Document ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0353-0005
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2006-10-10T04:00Z

SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION III

1650 Arch Street 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103

DATE:	September 28 2006

							

SUBJECT:	Technical Support Document - Maryland; Redesignation to
Attainment of the Kent and Queen Anne’s Ozone Nonattainment Area and
Approval of the Area’s Maintenance Plan (EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0353)

FROM:	Helene Drago, Environmental Scientist	/s/		

		Air Quality Planning Branch

								

TO:		File								

THRU:	Makeba Morris, Chief		/s/

		Air Quality Planning Branch

I.  BACKGROUND

On May 2 and 19, 2006, the Maryland Department of Environmental
Protection (MDE) formally submitted a redesignation request for the Kent
and Queen Anne’s (herein referred to as the “Kent and Queen Anne’s
area”) ozone nonattainment area to attainment of the eight-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS).  The area is comprised of
two counties (Kent and Queen Anne’s).  Also, On May 19, 2006, Maryland
submitted a maintenance plan for the Kent and Queen Anne’s as a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision, to assure continued attainment over
the next 12 years.  

The Kent and Queen Anne’s area was designated as marginal 8-hour ozone
nonattainment status on September 22, 2004 (69 FR 56697), based on its
exceedance of the health-based standards for ozone.  Under section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, the following five criteria must be met for an
ozone nonattainment area to be redesignated to attainment:

A.  The area must meet the ozone NAAQS.

B.  The area must have a fully approved SIP under section 110(k). 

C.  The area must show improvement in air quality due to permanent and
enforceable reductions 

in emissions. 

D. The area must meet all requirements applicable under section 110 and
Part D.

E.  The area must have a fully approved maintenance plan under section
175A of the CAA.  

  

II. EPA Analysis of the State of Maryland’s Request

As identified above, Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA establishes five
criteria that an area must meet in order to be redesignated to
attainment.  EPA provided guidance on how it would review requests for
redesignation in a September 4, 1992 memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management Division Directors, entitled,
“Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment.”  The following is a discussion of how the State of
Maryland’s May 2 and 19, 2006 submittals satisfy the five requirements
of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.  The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) will discuss its evaluation of the maintenance plan under its
analysis of the redesignation request.  

A.  Attainment of the Ozone NAAQS in the Kent and Queen Anne’s Area

Section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA states that the EPA Administrator shall
determine whether an area has achieved the ozone standard based on the
design value of that area.  The design value for an area is based on the
three-year average (2003-2005) of the monitored annual fourth-highest
daily maximum eight-hour average ozone concentration.  In the Kent and
Queen Anne’s area, there is one ozone monitor located in the
Millington Wildlife Management Area in Kent County. According to the
Code of Federal Regulations, 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, which
establishes the procedure for interpreting ozone monitoring data under
the standard promulgated in 40 CFR 50.10, the Kent and Queen Anne’s
area is attaining the ozone standard for the most recent three-year
period of 2003-2005 (see Table 1 below).  The data collected at the
ozone monitors satisfy the CAA requirement that the three-year average
of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum eight-hour average ozone
concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 parts per million (ppm). 
The State of Maryland’s request for redesignation of the Kent and
Queen Anne’s area indicates that the data was quality assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58.  The State uses the Air Quality
Subsystem (AQS)) as the permanent database to maintain its data and
quality assures the data transfers and content for accuracy.  In
addition, as discussed below with respect to the maintenance plan, MDE
has committed to continue monitoring in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. 
   

			

Table 1: Kent and Queen Anne’s Counties Nonattainment Area Fourth
Highest 8-hour Average Values; Millington Monitor, 

Year	Annual 4th High Reading (ppm)

2003	0.086

2004	0.078

2005	0.084

The average for the 3-year period 2003 through 2005 is 0.082 ppm

The air quality data for 2003-2005 show that the entire area has
attained the standard with a design value 0.082 ppm.  The data collected
at the area monitor satisfy the CAA requirement that the 3-year average
of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm as determined according
to the procedures of 40 CFR 50.10.  In addition, as discussed below with
respect to the maintenance plan, MDE has committed to continue
monitoring in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.  In summary, EPA has
determined that the data submitted by Maryland and data taken from AQS
indicates that the Kent and Queen Anne’s area has attained and
continues to attain the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

						

B.  Fully approved SIP under Section 110(k) of the CAA 

EPA has determined that the Kent and Queen Anne’s area has met all SIP
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation under section 110
of the CAA (General SIP Requirements) and that it meets all applicable
SIP requirements under Part D of Title I of the CAA, in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(v).  In addition, EPA has determined that the SIP
is fully approved with respect to all requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). 
In making these proposed determinations, EPA ascertained what
requirements are applicable to the area, and determined that the
applicable portions of the SIP meeting these requirements are fully
approved under section 110(k) of the CAA.  We note that SIPs must be
fully approved only with respect to applicable requirements.  

The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (“Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,” Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992)
describes EPA’s interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E) with respect to
the timing of applicable requirements.  Under this interpretation, to
qualify for redesignation, states requesting redesignation to attainment
must meet only the relevant CAA requirements that came due prior to the
submittal of a complete redesignation request.  See also Michael Shapiro
memorandum, September 17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7,
1995) (redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor).  Applicable requirements of
the CAA that come due subsequent to the area’s submittal of a complete
redesignation request remain applicable until a redesignation is
approved, but are not required as a prerequisite to redesignation. 
Section 175A(c) of the CAA.  Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir.
2004).  See also 68 FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St.
Louis).

