8­
Hour
Ozone
Reclassification
Request
for
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
County
Maryland
­
5%
Reclassification
Bump
Down
­
Clean
Air
Act
Section
181
(
a)
(
4)

(
FINAL)

July
15,
2004
Prepared
for:

U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Prepared
by:

Maryland
Department
of
the
Environment
MARYLAND
DEPARTMENT
OF
THE
ENVIRONMENT
1800
Washington
Boulevard
 
Baltimore
MD
21230
410­
537­
3000
 
1­
800­
633­
6101
Robert
L.
Ehrlich,
Jr.
Governor
Michael
S.
Steele
Lt.
Governor
Kendl
P.
Philbrick
Secretary
2
This
Page
Left
Intentionally
Blank
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
Executive
Summary
..................................................................................................................
2
Part
One:
Review
of
Monitoring
Data
for
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties
...........................
4
Part
Two:
Review
of
Additional
Data
to
Support
Reclassification
Request
...............................
9
Request
by
the
State
................................................................................................................
9
Discontinuity
...........................................................................................................................
9
Attainment...............................................................................................................................
9
Emissions
Reductions
............................................................................................................
11
Trends
...................................................................................................................................
15
Years
of
Data.........................................................................................................................
17
Subpart
1
vs.
Subpart
2
..........................................................................................................
17
Limitations
on
Bump
Downs
.................................................................................................
18
Appendix
A:
Copy
of
USEPA
5%
Reclassification
Possibilities
Presentation
Appendix
B:
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
EAC
Modeling
Information
2
Executive
Summary
Section
181
(
a)
(
4)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
CAA)
states
that
an
ozone
nonattainment
area
may
be
reclassified
in
another
category
if
the
design
value
in
the
area
were
5
percent
greater
or
5
percent
less
than
the
level
on
which
the
classification
was
based.

Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
County
were
recently
classified
as
Moderate
Nonattainment
area
under
the
new
8­
hr
ozone
standard.
Based
on
CAA
Section
181
(
a)
(
4)
Maryland
would
like
to
request
that
these
two
counties
be
"
bumped
down"
from
a
Moderate
Nonattainment
area
to
a
Marginal
Nonattainment
area.
The
monitoring
values
for
the
Millington
air
quality
monitor
(
located
in
Kent
County)
shows
that
these
counties
are
within
the
prescribed
5%
allowable
design
value
that
is
eligible
for
a
"
bump
down".
A
Moderate
Nonattainment
area
with
an
8­
hr
design
value
of
0.096
or
less
is
eligible
for
a
"
bump
down"
and
the
2003
Design
Value
for
the
Millington
monitor
is
0.095.
Therefore,
Maryland
is
making
the
formal
request
that
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties
be
reclassified
from
a
Moderate
8­
hr
Ozone
Nonattainment
area
to
a
Marginal
8­
hr
Ozone
Nonattainment
area.

In
addition
to
the
monitoring
data
there
are
numerous
other
compelling
statistics
that
point
to
these
two
counties
being
more
of
a
Marginal
Nonattainment
area
than
a
Moderate
Nonattainment
area.
The
counties
attainment
of
the
1­
hr
standard,
ozone
violation
statistics,
pollution
transport
arguments,
the
mix
of
sources
and
air
pollutants
in
the
area,
emission
reductions
over
time,
and
trends
in
demographics
were
all
reviewed
during
the
development
of
this
reclassification
request.

Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties
were
classified
as
a
marginal
nonattainment
area
under
the
1­
hr
ozone
standard.
(
The
two
counties
have
since
attained
the
1­
hr
ozone
standard
and
MDE
has
submitted
a
redesignation
request
to
USEPA).
No
emission
reduction
requirements
were
associated
with
this
classification.
However,
since
Maryland
is
part
of
the
Ozone
Transport
Region,
some
control
strategies
were
required.
These
included
NOx
and
VOC
RACT,
Stage
II
Vapor
Recovery
or
equivalent
reductions,
Enhanced
Vehicle
Inspection
and
Maintenance
Program
in
qualifying
areas,
and
a
lower
major
source
threshold.
Further,
Maryland
chose
to
include
these
nonattainment
counties
in
a
number
of
other
non­
mandated
control
strategies
including
reformulated
fuels
Phase
I
and
II,
lower
RVP
requirements,
NLEV
and
controls
on
auto
refinishing
and
degreasing.
Adding
these
"
severe"
area
controls
to
a
Marginal
1­
hr
Nonattainment
area
was
not
a
simple
task
as
shown
by
the
number
of
OTC
states
that
originally
opted
in
to
some
of
these
programs
and
then
decided
to
opt
out
as
the
costs
and
politics
surrounding
these
programs
created
a
great
deal
of
pressure.
Maryland
is
proud
of
our
achievement
in
keeping
these
controls
in
rural
counties,
as
we
believe
the
emission
benefits
to
be
substantial.
The
high
level
of
emissions
control
achieved
in
these
rural
counties
already
is
a
major
factor
in
requesting
the
bump
down.
Very
few,
if
any,
cost­
effective
controls
remain
available
in
these
rural
and
economically
fragile
counties.

Maryland
believes
that
the
marginal
classification
is
appropriate
for
these
counties
under
the
8­
hour
standard
also.
The
marginal
classification
allows
Maryland
more
latitude
in
selecting
appropriate
additional
controls
for
these
counties
that
complement
the
stringent
controls
already
in
place.
Maryland
has
shown
this
initiative
under
the
1­
hour
process
and
will
continue
to
pursue
clean
air
under
the
8­
hour
standard
including
the
adoption
of
beneficial
controls
in
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
County.
3
In
combination,
Maryland
believes
that
the
science
and
statistical
information
available
combined
with
historical
actions
make
a
strong
case
that
both
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties
should
be
reclassified
to
a
Marginal
8­
hr
nonattainment
area.
4
Part
One:
Review
of
Monitoring
Data
for
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties
Per
EPA
guidance
the
following
calculation
is
used
to
determine
if
an
area
is
eligible
for
a
bump
down
from
a
higher
to
a
lower
ozone
classification.
Tom
Helms
of
USEPA
presented
the
following
slides
to
STAPPA/
ALAPCO
on
April
28,
2004.
5
°
For
an
area
to
be
eligible
for
a
bump
down
(
or
bump
up)
under
section
181(
a)(
4),
the
area's
design
value
must
be
within
5%
of
the
next
lower
(
or
higher)
classification.

°
Example
#
1
 
an
area
with
a
moderate
design
value
of
0.096
ppm
(
or
less)
would
be
eligible
to
request
a
bump
down
because
5%
less
than
0.096
ppm
is
0.091
ppm
 
a
marginal
design
value.

°
Example
#
2
 
an
area
with
a
moderate
design
value
of
0.102
ppm
(
or
more)
would
be
eligible
for
a
bump
up
because
5%
more
than
0.102
ppm
is
0.107
ppm,
a
serious
design
value.
Calculation
of
5%
Percent
 

°
The
following
areas
may
be
eligible
to
request
a
bump
down
:


moderate
areas
with
design
value
of
0.096
ppm
or
less;


serious
areas
with
design
value
of
0.112
ppm
or
less;
and

severe­
17
areas
with
design
value
of
0.133
ppm
or
less.

°
For
bump
ups,
the
following
areas
may
be
eligible:


marginal
areas
with
a
design
value
of
0.088
ppm
or
more;


moderate
areas
with
a
design
value
of
0.102
ppm
or
more;
and

serious
areas
with
a
design
value
of
0.115
ppm
or
more.
Calculation
of
Five
Percent
 

5%
5%
6
Bump
Ups
Marginal
areas
with
a
DV
of
88
ppb
or
more
Moderate
areas
with
a
DV
of
102
ppb
or
more
Serious
areas
with
a
DV
of
115
ppb
or
more
Severe­
15
areas
with
a
DV
of
121
ppb
or
more
Severe­
17
areas
with
a
DV
of
179
ppb
or
more
Bump
Downs
Moderate
areas
with
a
DV
of
96
ppb
or
less
Serious
areas
with
a
DV
of
112
ppb
or
less
Severe­
15
areas
with
a
DV
of
126
ppb
or
less
Severe­
17
areas
with
a
DV
of
133
ppb
or
less
Extreme
areas
with
a
DV
of
196
ppb
or
less
How
EPA
bump
ups
and
down
work
under
5%
provision?
More
 

