Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 134 / Tuesday, July 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 40917 

2015. This will incorporate the rule into 

the federally enforceable SIP. 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is finalizing 

regulatory text that includes 

incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, the EPA is finalizing the 

incorporation by reference of the 

SCAQMD rule described in the 

amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth 

below. The EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these documents 

available electronically through 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at the appropriate EPA office (see the 

ADDRESSES section of this preamble for 

more information).] 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the 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 Clean Air Act. 

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 of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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 an 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 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, 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, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

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 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the 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). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by September 14, 

2015. Filing a petition for 

reconsideration by the Administrator of 

this final rule does not affect the finality 

of this action for the purposes of judicial 

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. Parties with objections to this 

direct final rule are encouraged to file a 

comment in response to the parallel 

notice of proposed rulemaking for this 

action published in the Proposed Rules 

section of today’s Federal Register, 

rather than file an immediate petition 

for judicial review of this direct final 

rule, so that EPA can withdraw this 

direct final rule and address the 

comment in the proposed rulemaking. 

This action may not be challenged later 

in proceedings to enforce its 

requirements (see section 307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: June 9, 2015. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

Part 52, Chapter I, Title 40 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is 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 F—California 

■ 2. Section 52.220 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c)(457)(i)(E) to read 

as follows: 

§ 52.220 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(457) * * * 

(i) * * * 

(E) South Coast Air Quality 

Management District. 

(1) Rule 1130, ‘‘Graphic Arts,’’ 

amended on May 2, 2014. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–17061 Filed 7–13–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0241; FRL–9930–35– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Maryland; Low Emissions Vehicle 

Program Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve two revisions to the 

Maryland State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). The Clean Air Act (CAA) provides 

authority allowing California to adopt 

its own motor vehicle emissions 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
40918 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 134 / Tuesday, July 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

standards for newly manufactured 

vehicles, in lieu of federal vehicle 

standards. The CAA also allows other 

states to adopt California’s vehicle 

standards, as long as they are identical 

to California’s standards. Maryland’s 

recent SIP submittals serve to amend 

Maryland’s Clean Car Program to 

incorporate updates that California has 

made to its Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) 

program rules. Maryland adopted 

California’s emission standards 

applicable to newly manufactured light 

and medium-duty vehicles in 2007, and 

EPA approved Maryland’s Clean Car 

Program in prior rulemakings. However, 

since then California revised its LEV 

program regulations on several 

occasions, and Maryland subsequently 

amended its own rules to be consistent 

with those of California. Since the Clean 

Car Program is part of the SIP, Maryland 

then submits these amendments as a SIP 

revision. Maryland submitted such SIP 

revision requests in July 2014 and again 

in April 2015 to update its SIP to be 

consistent with California’s latest LEV 

program rules. EPA’s action to approve 

Maryland’s most recent Clean Car 

Program SIP revisions is being taken 

under the CAA. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

September 14, 2015 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

written comment by August 13, 2015. If 

EPA receives such comments, it will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

and inform the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2015–0241 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: Fernandez.cristina@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0241, 

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 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2015– 

0241. 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 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in 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 of 

the Environment, 1800 Washington 

Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21230. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian Rehn, (215) 814–2176, or by email 

at rehn.brian@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Maryland 

originally adopted a Low Emissions 

Vehicle Program in 2007 under 

Regulation .02 of COMAR 26.11.34 Low 

Emission Vehicles. Since then, 

Maryland updated its program rule on 

several occasions (in 2009 and 2011), to 

incorporate changes made by California 

to its own LEV program rule. Maryland 

originally submitted its Clean Car 

Program to EPA for inclusion in the SIP 

in December 2007 (Revision #07–16), 

with subsequent revisions in November 

2010 (Revision #10–08) and again in 

June 2011 (Revision #11–05), to reflect 

Maryland regulatory updates made in 

2009 and 2011. EPA approved 

Maryland’s original Clean Car SIP 

submittal (and the November 2010 and 

June 2011 revisions) in a rulemaking 

action published in the Federal Register 

on June 11, 2013 (78 FR 34911). 