1.  Section 110 General SIP Requirements:

Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA delineates the general
requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions limitations
and other control measures, means, or techniques, provisions for the
establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect
data on ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations. 
The general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2)
include, but are not limited to, the following:

Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after reasonable
public notice and hearing; 

Provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate procedures
needed to monitor ambient air quality; 

Implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the
implementation of Part C requirement (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD); 

Provisions for the implementation of Part D requirements for New Source
Review (NSR) permit programs; 

Provisions for air pollution modeling; and 

Provisions for public and local agency participation in planning and
emission control rule development.       

Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another state.  To implement this provision, EPA has
required certain states to establish programs to address transport of
air pollutants in accordance with the NOx SIP Call, October 27, 1998 (63
FR 57356), amendments to the NOx SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR 26298)
and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and the Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR), May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162).  However, the section 110(a)(2)(D)
requirements for a state are not linked with a particular nonattainment
area’s designation and classification in that state.  EPA believes
that the requirements linked with a particular nonattainment area’s
designation and classifications are the relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request.  The transport SIP submittal
requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a state regardless
of the designation of any one particular area in the state.

Thus, we do not believe that these requirements should be construed to
be applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.  In addition,
EPA believes that the other section 110 elements not connected with
nonattainment plan submissions and not linked with an area’s
attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation.  Maryland will still be subject to these requirements
after the Kent and Queen Anne’s area is redesignated.  The section 110
and Part D requirements, which are linked with a particular area’s
designation and classification, are the relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request.  This policy is consistent with
EPA’s existing policy on applicability of conformity (i.e., for
redesignations) and oxygenated fuels requirement.  See Reading,
Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings 61 FR 53174-53176 (October
10, 1996), 62 FR 24826 (May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio,
final rulemaking 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final
rulemaking 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995).  See also the discussion on
this issue in the Cincinnati redesignation 65 FR 37890 (June 19, 2000),
and in the Pittsburgh redesignation 66 FR 53099 (October 19, 2001). 
Similarly, with respect to the NOx SIP Call rules, EPA noted in its
Phase 1 Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, that the NOx SIP
Call rules are not “an ‘applicable requirement’ for purposes of
section 110(l) because the NOx rules apply regardless of an area’s
attainment or nonattainment status for the 8-hour (or the 1-hour)
NAAQS.” 69 FR 23951, 23983 (April 30, 2004).  

EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. 
Any section 110 requirements that are linked to the Part D requirements
for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are not yet due, because, as we
explain in the notice, no Part D requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due prior to submission
of the redesignation request.  

Because the Maryland  SIP satisfy all of the applicable general SIP
elements and requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2),  EPA concludes
that Maryland has satisfied the criterion of section 107(d)(3)(E)
regarding section 110 of the Act.  

2.  The Kent and Queen Anne’s area has a fully approved SIP for the
purposes of redesignation:

EPA has fully approved the Maryland SIP for the purposes of
redesignation.  EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request.  Calcagni Memo, p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania
Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall
v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional measures it
may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action.  See 68 FR 25425
(May 12, 2003) and citations therein.  The Kent and Queen Anne’s area
was a 1-hour maintenance area at the time of its designation as a basic
8-hour ozone nonattainment area on April 30, 2004.  Because the Kent and
Queen Anne’s area was a 1-hour maintenance area, all previous Part D
SIP submittal requirements were fulfilled at the time the area was
redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS or have been
fulfilled with the submittal of the 8-hour maintenance plan for Kent and
Queen Anne’s Counties.  See 59 FR 45980 at 45981-45982 (September 6,
1994), 59 FR 45019 (September 6, 1994), and, 59 FR 65719 (December 21,
1994).  Because there are no current outstanding SIP submission
requirements applicable for the purposes of redesignating the Kent and
Queen Anne’s area, the applicable implementation plan satisfies all
pertinent SIP requirements.  As indicated previously, EPA believes that
the section 110 elements not connected with Part D nonattainment plan
submissions and not linked to the area’s nonattainment status are not
applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.  EPA also
believes that no 8-hour Part D requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation have yet become due for the Kent and Queen Anne’s area,
and therefore they need not be approved into the SIP prior to
redesignation.

C.  Demonstration of Permanent and Enforceable Improvement

EPA believes that the State has demonstrated that the observed air
quality improvement in the area is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP,
Federal measures, and other state-adopted measures.  Emissions
reductions attributable to these rules, in the Kent and Queen Anne’s
area, are shown in Table 2.    

 

Table 2: Total VOC and NOx Emissions for 2002 and 2005 (tpd)

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)

Year	Point	Area *	Nonroad	Mobile	Total 

Year 2002	0.12	5.12	11.0	4.18	20.4

Year 2005	0.12	5.31	10.0	3.15	18.6

Diff. (02-04)	0	+0.2	-1.0	-1.0	-1.8

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)

Year	Point	Area *	Nonroad	Mobile	Total 

Year 2002	0.07	0.23	3.74	7.96	12.0

Year 2005	0.07	0.25	3.77	6.57	10.7

Diff. (02-05)	0	+0.02	+0.03	-1.4	-1.3

Between 2002 and 2005, VOC emissions were reduced by 1.8 tpd and , and
NOx emissions were reduced by 1.3 tpd, due to  permanent and enforceable
measures implemented or in the process of being implemented in the Kent
and Queen Anne’s area.

