ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R03-OAR-2009-0957; FRL- 

## 1 Approval and Promulgation ofAir Quality Implementation Plans; Maryland; 2002 Base

Year Emission Inventory, Reasonable FurtherProgress Plan, Contingency Measures, Reasonably Available Control Measures, and Transportation Conformity Budgets for the Baltimore 1997 8-Hour Moderate Ozone NonattainmentArea AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve arevisionto the Maryland State Implementation Plan (SIP) to meet the 2002 base year emissions inventory, the reasonable furtherprogress (RFP) plan, RFP contingency measure, and reasonably available control measure (RACM) requirements ofthe Clean Air Act (CAA) forthe Baltimore moderate 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainmentarea. EPA is also proposing to approve the transportation conformity motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) and associated with this revision. EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision because it satisfies the emission inventory, RFP, RACM, RFP contingency measures, and transportation conformity requirements for areas classified as moderate nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) and demonstrates further progress inreducing ozone precursors. EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revisionpursuantto section 110 and part D ofthe CAA and EPA’s regulations. DATES: Written comments mustbe received on orbefore [insert date 30 days from date of publication]. ADDRESSES: Submityour comments, identifiedby DocketID NumberEPA-R03-OAR-2009-0957 by one ofthe following methods: A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. B. E-mail: fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2009-0957, CristinaFernandez, Associate Director, Office ofAir Program Planning, Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket’s normal hours ofoperation, and special arrangements shouldbe made for deliveries ofboxed information. Instructions: Directyour comments to Docket ID No. EPA- R03-OAR-2009-0957. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included inthe public docketwithout change, and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including anypersonal information provided, unless the commentincludes information claimedto be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restrictedby statute. Do not submit informationthatyou considerto be CBI or otherwise protectedthrough www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov website is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will notknow your identity or contact informationunless you provide it in the body ofyour comment. Ifyou send, an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address’will be automatically captured and included as part of the commentthat is placed in the public docket and made available onthe Internet. Ifyou submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends thatyou include yourname and other contact information inthe body ofyour comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. IfEPA 2cannotread your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consideryour comment. Electronic files should avoid the use ofspecial characters, any form ofencryption, and be free ofany defects or viruses. Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is notpublicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is notplaced on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal are available at the Maryland Department ofthe Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, Maryland 21230. FORFURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MariaA. Pino, (215) 814-2181, or by e-mail at pino.mariaepa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughoutthis document, whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA. The following is provided to aid in locating information inthis document. I. WhatAction is EPA Taking? II. What is the Background ofThis Action? 3III. Whatis EPA’s Evaluation ofthe Revision? IV. Statutory and Executive OrderReviews I. WhatAction is EPA Taking? EPA is proposing to approve arevision to the Maryland SIP submitted by the Maryland Department ofthe Environment (MDE) on June 4, 2007 to meetthe emissions inventory and RFP requirements ofthe CAA for the Baltimore moderate 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area (NAA). EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 base year emissions inventory, the 15 percent REP plan and associatedprojected 2008 emission inventories, the contingency measures for failure to meet 2008 REP, the RACM analysis, and the REP 2008 MVEBs. The REP plan demonstrates that emissions will be reduced 15 percent forthe period of2002 through 2008. The volatile organic compound (VOC) MVEB is 41.2 tons per day (tpd) and the nitrogen oxides (NOx) MVEB is 106.8 tpd. EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revisionbecause it satisfies RFP, contingency measure, RACM, REP transportation conformity, and emissions inventory requirements for areas classified as moderate nonattainmentforthe 1997 8-hour ozoneNAAQS and demonstrates furtherprogress in reducing ozone precursors. EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision pursuantto section 110 and partD ofthe CAA and EPA’s regulations.
II. What is the Background for This Action? In 1997, EPA revised the health-basedNAAQS for ozone, setting it at 0.08 parts per million (ppm) averaged over an 8-hour time frame. EPA setthe 8-hour ozone standard based on scientific evidence demonstrating that ozone causes adverse health effects at lower ozone concentrations and over longerperiods oftime, than was understood whenthe pre-existing 41-hour ozone standard was set. EPA determined thatthe 8-hour standard wouldbe more protective ofhuman health, especially children and adults who are active outdoors, and individuals with apre-existing respiratory disease, such as asthma. On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951), EPA finalized its attainment/nonattainment designations for areas across the country with respectto the 8-hour ozone standard. These actions became effective on June 15, 2004. Among those nonattainment areas is the Baltimore moderateNAA. This NAA includes Baltimore City and Anne Arundel., Baltimore, Carroll, Harford, and Howard Counties, all in Maryland. These designations triggered the CAA’s section 1 l0(a)(1) requirementthat states must submit attainment demonstrations fortheirnonattainrnent areas to EPA by no laterthanthree years after the promulgation ofaNAAQS. Accordingly, EPA’s Phase 1 8-hour ozone implementation rule (Phase 1 rule), published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951), specifies that states must submit attainment demonstrations fortheirnonattainment areas to the EPA by no laterthanthree years from the effective date ofdesignation, thatis, by June 15, 2007.
Pursuantto the Phase 1 rule, an areawas classified under subpart 2 ofthe CAA based on its 8- hour design value ifthat areahad a 1-hour design value at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour design value in Table 1 ofsubpart 2). Based on this criterion, the Baltimore ozoneNAA was classified under subpart 2 as amoderate nonattainment area.

5On November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71612), as revised on June 8, 2007 (72 FR 31727), EPA published the Phase 2 final rule for implementation ofthe 8-hour standard (Phase 2 rule). The Phase 2 rule addressed the RFP control andplanning obligations as they apply to areas designated nonattainment forthe 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Among other things, the Phase 1 and 2 rules outline the SIP requirements and deadlines for various requirements in areas designated as moderate nonattainment. The rules furtherrequire thatmodeling and attainment demonstrations, reasonable furtherprogress plans, reasonably available control measures, projectionyear emission inventories, motorvehicle emissions budgets, and contingency measures were all due by June 15, 2007 (40 CFR 5 1.908(a), (c)). Section 182(b)(1) ofthe CAA and EPA’s 1997 8-hour ozone implementationrule (40 CFR 51.910) require each 8-hour ozone nonattainment area designated moderate and above to submit an emissions inventory and RFP Plan, forreviewand approval into its SIP, that describes how the area will achieve actual emissions reductions ofVOC and NOx from abaseline emissions inventory.
III. What is EPA’s Evaluation ofthe Revision? EPA’s analysis and findings are discussed inthis proposedrulemaking and amore detailed discussion is contained inthe Technical Support Documentforthis Proposal which is available on line at www.regulations.gov, Docket numberEPA-R03-OAR-2009-0957. On June 4, 2007, Maryland submitted acomprehensiveplan forthe Baltimore NAAto address
6the CAA’s 8-hour ozone attainmentrequirements that were identified earlier (the Baltimore 8- hour ozone plan). The SIP submittal included an attainment demonstration plan, RFP plans for 2008 and 2009, aRACM analysis, contingency measures, on-road VOC andNOx MVEBs, and the 2002 base year emissions inventory. These SIP revisions were subjectto notice and comment by the public and the State addressedthe comments received onthe proposed SIPs. All sections ofthis SIP submittal with the exception ofthe attainment demonstrationplan will be discussed in this rulemaking. The attainment demonstration plan sections ofthis SIP submittal will be discussed in a separate rulemaking. A. Base YearEmissions Inventory An emissions inventory is a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory ofactual emissions from all sources and is required by section 172(c)(3) ofthe CAA. For ozone nonattainment areas, the emissions inventory needs to containVOC and NOx emissions because these pollutants are precursors to ozone formation. EPA recommended 2002 as the base year emissions inventory, and is therefore the starting point for calculating RFP. Maryland submitted its 2002base year emissions inventory on Jufie 4, 2007. A summary ofthe BaltimoreNAA 2002 base yearVOC andNOx emissions inventories is included in Table 1, below. Table 1. Baltimore NAA 2002 Base Year VOC & NOx Emissions in Tons perDay (tpd) Emission Source Category VOC NOx Point 13.88 111.88 StationaryArea 116.81 8.18 Non-RoadMobile 70.22 40.96 On-Road Mobile 70.57 177.06 Total (excluding Biogenics) 271.48 338.08 Biogenics 223.20 0

7B. Adjusted Base Year Inventory and 2008 RFP TargetLevels Theprocess for determining the emissions baseline from whichthe RFP reductions are calculated is descrfled in section 182(b)(1) ofthe CAA and 40 CFR 5 1.910. This baseline value is the 2002 adjusted base year inventory. Sections 1 82(b)(1)(B) and (D) require the exclusion fromthe base year inventory ofemissions benefits resulting from the Federal MotorVehicle Control• Program (FMVCP) regulations promulgated by January 1, 1990, and the Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) regulations promulgated June 11, 1990 (55 FR 23666). The FMVCP and RVP emissions reductions, are determined by the State using EPA’s on-road mobile source emissions modeling software, MOBILE6. The FMVCP and RVP emissionreductIons are thenremoved fromthe base year inventory by the State, resulting in an adjustedbase year inventory. The emission reductions needed to satisfythe RFP requirement are then calculated fromthe adjusted base year inventory. These reductions are then subtracted from the adjustedbase year inventory to establish the emissions target forthe RFP milestoneyear (2008).
For moderate areas like the Baltimore NAA, the CAA specifies a 15 percentreduction in ozone precursor emissions over an initial six yearperiod. Inthe Phase 2 Rule, EPA interpreted this requirement for areas that were also designatednonattainment and classified as moderate or higher for the 1-hour ozone standard. In the Phase 2 Rule, EPA providedthat an area classified as moderate orhigherthathas the same boundaries as an area, or is entirely composed ofseveral areas orportions ofareas, for which EPA fully approved a 15.percentplan for the 1-hour NAAQS, is considered to have metthe requirements ofsection 1 82(b)(1) ofthe CAA forthe 8- hourNAAQS. In this situation, amoderate nonattainment area is subjectto RFP under section 172(c)(2) ofthe CAA and shall submit, no laterthan 3 years after designation forthe 8-hour 8NAAQS, a SIP revisionthat meets the requirements of40 CFR 51.91 0(b)(2). The RFP SIP revision must provide fOr a 15 percent emission reduction (eitherNOx and/or VOC) accounting for any growth that occurs during the six yearperiod following the baseline emissions inventory year, that is, 2002-2008. The Baltimore ozone NAA under the 1-hour ozOne standard hadthe same boundary as the Baltimore NAA under the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. The Baltimore nonattainment areaunder the 1-hour ozone standard was classified as severe. EPA approvedMaryland’s 15% plan forthe Baltimore severe ozone nonattainment area on February 2, 2000 (65 FR 5252). Therefore, according to the Phase 2 Rule, the RFP plan for the Baltimore NAA may use eitherNOx or VOC emissions reductions (orboth) to achieve the 15 percent emission reduction requirement. According to section 1 82(b)(1)(D) ofthe CAA, emissionreductions thatresulted from the FMVCP and Reid Vapor Pressure RVP rules promulgatedprior to 1990 are not creditable for achieving RFP emission reductions. Therefore, the 2002 base year inventory is adjusted by subtracting the VOC andNOX emissionreductions that are expected to occurbetween 2002 and the future milestone years due to the FMVCP and RVP rules. Maryland sets out its calculations fOrthe adjusted base year inventory and 2008 RFP target levels in Section 5 ofthe Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. Step 1. Calculate the Baltimore NAA 2002 anthropogenic base year inventory. This is found in Table 5-1 ofthe Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan, and shown in Table 2, below. 9Table 2. Baltimore NAA 2002 Anthropogenic Base YearInventory (Ozone Season tpd) Source Category VOC NOx Point 13.88 111.88 Area 116.81 8.18 Non-Road 70.22 40.96 On-Road 70.57 177.06 TOTAL 271.48 338.08 Step 2. Maryland calculatedthe non-creditable emissionreductions between 2002 and 2008 by modeling its 2002 and 2008 motor vehicle emissions with all post-1990 CAA measures turned off, and calculating the difference. See, Table 3, below. Table 3. Baltimore NAA Non-Creditable Emission Reductions (Ozone Season tpd)

Source Category (i) 2002 On-Road 101.876 211.145 (ii)2008 On-Road 92.778 188.541 Non-creditable Reductions (i)

— (ii) 9.10 22.60 Step 3. Maryland’s calculations ofthe Baltimore NAA 2002 VOC andNOx inventories adjusted relative to 2008 and VOC andNOx target levels for 2008 are found in Table 5-4 and Appendix C ofthe Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan, and are summarized in Table 4, below. Table 4. Baltimore NAA 2008 RFP TargetLevel Calculations (Ozone Season tpd)

C. Projected Inventories and Determination ofRFP Maryland describes its methods used for developing its 2008 projected VOC andNOx inventories in Section 4.0 and Appendix B ofthe Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. Projected VOC NOx

Description Formula VOC NOx A 2002 Rate-OfProgress Base YearInventory 271.48 338.08 B FMVCP/RVP Reductions Between 2002 And 2008 9.10 22.60 C ‘2002 Adjusted Base Year Inventory Relative To 2008 A

- B 262.38 315.48 D FP Reductions Totaling 15% 8% 7% E Emissions Reductions Required Between 2002 & 2008 C * D 20.99 22.08 F [‘argetLevelfor2008 C-E 241.39 293.40

10uncontrolled and controlled 2008 VOC andNOx emissions are found inAppendix C ofthe Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. EPA reviewed the procedures Marylandused to develop its projected inventories and found them to be reasonable. Projected controlled 2008 emissions forthe Baltimore NAA are summarized in Table 4-3 ofthe Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. The data from Table 4-3 is presented below, in Table 5, below. Table 5. Baltimore NAA 2008 Projected Controlled VOC & NOx Emissions (tpd) • Emission Source VOC Emissions NOx Emissions Category (tpd) (tpd) Point 15.63 122.64 Area 108.17 8.43 Non-road 54.21 39.60 Mobile 41.23 106.84 Total 219.25 277.50 To determine if2008 RFP is met in the Baltimore NAA, the total projected controlled emissions must be compared to the target levels calculated in the previous section ofthis document. As shown below in Table 6, the total VOC andNOx emissionprojections meetthe 2008 emission targets. Therefore, the 2008 RFP in the Baltithore NAA is demonstrated. Table 6. Determination ofwhetherR1?P is met in 2008 in the Baltimore NAA

. . VOC Emissions NOx Emissions Description (tpd) (tpd) A Total 2008 Projected ControlledEmissions 219.25 277.50 B Target Level for2008 241.39 293.40 RFP met ifA < B Yes Yes
D. Control Measures and Emission Reductions for RFP The control measure Marylandtookcredit for in orderto meetthe RFP requirementinthe Baltimore NAA are described in Section 6.0 ofthe Baltimore 8-hour ozoneplan. Marylandused 11a combination ofon-roadmobile, non-road mobile, and area source control measures to meetthe RFP requirement for the BaltimoreNAA. The on-road mobile measures Maryland used to meet 2008 RFP inthe BaltimoreNAA include enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance (enhanced JIM)
, TierI vehicle emission standards and new federal evaporative testprocedures (Tier I), reformulated gasoline, the national low emission vehicle (NLEV) program, and the federal heavy-duty diesel engine (HDDE) rule. Maryland calculatedthe emission reductions for 2008 RFP using the MOBILEmodel forthese on-road mobile measures. EPA reviewed the procedures that MDE used to develop its projected inventories, including the use ofthe MOBILE model, and foundthem to be reasonable. Maryland calculated the on-road mobile 2008 emission reductions to be 42.45 tpd VOC and 59.10 tpdNOx. The non-road measures Maryland used to meet 2008 RFP inthe Baltimore NAA include nonroad small gasoline engines, non-road diesel engines (Tier I and Tier II), marine engine standards, emission standards for large spark engines, and reformulated gasoline used in nonroad motor vehicles and equipment. Maryland used the NONROAD model to calculate emission reductions fromthese non-road measures. EPA reviewedthe procedures thatMDE used to develop its projected inventories, including the use oftheNONROAD model, and foundthemto be reasonable. Maryland calculated.the non-road mobile 2008 emission reductions to be 17.89 tpd VOC and 6.74 tpdNOx. The othermeasures thatMaryland used to meetRFP inthe BaltimoreNAA are railroad engine

12standards (Tier 2), the consumer and commercial products rule (Phase I), the architectural and industrial (AIM) coatings rule, and the portable fuel containers rule (Phase I). In the Technical Support Document (TSD) for this action, EPA evaluates each ofthese measures and calculated the projected 2008 emission for each measure. For details, please referto EPA’s TSD. The tier 2 railroad engine standards for newly manufactured and remanufactured diesel-powered locomotives and locomotive engines took effect in 2000. EPA calculated 2008 emission reductions fromrailroad engine to be 1.37 tpdNOx. A federal measure requires reformulation ofAIM coatings, which are field-applied coatings used by industry, contractors, and homeowners to coat houses, buildings, highway surfaces, and industrial equipment for decorative orprotective purposes. Maryland’s AIM rule was effective on March 29, 2004. EPA calculated 2008 emission reductions from Maryland’s AIM rule to be 6.02 tpd VOC. The phase I commercial and consumerproducts rule requires the reformulation ofcertain consumerproducts to reduce their VOC content. Maryland’s consumerproducts rule was effective on August 18, 2003. EPA calculated 2008 emissionreductions from Maryland’s consumer and commercial products rule to be 3.70 tpd VOC. The phase I portable fuel containers rule introduces performance standards forportable fuel containers and spouts, and is intendedto reduce emissions from storage, transport and refueling activities. Maryland’s portable fuel containerrule was effective on January 21, 2002. EPA 13calculated 2008 emission reductions from Maryland’s portable fuel containers rule to be 8.13 tpd VOC. Table 7 summarizes the emissionreductions thatMaryland claimed in the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan to meetRFP in the Baltimore NAA. For certain control measures, the 2008 projected emissionreductions calculatedby EPA differ from the 2008 projected emissionreductions that MDE is taking credit for in the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. The total 2008 projected emission reductions calculated by EPA are greaterthanthe emission reductions claimed by MDE in the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. Therefore, the emission reductions claimed inthe Baltimore 8- hour ozone plan are approvable. Table 7. Control Measures and 2008 Emission Reductions in the Baltimore

ontrol Measure VOC (tpd) NOx (tpd) On-roadMobile Measures 42.45 59.10 Non-road Model 17.89 6.74 Railroads (Tier 2) 0.OO 1.18 OTC

- ConsumerProducts Phase 1 3.70 0.00 OTC

— AIM Coatings 6.03 0.00 OTC

— Portable Fuel Containers Phase 1 6.71 0.00 Total 76.78 67.02 E. Contingency Measures Section 172(c)(9) ofthe CAA requires a state with amoderate or above ozone nonattainment areato include sufficient additional contingency measures in its RFP plan in case the areafails to meet RFP. The same provision ofthe CAA also requires that the contingency measures mustbe fully adopted control measures orrules. Upon failure to meet an RFP milestone requirement, the state mustbe able to implementthe contingency measures without any furtherrulemaking activities. Upon implementation ofsuchmeasures, additional emissionreductions ofatleast 3 14percent ofthe adjusted 2002 baseline emissions must be achieved. For more information on contingency measures, see the April 16, 1992 General Preamble (57 FR 13512) and the November 29, 2005 Phase 2 8-hour ozone implementationrule (70 FR 71612). To meetthe requirements for contingency emissionreductions, EPA allows states to use NOx emissionreductions to substitute for VOC emissionreductions intheir contingencyplans. However, MDE chose to use only VOC reductions to meetthe contingency measure requirement in the Baltimore NAA. MDE discusses its BaltimoreNAA contingency measures for failure to meetRFP in Section 10.2 ofthe Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. MDE calculated the contingency VOC reduction for the Baltimore NAA as shown in Table 8, below. The RFP contingency requirement may be met by including inthe RFP plan a demonstration of 18 percentVOC & NOx RFP. The additional 3 percentreduction above the 15 percentrequirement mustbe attributed to specific measures. Table 8. Baltimore NAA 2008 RFP Contingency Measure TargetLevel Calculations

Description Formula VOC NOx A 2002 Rate-OfProgress Base YearInventory 271.48 338.08 B FMVCP/RVP Reductions Between 2002 And 2008 9.10 22.60 C 2002 Adjusted Base YearInventory Relative To 2008 A

- B 262.38 315.48 D RFP Reductions Totaling 15% 8% 7% E RFP Emissions Reductions Required Between 2002 & 2008 C * D 20.99 22.08 F Contingency Percentage 3.00 0.00 C Contingency Emission Reduction Requirements C * F 7.87 0.00 H Contingency Measure TargetLevel for 2008 C E

— G 233.52 293.40 To determine ifMaryland metthe three percent contingency measure requirementforthe Baltimore NAA, the total projected controlled emissions mustbe comparedto the contingency measure target levels calculated above. As shown below in Table 9, the total VOC andNOx 15emission projections meetthe 2008 contingency measure targets. Therefore, MDEhas metthe contingency measure requirement forthe Baltimore NAA. Table 9. Evaluation ofthe Baltimore NAA 2008 RYP Contingency Measure Requirement

. Description VOC (tpd) NOx(tpd) A Total 2008 Projected Controlled Emissions 219.25 277.50 B Contingency Measure Target Level for 2008 233.52 293.40 Contingency measure requirement met ifA < B Yes Yes
F. RACM Analysis Pursuant to section 172(c)(1) ofthe CAA, states are required to implement all RACM as expeditiously as practicable for each nonattainment area. Specifically, section 172(c)(1) states the following: “In general—Suchplanprovisions shall provide for the implementation ofall reasonably available control measures as expeditiously as practicable (including suchreductions in emissions from existing sources in the area as may be obtained throughthe adoption, at a minimum, ofreasonably available control technology) 

### and shall provide for attainment ofthe national primary ambient air quality standards.” Furthermore, in EPA’s Phase 2 Rule, EPA describes how states must include a RACM analysis withtheir attainmentdemonstration (70 FR 71659). The purpose ofthe RACM analysis is to determine whether ornotreasonably available control measures existthat would advance the attainment date fornonattainmentareas. Control measures that would advance the attainment date are considered RACM and mustbe included in the SIP. RACM are necessary to ensure thatthe attainment date is achieved “as expeditious as practicable.” RACM is defined by the EPA as any potential control measure for applicationto point, area, on-road and non-road emission source categories thatmeets the following criteria:

. The control measure s technologically feasible
16o The control measure is economically feasible

• The control measure does not cause “substantial widespread and long-term adverse impacts”

o The control measure is not “absurd, unenforceable, or impracticable”

• The control measure can advance the attainmentdate by at least one year. MDE addresses the RACM requirement in Section 7.0 andAppendix B ofthe Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. To meetthe RACM requirement, Maryland must demonstrate that ithas adopted all RACM necessary to move the BaltimoreNAA toward attainment as expeditiously as practicable and to meet all RFP requirements. As demonstrated above in Sections C and D ofthis document, Maryland has met the RFP requirements forthe Baltimore NAA.
MDE used two independently developed lists ofpotential control measures for its RACM analysis. The first list consists ofthe RACM analysis performed forthe Washington, DC NAA’s 8-hour ozone plan. The second list ofmeasures was developed by the Baltimore Metropolitan Council (BMC) with MDE in 2006. These measures are evaluated in Appendices E-l and E-2 of the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. EPA has reviewed MDE’s RACM analysis In the TSD forthis action. MDE evaluated all source categories that could contribute meaningful emissionreductions, and evaluated an extensive list ofpotential control measures. MDE consideredthe time neededto develop and adopt regulations and the time it would take to see the benefit from these measures. EPA concurs with MDE’ s conclusion thatthere are no RACM that would have advancedthe moderate area
17attainment date of2010 forthe BaltimoreNAA. Therefore, MDE’s RACM analysis inthe Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan is approvable. G. Transportation Conformity Budgets Transportation conformity is required by CAA section 176(c). EPA’s conformity rule requires thattransportationplans, programs andprojects conformto state air quality implementationplans and establishes the criteria and procedure for determiningwhether or notthey do. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will notproduce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment ofthe national ambient air quality standards. States must establishVOC andNOx MVEBs for each ofthe milestone years up to the attainment year and submitthe mobile budgets to EPA for approval. Upon adequacy determination or approval by EPA, states must conduct transportation conformity analysis fortheirTransportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) and long range transportationplans to ensure highway vehicle emissions will not exceed relevant MVEBs.
MDE discusses transportation conformity in Section 8.0 ofthe Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. MDE describes the methods itusedto calculate the 2008 mobile emissions inventory in Appendix F ofthe Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. The Baltimore NAA MVEB forthe 2008 RFP is based on the projected 2008 mobile source emissions accounting for all mobile control measures. The MVEBs forthe 2008 RFP are shown in Table 10, below.

18Table 10. Baltimore NAA 2008 RFP MVEBs VOC (tpd) NOx (tpd) 41.2 106.8 In aMarch 27, 2009 Federal Registernotice (74 FR 13433), EPA notified the public that EPA found that the 2008 RFP MVEBs in the Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan are adequate for transportation conformitypurposes. In addition to the budgets being adequate for transportation conformity purposes, EPA found the procedures Maryland usedto develop the MVEBs to be reasonable. The budgets are identical to the projected 2008 on-road mobile sOurce emission

•inventories. Because the 2008 RFP MVEBs are adequate fortransportation conformitypurposes

andthe methods MDE used to develop them are correct, the 2008 RFP budgets are approvable.
V. What are EPA’s Conclusions? EPA’s review ofthe 2002 base year emissions inventory; the 2008 ozone projected emission inventory; the 2008 RFP plan; RFP contingency measures; Maryland’s RACM analysis; and 2008 transportation conformity budgets contained in MDE’s June 4, 2007 SIP revision submittal forthe Baltimore NAA fully addressed the CAA’s requirements. Therefore, EPA is proposing approval ofthose following elements ofMDE’s June 4, 2007 Baltimore 8-hour ozone plan. EPA is soliciting public comments onthe issues discussed inthis document. These comments will be considered before taking final action.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submissionthat complies with the provisions ofthe CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, provided 19thatthey meetthe criteria ofthe CAA. Accordingly, this action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Forthatreason, this proposed action:

• is not a “significantregulatory action” subjectto review by the Office ofManagement and Budgetunder Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);

• does not impose an information collection burden underthe provisions ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act (44 u.s.c. 3501 et seq.);
o is certified as nothaving a significant economic impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 u.s.c. 601 et seq.);

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

• does nothave Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

• is not an economically significantregulatory action based on health or safetyrisks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• is not a significantregulatory action subjectto Executive Order 13211(66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• is not subjectto requirements ofSection 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
20• does notprovide EPA withthe discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate humanhealth or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule pertainingto the Baltimore NAA’s 2002 base year emissions inventory; 2008 ozone projected emission inventory; 2008 RFP plan; RFP contingency measures; RACM analysis; and 2008 transportation conformity budgets 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 itwill not impose substantial direct costs ontribal governments orpreempttribal law. List ofSubjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Airpollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. William C. Early, Acting Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Regional Admi istrator 

### DEC23 Dated: 

### 1Shawn M. Garvin, Regional Administr, Region III.

21