Maryland again submitted a revised SIP 

submittal in August 2013 (Revision 

#13–02), to incorporate regulatory 

changes made in 2012 to its Clean Car 

Program rule. EPA approved that SIP 

revision in a final rulemaking action 

published in the Federal Register on 

July 9, 2013 (79 FR 38787). 

On July 28, 2014, Maryland submitted 

a revision for the SIP (Revision #14–01) 

to again amend its Clean Car Program 

SIP to include regulatory updates made 

in 2014 to ensure consistency with 

California’s LEV rules. Maryland later 

submitted another revision for the SIP 

(Revision #15–02) on April 13, 2015 to 

adopt additional regulatory 

amendments made in 2015. It is these 

two most recent SIP revisions that are 

the subject of this rulemaking. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

A. Maryland’s Air Quality With Respect to 

the Federal National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS) for Ozone 

B. Federal Vehicle Emission Standards 

C. California’s Low Emission Vehicle 

Standards 

D. Maryland’s Low Emissions Vehicle 

Program 

II. Summary of SIP Revisions 

III. Final Action 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A. Maryland’s Air Quality With Respect 

to the Federal National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS) for Ozone 

The CAA, which was last amended in 

1990, requires EPA to set NAAQS for 

pollutants considered harmful to public 

health and the environment. EPA 

establishes NAAQS for six principal 

pollutants, or ‘‘criteria’’ pollutants, 

which include: ozone, carbon monoxide 

(CO), lead, nitrogen dioxide, fine 

particulate matter (PM), and sulfur 

dioxide. The CAA establishes two types 

of NAAQS. Primary standards provide 

public health protection, including 

protecting the health of ‘‘sensitive’’ 

populations such as asthmatics, 

children, and the elderly. Secondary 

standards protect public welfare, 

including protection against decreased 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 134 / Tuesday, July 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 40919 

visibility and damage to animals, crops, 

vegetation, and buildings. The CAA also 

requires EPA to periodically review the 

standards to ensure that they provide 

adequate health and environmental 

protection, and to update those 

standards as necessary. 

Ozone is formed in the atmosphere by 

photochemical reactions between ozone 

precursor pollutants, including volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs) and 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) in the presence of 

sunlight. In order to reduce ozone 

concentrations in the ambient air, the 

CAA directs areas designated as 

nonattainment to apply controls on VOC 

and NOX emission sources to reduce the 

formation of ozone. 

Although EPA has revised the ozone 

NAAQS several times since the CAA 

was reauthorized in 1990, Maryland has 

historically had three areas designated 

as nonattainment under each successive 

ozone NAAQS. These include portions 

of the Baltimore metropolitan area, the 

Maryland portion of the Washington, 

DC metropolitan area, and the Maryland 

portion of the Philadelphia metropolitan 

area. Most recently, EPA revised the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS from 0.08 parts per 

million (ppm) to 0.075 ppm on March 

27, 2008 (73 FR 16436). On May 21, 

2012 (77 FR 30088), EPA finalized 

designations for this 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, including as nonattainment the 

same three Maryland areas. 

B. Federal Vehicle Emission Standards 

Vehicles sold in the United States are 

required by the CAA to be certified to 

meet either Federal motor vehicle 

emission standards or California 

emission standards. States other than 

California are forbidden from adopting 

their own standards, but may elect to 

adopt California emission standards for 

which EPA has granted a waiver of 

preemption. Specifically, section 209 of 

the CAA prohibits states from adopting 

or enforcing standards relating to the 

control of emissions from new motor 

vehicles (or new vehicle engines), 

however, EPA may waive that 

prohibition for any state that adopted its 

own standards prior to March 30, 1966. 

As California was the only state to do 

so, California has authority to adopt its 

own vehicle emissions standards. 

California must demonstrate to EPA that 

its newly adopted standards will be 

‘‘. . . in the aggregate, at least as 

protective of public health and welfare 

as applicable Federal standards,’’ after 

which time EPA may then grant a 

waiver of preemption from Federal 

standards for California’s standards. 

Section 177 of the CAA authorizes 

other states to adopt California’s 

standards in lieu of Federal vehicle 

standards, provided the state does so 

with at least two model years lead time 

prior to the effective date of its program 

and EPA has issued a waiver of 

preemption to California for such 

standards. 

EPA has adopted several iterations, or 

‘‘tiers,’’ of federal emissions standards 

since the CAA was reauthorized in 

1990. When Maryland first adopted its 

Clean Car Program in 2007, the federal 

standards in effect were Tier 2 standards 

that were adopted by EPA on February 

10, 2000 (65 FR 6698) and were 

implemented beginning with 2004 

model year federally certified vehicles. 

These Federal Tier 2 standards set 

tailpipe emissions standards for 

passenger vehicles and light duty trucks 

and also limited gasoline sulfur levels. 

EPA later finalized Tier 3 Federal 

vehicle and fuel standards on April 28, 

2014 (79 FR 23414). The Federal Tier 3 

program set more stringent Federal 

vehicle emissions standards and further 

limited allowable sulfur content of 

gasoline for new cars, beginning in 

2017. EPA attempted to closely 

harmonize the Tier 3 standards with 

California’s most current Low Emissions 

Vehicle Program. 

On May 7, 2010 (75 FR 25324), EPA 

and the U.S. Department of 

Transportation’s National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 

jointly established a national program 

consisting of new standards for lightduty motor vehicles to reduce 

greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions and 

to improve fuel economy. This program 

affected new passenger cars, light 

trucks, and medium-duty passenger 

vehicles sold in model years 2012 

through 2016. On October 15, 2012 (77 

FR 62624), EPA and NHTSA issued 

another joint rule to further tighten GHG 

emissions standards for model years 

2017 through 2025. The Federal GHG 

standards were harmonized with similar 

GHG standards set by California, to 

ensure that automobile manufacturers 

would face a single set of national 

emissions standards to meet both 

Federal and California emissions 

requirements. 

C. California’s Low Emission Vehicle 

Standards 

In 1990, California’s Air Resources 

Board (CARB) adopted its first 

generation of LEV standards applicable 

to light and medium duty vehicles. 

California’s LEV program standards 

were phased-in beginning in model year 

1994 through model year 2003. In 1999, 

California adopted a second generation 

of LEV standards, known as LEV II, 

which were phased-in beginning model 

year 2004 through model year 2010. 

EPA granted a Federal preemption 

waiver for CA LEV II program on April 

22, 2003 (68 FR 19811). 

California’s LEV II program reduces 

emissions in a similar manner to the 

Federal Tier 2 program by use of 

declining fleet average non-methane 

organic gas (NMOG) emission standards, 

applicable to each vehicle manufacturer 

each year. Separate fleet average 

standards are not established for NOX, 

CO, PM, or formaldehyde as these 

emissions are controlled as a co-benefit 

of the NMOG fleet average (fleet average 

values for these pollutants are set by the 

certification standards for each set of 

California prescribed certification 

standards.) These allowable sets of 

standards range from LEV standards (the 

least stringent standard set) to Zero 

Emission Vehicle (ZEV) standards (the 

most stringent standard set). California’s 

LEV II program establishes various other 

standards: The Ultra-Low Emission 

Vehicles (ULEV), Super-Ultra Low 

Emission Vehicles (SULEV), Partial Zero 

Emission Vehicles (PZEV), and 

Advanced Technology-Partial Zero 

Emission Vehicles (AT–PZEV). Each 

manufacturer may comply by selling a 

mix of vehicles meeting any of these 

standards, as long as their salesweighted, overall average of the various 

standard sets meets the overall fleet 

average and ZEV requirements. 

