## UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION III 1650 Arch Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029

SUBJECT: District ofColumbia, District Department of the Environment (DDOE) Nonattainment New Source Review NNSR SIP Revision Request- Addendum to Technical Support



## FROM: Document (TSD) 

# I

David

# Talley**~**T).JPPJ /6 

# 1.--z.h

Permits and TecMtical

# A~s~;s~e~t Branch



## TO: Air Protection**Di~v si**  

## n

# ~ 

# i0/&?3/t'f Andrew Kreider, A ting, Associate Director Office ofPermits and Air Toxics



## Approval and Promulgation ofAir Quality Implementation Plans; District ofColumbia; Preconstruction Requirements-Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR)

Subsequent to the development ofthe initial TSD, on October 6, 2014, EPA took final action to redesignate the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 1997 annual PM2.s NAAQS to attainment. This absolves the District ofany further nonattainment NSR requirements pertaining to PM2.s. Therefore, the proposed rulemaking action will be a full approval, rather than a limited approval, as described inthe original TSD.

### ·~~"

# .."'"9

U5<>0\IU

.....(Nf CPO 

### Federal Register/Val. 79, No. 193 /Monday, October 6, 2014/Rules and R egulations 

### 60081

PART 81-DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES



### • 3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U

.S

.C

. 7401 et seq
.



### Designated area

Clark County: Subpart C-Sectlon 107 Attainment Status Designations



### • 4. Section 81

.329 is amendedby: • a. Removing inthe table under "Nevada-TSP," the entry f or "Las Vegas Valley (2 1 2) (15-24S , 56-64E) " ; and
NEVADA-PM-10 Designation Date Type

Las Vegas planning area

... ............. ........ .. ........ .... November 5, 2014 

### Attainment Hydrographic area 212

.. .... . ..... ........ .. ... ....... .... .. ... ..................... .. .. .......



### * * 

### " * 

### * [FR Doc. 2014-23623 Filed 1Q-3-14; 8:45am] BILLING CODE 656G-5G-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA-R03-0AR-2014-()148; FRL-9917-39- Reglon-3] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia; Approval of the Redeslgnation Requests and Maintenance Plan of the Washington, DC-MD-VA Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter Standard
AGENCY: 

### Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: 

### Final rule.

SUMMARY: 

### The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving the requests from the District ofColumbia (the District), the State ofMaryland (Maryland), and the Commonwealth of Virginia (Virginia) (collectively "the States") to redesignate to attainment their respective portions ofthe Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area (hereafter "the Washington Area" or "the Area") for the 1997 annual fine particulate matter (PMz.s) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard). EPA is also approving, as a revision to their respective State Implementation Plans (SIPs), the common maintenance plan submitted by the States to show maintenance ofthe 1997 annual PMz

.s NAAQS through 2025 for the Washington Area. The Washington Area maintenance plan includes motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for PMz

.s and nitrogen oxides (NOx) for the Area for the 1997 annual PMz

.s standard, which EPA is approving for transportation conformity purposes. These actions are being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: 

### This final rule is effective on November 5, 2014.
ADDRESSES: 

### EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA-R03-0AR-2014-0148. All documents in the docket are listed in the 

### www
.regulations.govWeb site. Although listed in the electronic docket,
some information is not publicly available, i.e., confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically through 

### www.regulations.gov or in hard copy for public inspection during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region lll, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies ofthe State submittals are available at District ofColumbia, Department ofthe Environment, Air Quality Division, 1200 1st Street NE

., 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20002; Maryland Department ofthe Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland 21230; and Virginia Department ofEnvironmental Quality, 629 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219, respectively

. • b. Revising inthe table und

. er "Nevada-PM-10," the entry for "Clark County" to read as follows:
§ 81.329 Nevada. 

