Document ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215-0084
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approval and Promulgation: District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia; Maryland and Virginia Redesignation Requests and District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia Maintenance Plan for the Washington, DC-MD-VA 2008 Ozone Standard Nonattainment Area
Posted Date: 2019-04-15T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 72 (Monday, April 15, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 15108-15119]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-06128]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215; FRL-9991-44-Region 3]

Air Plan Approval; District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia; 
Maryland and Virginia Redesignation Requests and District of Columbia, 
Maryland, and Virginia Maintenance Plan for the Washington, DC-MD-VA 
2008 Ozone Standard Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving the 
requests from the State of Maryland (Maryland) and the Commonwealth of 
Virginia (Virginia) to redesignate to attainment their respective 
portions of the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area (hereafter 
``the Washington Area'' or ``the Area'') for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS or standard) (also 
referred to as the 2008 ozone NAAQS) as Maryland's and Virginia's 
portions of the Area meet the statutory requirements for redesignation 
under the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is therefore redesignating the 
following jurisdictions to attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS: The 
Counties of Calvert, Charles, Frederick, Montgomery, and Prince 
George's in Maryland as well as the Counties of Arlington, Fairfax, 
Loudoun, and Prince William and the Cities of Alexandria, Fairfax, 
Falls Church, Manassas, and Manassas Park in Virginia. EPA is also 
approving, as a revision to District of

[[Page 15109]]

Columbia's (the District), Maryland's, and Virginia's state 
implementation plans (SIPs), the joint Washington Area maintenance plan 
submitted by the District, Maryland, and Virginia, which demonstrates 
maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS through 2030 in the Washington 
Area. The Washington Area maintenance plan includes motor vehicle 
emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS for nitrogen oxides 
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which are 
precursors to ozone. EPA has found the MVEBs adequate and is approving, 
as a SIP revision, these 2014, 2025, and 2030 NOX and VOC 
MVEBs for the Washington Area.

DATES: This final rule is effective on May 15, 2019.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215. All documents in the docket are listed on 
the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, 
some information is not publicly available, e.g., 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 through 
https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in 
the For Further Information Contact section for additional availability 
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara Calcinore, (215) 814-2043, or by 
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On May 21, 2012 and June 11, 2012, EPA designated nonattainment 
areas for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 77 FR 30088 and 77 FR 34221. Effective 
July 20, 2012, the Washington Area was designated as marginal 
nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The Washington Area consists of 
the Counties of Calvert, Charles, Frederick, Montgomery, and Prince 
George's in Maryland, the Counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and 
Prince William and the Cities of Alexandria, Fairfax, Falls Church, 
Manassas, and Manassas Park in Virginia, and the District of Columbia. 
See 40 CFR 81.309, 81.321, and 81.347.
    Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows redesignation of an area to 
attainment of the NAAQS provided that: (1) The Administrator (EPA) 
determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the 
Administrator has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for 
the area under section 110(k) of the CAA; (3) the Administrator 
determines that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and 
enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of 
the applicable SIP, applicable Federal air pollutant control 
regulations, and other permanent and enforceable emission reductions; 
(4) the Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan for the 
area as meeting the requirements of section 175A of the CAA; and (5) 
the State containing the area has met all requirements applicable to 
the area for purposes of redesignation under section 110 and part D of 
the CAA.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The following EPA guidance documents are included in the 
docket for this rulemaking available online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215: ``Procedures 
for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' 
Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management 
Division, September 4, 1992 (the ``Calcagni memorandum'') and 
``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 (the ``Shapiro memorandum'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 12, 2018, February 5, 2018, and January 3, 2018, the 
District, Maryland, and Virginia, respectively, formally submitted 
requests to redesignate their portions of the Washington Area from 
marginal nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\2\ 
Concurrently, the District, Maryland, and Virginia formally submitted, 
as revisions to their respective SIPs, a joint maintenance plan 
prepared by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) 
for the Washington Area to ensure continued attainment for at least 10 
years following redesignation. The maintenance plan includes MVEBs for 
NOX and VOC for the years 2014, 2025, and 2030.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In the August 8, 2018 NPRM (83 FR 39019), EPA incorrectly 
stated that Maryland's request to redesignate its portion of the 
Washington Area was submitted on January 29, 2018. Maryland's 
redesignation request and corresponding maintenance plan were 
submitted February 5, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 8, 2018 (83 FR 39019), EPA published a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) for the District, Maryland, and Virginia. In the 
NPRM, EPA proposed approval of Maryland's and Virginia's requests to 
redesignate to attainment their respective portions of the Washington 
Area, pursuant to CAA section 107(d)(3).\3\ EPA did not propose 
approval of the redesignation request for the District's portion of the 
Washington Area and will address the District's redesignation request 
for its portion of the Area in a separate rulemaking action. EPA also 
proposed to approve, as a revision to the District's, Maryland's, and 
Virginia's SIPs, the joint maintenance plan submitted by the District, 
Maryland, and Virginia that demonstrates maintenance of the 2008 ozone 
NAAQS through 2030 in the Washington Area. Additionally, EPA proposed 
to approve, as revisions to the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's 
SIPs, the 2014, 2025, and 2030 MVEBs for NOX and VOC for the 
Washington Area identified in the Washington Area maintenance plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ As stated previously, Maryland's portion of the Washington 
Area consists of the Counties of Calvert, Charles, Frederick, 
Montgomery, and Prince George's. Virginia's portion of the 
Washington Area consists of Counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, 
and Prince William and the Cities of Alexandria, Fairfax, Falls 
Church, Manassas, and Manassas Park in Virginia. In the August 8, 
2018 NPRM, EPA proposed to redesignate these areas to attainment for 
the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis

    EPA reviewed the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's 
redesignation requests and found that Maryland's and Virginia's 
portions of the Washington Area have satisfied the requirements for 
redesignation pursuant to CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). As one of the 
criteria for redesignation to attainment, section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of 
the CAA requires EPA to determine that the area has a fully approved 
maintenance plan pursuant to section 175A of the CAA that demonstrates 
continued attainment of the NAAQS for at least 10 years following 
redesignation to attainment. EPA reviewed the joint maintenance plan 
submitted by the District, Maryland, and Virginia and found that it 
satisfies the requirements of section 175A. The Washington Area 
maintenance plan includes 2014, 2025, and 2030 MVEBs for NOX 
and VOC for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA found the submitted MVEBs 
adequate and approvable as a revision to the District's, Maryland's, 
and Virginia's SIPs.\4\ EPA's

[[Page 15110]]

rationale for these actions can be found in the August 8, 2018 NPRM and 
corresponding Technical Support Documents (TSDs) included in the docket 
for this action available online at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: 
EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The adequacy comment period for the MVEBs began on May 21, 
2018, with EPA's posting of the availability of the District's, 
Maryland's, and Virginia's maintenance plan submittal on EPA's 
Adequacy website (at https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation). The adequacy comment period for these MVEBs ended 
on June 20, 2018. EPA did not receive any adverse comments on this 
submittal during the adequacy comment period. EPA originally 
informed the District, Maryland, and Virginia that the 2014, 2025, 
and 2030 MVEBs were adequate for use in transportation conformity 
analyses in letters dated July 18, 2018. EPA revised language in 
these letters and sent the revised letters to the District, 
Maryland, and Virginia on July 24, 2018. The original and revised 
letters are available online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket 
ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Public Comments and EPA Response

    EPA received comments on the August 8, 2018 NPRM from four 
commenters. Comments from two anonymous commenters did not concern any 
of the specific issues raised in the NPRM, nor did they address EPA's 
rationale for the proposed approval of Maryland's and Virginia's 
redesignation requests or the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's 
joint maintenance plan. Therefore, EPA is not responding to those 
comments. EPA received relevant comments from two commenters. Those 
comments and EPA's responses are discussed below. All of the comments 
received and any submitted attachments are included in the docket for 
this action, available online at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-
R03-OAR-2018-0215.
    Commenter 1: On August 16, 2018, EPA received anonymous comments on 
the August 8, 2018 NPRM. The commenter questioned how EPA can 
redesignate a portion of the Washington Area if the Area was designated 
as one nonattainment area due to air quality in the entire Area not 
meeting the standard. The commenter also questioned how the maintenance 
plan for the entire Washington Area could be approved without first 
redesignating the District's portion of the Area. The commenter 
suggested that the entire Washington Area, including the District, be 
redesignated prior to the approval of the maintenance plan.
    EPA Response: Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, which sets forth the 
criteria that must be met to redesignate a nonattainment area, 
specifically mentions redesignating a portion of a nonattainment area. 
Section 107(d)(3)(E) states that ``[t]he Administrator may not 
promulgate a redesignation of a nonattainment area (or portion thereof) 
to attainment unless . . .'' five criteria in sections 107(d)(3)(E)(i)-
(v) are met. (Emphasis added). Therefore, that statute allows EPA to 
redesignate to attainment Maryland's and Virginia's portions of the 
Washington Area without simultaneously redesignating the District's 
portion. See, e.g., Pennsylvania portion of the Philadelphia-
Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE nonattainment area for the 1997 Annual and 2006 
24-Hour fine particulate matter standard, final rulemaking for 
redesignation, 80 FR 22112 (April 21, 2015); Ohio portion of the 
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon, OH-PA nonattainment area for the 1997 ozone 
NAAQS, final rulemaking for redesignation, 72 FR 32190 (June 12, 2007); 
Indiana portion of the Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN nonattainment 
area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, final rulemaking for redesignation, 75 
FR 26113 (May 11, 2010); and, West Virginia portion of the Huntington-
Ashland, WV-KY nonattainment area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, final 
rulemaking for redesignation, 71 FR 54421 (September 15, 2006).
    Regarding the initial nonattainment designation for the Area based 
on air quality not meeting the standard, air quality in the entire Area 
has improved, and on November 14, 2017, EPA determined that the entire 
Washington Area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the July 20, 2016 
attainment date. 82 FR 52651. As discussed in the August 8, 2018 NPRM, 
the entire Washington Area also continues to attain the 2008 ozone 
NAAQS. Because the entire Area is in attainment, EPA received formal 
requests from the District, Maryland, and Virginia to redesignate their 
respective portions of the Washington Area to attainment for the 2008 
ozone NAAQS. As explained in the NPRM, EPA found that Maryland and 
Virginia have satisfied the CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) requirements for 
redesignation of their respective portions of the Washington Area, so 
EPA is approving Maryland's and Virginia's requests and redesignating 
their respective portions of the Washington Area to attainment in 
accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. As stated in the NPRM, 
EPA will act on the District's redesignation request at a later date.
    The commenter also questioned how EPA can approve the maintenance 
plan for the Washington Area prior to redesignating the District's 
portion of the Area. However, CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) requires 
that in order to redesignate an area to attainment, EPA must first have 
fully approved a maintenance plan for the area meeting the requirements 
of CAA section 175A. EPA has long interpreted that provision to also 
allow for concurrent approval of the maintenance plan or other 
necessary SIP submissions. See Calcagni memorandum at 7. Because a 
maintenance plan is one of the prerequisites in sections 
107(d)(3)(E)(i)-(iv) for redesignation, EPA cannot redesignate an area 
until the area has a maintenance plan approved by EPA.
    Furthermore, nothing in CAA sections 107(d)(3)(E) or 175A prohibits 
EPA from approving a maintenance plan for an area prior to 
redesignating the area, and approving the maintenance plan into the 
District's SIP prior to redesignating the District does not adversely 
impact the District's ability to maintain the NAAQS and will provide 
for continued maintenance in the Washington Area, including the 
District, for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is approving the 
maintenance plan as a revision to the District's, Maryland's, and 
Virginia's SIPs.
    Commenter 2: On September 7, 2018, Earthjustice submitted comments 
on the August 8, 2018 NPRM on behalf of Sierra Club. The following is a 
summary of Earthjustice's comments and EPA's responses:
    Comment 1: Earthjustice commented that redesignating the Washington 
Area under the 2008 ozone standard ``would authorize weaker protections 
against ozone despite the fact that the area continues to have 
unhealthy levels of ozone.'' Earthjustice noted that EPA just 
designated the Washington Area as nonattainment under the 2015 ozone 
NAAQS and that the most recent 2017 design value for the Washington 
Area is in violation of the 2015 standard. Earthjustice provided Air 
Quality Index (AQI) data for several days from May 2018 to August 2018 
and stated that this year, air quality monitors within the Washington 
Area have ``repeatedly recorded ozone pollution levels exceeding the 
level of even the 1997 standard, while far more often exceeding the 
level of the 2008 and 2015 standards.'' \5\ Earthjustice stated that, 
``It is inconsistent with the Act's [CAA] statutory design to allow 
protections against the ozone pollution that plagues the region to be 
weakened via a redesignation under the 2008 ozone standard.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Earthjustice submitted AQI data from May 2, 2018, May 24, 
2018, June 18, 2018, June 30, 2018, July 3, 2018, July 9, 2018, July 
10, 2018, July 16, 2018, and August 10, 2018 with their comment, 
which are included in the docket for this action, available online 
at www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA Response: EPA does not agree that redesignating the Washington 
Area to attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS will authorize weaker 
protections against ozone in the area. The August 8, 2018 NPRM proposes 
to redesignate the Washington Area only for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and 
does not affect the Washington Area's designation as marginal 
nonattainment

[[Page 15111]]

for the more stringent 2015 ozone NAAQS. The 2008 ozone NAAQS and 2015 
ozone NAAQS are two separate standards: Areas within states are 
designated for each standard and must satisfy the requirements 
applicable to their designation for each standard.\6\ The redesignation 
of the Washington Area from marginal nonattainment to attainment of the 
2008 ozone NAAQS will not change the Area's marginal nonattainment 
designation under the 2015 ozone NAAQS, nor exempt the Area from 
meeting the applicable requirements for marginal nonattainment areas 
under the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Because the Washington Area was classified 
as marginal nonattainment under both the 2008 and 2015 ozone standards, 
the Area is subject to the same statutory and associated regulatory 
requirements in subchapter I, Part D of the CAA under both standards. 
Therefore, redesignating the Washington Area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS 
will not remove any of the protections related to the Washington Area's 
marginal nonattainment designation under the more stringent 2015 ozone 
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ On October 26, 2015, EPA strengthened both the primary and 
secondary NAAQS for ozone to a level of 0.070 parts per million 
(ppm) (annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average 
concentration, averaged over 3 years). See 80 FR 65292. The 2015 
ozone NAAQS is more stringent than the 2008 ozone NAAQS, which was 
set at 0.075 ppm (annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average 
concentration, averaged over 3 years). See 73 FR 16483 (March 27, 
2008). The Washington Area was designated as marginal nonattainment 
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS (83 FR 25776, June 4, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, as demonstrated in the NPRM, air quality in the 
Washington Area satisfies the CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) requirement 
for redesignation to attainment under the 2008 ozone NAAQS, which 
requires the Administrator (EPA) to determine that the area has 
attained the applicable NAAQS. Therefore, in order to be redesignated 
to attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the Washington Area must, among 
other requirements, attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On November 14, 2017 
(82 FR 52651), EPA determined that the entire Washington Area attained 
the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the July 20, 2016 attainment date because all 
of the Washington Area monitoring sites with valid data had design 
values less than or equal to 0.075 ppm during the 2013-2015 monitoring 
period. The Washington Area continues to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 
as shown by 2014-2016 and 2015-2017 design values and preliminary 2016-
2018 design values throughout the Area that continue to be below the 
0.075 ppm level of the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ A summary of the 2014 to 2016 ozone air quality data as well 
as the preliminary 2015-2017 ozone design values were provided in 
Table 1 of the August 8, 2018 NPRM. Since the publication of the 
NPRM, the 2015-2017 design values were finalized and preliminary 
2016-2018 design value data became available. This data is included 
in the docket for this rulemaking action available online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.

                              Table 1--Washington Area 2014-2016, 2015-2017, and Preliminary 2016-2018 Ozone Design Values
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                          Annual 4th highest reading (ppm)             2014-2016   2015-2017   2016-2018
                                                              -------------------------------------------------------   design      design      design
    AQS site ID      Site description       Jurisdiction                                                                 value       value       value
                                                                  2014       2015       2016       2017       2018       (ppm)       (ppm)     (ppm) \8\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11-001-0041 \9\...  420 34th Street    District of Columbia..  .........  .........      0.065      0.056      0.050       0.056       0.060       0.057
                     NE, Washington,
                     DC 20019.
11-001-0043.......  2500 1st Street    District of Columbia..      0.068      0.072      0.072      0.071      0.073       0.070       0.071       0.072
                     NW, Washington,
                     DC.
11-001-0050.......  300 Van Buren      District of Columbia..      0.069       0.72      0.071      0.067      0.073       0.070       0.070       0.070
                     Street NW,
                     Washington, DC
                     20012.
24-009-0011.......  350 Stafford Road  Maryland..............      0.070      0.067      0.070      0.066      0.067       0.069       0.067       0.067
24-017-0010.......  14320 Oaks Road..  Maryland..............      0.070      0.068      0.073      0.068      0.068       0.070       0.069       0.069
24-021-0037.......  Frederick County   Maryland..............      0.063      0.070      0.070      0.067      0.067       0.067       0.069       0.068
                     Airport.
24-031-3001.......  Lathrop E. Smith   Maryland..............      0.064      0.072      0.068      0.065      0.069       0.068       0.068       0.067
                     Environmental
                     Education Center.
24-033-0030.......  Howard             Maryland..............      0.065      0.072      0.070      0.069      0.070       0.069       0.070       0.069
                     University's
                     Beltsville
                     Laboratory.
24-033-8003.......  PG County          Maryland..............      0.069      0.069      0.073      0.072      0.070       0.070       0.071       0.071
                     Equestrian
                     Center.
24-033-9991.......  Powder Mill Rd     Maryland..............      0.069      0.067      0.070      0.070      0.073       0.068       0.069       0.071
                     Laurel, MD 20708.
51-013-0020.......  S 18th and Hayes   Virginia..............      0.071      0.073      0.072      0.070      0.070       0.072       0.071       0.070
                     St..
51-059-0030.......  STA. 46-B9, Lee    Virginia..............      0.065      0.072      0.073      0.068      0.066       0.070       0.071       0.069
                     Park, Telegraph
                     Road.
51-107-1005.......  38-I, Broad Run    Virginia..............      0.063      0.071      0.068      0.066      0.065       0.067       0.068       0.066
                     High School,
                     Ashburn.
51-153-0009.......  James S. Long      Virginia..............      0.062      0.067      0.067      0.065      0.065       0.065       0.066       0.065
                     Park.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, the Washington Area has satisfied the requirement in CAA 
section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) for redesignation to attainment of the 2008 
ozone NAAQS. The Washington Area's designation status for the 2015 
ozone NAAQS is not relevant to determining if the Area has satisfied 
the requirement in CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) for redesignation for 
the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ As noted previously, the 2016-2018 design values are 
preliminary.
    \9\ The 2014 and 2015 data at monitoring site 11-001-0041 (also 
referred to as ``the River Terrace monitor'') is incomplete. 
Therefore, the 2014-2016 and 2015-2017 design values are invalid. 
The River Terrace monitor was temporarily shut down in March 2014 
due to renovations at the monitoring site. The River Terrace monitor 
was reinstated in 2016, and began operation in May 2016. The 
temporary shutdown of the River Terrace monitor is discussed in more 
detail in the TSD for the August 8, 2018 NPRM available online at 
https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA notes that the 2015-2017 design value exceeds the 2015 ozone 
standard of 0.070 ppm but does not exceed the 2008 ozone standard of 
0.075 ppm. Because this redesignation is only for the less stringent 
2008 standard, a design value above the 2015 standard is not relevant, 
as long as it is below the 2008 standard. In addition, the other 
monitoring data (the AQI data) provided by Earthjustice are not design 
values. The values provided by Earthjustice are daily maximum 
concentrations of ozone at monitors located in the Washington Area. 
Compliance with the 2008 ozone NAAQS, as well as the 1997 and 2015 
NAAQS, is not determined based on daily maximum concentrations, as 
implied by Earthjustice, but on design values exceeding the particular 
NAAQS standard. A design value for an air quality monitor is the three-
year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average 
ozone concentrations recorded at that monitor. See 40 CFR 50.15(b). An 
area's design value is based on the monitor in the area which records 
the highest design value over the three-year period. As discussed in 
the August 8, 2018 NPRM, an area ``attains'' the 2008 ozone NAAQS if 
the area's design value is below 0.075 ppm. The final 2015-2017 design 
values, shown in Table 1, are below the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The most 
recent preliminary air quality monitoring data (2016-2018 design value) 
is also consistent with this finding. Thus, there is no evidence that 
the ozone design value for the Washington Area exceeded the 2008 ozone 
standard.
    Comment 2: Earthjustice also stated that EPA cannot approve the

[[Page 15112]]

redesignation of the Washington Area because the Area has not satisfied 
its anti-backsliding obligations under the 1997 ozone standard. 
Earthjustice commented that EPA failed to evaluate in the NPRM if the 
Washington Area has met the anti-backsliding requirements under the 
1997 ozone NAAQS and that Virginia lacks EPA-approved reasonably 
available control technology (RACT) SIPs under the 1997 standard. 
Specifically, Earthjustice referenced EPA's ``SIP Dashboard,'' which 
showed that for Virginia's portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA 
nonattainment area for the 1997 ozone NAAQS,\10\ EPA had not approved 
the following RACT VOC control techniques guidelines (CTGs): Control 
Techniques Guidelines for Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly 
Coatings (Publication No. EPA 453/R-08-006; September 2008) (auto and 
light-duty truck assembly coatings CTG), Control Techniques Guidelines 
for Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing (Publication No. EPA 453/R-08-004; 
September 2008) (fiberglass boat manufacturing materials CTG), Control 
Techniques Guidelines for Flat Wood Paneling Coatings (Publication No. 
EPA 453/R-06-004; September 2006) (flat wood paneling coatings CTG), 
Control Techniques Guidelines for Flexible Package Printing 
(Publication No. EPA 453/R-06-003; September 2006) (flexible packaging 
printing materials CTG), Control Techniques Guidelines for Large 
Appliance Coatings (Publication No. EPA 453/R-07-004; September 2007) 
(large appliance coatings CTG), Control Techniques Guidelines for Metal 
Furniture Coatings (Publication No. EPA 453/R-07-005; September 2007) 
(metal furniture coatings CTG), Control Techniques Guidelines for 
Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings (Publication No. EPA 453/R-07-003; 
September 2007) (paper, film, and foil coatings CTG), and Control of 
Refinery Vacuum Producing Systems, Wastewater Separators, and Process 
Unit Turnarounds (Publication No. EPA 450/2-77-025; October 1977) 
(refinery vacuum producing systems, wastewater separators, and process 
unit turnarounds CTG).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ On April 30, 2004, EPA designated the following areas in 
Virginia as moderate nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS: The 
Counties of Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, and Prince William and the 
Cities of Alexandria, Fairfax, Falls Church, Manassas, and Manassas 
Park. See 69 FR 23858.
    \11\ A copy of the list submitted by Earthjustice to EPA as part 
of Earthjustice's comment is included in the docket for this 
rulemaking available online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket 
ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215. The current version of EPA's ``SIP 
Dashboard'' may be accessed online at https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/sip-status-reports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA Response: EPA disagrees that the Washington Area has not met 
its anti-backsliding requirements for the 1997 ozone standard. In 
accordance with 40 CFR 51.1105(a)(1), the Washington Area is subject to 
those anti-backsliding controls listed in 40 CFR 51.1100(o) that were 
applicable to an area with a moderate nonattainment classification as 
of the time of revocation, until the area is redesignated to attainment 
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA believes Virginia and Maryland have 
complied with all applicable anti-backsliding requirements for the 
revoked 1997 ozone NAAQS.
    Specifically, with respect to ozone RACT requirements under the 
revoked 1997 standard, EPA believes that Virginia has met its 
obligations. The commenter is correct that at the time Earthjustice 
submitted its comment, EPA's ``SIP Dashboard'' indicated that Virginia 
did not have an approved RACT SIP for the refinery vacuum producing 
systems, wastewater separators, and process unit turnarounds CTG under 
the 1997 ozone NAAQS. However, this entry in the SIP Dashboard was 
incorrect. On October 23, 2006, Virginia submitted a SIP revision to 
EPA that addressed the requirements of RACT under the 1997 ozone NAAQS 
(also referred to at the time as the ``8-hour ozone NAAQS'') for all 
RACT VOC CTGs that were due at the time (September 15, 2006). EPA found 
that Virginia met all of the RACT requirements,\12\ including those 
addressing the refinery vacuum producing systems, wastewater 
separators, and processes unit turnarounds CTG in question. On June 16, 
2009 (74 FR 28444), EPA finalized approval of Virginia's October 23, 
2006 SIP revision as satisfying the requirements of RACT under the 1997 
8-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ EPA found that Virginia met all of the RACT requirements 
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS through: Certification that 
previously adopted RACT controls in Virginia's SIP that were 
approved by EPA under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS are based on the 
currently available technically and economically feasible controls, 
and that they continue to represent RACT for 1997 8-hour 
implementation purposes; a negative declaration demonstrating that 
no facilities exist in the Virginia portion of the Washington, DC-
MD-VA 1997 ozone NAAQS nonattainment area for certain CTG 
categories; and a new RACT determination for a specific source.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsequent to Virginia's 2006 submittal, EPA issued additional CTGs 
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS in September 2006, 2007, and 2008.\13\ With 
respect to CTG requirements covering lithographic printing materials 
and letterpress printing materials, industrial cleaning solvents, 
miscellaneous industrial adhesives, and miscellaneous metal products 
coatings and plastic parts coatings, Virginia submitted three SIP 
revisions on February 1, 2016 adopting RACT for these source categories 
located in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 
Control Area. On August 23, 2016 (81 FR 57531), EPA approved Virginia's 
SIP revisions adopting RACT for these source categories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The following RACT VOC CTGs were issued and/or became due 
after Virginia submitted their SIP submittal addressing the RACT CTG 
requirements for the 1997 ozone NAAQS: Auto and light-duty truck 
assembly coatings CTG; fiberglass boat manufacturing materials CTG; 
flat wood paneling coatings CTG; flexible packaging printing 
materials CTG; Control Techniques Guidelines for Industrial Cleaning 
Solvents (Publication No. EPA 453/R-06-001; September 2006) 
(industrial cleaning solvents CTG); large appliance coatings CTG; 
metal furniture coatings CTG; Control Techniques Guidelines for 
Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives (Publication No. EPA 453/R-08-
005; September 2008) (miscellaneous industrial adhesives CTG); 
Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic 
Parts Coatings (Publication No. EPA 453/R-08-003; September 2008) 
(miscellaneous metal products coatings and plastic parts coatings 
CTGs); Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic 
Printing and Letterpress Printing (Publication No. EPA 453/R-06-002; 
September 2006) (lithographic printing materials and letterpress 
printing materials); and paper, film, and foil coatings CTG. These 
CTGs were due one year from the date they were issued. Therefore, 
they were not addressed in Virginia's October 23, 2006 submittal 
addressing RACT requirements for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other 1997 ozone NAAQS CTGs issued subsequent to Virginia's 2006 
SIP submission include those covering flat wood paneling coatings, 
flexible packaging printing materials, large appliance coatings, paper, 
film, and foil coatings, metal furniture coatings, fiberglass boat 
manufacturing materials, and auto and light-duty truck assembly 
coatings. However, no sources subject to these CTGs are located within 
the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions Control 
Area.\14\ Virginia therefore sent negative declaration letters to EPA 
on November 25, 2008 for the flat wood paneling coatings CTG and 
flexible packaging printing materials CTG, on December 3, 2008 for the 
large appliance coatings CTG, paper, film, and foil coatings CTG, and 
metal furniture coatings CTG, on May 6, 2009 for the fiberglass boat 
manufacturing materials CTG, and on May 18, 2009 for the auto and 
light-duty truck assembly coatings CTG.\15\ These

[[Page 15113]]

negative declaration letters certified that there are no sources 
located in the Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 
Control Area subject to the RACT VOC CTGs for fiberglass boat 
manufacturing materials and auto and light-duty truck assembly coatings 
and no sources located in the Commonwealth of Virginia subject to the 
RACT VOC CTGs for large appliance coatings, paper, film, and foil 
coatings, metal furniture coatings, flat wood paneling coatings, and 
flexible packaging printing materials. Virginia has recently re-
certified that there are no sources located in the relevant Control 
Area subject to these same CTGs as part of its December 12, 2017 SIP 
submission addressing Virginia's RACT obligations under the 2008 ozone 
NAAQS.\16\ In addition, EPA consulted the latest version of EPA's 
National Emissions Inventory (2014 NEI v2) and confirmed that no 
facilities subject to these CTGs were found in Virginia's portion of 
the Washington Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The Northern Virginia Volatile Organic Compound Emissions 
Control Area consists of Arlington, Fairfax, Loudoun, Prince 
William, and Stafford Counties as well as the cities of Alexandria, 
Fairfax, Falls Church, Manassas, Manassas Park and therefore 
includes Virginia's portion of the Washington Area plus Stafford 
County.
    \15\ These negative declaration letters were submitted by 
Virginia in order to meet section 105 grant commitments for 2009 and 
2010 and are included in the docket for this rulemaking available 
online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-
0215.
    \16\ We note that RACT SIPs submitted to address the 2008 ozone 
NAAQS are not applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation 
under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v). As explained in the 
August 8, 2018 NPRM, EPA has interpreted the CAA section 184 
requirements, including reasonable available control technology 
(RACT), as not applicable under these provisions because they apply 
to the Washington Area pursuant to the Area's inclusion in the ozone 
transport region (OTR), and are not tied to the area's designation 
status. See 61 FR 53174, 53175-53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 
24826, 24830-24832 (May 7, 1997). Therefore, the Washington Area 
will remain subject to the requirements of CAA section 184, 
including RACT, even after redesignation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 3: Earthjustice stated that EPA cannot approve the proposed 
maintenance plan because the contingency measures do not include 
implementation of ``all measures with respect to the control of the air 
pollutant concerned which were contained in the State implementation 
plan for the area before redesignation of the area.'' See CAA section 
175A(d).
    EPA Response: The District, Maryland, and Virginia are not moving 
any of their existing SIP-approved measures into the contingency plan. 
These measures remain part of their active SIPs. Therefore, these 
measures are not included as part of the contingency plan in the 
maintenance plan for the Washington Area. The District's, Maryland's, 
and Virginia's maintenance plan states, ``This maintenance plan 
includes a commitment to continue to enforce all applicable 
requirements of past revisions to the state implementation plan (SIP) 
after the ozone nonattainment area is redesignated to attainment.'' 
\17\ On February 26, 2019, February 27, 2019, and February 6, 2019, EPA 
received letters from the District, Maryland, and Virginia, 
respectively, clarifying that this statement in the maintenance plan 
was intended to mean that, in accordance with section 175A(d) of the 
CAA, the District, Maryland, and Virginia will implement all measures, 
with respect to the control of ozone, that were contained in the SIPs 
for the Washington Area prior to redesignation of the Area to 
attainment and that any measures currently in the District's, 
Maryland's, and Virginia's SIPs, with respect to the control of ozone, 
will be retained as contingency measures for the 20-year maintenance 
period following redesignation of the Washington Area to attainment for 
the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\18\ Therefore, EPA finds that the maintenance 
plan for the Washington Area satisfies the requirement of CAA section 
175A(d) referenced in Earthjustice's comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See pages 11 and 15-17 of the ``Maintenance Plan for the 
Washington DC-MD-VA 2008 Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Area,'' prepared 
by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, December 20, 
2017 included in the docket for this rulemaking available online at 
https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.
    \18\ These February 26, 2019, February 27, 2019, and February 6, 
2019 clarifying letters from the District, Maryland, and Virginia, 
respectively, are included in the docket for this rulemaking 
available online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-
OAR-2018-0215.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 4: Earthjustice commented that EPA cannot approve the 
maintenance plan because EPA proposed to approve ``a commitment to 
adopt contingency measures to address violations'' as a contingency 
measure. Earthjustice stated that EPA cannot approve the contingency 
measures in the maintenance plan because the commitment to adopt 
contingency measures to address violations is a ``promise to do later 
what's required now'' by CAA section 175A(d).
    EPA Response: Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a 
maintenance plan include contingency provisions, as necessary, to 
promptly correct any violation of the NAAQS that occurs after 
redesignation of the area. States are not required to have fully-
adopted contingency measures in their SIP in order for the maintenance 
plan to be approved.\19\ Contingency measures are adopted and 
implemented by a State if a violation of the NAAQS occurs in the 
maintenance area or if a triggering event (also referred to as an 
``indicator'') identified by the State in its maintenance plan 
occurs.\20\ The District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's joint 
maintenance plan identifies specific measures that EPA has found to be 
appropriate to use as contingency measures.\21\ In addition to these 
measures, the District, Maryland, and Virginia commit in their 
maintenance plan to adopt, as SIP revisions, additional contingency 
measures if necessary to address a violation of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in 
the Washington Area. This commitment strengthens the contingency 
measures in the maintenance plan by providing assurance that if a 
violation of the 2008 ozone NAAQS occurs in the Washington Area that 
may not be responsive using the existing contingency measures in the 
maintenance plan, the District, Maryland, and Virginia can assess the 
specific cause of the violation and adopt appropriate, tailored 
contingency measures as necessary. The contingency measures included in 
the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's maintenance plan satisfy the 
requirements for contingency measures in CAA section 175A as well as 
the Calcagni memorandum.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate 
Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air 
Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992 (the ``Calcagni 
memorandum'') included in the docket for this rulemaking available 
online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-
0215.
    \20\ The Calcagni memorandum states that the State should 
identify in the maintenance plan specific indicators, or 
``triggers'', to be used to determine when the contingency measures 
need to be implemented.
    \21\ See the discussion of the contingency measures included in 
the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's maintenance plan in the 
August 8, 2018 NPRM as well as the July 19, 2018 ``Technical Support 
Document for the Approval of the Maryland and Virginia Redesignation 
Requests and District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia 
Maintenance Plan for the Washington, DC-MD-VA 2008 Ozone Standard 
Nonattainment Area'' included in the docket for this rulemaking 
available online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-
OAR-2018-0215.
    \22\ For a detailed analysis of the contingency measures 
included in the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's maintenance 
plan, see the August 8, 2018 NPRM as well as the July 19, 2018 
``Technical Support Document for the Approval of the Maryland and 
Virginia Redesignation Requests and District of Columbia, Maryland, 
and Virginia Maintenance Plan for the Washington, DC-MD-VA 2008 
Ozone Standard Nonattainment Area'' included in the docket for this 
rulemaking available online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket 
ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 5: Earthjustice commented that if EPA approves the proposed 
redesignation, EPA ``should make clear in the final action that the 
redesignation does not affect obligations that apply via the Washington 
nonattainment area's severe classification under the 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS.''

[[Page 15114]]

    EPA Response: EPA's approval of Maryland's and Virginia's 
redesignation requests for the Washington Area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS 
and the associated maintenance plan submitted by the District, 
Maryland, and Virginia pertains to the 2008 ozone NAAQS and the anti-
backsliding requirements for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and does not affect 
obligations that apply under 40 CFR 51.905(a) for the 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS. South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 882 F.3d 1138, 1151 
(D.C. Cir. 2018).
    Comment 6: Earthjustice stated that EPA should not finalize the 
August 8, 2018 NPRM nor redesignate the Washington Area to attainment 
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
    EPA Response: EPA disagrees with Earthjustice's comment that EPA 
should not finalize the August 8, 2018 NPRM. EPA finds that Maryland's 
and Virginia's portions of the Washington Area satisfy the requirements 
for redesignation under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for the 2008 ozone 
NAAQS. EPA also still finds that the joint maintenance plan submitted 
by the District, Maryland, and Virginia for the Washington Area 
satisfies the requirements of CAA section 175A. Therefore, EPA is 
approving the requests from Maryland and Virginia to redesignate to 
attainment their respective portions of the Washington Area for the 
2008 ozone NAAQS as well as the joint maintenance plan submitted by the 
District, Maryland, and Virginia.

IV. Final Action

    EPA is approving the requests from Maryland and Virginia to 
redesignate to attainment their respective portions of the Washington 
Area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA is not at this time approving the 
redesignation request from the District but will address the District's 
redesignation request in a separate rulemaking action. EPA is also 
approving, as a revision to the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's 
SIPs, the joint maintenance plan submitted by the District, Maryland, 
and Virginia. The joint maintenance plan demonstrates maintenance of 
the 2008 ozone NAAQS through 2030 in the Washington Area and includes 
2014, 2025, and 2030 MVEBs for NOX and VOCs for the 2008 
ozone NAAQS. Finally, EPA has found adequate and is approving these 
2014, 2025, and 2030 NOX and VOC MVEBs for the Washington 
Area.

V. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the 
Commonwealth of Virginia

    In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation that provides, subject to 
certain conditions, for an environmental assessment (audit) 
``privilege'' for voluntary compliance evaluations performed by a 
regulated entity. The legislation further addresses the relative burden 
of proof for parties either asserting the privilege or seeking 
disclosure of documents for which the privilege is claimed. Virginia's 
legislation also provides, subject to certain conditions, for a penalty 
waiver for violations of environmental laws when a regulated entity 
discovers such violations pursuant to a voluntary compliance evaluation 
and voluntarily discloses such violations to the Commonwealth and takes 
prompt and appropriate measures to remedy the violations. Virginia's 
Voluntary Environmental Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-
1198, provides a privilege that protects from disclosure documents and 
information about the content of those documents that are the product 
of a voluntary environmental assessment. The Privilege Law does not 
extend to documents or information that: (1) Are generated or developed 
before the commencement of a voluntary environmental assessment; (2) 
are prepared independently of the assessment process; (3) demonstrate a 
clear, imminent and substantial danger to the public health or 
environment; or (4) are required by law.
    On January 12, 1998, the Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the 
Attorney General provided a legal opinion that states that the 
Privilege law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1198, precludes granting a privilege 
to documents and information ``required by law,'' including documents 
and information ``required by federal law to maintain program 
delegation, authorization or approval,'' since Virginia must ``enforce 
federally authorized environmental programs in a manner that is no less 
stringent than their federal counterparts. . . .'' The opinion 
concludes that ``[r]egarding Sec.  10.1-1198, therefore, documents or 
other information needed for civil or criminal enforcement under one of 
these programs could not be privileged because such documents and 
information are essential to pursuing enforcement in a manner required 
by federal law to maintain program delegation, authorization or 
approval.''
    Virginia's Immunity law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1-1199, provides that 
``[t]o the extent consistent with requirements imposed by federal 
law,'' any person making a voluntary disclosure of information to a 
state agency regarding a violation of an environmental statute, 
regulation, permit, or administrative order is granted immunity from 
administrative or civil penalty. The Attorney General's January 12, 
1998 opinion states that the quoted language renders this statute 
inapplicable to enforcement of any federally authorized programs, since 
``no immunity could be afforded from administrative, civil, or criminal 
penalties because granting such immunity would not be consistent with 
federal law, which is one of the criteria for immunity.''
    Therefore, EPA has determined that Virginia's Privilege and 
Immunity statutes will not preclude the Commonwealth from enforcing its 
program consistent with the Federal requirements. In any event, because 
EPA has also determined that a state audit privilege and immunity law 
can affect only state enforcement and cannot have any impact on Federal 
enforcement authorities, EPA may at any time invoke its authority under 
the CAA, including, for example, sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to 
enforce the requirements or prohibitions of the state plan, 
independently of any state enforcement effort. In addition, citizen 
enforcement under section 304 of the CAA is likewise unaffected by 
this, or any, state audit privilege or immunity law.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the 
accompanying approval of the maintenance plan under CAA section 
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the air quality designation status 
of geographical areas and do not impose any additional regulatory 
requirements on sources beyond those required by state law. A 
redesignation to attainment does not in and of itself impose any new 
requirements, but rather results in the application of requirements 
contained in the CAA for areas that have been redesignated to 
attainment. Moreover, 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 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 Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735,

[[Page 15115]]

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because it is not a significant regulatory 
action under Executive Order 12866.
     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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land as 
defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151 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). 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 June 14, 2019. 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. This action approving Maryland's and Virginia's redesignation 
requests for their respective portions of the Washington Area as well 
as the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's maintenance plan for the 
Washington Area may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce 
its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen 
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, 
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: March 19, 2019.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

    Title 40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart J--District of Columbia

0
2. In Sec.  52.470, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an 
entry for ``Maintenance plan for the District of Columbia portion of 
the Washington, DC-MD-VA Nonattainment Area for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
National Ambient Air Quality Standard'' at the end of the table to read 
as follows:

Sec.  52.470   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Name of non-regulatory SIP        Applicable           State
            revision               geographic area   submittal date   EPA approval date   Additional explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintenance plan for the         District of                3/12/18  4/15/2019, [Insert  Sec.   52.476(j).
 District of Columbia portion     Columbia.                           Federal Register
 of the Washington, DC-MD-VA                                          citation].
 Nonattainment Area for the
 2008 8-hour ozone National
 Ambient Air Quality Standard.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
 3. Section 52.476 is amended by adding paragraph (j) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  52.476   Control strategy: ozone.

* * * * *
    (j) EPA approves the maintenance plan for the District of Columbia 
portion of the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS submitted by the Director of the District of Columbia 
Department of Energy and Environment on March 12, 2018. The maintenance 
plan includes 2014, 2025, and 2030 motor vehicle emission budgets

[[Page 15116]]

(MVEBs) for VOC and NOX to be applied to all future 
transportation conformity determinations and analyses for the entire 
Washington, DC-MD-VA area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The 
maintenance plan includes two sets of VOC and NOX MVEBs: The 
MVEBs without transportation buffers are effective as EPA has 
determined them adequate for transportation conformity purposes; the 
MVEBs with transportation buffers will be used only as needed in 
situations where the conformity analysis must be based on different 
data, models, or planning assumptions, including, but not limited to, 
updates to demographic, land use, or project-related assumptions, than 
were used to create the set of MVEBs without transportation buffers. 
The technical analyses used to demonstrate compliance with the MVEBs 
and the need, if any, to use transportation buffers will be fully 
documented in the conformity analysis and follow the Transportation 
Planning Board's (TPB) interagency consultation procedures.

           Table 3 to Paragraph (j)--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the Washington, DC-MD-VA Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            Effective date of
     Type of control strategy SIP            Year          VOC (TPD)       NOX (TPD)     adequacy determination
                                                                                             of SIP approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintenance Plan......................            2014            61.3           136.8  5/15/2019.
                                                  2025            33.2            40.7
                                                  2030            24.1            27.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 4 to Paragraph (j)--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets With Transportation Buffers for the Washington, DC-MD-
                                                     VA Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            Effective date of
     Type of control strategy SIP            Year          VOC (TPD)       NOX (TPD)     adequacy determination
                                                                                             of SIP approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintenance Plan......................            2014            61.3           136.8  Contingent and effective
                                                  2025            39.8            48.8   upon interagency
                                                  2030            28.9            32.9   consultation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subpart V--Maryland

0
4. In Sec.  52.1070, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an 
entry for ``Maintenance plan for the Maryland portion of the 
Washington, DC-MD-VA Nonattainment Area for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
National Ambient Air Quality Standard'' at the end of the table to read 
as follows:

Sec.  52.1070   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Name of non-regulatory SIP        Applicable           State
            revision               geographic area   submittal date   EPA approval date   Additional explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Maintenance plan for the         Calvert, Charles,         2/5/2018  4/15/2019, [Insert  Sec.   52.1076(ee).
 Maryland portion of the          Frederick,                          Federal Register
 Washington, DC-MD-VA             Montgomery, and                     citation].
 Nonattainment Area for the       Prince George's
 2008 8-hour ozone National       Counties.
 Ambient Air Quality Standard.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
5. Section 52.1076 is amended by adding paragraph (ee) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  52.1076   Control strategy plans for attainment and rate-of-
progress: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (ee) EPA approves the maintenance plan for the Maryland portion of 
the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS submitted by the Secretary of the Maryland Department of the 
Environment on February 5, 2018. The maintenance plan includes 2014, 
2025, and 2030 motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for VOC and 
NOX to be applied to all future transportation conformity 
determinations and analyses for the entire Washington, DC-MD-VA area 
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The maintenance plan includes two sets 
of VOC and NOX MVEBs: The MVEBs without transportation 
buffers are effective as EPA has determined them adequate for 
transportation conformity purposes; the MVEBs with transportation 
buffers will be used only as needed in situations where the conformity 
analysis must be based on different data, models, or planning 
assumptions, including, but not limited to, updates to demographic, 
land use, or project-related assumptions, than were used to create the 
set of MVEBs without transportation buffers. The technical analyses 
used to demonstrate compliance with the MVEBs and the need, if any, to 
use transportation buffers will be fully documented in the conformity 
analysis and follow the Transportation Planning Board's (TPB) 
interagency consultation procedures.

[[Page 15117]]

          Table 9 to Paragraph (ee)--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the Washington, DC-MD-VA Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            Effective date of
     Type of control strategy SIP            Year          VOC (TPD)       NOX (TPD)     adequacy determination
                                                                                             of SIP approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintenance Plan......................            2014            61.3           136.8  5/15/2019.
                                                  2025            33.2            24.1
                                                  2030            40.7            27.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Table 10 to Paragraph (ee)--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets With Transportation Buffers for the Washington, DC-
                                                   MD-VA Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            Effective date of
     Type of control strategy SIP            Year          VOC (TPD)       NOX (TPD)     adequacy determination
                                                                                             of SIP approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintenance Plan......................            2014            61.3           136.8  Contingent and effective
                                                  2025            39.8            48.8   upon interagency
                                                  2030            28.9            32.9   consultation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subpart VV--Virginia

0
6. In Sec.  52.2420, the table in paragraph (e)(1) is amended by adding 
an entry for ``Maintenance plan for the Virginia portion of the 
Washington, DC-MD-VA Nonattainment Area for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
National Ambient Air Quality Standard'' at the end of the table to read 
as follows:

Sec.  52.2420   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (1) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Name of non-regulatory SIP        Applicable           State
            revision               geographic area   submittal date   EPA approval date   Additional explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Maintenance plan for the         Arlington,                  1/3/18  4/15/2019, [Insert  Sec.   52.2428(m).
 Virginia portion of the          Fairfax, Loudoun,                   Federal Register
 Washington, DC-MD-VA             and Prince                          citation].
 Nonattainment Area for the       William Counties
 2008 8-hour ozone National       and the Cities of
 Ambient Air Quality Standard.    Alexandria,
                                  Fairfax, Falls
                                  Church, Manassas,
                                  and Manassas Park.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

0
7. Section 52.2428 is amended by adding paragraph (m) to read as 
follows:

Sec.  52.2428   Control Strategy: Carbon monoxide and ozone.

* * * * *
    (m) EPA approves the maintenance plan for the Virginia portion of 
the Washington, DC-MD-VA nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS submitted by the Director of the Virginia Department of 
Environmental Quality on January 3, 2018. The maintenance plan includes 
2014, 2025, and 2030 motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for VOC and 
NOX to be applied to all future transportation conformity 
determinations and analyses for the entire Washington, DC-MD-VA area 
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The maintenance plan includes two sets 
of VOC and NOX MVEBs: The MVEBs without transportation 
buffers are effective as EPA has determined them adequate for 
transportation conformity purposes; the MVEBs with transportation 
buffers will be used only as needed in situations where the conformity 
analysis must be based on different data, models, or planning 
assumptions, including, but not limited to, updates to demographic, 
land use, or project-related assumptions, than were used to create the 
set of MVEBs without transportation buffers. The technical analyses 
used to demonstrate compliance with the MVEBs and the need, if any, to 
use transportation buffers will be fully documented in the conformity 
analysis and follow the Transportation Planning Board's (TPB) 
interagency consultation procedures.

           Table 3 to Paragraph (m)--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the Washington, DC-MD-VA Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            Effective date of
     Type of control strategy SIP            Year          VOC (TPD)       NOX (TPD)     adequacy determination
                                                                                             of SIP approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintenance Plan......................            2014            61.3           136.8  5/15/2019.
                                                  2025            33.2            40.7
                                                  2030            24.1            27.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 15118]]

Table 4 to Paragraph (m)--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets With Transportation Buffers for the Washington, DC-MD-
                                                     VA Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                            Effective date of
     Type of control strategy SIP            Year          VOC (TPD)       NOX (TPD)     adequacy determination
                                                                                             of SIP approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maintenance Plan......................            2014            61.3           136.8  Contingent and effective
                                                  2025            39.8            48.8   upon interagency
                                                  2030            28.9            32.9   consultation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
8. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations

0
9. In Sec.  81.321, the table ``Maryland--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS 
(Primary and secondary)'' is amended by revising the entry 
``Washington, DC-MD-VA:'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.321   Maryland.

* * * * *

                                        Maryland--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Designation                           Classification
         Designated area         -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type               Date\1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Washington, DC-MD-VA: \2\.......  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Calvert County..............  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Charles County..............  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Frederick County............  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Montgomery County...........  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Prince George's County......  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *

0
10. In Sec.  81.347, the table ``Virginia--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS 
(Primary and secondary)'' is amended by:
0
a. Removing the footnote designation from the table heading 
``Designated area'';
0
b. Revising the footnote designations for both ``Date'' table headings; 
and
0
c. Revising the entry ``Washington, DC-MD-VA:''.
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  81.347   Virginia.

* * * * *

                                        Virginia--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Designation                           Classification
         Designated area         -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Date \1\              Type               Date\1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Washington, DC-MD-VA: \2\.......  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Arlington County............  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Fairfax County..............  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Loudoun County..............  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Prince William County.......  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Alexandria City.............  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Fairfax City................  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Falls Church City...........  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Manassas City...............  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
    Manassas Park City..........  April 15, 2019....  Attainment........
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.

[[Page 15119]]

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2019-06128 Filed 4-12-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P