						

Nearly all of the reductions in VOC are attributable to mobile onroad
and nonroad source emission controls and all of the reductions in NOx
are attributable to the implementation of mobile source programs.  
Maryland noted a major portion of the decrease in ozone precursors is
due to the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program.  Over a period of
time, older, poorer performing on-road vehicles have been gradually
replaced with newer vehicles that must meet increasingly stringent
tailpipe standards.  

Other regulations, such as the non-road diesel, 69 FR 38958 (June 29,
2004), the heavy duty engine and vehicle standards, 66 FR 5002 (January
18, 2001) and the new Tier 2 tailpipe standards for automobiles, 65 FR
6698 (February 10, 2000), are also expected to greatly reduce emissions
throughout the country and thereby reduce emissions impacting the Kent
and Queen Anne’s area monitors.  The Tier 2 standards came into effect
in 2004, and by 2030, EPA expects that the new Tier 2 standards will
reduce NOx emissions by about 74 percent nationally.  EPA believes that
permanent and enforceable emissions reductions are the cause of the
long-term improvement in ozone levels and are the cause of the area
achieving attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard.   

						

Conformity Process

1.  What Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs)?

Under the CAA, States are required to submit, at various times, control
strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone areas.  These control
strategy SIPs (i.e. RFP SIPs and attainment demonstration SIPs) and
maintenance plans identify and establish MVEBs for certain criteria
pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from on-road
mobile sources.  In the maintenance plan the MVEBs are termed “on-road
mobile source emissions budgets.”  Pursuant to 40 CFR part 93 and
51.112, MVEBs must be established in an ozone maintenance plan.  A MVEB
is the portion of the total allowable emissions that is allocated to
highway and transit vehicle use and emissions.  A MVEB serves as a
ceiling on emissions from an area’s planned transportation system. 
The MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the November
24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188).  The preamble
also describes how to establish and revise the MVEBs in control strategy
SIPs and maintenance plans.  

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation projects, such as
the construction

of new highways, must “conform” to (i.e., be consistent with) the
part of the State’s air

quality plan that addresses pollution from cars and trucks. 
“Conformity” to the SIP means

that transportation activities will not cause new air quality
violations, worsen existing

violations, or delay timely attainment of or reasonable progress towards
the NAAQS.  If a transportation plan does not “conform,” most new
projects that would expand the capacity of roadways cannot go forward. 
Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and
procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity of such
transportation activities to a state implementation plan.  

When reviewing submitted “control strategy” SIPs or maintenance
plans containing

MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find the MVEB budget contained therein
“adequate” for

use in determining transportation conformity.  After EPA affirmatively
finds the submitted

MVEB is adequate for transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB can
be used by State

and Federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation
projects “conform” to

the state implementation plan as required by section 176(c) of the CAA. 
EPA’s substantive criteria for determining “adequacy” of a MVEB
are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).

EPA’s process for determining “adequacy” consists of three basic
steps: public notification of a SIP submission, a public comment period,
and EPA’s adequacy finding.  This process for determining the adequacy
of submitted SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in EPA’s May 14, 1999
guidance, “Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999,
Conformity Court Decision.”  This guidance was finalized in the
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the “New 8-Hour Ozone
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous
Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments
- Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Change” on July 1,
2004 (69 FR 40004).  EPA follows this guidance and rulemaking in making
its adequacy determinations.  

The MVEBs for the Kent and Queen Anne’s area are listed in Table 3 of
this document for the 2009 and 2018 years and are the projected
emissions for the on-road mobile sources plus any portion of the safety
margin allocated to the MVEBs (safety margin allocation for 2009 and
2018 only).  These emission budgets, when approved by EPA, must be used
for transportation conformity determinations.

Table 3: Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Tons per Day (tpd)

Year	NOx	VOC

2009	5.11	2.72

2018	2.38	1.62

			

2.  What is a Safety Margin? 

A “safety margin” is the difference between the attainment level of
emissions (from all sources) and the projected level of emissions (from
all sources) in the maintenance plan.  The attainment level of emissions
is the level of emissions during one of the years in which the Kent and
Queen Anne’s area met the NAAQS.  The following example is for the
2018 safety margin: Kent and Queen Anne’s first attained the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS during the 2002 to 2005 time period.  The State used 2005 as
the year to determine attainment levels of emissions for the Kent and
Queen Anne’s area.  The total emissions from point, area, mobile
on-road, and mobile non-road sources in 2005 equaled 18.58 tpd of VOC
and 10.66 tpd of NOx.  The MDE  projected emissions out to the year 2018
and projected a total of 12.84 tpd of VOC and 5.53 tpd of NOx from all
sources in the Kent and Queen Anne’s area.  The safety margin for Kent
and Queen Anne’s  for 2018 would be the difference between these
amounts, or 5.74 tpd of VOC and 5.13 tpd of NOx.  The emissions up to
the level of the attainment year including the safety margins are
projected to maintain the area's air quality consistent with the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.  The safety margin is the extra emissions reduction below
the attainment levels that can be allocated for emissions by various
sources as long as the total emission levels are maintained at or below
the attainment levels.  Table 4 shows the safety margins for the 2009
and 2018 years.