### * * * 

### * *

Classification Date Type

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

### Emlyn Velez-Rosa, (215) 814-2038, or by email at 

### velez-rosa.emlyn@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

### I. Background

The District ofColumbia Department ofthe Environment (DDOE), the Maryland Department ofthe Environment (MDE), and the Virginia Department ofEnvironmental Quality (VADEQ) worked together in developing
a combined document to address the requirements for the redesignation to attainment ofthe Washington Area for the 1997 annual PMz.s NAAQS. The States also developed a common maintenance plan as a revision to their respective SIPs to ensure continued attainment ofthe 1997 annual PMz

.s standard in the Washington Area throughout 2025. The 1997 annual PMz.s redesignation requests and maintenance plans for the Washington Area were submitted to EPA byDDOE on June 3, 2013, by MDE onJuly 10, 2013, and by VADEQonJune 3, 2013. The emissions inventories included in the Washington Area maintenance plans were subsequently supplemented by the States to provide for emissions estimates ofVOC and ammonia. The supplemental inventories were submitted to EPA onJuly 22, 2013 by DDOE, onJuly 26, 2013 by MDE, and on July 17,2013 by VADEQ. In addition, the maintenance plan includes the 2017 and 2025 PMz

.s and NOx MVEBs used for transportation conformity purposes for the entire Washington Area for the 1997 annual PMz.s NAAQS.

On August 8, 2014 (79 FR 45735), EPA published a notice ofproposed rulemaking (NPR), proposing to take several rulemaking actions related to the redesignation ofthe Washington Area to

### 60082 

### Federal Register/Val. 79, No. 193/Monday, October 6, 2014/Rules and Regulations

attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.s NAAQS. First, EPA proposed to find that the States met the requirements for redesignation ofthe Washington Area for the 1997 annual PM2.s NAAQS under section 107(d)(3)(E) ofthe CAA. Second, EPA proposed to approve the Washington Area's maintenance plan for the Area as a revision to the District, Virginia, and Maryland SIPs for the 1997 annual PMz.s NAAQS. Third, EPA proposed to approve the MVEBs for PM2

.s and NOx emissions for the 1997 annual PM2

.s standard, which are included as part ofthe Washington Area's maintenance plan. Finally, EPA proposed to find that the Washington Area continues to attain the 1997 annual PM2,s standard.

In the August 8, 2014 NPR, EPA considered the effects ofthree legal decisions on the approval ofthe redesignation requests and maintenance plan: (1) Collectively, the decisions in 

### EMEHomer City Generation, L.P. v. 

### EPA, 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), 

### rev'd, No. 12-1182 (S. Ct. April 29, 2014) from the United States Court ofAppeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit Court) and the United States Supreme Court with respect to the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR); and (2) the January 4, 2013, D.C. Circuit decision remanding to EPA the "Final Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation Rule" (72 FR 20586, April 25, 2007) and the "Implementation ofthe New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PMz.sl" final rule (73 FR 28321, May 16, 2008) (collectively, "1997 PMz

.s Implementation Rule"). 

### Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. 

### EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013).

Specific details ofthe States' submittals and the rationale for EPA's proposed actions are explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. No adverse public comments were received
on the NPR. II. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the Commonwealth ofVirginia

In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit) "privilege" for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden ofprooffor parties either asserting the privilege or seeking disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's legislation also,provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty waiver for violations ofenvironmental laws when a regulated entity discovers such 

# I I violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec

. 10

.1-1198, provides
a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and information about the content ofthose documents that are the product ofa voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not extend to documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2)
are prepared independently ofthe assessment process; (3) demonstrate a clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or environment; or (4) are required by law.

OnJanuary 12, 1998, the Commonwealth ofVirginia Office ofthe Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the Privilege law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege to documents and information "required by law," including documents and information "required by Federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or approval," since Virginia must "enforce Federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less stringent than their Federal counterparts

. * * *"The opinion concludes that "[r]egarding § 10.1-1198, therefore, documents or other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one ofthese programs could not be privileged because such documents and information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required by Federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or approval."

Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that "[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by Federal law," any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a state agency regarding
a violation ofan environmental statute, regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12, 1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute inapplicable to enforcement of any Federally authorized programs, since "no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with Federal law, which is one ofthe criteria for immunity."

Therefore, EPA has determined that Vhginia's Privilege and Immunity

I statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its program consistent with the Federal requirements. In any event, because EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on Federal enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under the CAA, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to enforce the requirements or prohibitions ofthe state plan, independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen enforcement under section 304 ofthe CAA is likewise unaffected by this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law. III. Final Action

EPA is approving the requests submitted by the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth ofVirginia, and the State ofMaryland to redesignate from nonattainment to attainment their respective portions ofthe Washington Area for the 1997 annual PMz.s NAAQS. EPA has evaluated the States' redesignation requests and determined that they meet the redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) ofthe CAA for the 1997 annual PMz

.s standard. In this final rulemaking action, EPA finds that the Washington Area is attaining and will continue to attain the 1997 annual PMz.s NAAQS. EPA is also approving the common maintenance plan for the Washington Area submitted by the States as revisions to their respective SIPs for the 1997 annual PM2.s standard, as the plan meets the requirements ofCAA section 175A for the standard. Furthermore, EPA is approving the 2017 and 2025 MVEBs for PM2

.s and NOx submitted by the States for the Washington Area for transportation conformity determinations with respect to the 1997 annual PM2

.5 NAAQS. Final approval of the redesignation requests will change the official designations ofthe Washington Area, from nonattainment to attainment as found at 40 CFR part 81, for each ofthe States for the 1997 annual PMz.s NAAQS, and will incorporate into the States SIPs the maintenance plan ensuring continued attainment ofthe 1997 annual PM2.s NAAQS in the Area for the next 10 years, until 2025. IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. 

### General Requirements

Under the CAA, redesignation ofan area to attainment and the accompanying approval ofthe

### Federal Register/Val. 79, No. 193/Monday, October 6, 2014/Rules and Regulations 

### 60083

maintenance plan under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the status ofgeographical area and do not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those required by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and ofitself impose any new requirements, but rather results in the application of requirements contained in the CAA for
areas that have been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions ofthe Act and applicable Federal regulations

. 42 U.S

.C

. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:

• Is not a "significant regulatory action" subject to review by the Office ofManagement and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735 , October 4, 1993);

• does not impose an information collectionburden under the provisions ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act ( 44 U.S.C. 3501 

### et seq
.);

• is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

### et seq.);

• does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly oruniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);

• does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

• is not an economically significant regulatory actionbased on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April23, 1997);

• is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

Name of non-regulatory SIP revision • is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) ofthe National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application ofthose requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and

• does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law

. 

### B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U

.S.C. 801 

### et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides thatbefore a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy ofthe rule, to each House ofthe Congress and to the Comptroller General ofthe United States

. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House ofRepresentatives, and the Comptroller General ofthe United States prior to publication ofthe rule in

. the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a "major rule" as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2)

. C. 

### PetitionsforJudicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) ofthe CAA, petitions for judicial review ofthis action mustbe filed in the United States Court ofAppeals for the appropriate circuit by December 5, 2014. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator ofthis final rule does not affect the finality ofthis action for the
Applicable geographic area State submittal

date purposes ofjudicial review nor does it 

### extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action, in which EPA is approving the redesignation requests and maintenance plan submitted by the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the State ofMaryland for the 1997 annual 

### PMz.s NAAQS Washington Area, may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)

.) List ofSubjects 

### 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen oxides, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. 

### 40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

Dated: September 15, 2014. William C. Early, ActingRegionalAdministrator, Region III.



### 40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended
as follows:
PART 52-APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

• 1. 

### The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows :

Authority: 42 U

.S

.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart J-Distrlct of Columbia



### • 2. In§ 52.470, thetable inparagraph (e) is amendedby adding an entry for the 1997 Annual 

### PMz.s Maintenance Plan for the District ofColumbia Portion ofthe Washington, DC-MD-VA Area at the end ofthe table to read as follows: §52.470 Identification of plan. 

### * * 

### * *

(e) 

### * * *

EPA approval date 

### *

Additional explanation

Maintenance plan for the District of Columbia Por- District of Columbia

.... ....

lion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA Nonattain06/03/13 1 0/6/14 [ Insert Federal 

### See §52.477(b). 07/22/13 Register 

### Citation]. ment Area for the 1997 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.s) National Ambient Air Quality Standard.

### 60084 

### Federal Register 

### IVol. 79, 

### No. 193 

### IMonday, October 6, 2014 

### IRules and Regulations

• 3. Section 52.477 is revised to read as follows : §52.477 Control strategy: Particular matter.

(a) 

### Determination of Attainment. EPA has determined, as ofJanuary 12, 2009, that the District ofColumbia portion of the Metropolitan Washington, DC-MDVA nonattainment area for the 1997 PMz.s NAAQS has attained the 1997 PM2 s NAAQS. This determination, in accordance with 40 CFR 52.1004(c), suspends the requirements for this area to submit an attainment demonstration and associated reasonably available control measures, a reasonable further progress plan, contingency measures, and other planning SIPs related to attainment ofthe standard for as long as the area continues to attain the 1997 PM2

.s NAAQS

. (b) 

### Maintenance Plan and Transportation Conformity Budgets. EPA approves the maintenance plan for the District ofColumbia portion ofthe Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 1997 annual PM2• 5 NAAQS submitted by the District ofColumbia for the entire Area on June 3, 2013 and supplemented onJuly 22, 2013. The MVEBs are based on a tiered approach: Tier 1 MVEBs are effective as EPA has determined them adequate for transportation conformity purposes; Tier 2 mobile budgets will become effective upon the completion ofthe interagency consultation process and fully documented within the first conformity analysis that uses the Tier 2 MVEBs.
WASHINGTON, DC-MD-VA PM2

### .s AREA'S TIER 

### 1 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE 

### 1997 ANNUAL PMz

.s NAAQS, (TPY)
Effective Type of control strategy SIP Year NOx PM2s date of SIP approval
Maintenance Plan

••••• • •• • • ••••• • • o oo ooo

- u•o • • •

- • • • ooooo uo oooooooooooo o••• ••••••••• • ••oooooo oo oo• ••••• • •••• • ••••• 2017 41,709 1,787 11/5/14 2025 27,400 1,350

WASHINGTON, DC-MD-VA PM2

### .s AREA'S TIER 

### 2 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE 

### 1997 ANNUAL PM2.s NAAQS, (TPY) Type of control strategy SIP Year NOx Maintenance Plan

.. .. .... .... ....... ...... .. ... ......... .. ... .... ..... ......... 2017 50,051

Subpart V-Maryland

• 4. In§ 52.1070, the table inparagraph (e) is amended by adding an entry for

Name of non

-regulatory SIP revision 2025 32,880

the 1997 Annual PMz5 Maintenance Plan for the Maryland portion ofthe Washington, DC-MD-V A Area at the end ofthe table to read as follows:
Applicable geographic area State submittal

date PMz.s Effective date of SIP approval 2,144 Conti ngent and effective upon interagency consultation

. 1,586

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan. 

### * * *

(e) 

### * 

### * *

EPA approval date 

### *

Additional explanation

Maintenance plan for the Maryland Portion of the Statewide

.......... .. .... .. ...... 07/10/13 10/6/14 [Insert Federal See §52.1081(d).

Washington, DC-MD-VA Nonattainment Area for the 1997 annual fine particulate matter (PM2 s) National Ambient Air Quality Standard. 07/26/13 Register Citation).



### * * * * *

• 5. Section 52.1081 is amendedby adding paragraph (d) to read as follows : §52.1081 Control strategy: Particular matter. 

### * * * * *

(d) 

### Maintenance Plan and 

### Transportation Conformity Budgets. EPA approves the maintenance plan for the Maryland portion ofthe Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 1997 annual PMz..s NAAQS submitted by the State of Maryland for the entire Area onJuly 10, 2013 and supplemented on July 26, 2013. The maintenance plan includes motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) to be applied to all future transportation conformity determinations and analyses for the entire Washington, DC-MD-VA PMz

.s Area for the 1997 PM2.s NAAQS. The MVEBs are based on a tiered approach: Tier 1 MVEBs are effective as EPA has determined them adequate for transportation conformity purposes; Tier 2 mobile budgets will become effective upon the completion ofthe interagency consultation process and fully documented within the first conformity analysis that uses the Tier 2 MVEBs.

### Federal Register/Val. 79, No. 193/Monday, October 6, 2014/Rules and Regulations 60085

WASHINGTON, DC-MD-VA PM2.s AREA'S TIER 

### 1 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE 

### 1997 ANNUAL PM2.s NAAQS, (TPY)
Effective Type of control strategy SIP Year NOx PMz.s date of SIP approval
Maintenance Plan**~·• ••••** **•• ••** **••• ••** **•• •••** **•• •••** **•••• •••** **•• ••** **•• ••** **••• ••** **•l ••** **••• •••** **•• uul** **o• •••**  2017 41,709 1,787 11/5/14 2025 27,400 1,350

WASHINGTON, DC-MD-VA PM2.s AREA'S TIER 

### 2 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE 

### 1997 ANNUAL PM2.s NAAQS, (TPY) Type of control strategy SIP Year NOx
Maintenance Plan

.... .... .... ... ...... ...... ... .................... .. ..... ..... 2017 50,051

Subpart VV-Virginia

• 6. In§ 52.2420, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an entry for

Name of non·regulatory SIP revision 2025 32,880

the 1997 Annual PMz.s Maintenance Plan for the Virginia Portion ofthe Washington, DC-MD-VA Area at the end ofthe table to read as follows:
Applicable geographic area State submittal

date PMz

.s Effective date of SIP approval 2,144 Contingent and effective upon interagency consultation. 1,586

§ 52.2420 Identification of plan.



# .. * * 

### *

(e) 

### * 

### * *

EPA approval date 

### *

Additional explanation

Maintenance plan for the Virginia Portion of the Statewide

... ................... . . 06/03/13 10/6/14 [Insert Federal See §52.2429(b).

Washington, DC-MD-VA Nonattainment Area for the 1997 Annual PMz.s National Ambient Air Quality Standard. 07/17/13 Register Citation].



### * * * * *
• 7. Section 52.2429 is amendedby designating the existing text as paragraph (a) and adding paragraph (b).

The addition reads as follows: § 52.2429 Control strategy: Particular maHer. 

### * * * * *

(b) 

### Maintenance Plan and Transportation ConformityBudgets. EPA approves the maintenance plan for the Virginia portion ofthe Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 1997 annual PM2.s NAAQS submitted by the Commonwealth ofVirginia for the entire Area onJune 6, 2013 and supplemented on July 17, 2013. The maintenance plan includes motor vehicle emissionbudgets (MVEBs) to be applied to all future transportation conformity determinations and analyses for the entire Washington, DC-MD-VA PMz.s Area for the 1997 PMz.s NAAQS. The MVEBs are based on a tiered approach: Tier 1 MVEBs are effective as EPA has determined them adequate for transportation conformity purposes; Tier 2 mobile budgets will become effective upon the completion ofthe interagency consultation process and fully documented within the first conformity analysis that uses the Tier 2 MVEBs. WASHINGTON, DC-MD-VA PM2.s AREA'S TIER 

### 1 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE 

### 1997 ANNUAL PM2.s NAAQS, (TPY)
Effective Type of control strategy SIP Year NOx PMzs date of SIP approval
Maintenance Plan



### ··· ······· ·········· ····· ····· ···· ···· ···· ·············· ······ ······· ······ ···· ················· 2017 41,709 1,787 11/5/14 2025 27,400 1,350

WASHINGTON, DC-MD-VA PM2.s AREA'S TIER 

### 2 MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE 

### 1997 ANNUAL PM2.s NAAQS, (TPY) Type of control strategy SIP Year NOx PMz.s Effective date of SIP approval
Maintenance Plan

.... ... ... ... .. ... .. .............. ...... .... .. .. .. ........ .... 2017 50,051 2,144 Contingent and effective upon interagency consultation. 2025 32,880 1,586

### 60086 Federal Register/Val. 79, No. 193/Monday, October 6, 2014/Rules and Regulations

PART 81-DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. § 81.309 District of Columbia.

• 8. The authority citationfor part 81 continues to read as follows: • 9. In§ 81.309, revise the table for "District ofColumbia-1997 Annual PMz.s NAAQS [Primary and secondary]" to read as follows: 

## • *

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA-1997 ANNUAL PM2.s NAAQS [Primary and secondary] 

### *

Designation a Designated area

Washington, DC-MD:-VA: District of Columbia

.......................................................................................................

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 1 This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted. Date 1 Type

10/6/14 Attainment 

## •

* 

### * * * 

### * removing footnote number 2 in the table and revising the entries for the Washington, DC-MD-VA Area to read
as follows: §81.321 Maryland.
• 10. In§ 81.321, the table for Maryland-1997 Annual PMz s NAAQS [Primary and secondary] is amended by 

### * * *

MARYLAND--1997 ANNUAL PM2.s NAAQS [Primary and secondary]

Designated area

Washington, DC-MD-VA: Charles County

. ... ... .. .... .. ... .. .... ... ..... ... ........ ... .. ... ... ....... ...... .... ... ........ ........ .... ... ........ ... . Frederick County

........ ... .... .... ... ... .. .... .. ... ................ .. ......... .. ...... ... ......... ... .................... . Montgomery County

.......................................................... .. ... .... ... ............ .. .............. .. .. Prince George's County

.. ..............................................................................................

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 1 This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted. Designation a Date 1 Type

10/6/14 Attainment 10/6/14 Attainment 10/6/14 Attainment 10/6/14 Attainment 

### *

* * 

### * * * and secondary] is amended by removing footnote number 2 in the table and revising the entries for the Washington, DC-MD-VA Area to read as follows: § 81.347 Virginia.

• 11. In§ 81.347, the table for Virginia1997 Annual PMz.s NAAQS [Primary

VIRGINIA-1997 ANNUAL PM2.s NAAQS [Primary and secondary] 

### * * 

### *

Designation a Designated area Date 1 Type Washington, DC-MD-VA: Arlington County

..................... ..... .. ................ .. .... .. ............................ ..... .......... .. ........... 10/6/14 Attainment Fairfax County

........ .... .. . ........ ... .... .. ....... .. .. ... .. ....... .. .. .... .... .. .... ..... ...... ..... ......... ........... .. 10/6/14 Attainment Loudoun County

.... ................ . ............................... ........... ........... ........ .. ........................ 10/6/14 Attainment Prince William County

.................................................................................................... 10/6/14 Attainment Alexandria City

... ...................... .. ................................................... ................. ............... 10/6/14 Attainment Fairfax City

.. .. ....... .. ... ... ..... ............ .... .. . .. ............... ............. ................ .... ................... .. .. 10/6/14 Attainment Falls Church City

..................................... ......................... ........................ ..... ... .. ....... ... . 10/6/14 Attainment Manassas City

............ ... ........ . .. ........ .... .. ......... .. .... ... .... .... . .. .... .. . .. ... .... ........ .............. .. .. 10/6/14 Attainment Manassas Park City

....... ... .... .. .......... .. ..... .............. .................. .. ......... .. ........................ 10/6/14 Attainment

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 1 This date is 90 days after January 5, 20op, unless otherwise noted. · 

### * Classification
Date Type



### *

Classification
Date Type



## •

Classification
Date Type

### Federal Register/Val. 79, No. 193/Monday, October 6, 2014/Rules and Regulations 60087



### * * 

### * * * [FR Doc. 2014-23624 Filed 10-3-14; 8:45am] BILLING CODE 656D-5D-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 312 [EPA-HQ-SFUND-2014-0474; FRL-9917- 28-0SWER) Amendment to Standards and Practices for All Appropriate Inquiries AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending the standards and practices for conducting all appropriate inquiries under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) to remove the reference to ASTM International's E1527-05 standard practice. This 2005 standard practice was replaced with an updated standard, the E1527-13, by ASTM International, a widely recognized standards development organization. Specifically, EPA is amending the "All Appropriate Inquiries Rule" to remove the reference to ASTM International's E1527-05 "Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process." DATES: The effective date for this action is October 6, 2015. ADDRESSES: Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in 

### www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the HQEPA Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC

. The Public Reading Room at this docket facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays

. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Superfund Docket is (202) 566-9744. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information, contact the CERCLA Call Center at 800-424-9346 or TDD 800-553-7672 (hearing impaired). In the Washington, DC metropolitan area, call 703-412-9810 or TDD 703- 412-3323. For more detailed information on specific aspects ofthis rule, contact Patricia Overmeyer, Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization (5105T), U

.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460-0002, 202- 566-2774, 

### overmeyer.patricia@epa.gov

. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table ofContents I. Regulated Entities II. Statutory Authority III. Background IV. Sununary ofConunents and EPA Responses V. Overview ofToday's Action VI. Effective Date ofFinal Action VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Regulated Entities

The EPA is removing the reference to the 2005 ASTM standard in the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule at 40 CFR part 312 (70 FR 66070, as amended). In November 2013, ASTM International replaced its 2005 standard (ASTM E1527-05 "Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process") with an updated standard, ASTM E1527-13 "Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process." The updated 2013 standard is
a currently recognized industry consensus-based standard to conduct all appropriate inquiries as provided under CERCLA. In December 2013 , EPA published a final rule indicating that parties who acquire potentially contaminated properties and brownfields grantees using EPA brownfield grant funding to conduct site characterizations and assessments may use the ASTM E1527-13 standard practice when conducting all appropriate inquiries pursuant to CERCLA (78 FR 79319). Today's rule does not include any changes to the standards and practices included in the All Appropriate Inquiries Rule (AAI Rule). Any party who wants to meet the provisions under CERCLA to conduct
all appropriate inquiries may follow the standards and procedures set forth in the AAI Rule at 40 CFR part 312 or use the new ASTM E1527-13 standard, as provided in the AAI Rule.

Persons potentially affected by this action are those who perform all appropriate inquiries, including public and private entities who intend to claim protection from CERCLA liability as bona fide prospective purchasers, contiguous property owners, or innocent landowners. In addition, any person conducting a site characterization or assessment on a property with a brownfields grant awarded under CERCLA section 104(k)(2)(B)(ii) may be affected by today's action. This includes state, local and tribal governments that receive brownfields site assessment grants. A summary ofthe potentially affected industry sectors (by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes) is displayed in the table below. Industry category
Real Estate

......... 531 Insurance

......... .. . 52412 Banking/Real Es- 52292

tate Credit. Environmental 54162

Consulting SeiVices. NAICS code

State, Local and 926110, 925120

Tribal Government. Federal Govern- 925120, 921190, 924120

ment.

The list ofpotentially affected persons in the above table may not be exhaustive. Our aim is to provide a guide for readers regarding those entities that EPA is aware potentially could be affected by this action. II. StatutoryAuthority

Today's·action, which amends the AAI Rule at 40 CFR part 312 setting Federal standards for the conduct of "all appropriate inquiries," is authorized under section 101(35)(B) ofCERCLA (42 U.S.C. 9601), as amended by the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2002. III. Background

OnJanuary 11, 2002, President Bush signed the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, Public Law 107-118 ("the Brownfields Amendments"), which amended CERCLA. In general, the Brownfields Amendments provide funds to assess and clean up brownfields sites; clarify CERCLA liability provisions related to certain purchasers ofcontaminated properties; and provide funding to enhance state and tribal cleanup programs. Subtitle B ofthe Brownfields Amendments added
new limitations on CERCLA liability under section 107 for bona fide prospective purchasers andcontiguous property owners and clarified the requirements necessary to establish the innocent landowner defense under CERCLA. The Brownfields Amendments also revised section 101(35) ofCERCLA to provide that parties acquiring contaminated or potentially contaminated property must undertake "all appropriate inquiries" into prior ownership and use ofthe property prior