Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 203 / Thursday, October 19, 2000 / Proposed Rules 62675

Dated: October 12, 2000.

Bradley M. Campbell,

Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 00–26904 Filed 10–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MD107–3059; FRL–6888–1]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans;

Maryland; New Source Review

Regulations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to grant

limited approval of a State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision

submitted by the State of Maryland

pursuant to the requirements of the

Clean Air Act (CAA). This revision

requires major new sources and major

modifications to existing sources of

volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and

nitrogen oxides ( NOX) to meet certain

new source review permitting

requirements if they are proposing to

locate or are located within the State of

Maryland. These NSR requirements

apply not only in those portions of

Maryland designated as ozone

nonattainment areas, but throughout the

State of Maryland as the entire state is

located within the Ozone Transport

Region (OTR). The intended effect of

this action is two-fold. First, it

withdraws the rulemaking action

proposing limited approval/disapproval

of Maryland’s NSR regulations

published by EPA on May 25, 1994.

Secondly, it proposes limited approval

of Maryland’s NSR regulations as

Maryland has amended those

regulations to correct the deficiencies

noted in EPA’s May 25, 1994 proposal.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before November 9, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

Makeba Morris, Chief, Permits and

Technical Assessment Branch, Mailcode

3AP11, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.

Copies of the documents relevant to this

action are available 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, and

at the Maryland Department of the

Environment, 2500 Broening Highway,

Baltimore, Maryland 21224.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Perry R. Pandya, Mailcode 3AP11, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region III, 1650 Arch Street,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103, (215)

814–2167.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. New Source Requirements and

Maryland’s SIP Revision

The CAA requires that all states

submit revisions to their State

Implementation plans (SIPs) requiring

major new and major modified sources

to meet certain new source review

(NSR) requirements if they are located

(or are proposing to locate) in areas

designated nonattainment for a

pollutant, or, in the case of VOC or NOX

sources, in the OTR. This requirement

for a SIP revision applies to Maryland,

which currently has areas designated

nonattainment for ozone (a pollutant

formed under certain meteorological

conditions from precursor VOC and

NOX emissions). Additionally, the entire

State of Maryland is located within the

OTR.

On June 8, 1993, Maryland submitted

a revision to its SIP requiring new major

sources and major modifications of

VOCs and NOX to meet certain NSR

requirements. On May 25, 1994, EPA

proposed limited approval/disapproval

of that SIP revision (59 FR 26994). At

that time, EPA identified a number of

deficiencies with Maryland’s NSR

regulations which the state would have

to correct in order for EPA to grant final

approval of its NSR regulations. The

only comments submitted pursuant to

EPA’s May 25, 1994 proposal came from

the State of Maryland.

On September 25, 2000, the State of

Maryland submitted a revision to its SIP

which consists of amendments to its

NSR regulations. Those amendments

were made to satisfy the deficiencies

cited by EPA in its May 25, 1994

proposal.

EPA has determined that Maryland’s

NSR regulations, as amended and

submitted on September 25, 2000,

correct those deficiencies. For a detailed

analysis of the deficiencies and how

they were corrected, please refer to the

Technical Support Documents in the

Administrative Record. Therefore, EPA

has determined that the NSR regulations

submitted by the State of Maryland as

a SIP revision on June 8, 1993 in

conjunction with the amendments to

those regulations submitted as a SIP

revision on September 25, 2000 satisfy

the CAA and its associated NSR

regulations and policies.

A detailed description of federal NSR

requirements, Maryland’s NSR

regulations, the deficiencies of the those

regulations, and specific corrections that

Maryland had to make to those NSR

regulations were provided in EPA’s May

25, 1994 proposed rulemaking notice

(59 FR 26994) and shall not be restated

here. Maryland’s only amendments to

its NSR regulations, as submitted on

September 25, 2000, were those

necessary to address the deficiencies

cited by EPA in its May 25, 1994

proposed rulemaking notice. Rather

than proceed to final action, however,

given the length of time that has

transpired since that proposed action,

EPA believes it is prudent to withdraw

the May 25, 1994 proposed limited

approval/disapproval and to re-propose

limited approval of Maryland’s NSR

regulations.

II. Why EPA is Proposing Limited

Versus Full Approval of Maryland’s

NSR Regulations

Although the following explanation

for EPA proposing limited approval was

provided in the May 25, 1994 proposal,

given that EPA is re-proposing limited

approval at this time, it is being restated

here.

The Code of Maryland Regulations at

COMAR 26.11.17.04E provides that

emissions reductions achieved by

shutting down an existing source or

permanently curtailing productions or

operating hours below baseline levels

are creditable if the reductions are

permanent, quantifiable, and federally

enforceable, and only if such reductions

occurred on or after January 1, 1991.

However, existing EPA regulations also

provide that if a state does not have an

EPA-approved attainment

demonstration, then post-January 1,

1991 reductions achieved by a

shutdown or curtailment of production

or operating hours are only creditable if

the state is current in its attainment

planning obligations. See 54 FR 27286

(June 28, 1989). EPA’s current rules also

require that even in nonattainment areas

with approved attainment

demonstrations, only those shutdown or

curtailment credits generated after the

date of permit application are

creditable. See 40 CFR part 51,

appendix S.

Maryland’s revised NSR regulation

affirmatively allows persons seeking to

build new major sources or major

modifications to take credit for emission

reductions resulting from shutdowns or

curtailments of production or operating

hours if those shutdowns or

curtailments occurred after January 1,

1991. Because Maryland’s regulation

allows persons seeking to construct new

62676 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 203 / Thursday, October 19, 2000 / Proposed Rules

major sources or major modifications in

a nonattainment area for which EPA has

not approved an attainment plan to take

credit for shutdowns or curtailments

which occurred prior to the date they

filed their permit application,

Maryland’s NSR regulation appears not

to conform with the existing EPA

prohibition on the use of preapplication shutdown or curtailment

credits in nonattainment areas for which

EPA has not approved an attainment

plan. This prohibition is found at 40

CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(2).

On July 23, 1996, EPA published in

the Federal Register a comprehensive

rulemaking which proposed significant

changes to the current NSR rules. This

proposed rulemaking is hereinafter

referred to as the ‘‘NSR Reform

Rulemaking.’’ See 61 FR 38250. The

NSR Reform Rulemaking proposes to

revise regulations for the approval and

promulgation of SIPs and the

requirements for preparation, adoption,

and submittal of implementation plans

governing the NSR programs mandated

by parts C and D of Title I of the CAA.

Specifically, section VII. A. of EPA’s

NSR Reform Rulemaking, entitled

‘‘Emissions Credits Resulting From

Source Shutdowns and Curtailments,’’

proposes to eliminate the current

restrictions on crediting of emissions

reductions from source shutdowns and

curtailments that occurred after 1990. In

the NSR Reform Rulemaking, EPA

proposes two different alternatives for

eliminating the prior shutdown

prohibition. The second of these

alternatives, entitled ‘‘Shutdown

Alternative 2,’’ generally lifts the

current offset restriction applicable to

emissions reductions from source

shutdowns and source curtailments for

all nonattainment areas and all

pollutants where such reductions occur

after the base year of the emissions

inventory used (or to be used) to meet

the applicable provisions of part D of

the CAA. See proposed section

51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(5), Alternative 2, 61

FR 38314. Under this alternative, states

could allow emissions reductions from

source shutdowns or curtailments to be

used as offsets in all nonattainment

areas and for all pollutants provided

such reductions occurred after the base

year of the emissions inventory used by

the state to meet the applicable

provisions of part D of the CAA. As

explained above, Maryland’s NSR rule

allows sources to take credit for

emissions reductions from shutdowns

or curtailments of production or

operating hours which occurred after

January 1, 1991. This is consistent with

Alternative 2 of EPA’s NSR Reform

Rulemaking, which credits only those

emissions reductions from source

shutdowns and curtailments occurring

after 1990, i.e., the base year of the

emissions inventory used to meet the

applicable provisions of part D of the

CAA. Thus, EPA believes that

Maryland’s NSR regulation is generally

consistent with ‘‘Shutdown Alternative

2’’ as described in EPA’s proposed NSR

Reform Rulemaking, because both

Maryland’s rule and Alternative 2 allow

sources to take credit only from

emission reductions or curtailments

occurring after January 1, 1991. Because

Maryland’s NSR regulation is generally

consistent with Alternative 2 of EPA’s

proposed NSR Reform Rulemaking (as

discussed above), and because approval

of the revised version of Maryland’s

NSR regulation submitted on June 8,

1993 and as amended on September 25,

2000 would strengthen the SIP to be

consistent with the CAA’s provisions for

NSR, EPA believes that Maryland’s

revised NSR regulation warrants limited

approval. If EPA promulgates

Alternative 2, this limited approval

would convert to a full approval.

The alternative shutdown related

provision set forth in EPA’s NSR Reform

Rulemaking proposal is entitled

‘‘Shutdown Alternative 1.’’ This

alternative proposes, for ozone

nonattainment areas, to lift the current

offset restriction applicable to emissions

reductions from source shutdowns and

curtailments in such areas without EPAapproved attainment demonstrations,

provided the emissions reductions

occur after November 15, 1990 and the

area has kept current with the CAA’s

scheduled part D ozone nonattainment

planning requirements. See proposed

section 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(5) and (6),

Alternative 1.

EPA acknowledges that either

Alternative 1 or 2 may be eventually

incorporated into the final NSR Reform

Rulemaking upon its final

promulgation. It is also noted that while

EPA is, with this rulemaking, proposing

to grant limited approval of Maryland’s

NSR regulation based on the rule’s

consistency with Shutdown Alternative

2 in EPA’s NSR Reform rulemaking, the

state may need to amend its NSR

regulation if Shutdown Alternative 1

rather than Shutdown Alternative 2 is

promulgated. If Alternative 1 is

promulgated, EPA would determine the

status of Maryland’s conformance with

part D ozone planning requirements for

any nonattainment area. If Maryland’s

SIP were not current with the part D

ozone planning requirements for any

nonattainment area, EPA would make a

SIP call for Maryland to amend its NSR

rule to conform with Alternative 1 as

provided in EPA’s final NSR Reform

Rulemaking.

Maryland’s regulation does not state

that any emission reductions must also

have occurred after the base year of the

emissions inventory most recently used

(or to be used) to meet the applicable

provisions of part D of the CAA. If an

area in Maryland is designated as a new

nonattainment area in the future, the

baseline year of the inventory used in

the attainment demonstration for that

area would likely be after the January 1,

1991 baseline year used for areas

designated as nonattainment at the time

of the 1990 CAA amendments. Because

Maryland does not state in its NSR

regulation that any emission reductions

must also have occurred after the base

year of the emissions inventory most

recently used (or to be used) to meet the

applicable provisions of part D of the

CAA, Maryland would have to modify

its NSR rule if, in the future, Maryland

is required to do a new attainment

demonstration because a new area in

Maryland is designated as

nonattainment or the attainment

demonstration for any current

nonattainment area is revised to use a

base year emission inventory other than

1990.

III. Proposed Action

Maryland’s only amendments to its

NSR regulations, as submitted on

September 25, 2000, were those

necessary to address the deficiencies

cited by EPA in its May 25, 1994

proposal. Rather than proceed to grant

final limited approval, however, given

the length of time that has transpired

since that proposed action, EPA believes

it is prudent to withdraw the May 25,

2000 proposed limited approval/

disapproval (FR 59 26994) and to repropose limited approval of Maryland’s

NSR regulations.

EPA is hereby withdrawing the

limited approval/disapproval action of

Maryland’s NSR SIP revision that was

published in the Federal Register on

May 25, 1994 (FR 59 26994). EPA is reproposing limited approval. Such

approval would strengthen the SIP for

meeting the NSR requirements of the

CAA. Because Maryland’s NSR

regulations are generally consistent with

Alternative 2 of EPA’s proposed NSR

Reform Rulemaking (as discussed

above), and because approval of the

revised version of Maryland’s NSR

regulations submitted on June 8, 1993

and September 25, 2000 would

strengthen the SIP to be consistent with

the CAA’s provisions for NSR, EPA

believes that Maryland’s revised NSR

regulations warrants limited approval. If

EPA promulgates Alternative 2, this

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 203 / Thursday, October 19, 2000 / Proposed Rules 62677

limited approval would convert to a full

approval.

Written comments must be received

on or before November 9, 2000. EPA

calls your attention to the November 9,

2000 deadline date for submittal of

comments on this proposed action to

grant limited approval of this SIP

revision submitted by the State of

Maryland. The EPA is providing a

shortened time period for comment for

two reasons. As an initial matter, this

revision is non-controversial and EPA

does not expect comment as we

proposed approval of it previously and

got comments only from the State of

Maryland. Maryland’s recent revisions

were done simply to correct the

deficiencies noted in our previous

proposed action. Moreover, this SIP

revision is necessary for full approval of

the attainment demonstration SIP for

the Metropolitan Washington, D.C.

ozone nonattainment area. The EPA is

currently under an obligation to

complete rulemaking by November 15,

2000 fully approving the attainment

demonstration for the Metropolitan

Washington, D.C. ozone nonattainment

area or, in the alternative, proposing a

Federal implementation plan.

IV. Administrative Requirements

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR

51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed

action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory

action’’ and therefore is not subject to

review by the Office of Management and

Budget. This proposed action merely

approves state law as meeting federal

requirements and imposes no additional

requirements beyond those imposed by

state law. Accordingly, the

Administrator certifies that this

proposed rule will not have a significant

economic impact on a substantial

number of small entities under the

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601

et seq.). Because this rule proposes to

approve pre-existing requirements

under state law and does not impose

any additional enforceable duty beyond

that required by state law, it 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). For the same

reason, this proposed rule also does not

significantly or uniquely affect the

communities of tribal governments, as

specified by Executive Order 13084 (63

FR 27655, May 10, 1998). This proposed

rule will not have substantial direct

effects on the States, on the relationship

between the national government and

the States, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities among the

various levels of government, as

specified in Executive Order 13132 (64

FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it

merely approves a state rule

implementing a federal standard, and

does not alter the relationship or the

distribution of power and

responsibilities established in the Clean

Air Act. This proposed rule also is not

subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR

19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not

economically significant. In reviewing

SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to

approve state choices, provided that

they meet the criteria of the Clean Air

Act. In this context, in the absence of a

prior existing requirement for the State

to use voluntary consensus standards

(VCS), EPA has no authority to

disapprove a SIP submission for failure

to use VCS. It would thus be

inconsistent with applicable law for

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of

the Clean Air Act. Thus, the

requirements of section 12(d) of the

National Technology Transfer and

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.

272 note) do not apply. As required by

section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61

FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing

this proposed rule, EPA has taken the

necessary steps to eliminate drafting

errors and ambiguity, minimize

potential litigation, and provide a clear

legal standard for affected conduct. EPA

has complied with Executive Order

12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by

examining the takings implications of

the rule in accordance with the

‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental

Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk

and Avoidance of Unanticipated

Takings’’ issued under the executive

order. This proposed rule to grant

limited approval of Maryland’s NSR

regulations does not impose an

information collection burden under the

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Hydrocarbons, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: October 13, 2000.

Thomas Voltaggio,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

[FR Doc. 00–26903 Filed 10–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[MD 096–3053; FRL–6887–9]

Approval and Promulgation of Air

Quality Implementation Plans;

Maryland; Nitrogen Oxides Budget

Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve

a State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revision submitted by the State of

Maryland. The revision consists of

amendments to Maryland’s Nitrogen

Oxides ( NOX) Budget Program. The

revisions implement the Ozone

Transport Commission’s (OTC)

September 27, 1994 Memorandum of

Understanding (MOU) in Maryland. In

accordance with the MOU, the revisions

implement the Maryland portion of a

regional NOX cap and trade program

that significantly reduces NOX

emissions generated within the Ozone

Transport Region (OTR). EPA is

approving these revisions in accordance

with the requirements of the Clean Air

Act.

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before November 9, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be

mailed to David L. Arnold, Chief, Ozone

& Mobile Sources Branch, Mailcode

3AP21, U.S. EPA, Region III, 1650 Arch

Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103. Copies

of the documents relevant to this action

are available for public inspection

during normal business hours at the Air

Protection Division, EPA, Region III,

1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA

19103 and Maryland Department of the

Environment, 2500 Broening Highway,

Baltimore, MD, 21224.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Cristina Fernandez, (215) 814–2178, or

by e-mail at fernandez.cristina@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On August 28,1998, the Maryland

Department of the Environment (MDE)

submitted a revision to its SIP. The

revision to the SIP includes the

adoption of new sections .01–.14 under

a new chapter, COMAR 26.11.27—Post

RACT Requirements for NOX Sources

(Nitrogen Oxides ( NOX) Budget

Program) and new sections .01–.13

under a new chapter, COMAR

26.11.28—Polices and Procedures

Relating to Maryland’s NOX Budget

Program. On November 16, 1999 and