Table 4:  2009 and 2018 Safety Margins for the Kent and Queen Anne’s
Area

Inventory Year	VOC Emissions (tpd)	NOx Emissions (tpd)

2005 Attainment	18.58	10.66

2009 Interim	16.37	8.81

2009 Safety Margin	2.21	1.85

2004 Attainment	18.58	10.66

2018 Final	12.84	5.53

2018 Safety Margin	5.74	5.13

The MDE allocated 0.29 tpd NOx and 0.27 tpd VOC to the 2009 interim VOC
projected on-road mobile source emissions projection and the 2009
interim NOx projected on-road mobile source emissions projection to
arrive at the 2009 MVEBs.  For the 2018 MVEBs the MDE allocated 0.24 tpd
NOx and 0.07 tpd VOC from the 2018 safety margins to arrive at the 2018
MVEBs.  Once allocated to the mobile source budgets these portions of
the safety margins are no longer available, and may no longer be
allocated to any other source category.  Table 5 shows the final 2009
and 2018 MVEBS for the Kent and Queen Anne’s area. 

Table 5:  2009 and 2018 Final MVEBs for the Kent and Queen Anne’s Area

Inventory Year	VOC Emissions (tpd)	NOx Emissions (tpd)

2009 projected on-road mobile source projected emissions	2.45	4.82

2009 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs	0.27	0.29

2009 MVEBs	2.72	5.11

2018 projected on-road mobile source projected emissions	1.55	2.14

2018 Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs	0.07	0.24

2018 MVEBs	1.62	2.38

3.  How Much of the Margins Were Allocated to the Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets?

The State allocated part of the safety margins to the MVEBs:

(a) 2005 MVEBs - Section 93.118 of the conformity rule (40 CFR part 93)
sets forth the criteria and procedures for using MVEBs in the SIP. 
Under section 93.118(b) consistency with the MVEBs must be demonstrated
for each year for which the applicable (and/or submitted) implementation
plan specifically establishes MVEBs, for the attainment year (if it is
within the timeframe of the transportation plan), for the last year of
the transportation plan's forecast period, and for any intermediate
years as necessary so that the years for which consistency is
demonstrated are no more than ten years apart.  

Under section 93.118(b)(2) the following criteria apply when a
maintenance plan has been submitted:  

(i)  Emissions must be less than or equal to the MVEBs established for
the last year of the maintenance plan, and for any other years for which
the maintenance plan establishes MVEBs (§93.118(b)(1)(i));

(ii) For years after the last year of the maintenance plan, emissions
must be less than or equal to the maintenance plan's MVEBs for the last
year of the maintenance plan (§93.118(b)(1)(ii));

(iii) If an approved and/or submitted control strategy implementation
plan has established MVEBs for years in the time frame of the
transportation plan, emissions in these years must be less than or equal
to the control strategy implementation plan's MVEBs for these years
(§93.118(b)(1)(iii)); and

(iv) For any analysis years before the last year of the maintenance
plan, emissions must be less than or equal to the MVEBs established for
the most recent prior year (§93.118(b)(1)(iv)). 

In the absence of an approved (or submitted with adequate MVEBs) 8-hour
ozone SIP, the requirement of section 93.118(b) to demonstrate
conformity for the attainment year (if it is within the timeframe of the
transportation plan) conformity is demonstrated using the MVEBs in the
approved 1-hour maintenance plan SIP.  Once an 8-hour ozone SIP is
approved the MVEBs in the 1-hour maintenance plan SIP will no longer be
the applicable MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 93.109(e).  “Any existing
1-hour ozone SIP budgets and/or interim emissions tests will no longer
be used for conformity for either NOx or VOC once an adequate or
approved 8-hour SIP budget is established for such a precursor.”  70
FR 40022 (July 1, 2005).

In the case of the Kent and Queen Anne’s area maintenance plan, EPA
believes that section 93.118 will apply to future conformity
determinations after the effective date of an approval of the
maintenance plan as follows:

(i) There currently are no applicable MVEBs in an approved control
strategy implementation plans for the area, and, therefore, section
93.118(b)(1)(iii) does not apply.  The approved 1-hour maintenance plan
is not a control strategy implementation plan as that term is defined by
40 CFR 93.101 and these MVEBs in the 1-hour SIP will cease to be
applicable after the 8-hour maintenance plan MVEBs are deemed adequate
or approved;

(ii) Because the maintenance plan establishes MVEBs for 2009, conformity
must be demonstrated for 2009 against the 2009 MVEBs whenever 2009 is
within the time frame of the transportation plan/TIP;

(iii) Because the maintenance plan establishes MVEBs for 2018,
conformity must be demonstrated for 2018 against the 2018 MVEBs whenever
2018 is in the time frame of the transportation plan/TIP;

(iv) For analysis years after the last year of the maintenance plan, the
applicable MVEBs will be those established for 2018.  If the last
forecast year of the transportation plan is 2029, conformity must be
shown for 2018 (because the maintenance plan establishes MVEBs for
2018), 2029 (because this is the last forecast year of the
transportation plan) and some interim year;

(v)  The 2009 and 2018 MVEBs are for years less than 10 years apart. 
Therefore, for all periods prior to 2018, any demonstration of
consistency against these MVEBs will always ensure compliance with the
requirement of subsection 93.118(b) that any interim year period be no
more than ten years apart.

(b) 2009 MVEBs - For the year 2009, the available safety margins were:
1.85 tpd for NOx and 2.21 tpd for VOC.  These margins are the difference
between the 2004 attainment year emissions inventory levels and the
projected 2009 emissions levels before any adjustments  

For the year 2009, the projected on-road mobile source emissions were:
5.11 tpd for NOx and 2.72 tpd for VOC.  After partial allocation of the
safety margin to the MVEBs, the remaining safety margins in 2009 are
1.56 tpd for NOx and 1.94 tpd for VOC.  