16
Moderate
to
Marginal
(
96
design
value
cutpoint):
Boston
MA
(
95)
Springfield
MA
(
94)
Boston/
Portsmouth
MA/
NH
(
95)
Greensboro
NC
(
93)
Greater
CT
(
95)
Cass
Co
MI
(
93)
Kent/
Queen
Anne's
MD
(
95)
La
Porte
IN
(
93)
Muskegon
MI
(
95)
Lancaster
PA
(
92)
RI
(
95)
Memphis
TN
(
92)
Ventura
(
95)
St
Louis
MO/
IL
(
92)
Poughkeepsie
NY
(
94)
Richmond
VA
(
94)

2
Serious
to
Moderate
(
112
design
value
cutpoint):
Riverside
(
Coachella
V.)
CA
(
108)
Sacramento
CA
(
107)

Severe­
17
to
serious
(
133
design
value
cutpoint)
Los
Angeles
CA
(
131)
Which
areas
could
EPA
bump
down
under
5%
provision?
5%
7
Below
is
a
summary
table
showing
the
2003
design
value
data
for
the
Millington
Monitor
(
location
shown
in
Map
1).

Maryland's
8
Hour
Ozone
Design
Values­
Eastern
Shore
for
2003
Site
Year
%
data
1st
MAX
2nd
MAX
3rd
MAX
4th
MAX
Design
capture
Value
Millington
Kent
Co.
2001
98%
0.106
0.103
0.097
0.096
2002
100%
0.115
0.105
0.104
0.103
2003
100%
0.109
0.108
0.092
0.086
0.095ppm
As
noted
in
the
above
table
the
2003
8­
hr
Ozone
Design
Value
of
the
Millington
Monitor
is
0.095
which
is
below
the
5%
Moderate
to
Marginal
Bump
Down
Threshold
of
0.096.
Based
on
the
data
available
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties
are
eligible
for
a
reclassification.
Therefore,
Maryland
is
making
the
formal
request
that
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties
be
reclassified
from
a
Moderate
8­
hr
Ozone
Nonattainment
area
to
a
Marginal
8­
hr
Ozone
Nonattainment
area.
8
Map
1:
Millington
Ozone
Monitoring
Site
in
Kent
County
9
Part
Two:
Review
of
Additional
Data
to
Support
Reclassification
Request
USEPA
listed
the
following
Bump
Down
Criteria
that
will
be
reviewed
during
the
analysis
of
a
reclassification
request:

 
Request
by
the
State
 
Discontinuity
 
Attainment
 
Emissions
Reductions
 
Trends
(
near
and
long
term
trends
in
emissions
and
air
quality,
growth
projections,
and
vehicle
miles
traveled)
 
Years
of
Data
 
Subpart
1
vs.
Subpart
2
 
Limitations
on
Bump
Downs
The
Maryland
Department
of
the
Environment
(
MDE)
has
reviewed
each
of
the
criteria
and
finds
the
following:

Request
by
the
State
Through
the
submission
of
this
document
the
state
of
Maryland
is
formally
requesting
that
the
USEPA
reclassify
both
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
County
as
a
Marginal
Nonattainment
area
under
the
8­
hour
Ozone
Standard.

Discontinuity
If
granted,
Maryland's
reclassification
request
would
not
establish
a
discontinuous
nonattainment
structure
in
Maryland.
Both
the
Washington
DC
and
Baltimore
Nonattainment
areas
would
remain
Moderate
Nonattainment
areas
and
the
Chesapeake
Bay
divides
these
areas
from
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties.
Whether
comparing
emissions
or
demographics
there
are
very
few
connections
between
the
remaining
Moderate
Nonattainment
areas
and
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties.
The
main
culprit
in
the
monitoring
values
in
Millington
is
pollution
transport
meaning
that
all
the
control
measures
being
implemented
to
the
south
and
west
of
these
two
rural
eastern
shore
counties
will
help
with
attainment.

