[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 153 (Wednesday, August 8, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39019-39035]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16882]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215; FRL-9981-75--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: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve 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). EPA is not proposing to approve
the redesignation request for the District of Columbia (the District)
for its portion of the Area; EPA will address the District's
redesignation request for its portion of the Area in a separate
rulemaking action. EPA is also proposing to approve, as a revision to
the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's state implementation plans
(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. Approval of a
maintenance plan is among the CAA criteria for redesignation to
attainment, as discussed in more detail in this notice. 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 proposing to approve, as a SIP
revision, these 2014, 2025, and 2030 NOX and VOC MVEBs for
the Washington Area.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 7,
2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R03-
OAR-2018-0215 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be confidential business information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sara Calcinore,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or by
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What are the actions EPA is proposing?
II. What is the background for these proposed actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of Maryland's and Virginia's
redesignation requests for the Washington Area?
    A. Has the Washington Area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS?

    B. Have Maryland and Virginia met all applicable requirements of
section 110 and part D of the CAA for the Washington Area and does
the Washington Area have a fully approved SIP under section 110(k)
of the CAA?
    C. Are the air quality improvements in the Washington Area due
to permanent and enforceable emission reductions?
    D. Do the District, Maryland, and Virginia have fully approvable
ozone maintenance plans for the Washington Area?
V. Have the District, Maryland, and Virginia adopted approvable
MVEBs?
    A. What are the MVEBs?
    B. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the
proposed 2025 and 2030 VOC and NOX MVEBs for the
Washington Area?
    C. What is a safety margin and how was it allocated?
VI. Proposed Action
VII. General Information Pertaining to SIP Submittals From the
Commonwealth of Virginia
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What are the actions EPA is proposing?

    On March 12, 2018, January 29, 2018, and January 3, 2018, the
District, Maryland, and Virginia, respectively, formally submitted a
request to redesignate their portions of the Washington Area from
marginal nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Concurrently, the District, Maryland, and Virginia formally submitted,
as a revision to their respective SIPs, a joint maintenance plan 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. Pursuant to
CAA section 107(d)(3), in this rulemaking action, EPA is proposing to
approve the redesignation requests submitted by Maryland and Virginia
for their portions of the Washington Area. EPA is not proposing to
approve (at this time) the redesignation request from the District and
will act on the District's redesignation request for its portion of the
Area in a separate action. EPA is also proposing to approve, as
revisions to the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's SIPs, the joint
maintenance plan submitted by the District, Maryland, and Virginia.
    EPA is proposing to take several related actions. EPA is proposing
to determine that Maryland and Virginia have met the requirements for
redesignation for their respective portions of the Washington Area
pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is therefore proposing
to approve Maryland's and Virginia's redesignation requests and change
the designation of their respective portions of the Washington Area
from marginal nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA
is also proposing to approve, as revisions to the District's,
Maryland's, and Virginia's SIPs, the joint Washington Area maintenance
plan that was prepared by the Metropolitan Washington Council of
Governments (MWCOG) and jointly submitted by the District, Maryland,
and Virginia. The maintenance plan is designed to ensure continued
attainment in the Washington Area for the next ten years. Additionally,
EPA has found the submitted MVEBs adequate and is proposing 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 that are identified in the Washington Area maintenance
plan. 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. In letters dated July 24, 2018, EPA informed the
District, Maryland, and Virginia that the 2014, 2025, and 2030 MVEBs
are adequate for use in transportation conformity analyses.\1\ Please
see section V.B., ``What Is the Status of EPA's Adequacy Determination
for the Proposed NOX and VOC MVEBs for the Washington
Area?'', of this rulemaking for further explanation of this process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. What is the background for these proposed actions?

    Under the CAA, EPA establishes NAAQS for criteria pollutants in
order to protect human health and the environment. In response to
scientific evidence linking ozone exposure to adverse health effects,
EPA promulgated the first ozone NAAQS, the 0.12 part per million (ppm)
1-hour ozone NAAQS, in 1979. See 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). The CAA
requires EPA to review and reevaluate the NAAQS every 5 years in order
to consider updated information regarding the effects of the criteria
pollutants on human health and the environment. On July 18, 1997, EPA
promulgated a revised ozone NAAQS, referred to as the 1997 ozone NAAQS,
of 0.08 ppm averaged over eight hours. 62 FR 38855. This 8-hour ozone
NAAQS was determined to be more protective of public health than the
previous 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS. In 2008, EPA strengthened the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS from 0.08 to 0.075 ppm. The 0.075 ppm standard is referred
to as the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
    Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, section 107(d)(1)(B)
of the CAA requires EPA to designate as nonattainment any areas that
are violating the NAAQS based on the most recent three years of
quality-assured ozone monitoring data. 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 Cities
in Virginia, and the District of Columbia. See 40 CFR 81.309, 81.321,
and 81.347.
    As stated previously, on March 12, 2018, January 29, 2018, and
January 3, 2018, the District, Maryland, and Virginia, respectively,
formally submitted requests to redesignate their respective portions of
the Washington Area from marginal nonattainment to attainment for the
2008 ozone NAAQS. The District, Maryland, and Virginia concurrently
submitted, as revisions to their SIPs, a maintenance plan for the
Washington Area to ensure continued attainment for at least 10 years
following redesignation. In this rulemaking action, EPA is proposing to
approve the redesignation requests submitted by Maryland and Virginia
for their respective portions of the Area. EPA is not proposing to
approve the redesignation request for the District for its portion and
will act on the redesignation request for the District in a separate
action. EPA is also proposing to approve, as revisions to the
District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's SIPs, the maintenance plan
jointly submitted by the District, Maryland, and Virginia.

III. What are the criteria for redesignation?

    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.
    On April 16, 1992, EPA provided guidance on redesignations in the
General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the CAA
Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498) and supplemented this guidance on
April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on
processing redesignation requests in the following documents:

1. ``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations,''
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, Director, Technical Support Division,
June 18, 1990;
2. ``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;
3. ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
4. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (the ``Calcagni
memorandum'');
5. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response
to Clean Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
6. ``Technical Support Documents (TSDs) for Redesignation of Ozone
and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G.T.
Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17,
1993;
7. ``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'');
8. ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone
and CO Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting
Director, Air Quality Management Division, November 30, 1993;
9. ``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
10. ``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.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of Maryland's and Virginia's redesignation
requests for the Washington Area?

A. Has the Washington Area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS?

    For redesignation of a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS. See CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i). An area is attaining the 2008
ozone NAAQS if it meets the 2008 ozone NAAQS, as determined in
accordance with 40 CFR 50.15 and appendix P of part 50, based on three
complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality
data for all monitoring sites in the area. To attain the NAAQS, the
three-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average ozone concentrations, referred to as ozone design values, at
each monitor must not exceed 0.075 ppm.\2\ The air quality data must be
collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and
recorded in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS). Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period must also meet data completeness
requirements. An ozone design value is valid if daily maximum 8-hour
average concentrations are available for at least 90 percent of the
days within the ozone monitoring season,\3\ on average, for the three-
year period, with a minimum data completeness of 75 percent during the
ozone monitoring season of any year during the three-year period. See
section 2.3 of appendix P to 40 CFR part 50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The rounding convention under 40 CFR part 50, appendix P
dictates that concentrations shall be reported in ppm to the third
decimal place, with additional digits to the right of the third
decimal place truncated. Thus, a computed three-year average ozone
concentration of 0.0759 ppm or lower would meet the standard, but
0.0760 ppm or higher would be over the standard.
    \3\ The ozone season is defined by state in 40 CFR 58 appendix
D. For the 2013-2015 time period, the ozone season was April-October
for the states in the Area. Beginning in 2016, the ozone season is
March-October for the states in the Washington Area. See 80 FR
65292, 65466-67 (October 26, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of the final rule, ``Implementation of the 2008 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan
(SIP) Requirements,'' for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (80 FR 12264, March 6,
2015) (hereinafter, SIP Requirements Rule), EPA modified the maximum
attainment dates for all nonattainment areas for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
to be consistent with the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit's (D.C. Circuit) decision in NRDC v. EPA,
777 F .3d 456, 464-69 (D.C. Cir. 2014).\4\ The SIP Requirements Rule
established a maximum deadline for marginal nonattainment areas to
attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS of three years from the effective date of
designation, or July 20, 2015. See 80 FR at 12268; 40 CFR 51.1103.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ In a final rule published on May 21, 2012 and effective July
20, 2012, EPA established the air quality thresholds that define the
classification assigned to all nonattainment areas for the 2008
ozone NAAQS (the Classifications Rule). See 77 FR 30160. This
rulemaking also established December 31 of each relevant calendar
year as the attainment date for all nonattainment area
classification categories. Section 181 of the CAA provides that the
attainment deadline for ozone nonattainment area is ``as
expeditiously as practicable'' but no later than the prescribed
dates that are provided in Table 1 of that section. In the
Classifications Rule, EPA translated the deadlines in Table 1 of CAA
section 181 for purposes of the 2008 standard by measuring those
deadlines from the effective date of the new designations, but
extended those deadlines by several months to December 31 of the
corresponding calendar year. Pursuant to a challenge of EPA's
interpretation of the attainment deadlines, on December 23, 2014,
the D.C. Circuit issued a decision rejecting, among other things,
the Classifications Rule's attainment deadlines for the 2008 ozone
nonattainment areas, finding that EPA did not have statutory
authority under the CAA to extend those deadlines to the end of the
calendar year. NRDC v. EPA, 777 F .3d 456, 464-69 (D.C. Cir. 2014).
    \5\ On February 16, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Cir. Court) issued an opinion
on the SIP Requirements Rule. South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v.
EPA, No. 15-1115 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 16, 2018). The D.C. Cir. Court
found certain provisions from the SIP Requirements Rule unreasonable
including EPA's provision for a ``redesignation substitute.'' The
D.C. Cir. Court vacated these provisions and found redesignations
must comply with all required elements in CAA section 107(d)(3) and
thus found the ``redesignation substitute'' which did not require
all items in CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) violated the CAA and was thus
unreasonable. The D.C. Cir. Court also vacated other provisions
relating to anti-backsliding in the SIP Requirements Rule as the
Court found them unreasonable. Id. The D.C. Circuit found other
parts of the 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule unrelated to anti-
backsliding and this action reasonable and denied the petition for
appeal on those. Id.

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

    In a final rulemaking action published on May 4, 2016, EPA
determined that the Washington Area did not attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS
by its July 20, 2015 attainment date, based on ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 2012-2014 monitoring period. In that same
action, EPA determined that the Washington Area qualified for a 1-year
extension of its attainment date, as provided in section 181(a)(5) of
the CAA and interpreted by regulation at 40 CFR 51.1107. With that
final rulemaking action, the new attainment date for the Washington
Area was July 20, 2016. See 81 FR 26697 (May 4, 2016).
    On November 14, 2017 (82 FR 52651), in accordance with section
181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA and Provisions for Implementation of the 2008
Ozone NAAQS (40 CFR part 51, subpart AA), EPA made a determination that
the Washington Area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the July 20, 2016
attainment date. EPA's determination was based upon three years of
complete, certified, and quality-assured data for the 2013-2015
monitoring period.
    In addition, EPA has reviewed the most recent ambient air quality
monitoring data for ozone in the Area, including preliminary 2017
design values, as submitted by the District, Maryland, and Virginia and
recorded in EPA's AQS. The quality-assured, quality-controlled, and
state-certified 2014 to 2016 ozone air quality data shows that the
Washington Area continues to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS. This data, as
well as the preliminary design values for 2017, are summarized in Table
1 and are also included in the docket for this rulemaking available
online at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.

                Table 1--Washington Area 2014-2016 and Preliminary 2015-2017 Ozone Design Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Annual 4th highest reading (ppm)   2014-2016  2015-2017
                            Site                       ------------------------------------   design     design
     AQS Site ID        description      Jurisdiction                                         value      value
                                                          2014     2015     2016     2017     (ppm)    (ppm) \6\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11-001-0041 \7\.....  420 34th Street  District of      .......  .......    0.065    0.056      0.056      0.060
                       NE,              Columbia.
                       Washington, DC
                       20019.
11-001-0043.........  2500 1st Street  District of        0.068    0.072    0.072    0.071      0.070      0.071
                       NW,              Columbia.
                       Washington, DC.
11-001-0050.........  300 Van Buren    District of        0.069     0.72    0.071    0.067      0.070      0.070
                       Street NW,       Columbia.
                       Washington, DC
                       20012.
24-009-0011.........  350 Stafford     Maryland.......    0.070    0.067    0.070    0.066      0.069      0.067
                       Road.
24-017-0010.........  14320 Oaks Road  Maryland.......    0.070    0.068    0.073    0.068      0.070      0.069
24-021-0037.........  Frederick        Maryland.......    0.063    0.070    0.070    0.067      0.067      0.069
                       County Airport.
24-031-3001.........  Lathrop E.       Maryland.......    0.064    0.072    0.068    0.065      0.068      0.068
                       Smith
                       Environmental
                       Education
                       Center.
24-033-0030.........  Howard           Maryland.......    0.065    0.072    0.070    0.069      0.069      0.070
                       University's
                       Beltsville
                       Laboratory.
24-033-8003.........  PG County        Maryland.......    0.069    0.069    0.073    0.072      0.070      0.071
                       Equestrian
                       Center.
24-033-9991.........  Powder Mill      Maryland.......    0.069    0.067    0.070    0.070      0.068      0.069
                       Rd., Laurel,
                       MD 20708.
51-013-0020.........  S 18th and       Virginia.......    0.071    0.073    0.072    0.070      0.072      0.071
                       Hayes St..
51-059-0030.........  STA. 46-B9, Lee  Virginia.......    0.065    0.072    0.073    0.068      0.070      0.071
                       Park,
                       Telegraph Road.
51-107-1005.........  38-I, Broad Run  Virginia.......    0.063    0.071    0.068    0.066      0.067      0.068
                       High School,
                       Ashburn.
51-153-0009.........  James S. Long    Virginia.......    0.062    0.067    0.067    0.065      0.065      0.066
                       Park.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Washington Area's most recent monitoring data supports EPA's
previous determination that the Area has attained, and continues to
attain, the 2008 ozone NAAQS. In addition, as discussed subsequently
with respect to the maintenance plan for the Washington Area, Maryland
and Virginia have committed to continue monitoring ambient ozone
concentrations in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. Therefore, EPA is
proposing to determine that the Washington Area continues to attain the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, which is required by CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(i) for redesignation of a nonattainment area to
attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ As noted previously, the 2017 design values are preliminary.
    \7\ The 2014 and 2015 data at monitoring site 11-001-0041 (also
referred to as ``the River Terrace monitor'') is incomplete.
Therefore, the 2016 and 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 this rulemaking action available online at https://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Have Maryland and Virginia met all applicable requirements of
section 110 and part D of the CAA for the Washington Area and does the
Washington Area have a fully approved SIP under section 110(k) of the
CAA?

    EPA has determined that Maryland and Virginia have met all SIP
requirements applicable for purposes of this redesignation of the
Maryland and Virginia portions of the Washington Area under section 110
of the CAA (General SIP Requirements) and that they have met 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 Maryland and Virginia SIPs are fully approved with
respect to all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation in
accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these
determinations, EPA ascertained what requirements are applicable to the
Area and determined that the portions of the Maryland and Virginia SIPs
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 come due prior to the submittal of a complete
redesignation request. See also Shapiro memorandum, September 17, 1993,
and 60 FR 12459, 12465-12466, (March 7, 1995)

(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor).\8\ 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 the
St. Louis/East St. Louis area to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Calcagni memorandum and Shapiro memorandum are included
in the docket for this rulemaking available online at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Maryland and Virginia Have Met All Applicable Requirements of
Section 110 and Part D of the CAA Applicable to the Washington Area for
Purposes of Redesignation
a. Section 110 General Requirements for SIPs
    Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA contains 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: (1) Submit a
SIP that has been adopted by the state after reasonable public notice
and hearing; (2) include enforceable emission limitations and other
control measures, means, or techniques necessary to meet the
requirements of the CAA; (3) provide for establishment and operation of
appropriate devices, methods, systems and procedures necessary to
monitor ambient air quality; (4) provide for implementation of a source
permit program to regulate the modification and construction of
stationary sources within the areas covered by the plan; (5) include
provisions for the implementation of part C prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) and part D new source review (NSR) permit programs;
(6) include provisions for stationary source emission control measures,
monitoring, and reporting; (7) include provisions for air quality
modeling; and, (8) provide for public and local agency participation in
planning and emission control rule development.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires SIPs to 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,\9\ amendments to the NOX SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR
26298), and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and the Cross-State Air
Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Update, October 26, 2016 (81 FR 74504). However,
the section 110(a)(2)(D) SIP requirements are not linked with a
particular area's ozone designation and classification. EPA concludes
that the SIP requirements linked with an area's ozone designation and
classification are the relevant measures to evaluate when reviewing a
redesignation request for the area. The section 110(a)(2)(D)
requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a state regardless
of the designation (or redesignation) of any one particular area within
the state. Thus, these requirements are not applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation. See 65 FR 37890 (June 15, 2000), 66 FR 50399
(October 19, 2001), and 68 FR 25418, 25426-25427 (May 13, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA finalized the
``Finding of Significant Contribution and Rulemaking for Certain
States in the Ozone Transport Assessment Group Region for Purposes
of Reducing Regional Transport of Ozone''--commonly called the
NOX SIP Call. The NOX SIP call requires the
District of Columbia and 22 states to reduce emissions of
NOX in order to reduce the transport of ozone and ozone
precursors. EPA developed the NOX Budget Trading Program,
an allowance trading program that states could adopt to meet their
obligations under the NOX SIP Call. The NOX
Budget Trading Program allowed electric generating units (EGUs)
greater than 25 megawatts and industrial non-electric generating
units, such as boilers and turbines, with a rated heat input greater
than 250 million British thermal units per hour (MMBtu/hr), referred
to as ``large non-EGUs'', to participate in a regional
NOX cap and trade program. The NOX SIP call
also established reduction requirements for other non-EGUs,
including cement kilns and stationary internal combustion (IC)
engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, other section 110 elements that are neither connected
with attainment plan submissions nor linked with an area's ozone
attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation. An area that is redesignated from nonattainment to
attainment will remain subject to these statewide requirements after
the area is redesignated to attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The
section 110(a)(2) requirements, which are linked with a particular
area's designation and classification, are the relevant measures to
evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The section 110(a)(2)
elements not linked to the area's nonattainment status are not
applicable for purposes of redesignation. This approach is consistent
with EPA's existing policy on applicability (e.g., for redesignations)
of conformity and oxygenated fuels requirements, as well as with
section 184 ozone transport region (OTR) requirements. See, e.g.,
Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings for
redesignation, 61 FR 53174-53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826
(May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio, final rulemaking for
redesignation, 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida final
rulemaking for redesignation, 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995). For
further information and analysis, see the discussion of this issue in
the Cincinnati, Ohio ozone redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000),
and the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania ozone redesignation (66 FR 50399,
October 19, 2001).
    EPA has reviewed Maryland's and Virginia's SIPs and concludes that
they meet the general SIP requirements under section 110 of the CAA, to
the extent those requirements are applicable for purposes of
redesignation. On November 17, 2014 (79 FR 62010) and March 27, 2014
(79 FR 17043), EPA approved elements of the SIPs submitted by Maryland
and Virginia, respectively, which, with the exception of interstate
transport, meet the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2), for the 2008
ozone NAAQS. As explained previously, the general requirements of
section 110(a)(2) are statewide requirements that are not linked to the
2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment status of the Washington Area and are
therefore not ``applicable requirements'' for purpose of the review of
Maryland's and Virginia's 2008 ozone NAAQS redesignation requests.
Because Maryland's and Virginia's SIPs satisfy all of the general SIP
elements and requirements set forth in CAA section 110(a)(2) applicable
to and necessary for redesignation, EPA concludes that Maryland and
Virginia have satisfied the criterion of section 107(d)(3)(E) regarding
section 110 of the CAA.
b. Part D Requirements
    Areas designated nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS are subject to
the applicable nonattainment area and ozone-specific planning
requirements of part D of the CAA. Sections 172-176 of the CAA, found
in subpart 1 of part D, set forth the basic nonattainment requirements
for all nonattainment areas. Section 172(c), under part D of the CAA,
sets forth the basic requirements of air quality plans for states with
nonattainment areas for all pollutants that are required to submit