(c) 2018 MVEBs - For the year 2018, the available safety margins were:
5.13 tpd for NOx and 5.74 tpd for VOC.  These margins are the difference
between the 2004 attainment year emissions inventory levels and the
projected 2018 emissions levels before any adjustments  

For the year 2018, the projected on-road mobile source emissions were:
2.38 tpd for NOx and 1.62 tpd for VOC.  After partial allocation of the
safety margin to the MVEBs, the remaining safety margins in 2018 are
4.89 tpd for NOx and 5.67 tpd for VOC.  

It should be noted that the above MVEBs are to be used by the
transportation authorities to assure that transportation plans,
programs, and projects for the Kent and Queen Anne’s nonattainment
area are consistent with, and conform to, the maintenance plan of
acceptable air quality in the area. 

								

4.  Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?

The 2009 and 2018 MVEBs for the Kent and Queen Anne’s area are
approvable because the MVEBs for NOx and VOC, including the allocated
safety margins, continue to maintain the total emissions at or below the
attainment year inventory levels as required by the transportation
conformity regulations.

						

			

5.  What Is the Adequacy and Approval Process for the MVEBs in the Kent
and Queen Anne’s  Area Maintenance Plan?

The MVEBs for the Kent and Queen Anne’s area maintenance plan are
being posted to EPA's conformity Web site concurrent with this proposal.
 The public comment period will end at the same time as the public
comment period for this proposed rule.  In this case, EPA is
concurrently processing the action on the maintenance plan and the
adequacy process for the MVEBs contained therein.  In this proposed
rule, EPA is proposing to find the MVEBs adequate and also proposing to
approve the MVEBs as part of the maintenance plan.  The MVEBs cannot be
used for transportation conformity until the maintenance plan update and
associated MVEBs are approved in a final Federal Register notice, or EPA
otherwise finds the budgets adequate in a separate action following the
comment period.  				

If EPA receives adverse written comments with respect to the proposed
approval of the Kent and Queen Anne’s area MVEBs, or any other aspect
of our proposed approval of this updated maintenance plan, we will
respond to the comments on the MVEBs in our final action or proceed with
the adequacy process as a separate action.  Our action on the Kent and
Queen Anne’s area MVEBs will also be announced on EPA's conformity Web
site:  http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/index.html, (once there,
click on “ Transporation Conformity”, then look for “Adequacy
Review of SIP Submissions ”).  Also, see the Kent and Queen Anne’s
area mobile budget TDS.  

D.  The Area Must Meet All Requirements Applicable Under Section 110 and
Part D

The Kent and Queen Anne’s area was designated a marginal nonattainment
area for the 8-hour ozone standard.  Sections 172-176 of the CAA, found
in subpart 2 of Part D, set forth the basic nonattainment requirements
for all nonattainment areas.  As discussed previously, there are no
outstanding Part D submittals under the 1-hour standard for the Kent and
Queen Anne’s area. 

Section 182 of the CAA, found in subpart 2 of Part D, establishes
additional specific requirements depending on the area’s nonattainment
classification.  The Kent and Queen Anne’s area was classified as a
marginal subpart 2 nonattainment area.

With respect to the 8-hour standard, EPA proposes to determine that the
Maryland SIP meets all applicable SIP requirements under Part D of the
CAA, because no 8-hour ozone standard Part D requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation became due prior to submission of the Kent and
Queen Anne’s area redesignation request.  Because the State of
Maryland submitted a complete redesignation request for the Kent and
Queen Anne’s area prior to the deadline for any submissions required
under the 8-hour standard, we have determined that the Part D
requirements do not apply to the Kent and Queen Anne’s area for the
purposes of redesignation. 

In addition to the fact that Part D requirements applicable for purposes
of redesignation did not become due prior to submission of the
redesignation request, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the
general conformity and NSR requirements as not requiring approval prior
to redesignation.  

With respect to section 176, Conformity Requirements, section 176(c) of
the CAA requires states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure
that Federally supported or funded projects conform to the air quality
planning goals in the applicable SIP.  The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation plans, programs, and projects
developed, funded or approved under Title 23 U.S.C. and the Federal
Transit Act (“transportation conformity”) as well as to all other
Federally supported or funded projects (“general conformity”). 
State conformity revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability
that the CAA required the EPA to promulgate.

EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the
redesignation request under section 107(d) since state conformity rules
are still required after redesignation and federal conformity rules
apply where state rules have not been approved.  See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.
3d 426, 438-440 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation.  See
also 60 FR 62748 (Dec. 7, 1995).

EPA has also determined that areas being redesignated need not comply
with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to
redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the
standard without Part D NSR in effect, because PSD requirements will
apply after redesignation.  The rationale for this view is described in
a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, “Part D NSR Requirements
or Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.”  Maryland has
demonstrated that the area will be able to maintain the standard without
Part D NSR in effect in the Kent and Queen Anne’s area, and therefore,
Maryland need not have a fully approved Part D NSR program prior to
approval of the redesignation request.  Maryland’s SIP-approved PSD
program will become effective in the Kent and Queen Anne’s area upon
redesignation to attainment.  See rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60
FR 12467-12468, March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, Ohio (61 FR
20458, 20469-70, May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665,
October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21,
1996).  