In January 2012, California approved 

a new emissions-control program for 

model years 2017 through 2025, called 

the Advanced Clean Cars Program, or 

the LEV III program. The program 

combines the control of smog, soot, and 

GHG and requirements for greater 

numbers of ZEV vehicles into a single 

package of standards. The regulations 

apply to light duty vehicles, light duty 

trucks, and medium duty passenger 

vehicles. Under California’s Advanced 

Clean Cars Program, manufacturers can 

certify vehicles to the standards before 

model year 2015. Beginning with model 

year 2020, all vehicles must be certified 

to LEV III standards. The ZEV 

amendments add flexibility to 

California’s existing ZEV program for 

2017 and earlier model years, and 

establish new sales and technology 

requirements starting with the 2018 

model year. The LEV III amendments 

establish more stringent criteria and 

GHG emission standards starting with 

the 2015 and 2017 model years, 

respectively. The California GHG 

standards are almost identical in 

stringency and structure to the Federal 

GHG standards for model years from 

2017 to 2025. Additionally, on 

December 2012, California adopted a 

‘‘deemed to comply’’ regulation that 

enables manufacturers to show 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
40920 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 134 / Tuesday, July 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

compliance with California GHG 

standards by demonstrating compliance 

with Federal GHG standards. On June 9, 

2013 (78 FR 2112), EPA granted a 

Federal preemption waiver for 

California’s Advanced Clean Cars 

Program. California’s LEV III program 

rules are codified in Title 13 of the 

California Code of Regulations (CCR), 

under Division 3. 

D. Maryland’s Low Emissions Vehicle 

Program 

Maryland’s legislature adopted and 

the Governor signed into law the 

Maryland Clean Cars Act of 2007, 

establishing legal authority compelling 

Maryland to adopt California’s LEV 

standards. Maryland adopted its ‘‘Low 

Emission Vehicle Program,’’ codified at 

COMAR 26.11.34 in 2007. Since then, 

Maryland has revised its program rules 

a number of times to ensure consistency 

with California’s LEV program. As 

discussed in the Supplemental 

Information section, Maryland 

submitted revisions in 2009 and 2011, 

which EPA approved (along with the 

original 2007 Clean Car revision) on 

June 11, 2013 (78 FR 34911). Since then, 

Maryland amended its program in 2013 

and submitted another SIP revision to 

EPA in August 2013, which EPA 

approved on July 9, 2014 (79 FR 38787). 

The Maryland Clean Car Program has 

two objectives. The first is to reduce 

emissions of NOX and VOCs, as 

precursors of ground level ozone, from 

new motor vehicles sold in Maryland. 

The second objective of the program is 

to reduce GHG emissions from motor 

vehicles. The program requires 2011 

and newer model year passenger cars, 

light trucks, and medium-duty vehicles 

having a gross vehicle weight rating 

(GVWR) of 14,000 pounds or less that 

are sold as new cars or transferred in 

Maryland to meet the applicable 

California emissions standards. For 

purposes of the Clean Car Program, 

transfer means to sell, import, deliver, 

purchase, lease, rent, acquire, or receive 

a motor vehicle for titling or registration 

in Maryland. 

II. Summary of SIP Revisions 

On July 28, 2014, Maryland submitted 

a formal SIP Revision #14–01 containing 

Maryland’s updated Clean Car 

regulations to reflect changes made to 

adopt California’s LEV III Program. This 

SIP submittal consists of updates to 

make Maryland’s Clean Car Program 

consistent with California’s program. 

Specifically, California amended its LEV 

III program rule to allow as a 

compliance option the recent Federal 

GHG standards for model years 2017 to 

2025. Since California’s LEV III program 

addresses GHG pollutants, in addition 

to criteria pollutants that are precursors 

to ozone pollution, Maryland 

incorporated by reference this 

compliance alternative for California’s 

LEV III program to its own Clean Car 

Program rule. 

On April 30, 2015, Maryland 

submitted another revision to its SIP to 

update the Clean Car Program rules. 

This latest change relates to the ZEV 

requirements of California’s rules, 

including adjustments to optional 

compliance path (OCP) for 

manufacturers related to the elimination 

of certain credits in qualifying for the 

OCP and pooling of credits across model 

years. Another ZEV-related provision 

establishes a minimum amount of ZEV 

credits to be used each year, specifically 

a limit to use of non-ZEV credits to 

satisfy ZEV requirements. Further, 

California amended the definition for 

fast refueling for purposes of 

determining the ZEV type to limit 

credits to only technologies that have 

actually been demonstrated in practice. 