Attainment
The
MDE
believes
that
early
attainment
of
the
8­
hr
Ozone
Standard
is
possible
based
on
the
following
factors:
reduced
transport
emissions,
monitoring
trends
showing
an
improvement
in
air
quality,
the
recent
attainment
of
the
1­
hr
ozone
standard
in
these
two
counties,
and
the
proposed
benefits
of
recent
EPA
modeling
(
for
Clear
Skies
Institutive)
show
attainment
of
the
standard
in
the
2010
timeframe.

Transport
Emissions:
reductions
made
under
the
1­
hr
ozone
standard
like
the
required
installation
of
SCR
from
the
NOx
SIP
Call,
the
new
mobile
diesel
rules,
and
early
reduction
progress
for
the
8­
he
ozone
standard
will
all
assist
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties
in
attaining
the
new
standard.
Lacking
any
large
emission
sources,
the
MDE
believes
that
the
main
culprit
in
bad
air
quality
for
these
two
counties
is
transport
primarily
from
the
west
and
south.
Reductions
10
in
transport
emissions
will
greatly
impact
the
monitored
values
at
Millington
and
we
believe
the
timing
of
the
NOx
SIP
Call
implementation
and
the
Federal
mobile
rules
will
show
substantial
benefits.

Monitoring
Trends:
for
the
1­
hr
Ozone
Standard
show
that
the
total
number
of
violations
in
Millington
are
decreasing
with
time.
These
improvements
in
monitored
values
are
expected
to
continue
with
time
allowing
an
earlier
attainment
of
the
new
standard.

Trend
in
Number
of
Exceedances
of
the
1­
hour
Standard
for
Ozone
at
the
Millington
Monitor
Between
1989
and
2003
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Year
Attainment
of
the
1­
hr
Ozone
Standard:
In
early
2004
the
MDE
submitted
a
redesignation
request
to
USEPA
showing
that
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties
attained
the
1­
hr
Ozone
Standard
based
on
2001­
2003
ozone
season
data.
Being
the
first
two
counties
in
the
state
to
attain
the
1­
hr
standard
there
is
reason
to
believe
our
progress
in
ozone
controls
will
continue
under
the
8hr
standard.

EPA
Modeling
Efforts:
During
the
development
of
the
Clear
Skies
Initiative
in
2003/
4
the
EPA
completed
some
air
quality
modeling
showing
the
projected
ozone
benefits
for
the
nation.
The
results
of
this
modeling
demonstration
show
that
under
a
base
case
scenario
where
only
the
current
Clean
Air
Act
requirements
are
implemented
a
5­
10
ppb
ozone
reduction
can
be
expected
at
the
Millington
monitor
by
2010.
Under
this
scenario
with
a
2003
design
value
of
0.095
a
10
ppb
benefit
will
get
us
very
close
to
the
new
standard.

MDE
Modeling
Efforts:
Attached
to
this
document
is
a
modeling
document
prepared
under
the
Early
Action
Compact
Submittal
for
these
two
counties
that
shows
that
implementing
local
controls
in
these
two
counties
could
indeed
assist
with
attainment
of
the
8­
hour
ozone
standard
in
the
2007
timeframe.
11
EPA
Clear
Skies
Modeling
(
Base
Case
Scenario):
8Hr
Ozone
Benefits
in
2010
Emissions
Reductions
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties
were
classified
as
a
marginal
nonattainment
area
under
the
1­
hr
ozone
standard
(
Maryland
has
found
that
these
two
counties
are
now
in
attainment
of
the
1­
hr
ozone
standard
and
have
submitted
a
redesignation
request
to
USEPA).

No
emission
reduction
requirements
were
associated
with
this
classification.
However,
since
Maryland
is
part
of
the
Ozone
Transport
Region,
some
control
strategies
were
required.
These
included
NOx
and
VOC
RACT,
Stage
II
Vapor
Recovery
or
equivalent
reductions,
Enhanced
Vehicle
Inspection
and
Maintenance
Program
in
qualifying
areas,
and
a
lower
major
source
threshold.
Maryland
chose
to
include
these
nonattainment
counties
in
a
number
of
other
nonmandated
control
strategies
including
reformulated
fuels
Phase
I
and
II,
lower
RVP
requirements,
NLEV
and
controls
on
auto
refinishing
and
degreasing.
The
high
level
of
Kent
County:
85­
89
ppb
12
emissions
control
achieved
in
these
rural
counties
already
is
a
major
factor
in
requesting
the
bump
down.
Very
few,
if
any,
cost­
effective
controls
remain
available
in
these
rural
and
economically
fragile
counties.

Most
of
the
Severe
Nonattainment
area
controls
being
applied
to
the
Washington
and
Baltimore
regions
were
adopted
statewide
meaning
that
while
these
two
rural
counties
were
classified
as
marginal
most
of
their
control
requirements
mirrored
a
severe
nonattainment
area.
In
essence,
where
applicable,
severe
area
controls
have
already
been
implemented
in
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties.
Implementing
these
rules
statewide
was
not
an
easy
process
for
Maryland.
Many
states
in
the
OTR
were
initially
interested
in
adopting
some
of
the
more
difficult
rules
like
reformulated
fuels
and
enhanced
I/
M
but
decided
to
opt
out
of
these
programs
as
the
economic
and
political
pressures
were
very
intense.
Maryland
is
proud
of
our
successful
implementation
of
these
programs
in
rural
counties
like
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's,
as
we
believe
the
emission
benefits
from
these
programs
have
been
a
significant
help
for
Maryland
and
the
region.

The
following
are
state
and
federal
emission
reduction
strategies
adopted
since
1990
that
are
included
in
this
plan.

Stationary
Point
Sources
 
Reasonably
Available
Control
Technology
(
RACT)
regulations
 
New
Source
Review
(
NSR)
 
Emissions
certification
requirements
 
NOx
SIP
call
 
NOx
Reduction
and
Trading
Stationary
Area
Sources
 
Automobile
refinish
coatings
 
Consumer
products
 
Degreasing
 
Architectural
and
industrial
maintenance
coatings
(
AIM)
 
Tank
truck
unloading
Highway
Vehicles
 
Federal
Motor
Vehicle
Control
Program
(
FMVCP)
including
onboard
control
of
evaporative
and
refueling
emissions
 
Lower
Reid
Vapor
Pressure
(
RVP)
for
gasoline
 
Reformulated
gasoline
 
Enhanced
Vehicle
Emissions
Inspection/
Maintenance
 
National
Low
Emission
Vehicle
(
NLEV)
program
 
EPA's
heavy­
duty
diesel
engine
standards
(
2004
program)
 
EPA's
Tier
2/
low
sulfur
gasoline
program
for
light­
duty
vehicles
Nonroad
Sources
 
EPA
rules
for
large
and
small
compression­
ignition
engines
 
EPA
rules
for
smaller
spark­
ignition
engines
 
EPA
rules
for
recreational
spark­
ignition
marine
engines
13
Before
reviewing
the
various
permanent
and
enforceable
emission
reduction
measures
that
have
led
to
lower
levels
of
ozone
in
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties,
it
is
important
to
have
a
good
understanding
of
the
ozone
precursors
inventory
for
the
two
jurisdictions.
Tables
1
and
2
present
the
1990
base
year
emissions
inventories
for
VOC
and
NOx,
the
precursors
of
ozone
(
1990
Base
Year
Inventory,
September
1993).

Table
1:
1990
Base
Year
Ozone
Precursor
Emissions
Inventory,
VOC
Emissions
Summary
in
Tons
per
Day
Source
of
VOCs
Point
Area
Non­
road
Mobile
On­
road
Mobile
Total
Kent
Co.
0
4.52
1.66
1.90
8.08
Queen
Anne's
Co.
0.24
5.17
1.79
4.70
11.90
Total
0.24
9.69
3.45
6.60
19.98
Table
2:
1990
Base
Year
Ozone
Precursor
Emissions
Inventory,
NOx
Emissions
Summary
in
Tons
per
Day
Source
of
NOx
Point
Area
Non­
road
Mobile
On­
road
Mobile
Total
Kent
Co.
0
0.35
0.77
1.90
3.02
Queen
Anne's
Co.
0
0.37
1.00
5.40
6.77
Total
0
0.72
1.77
7.30
9.79
A
number
of
permanent
and
enforceable
measures
have
caused
emission
reductions
in
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties.
These
reductions
are
from
all
source
sectors.

A
major
portion
of
the
decrease
in
ozone
precursors
is
due
to
the
Federal
Motor
Vehicle
Control
Program
(
FMVCP)
Tier
1
tailpipe
standards.
Over
a
period
of
time,
older,
poorer
performing
on­
road
vehicles
have
gradually
been
replaced
with
newer
vehicles
that
must
meet
increasingly
more
stringent
tailpipe
standards.

In
1997
and
1998,
new
emissions
standards
for
non­
road
mobile
sources
took
effect,
leading
to
additional
permanent
and
enforceable
reductions
in
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties.
The
major
emissions
categories
in
these
counties
are
farm
equipment,
lawn
and
garden
equipment
and
recreational
boats.
Nonroad
VOC
and
NOx
emissions
are
expected
to
decline
due
primarily
to
implementation
of
the
following
Federal
permanent
and
enforceable
measures
and
remain
in
check
with
additional
Tier
3
standards
that
will
be
implemented
in
the
future:
14
 
Tier
1,
Tier
2,
and
Tier
3
compression­
ignition
standards
for
diesel
engines
greater
than
50
horsepower;
 
Tier
1
and
Tier
2
compression­
ignition
standards
for
diesel
engines
below
50
horsepower;
 
Phase
1
and
Phase
2
of
the
spark­
ignition
standards
for
gasoline
engines
less
than
25
horsepower;
and
 
Recreational
spark­
ignition
marine
engine
controls.

Total
emissions
form
area
sources
will
decrease
as
well
in
the
two
counties,
the
largest
categories
being
tank
truck
unloading,
degreasing,
architectural
surface
coatings,
and
commercial
and
consumer
solvents.
State
regulations
address
emissions
from
tank
truck
unloading
and
degreasing.
The
tank
truck
unloading
regulation,
COMAR
26.11.13.04(
C)
4
was
adopted
on
March
26,
1993
and
went
into
effect
on
November
15,
1993.
The
degreasing
regulation,
COMAR
26.11.19.09,
was
adopted
on
May
12,
1995
and
became
effective
on
June
5,
1995.
Federal
regulations
for
reformulating
architectural
coatings
and
consumer
solvents
will
also
result
in
lower
emissions.

There
is
very
little
industry
in
the
two
counties
and
thus
point
source
emissions
are
very
low.
Growth
in
point
sources
will
be
controlled
through
the
new
source
review
program
requirement
for
offsets.
Any
major
sources
that
wish
to
locate
in
Kent
or
Queen
Anne's
Counties
will
need
to
procure
emissions
offsets
at
a
ratio
of
1.15
to
1
for
NOx
and
VOCs.
This
will
limit
new
point
source
emissions
that
would
result
from
industry
growth
in
these
two
counties
in
the
future.

It
is
important
to
note
that
in
addition
to
reductions
caused
by
all
of
the
measures
outlined
above,
background
concentrations
of
ozone
in
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties
will
decrease
as
a
result
of
the
many
ozone
precursor
reduction
strategies
being
implemented
in
the
Baltimore
and
Washington
D.
C.
severe
nonattainment
areas
via
transport
MDE's
calculations
of
future
emissions
of
VOCs
and
NOx
from
stationary
and
mobile
sources
demonstrate
that
future
emissions
will
continue
to
decrease
with
time.

Table
3:
Base
Year
and
Projected
VOC
Emissions
Inventories
for
the
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
County
Region
Source
Category
2002
VOC
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Day)
2014
Projected
VOC
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Day)
On­
road
Mobile
4.91
2.09
Non­
road
Mobile
5.91
6.59
Area
4.33
5.34
Point
0.12
0.16
Total
15.26
14.18
15
Table
4:
Base
Year
and
Projected
NOx
Emissions
Inventories
for
the
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
County
Region
Source
Category
2002
NOx
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Day)
2014
Projected
NOx
Emissions
(
Tons
per
Day)
On­
road
Mobile
7.7
2.92
Non­
road
Mobile
3.22
4.15
Area
1.46
1.75
Point
0.07
0.09
Total
12.45
8.91
Figure
5:
Base
Year
and
Projection
Year
Emissions
for
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties
0
5
10
15
20
25
1990
2002
2014
YEAR
VOC
NOx
Throughout
the
1990'
s,
there
has
been
a
growing
understanding
of
the
extent
to
which
long­
range
transport
contributes
to
ozone
nonattainment,
especially
along
the
East
Coast
of
the
United
States.
Incoming
ozone
transported
from
upwind
areas
needs
to
be
reduced
for
areas
like
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
Counties
to
continue
to
meet
the
federal
air
standards.
To
reduce
both
longrange
and
short­
range
transport,
Maryland
has
implemented
the
NOx
SIP
Call.
In
2004,
most
other
states
required
to
implement
the
NOx
SIP
Call
will
have
complied
with
this
requirement.
Tier
2
tailpipe
standards
for
vehicles
will
also
be
implemented
throughout
the
nation.
EPA
has
performed
modeling
for
the
NOx
SIP
Call
that
shows
these
measures
will
reduce
ozone
transport
to
the
Kent
and
Queen
Anne's
region
substantially.

Trends
Emissions
 
see
section
above
Air
Quality
The
2003
8­
hr
Design
Value
for
the
Millington
monitor
is
0.095
which
is
.010
ppm
above
the
8
hr
standard.
However,
when
you
look
at
the
progress
Maryland
made
with
respect
to
the
1­
hr
standard
at
the
same
monitoring
site
you
can
see
that
overall
air
quality
has
vastly
improved.
16
Number
of
Exceedances
of
the
1­
hour
Standard
for
Ozone
at
the
Millington
Monitor
Between
1989
and
2003
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Year
Trend
in
Number
of
Exceedances
of
the
1­
hour
Standard
for
Ozone
at
the
Millington
Monitor
Between
1989
and
2003
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Year
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
(
VMT)

While
VMT
is
expected
to
increase
slightly
over
time
(
see
attached
graphic)
the
expected
growth
is
very
small
when
compared
to
other
nonattainment
counties
in
Maryland.
17
Page
41
8­
hr
Ozone
Nonattainment
(
NAA)
Counties
Expected
Growth
in
Vehicle
Miles
Traveled
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
Allegany,
MD
Anne
Arundel,
MD
Baltimore,
MD
Calvert,
MD
Caroline,
MD
Carroll,
MD
Cecil,
MD
Charles,
MD
Dorchester,
MD
Frederick,
MD
Garrett,
MD
Harford,
MD
Howard,
MD
Kent,
MD
Montgomery,
MD
Prince
George's,
MD
Queen
Anne's,
MD
St.
Mary's,
MD
Somerset,
MD
Talbot,
MD
Washington,
MD
Wicomico,
MD
Worcester,
MD
Baltimore
City,
MD
1996
VMT
2007
VMT
2030
VMT
VMT
Growth
(
10^
6
MILES)

Kent
&
Queen
Anne's
Population
Projections
The
Maryland
Department
of
Planning
has
calculated
growth
rates
for
all
Maryland
counties.
Kent
County,
where
the
Millington
monitor
is
located,
has
the
smallest
population
of
any
Maryland
county
with
a
2000
Census
total
of
19,197.
It
is
projected
to
remain
at
low
levels
for
the
foreseeable
future
with
a
2005­
estimated
population
of
19,650
people.
Queen
Anne's
County
has
a
larger
population
(
40,563
as
of
the
2000
Census)
and
is
growing
at
a
faster
rate
but
still
less
than
the
growth
rate
of
some
of
the
metropolitan
Baltimore
and
Washington
counties.
The
Queen
Anne's
County
projected
population
for
2005
is
44,600.
Neither
county
is
projected
to
have
a
population
greater
than
60,000
people
by
2030.

Years
of
Data
Other
than
for
the
purpose
of
historical
trends
analysis
the
MDE
supports
the
use
of
2001­
2003
air
quality
data
for
this
reclassification
request.

Subpart
1
vs.
Subpart
2
The
MDE
is
not
requesting
a
move
from
CAA
Subpart
2
to
Subpart
1
(
classification
schemes)
as
part
of
this
reclassification
request.
18
Limitations
on
Bump
Downs
The
MDE
is
requesting
a
Bump
Down
of
one
classification
(
Moderate
to
Marginal).