E.  Maintenance Plan for the Kent and Queen Anne’s Area					

1.  Maintenance Plan Requirements

A maintenance plan is a SIP revision that provides maintenance of the
relevant NAAQS in the area for at least 10 years after redesignation.  A
maintenance plan consists of the following requirements as outlined in
section 175A of the CAA: (a) an attainment inventory; (b) a maintenance
demonstration; (c) a monitoring network; (d) verification of continued
attainment; and, (e) a contingency plan. 		

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 (a)  Attainment Inventory  - Attainment inventory
includes the emissions during the time period associated with the
monitoring data showing attainment.  MDE determined that the appropriate
attainment inventory year is 2005.  That year establishes a reasonable
year within the three-year block of 2003-2005 as a baseline and accounts
for reductions attributable to implementation of the CAA requirements to
date.  The 2005 inventory is consistent with EPA guidance, is based on
actual (typical summer day( emissions of VOC, NOx, and Carbon Monoxide
(CO) during 2004, and consists of a list of sources and their associated
emissions (see Table 3).   To develop the NOx and VOC base year
emissions inventories, MDE used the approaches outlined in the document
titled “Inventory Preparation Plan/ Quality Assurance Plan for
Maryland.”    The 2005 point source data was “grown” using the
2002 base year inventory.  MDE projected the 2002 base year inventory
using EPA’s EGAS Model (version 5.0) for all inventory years.  EGAS
(version 5.0) generates emission growth factors by sector.  The 2005
area source data was projected using a variety of methods including the
EGAS model (version 5.0) and forecasts prepared by the Baltimore
Metropolitan Council.  The nonroad inventory was developed using NONROAD
model (version 2004).  The on road mobile source inventory was generated
using the HPMS module of the PPSuite software.  MDE used MOBILE model
(version 6.2) to assess the mobile source emission levels in the
counties and estimate the benefits gained from mobile control measures. 
This estimate assumes the following emissions control programs, which
are or will be permanent and enforceable: Federal Motor Vehicle Control
Program, the 1992 Reid Vapor Pressure Program, Tier 1 and 2 controls on
new vehicles, Evaporative Emissions Control Program, Federal
Reformulated Gasoline Program, Enhanced I/M Program in Queen Anne's
County, Stage I Vapor Recovery, On Board Controls and National Low
Emissions Vehicle (NLEV) Program, federal HDDE rule and low sulfur
fuels.

					

 (b) Maintenance Demonstration 

(1) 8-Hour NAAQS

The submittal by MDE consists of the maintenance plan as required by
section 175A of the CAA.  The Kent and Queen Anne’s area plan shows
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS by demonstrating that current and
future emissions of VOC and NOx remain at or below the attainment year
2005 emissions levels throughout the Kent and Queen Anne’s area
through the year 2018.  The Kent and Queen Anne’s area maintenance
demonstration need not be based on modeling.  See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d
426 (6th Cir. 2001); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). 
See also 66 FR 53094, 53099-53100 (October 19, 2001), 68 FR 25418,
25430-32 (May 12, 2003).

Tables 6 and 7 specify the Kent and Queen Anne’s area VOC and NOx
emissions for 2005, 2009, and 2018.  The MDE chose 2009 as an interim
year in the 12-year maintenance demonstration period to demonstrate that
the VOC and NOx emissions are not projected to increase above the 2005
attainment level during the time of the 12-year maintenance period. 

Table 5: Total VOC Emissions for 2005-2018 (tons per day)

Source Category 	2005 VOC Emissions      	2009 VOC Emissions	2018 VOC
Emissions      

Mobile	3.15	2.45	1.55

Nonroad	10.00	8.25	5.96

Area	5.31	5.54	5.17

Point	0.12	0.13	0.16

Total 	18.58	16.37	12.84

2018 VOC Safety Margin:  5.74 tpd

Table 6: Total NOx Emissions 2005-2018 (tons per day)

Source Category 	2005 NOx Emissions      	2009 NOx Emissions	2018 NOx
Emissions      

Mobile	6.57	4.82	2.14

Nonroad	3.77	3.66	3.03

Area	0.25	0.26	0.28

Point	0.07	0.07	0.08

Total 	10.66	8.81	5.53

 2018 NOx Safety Margin:  5.13 tpd

							

Additionally, the following mobile programs are either effective or due
to become effective and will further contribute to the maintenance
demonstration of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS:   

Heavy duty diesel on-road (2004/2007) and low-sulfur on-road (2006); 66
FR 2001 (January 18, 2001); and 

Non-road emissions standards (2008) and off-road diesel fuel
(2007/2010); 69 FR 38958 (June 29, 2004). 

 (2)  1-Hour NAAQS

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 In conjunction with Maryland’s maintenance plan,
for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the state is requesting that this SIP (the
8-hour maintenance plan) revision be approved as fulfilling the
requirement of CAA 175A(b) to update the 1-hour ozone maintenance plan
to provide for maintenance of the ozone NAAQS for a further 10-year
period.  

The Kent and Queen Anne’s area was redesignated to attainment of the
1-hour ozone NAAQS on October 21, 2004 (69 FR 61766) and the original
maintenance plan provided for maintenance through the maintenance
period.  The Kent and Queen Anne’s area was designated as a marginal
nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS on September 22, 2004, (69 FR
56697).