Maryland incorporated by reference in 

its Clean Car Program these latest 

changes to California’s LEV III program. 

These two most recent Maryland SIP 

submittals are the subject of this 

rulemaking action. Maryland adopted 

California’s updates to portions of CCR 

Title 13, Division 3 by amending 

COMAR 26.11.34.02, relating to 

incorporation by reference of 

California’s LEV standards. The July 28, 

2014 and April 13, 2015 SIP submittals 

include Maryland’s adopted regulatory 

amendments to the Clean Car Program 

rule (with the exception of CCR, Title 

13, Division 3, Article 5, Section 2030 

‘‘Liquefied Petroleum Gas or Natural 

Gas Retrofit Systems,’’ which Maryland 

requested EPA to exclude from the SIP). 

The April 13, 2015 SIP submittal will 

replace in its entirety the existing 

regulation COMAR 26.11.34.02 as 

approved in the SIP on July 9, 2014 with 

the revised version of COMAR 

26.11.34.02 effective February 16, 2015. 

See 79 FR 38787. A list of California’s 

regulations being incorporated by 

reference is included as part of 

Maryland’s notice of proposed action 

dated December 1, 2014, which is 

included in the State submittal and 

available online at www.regulations.gov, 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2015– 

0241. These revisions to Maryland’s 

Clean Car Program, as approved in the 

Maryland SIP, are important to ensure 

consistency with California’s LEV 

program. This will ensure that 

Maryland’s Clean Vehicle Program 

complies with the requirements for 

adoption of another state’s vehicle 

standards in lieu of Federal vehicle 

standards, per section 177 of the CAA. 

III. Final Action 

EPA is approving Maryland’s July 28, 

2014 and April 13, 2015 SIP submittals. 

These revisions amend the prior 

approved Maryland Clean Vehicle 

Program, specifically with respect to 

Maryland’s updated incorporation by 

reference (at COMAR 26.11.34.02) of 

California’s LEV program rules (at Title 

13, CCR, Division 3, with the exception 

of CCR, Title 13, Division 3, Article 5, 

Section 2030). Maryland’s SIP revisions 

serve to ensure consistency of 

Maryland’s Clean Vehicle Program with 

California’s LEV III program, satisfying 

Federal requirements for state adoption 

of vehicle emission standards under 

section 177 of the CAA. EPA is 

publishing this rule without prior 

proposal because EPA views this as a 

noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipates no adverse comment. 

However, in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ 

section of this Federal Register, EPA is 

publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

SIP revision if adverse comments are 

filed. This rule will be effective on 

September 14, 2015 without further 

notice unless EPA receives adverse 

comment by August 13, 2015. If EPA 

receives adverse comment, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. EPA 

will address all public comments in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period on this action. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

must do so at this time. 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rulemaking action, EPA is 

finalizing regulatory text that includes 

incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, the EPA is finalizing the 

incorporation by reference of 

Maryland’s Clean Vehicle Program rules 

at COMAR 26.11.34.02, as adopted on 

January 20, 2015 and effective on 

February 16, 2015. EPA has made, and 

will continue to make, these documents 

generally available electronically 

through www.regulations.gov and in 

hard copy at the appropriate EPA office 

(see the ADDRESSES section of this 

preamble for more information). 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. General Requirements 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve SIP submissions 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 134 / Tuesday, July 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 40921 

that comply with the provisions of the 

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 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 

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 an 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 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 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 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the 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. Petitions for Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by September 14, 2015. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial 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. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register, rather than file 

an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking action. This action 

approving revisions to the Maryland 

Clean Car Program may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: June 26, 2015. 

William C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR part 52 is 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 V—Maryland 

■ 2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entry for 

COMAR 26.11.34.02 to read as follows: 

§ 52.1070 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA—APPROVED REGULATIONS, TECHNICAL MEMORANDA, AND STATUTES IN THE MARYLAND SIP 

Code of 

Maryland 

Administrative 

Regulations (COMAR) 

citation 

Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date Additional explanation/ citation at 40 CFR 52.1100 

*******

26.11.34 ......................... Low Emissions Vehicle Program 

*******

26.11.34.02 (except 

.02B(20)).

