FR 2021-02619

The document in question is a proposed rule from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), focusing on the air quality management efforts of the State of Maryland. Specifically, it pertains to Maryland's Air Plan Approval and its assertion, via a "negative declaration," that there are no existing sources within the state that fall under the EPA's 2016 Oil and Natural Gas Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG). This is significant under the Clean Air Act (CAA) because states need to manage pollutants that contribute to ozone formation, such as volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOx).

General Summary

The EPA's proposed rule suggests approving Maryland's assessment that no facilities within its borders meet the criteria laid out in the 2016 Oil and Gas Control Techniques Guidelines. The state conducted a detailed review of its oil and gas facilities and concluded that none require the regulatory controls outlined in the guidelines. This initiative is part of broader efforts to control air pollution and ensure compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone.

Significant Issues and Concerns

This document contains numerous technical terms and legal references which may be opaque to those without specific expertise. Terms like "CTG" (Control Techniques Guidelines), "VOC" (volatile organic compounds), "NOx" (nitrogen oxides), and "NAAQS" are not defined within the document, potentially limiting public understanding.

Furthermore, the proposal includes numerous references to various Executive Orders and regulations, yet fails to provide adequate summaries or context, rendering it difficult for lay readers to fully grasp the implications of these references. The complexity of the regulatory language and specific legal requirements from the Clean Air Act may also hinder comprehension without prior knowledge of legal and industry practices.

Public Impact

For the general public, the impact may seem obscure at first glance. However, it signifies Maryland’s commitment to maintaining air quality standards by confirming no existing compliance obligations under the specific EPA oil and gas guidelines. This maintains regulatory efficiency—preventing unnecessary regulations where no relevant pollution sources exist—conserving state resources.

From a broader perspective, this proposal reflects a procedural norm whereby states demonstrate adherence to national air quality standards. It shows a proactive approach in preventing ozone pollution from oil and gas operations even when such operations are minimal or non-existent in the state.

Stakeholder Impact

For stakeholders, particularly those in the oil and gas industry operating in Maryland, this determination removes the potential regulatory burden associated with meeting EPA’s guidelines. With no sources identified that require these specific controls, businesses in the oil and gas production and processing sectors, particularly smaller entities, are spared additional compliance costs or operational adjustments.

Conversely, environmental advocacy groups looking to ensure stringent air quality controls may view this as a matter of concern if they believe the state’s review process could have overlooked potential sources of pollution. However, the public comment period included in the document invites input which could potentially address such concerns or inform future regulatory actions.

In conclusion, the EPA’s proposal to approve Maryland’s negative declaration underscores streamlined regulatory adherence tailored to the state's specific situation, reflecting efficient environmental governance without compromising air quality standards.