Under 40 CFR 51.905(e), the EPA may approve a SIP revision requesting
the removal of the obligation to implement contingency measures upon a
violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS when the State submits and EPA
approves an attainment demonstration for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for an
area initially designated nonattainment for the 8-hour NAAQS or a
maintenance SIP for the 8-hour NAAQS for an area initially designated
attainment for the 8-hour NAAQS.  The rationale behind 40 CFR 51.905(e)
is to ensure that the area maintains the applicable ozone standard (the
8-hour standard in areas where the 1-hour standard has been revoked). 
EPA believes this rationale analogously applies to areas that were not
initially designated, but are redesignated as attainment with the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.  Therefore, EPA intends to treat redesignated areas as
though they had been initially designated attainment of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, and accordingly proposes to relieve the Kent and Queen Anne’s
area of its maintenance plan obligations with respect to the 1-hour
standard.  Once approved, the maintenance plan for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, will ensure that the SIP for the Kent and Queen Anne’s area
meets the requirements of the CAA regarding maintenance of the
applicable 8-hour ozone standard.

Specifically, 40 CFR 51.905(e)(1)  provides that:  “Upon revocation of
the 1-hour NAAQS, an area with an approved 1-hour maintenance plan under
section 175A of the CAA may modify the maintenance plan: To remove the
obligation to submit a maintenance plan for the 1-hour NAAQS 8 years
after approval of the initial 1-hour maintenance plan; and to remove the
obligation to implement contingency measures upon a violation of the
1-hour NAAQS.”  

EPA is also approving this 8-hour maintenance plan so that contingency
measures are not triggered based on the 1-hour NAAQS, but that the
contingency measures are only triggered by exceedances of the 8-hour
ozone standard.  Between the years 2003-2005 the highest 1-hour maximum
value at the Kent monitor was 0.129 ppm.  Based on this air quality
monitoring data, the Kent and Queen Anne’s area is in compliance with
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (which ceased to be in effect as of June 15,
2005).  Also, EPA’s analysis of 1-hour ozone air monitoring data
indicates that the Kent and Queen Anne’s area did not violate the
1-hour standard over any three year period within the years 2002-2005
(See Tables 8).  EPA came to this conclusion based on the maximum values
for the 1-hour standard (2003-2005 air monitoring data), which show
that: (1) there have not been more than 2 exceedances of the 1-hour
standard (0.12 ppm) over any three year period, and, (2) therefore the
air quality data over this period demonstrates that the air quality met
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS of 40 CFR 50.9 because the annual average number
of expected exceedances of the former 1-hour NAAQS has not exceeded 1.0
in any three year period.     

Table 7:  Kent and Queen Anne’s Area 1-Hour Ozone Air Monitoring Data;
2002-2005; 10 Highest 1-Hour Values 

2003	2004	2005

1st

.129	.110	.115

2nd

.119	.098	.111

3rd

.105	.098	.103

4th

.098	.087	.103

5th

.091	.087	.100

6th

.091	.086	.096

7th

.089	.086	.096

8th

.088	.085	.096

9th

.088	.082	.095

10th

.088	.081	.091

EPA believes that the 2004 attainment year emissions are representative
of attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS as well as for the 8-hour NAAQS.
 Based upon the comparison of the projected emissions and the attainment
year emissions along with the additional measures and 1-hour ozone air
monitoring data, EPA concludes that MDE has successfully demonstrated
that the 1-hour ozone standard would have been maintained in the Kent
and Queen Anne’s area through 2018.  Section 175A(b) required a
maintenance plan for a second ten-year period after the area was
redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.  EPA believes that
section 175A of the CAA requires that the maintenance plans (as required
under section 175A(a) and section 175A(b)) provide for maintenance for a
period of at least 20 years after the effective date of the areas’
redesignated to attainment.  EPA concludes that the maintenance plan for
the Kent and Queen Anne’s area, under the 8-hour NAAQS, demonstrates
maintenance of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for a period of 24 years after the
area was redesignated to attainment for that standard.   

The contingency measures in this maintenance plan for the Kent and Queen
Anne’s area will not be triggered by an exceedance or violation of the
1-hour ozone NAAQS, but will only be triggered by a violation of the
8-hour ozone NAAQS.  EPA believes that this is acceptable for several
reasons:  (1) the 1-hour NAAQS was revoked on June 15, 2005 (40 CFR
50.9(b), 69 FR at 23951, 23996; see also 70 FR 44470, August 3, 2005);
(2) the 8-hour standard is more protective of public health than the
1-hour ozone NAAQS and is now the proper standard to enforce; and, (3)
because the ozone implementation rule of 40 CFR 51.905(e) would allow
removal of a contingency trigger tied to a violation of the 1-hour ozone
NAQQS upon approval of a maintenance plan for the 8-hour ozone standard,
there is no need to add such a trigger in the first place for which
approval of this 8-hour maintenance plan would replace.   

(c)  Monitoring Network - There is currently one monitor measuring ozone
in the Kent and Queen Anne’s area.  Maryland has committed to continue
to operate its current air quality monitor (located in Kent County) in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58.							

(d)  Verification of Continued Attainment - The State of Maryland has
the legal authority to implement and enforce specified measures
necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS.  Additionally, Federal
programs such as Tier 2/Low Sulfur Gasoline Rule, 2007 On-Road Diesel
Engine Rule, and Federal Non-road Engine/Equipment Rules will continue
to be implemented on a national level.  These programs help provide the
reductions necessary for the Kent and Queen Anne’s area to maintain
attainment.  

In addition to maintaining the key elements of its regulatory program,
Maryland requires ambient and source emissions data to track attainment
and maintenance.  The MDE proposes to fully update its point, area, and
mobile emission inventories at 3-year intervals as required by the
Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) and Section 187(a)(5) of
the CAA.  MDE will compare actual inventories to projected inventories,
to determine if emission levels exceed the attainment year levels.  If
there is an attainment year inventory excursion, MDE will assess the
need to trigger contingency measures implementation procedures.   The
MDE shall also continue to operate the existing ozone monitoring
stations in the areas pursuant to 40 CFR part 58 throughout the
maintenance period and submit quality-assured ozone data to EPA through
AQS. system.   

(e) The Maintenance Plan’s Contingency Measures - The contingency plan
provisions are designed to promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS
that occurs after redesignation.  Section 175A of the Act requires that
a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to ensure that the State will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation.  The maintenance plan should
identify the events that would “trigger” the adoption and
implementation of a contingency measure(s), the contingency measure(s)
that would be adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the
time frame by which the State would adopt and implement the measure(s). 
 

The ability of the Kent and Queen Anne’s area to stay in compliance
with the 8-hour ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and
NOx emissions in the area remaining at or below 2004 levels.  The
State’s maintenance plan projects VOC and NOx emissions to decrease
and stay below 2004 levels through the year 2018.  The State’s
maintenance plan outlines the procedures for the adoption and
implementation of  contingency measures to further reduce emissions
should a violation occur. They are as follows:

After the 4th exceedance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS (0.08ppm) occurs
within any given calendar year, the MDE will consider that fourth
exceedance and any subsequent exceedance as

the trigger by which an immediate recalculation of the design value for
the Millington Monitor

would be required. If the recalculated design value is shown to be above
the 8-hour NAAQS

(0.08ppm) then Maryland would initiate the following schedule:

1) Within 2 weeks of the “trigger”- MDE will notify Kent and Queen
Anne’s Counties

and other stakeholders of the violations and will schedule an initial
work group

meeting concerning contingency measures.

2) Within 6 weeks of the “trigger” - MDE will convene a stakeholder
group to evaluate

the selection and implementation of the contingency measures. The
stakeholder group

will be composed of interested state and local government agencies;
business,

environmental and health representatives; citizens and other interested
parties

3) Within 12 weeks of the “trigger”- A public meeting will be held
on the proposed

contingency measures

4) Within 18 weeks of the “trigger”- MDE/ Stakeholders will meet to
consider public

comments and finalize a list of planned contingency measures

5) After the list of planning of measures is finalized as identified
above in step 4 it will

take approximately 12 months from that date to go through any required
rulemaking

processes.

6) Within 24 months of the “trigger” - Agreed-upon contingency
measures will be

implemented in the impacted counties



The following measures may be considered contingency measures:

Industrial Commercial Institutional (ICI) Boiler RACT 

Commuter/traffic measures such as Potential expansion of park and ride
lots, expanded transit services, enhance opportunities for
telecommuting/flexible hours/ compressed work schedules

Expand Air Quality Action Day activities such as put off any painting
until later; don’t use aerosol consumer products; avoid mowing lawns
with gasoline-powered mowers;  start charcoal with an electric or
chimney-type fire starter instead of lighter fluid; take public
transportation; try telecommuting

Clean Air Partners public education outreach

Expansion of E-government services at state and county level

Bicycle and pedestrian enhancements such as additional trails and bike
lanes

Emissions testing for truck transport

Land use/transportation policies

Promote non-motorized transport

Promote tree planting standards that favor trees with low VOC biogenic
emissions

Promote energy saving plan for county government

Gas can replacement

Lawnmower replacement				

					

The maintenance plan adequately addresses the five basic components of a
maintenance plan:  attainment inventory, maintenance demonstration,
monitoring network, verification of continued attainment, and a
contingency plan.  EPA believes that the maintenance plan SIP revision
submitted by Maryland for the Kent and Queen Anne’s area meets the
requirements of section 175A of the Act.

2.  Requirement for Continued Maintenance

Section 175A(b) of the CAA will also require the State of Maryland to
submit a revision to the SIP eight years after the original
redesignation request is approved to provide for maintenance of the
NAAQS in  Kent and Queen Anne’s for total of 20 years following
redesignation to attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS.  Maryland commits to
this SIP revision requirement.  

III. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDED AGENCY ACTION:

The Kent and Queen Anne’s area has met the criteria for a maintenance
plan that satisfies section 175A and for redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment.  Also, the Kent and Queen Anne’s area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on air quality monitoring data
from AQS.  Therefore, I recommend that the maintenance plan for the Kent
and Queen Anne’s area be approved and the area be redesignated to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.  

IV.  LIST OF EPA GUIDANCE MEMOS AND DOCUMENTS

			

“Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations”, Memorandum
from Bill   Laxton, June 18, 1990;

“Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon Monoxide
Nonattainment Areas,” Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;

“Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,” Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;

“Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992;

“State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response to
Clean Air Act (Act) Deadlines,” Memorandum from John Calcagni
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;

“Technical Support Documents (TSD’s) for Redesignation Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,” Memorandum from G.T. Helms,
Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 1993; 		

“State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting
Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After
November 15, 1992,” Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993;

Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air Quality Management
Division, to Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10, “Use of Actual
Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone and CO Nonattainment
Areas,” dated November 30, 1993; 

“Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,” Memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14,
1994; and 

“Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and Related
Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard,” Memorandum from John S. Seitz,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 1995. 

  PAGE   1 

  PAGE   11 

  PAGE   19