plans pursuant to section 172(b). Section 182 of the CAA, found in
subpart 2 of part D, establishes specific requirements for ozone
nonattainment areas depending on the areas' nonattainment
classifications.\10\ The Washington Area was classified as marginal
under subpart 2 of part D of the CAA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. As such,
the Area is subject to the subpart 1 requirements contained in CAA
sections 172(c) and 176. The Area is also subject to the subpart 2
requirements contained in CAA section 182(a) (marginal nonattainment
area requirements), which include, but are not limited to, submitting a
baseline emissions inventory, adopting a SIP requiring emissions
statements from stationary sources, and implementing a nonattainment
NSR (NNSR) program for the relevant ozone standard. A thorough
discussion of the requirements contained in CAA sections 172(c) and 182
can be found in the General Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57
FR 13498).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Ozone nonattainment areas are classified based on the
severity of their ozone levels (as determined based on the area's
``design value,'' which represents air quality in the area for the
most recent 3 years). The possible classifications for ozone
nonattainment areas are Marginal, Moderate, Serious, Severe, and
Extreme. See CAA section 181(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, states located in the OTR, which includes Maryland
and portions of Virginia,\11\ are also subject to the requirements of
CAA section 184. All areas located in the OTR, both attainment and
nonattainment, are subject to additional control requirements under
section 184 for the purpose of reducing interstate transport of
emissions that may contribute to downwind ozone nonattainment. The
section 184 requirements include reasonably available control
technology (RACT), NSR, enhanced vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/
M), and Stage II vapor recovery or a comparable measure relating to
gasoline dispensing facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The OTR is comprised of the states of Connecticut,
Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey,
New York, Pennsylvania, and the Consolidated Metropolitan
Statistical Area, which includes the District of Columbia and
portions of Virginia. The areas designated as in the Virginia
portion of the OTR are as follows: Arlington County, Fairfax County,
Loudoun County, Prince William County, Stafford County, Alexandria
City, Fairfax City, Falls Church City, Manassas City, and Manassas
Park City. See, e.g. ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality
Implementation Plans; Virginia; NSR in the Ozone Transport Region'',
71 FR 39570 (July 13, 2006) and 71 FR 890 (January 6, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements, including the
NSR program, as not being applicable for purposes of redesignation. The
rationale for this is based on two considerations. First, the
requirement to submit SIP revisions for the section 184 requirements
continues to apply to areas in the OTR even after redesignation to
attainment. Therefore, states remain obligated to have NSR, as well as
RACT, and I/M programs, even after redesignation. Second, the section
184 control measures are region-wide requirements and do not apply to
the area by virtue of the area's designation and classification, and
thus are properly considered not relevant to an action changing an
area's designation. See 61 FR 53174, 53175-53176 (October 10, 1996) and
62 FR 24826, 24830-24832 (May 7, 1997).
i. CAA Section 172 Requirements
    As provided in CAA part D, subpart 2, for marginal ozone
nonattainment areas such as the Washington Area, the ozone specific
requirements of section 182(a) supersede (where overlapping) the
attainment planning requirements that would otherwise apply under
section 172(c), including the attainment demonstration and reasonably
available control measures (RACM) under section 172(c)(1), reasonable
further progress (RFP) under section 172(c)(2), and contingency
measures under section 172(c)(9). 42 U.S.C. 7511a(a).
    Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions.
This requirement is superseded by the inventory requirement in section
182(a)(1) discussed later in this notice.
    Section 172(c)(4) requires the identification and quantification of
allowable emissions for major new and modified sources in an area, and
section 172(c)(5) requires source permits for the construction and
operation of new and modified major stationary sources anywhere in the
nonattainment area (NNSR). As explained previously, the Washington Area
is included in the OTR established by Congress in section 184 of the
CAA. Therefore, sources located in Maryland and the portions of
Virginia included in the OTR will remain subject to the part D NNSR
requirements even after the Washington Area is redesignated to
attainment. Since the part D NNSR requirements apply to the Washington
Area regardless of its attainment status, they are not considered to be
relevant for purposes of redesignation. Regardless, Maryland and
Virginia both have an approved NNSR program. See 82 FR 45475 (September
29, 2017) and 64 FR 51047 (September 21, 1999).
    Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures
necessary to provide for attainment of the NAAQS. Because attainment
has been reached in the Area, EPA finds no additional measures are
needed in the SIPs to provide for attainment.
    Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable
provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted previously, Maryland's and
Virginia's SIPs meet the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2)
for purposes of redesignation.
ii. CAA 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 that are developed, funded, or approved under
title 23 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act
(transportation conformity) as well as to all other federally supported
or funded projects (general conformity). State transportation
conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement, and enforceability
that EPA promulgated pursuant to its authority under the CAA.
    EPA interprets the conformity SIP requirements \12\ as not
applicable for purposes of evaluating a redesignation request under
section 107(d) because state conformity rules are still required after
redesignation and federal conformity rules apply where state conformity
rules have not been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F .3d 426 (6th Cir.
2001) (upholding this interpretation); see also 60 FR 62748 (December
7, 1995) (redesignation of Tampa, Florida).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to submit
revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain federal criteria and
procedures for determining transportation conformity. Transportation
conformity SIPs are different from SIPs requiring the development of
Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs), such as control strategy
SIPs and maintenance plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

iii. Section 182 Requirements
    Section 182(a)(1) requires states to submit a comprehensive,
accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions from sources of
NOX and VOC emitted within the boundaries of the ozone
nonattainment area. On July 17, 2014, the District and Virginia
submitted a joint 2011 base year emissions inventory addressing
NOX and VOC emissions, as well as carbon monoxide (CO)
emissions, for the Washington Area. On

August 4, 2014, Maryland submitted its 2011 base year emissions
inventory for the Washington Area, which also addressed NOX,
VOC, and CO. EPA approved the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's
base year emissions inventories for NOX and VOC for the 2008
ozone NAAQS on May 13, 2015 (80 FR 27255). On July 23, 2015 (80 FR
43625), EPA approved the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's base
year emission inventories for CO.
    Under section 182(a)(2)(A), states with ozone nonattainment areas
that were designated prior to the enactment of the 1990 CAA amendments
were required to submit, within six months of classification, all rules
and corrections to existing RACT rules that were required under section
172(b)(3) prior to the 1990 CAA amendments. EPA approved Maryland's and
Virginia's SIP revisions satisfying the section 182(a)(2) RACT ``fix-
up'' requirement on March 31, 1994 (59 FR 15117) and November 29, 1994
(59 FR 60908).
    Section 182(c)(3) of the CAA requires areas classified as serious
and above to adopt and implement an enhanced I/M program. The
Washington Area was classified as severe for the 1979 1-hour ozone
NAAQS, and therefore enhanced I/M was required. In addition, section
184(b)(1)(a) of the CAA requires areas located in the OTR that are a
metropolitan statistical area, or part thereof, with a population of
100,000 or more to meet the enhanced I/M program requirements of CAA
section 182(c)(3). EPA approved Maryland's enhanced I/M program into
Maryland's SIP on October 29, 1999 (64 FR 58340). EPA approved
Virginia's enhanced I/M program on September 1, 1999 (64 FR 47670), as
revised April 22, 2008 (73 FR 21540).
    CAA section 182(a)(2)(C) and section 182(a)(4) contain source
permitting and offset requirements (known as NNSR). As discussed
previously, part D NNSR will continue to apply to the Washington Area,
regardless of attainment status, due to the Washington Area being part
of the OTR. Therefore, EPA concludes that Maryland and Virginia need
not have a fully approved part D NSR program prior to approval of the
redesignation request. As stated previously, however, Maryland and
Virginia both have an approved NNSR program. See 82 FR 45475 (September
29, 2017) for Maryland and 64 FR 51047 (September 21, 1999) for
Virginia. On January 29, 2018 (83 FR 3982), EPA approved Maryland's May
8, 2017 SIP revision addressing the NNSR requirements for the 2008
ozone NAAQS and certifying that Maryland's existing NNSR program
covering Maryland's portion of the Washington Area is at least as
stringent as the requirements at 40 CFR 51.165, as amended by the SIP
Requirements Rule. On May 11, 2017, Virginia formally submitted a SIP
revision to address the specific NNSR requirements for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS, located in 40 CFR 51.160-165. In Virginia's SIP revision,
Virginia is certifying that its existing NNSR program covering
Virginia's portion of the Washington Area is at least as stringent as
the requirements at 40 CFR 51.165, as amended by the SIP Requirements
Rule. EPA proposed approval of Virginia's May 11, 2017 SIP revision
addressing the NNSR requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS on April 4,
2018 (83 FR 14386).\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ While not prejudging the outcome of EPA's rulemaking on
Virginia's May 11, 2017 SIP revision, EPA expects to finalize
rulemaking on that NNSR SIP revision before taking final action on
this redesignation action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 182(a)(3) requires states to submit periodic emission
inventories and a revision to the SIP to require the owners or
operators of stationary sources to annually submit emission statements
documenting actual NOX and VOC emissions. Maryland and
Virginia submit periodic emission inventories as required by CAA
section 182(a)(3). As stated above, EPA approved the District's,
Maryland's, and Virginia's base year emissions inventories for
NOX and VOC for the 2008 ozone NAAQS on May 13, 2015 (80 FR
27255). With regard to stationary source emission statements, EPA
approved Maryland's and Virginia's emission statement rules on October
12, 1994 (59 FR 51517) and May 2, 1995 (60 FR 21451), respectively,
which satisfied the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(3)(B).
Maryland's and Virginia's emission statement rules require certain
sources in ozone nonattainment areas and the OTR to report annual
NOX and VOC emissions. EPA approved Maryland's and
Virginia's emission statement certification SIPs (finding Maryland and
Virginia had an emission statement program meeting section 182(a)(3)
requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS) on July 16, 2018 (83 FR 32796)
and June 1, 2018 (83 FR 25378), respectively.
    Therefore, Maryland and Virginia have satisfied all applicable SIP
requirements under section 110 and part D of title I of the CAA for
purposes of redesignation of their respective portions of the
Washington Area. As noted previously, EPA will act on the District's
redesignation request for its portion of the Washington Area in a
separate rulemaking.
2. Maryland and Virginia Have Fully Approved SIPs for Purposes of
Redesignation Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
    At various times, Maryland and Virginia have adopted and submitted,
and EPA has approved, provisions addressing the various SIP elements
applicable for the ozone NAAQS. As discussed previously, EPA has fully
approved Maryland's and Virginia's SIPs for the Washington Area under
section 110(k) for all requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation under the 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA may rely on prior SIP
approvals in approving a redesignation request (see the Calcagni
memorandum at page 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v.
Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-990 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d
426), plus any additional measures it may approve in conjunction with a
redesignation action (see 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and citations
therein).

C. Are the air quality improvements in the Washington area due to
permanent and enforceable emission reductions?

    To redesignate an area from nonattainment to attainment, section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA requires EPA to determine that the air
quality improvement in the area is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from the implementation of the SIP
and applicable federal air pollution control regulations and other
permanent and enforceable emission reductions. Maryland and Virginia
have demonstrated that the observed ozone air quality improvement in
the Washington Area is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in
NOX and VOC emissions resulting from Maryland and Virginia
measures approved as part of the SIP as well as federal measures.
    In making this demonstration, Maryland and Virginia have calculated
the change in emissions between 2011 and 2014. The change in emissions
is shown in Table 2. Maryland and Virginia attribute the decrease in
emissions and corresponding improvement in air quality during this time
period to a number of regulatory control measures that have been
implemented in the Washington Area and upwind areas in recent years.
Based on the information summarized in the following sections, Maryland
and Virginia have adequately demonstrated that the improvement in air
quality is due to permanent and enforceable emissions reductions.

1. Permanent and Enforceable Emission Controls Implemented
a. Federal Emission Control Measures
    A variety of federal and state control programs have contributed to
reduced on-road, point source, and nonroad emissions of NOX
and VOC in the Washington Area, with additional emission reductions
expected to occur in the future as older equipment and vehicles are
replaced with newer, compliant models. Federal emission control
measures include the following:
Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards and Gasoline Sulfur Control
Requirements
    On February 10, 2000 (65 FR 6698), EPA promulgated Tier 2 motor
vehicle emission standards and gasoline sulfur control requirements.
These emission control requirements result in lower NOX and
VOC emissions from new cars and light duty trucks, including sport
utility vehicles. With respect to fuels, this rule required refiners
and importers of gasoline to meet lower standards for sulfur in
gasoline, which were phased in between 2004 and 2006. By 2006, refiners
were required to meet a 30 ppm average sulfur level, with a maximum cap
of 80 ppm. This reduction in fuel sulfur content ensures the
effectiveness of low emission-control technologies. The Tier 2 tailpipe
standards established in this rule were phased in for new vehicles
between 2004 and 2009. EPA estimated in the final rule that this
program will reduce annual NOX emissions by about 2.2
million tons per year in 2020 and 2.8 million tons per year in 2030
after the program is fully implemented and non-compliant vehicles have
all been retired.
Control of Emissions From Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines and Equipment
    On October 8, 2008 (73 FR 59034), EPA finalized emission standards
for new nonroad spark-ignition engines. The exhaust emission standards
applied beginning in 2010 for new marine spark-ignition engines and in
2011 and 2012 for different sizes of new land-based, spark-ignition
engines at or below 19 kW (i.e. small engines used primarily in lawn
and garden applications). In the October 8, 2008 final rule, EPA
estimated that by 2030 the rule will result in annual nationwide
reductions of 604,000 tons of volatile organic hydrocarbon emissions,
132,200 tons of NOX emissions, and 5,500 tons of directly-
emitted PM2.5 emissions. These reductions correspond to
significant reductions in the formation of ground-level ozone.
Nonroad Diesel Engines Tier 1 and Tier 2
    On June 17, 1994 (59 FR 31306), EPA made an affirmative
determination under section 213(a)(2) of the CAA that nonroad engines
are significant contributors to ambient ozone or CO levels in more than
one nonattainment area. In the same notice, EPA also made a
determination under CAA section 213(a)(4) that other emissions from
compression-ignition (CI) nonroad engines rated at or above 37
kilowatts (kW) cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably
be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. In the June 17,
1994 final rule, EPA set a first phase of emission standards (Tier 1
standards) for nonroad diesel engines rated 37 kW and above. These
standards apply to nonroad, compression-ignition (i.e. diesel-powered)
utility engines including, but not limited to, farm, construction, and
industrial equipment, rated at or above 37 kW. On October 23, 1998 (63
FR 56968), EPA finalized a second phase of emission standards (Tier 2
standards) for nonroad diesel engines rated under 37 kW. These emission
standards have resulted in a decrease in NOX emissions from
the combustion of diesel fuel used to power this equipment. The Tier 1
and Tier 2 standards for nonroad diesel engines will continue to result
in emission reductions as older equipment is replaced with newer,
compliant models.
Emissions Standards for Large Spark Ignition Engines
    On November 8, 2002 (67 FR 68242), EPA established emission
standards for large spark-ignition engines such as those used in
forklifts and airport ground-service equipment; recreational vehicles
using spark-ignition engines such as off-highway motorcycles, all-
terrain vehicles, and snow mobiles; and recreational marine diesel
engines. These emission standards were phased in from model year 2004
through 2012. When the emission standards are fully implemented in
2030, EPA expects a national 75 percent reduction in hydrocarbon (HC)
emissions, 82 percent reduction in NOX emissions, 61 percent
reduction in CO emissions, and a 60 percent reduction in direct
particulate matter (PM) emissions from these engines, equipment, and
vehicles compared to projected emissions if the standards were not
implemented.
Standards for Reformulated and Conventional Gasoline
    On February 16, 1994 (59 FR 7716), EPA finalized regulations
requiring that gasoline in certain areas be reformulated to reduce
vehicle emissions of toxic and ozone-forming compounds, including
NOX and VOC. Reformulated gasoline (RFG) is required in the
Washington Area. The first phase of the RFG program (Phase I) began in
1995 and the second phase (Phase II) began in 2000. These standards
affect various gasoline-powered non-road mobile sources, such as lawn
equipment, generators, and compressors. EPA estimates that Phase I of
the RFG program resulted in a 2 percent and 17 percent annual reduction
in NOX, and VOCs, respectively, from 1995 emission levels
and prevented 64,000 tons of smog-forming pollutants, including
NOX and VOC, from being emitted into the air from 1995 to
2000. Phase II of the RFG program, which began in 2000, was expected to
reduce emissions of NOX and VOC by 7 percent and 27 percent,
respectively, from 1995 emission levels and reduce emissions of smog-
forming pollutants by an additional 41,000 tons.\14\ The RFG program
continues to provide emission reductions in the Washington Area as the
use of RFG results in less vehicle emissions of NOX and VOC
compared to the use of conventional gasoline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See https://www.epa.gov/gasoline-standards/reformulated-gasoline for more information on the RFG program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Emission Standards for Locomotives and Locomotive Engines
    On April 16, 1998 (63 FR 18978), EPA established emission standards
for NOX, HC, CO, PM, and smoke from newly manufactured and
remanufactured diesel-powered locomotives and locomotive engines. These
emission standards were effective in 2000 and are expected to result in
a more than 60 percent reduction in NOX emissions from
locomotives by 2040 compared to 1995 baseline levels.
b. Control Measures Specific to the Washington Area
Maryland Healthy Air Act
    In addition to the measures referenced previously, a reduction of
emission of ozone precursors can also be attributed to the Maryland
Healthy Air Act (Annotated Code of Maryland Environment Title 2 Ambient
Air Quality Control Subtitle 10 Healthy Air Act Sections 2-1001 to 2-
1005, with implementing regulations at COMAR 26.11.27 Emission
Limitations for Power Plants). The Maryland Health Air Act (HAA) was
effective on July 16, 2007 and approved by EPA on September 4, 2008 (73
FR 51599). The HAA established limits on the amount of NOX
and SO2 emissions affected facilities in

Maryland could emit and required the installation of on-site pollution
controls at 15 power plants in Maryland. The first phase of the HAA
occurred between 2009 and 2010 and reduced NOX emissions
from affected sources by almost 70% compared to 2002 levels. The second
phase of the HAA occurred between 2012 and 2013. Maryland estimates
that the HAA will reduce NOX emissions by approximately 75%
from 2002 levels.
Closure of GenOn Potomac River LLC Facility
    The decrease in emissions of ozone precursors is also attributable
to the closure of the GenOn Potomac River plant located in Alexandria,
Virginia. This 482-megawatt electrical generating facility consisted of
five coal-fired boilers and emitted 557.7 tons of NOX
annually and 2.7 tons of NOX per ozone season day (tpd) in
2011. The plant ceased operations and signed a mutual determination
letter on December 21, 2012, agreeing to the permanent shutdown of the
source and revoking all permits for the facility.\15\ Therefore, this
closure is permanent and federally enforceable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See Mutual Determination Letter from Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality to Mr. William Lee Davis, President, GenOn
Potomac River, LLC, Subject: Mutual Determination of Permanent
Shutdown of the Potomac River Generating Station, December 20, 2012
included in the docket for this rulemaking available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Emission Reductions
    Maryland and Virginia calculated the change in emissions between
2011 and 2014 throughout the entire Washington Area to demonstrate that
air quality has improved. The change in emissions is shown in Table 2.
Maryland and Virginia used the 2011 base year emissions inventory for
the Washington Area as the nonattainment year inventory because 2011
was one of the three years used to designate the area nonattainment for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA approved the Washington Area 2011 base year
inventory as meeting the requirements of CAA section 182(a)(1) on May
13, 2015 (80 FR 27276) for NOX and VOC emissions and July
23, 2015 (80 FR 43625) for CO emissions. As explained later in this
notice, 2014 was used as the attainment year inventory.

                    Table 2--2011-2014 Emissions Reduction for the Washington, DC-MD-VA Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                [Delta] 2011--    % Reduction
                              2011                                     2014            2014          from 2011
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               VOC Emissions (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
295.0...........................................................           259.4            35.6            12.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               NOX Emissions (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
436.5...........................................................           296.9           139.6            32.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               CO Emissions (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1,800.8.........................................................         1,617.9           182.9            10.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: 2011 emissions data is from the 2011 base year emissions inventory for the Washington, DC-MD-VA 2008 ozone
  NAAQS nonattainment area that was approved by EPA on May 13, 2015 (80 FR 27276) for NOX and VOC emissions and
  July 23, 2015 (80 FR 43625) for CO emissions.

    Table 2 shows that emissions of NOX and VOC in the
Washington area were reduced by 139.6 tpd and 35.6 tpd, respectively,
between 2011 and 2014. As discussed previously, Maryland and Virginia
identified several federal and state rules approved into Maryland's and
Virginia's SIPs that resulted in the reduction of NOX and
VOC emissions from 2011 to 2014. Therefore, Maryland and Virginia have
shown that the air quality improvements in the Washington Area are due
to permanent and enforceable emission reductions.

D. Do the District, Maryland, and Virginia have fully approvable ozone
maintenance plans for the Washington Area?

    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.
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan
for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. Under
CAA section 175A, the maintenance plan must demonstrate continued
attainment of the NAAQS for at least 10 years after the Administrator
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the
redesignation, the state must submit a revised maintenance plan which
demonstrates that attainment of the NAAQS will continue for an
additional 10 years beyond the initial 10-year maintenance period. To
address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance
plan must contain contingency measures, as EPA deems necessary, to
assure prompt correction of the future NAAQS violation.
    The Calcagni memorandum provides further guidance on the content of
a maintenance plan, explaining that a maintenance plan should address
five elements: (1) An attainment emission inventory; (2) a maintenance
demonstration; (3) a commitment for continued air quality monitoring;
(4) a process for verification of continued attainment; and (5) a
contingency plan.
    In conjunction with their requests to redesignate their respective
portions of the Washington Area to attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS,
the District, Maryland, and Virginia submitted, as a revision to their
SIPs, a plan to provide for maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS through
2030, which is more than 10 years after the expected effective date of
the redesignation to attainment. EPA anticipates redesignating the
entire Washington Area, including the District's portion, by 2019. As
discussed in this notice, EPA is proposing to find that the District's,
Maryland's, and Virginia's maintenance plan for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
includes the necessary components per the CAA, including CAA section
175A and EPA guidance, and is proposing to approve the maintenance plan
as revisions to the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's SIPs.

1. Attainment Inventory
    The Calcagni memorandum indicates that states requesting
redesignation to attainment should develop an attainment emissions
inventory in order to identify the level of emissions in the area which
is sufficient to attain the NAAQS. The attainment inventory should be
consistent with EPA's most recent guidance on emission inventories for
nonattainment areas available at the time and should include the
emissions during the time period associated with monitoring data
showing attainment.
    For the attainment inventory, the District, Maryland, and Virginia
used the year 2014, which is one of the years during the three-year
period associated with the monitoring data first showing attainment of
the 2008 ozone NAAQS (i.e., 2013 to 2015). As previously mentioned, on
November 14, 2017, EPA determined that the Washington Area attained the
2008 ozone NAAQS by the attainment date, based on 2013 to 2015 data.
See 82 FR 52651. The attainment year inventory is summarized in Table
3. A detailed evaluation of the methodology used to develop the
attainment year inventory (and EPA's rationale to approve the
attainment inventory) is provided in the Emission Inventory Technical
Support Document (EI TSD), which is included in the docket for this
rulemaking available online at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID:
EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.

                           Table 3--2014 Attainment Inventory for the Washington Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Source category                             NOX (tpd)      VOC  (tpd)       CO  (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................................            64.9             7.7            23.7
Non-Point (Area)................................................             9.6           139.3            63.5
Marine, Air, Rail (MAR).........................................            19.2             2.4            19.6
Nonroad Model...................................................              52            47.5           762.8
On-Road Mobile..................................................           136.8            61.3           744.1
Quasi-Point.....................................................            14.4             1.2             4.2
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................           296.9           259.4          1617.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Have the District, Maryland, and Virginia documented maintenance of
the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the Washington Area?
a. Maintenance Emission Inventory for the Washington Area
    The District, Maryland, and Virginia have demonstrated maintenance
of the 2008 ozone standard through 2030 by the use of emission
inventories showing that future emissions of NOX and VOC for
the Washington Area will remain at or below attainment year emission
levels. A 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) and 68 FR 25413, 25430-25432 (May 12, 2003).
    The District, Maryland, and Virginia are using emissions
inventories for the years 2025 and 2030 to demonstrate maintenance in
the Washington Area. EPA anticipates redesignating the entire
Washington Area, including the District's portion, in 2019. 2030 is
more than 10 years after the expected effective date of the
redesignation to attainment, and 2025 was selected to demonstrate that
emissions are not expected to increase in the interim between the
attainment year and the final maintenance year.
    In order to develop the 2025 and 2030 inventories, the District,
Maryland, and Virginia applied growth factors to the 2014 attainment
year emissions inventory (shown in Table 3). A detailed evaluation of
the methodology used to develop the maintenance inventory (and EPA's
rational for approving the maintenance inventory as well as the growth
factors used) is provided in EPA's EI TSD, which is included in the
docket for this rulemaking available online at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.
    The maintenance inventory, provided in Table 4, shows the projected
emissions of NOX, VOC, and CO in the Washington Area for
2014 (the attainment year), 2025, and 2030 and demonstrates that future
emissions of NOX, VOC, and CO will not exceed the levels of
the 2014 attainment year inventory for the Washington area for a
minimum of 10 years following redesignation.

