Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 4937 

20There may be instances where a workout loan 

is not a TDR even though the borrower is 

experiencing financial hardship. For example, a 

workout loan would not be a TDR if the fair value 

of cash or other assets accepted by a credit union 

from a borrower in full satisfaction of its receivable 

is at least equal to the credit union’s recorded 

investment in the loan, e.g., due to charge-offs. 

1For ease of communication, many reports of 

ozone concentrations are given in parts per billion 

(ppb); ppb = ppm × 1000. Thus, 0.12 ppm becomes 

120 ppb (or between 120 to 124 ppb, when 

rounding is considered). 

include loans made to market rates and terms 

such as refinances, borrower retention 

actions, or new loans.20

[FR Doc. 2012–2206 Filed 1–31–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7535–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2011–0775; FRL–9625–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Texas; 

Determination of Failure to Attain the 

One-Hour Ozone Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Houston/Galveston/ 

Brazoria (HGB) area did not attain the 

one-hour ozone national ambient air 

quality standard (NAAQS) by its 

applicable attainment date, November 

15, 2007. This determination is based on 

three years of complete, quality-assured 

and certified ambient air quality 

monitoring data for the period 

preceding the applicable attainment 

deadline. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before March 2, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket No. EPA–R06– 

OAR–2011–0775, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• EPA Region 6 Contact Us Web site: 

http://epa.gov/region6/r6coment.htm. 

Please click on ‘‘6PD’’ (Multimedia) and 

select ‘‘Air’’ before submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Mr. Guy Donaldson at 

donaldson.guy@epa.gov. Please also 

send a copy by email to the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section below. 

• Fax: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air 

Planning Section (6PD–L), at fax 

number 214–665–7263. 

• Mail: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, 

Air Planning Section (6PD–L), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. 

• Hand or Courier Delivery: Mr. Guy 

Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section 

(6PD–L), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Such 

deliveries are accepted only between the 

hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. weekdays 

except for legal holidays. Special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2011– 

0775. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Planning Section (6PD–L), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 

Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 

75202–2733. The file will be made 

available by appointment for public 

inspection in the Region 6 FOIA Review 

Room between the hours of 8:30 a.m. 

and 4:30 p.m. weekdays except for legal 

holidays. Contact the person listed in 

the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

paragraph below or Mr. Bill Deese at 

214–665–7253 to make an appointment. 

If possible, please make the 

appointment at least two working days 

in advance of your visit. There will be 

a 15 cent per page fee for making 

photocopies of documents. On the day 

of the visit, please check in at the EPA 

Region 6 reception area at 1445 Ross 

Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kenneth W. Boyce, Air Planning Section 

(6PD–L), Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, 

Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, 

telephone 214–665–7259; fax number 

214–665–7263; email address 

boyce.kenneth@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, whenever 

‘‘we’’ ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

the EPA 

Table of Contents 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

II. Background 

III. What is EPA’s analysis? 

IV. What is the effect of the proposed 

determination? 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What actions is EPA taking? 

The EPA is proposing to determine 

that, under the Clean Air Act (CAA or 

‘‘Act’’), the HGB area failed to attain the 

NAAQS for one-hour ozone by its 

applicable one-hour NAAQS attainment 

date of November 15, 2007. 

II. Background 

Regulatory Context 

The Act requires us to establish 

NAAQS for certain widespread 

pollutants that cause or contribute to air 

pollution that is reasonably anticipated 

to endanger public health or welfare 

(sections 108 and 109 of the Act). In 

1979, we promulgated the revised onehour ozone standard of 0.12 parts per 

million (ppm) (44 FR 8202, February 8, 

1979).1

An area is considered to have attained 

the one-hour ozone standard if there are 

no violations of the standard, as 

determined in accordance with the 

regulation codified at 40 CFR section 

50.9, based on three consecutive 

calendar years of complete, qualityassured and certified monitoring data. A 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
4938 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

2An ‘‘expected number’’ of exceedances is a 

statistical term that refers to an arithmetic average. 

An ‘‘expected number’’ of exceedances may be 

equivalent to the number of observed exceedances 

plus an increment that accounts for incomplete 

sampling. See 40 CFR part 50, appendix H. Because, 

in this context, the term ‘‘exceedances’’ refers to 

days (during which the daily maximum hourly 

ozone concentration exceeded 0.124 ppm), the 

maximum possible number of exceedances in a 

given year is 365 (or 366 in a leap year). 

3 56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991 and CAA 

section 181(a)(1). 4Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard—Phase 1, 

69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004). 

5 Generally, a ‘‘complete’’ data set for determining 

attainment of the ozone is one that includes three 

years of data with an average percent of days with 

valid monitoring data greater than 90% with no 

single year less than 75%. See 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix I. There are less stringent data 

requirements for showing that a monitor has failed 

an attainment test and thus has recorded a violation 

of the standard. 

violation occurs when the ambient 

ozone air quality monitoring data show 

greater than one (1.0) ‘‘expected 

number’’ of exceedances per year at any 

site in the area, when averaged over 

three consecutive calendar years.2 An 

exceedance occurs when the maximum 

hourly ozone concentration during any 

day exceeds 0.124 ppm. For more 

information, please see ‘‘National 1- 

hour primary and secondary ambient air 

quality standards for ozone’’ (40 CFR 

50.9) and ‘‘Interpretation of the 1-Hour 

Primary and Secondary National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards for 

Ozone’’ (40 CFR part 50, appendix H). 

The Act, as amended in 1990, 

required EPA to designate as 

nonattainment any area that was 

violating the one-hour ozone standard, 

generally based on air quality 

monitoring data from the 1987 through 

1989 period (section 107(d)(4) of the 

Act; 56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991). 

The Act further classified these areas, 

based on the severity of their 

nonattainment problem, as Marginal, 

Moderate, Serious, Severe, or Extreme. 

The control requirements and date by 

which attainment of the one-hour ozone 

standard was to be achieved varied with 

an area’s classification. Marginal areas 

were subject to the fewest mandated 

control requirements and had the 

earliest attainment date, November 15, 

1993, while Severe and Extreme areas 

were subject to more stringent planning 

requirements and were provided more 

time to attain the standard. Two 

measures that are triggered if a Severe 

or Extreme area fails to attain the 

standard by the applicable attainment 

date are contingency measures [section 

172(c)(9)] and a major stationary source 

fee provision [sections 182(d)(3) and 

185)] (‘‘major source fee program’’ or 

‘‘section 185 fee program’’). 

Designations and Classifications 

The HGB area consists of Brazoria, 

Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, 

Liberty, Montgomery and Waller 

counties in Texas. Upon the date of 

enactment of the 1990 CAA 

Amendments, the HGB area was 

classified as a severe ozone 

nonattainment area for the one-hour 

ozone NAAQS. As noted above, severe 

and extreme areas are subject to more 

stringent planning requirements but 

were provided more time to attain the 

ozone standard. HGB one-hour ozone 

nonattainment area was classified as 

severe 17. As a result the attainment 

date for the HGB area was November 15, 

2007. 3

On January 13, 2011, the Sierra Club 

filed a complaint in the U.S. District 

Court for the District of Columbia 

alleging EPA failed in its mandatory 

duties to make a determination of 

attainment by the applicable attainment 

date for certain one hour ozone 

nonattainment areas. The Houston/ 

Galveston/Brazoria was one of the 

nonattainment areas listed in Sierra 

Club’s complaint. On September 12, 

2011, EPA signed a Settlement 

Agreement with the Sierra Club which, 

in relevant part to this rulemaking, 

committed EPA by January 31, 2012 to 

sign a proposed notice to be published 

in the Federal Register as to whether 

Houston/Galveston/Brazoria has 

attained the 1 hour ozone standard by 

its attainment date and by May 31, 2012, 

to sign a final notice to be published in 

the Federal Register determining 

whether Houston/Galveston/Brazoria 

has attained the 1 hour ozone standard 

by its attainment date. 

Transition From One-Hour Ozone 

Standard to Eight-Hour Ozone Standard 

In 1997, EPA promulgated a new, 

more protective standard for ozone 

based on an eight-hour average 

concentration (the 1997 eight-hour 

ozone standard). In 2004, EPA 

published the 1997 eight-hour ozone 

designations and classifications and a 

rule governing certain facets of 

implementation of the eight-hour ozone 

standard (Phase 1 Rule) (69 FR 23858 

and 69 FR 23951, respectively, April 30, 

2004). 

Although EPA revoked the one-hour 

ozone standard (effective June 15, 2005), 

to comply with anti-backsliding 

requirements of the Act, eight-hour 

ozone nonattainment areas remain 

subject to certain requirements based on 

their one-hour ozone classification. 

Initially, in our rules to address the 

transition from the one-hour to the 

eight-hour ozone standard, EPA did not 

include contingency measures or the 

section 185 fee program among the 

measures retained as one-hour ozone 

anti-backsliding requirements.4

However, on December 23, 2006, the 

United States Court of Appeals for the 

District of Columbia Circuit determined 

that EPA should not have excluded 

these requirements from its antibacksliding requirements. South Coast 

Air Quality Management District v. EPA, 

472 F.3d 882 (DC Cir. 2006) reh’g 

denied 489 F.3d 1245 (clarifying that 

the vacatur was limited to the issues on 

which the court granted the petitions for 

review). 

Thus, the Court vacated the 

provisions that excluded these 

requirements. As a result, States must 

continue to meet the obligations for onehour ozone NAAQS contingency 

measures and, for Severe and Extreme 

areas, major source fee programs. EPA 

has issued a proposed rule that would 

remove the vacated provisions of 40 

CFR 51.905(e), and that addresses 

contingency measures for failure to 

attain or make reasonable further 

progress toward attainment of the onehour standard. See 74 FR 2936, January 

16, 2009 (proposed rule); 74 FR 7027, 

February 12, 2009 (notice of public 

hearing and extension of comment 

period). 

Rationale for Today’s Proposed Action 

After revocation of the one-hour 

ozone standard, EPA must continue to 

provide a mechanism to give effect to 

the one-hour anti-backsliding 

requirements. See SCAQMD v. EPA, 47 

F.3d 882, at 903. In keeping with this 

responsibility with respect to one-hour 

anti-backsliding contingency measures 

and section 185 fee programs for the 

HGB area, EPA proposes to determine 

that the area failed to attain the onehour ozone standard by its applicable 

attainment date. See CAA section 301(a) 

and the relevant portion of section 

181(b)(2). 

III. What is EPA’s analysis? 

A determination of whether an area’s 

air quality meets the one-hour ozone 

standard is generally based upon three 

years of complete 5, quality-assured and 

certified air quality monitoring data 

gathered at established State and Local 

Air Monitoring Stations (‘‘SLAMS’’) in 

the nonattainment area and entered into 

the EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) 

database. Data from air monitors 

operated by state/local agencies in 

compliance with EPA monitoring 

requirements must be submitted to the 

AQS database. Monitoring agencies 

annually certify that these data are 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 4939 

6The average number of expected exceedances is 

determined by averaging the expected exceedances 

of the one-hour ozone standard over a consecutive three calendar year period. See 40 CFR part 50 

appendix H. 

accurate to the best of their knowledge. 

Accordingly, EPA relies primarily on 

data in its AQS database when 

determining the attainment status of an 

area. See 40 CFR section 50.9; 40 CFR 

part 50, appendix H; 40 CFR part 53; 40 

CFR part 58, appendices A, C, D and E. 

All data are reviewed to determine the 

area’s air quality status in accordance 

with 40 CFR part 50, appendix H. 

Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 

section 50.9, the one-hour ozone 

standard is attained at a monitoring site 

when the expected number of days per 

calendar year with maximum hourly 

average concentrations above 0.12 parts 

per million (235 micrograms per cubic 

meter) is equal to or less than 1, as 

determined by 40 CFR part 50, appendix 

H.6 EPA proposes to determine that the 

HGB area failed to attain the one-hour 

ozone standard by its applicable 

attainment date; that is, the number of 

expected exceedances at sites in the 

nonattainment area was greater than one 

per year in the period prior to the 

applicable attainment date. This 

proposed determination is based on 

three years of complete, quality-assured 

and certified ambient air quality 

monitoring data in AQS for the 2005– 

2007 monitoring period for the HGB 

area. 

Table 1 summarizes the ozone 

monitoring data from the various 

monitoring sites in the HGB area by 

showing the expected exceedances per 

year and 3-year expected exceedances 

averages over the 2005–2007 period. 

The data summarized in Table 1 below 

are considered complete for the purpose 

of determining if the standard is met. 

Review of the data in Table 1 shows that 

the average number of expected 

exceedances for the 2005–2007 period is 

greater than one for 12 of the ozone 

monitoring sites in the HGB area. 

Furthermore, the NW Harris County site 

had more than one expected exceedance 

in the attainment year, 2007, so the area 

could not qualify for a 1 year extension 

to the attainment date. 

TABLE 1—ONE-HOUR OZONE DATA FOR THE HGB ONE-HOUR OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA

Site name AQS ID 

Expected exceedances by year Expected 

exceedances 

2005 2006 2007 3-yr average 

Brazoria County ............................................. .............................. ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................

Manvel ............................................................ 480391004 2.1 3 1.1 2.1 

Lake Jackson ................................................. 480391016 0 0 0 0.0 

Galveston County .......................................... .............................. ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................

Galveston County Airport ............................... 481670014/1034 0 0 0 0.0 

Harris County ................................................. .............................. ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................

Aldine ............................................................. 482010024 2.1 0 0 0.7 

Channelview ................................................... 482010026 2 2 1 1.7 

NW Harris County .......................................... 482010029 2.1 2 2 2.0 

Wayside ......................................................... 482010046 0 0 0 0.0 

Lang ............................................................... 482010047 0 0 0 0.0 

Croquet .......................................................... 482010051 4.1 1 0 1.7 

Bayland Park .................................................. 482010055 6.1 5.1 0 3.7 

Monroe ........................................................... 482010062 5.1 3 0 2.7 

Westhollow ..................................................... 482010066 1 4 1 2.0 

Regional Office .............................................. 482010070 3 2 0 1.7 

Texas Avenue ................................................ 482010075 0 1.1 1 0.7 

Park Place ...................................................... 482010416 NA 8.2 0 * 4.1 

Lynchburg ...................................................... 482011015 6.2 1 0 2.4 

Mae Drive ....................................................... 482011034 0 2.1 0 0.7 

Clinton Drive .................................................. 482011035 1 0 0 0.3 

Deer Park ....................................................... 482011039 3.1 4.1 0 2.4 

Seabrook ........................................................ 482011050 3.1 2 1 2.0 

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

Conroe ........................................................... 483390078 1 2 0 1.0 

Source: AQS Quicklook Report, September 26, 2011. 

* Two-year average 2006–2007. 

IV. What is the effect of the proposed 

determination? 

After revocation of the one-hour 

ozone standard, EPA must continue to 

provide a mechanism to give effect to 

the one-hour anti-backsliding 

requirements. See SCAQMD v. EPA, 47 

F.3d 882, at 903. In keeping with this 

responsibility with respect to one-hour 

anti-backlsiding contingency measures 

and section 185 fee programs for the 

HGB one hour ozone area, EPA proposes 

to determine that the HGB area failed to 

attain the one-hour ozone standard by 

its applicable attainment date. 

Consistent with 40 CFR 51.905(e)(2) and 

the South Coast court decision, upon 

revocation of the one-hour ozone 

NAAQS for an area, EPA is no longer 

obligated to determine whether an area 

has attained the one-hour NAAQS by its 

applicable deadline, except insofar as it 

relates to effectuating the antibacksliding requirements that are 

specifically retained. EPA’s proposed 

determination here—that the area did 

not attain the one-hour ozone standard 

by the November 15, 2007 deadline 

(based on data for 2005–2007) is made 

pursuant to section (301)(a) and the 

relevant portion of section 181(b)(2), 

and is linked solely to two required onehour anti-backsliding measures: i.e., 

one-hour contingency measures for 

failure to attain under section 172(c)(9), 

and fee programs under sections 

182(d)(3) and 185. A final determination 

of failure to attain by the area’s 2007 

attainment date will not result in 

reclassification of the area under the 

revoked one-hour standard. As a severe 

one-hour nonattainment area, the HGB 

area is not subject to reclassification for 

the one-hour standard, and in any event 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
4940 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 21 / Wednesday, February 1, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

EPA is no longer required to reclassify 

any area to a higher classification for the 

one-hour ozone NAAQS based upon a 

determination that the area failed to 

attain that NAAQS by its attainment 

date. 40 CFR 51.905(e)(2)(i)(B). 

The EPA’s proposed determination 

that the area failed to attain the onehour ozone standard by its applicable 

date, if finalized, would bear on the 

area’s obligations with respect to two 

one-hour ozone anti-backsliding 

requirements whose implementation is 

triggered by a finding of failure to attain 

by the applicable attainment date: 

section 172(c)(9) contingency measures 

for failure to attain, and sections 

182(d)(3) and 185 major stationary 

source fee programs. 

With respect to the one-hour ozone 

anti-backsliding requirement for 

contingency measures, the Texas SIP 

included contingency measures to 

achieve an additional 3 percent 

reduction in NOX and VOC emissions in 

2008. The contingency measure 

reductions for 2008 were to be obtained 

from on-road and off-road mobile 

control measures already being 

implemented. EPA has previously 

approved the State’s one-hour ozone 

attainment demonstration and Rate of 

Progress plans for the HGB area which 

included contingency measures. See: 71 

FR 52670, 70 FR 7407, 66 FR 57195, and 

66 FR 20750. Thus, the reductions from 

contingency measures have already 

been achieved and therefore a final 

determination of failure to attain by the 

area’s one-hour ozone attainment date 

would not trigger additional emissions 

reductions. 

With respect to the one-hour ozone 

anti-backsliding requirement for penalty 

fees, section 182(d)(3) requires SIPs to 

include provisions required by section 

185. Section 185 requires one-hour 

ozone SIPs for severe areas to provide a 

program requiring each major stationary 

source of ozone precursors located in 

the area to pay fees to the State if the 

area has failed to attain by the 

attainment date. A final determination 

of failure to attain by the area’s one-hour 

attainment date would trigger the onehour anti-backsliding obligation to 

implement the penalty fee program 

under section 182(d)(3) and 185, unless 

that obligation is terminated. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action proposes to make a 

determination that this area did not 

attain the one-hour ozone standard 

based on air quality, and does not 

impose any requirements beyond those 

required by statute or regulation. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the 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 or uniquely 

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 a economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to the requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule does not 

have tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because it would 

not 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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Oxides of nitrogen, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: January 24, 2012. 

Al Armendariz, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2012–2199 Filed 1–31–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2011–0680; FRL–9625–4 ] 

Determination of Failure To Attain by 

2005 and Determination of Current 

Attainment of the 1-Hour Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards in the Baltimore 

Nonattainment Area in Maryland 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Baltimore severe 

1-hour ozone nonattainment area failed 

to attain the 1-hour ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) by the applicable attainment 

date of November 15, 2005, based on 

three years of complete, quality-assured 

and certified ambient air quality 

monitoring data for 2003 through 2005. 

In addition, EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Baltimore area is 

currently attaining the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS. This proposed determination 

is based upon the most recent three 

years, 2008–2010, of complete, qualityassured and certified ambient air 

monitoring data showing the area has 

monitored attainment of the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS. EPA’s review shows that 

the area has attained the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS since the 2006–2008 

monitoring period and that it continues 

to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. If 

this latter proposed determination is 

made final, the requirement for the State 

of Maryland to submit contingency 

measures related to attainment of the 

1-hour ozone NAAQS in the Baltimore 

severe 1-hour ozone nonattainment area 

shall be suspended. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before March 2, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2011–0680 by one of the 

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–2011–0680, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Program Planning, 

Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS