirements will be phased in over three model years with 40 
percent, 80 percent, and 100 percent of new car production being 
required to meet the standard in model years 1998, 1999, and 2000, 
respectively. The phase-in of onboard controls for light trucks will 
follow the phase-in period for cars. Onboard controls for the lighter 
class of

[[Page 574]]

light trucks (those under 6000 pounds GVWR) will be phased in during 
models years 2001 through 2003, while onboard controls for the heavier 
light trucks (those from 6001 through 8500 pounds GVWR) will be phased 
in during models years 2004 through 2006. When fully phased in, the new 
controls will capture 95 percent of refueling emissions.
    d. Nonroad mobile source controls.
    EPA has established emission standards for a variety of non-road 
engine categories that will reduce ozone precursor emissions over the 
time period covered by the Maine 15% plan. These standards affect heavy 
duty compression ignition (diesel) engines, small non-road spark-
ignition (gasoline) engines, large non-road gasoline engines, gasoline 
powered outboard and personal water-craft engines, commercial diesel 
marine engines, recreational stern-drive and inboard engines, and 
locomotives. Detailed information regarding each of these emission 
control programs is available on EPA's Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq.
    EPA has also created a draft nonroad air emissions estimation model 
that can be used to calculate emissions from all nonroad engines except 
those used to power aircraft, locomotives, and large commercial marine 
vessels, for the present year, and for past or future years. Maine DEP 
used the Nonroad Model to calculate air emissions from this sector in 
the Portland area. Region 1 has reviewed and confirmed the emission 
estimates for nonroad engines Maine has used in its revised inventories 
and ROP plans.
4. Contingency Measures
    On April 30th, 2004, EPA published a final rule (the ``Phase 1'' 
rule), which included provisions for revoking the one-hour ozone 
standard one-year from the effective date of the designations for the 
8-hour ozone standard. This requirement is codified in the Code of 
Federal Regulations at 40 CFR Part 50.9(b). Prior to revocation, ozone 
nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above were required to 
include in their submittals under section 172(b) of the CAA, 
contingency measures to be implemented if ROP was not achieved or if 
the standard is not attained by the applicable date. However, on May 
26, 2005, EPA published a final rule (70 FR 30592) that, in light of 
the revocation of the one-hour ozone standard, removed the requirement 
that contingency plans be adopted for ROP plans submitted to make 
progress toward achievement of the one-hour ozone standard. 
Accordingly, Maine-DEP's revised 15% ROP plan does not contain 
contingency measures.

C. 5% Increment of Progress Plan

1. Background
    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a new NAAQS for ozone based on an 
8-hour averaging period. Court challenges to the 8-hour ozone standard 
delayed implementation of it, but were eventually resolved and on April 
30, 2004, EPA promulgated designations for the 8-hour ozone standard in 
the Federal Register (69 FR 23858). The effective date for the 
designations was June 15, 2004. Portions of Maine were designated 
nonattainment for this standard, including the Portland 8-hour area 
which was classified as a marginal nonattainment area. The Portland 8-
hour marginal nonattainment area consists of Sagadahoc county, most 
portions of Cumberland and York counties, and one town in Androscoggin 
county. As such, it differs geographically from the Portland 1-hour 
nonattainment area, as that area consists of Cumberland, Sagadahoc, and 
York counties in their entirety.
    On April 30, 2004, EPA also published the first part of its rule 
governing implementation of the 8-hour ozone standard (69 FR 23951). 
Although this rule dealt primarily with issues pertaining to the new 8-
hour ozone standard, it included some provisions relevant to the one-
hour ozone NAAQS. Of particular interest to Maine was a provision 
allowing one-hour areas with unmet attainment demonstration obligations 
to submit, in lieu of a full one-hour ozone attainment demonstration, 
an early 5% increment of progress plan toward achievement of the 8-hour 
standard. Such plans would need to be submitted no later than one year 
from the effective date of the 8-hour ozone standard, meaning by no 
later than June 15, 2005. Maine's Portland one-hour nonattainment area 
has an unmet attainment demonstration obligation, and so Maine DEP 
decided to prepare a 5% increment of progress plan to meet its unmet 
one-hour attainment demonstration obligation. Accordingly, Maine's June 
9, 2005 SIP revision request to EPA included a 5% increment of progress 
plan.
    The geographic area covered by the Portland 8-hour area is smaller 
than the area covered by the Portland 1-hour area in that it only 
includes portions of Cumberland and York counties, whereas the 1-hour 
area covers these two counties entirely (plus all of Sagadahoc county). 
Given the difficulties of SIP planning activities at a sub-county 
level, in particular preparation of emission inventories at a sub-
county level, Maine DEP developed its 5% increment of progress plan 
such that it covers all of the old one-hour nonattainment area. As such 
it covers a larger area and plans for more emission reductions than is 
required, even though one town, the town of Durham in Androscoggin 
county, is not covered by the plan. EPA worked closely with the Maine 
DEP in development of this plan, and we believe that the geographic 
area Maine DEP chose to cover in its 5% increment of progress plan is 
appropriate and reasonable. We believe this to be so because the mix of 
stationary and mobile emission sources is fairly uniform across the 
area, and so the net result of expansion of the geographic area is 
primarily an increase in the amount of emission reductions that must be 
planned for.
    Given the difficulty and additional uncertainty introduced by 
developing emission inventories at the sub-county level, it is not 
likely that doing so would produce data that would improve our decision 
making ability. Accordingly, as mentioned above we believe that Maine 
DEP's use of full county emission inventories is appropriate. However, 
transportation conformity budgets need to match the exact geographic 
borders of the nonattainment area they are associated with. Since 
development of on-road mobile source emission estimates at the sub-
county level is not unduly burdensome, and critical for transportation 
conformity purposes, Maine DEP's 5% increment of progress plan contains 
on-road mobile source inventories for 2007 that exactly match the 
geographic area of its 8-hour nonattainment area.
2. 5% Increment of Progress Plan Requirements
    EPA issued a guidance memorandum \2\ on August 18, 2004 which 
outlines the criteria for 5% increment of progress plans. In brief 
summary, the guidance requires the emission reduction be based on a 
2002 inventory, does not allow credit from federal measures or measures 
already in the SIP as of 2002, requires that the reduction occur by 
2007, and allows use of VOC, NOX, or some combination of 
both pollutants. The steps involved in determining the magnitude of the 
emission reductions needed to meet the 5% plan obligation are outlined 
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ ``Guidance on 5% Increment of Progress'' (40 CFR 
51.905(a)(1)(ii)); dated August 18, 2004; from Lydia Wegman, 
Director, OAQPS, to EPA Regional Air Directors.

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

[[Page 575]]

Step 1: Establish 2002 Emissions Baseline

    The first step in this calculation is the establishment of a 2002 
emissions baseline. Although EPA's August 18, 2004 guidance allows 
states to use EPA's draft 2002 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) for 
the 2002 baseline, Maine DEP provided a better 2002 emissions baseline 
by developing their own 2002 inventory. This inventory includes better 
activity data in many instances than what is available in EPA's NEI. 
Maine's 2002 inventory of ozone precursors for the full 3 county area 
is shown below in Table 4 by major source category.

      Table 4.--2002 Anthropogenic Emissions for the Portland Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       2002 VOC            2002 NOX
      Major source category        emissions (tpsd)    emissions (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................                3.29               13.08
Area............................               23.65                1.89
On-road.........................               30.94               61.20
Off-road........................               16.59               13.23
Com. marine, rail, and aircraft.                0.45                2.33
                                 ---------------------
    Total.......................               74.90               91.70
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Step 2: Calculate 5% Reduction

    EPA's August 18, 2004 5% plan guidance allows the 5% reduction to 
be made from only VOC emission reductions, only NOX 
reductions, or from a combination of VOC and NOX reductions 
which in total equal 5%. Maine DEP chose to demonstrate it could meet 
the 5% emission reduction requirement by relying exclusively on VOC 
emission reductions. Therefore, its emission reduction obligation is 
calculated as follows: 0.05 * 74.90 = 3.75 tpsd of VOC emissions.

Step 3: Project Emissions to 2007

    The third step in the 5% calculation is to develop a 2007 inventory 
that reflects growth and controls from measures already in the SIP or 
expected to occur due to federal measures. Maine DEP prepared its 
projected 2007 inventory for the three county Portland area in a manner 
similar to the way it prepared its 2005 projected inventory as 
described in section 2.g of this document. Table 5 below shows Maine's 
2002 baseline and projected 2007 emissions inventory for VOCs.

     Table 5.--2002 and 2007 VOC Emissions by Major Source Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       2002 VOC            2007 VOC
      Major source category        emissions (tpsd)    emissions (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................                3.29                 4.0
Area............................               23.65               25.52
On-road.........................               30.94               20.48
Off-road........................               16.59               14.21
Commercial Marine, Rail, and                    0.45                 0.5
 Aircraft.......................
                                 ---------------------
    Total.......................               74.90               64.73
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Step 4: Determine Emissions Target

    In Step 4, the required 5% emission reduction of 3.75 tpsd is 
subtracted from the projected 2007 emission inventory of 64.73 tpsd, 
establishing an emissions target level of 60.98 tpsd for 2007. Maine's 
5% plan demonstrates that it will meet this target by reducing the area 
source inventory by 4.47 tpsd, taking it from 25.52 tpsd down to 21.05. 
This will reduce the overall inventory similarly, taking it from 64.73 
tpsd to 60.26 tpsd, which is 0.72 tpsd below the target level of 
emissions.

Step 5: Compare 2007 to 2002 Inventory

    The final step in the 5% calculation is to ensure that the 2007 
projected, controlled inventory is 5% lower than the 2002 emissions 
baseline. This step is required because in a rapidly growing area, a 
large increment of growth could conceivably overwhelm the 5% emission 
reduction, and the reductions from already scheduled SIP and federal 
control programs. This is not the case in Maine, however, as the 
projected, controlled 2007 emission level of 60.26 tpsd is almost 20% 
lower than 2002 emissions.
3. Evaluation of Control Measures
    Maine DEP's 5% plan demonstrates that it will achieve the required 
level of emission reductions via adoption of four VOC emission control 
measures that are based on model rules developed by the Ozone Transport 
Commission (OTC). The four rules apply to small source solvent cleaners 
(degreasers), architectural and industrial maintenance (AIM) coatings, 
consumer and commercial products, and mobile equipment repair and 
refinishing. Several of these rules require control measures beyond 
those already required by the corresponding federal measures relied on 
in Maine's 15% plan. Each of these rules, and the emission reductions 
anticipated from them, are discussed below.
    a. Chapter 130 solvent cleaning rule: This regulation establishes 
requirements for testing, evaluating, and limiting VOCs from solvent 
cleaning machines and sets minimum requirements for equipment and 
operation standards in order to reduce VOC emissions. Maine used a 
control factor of 66% as recommended in a report by E.H. Pechan and 
associates \3\ in work done for the OTC. Facilities were required to 
comply with the rule by January 1, 2005, and Maine DEP expects it to 
produce 2.57 tpsd in emission reductions. EPA approved this rule into 
the state's SIP in a final rule published

[[Page 576]]

in the Federal Register on May 26, 2005 (70 FR 30367).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ E.H. Pechan and Associates, ``Control Measures Development 
Support Analysis of Ozone Transport Commission Model Rules,'' March 
31, 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    b. Chapter 151 AIM coatings rule: Chapter 151 establishes limits 
for emissions of VOCs from 51 AIM coating categories. Compliance with 
the rule will be required as of January 1, 2006, and Maine DEP expects 
it to produce 0.99 tpsd in emission reductions beyond the reductions 
already achieved by the federal program. However, Maine DEP will need 
to adjust the credit claimed for AIM reductions downward to reflect 
recent revisions to its Chapter 151 rule. Specifically, the proposal 
contains a new, less stringent, emission limit for interior wood clear 
and semitransparent stains. The proposal also includes a less stringent 
2006 emission limit for varnishes (although by 2011 varnishes are 
required to meet the same limit as in the existing rule). These 
revisions will impact the emission reductions Maine achieves from the 
implementation of Chapter 151 by 2007. However, given that Maine's 5% 
plan currently includes 0.72 tpsd of surplus credits, it appears that 
even with these adjustments, Maine will be able to meet its 5% plan 
target.
    Additionally, in the August 31, 2005 Federal Register (70 FR 51694) 
EPA published a notice soliciting comments, data and information with 
regard to calculation of emission reductions from AIM coating rules. 
Therefore, future adjustments may also need to be made to Maine's 
credit claim from this rule. However, EPA has analyzed the emission 
credit claims made by states that have adopted AIM rules based on the 
OTC's model rule, and determined a 35% post federal AIM rule reduction 
factor is currently the most appropriate reduction factor to use. Maine 
DEP used the 35% post federal rule reduction factor in its AIM credit 
calculation. EPA has not yet approved this rule into the state's SIP. 
Therefore, emission reduction credit will only be granted to Maine for 
reductions from this rule if EPA approves it into the state's SIP on or 
before the date final action is taken on Maine's 5% increment of 
progress plan. On December 15, 2005, EPA publised a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (70 FR 74259) that proposes approval of Maine's AIM coatings 
rule. The comment period for that proposed rule ends January 17, 2006.
    c. Chapter 152 consumer and commercial products rule: This 
regulation limits emissions of VOC from consumer products by 
establishing emission limits for consumer product source categories. 
Compliance with the rule was required by May 1, 2005, and Maine DEP 
expects it to produce 0.72 tpsd in emission reductions in the three 
county area beyond the reductions already achieved by the federal 
program. EPA approved this rule into the state's SIP in a final rule 
published in the Federal Register on October 24, 2005 (70 FR 61382).
    d. Chapter 153 mobile equipment repair and refinishing rule: This 
regulation limits emissions of VOCs from mobile equipment refinishing 
and repair facilities by limiting the VOC content of coatings, by 
requiring the use of high efficiency coating application systems, and 
through work practice standards. Maine used a control factor of 38% as 
recommended in the previously mentioned report by E.H. Pechan. This 38% 
emission reduction is above and beyond the emission reductions achieved 
from this sector by an earlier federal rule. Facilities were required 
to comply with the rule by January 1, 2005, and Maine DEP expects it to 
produce 0.19 tpsd in emission reductions in the three county area. EPA 
approved this rule into the state's SIP in a final rule published in 
the Federal Register on May 26, 2005 (70 FR 30367).

D. Transportation Conformity Budgets

    Maine's 5% increment of progress plan contains projected, 
controlled emission levels for on-road mobile sources for 2007. 
Although the 15% plan also contains projected, controlled emission 
levels, they are for 2005, and are geographically matched to the full 
county Portland one-hour nonattainment area. EPA revoked the one-hour 
ozone standard on June 15, 2005. Therefore, the on-road mobile source 
VOC and NOX emissions estimates for 2007 contained in 
Maine's 5% increment of progress plan will establish a transportation 
conformity budget, and the 2005 on-road mobile estimates in the 15% 
plan will not.
    Although Maine DEP prepared its base year and future year 
inventories at the full county level, the state included in its 5% plan 
a 2007 emission estimate for on-road mobile sources for the exact 
geographic area that comprises the Portland 8-hour nonattainment area. 
These 2007 emission estimates establish transportation conformity 
budgets, and they are as follows: For VOCs, 20.115 tpsd, and for 
NOX, 39.893 tpsd.
    In the August 30, 2005 Federal Register (70 FR 51353) EPA published 
a notice of adequacy determination for the above transportation 
conformity budgets. These budgets were calculated in accordance with 
standard EPA methods, and should be approved into the state's SIP along 
with the 5% increment of progress plan.

III. Proposed Action

    EPA's review of this material indicates that Maine has prepared 
these emission inventories, emission reduction plans, and 
transportation conformity budgets in accordance with EPA methods and 
guidance. EPA is proposing to approve Maine's 15% rate of progress plan 
and associated revised 1990 inventory, and also proposing approval of 
the state's 5% increment of progress plan, 2002 base year inventory, 
and transportation conformity budgets for 2007 for VOC and 
NOX for the Portland 8-hour ozone nonattainment area as a 
revision to the state's SIP. These SIP revisions were submitted to EPA 
on June 9, 13, and 14, 2005. EPA is soliciting public comments on the 
issues discussed in this notice or on other relevant matters. These 
comments will be considered before EPA takes final action. Interested 
parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure by 
submitting written comments to the EPA New England Regional Office 
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this action, or by submitting 
comments electronically, by mail, or through hand delivery/courier 
following the directions in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, I. General 
Information section of this action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it 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).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more

[[Page 577]]

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, as specified by 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also 
does not have federalism implications because it does not have 
substantial direct effects 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, as 
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), 
because it merely approves a state rule implementing a federal 
standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of 
power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule 
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children 
from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks''(62 FR 19885, April 
23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not 
impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide, 
Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: December 21, 2005.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
 [FR Doc. E5-8221 Filed 1-4-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P