Incorporation by Reference.02/16/15 07/14/15 [Insert Federal Register citation].Update to incorporate by reference California’s 

Advanced Clean Car Program rules, with the 

exception of Title 13, California Code of Regulations, Division 3, Chapter 2, Article 5, Section 2030. 

*******


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
40922 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 134 / Tuesday, July 14, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2015–17060 Filed 7–13–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 70 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0119; FRL–9930–30– 

Region 3] 

Clean Air Act Title V Operating Permit 

Program Revision; Pennsylvania 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a Title V 

Operating Permit Program revision 

submitted by the Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania. The revision amends the 

Title V fee program that funds the 

Pennsylvania Title V Operating Permit 

Program. EPA is approving these 

revisions to increase Pennsylvania’s 

annual emission fees to $85 per ton of 

emissions for emissions from Title V 

sources of up to 4,000 tons of each 

regulated pollutant in accordance with 

the requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

August 13, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0119. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov Web 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 III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmental 

Protection, Bureau of Air Quality 

Control, P.O. Box 8468, 400 Market 

Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gerallyn Duke (215) 814–2084, or by 

email at duke.gerallyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On March 18, 2015 (80 FR 14037), 

EPA published a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPR) for the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. In the 

NPR, EPA proposed approval of the 

Pennsylvania Title V Operating Program 

revision to increase the annual Title V 

fees paid by the owners or operators of 

all Title V facilities throughout 

Pennsylvania, including Allegheny and 

Philadelphia Counties, from $57.50 per 

ton of regulated air pollutant to $85 per 

ton. The formal Title V Program revision 

was submitted by Pennsylvania on 

February 11, 2014. 

Under 40 CFR 70.9(a) and (b), an 

approved state Title V operating permits 

program must require that the owners or 

operators of part 70 sources pay annual 

fees, or the equivalent over some other 

period, that are sufficient to cover the 

permit program costs and ensure that 

any fee required under 40 CFR 70.9 is 

used solely for permit program costs. 

Under Pennsylvania’s Title V permit 

emission fee rules at 25 PA Code 

127.705, the annual emission fee for 

emissions occurring in calendar year 

2012 was $57.50 per ton of regulated 

pollutant for emissions of up to 4,000 

tons of each regulated pollutant. The fee 

structure has not been revised since 

1994. As discussed further in our 

proposed approval of Pennsylvania’s 

Title V fee revision on March 18, 2015, 

Pennsylvania has determined that Title 

V annual emission fee revenues 

collected are no longer sufficient to 

cover Title V program costs. 

II. Summary of Title V Operating 

Permit Program Revision 

In the February 11, 2014 program 

revision, Pennsylvania included revised 

25 PA Code 127.705 which 

Pennsylvania has amended to increase 

Pennsylvania’s annual emission fees. 

Fees are increased to $85 per ton of 

emissions for emissions from Title V 

sources of up to 4,000 tons of each 

regulated pollutant. The provisions for 

increasing the annual emissions fees in 

response to increases in the Consumer 

Price Index at 25 PA Code 127.705(d) 

remain unchanged. The revised fees are 

designed to cover all reasonable costs 

required to develop and administer the 

Title V program as required by 40 CFR 

70.9(a) and (b). 

III. Final Action 

EPA is approving the Pennsylvania 

Title V Operating Program revision 

submitted on February 11, 2014 to 

increase the annual Title V fees paid by 

the owners or operators of all Title V 

facilities throughout Pennsylvania, 

including Allegheny and Philadelphia 

Counties, from $57.50 per ton of 

regulated air pollutant to $85 per ton. 

The revision meets requirements in 40 

CFR 70.9. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. General Requirements 

This action merely approves state law 

as meeting Federal requirements and 

imposes no 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 

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 an 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 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 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 related to 

Pennsylvania Title V fees does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the program 

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. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES