Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; 15% Plan for Metropolitan Washington, D.C. Area

Federal RegisterJun 5, 1997

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MD 053-3013; FRL-5835-6]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;

Maryland; 15% Plan for Metropolitan Washington, D.C. Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing conditional approval of the State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Maryland

for the Maryland portion of the Metropolitan Washington, D.C. serious

ozone nonattainment area to meet the 15 percent rate-of-progress (ROP)

requirements (also known as the 15% plan) of the Clean Air Act (the

Act). EPA is proposing conditional approval because the 15% plan

submitted by the State of Maryland will result in significant emission

reductions from the 1990 baseline emissions of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) which contribute to the formation of ground level

ozone, and, thus, will improve air quality. This action is being taken

under section 110 of the Act.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action for the 15% plan must be

postmarked by July 7, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be mailed to David L. Arnold, Chief,

Ozone/Carbon Monoxide, and 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, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region III, 841 Chestnut Building, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania, 19107. Persons interested in examining these documents

should schedule an appointment with the contact person (listed below)

at least 24 hours before the visiting day. Copies of the documents

relevant to this action are also available at the Maryland Department

of the Environment, 2500 Broening Highway, Baltimore, Maryland, 21224.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carolyn M. Donahue, Ozone/Carbon

Monoxide, and Mobile Sources Section (3AT21), USEPA--Region III, 841

Chestnut Building, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19107, or by telephone

at (215) 566-2095. Questions may also be addressed via e-mail at

[email protected]. Please note that only written comments

can be accepted for inclusion in the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Section 182(b)(1) of the Act, as amended in 1990, requires ozone

nonattainment areas classified as moderate or above to develop plans to

reduce VOC emissions by 15% from 1990 baseline levels in the area

accounting for growth from 1990 to 1996. VOCs emitted during the summer

months contribute significantly to the formation of ground level ozone.

The Metropolitan Washington, D.C. area is classified as a serious

ozone nonattainment area and is subject to the 15% requirement. The

Metropolitan Washington, D.C. ozone nonattainment area consists of the

entire District of Columbia (``the District''), five counties in the

Northern Virginia area and five counties in Maryland. The Maryland

portion of the nonattainment area consists of the Counties of Calvert,

Charles, Frederick, Montgomery, and Prince George's. These areas are

subject to Maryland's 15% plan.

The Act sets limitations on the creditability of certain control

measures towards reasonable further progress. Specifically, States

cannot take credit for reductions achieved by Federal Motor Vehicle

Control Program (FMVCP) measures (e.g., new car emissions standards)

promulgated prior to 1990; or for reductions stemming from regulations

promulgated prior to 1990 to lower the volatility [i.e., Reid Vapor

Pressure (RVP)] of gasoline. Furthermore, the Act does not allow credit

towards reasonable further progress (RFP) for post-1990 corrections to

existing motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs or

corrections to reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules,

since these programs were required to be in-place prior to 1990. In

addition to these restrictions, a creditable measure must be either in

the approved SIP, result from a national rule promulgated by EPA or be

contained in a permit issued under Title V of the Act. Any measure must

result in real, permanent, quantifiable, and enforceable emission

reductions to be creditable toward the 15% goal.

Virginia, Maryland and the District all must demonstrate reasonable

further progress for the Metropolitan Washington, D.C. nonattainment

area. The Commonwealth of Virginia, State of Maryland, and the District

of Columbia, in conjunction with municipal planning organizations,

collaborated on a coordinated 15% plan for the Metropolitan Washington,

D.C. nonattainment area (regional 15% plan). This was done with the

assistance of the regional air quality planning committee, the

Metropolitan Washington Air Quality Committee (MWAQC), and the local

municipal planning organization, the Metropolitan Washington Council of

Governments (MWCOG), to ensure coordination of air quality and

transportation planning. The Act provides for interstate coordination

for multi-state nonattainment areas. Because the interstate municipal

planning organization involved, MWCOG, meets the requirements of

section 174(c) of the Act, EPA has determined that the relevant

interstate coordination requirements have been fulfilled. In the

absence of an agreement to prepare a nonattainment area-wide plan, each

state could have developed and submitted a SIP revision to obtain the

15% ROP requirement independently of the others.

Although the plan was developed by a regional approach, each

jurisdiction is required to submit its portion of the 15% plan to EPA

as a revision to its SIP. The 15% plan for the Maryland portion of the

nonattainment area was submitted as a SIP revision by the Maryland

Department of the Environment (MDE) on July 12, 1995. Because ROP

requirements such as the 15% plan affect transportation improvement

plans, municipal planning organizations have historically been involved

in air quality planning in the Metropolitan Washington, DC area. As

explained in further detail below, the regional 15% plan determined the

regional target level, regional projections of growth and finally the

total amount of creditable reductions required under the 15%

requirement in the entire Metropolitan Washington, DC ozone

nonattainment area. The three jurisdictions, Maryland, Virginia, and

the District, all agreed to apportion this total amount of required

creditable reductions among themselves. EPA is taking action today on

Maryland's 15% plan submittal, which addresses only Maryland's

responsibility for the 15% ROP plan in the Metropolitan Washington, DC

area.

On March 4, 1997, Maryland submitted a draft revised regional 15%

plan for its portion of the Metropolitan Washington, DC nonattainment

area. Maryland scheduled a public hearing on the proposed revisions to

its 15% plan for March 3, 1997. EPA is taking action today on

Maryland's July 12, 1995 15% plan submittal with the knowledge that

[[Page 30822]]

Maryland will be making a formal SIP revision revising its 15% plan.

EPA has reviewed Maryland's July 12, 1995 15% plan submittal and

has identified several deficiencies, which prohibit its full approval.

A detailed discussion of these deficiencies is included below in the

Analysis portion of this rulemaking action, and also in the Technical

Support Document (TSD) prepared by EPA for this action. Copies of the

TSD are available, upon request, from the EPA Regional Office listed in

the ADDRESSES section of this notice. Due to these deficiencies, it

cannot be affirmatively determined that the State's plan achieves the

15% ROP target for reduction in VOCs. Therefore, EPA is proposing

conditional approval of this 15% plan.

II. Analysis of the SIP Revision

A. Base Year Emission 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, and off-road mobile.

Maryland submitted formal SIP revisions containing their 1990 VOC base

year inventory for the Maryland portion of the Metropolitan Washington,

DC area on July 12, 1995.

B. Growth in Emissions Between 1990 and 1996

EPA has interpreted the Act to require that reasonable further

progress towards attainment of the ozone standard must be obtained

after offsetting any growth expected to occur over that period.

Therefore, to meet the 15% ROP requirement, a state must enact measures

achieving sufficient emissions reductions to offset projected growth in

emissions, in addition to achieving a 15% reduction of VOC emissions

from baseline levels. Thus, an estimate of VOC emissions growth from

1990 to 1996 is necessary for determining whether the 15% reduction

target has been achieved. Growth is calculated by multiplying the 1990

base year inventory by acceptable forecasting indicators. Growth must

be determined separately for each source or source category, since

sources typically grow at different rates. EPA's inventory preparation

guidance recommends the following indicators, as applied to emission

units in the case of stationary sources or to a source category in the

case of area sources, in order of preference: Product output, value

added, earnings, and employment. Population can also serve as a

surrogate indicator.

Maryland's 15% plan for the Maryland portion contains growth

projections for stationary, area, on-road motor vehicle, and non-road

vehicle source categories. For a detailed description of the growth

methodologies used by the State, please refer to the TSD for this

action.

To estimate growth for area sources and non-road mobile sources,

Maryland used acceptable growth factor surrogates such as population,

employment and vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The travel demand computer

model, MOBILE5a, was used to project growth for on-road sources. The

State's methodology for selecting growth factors and applying them to

the 1990 base year emissions inventory to estimate growth in emissions

in area, on-road mobile, and off-road mobile sources from 1990 to 1996

is approvable.

EPA, however, disagrees with the growth projections for the point

source category. Maryland's 15% plan projected that point source

emissions would remain constant for the period 1990 to 1996 because

Maryland assumes new source review (NSR) offsets and special rules for

modifications of sections 182(c) (6), (7), (8), and (10) of the Act

would prevent an increase in point source emissions. EPA does not agree

with this assumption for the following reasons:

1. The revised NSR rules for source modifications were not

effective until November 15, 1992. Therefore, there may have been

modifications of sources of less than the significance level of 40 tons

per year (TPY) from 1990 to 1992. A potential 40 TPY increase could

represent a 0.1 to 0.15 tons per season day (TPD) potential increase

which is significant compared to the 1990 area-wide ROP (i.e., 1990

base year) inventory point source emissions of 18 TPD.

2. The revised NSR rules do not apply to cumulative modifications

at a source of less than 25 TPY (de minimis modifications) nor to

construction of new sources of less than 25 TPY potential emissions.

For inventory purposes, point sources are defined as stationary sources

with the potential to emit 10 TPY or more.

3. The NSR offset-related assumption does not address increases in

emissions from sources that operated at less than 100% capacity during

1990 that can legally increase their typical ozone season day emissions

by increasing the average daily production without triggering NSR

offset requirements.

EPA cannot fully approve Maryland's point source growth projection

based upon the assumption that the NSR program would hold point source

emissions constant. As a condition of final approval, Maryland will

have to remedy this deficiency and revise the 15% plan to:

1. Project growth in point source emissions between 1990 and 1996

using growth factors based upon an adequate surrogate in accordance

with the applicable EPA guidance documents. Such a projection may be

based upon more recent emissions data than 1990, e.g., from current

emission statements where available; and

2. Adopt and implement, if necessary, additional creditable

measures to ensure that growth in point source emissions from 1990 to

1996 is offset.

It is relevant to note that Maryland has included growth in point

sources, based on actual growth between 1990 and 1996, in the March 4,

1997 revised draft regional 15% plan subject to public hearing

scheduled for March 3, 1997.

C. Calculation of Target Level Emissions

The regional 15% plan calculates a target level of emissions to

meet the 15% ROP requirement over the entire nonattainment area. The

regional 15% plan projects emissions growth from 1990 to 1996 and

apportions among the three jurisdictions the amount of creditable

emission reductions that each jurisdiction must achieve in order for

the entire nonattainment area to achieve a 15% reduction in VOCs net of

growth. Each jurisdiction adopted the regional plan, which identified

the amount of creditable emission reductions which that jurisdiction

must achieve for the regional plan to get 15%, accounting for any

growth. The regional plan calculated the ``target level'' of 1996 VOC

emissions in accordance with EPA guidance.

EPA has interpreted section 182(b) of the Act to require that the

base year VOC emission inventory be adjusted to account for reductions

that would occur from the pre-1990 FMVCP and RVP programs. First, the

regional plan calculated the non-creditable reductions from the pre-

1990 FMVCP and RVP programs and subtracted those emissions from the

1990 ROP inventory. This yields the 1990 ``adjusted base year

inventory''. The target level is the 1990 ROP inventory less the sum of

the following:

1. 15% of the adjusted base year inventory,

2. The sum of the non-creditable reductions from the pre-1990 FMVCP

and RVP programs, and

3. Any reductions resulting from post-1990 corrections to existing

motor

[[Page 30823]]

vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) programs or corrections to

RACT rules.

There were no post-1990 emission reductions attributed to RACT

corrections or I/M corrections in the Metropolitan Washington, DC

nonattainment area, and the regional plan correctly claimed zero

reductions in the target level calculation. Table 1 summarizes the

calculations for the 1996 VOC target level for the entire Metropolitan

Washington, DC nonattainment area.

Table 1.--Calculation of Required Reductions for the Washington, DC Nonattainment Area 15% Plan

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

District Washington

of Maryland Virginia D.C. area

Columbia totals

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

1 1990 ROP Inventory........................................... 65.9 249.9 222.8 538.6

2 1990 Adjusted Base Year Inventory............................ 56.3 216.9 190.7 463.9

3 FMVCP/RVP Adjustment (Line 1 less Line 2).................... 9.60 33.00 32.10 74.70

4 15% Reduction Requirement = 15% of Adjusted Base Year (0.15

x Line 2)..................................................... 8.45 32.54 28.61 69.6

5 RACT Corrections............................................. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

6 I/M Corrections.............................................. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0

7 Total 15% & Non-creditable Reductions (Sum of lines 3, 4, 5 &

6)............................................................. 18.05 65.54 60.71 144.30

8 Projected Growth 1990 to 1996................................ 5.20 29.10 29.00 63.30

9 1996 Regional Target Level (line 1 less line 7).............. .......... .......... .......... 394.30

10 Apportioned State Emission Reduction and Regional Total...... 12.3 60.7 59.9 132.90

11 Total Reductions Claimed in 15% Plan......................... 12.7 62.7 61.8 137.20

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

The emission reduction required to meet the 15% ROP requirement

equals the sum of 15% of the adjusted base year inventory and any

reductions necessary to offset emissions growth projected to occur

between 1990 and 1996, plus reductions that resulted from corrections

to the I/M or VOC RACT rules that were required to be in-place before

1990. The target level, Line 9 of the table, is the 1990 ROP inventory

less the base 15% reduction (Line 4 of the table) and less all non-

creditable emission reductions (Lines 3, 5 and 6 of the table). The

Metropolitan Washington, DC nonattainment area regional target level is

394.3 TPD. EPA has determined that the regional target level for the

Metropolitan Washington, DC nonattainment area has been properly

calculated in accordance with EPA guidance.

The Maryland portion of the total 15% and non-creditable reductions

is 65.54 TPD. Thus, the target level for Maryland is 184.4 TPD. EPA has

determined that the target level for Maryland was also properly

calculated in accordance with EPA guidance.

D. Creditable Emission Control Strategies in the 15% Plan

The specific measures adopted (either through state or federal

rules) are addressed, in detail, in Maryland's 15% plan. The following

is a brief description of each control measure Maryland has claimed

credit for in the submitted 15% plan, as well as the results of EPA's

review of the use of that strategy towards the Act's ROP requirement.

Reformulated Gasoline (RFG)

Section 211(k) of the Act requires that, beginning January 1, 1995,

only RFG be sold or dispensed in ozone nonattainment areas classified

as severe or above. Gasoline is reformulated to reduce combustion by-

products and to produce fewer evaporative emissions. Section 211(k)(6)

allows other nonattainment areas to ``opt in'' to the program. EPA

approved the request by Maryland to opt in to the RFG program. The

State claims a reduction of 9.2 TPD from its 1996 projected

uncontrolled on-road mobile source emissions using the MOBILE5a model

to determine the emission benefit. EPA has reviewed the Maryland

submittal's calculation of the benefits for this measure and finds that

the amount of reduction Maryland claims is creditable, but has not been

documented as required by the Act.

In order to address these documentation and modeling issues, as

well as the requirements of the National Highway Systems Designation

Act (NHSDA), EPA is requiring Maryland to recalculate the mobile source

credits for enhanced I/M program, RFG and FMVCP (Tier I). The benefits

from RFG and Tier I must not be separated out on a tons per day basis

for each control measure, but rather all mobile source measures must be

included in the 1999 target level calculation run. This remodeling

assessment will therefore remove any potential for ``double-counting''

the credit accorded to individual mobile source measures. The

requirement for a remodeling assessment is discussed below in the

section addressing credits for Maryland's enhanced I/M program. While

EPA will require Maryland to document and remodel the credits derived

from RFG under the remodeling condition cited in the enhanced I/M

section of this rule, EPA has no reason to dispute at this time that

the 9.2 TPD emission benefit claimed in Maryland's 15% plan from the

RFG program is creditable.

Off-Road Use of Reformulated Gasoline

The use of RFG will also result in reduced emissions from off-road

engines such as motors for recreational boats and lawn mower engines,

commonly used in summer months. Maryland claims a reduction of 1.2 TPD

from its 1996 projected uncontrolled off-road mobile source emissions.

Maryland used guidance provided on August 18, 1993 by EPA's Office of

Mobile Sources on the VOC emission benefits for non-road equipment

which are in a nonattainment area that uses Federal Phase I RFG.

Maryland has correctly used the guidance to quantify the VOC emission

reductions for this measure. EPA had determined that the 1.2 TPD

emission benefit claimed in Maryland's 15% plan is creditable.

Post 1990 Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (Tier I)

EPA promulgated a national rule establishing ``new car'' standards

for 1994 and newer model year light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks

on June 5, 1991 (56 FR 25724). Since the standards were adopted after

the Act was amended in 1990, the resulting emission reductions are

creditable toward the 15% reduction goal. Due to the three-year phase-

in period for this program and the associated benefits stemming from

fleet turnover, the reductions prior to 1996 are somewhat limited.

Maryland claimed a reduction of 1.0 TPD from the

[[Page 30824]]

Tier I using the MOBILE5a model to determine the emission benefits. EPA

has reviewed the methodology used by Maryland in calculating the

benefits for this measure and finds that the amount of reduction

Maryland claims is creditable, but has not been documented as required

by the Act.

As described above, in order to address these documentation and

modeling issues, as well as the requirements of the NHSDA, EPA is

requiring Maryland to recalculate the mobile source credits for

enhanced I/M, RFG, and Tier I. While EPA will require Maryland to

remodel the credits derived from Tier I under the remodeling condition

cited in the enhanced I/M section of this rule, EPA has no reason to

dispute at this time that the 1.0 TPD emission benefit claimed by

Maryland in its 15% plan from Tier I is creditable.

Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings (AIM)

In EPA's most recent policy memorandum on AIM credits, ``Update on

the Credit for the 15 Percent Rate-of-Progress Plans for Reductions

from the Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings

Rule,'' dated March 7, 1996, EPA allowed states to claim a 20%

reduction of total AIM emissions from the national rule. Maryland

claimed a 20% reduction in AIM emissions under its 15% plan, which is a

reduction of 4.9 TPD from their 1996 projected uncontrolled AIM coating

emissions. In the March 7, 1996 memorandum, EPA allowed states to

continue to claim a 20% reduction of total AIM emissions from the

national rule in their 15% plans although the emission reductions are

not expected to occur until April 1997. As a result of legal challenges

to the proposed national rule, EPA has negotiated a compliance date of

no earlier than January 1, 1998. Even though the promulgation date for

this rule is now months beyond the end of 1996, it is EPA's intention

to still allow the amount of credit specified for the AIM rule in the

memorandum in states' 15% plans. EPA believes this is justified in

light of the significant delays in proposing the rule. Furthermore, EPA

believes the State has a significantly limited ability to effectuate

reductions from this measure through the state adoption process any

sooner than EPA's rulemaking schedule. If this final rule does not

provide the amount of credit that Maryland claims in its 15% plan, the

State is responsible for developing measures to make up the shortfall.

Use of emissions reductions from EPA's expected national AIM rule

is acceptable towards the 15% plan target. Therefore, the 4.9 TPD in

Maryland's 15% plan are creditable.

Consumer and Commercial Products

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 1.7 TPD from their 1996

projected uncontrolled consumer and commercial products emissions in

its 15% plan. For the reasons discussed above under the AIM rule

regarding delayed implementation of national rules, the EPA believes

the 1.7 TPD projected reduction in Maryland's 15% plan is creditable.

If this final rule does not provide the amount of credit that Maryland

claims in its 15% plan, the State is responsible for developing

measures to make up the shortfall.

Autobody Refinishing

In a November 29, 1994 memorandum, ``Credit for the 15 Percent

Rate-of-Progress Plans for Reductions from the Architectural and

Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coating Rule and the Autobody Refinishing

Rule,'' EPA set forth policy on the creditable reductions to be assumed

from the national rule for autobody refinishing. That memorandum

allowed for a 37% reduction from current emissions with an assumption

of 100% rule effectiveness (presuming the coating application

instructions were being followed). Maryland followed EPA's guidance to

determine the creditable emissions from this rule and claimed a

reduction of 2.5 TPD from their 1996 projected uncontrolled autobody

refinishing emissions in its 15% plan. For the reasons discussed above

under the AIM rule regarding delayed implementation of national rules,

EPA believes the 2.5 TPD projected reduction in Maryland's 15% plan is

creditable. If this final rule does not provide the amount of credit

that Maryland claims in its 15% plan, the State is responsible for

developing measures to make up the shortfall.

Stage I Vapor Recovery

Stage I vapor recovery is a control measure which substantially

reduces VOC emissions during the process of filling gasoline storage

tanks at gasoline stations. This measure can be applied in newly

designated nonattainment areas after the 1990 Amendments to the Act. In

the Maryland portion of the Metropolitan Washington, DC nonattainment

area, Stage I is a creditable measure in Calvert, Charles, and

Frederick Counties in Maryland because Stage I was not required in

these counties before 1990. The measure requires ``balanced submerged''

filling of gasoline storage tanks at gasoline service stations.

EPA policy allows emission reduction credits achieved in areas

implementing Stage I control measures after 1990 to be creditable

toward the 15% plan. Maryland estimates that this rule would result in

a reduction of 0.9 TPD from Stage I in Calvert, Charles, and Frederick

Counties. The 0.9 TPD projected reduction in Maryland's 15% plan is

creditable.

Stage II Vapor Recovery

Section 182(b)(3) of the Act requires all owners and operators of

gasoline dispensing systems in moderate and above ozone nonattainment

areas to install and operate a system for gasoline vapor recovery

(known as Stage II) of emissions from the fueling of motor vehicles.

Stage II vapor recovery is a control measure which substantially

reduces the VOC emissions during the refueling of motor vehicles at

gasoline service stations. The Stage II vapor recovery nozzles at

gasoline pumps capture the gasoline-rich vapors displaced by liquid

fuel during the refueling process. On November 15, 1992, Maryland

submitted a revision to its SIP to require the Stage II controls in all

counties of the Maryland portion of the Metropolitan Washington, D.C.

ozone nonattainment area.

Maryland had no pre-1990 Stage II controls in its portion of the

Metropolitan Washington, DC nonattainment area. Stage II is a

creditable measure in counties where these controls were not required

before 1990. Maryland estimates that the control measure will result in

a reduction of 7.9 TPD from the 1996 projected baseline of 11.7 TPD.

The Maryland 15% plan states that Maryland used the MOBILE5a model in

conjunction with gasoline throughput to determine the creditable

emission reduction. For this mobile source measure, the State submitted

limited documentation with regard to the

[[Page 30825]]

MOBILE5a runs and calculations done to determine credit. However, EPA

has no reason to dispute Maryland's methodology. This measure and the

7.9 TPD is creditable toward the 15% requirement of Maryland's 15%

plan.

Transportation Control Measures (TCMs)

TCMs are strategies to both reduce VMT and decrease the amount of

emissions per VMT. TCMs are considered an essential element of control

strategies for nonattainment areas. Section 108(f)(1)(A) of the Act

classifies TCMs as programs for improved transit, traffic flow, fringe

parking facilities for multiple occupancy transit programs, high

occupancy or share-ride programs, and support for bicycle and other

non-automobile transit. Maryland's measures include TCM projects

programmed between fiscal years 1994-1999 in the transportation

improvement plan (TIP) under the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality

(CMAQ) Improvement Program and funded for implementation by 1996 in the

Metropolitan Washington, DC region. CMAQ provides funding for

transportation related projects and programs designed to contribute to

the attainment of air quality standards. TCMs are considered acceptable

measures for states to use to achieve 15% reductions. EPA guidance

requires that TCMs meet the following conditions to be creditable for

the 15% plans: (1) A description of the measure; (2) evidence that the

measure was adopted by the jurisdictions with legal authority to

execute the measure; (3) evidence that funding is available to

implement the measure; (4) evidence that all approvals have been

obtained; (5) evidence that a complete schedule to plan, implement and

enforce the measure has been adopted by the implementing agencies; and

(6) a description of any monitoring program to evaluate the measure's

effectiveness.

Maryland provided the required evidence in the plan submittal for a

total emissions benefit of 0.2 TPD. Maryland used acceptable

methodology for calculating the emissions benefit for the TCMs. The

TCMs were all programmed and funded in the Washington Metropolitan

Region's Fiscal Year 1994-1999 TIP. EPA has determined that the 0.2 TPD

are creditable.

Seasonal Restrictions on Open Burning

Maryland has amended COMAR 26.11.07 to institute a ban on open

burning during the peak ozone season in Maryland's severe and serious

ozone nonattainment areas. Maryland considers the months of June, July,

and August the peak ozone season, because that is when ambient levels

of ozone in Maryland are usually the highest.

This ban on open burning affecting the Maryland portion of the

Metropolitan Washington, DC serious ozone nonattainment area is a

measure to reduce VOC emissions. During the peak ozone season, the

practice of burning for the disposal of brush and yard waste as a

method of land clearing will be banned. These revisions were adopted on

May 1, 1995, and effective on May 22, 1995. Maryland submitted these

revisions to EPA as a SIP revision on July 12, 1995. EPA's direct final

approval of these revisions into the Maryland SIP was signed on January

31, 1997.

The following open fires are not prohibited, as long as all

reasonable means are used to minimize smoke:

1. For cooking of food on noncommercial property (cook outs);

2. For recreational purposes (camp fires);

3. For prevention of fire hazards that cannot be abated by any

other means;

4. For the instruction of fire fighters or the testing of fire

fighter training systems fueled by propane or natural gas;

5. For protection of health and safety when disposal of hazardous

waste is not possible by any other means;

6. For burning pest infested crops or agricultural burning for

animal disease control;

7. For good forest resource management practices;

8. For the burning of excessive lodging for the purpose of re-

cropping; and

9. For testing fire fighting training systems.

This ban is in effect during the ``peak ozone season''. During the

remainder of the year (September 1-May 31) Maryland's existing open

fire regulations apply. Current regulations require that a permit be

obtained before open burning can take place.

The State of Maryland claims 3.7 TPD emissions reductions from the

seasonal open burning ban. EPA has determined that this emission

benefit is creditable to the Maryland portion of the Metropolitan

Washington, DC nonattainment area.

Enhanced Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program

Most of the 15% SIPs originally submitted to the EPA contained

enhanced I/M programs because this program achieves more VOC emission

reductions than most, if not all other, control strategies. However,

because most states experienced substantial difficulties with these

enhanced I/M programs, only a few states are currently actually testing

cars using their original enhanced I/M protocols.

In the case of the Maryland portion of the Metropolitan Washington,

DC nonattainment area, Maryland has submitted a 15% SIP that would

achieve the amount of reductions needed from I/M by November 1999. On

March 27, 1996, Maryland submitted an enhanced I/M SIP revision that

calls for I/M program implementation in counties in the Metropolitan

Washington, DC nonattainment area and Washington County. The Maryland

enhanced I/M program is a biennial program with implementation required

to begin no later than November 15, 1997. The enhanced I/M submittal

consists of it's enabling legislation, a description of the I/M

program, proposed regulations, and a good faith estimate that includes

the State's basis in fact for emission reductions claimed from the I/M

program. On October 31, 1996, EPA proposed conditional approval of the

March 27, 1996 enhanced I/M SIP revision (61 FR 56183). The proposed

conditional approval listed numerous minor and major deficiencies, and

required Maryland to submit a letter within 30 days committing to

correct the deficiencies. Maryland received an extension and submitted

a letter dated December 23, 1996 committing to meet the requirements of

full approval outlined in the October 31, 1996 proposed rulemaking.

Full approval of Maryland's 15% plan is contingent on Maryland

satisfying the conditions of the conditional approval of its enhanced

I/M SIP by a date certain within one year of final conditional

approval, and receiving final full EPA approval of its enhanced I/M

program. If Maryland corrects the deficiencies by that date and submits

a new enhanced I/M SIP revision, EPA will conduct rulemaking to approve

that revision. If Maryland fails to fulfill a condition required for

approval, and its I/M program converts to a disapproval, then the

conditional approval of Maryland's 15% plan would also convert to a

disapproval.

In September 1995, EPA finalized revisions to its enhanced I/M rule

allowing states significant flexibility in designing I/M programs

appropriate for their needs (60 FR 48029). Subsequently, Congress

enacted the NHSDA, which provides states with additional flexibility in

determining the design of enhanced I/M programs. The substantial amount

of time needed by states to re-design enhanced I/M programs in

accordance with the guidance contained within the NHSDA, secure state

legislative approval when

[[Page 30826]]

necessary, and set up the infrastructure to perform the testing program

has precluded states that revise their enhanced I/M programs from

obtaining emission reductions from such revised programs by November

15, 1996.

The heavy reliance by many states upon enhanced I/M programs to

help achieve the 15% VOC emissions reduction required under section

182(b)(1) of the Act, coupled with the recent NHSDA and regulatory

changes regarding enhanced I/M programs, rendered it impracticable for

many states to achieve the portion of the 15% reductions that are

attributed to I/M by November 15, 1996.

Under these circumstances, disapproval of the 15% SIPs would serve

no purpose. Consequently, under certain circumstances, EPA will propose

to allow states that pursue re-design of enhanced I/M programs to

receive emission reduction credit from these programs within their 15%

plans, even though the emissions reductions from the I/M program will

occur after November 15, 1996. The provisions for crediting reductions

for enhanced I/M programs is contained in two documents: ``Date by

which States Need to Achieve all the Reductions Needed for the 15

Percent Plan from I/M and Guidance for Recalculation,'' note from John

Seitz and Margo Oge, dated August 13, 1996, and ``Modelling 15 Percent

VOC Reductions from I/M in 1999--Supplemental Guidance,'' memorandum

from Gay MacGregor and Sally Shaver, dated December 23, 1996.

Specifically, EPA is proposing approval of 15% SIPs if the

emissions reductions from the revised, enhanced I/M programs, as well

as from the other 15% SIP measures, will achieve the 15% level as soon

after November 15, 1996 as practicable, pursuant to a February 12, 1997

memorandum from John Seitz and Richard Ossias entitled, ``15 Percent

VOC SIP Approvals and the ``As Soon As Practicable' Test.'' To make

this ``as soon as practicable'' determination, EPA must determine that

the SIP contains all VOC control strategies that are practicable for

the nonattainment area in question and that meaningfully accelerate the

date by which the 15% level is achieved. EPA does not believe that

measures meaningfully accelerate the 15% date if they provide only an

insignificant amount of reductions.

EPA has examined other potentially available SIP measures to

determine if they are practicable for Maryland's portion of the

Metropolitan Washington, DC area and if they would meaningfully

accelerate the date by which the area reaches the 15% level of

reductions. The EPA proposes to determine that the SIP does contain the

appropriate measures. The TSD for this action contains a discussion of

other measures available for 15% plans. Maryland has taken credit for

several of these measures (or essentially similar measures), such as

reformulated gasoline, revised surface cleaning rules, etc., in the 15%

plan; and taken credit for measures that EPA must promulgate under

section 183(e) such as AIM coatings, consumer and commercial products

rule, and autobody refinishing. Provided below is a tabular summary of

this analysis. Measures for which Maryland took credit in the 15% ROP

plan are identified in the table below as ``In 15% Plan'' and are not

available as a possible alternative to I/M. The other programs that

Maryland included in the 15% ROP plan result in only a possible 2.28

TPD reduction and do not deliver in the aggregate, anything close to

the reductions achieved by enhanced I/M.

Maryland 15% Plan Metropolitan Washington, D.C. Area Potential

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

Potential VOC reduction (tons/

Measures considered day)

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

Area Source Measures:

AIM Coatings--Federal Rule............. In 15% Plan.

Consumer Products--Federal Rule........ In 15% Plan.

Solvent Cleaning--Substitution/ In 15% Plan.

Equipment.

Graphic Arts--Web Offset Control....... 1.44

Autobody Refinishing--ACT control...... In 15% Plan.

Landfills--Federal Rule................ In 15% Plan.

Other Dry Cleaning--SCAQMD 1102........ 0.81

Stage I Enhancement--P/V Vents......... In 15% Plan.

Stage II--Vapor Recovery............... In 15% Plan.

Nonroad Gasoline--Reformulated Gasoline In 15% Plan.

Point Source Measures:

Other Dry Cleaning--SCAQMD 1102........ 0.02

Stage I--P/V Vents..................... In 15% Plan.

Flexographic Printing--MACT early In 15% Plan.

implementation.

Gravure Printing--MACT early 0.01

implementation.

Web Offset Lithography--ACT control.... In 15% Plan.

Non-mandated On-Road Mobile Measures:

Reformulated Gasoline.................. In 15% Plan.

I/M Reductions:

High Enhanced in 15% Plan.............. In 15% Plan.

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

EPA has determined that the enhanced I/M program is the only

measure that will significantly accelerate the date by which the 15%

requirement will be achieved. EPA proposes to determine that Maryland's

15% plan does contain all measures, including enhanced I/M, that

achieve reductions as soon as practicable. EPA proposes to allow

enhanced I/M reductions occurring until November 15, 1999 to count

toward the 15% emission reduction level for the 15% plan, since in

doing so, the state will reach a 15% VOC reduction as soon as

practicable.

Maryland claimed a total of 23.2 TPD credit for this measure. In

its July 12, 1995 15% plan submittal, Maryland evaluated the I/M

program using EPA's MOBILE5a model with assumptions that called for

implementation of a centralized, IM240 test with pressure and purge

testing, and a program start date of January 1, 1995. Since the time of

the July 12, 1995 submittal, Maryland has revised its enhanced I/M

program and submitted the redesigned program to EPA.

Maryland's I/M program is a biennial, centralized program network

using IM240 testing equipment scheduled to begin testing by November

1997. Maryland has designed its centralized network of testing stations

to accommodate biennial testing. EPA has determined that Maryland

cannot accelerate the reductions by initially requiring annual testing

because:

1. Without additional testing stations other requirements of the

enhanced I/M rule relating to motorist convenience would suffer.

Motorist convenience is one important aspect that affects public

acceptance and effectiveness of the I/M program.

2. Additional infrastructure changes (e.g. more testing equipment,

enlarging or building new testing stations, and the hiring and training

of additional inspectors) to the enhanced I/M program would not come

on-line in time to afford a substantial increase the amount of

reductions realized before November 15, 1999.

3. The cost effectiveness of the program would be adversely

affected because the additional costs would not result in a

corresponding amount of reductions.

EPA proposes to determine that the I/M program for Maryland's

portion of the Metropolitan Washington, D.C. area does achieve

reductions from enhanced I/M as soon as practicable.

Because Maryland's revised I/M program is designed to meet EPA's

high-enhanced performance standard and will achieve essentially the

same number of testing cycles between start-up and November 1999 as

that modeled

[[Page 30827]]

in the regional 15% plan, EPA believes that Maryland's program will

achieve 23.2 TPD of reductions by 1999. However, EPA believes that

Maryland (with MWCOG) is best able to perform the definitive

determination because Maryland will use the same highway network model

that was used to determine the 1990 base year inventory and the 1996

on-road VOC emissions budget used for transportation conformity

purposes (The same highway network model is also used for conformity

determinations). EPA believes it would be appropriate to condition

approval of the 15% ROP upon Maryland remodeling the I/M benefits to

reflect all relevant parameters (start date, network type, test types

for exhaust and purge/pressure testing, waiver rates, cut points, etc.)

of the revised, enhanced I/M program and show the I/M reductions needed

to make the 15% reduction are achieved by no later than November 15,

1999. In performing this demonstration, the State should ensure that

Tier I and RFG benefits are considered. Benefits should not be

separated out on a tons per day basis for each control measure, but

rather all mobile source measures should be evaluated in the 1999

``target level,'' as defined in the December 23, 1996 memorandum,

calculation run. EPA would further condition that such modeling would

be done in accordance with EPA guidance. EPA's guidance for remodeling

I/M for 15% plans includes: (1) A note to the Regional Division

Directors from John Seitz and Margo Oge dated August 13, 1996 entitled

``Date by which States Need to Achieve all the Reductions Needed for

the 15% Plan from I/M Guidance for Recalculation,'' and (2) a joint

memorandum from Gay MacGregor and Sally Shaver dated December 23, 1996

entitled ``Modeling 15% VOC Reduction(s) from I/M in 1999--Supplemental

Guidance.''

As it relates to Maryland's I/M program, EPA proposes a conditional

approval of the 23.2 TPD reduction from enhanced I/M in the

nonattainment area and Washington County, provided Maryland meets the

conditions of the October 31, 1996 conditional approval of the enhanced

I/M program; receives full EPA approval of its enhanced I/M program;

and remodels its enhanced I/M program using the appropriate, updated

parameters (e.g. appropriate start date, etc.).

Further, EPA makes this conditional approval of the 15% plan

contingent upon Maryland maintaining a mandatory I/M program. EPA will

not credit any reductions toward the 15% ROP requirement from a

voluntary enhanced I/M program. Since the State's 15% plan claims 23.2

TPD from the implementation of a mandatory, centralized, IM240 plan,

any changes to I/M which would render the program voluntary or

discontinued would cause a shortfall of credits in the 15% reduction

goal. EPA is, therefore, proposing in the alternative to convert this

action automatically to a proposed disapproval should the State make

the I/M a voluntary measure.

E. Emission Control Measures Not Evaluated

EPA is not taking action at this time on the following control

measures contained in the Maryland 15% Plan submitted July 12, 1995:

Graphic Arts

This measure regulates emissions from formerly uncontrolled small

lithographic printing operations, such as heatset web, non-heatset web,

non-heatset sheet-fed, and newspaper non-heatset web operations. VOCs

are emitted from the inks, fountain solutions and solvents used to

clean the printing presses. This measure is modeled on EPA's draft

documents ``Offset Lithographic Printing Control Techniques Guideline''

and ``Alternative Control Techniques Document: Offset Lithographic

Printing'' announced in the Federal Register, November 8, 1993.

Maryland claims 1.0 TPD in emission benefits from the 1996 projected

year inventory of lithographic printing sources. EPA is not taking

action on this control strategy in the July 12, 1995 Maryland 15% plan

submittal, nor crediting the 1.0 TPD reduction toward the 15% ROP

requirement in this rulemaking.

Surface Cleaning Operations

This measure amends the Maryland regulation for surface cleaning

(also called cold cleaning and degreasing) devices and operations for

area sources and requires more stringent emission control requirements

and enlarges the field of applicable sources. Maryland's 1996

projection year inventory in this source category is 3.7 TPD. Maryland

estimates that this measure would result in a 10% reduction of

emissions and with 80% rule compliance resulting in 1.5 TPD reduction

credits. EPA is not taking action on this control strategy in the July

12, 1995 Maryland 15% plan submittal, nor crediting the 1.5 TPD

reduction toward the 15% ROP requirement in this rulemaking.

Municipal Landfill Emissions

This control measure is a state control program regulating VOC

emissions from municipal landfills, utilizing landfill gas capture and

destruction systems. Maryland estimated that this rule would result in

a reduction of 0.7 TPD. EPA is not taking action on this control

strategy in the July 12, 1995 Maryland 15% plan submittal, nor

crediting the 0.7 TPD reduction toward the 15% ROP requirement in this

rulemaking.

Pesticide Reformulation

This measure requires the use of low-VOC content pesticides for

consumer, commercial and/or agricultural use. Maryland claims that this

measure results in a reduction of 2.5 TPD by applying a 40% overall

reduction to the 1996 base year projection emissions for pesticide

application. EPA is not taking action on this control strategy in the

July 12, 1995 Maryland 15% plan submittal, nor crediting the 2.5 TPD

reduction toward the 15% ROP requirement in this rulemaking.

Non-CTG RACT to 50 TPY

Section 182(b)(2)(B) of the Act requires that serious ozone

nonattainment areas adopt rules to require RACT for all VOC sources in

the nonattainment area not already covered by any Control Technique

Guideline (CTG) issued by EPA that has potential emissions of greater

than or equal to 50 TPY. Maryland revised its existing RACT regulations

to lower the major source threshold to include sources with allowable

emissions of 50 TPY or more, and to extend the geographic applicability

of the regulation statewide, which required RACT in Calvert, Charles,

and Frederick Counties for the first time.

The State of Maryland requires the use of RACT coatings with

emission limits of 3.5 pounds per gallon for Miscellaneous Metal

Coatings. Also, Maryland will require controls on the oven vents of

bakeries, but this rule has yet to be approved into Maryland's SIP. EPA

is currently reviewing the bakery rule submitted by the State of

Maryland. EPA is not taking action on this control strategy in the July

12, 1995 Maryland 15% plan submittal, nor crediting the 0.3 TPD

reduction toward the 15% ROP requirement in this rulemaking.

Non-CTG RACT to 25 TPY

This measure involves expanding the required RACT standards to

point sources with the potential to emit in excess of 25 TPY of VOC.

States would be required to develop and implement new RACT regulations

for all non-CTG point sources with the potential to emit between 25 and

50 TPY not already regulated or required to be regulated under the

major source definition.

[[Page 30828]]

Maryland claims 0.3 TPD emission reduction from two sources: Andrews

Air Force Base and Stone Industrial. EPA is not taking action on this

control strategy in the July 12, 1995 Maryland 15% plan submittal, nor

crediting the 0.3 TPD emission reduction toward the 15% ROP requirement

in this rulemaking.

F. Reasonable Further Progress

The table below summarizes the proposed creditable measures and

those measures which EPA is not taking action on in this rulemaking

from Maryland's 15% plan for the Metropolitan Washington, D.C. area.

Summary of Creditable Emission Reductions in the State of Maryland's 15%

Plan for the Metropolitan Washington, D.C. Serious Ozone Nonattainment

Area

[Tons/day]

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

Creditable Reductions:

FMVCP Tier I.................................................... 1.0

Reformulated Gasoline

On-Road....................................................... 9.2

Off-Road...................................................... 1.2

Autobody Refinishing............................................ 2.5

AIM............................................................. 4.9

Consumer/Commercial Products.................................... 1.7

TCMs............................................................ 0.2

Seasonal Open Burning Restrictions.............................. 3.7

Stage II Vapor Recovery Nozzles................................. 7.9

Stage I Enhancement............................................. 0.9

Enhanced Inspection & Maintenance \1\........................... 21.1

Washington County............................................... 2.1

-------

Total Creditable.............................................. 56.4

Measures EPA is not Taking Action on in This Rulemaking:

Graphic Arts--Offset lithography................................ 1.0

Surface Cleaning and Degreasing................................. 1.5

Non-CTG RACT to 50 TPY.......................................... 0.3

Non-CTG RACT to 25 TPY.......................................... 0.3

Municipal Landfills............................................. 0.7

Pesticide Reformulation......................................... 2.5

-------

Total No Action............................................... 6.3

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

\1\ To conform with EPA's proposal of conditional approval of Maryland's

I/M plan, EPA is proposing conditional approval of the reduction

credits from Maryland's I/M program claimed in Maryland's 15% plan.

EPA has evaluated the July 12, 1995 Maryland submittal for

consistency with the Act, applicable EPA regulations, and EPA policy.

On its face, Maryland's 15% plan achieves the required 15% VOC emission

reduction to meet Maryland's portion of the regional multi-state plan

to achieve the 15% ROP requirements of section 182(b)(1) of the Act.

However, there are measures included in the Maryland 15% plan, which

may be creditable towards the Act requirement but which are

insufficiently documented for EPA to take action on at this time. While

the amount of creditable reductions for certain control measures has

not been adequately documented to qualify for Clean Air Act full

approval, EPA has determined that the submittal for Maryland contains

enough of the required structure to warrant conditional approval.

Furthermore, the July 12, 1995 submittal strengthens the SIP.

Based on EPA's preliminary review of the draft revised regional 15%

plan for the Metropolitan Washington, DC nonattainment area, sent to

EPA for comment by the State on March 4, 1997, EPA believes that the

amount of VOC reduction that Maryland needs to satisfy the 15% ROP

requirement in the Metropolitan Washington, DC area may be lower than

the 56.4 TPD accounted for with creditable measures in the July 12,

1995 submittal. The draft revised plan includes revised information for

the 1990 base year inventory and actual growth between 1990 and 1996,

as opposed to projected growth. The effect of these revisions may lower

the amount of creditable emission reductions Maryland needs to achieve

the 15% ROP requirement.

III. Proposed Action

In light of the above deficiencies and to conform with EPA's

proposed conditional approval of Maryland's I/M program, EPA is

proposing conditional approval of this SIP revision under section

110(k)(4) of the Act.

EPA is proposing conditional approval of the Maryland 15% plan for

the Maryland portion of the Metropolitan Washington, DC nonattainment

area if Maryland commits, in writing, within 30 days of EPA's proposal

to correct the deficiencies identified in this rulemaking. These

conditions are described below. If the State does not make the required

written commitment to EPA within 30 days, EPA is proposing in the

alternative to disapprove the 15% plan SIP revision. If the State does

make a timely commitment, but the conditions are not met by the

specified date within one year, EPA is proposing that the rulemaking

will convert to a final disapproval. EPA would notify Maryland by

letter that the conditions have not been met and that the conditional

approval of the 15% plan has converted to a disapproval. Each of the

conditions must be fulfilled by Maryland and submitted to EPA as an

amendment to the SIP. If Maryland corrects the deficiencies within one

year of conditional approval, and submits a revised 15% plan as a SIP

revision, EPA will conduct rulemaking to fully approve the revision. In

order to make this 15% plan approvable, Maryland must fulfill the

following conditions by no later than 12 months after EPA's final

conditional approval:

1. Maryland's plan must account for growth in point sources.

2. Maryland must meet the conditions listed in the October 31, 1996

conditional I/M rulemaking notice, including its commitment to remodel

the I/M reductions using the following two EPA guidance memos: ``Date

by which States Need to Achieve all the Reductions Needed for the 15

Percent Plan from I/M and Guidance for Recalculation,'' note from John

Seitz and Margo Oge dated August 13, 1996, and ``Modeling 15% VOC

Reductions from I/M in 1999--Supplemental Guidance,'' from Gay

MacGregor and Sally Shaver dated December 23, 1996.

3. Maryland must remodel to determine affirmatively the creditable

reductions from RFG and Tier I in accordance with EPA guidance.

4. Maryland must submit a SIP revision amending the 15% plan with a

determination using appropriate documentation methodologies and credit

calculations that the 56.4 TPD reduction, supported through creditable

emission measures in the submittal, satisfies Maryland's 15% ROP

requirement for the Metropolitan Washington, DC area.

After making all the necessary corrections to establish the

creditability of chosen control measures, Maryland must demonstrate

that 15% emission reduction is obtained in the Washington, DC

nonattainment area as required by section 182(b)(1) of the Act and in

accordance with EPA's policies and guidance.