        Table 4--2014 to 2030 NOX, VOC, and CO Maintenance Emissions Inventories for the Washington Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         NOX (tpd)                  VOC (tpd)                   CO (tpd)
        Source category         --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   2014     2025     2030     2014     2025     2030     2014     2025     2030
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point..........................     64.9     66.0     68.5      7.7      8.8      9.4     23.7     25.1     26.2
Non-Point (Area)...............      9.6      9.9     10.0    139.3    153.7    160.3     63.6     64.9     65.5
Marine-Air-Rail (M-A-R)........     19.2     21.4     22.4      2.4      2.6      2.6     19.6     19.9     20.7
Nonroad Mobile.................     52.0     29.6     27.8     47.5     44.9     47.2    762.8    845.8    898.8
On-Road Mobile.................    136.8     40.7     27.4     61.3     33.2     24.1    744.1    457.1    323.7
Quasi-Point....................     14.4     14.4     14.4      1.2      1.2      1.2      4.2      4.2      4.2
                                --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total......................    296.9    182.0    170.5    259.4    244.4    244.8   1618.0   1417.0   1339.1
                                --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Delta] 2014-2025..............            114.9
                                            15.0
                                           201.0
                                --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Delta] 2014-2030..............            126.4
                                            14.6
                                           278.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In summary, EPA finds the maintenance inventory for the Washington
Area provided in Table 4 shows maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS by
providing emissions information and reasonable growth factors to
support the demonstration that future emissions of NOX and
VOC will remain at or below 2014 emission levels (an inventory year
showing attainment of NAAQS) when taking into account both future
source growth and implementation of future controls. Table 4 shows that
NOX and VOC emissions are projected to decrease by 126.4 tpd
and 14.6 tpd, respectively, between 2014 and 2030. EPA finds that the
District, Maryland, and Virginia have demonstrated maintenance of the
2008 ozone standard in the Washington Area through 2030.
b. Control Measures for Maintenance of Air Quality in the Washington
Area
    The point, nonroad, and on-road emission projections for 2025 and
2030 include a variety of control strategies that will reduce emissions
of NOX and VOC in future years.
i. Point Sector Controls
COMAR 26.11.38 Control of NOX Emissions From Coal-Fired
Electric Generating Units
    COMAR 26.11.38 (also referred to as the Maryland NOX
Rule) established new NOX emission standards and additional
monitoring and reporting requirements for coal-fired EGUs in Maryland.
COMAR 26.11.38 was approved by EPA into the SIP on May 30, 2017 (82 FR
24546). The coal-fired EGUs included in this rule account for more than
80 percent of the State of Maryland's NOX emissions from
power plants. These new NOX emission standards have resulted
in reductions in NOX emissions.
ii. Nonroad Emission Controls
    As discussed previously, a variety of federal and state control
programs have contributed to reduced on-road, point source, and nonroad
emissions of NOX and VOC in the Washington Area, with
additional emission reductions expected to occur in the future. These
Federal measures include the following and are discussed in more detail
in section IV.C.1.b. of this rulemaking: (1) Control of Emissions from
Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines and Equipment; (2) Nonroad Diesel
Engines Tier 1 and Tier 2; (3) Emissions Standards for Large Spark
Ignition Engines; (4) Standards for Reformulated and Conventional
Gasoline; and, (5) Emission Standards for Locomotives and Locomotive
Engines.
iii. On-Road Emission Controls
Tier 3 Vehicle Emissions and Fuel Standards Program
    On April 28, 2014 (79 FR 23414), EPA established more stringent
vehicle emissions standards. The vehicle emissions standards will
reduce both tailpipe and evaporative emissions of the ozone precursors
NOX and VOC from passenger cars, light-duty trucks, medium-
duty passenger vehicles, and some heavy-duty vehicles. These standards
will result in significant reductions in ozone concentrations due to
the decrease in NOX and VOC emissions. The Tier 3 standards
include new light- and heavy-duty vehicle emission standards for
exhaust emissions of VOC, NOX, and PM, as well as new
evaporative emissions standards. In the final rule, EPA estimates that
in 2030, when Tier 3 vehicles will make up the majority of the fleet as
well as vehicle miles traveled, NOX and VOC emissions from
on-highway vehicles will be reduced by about 21 percent compared to
projected emission levels if the Tier 3 standards were not implemented.
Transportation Emission Reduction Measures
    The National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (TPB)
\16\ utilizes many strategies to reduce emissions from mobile sources
by reducing the number of vehicle trips and/or vehicle miles traveled.
Such strategies include, but are not limited to, ridesharing programs,
telecommuting programs, improved transit and bicycling facilities, and
clean fuel vehicle programs. A summary of these measures is provided by
TPB in their transportation conformity analyses. The emission
reductions from these strategies were not included in the 2025 and 2030
maintenance emissions inventories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ The National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board
(TPB) is the federally designated metropolitan planning organization
(MPO) for metropolitan Washington.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Programs
    The District, Maryland, and Virginia operate enhanced I/M programs
to ensure that motorists are driving vehicles that meet federal
emission requirements. Owners of vehicles that do not meet
requirements, based on tail pipe or On-Board Diagnostic (OBD) testing,
must repair the vehicles or show that the total costs of repair are
more than waiver limitations. As noted previously, EPA approved
Maryland's and Virginia's enhanced I/M program into Maryland's and
Virginia's SIPs on October 29, 1999 (64 FR 58340) and September 1, 1999
(64 FR 47670), as revised April 22, 2008 (73 FR 21540), respectively.
EPA approved the District's enhanced I/M program into the District's
SIP on June 11, 1999 (64 FR 31498).
3. Continued Air Quality Monitoring
    The District, Maryland, and Virginia have committed, in their joint
maintenance plan for the Washington Area, to continue to operate an
appropriate air quality monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58. The District, Maryland, and Virginia also committed, in their
redesignation requests, to continue to monitor ozone concentrations in
the Washington Area in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and EPA-approved
annual monitoring plans, to quality-assure the monitoring data in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and to enter all data into AQS in a
timely fashion.
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
    The District, Maryland, and Virginia state in their maintenance
plan submittal that they have the legal authority to develop,
implement, and enforce regulations regarding air pollution, including
the requirements of the maintenance plan for the Washington Area. The
District, Maryland, and Virginia cite the regulations and statutory
provisions included in Table 5 below as providing them with the
authority to develop, implement, and enforce the requirements of the
maintenance plan for the Washington Area.

    Table 5--Measures Cited as Providing the District, Maryland, and
   Virginia With the Authority To Develop, Implement, and Enforce the
      Requirements of the Maintenance Plan for the Washington Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               State                      Citation         Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virginia...........................  Section 10.1-1308  Authorizes the
                                      of the Virginia    State Air
                                      Air Pollution      Pollution
                                      Control Law        Control Board
                                      (Title 10.1,       to promulgate
                                      Chapter 13 of      regulations
                                      the Code of        abating,
                                      Virginia).         controlling,
                                                         and prohibiting
                                                         air pollution
                                                         in order to
                                                         protect public
                                                         health and
                                                         welfare.
Maryland...........................  Annotated Code of  Legal authority
                                      Maryland,          to implement
                                      Section 2-103.     and enforce.
Maryland...........................  Annotated Code of  Authority for
                                      Maryland,          MDE to set
                                      Environment        emission
                                      Article, Section   standards and
                                      2-302(a)-(d).      ambient air
                                                         quality
                                                         standards for
                                                         each air
                                                         quality control
                                                         area in the
                                                         state.
Maryland...........................  Annotated Code of  Authority for
                                      Maryland,          MDE to enforce
                                      Environment        the standards
                                      Article, Section   and impose
                                      2-601-614.         penalties.
District of Columbia...............  Air Pollution      Provides
                                      Control Act of     authority to
                                      1984, as amended   ``develop a
                                      (D.C. Official     comprehensive
                                      Code Section 8-    program for the
                                      101.05-101.06).    control and
                                                         prevention of
                                                         air pollution
                                                         in the District
                                                         that provides
                                                         for the
                                                         administration
                                                         and enforcement
                                                         of the
                                                         requirements of
                                                         [the Act] and
                                                         the regulations
                                                         promulgated
                                                         pursuant to
                                                         [the Act].''
District of Columbia...............  20 DCMR Sections   Authority for
                                      101, 102, and      inspection,
                                      105.               order for
                                                         compliance, and
                                                         penalty,
                                                         respectively.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In their joint maintenance plan submittal, the District, Maryland,
and Virginia also referenced several regulatory elements that each
state will retain in order to maintain attainment of the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. These regulatory elements are summarized in Table 6.

       Table 6--Regulatory Measures Cited for Continued Attainment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               State                      Citation         Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
District of Columbia...............  20 DCMR 202 and    Shutdown
                                      20 DCMR 303.8.     requirements.
District of Columbia...............  20 DCMR Chapter 2  Permitting
                                      (General and Non-  requirements.
                                      Attainment Area
                                      Permits) and 20
                                      DCMR Chapter 3
                                      (Operating
                                      Permits and Acid
                                      Rain Programs).
District of Columbia...............  20 DCMR 804, 805,  Regulatory
                                      899 (NOX), 20      requirements.
                                      DCMR Chapter 10
                                      (NOX Emissions
                                      Budget), and 20
                                      DCMR Chapter 7
                                      (Volatile
                                      Organic
                                      Compounds).
District of Columbia...............  18 DCMR Chapters   I/M program
                                      4, 6, 7, 11, 26,   requirements.
                                      and 99.
District of Columbia...............  20 DCMR Chapter 5  Emission
                                                         statement
                                                         requirements.
Maryland...........................  COMAR <IP_ADDRESS>- Emission
                                      1.                 statement
                                                         requirements.
Maryland...........................  COMAR 11.14.08...  I/M program
                                                         requirements.
Maryland...........................  COMAR 26.11.02     Permitting
                                      and COMAR          requirements.
                                      26.11.03.
Virginia...........................  9VAC5-20-220.....  Shutdown
                                                         requirements.
Virginia...........................  9VAC5-80.........  Permits for
                                                         stationary
                                                         sources.
Virginia...........................  9VAC5-91.........  I/M program
                                                         requirements
                                                         for Northern
                                                         Virginia.
Virginia...........................  9VAC5-20-160.B...  Emission
                                                         statement
                                                         requirements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Verification of continued attainment is accomplished through
operation of the ambient ozone monitoring network and the periodic
update of the area's emissions inventory. As stated above, the
District, Maryland, and Virginia have committed, in their joint
maintenance plan for the Washington Area, to continue to operate an
appropriate air quality monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58. The District, Maryland, and Virginia also committed, in their
redesignation requests, to continue to monitor ozone concentrations in
the Washington Area in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and EPA-approved
annual monitoring plans, to quality-assure the monitoring data in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and to enter all data into AQS in a
timely fashion. The District, Maryland, and Virginia state in their
joint maintenance plan that they will track attainment and maintenance
using ambient and source emission data.
    In addition, to track the progress of the maintenance
demonstration, the District, Maryland, and Virginia state in their
joint maintenance plan submittal that they will periodically update the
emissions inventory. The District, Maryland, and Virginia also commit
to an annual evaluation consisting of a comparison of key emissions
trend indicators, such as the annual emissions update of stationary
sources and the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) vehicle
miles traveled data reported to the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA), to the growth assumptions used in the plan. The District,
Maryland, and Virginia also commit in their maintenance plan submittal
to developing and submitting to EPA ``comprehensive tracking
inventories every three years or as required by federal regulation
during the maintenance plan period.'' EPA notes that point source
facilities covered by the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's
emission statement rules are required to submit NOX and VOC
emissions on an annual basis to address CAA requirements in CAA section
182.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ In the District's May 25, 2018 emission statement
certification SIP submittal for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the District
cites to section 20-500.9 of the District of Columbia Municipal
Regulations (DCMR) (20 DCMR 500.9) as containing the District's
emission statement rules. However, the District's emission statement
rules were SIP-approved as 20 DCMR 500.7 (60 FR 27889, May 26,
1995). A recodification of 20 DCMR 500 caused the emission statement
rules under 20 DCMR 500.7 to move to 20 DCMR 500.9. Despite the
recodification, the District's emission statement rules continue to
require applicable point sources in the District to submit
information on NOX and VOC emissions on an annual basis.
EPA intends to propose conditional approval of the District's
emission statement certification SIP for the 2008 ozone NAAQS,
contingent on the District's submittal of a SIP revision updating
the District's SIP to reflect the recodification of 20 DCMR 500.

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

5. What is the contingency plan for the Washington Area?
    Section 175A of the CAA requires that the state must adopt a
maintenance plan, as a SIP revision, that includes such contingency
measures as EPA deems necessary to assure that the state will promptly
correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after a redesignation of
the area to attainment of the NAAQS. The maintenance plan must identify
the contingency measures to be considered and, if needed for
maintenance, adopted and implemented; a schedule and procedure for
adoption and implementation; and, a time limit for action by the state.
The state should also identify specific indicators to be used to
determine when the contingency measures need to be considered, adopted,
and implemented.
    As required by section 175A of the CAA, the District, Maryland, and
Virginia have adopted a contingency plan for the Washington Area to
address possible future ozone air quality problems as described herein
and in the TSD for this rulemaking available online at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215. EPA's analysis
of the contingency plan as addressing requirements in CAA section 175A
is also in the TSD.
a. Contingency Measures
    The District, Maryland, and Virginia included several measures as
contingency measures in their joint maintenance plan submittal that EPA
found to not be appropriate for use as contingency measures as
discussed in detail in the TSD for this rulemaking. However, since
emission reductions from these measures were not accounted for in the
maintenance inventory or the MVEBs, it is expected that these measures
will provide more emission reductions than what was projected in the
maintenance inventory or the MVEBs. Thus, these measures will provide
additional assurance that the 2008 ozone standard will be maintained in
the Washington Area. A description of the District's, Maryland's, and
Virginia's submitted contingency measures as well as EPA's evaluation
of these measures and the contingency plan as a whole can be found in
the TSD for this rulemaking available online at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215. Table 7 lists
the measures that EPA finds appropriate to use as contingency measures
for the Washington Area.

Table 7--Measures Found To Be Appropriate To Use as Contingency Measures
                         for the Washington Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Measure                               State
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) 2009-   Virginia.
 2014 model rule for VOC for consumer
 products \18\.
OTC 2009-2014 model rule for VOC for     Virginia.
 architectural and industrial
 maintenance coatings \19\.
Additional contingency measures as       District of Columbia, Maryland,
 needed.                                  and/or Virginia.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Indicators
    The District, Maryland, and Virginia include specific indicators,
or ``triggers'', to be used to determine when the contingency measures
need to be considered, adopted, and implemented. In the contingency
measure implementation schedule included in the maintenance plan and
discussed later in this notice, the District, Maryland, and Virginia
state that the ``schedule onset'' for the implementation of any
contingency measure will begin three months after quality assured data
determine that an exceedance or violation of the 2008 ozone NAAQS
occurred within the previous year or upon notification from EPA that a
contingency measure must be implemented. Another trigger is if any
future year emissions inventory indicates that the Washington Area's
total emissions of NOX or VOC exceeded the levels in the
attainment year inventory. If an audit of the attainment year and
future year inventories does not reconcile the original estimated
emissions with the exceedances, then the District, Maryland, and
Virginia commit to implementing one or more of the contingency measures
to ensure that future total emissions of NOX and VOC in the
Washington Area do not exceed the levels in the attainment year
inventory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The Model Rule for Consumer Products was developed by the
OTC and establishes limits on VOC emissions from consumer products
including, but not limited to, adhesives, air fresheners, general
purpose cleaners, and hairsprays. See ``2013 Consumer Product
Update'', May 21, 3013, available at https://otcair.org/document.asp?Fview=modelrules.
    \19\ The Model Rule for Architectural and Industrial Maintenance
(AIM) Coatings was developed by the OTC and establishes limits on
VOC emissions from AIM coatings, including, but not limited to
concrete/masonry sealer, driveway sealers, and wood coatings. See
``Model Rule 2009-2014--Architectural & Industrial Maintenance (AIM)
Coatings'', Updated October 13, 2014, available at https://otcair.org/document.asp?Fview=modelrules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Schedule and Procedure for Adoption and Implementation of
Contingency Measures
    The District, Maryland, and Virginia have committed to implementing
any contingency measure according to the following schedule: (1)
Schedule onset: Notification received from EPA that a contingency
measure must be implemented or three months after quality assured data
determine that an exceedance or violation occurred within the previous
year; (2) applicable regulation or program will be adopted six months
following the schedule onset; (3) applicable regulation or program will
be implemented six months following adoption; and, (4) compliance with
regulation, or full program implementation, to be achieved within
twelve months of adoption.
    The District and Metropolitan Washington Air Quality Committee
(MWAQC) will use their regional coordination process to determine the
contingency measure to be implemented.
d. EPA's Evaluation of the Contingency Plan for the Washington Area
    Based on EPA's evaluation of the District's, Maryland's, and
Virginia's contingency plan for the Washington Area, which is provided
in the TSD for this rulemaking available online at http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215, EPA finds that
the contingency plan includes the required elements for CAA section
175A and relevant EPA guidance and will promptly correct any violation
of the

NAAQS that occurs after the redesignation of the Washington Area.
    EPA has concluded that the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's
joint 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. Therefore, EPA concludes that the maintenance plan
SIP revisions submitted by the District, Maryland, and Virginia meet
the requirements of CAA section 175A. EPA is proposing to approve the
maintenance plan as a revision to the District's, Maryland's, and
Virginia's SIPs.

V. Have the District, Maryland, and Virginia adopted approvable MVEBs?

A. What are the MVEBs?

    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation plans,
programs, or projects that receive federal funding or support, such as
the construction of new highways, must ``conform'' (i.e., be consistent
with) the SIP. Conformity to the SIP means that transportation
activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing
air quality problems, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS or
interim air quality milestones. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth
EPA policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and assuring
conformity of transportation activities to a SIP. Transportation
conformity is a requirement for nonattainment and maintenance
areas.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Maintenance areas are areas that were previously
nonattainment for a particular NAAQS, but have been redesignated to
attainment with an approved maintenance plan for the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times,
control strategy SIPs for nonattainment areas and maintenance plans for
areas seeking redesignations to attainment of the ozone standard and
maintenance areas. See the SIP Requirements Rule. These control
strategy SIPs (including reasonable further progress plans and
attainment plans) and maintenance plans must include MVEBs for criteria
pollutants, including ozone, and their precursor pollutants
(NOX and VOC for ozone) to address pollution from on-road
transportation sources. The MVEBs are the portion of the total
allowable emissions that are allocated to highway and transit vehicle
use that, together with emissions from other sources in the area, will
provide for attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS. See 40 CFR 93.101.
    Under 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB for an area seeking redesignation to
attainment must be established, at minimum, for the last year of the
maintenance plan. A state may adopt MVEBs for other years as well. The
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 the MVEB in the
SIP and how to revise the MVEB, if needed, subsequent to initially
establishing a MVEB in the SIP. The most recently approved MVEBs for
the Washington Area originate from the attainment plan for the 1997
ozone NAAQS, which EPA found adequate on February 7, 2013 (78 FR 9044).
B. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the proposed
2025 and 2030 VOC and NOX MVEBs for the Washington Area?
    When reviewing submitted control strategy SIPs or maintenance plans
containing MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find that the MVEBs contained
therein are adequate for use in determining transportation conformity.
Once EPA affirmatively finds that the submitted MVEBs are adequate for
transportation purposes, the MVEBs must be used by state and federal
agencies in determining whether proposed transportation projects
conform to the SIP 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). The process for determining adequacy
consists of three basic steps: (1) Public notification of a SIP
submission, (2) provision for a public comment period, and (3) EPA's
adequacy determination. This process for determining the adequacy of
submitted MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes was initially
outlined in EPA's May 14, 1999 guidance, ``Conformity Guidance on
Implementation of March 2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision.'' EPA
adopted regulations to codify the adequacy process 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). Additional information on the
adequacy process for transportation conformity purposes is available in
the proposed rule titled, ``Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments:
Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Changes,'' 68 FR 38974,
38984 (June 30, 2003).
    The District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's maintenance plan
includes NOX and VOC MVEBs for the Washington Area for 2014
(the attainment year), 2025 (the intermediate year), and 2030 (the last
year of the maintenance period). The District's, Maryland's, and
Virginia's maintenance plan SIP submission, including the
NOX and VOC MVEBs for the Washington Area, was available for
public comment on EPA's adequacy website on May 21, 2018 at https://www.epa.gov/state-and-local-transportation. The EPA public comment
period on adequacy of the 2014, 2025, and 2030 MVEBs for the Washington
Area closed on June 20, 2018. No comments on the submittal were
received during the adequacy comment period. EPA reviewed the
NOX and VOC MVEBs in accordance with the adequacy process in
40 CFR part 93 and found the MVEBs adequate. EPA anticipates it will
publish a notice of adequacy for the 2014, 2025, and 2030 MVEBs for the
Washington Area before taking final action on this redesignation of the
Washington Area. In letters dated July 24, 2018, EPA informed the
District, Maryland, and Virginia that the 2014, 2025, and 2030 MVEBs
are adequate for use in transportation conformity analyses.\21\ EPA's
analysis of the MVEBs is included in the Notice of Adequacy TSD, which
is included in the docket for this rulemaking available online at
http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ As stated previously, 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
http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID: EPA-R03-OAR-2018-0215.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The MVEBs were calculated using the most current USEPA Motor
Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) model (MOVES2014a) and regional
travel demand forecasting model at the time of the submittal. These
MVEBs, when considered together with all other emissions sources, are
consistent with maintenance of the 2008 ozone standard. The MVEBs are
shown in Table 8.

  Table 8--Washington, DC-MD-VA Maintenance Plan On-Road Mobile Source
                            Emissions Budgets
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            NOX on-road     VOC on-road
                  Year                       emissions       emissions
                                               (tpd)           (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attainment Year 2014 Emission and Budget           136.8            61.3
Intermediate Year 2025 Emission and                 40.7            33.2
 Budget.................................
Final Year 2030 Emission and Budget.....            27.4            24.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What is a safety margin and how was it allocated?
    EPA's transportation conformity regulations allow for the use of a
safety margin, also referred to as a ``transportation buffer'', in the
development of MVEBs for maintenance plans. 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. All or a portion of these transportation buffers can
be allotted to mobile source inventories to develop MVEBs.
    Table 4 shows the difference in total emissions for NOX
and VOC from all sources between the attainment year (2014) and the
intermediate year (2025) as well as the attainment year (2014) and the
final maintenance year (2030). These differences in emissions provide
estimates of the total available transportation buffers for
NOX and VOC in 2025 and 2030. The total available
transportation buffers for NOX is 114.9 tpd in 2025 and
126.4 tpd in 2030 and for VOC the total available transportation buffer
is 15.0 tpd in 2025 and 14.6 tpd in 2030. The District, Maryland, and
Virginia used 20% of the total available transportation buffer to
develop the second set of mobile budgets for 2025 and 2030 in the
maintenance plan. The transportation buffers add 8.1 tpd of
NOX and 6.6 tpd of VOC to the 2025 emission inventories, and
5.5 tpd of NOX and 4.8 tpd of VOC to the 2030 emission
inventories. The MVEBs with the transportation buffers described
previously for the Washington Area are shown in Table 9.

  Table 9--Washington, DC-MD-VA Maintenance Plan On-Road Mobile Source
              Emissions Budgets With Transportation Buffers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            NOX on-road     VOC on-road
                  Year                       emissions       emissions
                                               (tpd)           (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attainment Year 2014 Emissions & Budget.           136.8            61.3
Predicted 2025 Emission.................            40.7            33.2
Transportation Buffer...................             8.1             6.6
Intermediate Year 2025 Budget...........            48.8            39.8
Predicted 2030 Emission.................            27.4            24.1
Transportation Buffer...................             5.5             4.8
Final Year 2030 Budget..................            32.9            28.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    These two sets of MVEBs (with and without transportation buffers)
have been developed for both milestone years (2025 and 2030). As can be
seen in Table 10, the MVEBs that include the transportation buffer
(Table 9), remain below the emission levels of the maintenance
inventory.

       Table 10--Maintenance Inventory: NOX and VOC Emissions in the Washington Area, Including MVEBs With
                                       Transportation Buffer, 2014 to 2030
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    NOX (tpd)                  VOC (tpd)
                      Source category                      -----------------------------------------------------
                                                              2014     2025     2030     2014     2025     2030
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point.....................................................     64.9     66.0     68.5      7.7      8.8      9.4
Non-Point (Area)..........................................      9.6      9.9     10.0    139.3    153.7    160.3
M-A-R.....................................................     19.2     21.4     22.4      2.4      2.6      2.6
Nonroad Mobile............................................     52.0     29.6     27.8     47.5     44.9     47.2
On-Road Mobile............................................    136.8     48.8     32.9     61.3     39.8     28.9
Quasi-Point...............................................     14.4     14.4     14.4      1.2      1.2      1.2
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
    Total.................................................    296.9    190.1    176.0    259.4    251.0    249.6
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
[Delta] 2014-2025.........................................            106.8
                                                                       8.4
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
[Delta] 2014-2030.........................................            120.9
                                                                       9.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The District, Maryland, and Virginia will only use the MVEBs with
transportation buffers, shown in Table 9, 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 first set of MVEBs in the maintenance plan. 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. Regulations
governing the interagency consultation process adopted by the District,
Maryland, Virginia, and the TPB are as follows:

1. District of Columbia: Title 20 Environment, Chapter 20-15 General
and Transportation Conformity, Rule Numbers 20-1503, 20-1504, 20-1505,
20-1506, 20-1507
2. Maryland: Title 26 Department of Environment, Subtitle 11 Air
Quality, Chapter 26 Conformity, Regulation Numbers <IP_ADDRESS>,
<IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>, <IP_ADDRESS>
3. Virginia: 9VAC5 Chapter 151 Regulation for Transportation Conformity
Section 70 Consultation (9VAC5-151-70)
4. Transportation Planning Board: Report titled ``Transportation
Planning Board Consultation Procedures with respect to Transportation
Conformity Regulations Governing TPB Plans and Programs,'' May 20, 1998

    EPA finds that the District, Maryland, and Virginia continue to
demonstrate maintenance of the 2008 ozone standard with both sets of
MVEBs, including the MVEBs with the transportation buffers. Therefore,
EPA is proposing to approve, as revisions to the District's,
Maryland's, and Virginia's SIPs, the MVEBs contained in this
maintenance plan for the Washington Area.

VI. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve 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 proposing to
approve the redesignation request from the District and will address
the District's redesignation request in a separate rulemaking action.
EPA is also proposing 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. 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 proposing to approve these 2014, 2025, and 2030
NOX and VOC MVEBs for the Washington Area. EPA is soliciting
public comments on the issues discussed in this document. These
comments will be considered before taking final action.

VII. 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.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the 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 status of geographical area
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 proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted 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 action approving Maryland's and Virginia's redesignation
request for their respective portions of the Washington Area for the
2008 ozone NAAQS as well as the District's, Maryland's, and Virginia's
maintenance plan for the Washington Area, 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).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: July 24, 2018.
Cosmo Servidio,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2018-16882 Filed 8-7-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P