Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan, 12238-12243 [2013-04011]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
12238
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mailings that are verified and paid for
by September 30, 2013 may be entered
at destination entry facilities through
October 15, 2013.
3.3.6 Mobile Buy-It Now
The Mobile Buy-It-Now promotion
provides mailers (of presort and
automation First-Class Mail cards,
letters, and flats and Standard Mail
letters and flats) with an upfront 2
percent postage discount. Qualifying
mailpieces must include a twodimensional barcode or print/mobile
technology that can be read or scanned
by a mobile device, directly leading the
recipient to a mobile-optimized Web
page that allows the purchase of an
advertised product through a financial
transaction on the mobile device. The
mailpiece must also contain text near
the image that guides the consumer to
scan the image. These additional
requirements apply:
a. The destination Web page must
contain information relevant to the
content of the mailpiece and some of the
products advertised must be available
for purchase on a mobile device.
b. The purchase must be able to be
completed through the mobile device
via an electronic payment method, or by
allowing an order placed on the mobile
device through the Internet leading to a
subsequent invoice.
c. A product, for purposes of this
promotion, is defined as a tangible and
physical item that can be shipped via a
mailng or shipping product offered by
the USPS (although delivery by the
USPS is not required).
d. Products must be offered for
fulfillment via home delivery; products
offered as shipments for in-store pickup
only will not qualify.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
3.4 Discounts
For all promotion providing an
upfront postage discount, mailers must
claim the postage discount on the
postage statement at the time the
statement is electronically submitted.
Mailings with postage affixed will
deduct the discount amount from the
additional postage due, except that mail
service providers authorized to submit
Value Added Refund (‘‘VAR’’) mailings
may include the discount in the amount
to be refunded. See also 3.2.
3.5 Mobile Barcode or Image
Placement
For promotions that include printing
of a mobile barcode or other scannable
printed image, the image cannot be
placed on a detached address label
(DAL or DML) or card that is not
attached to the mailpiece. The image
cannot be placed in the (postage) indicia
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:17 Feb 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
zone or the (Intelligent Mail) barcode
clear zone on the outside of the
mailpiece. For letters, the barcode clear
zone is defined in 202.5.1. For flats, the
barcode clear zone for this purpose is
the barcode itself and an area that
extends an additional 1⁄8 inch from any
part of the barcode. The indicia zone is
defined as follows:
a. The postage ‘‘indicia zone’’ is 2
inches from the top edge by 4 inches
from the right edge of the mailpiece;
b. When the postage indicium is not
in the area described in 3.4a, the mobile
barcode or image must not be placed
within 2 inches of the actual postage
indicium.
*
*
*
*
*
We will publish an appropriate
amendment to 39 CFR part 111 to reflect
these changes.
Stanley F. Mires,
Attorney, Legal Policy and Legislative Advice.
[FR Doc. 2013–03926 Filed 2–21–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–12–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0961; FRL–9782–8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and
Winston-Salem Carbon Monoxide
Limited Maintenance Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is taking direct final
action to approve a limited maintenance
plan update submitted by the State of
North Carolina, through the North
Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources (NC DENR), on
August 2, 2012. The limited
maintenance plan update is for the
Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and
Winston-Salem carbon monoxide (CO)
maintenance areas. Specifically, the
State submitted a limited maintenance
plan update for CO, showing continued
attainment of the 8-hour CO National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
for the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and
Winston-Salem Areas. The 8-hour CO
NAAQS is 9 parts per million (ppm).
EPA is taking direct final action to
approve the limited maintenance plan
update because it is consistent with the
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), and EPA’s
policy for limited maintenance plans.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective
April 23, 2013 without further notice,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
unless EPA receives adverse comment
by March 25, 2013. If EPA receives such
comments, it will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the
Federal Register and inform the public
that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2012–0961, by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562–9019.
4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0961,
Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae
Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2012–
0961. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through
www.regulations.gov or email,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30,
excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard Wong, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street
SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The
telephone number is (404) 562–8726.
Mr. Wong can be reached via electronic
mail at wong.richard@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. What criteria is EPA using to evaluate this
submittal?
III. What is EPA’s analysis of this submittal?
A. Requirements of Section 175A of the
CAA
B. Consistency With the October 6, 1995,
Memorandum
1. Attainment Inventory
2. Maintenance Demonstration
3. Monitoring Network and Verification of
Continued Attainment
4. Contingency Plan
5. Conformity Determination Under
Limited Maintenance Plan
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:17 Feb 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
I. Background
A maintenance plan, as defined in
section 175A of the CAA, is a revision
to the SIP to provide for the
maintenance of the NAAQS for the air
pollutant in question in the area
concerned for at least 10 years after the
redesignation. Eight years after the
redesignation, states are required to
submit an update to the maintenance
plan to provide for the maintenance of
the NAAQS for another 10 years after
the initial 10 year period has expired.
North Carolina’s second maintenance
plan for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham
and Winston-Salem Areas was approved
on March 24, 2006 (71 FR 14817).
A limited maintenance plan for CO is
a maintenance plan that is available to
states that have demonstrated that the
design values for CO in the
nonclassifiable nonattainment or
maintenance area are at, or below, 7.65
ppm or 85 percent of the 8-hour CO
NAAQS. To qualify for a limited
maintenance plan, the area’s design
value must not exceed the 7.65 ppm
threshold throughout the entire
rulemaking process. The design value
for CO is defined as the second highest
reading in the area in a two-year period.
Should an area have more than one
monitor, the monitor with the second
highest value in a two-year period
serves as the design monitor. EPA has
also previously determined that the
limited maintenance plan for CO is
available to all states as part of their
update to the maintenance plans as per
section 175A(b), regardless of the
original nonattainment classification, or
lack thereof.
NC DENR elected to convert its
second 10-year maintenance plan for CO
to a limited maintenance plan, to
provide additional flexibility for
implementing transportation conformity
requirements in these CO maintenance
areas. Briefly, counties in the Charlotte,
Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem
Areas were previously designated
nonattainment for the 8-hour CO
NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694, November 6,
1991. These areas subsequently attained
the 8-hour CO NAAQS and were
redesignated from nonattainment to
attainment. On November 7, 1994, EPA
redesignated the Winston-Salem Area to
attainment for the 8-hour CO NAAQS
based on the measured air quality data
and a 10-year maintenance plan
submitted for the Winston-Salem Area.
See 59 FR 48399. Additionally, on
September 18, 1995, EPA redesignated
both the Charlotte Area and the RaleighDurham Area to attainment for the 8hour CO NAAQS based on the measured
air quality data and the 10-year
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
12239
maintenance plan submitted for these
areas. See 60 FR 39258.
Section 175A(b) of the CAA mandates
that the State shall submit an additional
revision to the maintenance plan eight
years after redesignation of any area as
an attainment area. NC DENR fulfilled
this requirement by providing the
second and final maintenance plan for
all three CO maintenance areas in the
State. EPA subsequently approved NC
DENR’s maintenance plan. In summary,
on March 24, 2006, EPA approved the
second 10-year maintenance plan for the
Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and
Winston-Salem CO Maintenance Areas,
which are composed of the following
four counties: Mecklenburg (Charlotte
Area); Durham and Wake (RaleighDurham Area); and Forsyth (WinstonSalem Area). See 71 FR 14817.
As mentioned above, NC DENR
elected to convert the second
maintenance plan for the Charlotte,
Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem
Areas to a limited maintenance plan for
the ease of implementing transportation
conformity requirements for the CO
NAAQS. The limited maintenance plans
was submitted on August 2, 2012, for
EPA approval. EPA has made the
determination that North Carolina’s
limited maintenance plan satisfies the
requirements for section 175A
maintenance plan, and is consistent
with EPA’s policy for limited
maintenance plan elements as outlined
in an October 6, 1995, memorandum
from the Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards , entitled ‘‘Limited
Maintenance Plan Option for
Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment
Areas’’ (October 6, 1995, Memorandum).
More information regarding limited
maintenance plan requirements is
provided below.
II. What criteria is EPA using to
evaluate this submittal?
In addition to the general
requirements in section 175A of the
CAA, guidance for CO limited
maintenance plans is provided in the
October 6, 1995, memorandum, which
states that the following five
components need to be addressed: (1)
Attainment inventory; (2) maintenance
demonstration; (3) monitoring network/
verification of continued attainment; (4)
contingency plan; and (5) conformity
determinations under limited
maintenance plans. These elements
were outlined in the October 6, 1995,
EPA memorandum, and are
comprehensively discussed below.
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
12240
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
III. What is EPA’s analysis of this
submittal?
A. Requirements of Section 175A of the
CAA
Section 175A contains four
subsections pertaining to maintenance
plans. Section 175A(a) establishes
requirements for initial SIP
redesignation request maintenance
plans, as previously addressed by North
Carolina and subsequently approved by
EPA for all three of North Carolina’s CO
areas. See 59 FR 48399 and 60 FR
39258.
Section 175A(b) requires States to
submit an update to the maintenance
plan eight years following the original
redesignation to attainment. For the
section 175A(b) update, the State must
outline methods for maintaining the
pertinent NAAQS for ten years after the
expiration of the ten-year period
referred to in subsection (a), i.e., North
Carolina’s maintenance plan update
must outline methods for maintaining
the CO NAAQS through 2015, NC DENR
satisfied the requirements for the second
maintenance plans for all of its CO
maintenance areas, and EPA
subsequently approved NC DENR’s
second maintenance plan for each of its
CO maintenance areas. See 71 FR 14817,
March 24, 2006. As indicated above,
although North Carolina has previously
satisfied the requirements for the
175A(b) maintenance plan updates for
all of its CO areas, the State has elected
to convert these maintenance plans to
limited maintenance plans.
Section 175A(c) does not apply to this
rulemaking, given that EPA has
previously redesignated the Charlotte,
stationary sources that have the
potential to emit more than five tons per
year of CO emissions from a single
facility and are required to have an
operating permit. The stationary area
source inventory is estimated on a
county level and consisted of those
sources whose emissions are relatively
small, but due to the large number of
sources, the collective emissions could
be significant. North Carolina estimated
the stationary area source emissions by
multiplying an emission factor by some
known indicator of collective activity
(such as fuel usage, number of
households, or population). For on-road
mobile source emissions, NC DENR
used USEPA’s Motor Vehicle Emission
Simulator (MOVES) model version
2010a (i.e., MOVES2010a), released in
August 2010, for estimating vehicle
emissions. Nonroad mobile sources are
pieces of equipment that can move but
do not use roadways (e.g. lawn mowers,
construction equipment, railroad
locomotives, aircraft). The emissions
from this category are calculated at the
county level using USEPA’s
NONROAD2008s nonroad mobile
model, with the exception of railroad
locomotives and aircraft engines. The
railroad locomotives and aircraft
engines are estimated by taking an
activity and multiplying by an emission
factor. Table 1 displays the 2010
attainment year emissions inventory as
required for the limited maintenance
plans. Appendix B of North Carolina’s
SIP submittal provides detailed
discussions regarding the development
of emissions for the four emission
source classifications, and is provided
in the docket for today’s rulemaking.
Raleigh/Durham, and Winston-Salem
areas to attainment for CO.
Section 175A(d) which included the
contingency provisions requirements
are addressed in detail in section B4,
below.
B. Consistency With the October 6, 1995,
Memorandum
As discussed above, EPA’s
interpretation of section 175A of the
CAA, as it pertains to limited
maintenance plans for CO, is contained
in the October 6, 1995, Memorandum.
North Carolina addressed the five major
elements of that policy, as follows:
1. Attainment Inventory
The State is required to develop an
attainment emissions inventory to
identify a level of emissions in the area
which is sufficient to attain the CO
NAAQS. This 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
the monitoring data showing
attainment. It should be based on actual
‘‘typical CO season day’’ emissions for
all source classifications (i.e., stationary
point and area sources and nonroad and
onroad mobile sources) for the
attainment year. In its August 2, 2012,
submittal, NC DENR provided a
comprehensive CO emissions inventory
for nonroad mobile, onroad mobile,
point, and area sources for the Charlotte,
Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem
CO Maintenance Areas.
NC DENR collected or developed
point source emissions inventory from
TABLE 1—2010 CO EMISSIONS (TONS/DAY) FOR MAINTENANCE AREAS
Point
source
County
Area
source
On-road
Nonroad
Total
Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area
Durham ....................................................................................................
Wake ........................................................................................................
0.97
1.17
1.54
4.26
186.00
642.97
19.04
70.62
207.55
719.02
Total ..................................................................................................
2.14
5.80
828.97
89.66
926.57
1.41
244.16
23.97
271.76
4.21
724.39
114.71
845.70
Winston-Salem Maintenance Area
Forsyth .....................................................................................................
2.22
Charlotte Maintenance Area
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Mecklenburg ............................................................................................
2. Maintenance Demonstration
In the October 6, 1995, Memorandum,
EPA stated that the maintenance
demonstration requirement is
considered to be satisfied for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:17 Feb 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
2.39
nonclassifiable areas if the monitoring
data show that the area is meeting the
air quality criteria for limited
maintenance areas (i.e., 85 percent of
the eight hour CO NAAQS, or 7.65
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ppm). EPA determined in this same
memorandum that there is no
requirement to protect emissions over
the maintenance period. Instead, EPA
believes that if the area begins the
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
maintenance period at, or below, 7.65
ppm (85 percent of the 8-hour CO
NAAQS), the applicability of prevention
of significant deterioration (PSD)
requirements, control measures already
in the SIP, and other federal measures
should provide adequate assurance of
maintenance throughout the
maintenance period. Monitoring data
from 2008–2011 shows all three areas
below the 8-hour CO NAAQS values as
listed in Table 2. All monitoring levels
12241
are well below the 85 percent threshold
of 7.65 ppm and therefore the State has
satisfied the maintenance demonstration
requirement for a limited maintenance
plan for each of its CO maintenance
areas.
TABLE 2—CO 8-HOUR MONITORED CONCENTRATION NAAQS
[parts per million]
County
Monitor ID
2009
2010
2011
8-hr NAAQS
Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area
Wake ....................................................................................................................
371830014
1.3
1.3
1.4
9
1.7
1.9
2.1
9
1.7
1.7
1.5
9
Winston-Salem Maintenance Area
Forsyth .................................................................................................................
370670023
Charlotte Maintenance Area
Mecklenburg .........................................................................................................
3. Monitoring Network and Verification
of Continued Attainment
Once an area has been redesignated,
the state should continue to operate an
appropriate air quality monitoring
network, in accordance with 40 CFR
Part 58, to verify the attainment status
of the area. This is particularly
important for areas using a limited
maintenance plan because there will be
no cap on emissions. In accordance with
40 CFR Part 58, NC DENR commits to
continue monitoring CO at these three
sites to ensure that CO concentrations
remain well below the 7.65 ppm
threshold for limited maintenance
plans. The State’s monitoring plan for
2012 can be found at the following site:
https://www.ncair.org/monitor/
monitoring_plan/new_plan/
2012_NCDAQ_Network_Plan.pdf. EPA
has determined that the State has
satisfied the monitoring network and
verification of continued attainment
requirements for the limited
maintenance plan.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
4. Contingency Plan
Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires
that a maintenance plan include
contingency provisions, as necessary, to
promptly correct any violation of the
NAAQS that occurs after redesignation
of an area. The October 6, 1995,
Memorandum further requires that the
contingency provisions identify the
measures to be adopted, a schedule and
procedure for adoption and
implementation, and a specific time
limit for action by the state.
In its August 2, 2012, submittal, NC
DENR committed to the same
contingency measures that EPA
previously approved on March 24, 2006
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:17 Feb 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
371190041
(71 FR 14817) and a subsequent
clarification on June 19, 2007 (72 FR
33692). The State pre-adopted an
oxygenated fuels program with
minimum oxygen content by weight of
2.7 for Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and
Winston-Salem maintenance areas. The
oxygenated fuel program is required
under the CAA for the Raleigh-Durham
and Winston-Salem areas as a required
control measure prior to the attainment
redesignation. Charlotte was placed
under oxygenated fuel program for
effective area-wide CO emission
reduction and ease for State
implementation. The triggering date will
be no more than 60 days after an
ambient air quality violation is
monitored. NC DENR will commence an
analysis and regulation development
process during this time. The State will
consider the following control
measures:
a. Amending the oxygenated fuels
program by adopting oxygenate content
of 2.0 percent to 2.7 percent by weight,
or activate of the 2.7 percent by eight
pre-adopted contingency measure, or
2.7 percent to 3.1 percent by weight.
b. Expanding coverage of oxygenated
fuels to include counties where a strong
commuting pattern into the core
maintenance area exists.
c. Alternative fuel vehicle programs to
include compressed natural gas and
electric vehicles.
d. Employee commute options
programs.
NC DENR committed to implement at
least one of the control measures within
24 months of the trigger, or as
expeditiously as practicable. EPA has
determined that the State has satisfied
the contingency plan requirements
pursuant to section 175A(d) of the CAA
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
as well as those of the October 6, 1995,
Memorandum.
5. Conformity Determination Under
Limited Maintenance Plan
The transportation conformity rule of
November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188), and
the general conformity rule of November
30, 1993 (58 FR 63214), apply to
nonattainment areas and maintenance
areas operating under the maintenance
plans. Under either rule, one means of
demonstrating conformity of federal
actions is to indicate that expected
emissions from planned actions are
consistent with the emissions budget for
the area.
EPA’s October 6, 1995, Memorandum
states that emissions budgets in limited
maintenance plan areas may be treated
as essentially not constraining for the
length of the maintenance period
because it is unreasonable to expect that
such an area will experience so much
growth in that period that a violation of
the CO NAAQS would result. In other
words, EPA concluded that, for these
areas, emissions need not be capped for
the maintenance period.
In accordance with the Transportation
conformity rule, approval of a limited
maintenance plan only removes the
requirement to conduct a regional
emissions analysis as part of the
conformity determination. The
requirement to demonstrate conformity
per the requirements in section 93.109,
in Table 1 still applies. Additionally,
federally funded projects are still
subject to ‘‘Hot Spot’’ analysis
requirements. However, no regional
modeling analysis would be required.
Transportation partners should note
that this approval of these limited
maintenance plans in future
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
12242
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
transportation conformity
determinations. Additionally, while this
finding waives the requirements for a
regional emissions analysis for the CO,
as mentioned above, it does not waive
other conformity requirements for the
CO standard for the Charlotte, RaleighDurham and Winston-Salem areas, and
it does not waive transportation
conformity requirement for other
pollutants/precursors for which these
areas may be designated nonattainment
or redesigned to attainment with a full
maintenance plan.
The State has satisfied the conformity
determination under limited
maintenance plan requirements for the
Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and
Winston-Salem areas in this limited
maintenance plan.
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the CO limited
maintenance plan for the Charlotte,
Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem
Areas. The State of North Carolina has
complied with the requirements of
section 175A of the CAA, as interpreted
by the guidance provided in the October
6, 1995, Memorandum. North Carolina
has shown monitored levels of CO in
the three areas have been consistently
well below the requisite level of 7.65
ppm for the 8-hour CO NAAQS in order
to qualify for the limited maintenance
plan. North Carolina has also shown
monitored values for the 8-hour CO
NAAQS have been consistently well
below the NAAQS levels from 2009–
2011. EPA has made the determination
that the North Carolina, August 2, 2012,
submission providing the CO limited
maintenance plan for the Charlotte,
Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem
Areas is consistent with the CAA and
EPA’s guidance on limited maintenance
plans. This action is being taken
pursuant to section 110 of the CAA.
EPA is publishing this rule without
prior proposal because the Agency
views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed
rules section of this Federal Register
publication, EPA is publishing a
separate document that will serve as the
proposal to approve the SIP revision
should adverse comments be filed. This
rule will be effective April 23, 2013
without further notice unless the
Agency receives adverse comments by
March 25, 2013.
If EPA receives such comments, then
EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments
received will then be addressed in a
subsequent final rule based on the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:17 Feb 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period. Parties
interested in commenting should do so
at this time. If no such comments are
received, the public is advised that this
rule will be effective on April 23, 2013
and no further action will be taken on
the proposed rule. Please note that if we
receive adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
we may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, 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 final 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 final action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• 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 F43255, 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
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• 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).
In addition, this final rule does not
have tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by April 23, 2013. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section
307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: February 11, 2013.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
12243
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
Plan for Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and
Winston-Salem Maintenance Areas.’’ at
the end of the table to read as follows:
Subpart II—North Carolina
2. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by
adding a new entry for entry for ‘‘8-Hour
Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance
■
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
§ 52.1770
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA APPROVED NORTH CAROLINA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS
Provision
State effective date
*
*
*
8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan
for Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem
Maintenance Area.
*
August 2, 2012 .................
[FR Doc. 2013–04011 Filed 2–21–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2013–0094; FRL–9783–3]
Interim Final Determination To Stay
and Defer Sanctions, Placer County Air
Pollution Control District and Feather
River Air Quality Management District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is making an interim
final determination to stay the
imposition of offset sanctions and to
defer the imposition of highway
sanctions based on a proposed approval
of a revision to the Placer County Air
Pollution Control District (PCAPCD) and
Feather River Air Quality Management
District (FRAQMD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan
(SIP) published elsewhere in this
Federal Register. The SIP revision
concerns two permitting rules submitted
by the PCAPCD and FRAQMD,
respectively: Rule 502, New Source
Review, and Rule 10.1, New Source
Review.
DATES: This interim final determination
is effective on February 22, 2013.
However, comments will be accepted
until March 25, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by docket number EPA–R09–
OAR–2013–0094, by one of the
following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions.
2. Email: R9airpermits@epa.gov.
3. Mail or deliver: Gerardo Rios (Air3), U.S. Environmental Protection
SUMMARY:
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with RULES
EPA approval
date
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:17 Feb 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
*
2/22/13
Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through https://
www.regulations.gov or email. https://
www.regulations.gov is an ‘‘anonymous
access’’ system, and EPA will not know
your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send email
directly to EPA, your email address will
be automatically captured and included
as part of the public comment. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Docket: Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,
San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed at
https://www.regulations.gov, some
information may be publicly available
only at the hard copy location (e.g.,
copyrighted material, large maps), and
some may not be publicly available in
either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the
hard copy materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Laura Yannayon, EPA Region IX, (415)
972–3534, yannayon.laura@epa.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Federal Register citation
*
[Insert citation of publication].
Explanation
*
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
I. Background
On July 27, 2011 (76 FR 44809), we
published a limited approval and
limited disapproval of PCAPCD Rule
502 and FRAQMD Rule 10.1 as adopted
locally on October 28, 2010 and October
5, 2009, respectively. We based our
limited disapproval action on certain
deficiencies in the submitted rule. This
disapproval action started a sanctions
clock for imposition of offset sanctions
18 months after August 27, 2011 and
highway sanctions 6 months later,
pursuant to section 179 of the Clean Air
Act (CAA) and our regulations at 40
CFR 52.31. Under 40 CFR 52.31(d)(1),
offset sanctions apply eighteen months
after the effective date of a disapproval
and highway sanctions apply six
months after the offset sanctions, unless
we determine that the deficiencies
forming the basis of the disapproval
have been corrected.
On October 31, 2011 and February 7,
2012, PCAPCD and FRAQMD adopted
amended versions of Rules 502 and
10.1, respectively, which were intended
to correct the deficiencies identified in
our July 27, 2011 limited disapproval
action. On November 18, 2011 and
September 21, 2012, the State submitted
these amended rules to EPA. In the
Proposed Rules section of today’s
Federal Register, we are proposing a
limited approval/limited disapproval of
these rules because we believe it
corrects the deficiencies identified in
our July 27, 2011 disapproval action,
but other revisions have created new
deficiencies. Based on today’s proposed
action, we are taking this final
rulemaking action, effective on
publication, to stay the imposition of
the offset sanctions and to defer the
imposition of the highway sanctions
E:\FR\FM\22FER1.SGM
22FER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 36 (Friday, February 22, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12238-12243]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04011]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0961; FRL-9782-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Carbon Monoxide Limited
Maintenance Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a limited
maintenance plan update submitted by the State of North Carolina,
through the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NC DENR), on August 2, 2012. The limited maintenance plan
update is for the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem carbon
monoxide (CO) maintenance areas. Specifically, the State submitted a
limited maintenance plan update for CO, showing continued attainment of
the 8-hour CO National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for the
Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Areas. The 8-hour CO NAAQS
is 9 parts per million (ppm). EPA is taking direct final action to
approve the limited maintenance plan update because it is consistent
with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), and EPA's policy for limited
maintenance plans.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective April 23, 2013 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by March 25, 2013.
If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public
that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2012-0961, by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562-9019.
4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0961, Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2012-0961. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any
[[Page 12239]]
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding
federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Wong, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404)
562-8726. Mr. Wong can be reached via electronic mail at
wong.richard@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. What criteria is EPA using to evaluate this submittal?
III. What is EPA's analysis of this submittal?
A. Requirements of Section 175A of the CAA
B. Consistency With the October 6, 1995, Memorandum
1. Attainment Inventory
2. Maintenance Demonstration
3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
4. Contingency Plan
5. Conformity Determination Under Limited Maintenance Plan
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
A maintenance plan, as defined in section 175A of the CAA, is a
revision to the SIP to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS for the
air pollutant in question in the area concerned for at least 10 years
after the redesignation. Eight years after the redesignation, states
are required to submit an update to the maintenance plan to provide for
the maintenance of the NAAQS for another 10 years after the initial 10
year period has expired. North Carolina's second maintenance plan for
the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem Areas was approved on
March 24, 2006 (71 FR 14817).
A limited maintenance plan for CO is a maintenance plan that is
available to states that have demonstrated that the design values for
CO in the nonclassifiable nonattainment or maintenance area are at, or
below, 7.65 ppm or 85 percent of the 8-hour CO NAAQS. To qualify for a
limited maintenance plan, the area's design value must not exceed the
7.65 ppm threshold throughout the entire rulemaking process. The design
value for CO is defined as the second highest reading in the area in a
two-year period. Should an area have more than one monitor, the monitor
with the second highest value in a two-year period serves as the design
monitor. EPA has also previously determined that the limited
maintenance plan for CO is available to all states as part of their
update to the maintenance plans as per section 175A(b), regardless of
the original nonattainment classification, or lack thereof.
NC DENR elected to convert its second 10-year maintenance plan for
CO to a limited maintenance plan, to provide additional flexibility for
implementing transportation conformity requirements in these CO
maintenance areas. Briefly, counties in the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham
and Winston-Salem Areas were previously designated nonattainment for
the 8-hour CO NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991. These areas
subsequently attained the 8-hour CO NAAQS and were redesignated from
nonattainment to attainment. On November 7, 1994, EPA redesignated the
Winston-Salem Area to attainment for the 8-hour CO NAAQS based on the
measured air quality data and a 10-year maintenance plan submitted for
the Winston-Salem Area. See 59 FR 48399. Additionally, on September 18,
1995, EPA redesignated both the Charlotte Area and the Raleigh-Durham
Area to attainment for the 8-hour CO NAAQS based on the measured air
quality data and the 10-year maintenance plan submitted for these
areas. See 60 FR 39258.
Section 175A(b) of the CAA mandates that the State shall submit an
additional revision to the maintenance plan eight years after
redesignation of any area as an attainment area. NC DENR fulfilled this
requirement by providing the second and final maintenance plan for all
three CO maintenance areas in the State. EPA subsequently approved NC
DENR's maintenance plan. In summary, on March 24, 2006, EPA approved
the second 10-year maintenance plan for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham,
and Winston-Salem CO Maintenance Areas, which are composed of the
following four counties: Mecklenburg (Charlotte Area); Durham and Wake
(Raleigh-Durham Area); and Forsyth (Winston-Salem Area). See 71 FR
14817.
As mentioned above, NC DENR elected to convert the second
maintenance plan for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem
Areas to a limited maintenance plan for the ease of implementing
transportation conformity requirements for the CO NAAQS. The limited
maintenance plans was submitted on August 2, 2012, for EPA approval.
EPA has made the determination that North Carolina's limited
maintenance plan satisfies the requirements for section 175A
maintenance plan, and is consistent with EPA's policy for limited
maintenance plan elements as outlined in an October 6, 1995, memorandum
from the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards , entitled
``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment
Areas'' (October 6, 1995, Memorandum). More information regarding
limited maintenance plan requirements is provided below.
II. What criteria is EPA using to evaluate this submittal?
In addition to the general requirements in section 175A of the CAA,
guidance for CO limited maintenance plans is provided in the October 6,
1995, memorandum, which states that the following five components need
to be addressed: (1) Attainment inventory; (2) maintenance
demonstration; (3) monitoring network/verification of continued
attainment; (4) contingency plan; and (5) conformity determinations
under limited maintenance plans. These elements were outlined in the
October 6, 1995, EPA memorandum, and are comprehensively discussed
below.
[[Page 12240]]
III. What is EPA's analysis of this submittal?
A. Requirements of Section 175A of the CAA
Section 175A contains four subsections pertaining to maintenance
plans. Section 175A(a) establishes requirements for initial SIP
redesignation request maintenance plans, as previously addressed by
North Carolina and subsequently approved by EPA for all three of North
Carolina's CO areas. See 59 FR 48399 and 60 FR 39258.
Section 175A(b) requires States to submit an update to the
maintenance plan eight years following the original redesignation to
attainment. For the section 175A(b) update, the State must outline
methods for maintaining the pertinent NAAQS for ten years after the
expiration of the ten-year period referred to in subsection (a), i.e.,
North Carolina's maintenance plan update must outline methods for
maintaining the CO NAAQS through 2015, NC DENR satisfied the
requirements for the second maintenance plans for all of its CO
maintenance areas, and EPA subsequently approved NC DENR's second
maintenance plan for each of its CO maintenance areas. See 71 FR 14817,
March 24, 2006. As indicated above, although North Carolina has
previously satisfied the requirements for the 175A(b) maintenance plan
updates for all of its CO areas, the State has elected to convert these
maintenance plans to limited maintenance plans.
Section 175A(c) does not apply to this rulemaking, given that EPA
has previously redesignated the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham, and Winston-
Salem areas to attainment for CO.
Section 175A(d) which included the contingency provisions
requirements are addressed in detail in section B4, below.
B. Consistency With the October 6, 1995, Memorandum
As discussed above, EPA's interpretation of section 175A of the
CAA, as it pertains to limited maintenance plans for CO, is contained
in the October 6, 1995, Memorandum. North Carolina addressed the five
major elements of that policy, as follows:
1. Attainment Inventory
The State is required to develop an attainment emissions inventory
to identify a level of emissions in the area which is sufficient to
attain the CO NAAQS. This 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 the monitoring data showing attainment. It
should be based on actual ``typical CO season day'' emissions for all
source classifications (i.e., stationary point and area sources and
nonroad and onroad mobile sources) for the attainment year. In its
August 2, 2012, submittal, NC DENR provided a comprehensive CO
emissions inventory for nonroad mobile, onroad mobile, point, and area
sources for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem CO
Maintenance Areas.
NC DENR collected or developed point source emissions inventory
from stationary sources that have the potential to emit more than five
tons per year of CO emissions from a single facility and are required
to have an operating permit. The stationary area source inventory is
estimated on a county level and consisted of those sources whose
emissions are relatively small, but due to the large number of sources,
the collective emissions could be significant. North Carolina estimated
the stationary area source emissions by multiplying an emission factor
by some known indicator of collective activity (such as fuel usage,
number of households, or population). For on-road mobile source
emissions, NC DENR used USEPA's Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator
(MOVES) model version 2010a (i.e., MOVES2010a), released in August
2010, for estimating vehicle emissions. Nonroad mobile sources are
pieces of equipment that can move but do not use roadways (e.g. lawn
mowers, construction equipment, railroad locomotives, aircraft). The
emissions from this category are calculated at the county level using
USEPA's NONROAD2008s nonroad mobile model, with the exception of
railroad locomotives and aircraft engines. The railroad locomotives and
aircraft engines are estimated by taking an activity and multiplying by
an emission factor. Table 1 displays the 2010 attainment year emissions
inventory as required for the limited maintenance plans. Appendix B of
North Carolina's SIP submittal provides detailed discussions regarding
the development of emissions for the four emission source
classifications, and is provided in the docket for today's rulemaking.
Table 1--2010 CO Emissions (tons/day) for Maintenance Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point
County source Area source On-road Nonroad Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Durham......................................... 0.97 1.54 186.00 19.04 207.55
Wake........................................... 1.17 4.26 642.97 70.62 719.02
----------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................................... 2.14 5.80 828.97 89.66 926.57
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winston-Salem Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forsyth........................................ 2.22 1.41 244.16 23.97 271.76
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charlotte Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mecklenburg.................................... 2.39 4.21 724.39 114.71 845.70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Maintenance Demonstration
In the October 6, 1995, Memorandum, EPA stated that the maintenance
demonstration requirement is considered to be satisfied for
nonclassifiable areas if the monitoring data show that the area is
meeting the air quality criteria for limited maintenance areas (i.e.,
85 percent of the eight hour CO NAAQS, or 7.65 ppm). EPA determined in
this same memorandum that there is no requirement to protect emissions
over the maintenance period. Instead, EPA believes that if the area
begins the
[[Page 12241]]
maintenance period at, or below, 7.65 ppm (85 percent of the 8-hour CO
NAAQS), the applicability of prevention of significant deterioration
(PSD) requirements, control measures already in the SIP, and other
federal measures should provide adequate assurance of maintenance
throughout the maintenance period. Monitoring data from 2008-2011 shows
all three areas below the 8-hour CO NAAQS values as listed in Table 2.
All monitoring levels are well below the 85 percent threshold of 7.65
ppm and therefore the State has satisfied the maintenance demonstration
requirement for a limited maintenance plan for each of its CO
maintenance areas.
Table 2--CO 8-Hour Monitored Concentration NAAQS
[parts per million]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
County Monitor ID 2009 2010 2011 8-hr NAAQS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wake................................................. 371830014 1.3 1.3 1.4 9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winston-Salem Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forsyth.............................................. 370670023 1.7 1.9 2.1 9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charlotte Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mecklenburg.......................................... 371190041 1.7 1.7 1.5 9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
Once an area has been redesignated, the state should continue to
operate an appropriate air quality monitoring network, in accordance
with 40 CFR Part 58, to verify the attainment status of the area. This
is particularly important for areas using a limited maintenance plan
because there will be no cap on emissions. In accordance with 40 CFR
Part 58, NC DENR commits to continue monitoring CO at these three sites
to ensure that CO concentrations remain well below the 7.65 ppm
threshold for limited maintenance plans. The State's monitoring plan
for 2012 can be found at the following site: https://www.ncair.org/monitor/monitoring_plan/new_plan/2012_NCDAQ_Network_Plan.pdf. EPA
has determined that the State has satisfied the monitoring network and
verification of continued attainment requirements for the limited
maintenance plan.
4. Contingency Plan
Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include
contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct any violation
of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation of an area. The October 6,
1995, Memorandum further requires that the contingency provisions
identify the measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for
adoption and implementation, and a specific time limit for action by
the state.
In its August 2, 2012, submittal, NC DENR committed to the same
contingency measures that EPA previously approved on March 24, 2006 (71
FR 14817) and a subsequent clarification on June 19, 2007 (72 FR
33692). The State pre-adopted an oxygenated fuels program with minimum
oxygen content by weight of 2.7 for Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and
Winston-Salem maintenance areas. The oxygenated fuel program is
required under the CAA for the Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem areas
as a required control measure prior to the attainment redesignation.
Charlotte was placed under oxygenated fuel program for effective area-
wide CO emission reduction and ease for State implementation. The
triggering date will be no more than 60 days after an ambient air
quality violation is monitored. NC DENR will commence an analysis and
regulation development process during this time. The State will
consider the following control measures:
a. Amending the oxygenated fuels program by adopting oxygenate
content of 2.0 percent to 2.7 percent by weight, or activate of the 2.7
percent by eight pre-adopted contingency measure, or 2.7 percent to 3.1
percent by weight.
b. Expanding coverage of oxygenated fuels to include counties where
a strong commuting pattern into the core maintenance area exists.
c. Alternative fuel vehicle programs to include compressed natural
gas and electric vehicles.
d. Employee commute options programs.
NC DENR committed to implement at least one of the control measures
within 24 months of the trigger, or as expeditiously as practicable.
EPA has determined that the State has satisfied the contingency plan
requirements pursuant to section 175A(d) of the CAA as well as those of
the October 6, 1995, Memorandum.
5. Conformity Determination Under Limited Maintenance Plan
The transportation conformity rule of November 24, 1993 (58 FR
62188), and the general conformity rule of November 30, 1993 (58 FR
63214), apply to nonattainment areas and maintenance areas operating
under the maintenance plans. Under either rule, one means of
demonstrating conformity of federal actions is to indicate that
expected emissions from planned actions are consistent with the
emissions budget for the area.
EPA's October 6, 1995, Memorandum states that emissions budgets in
limited maintenance plan areas may be treated as essentially not
constraining for the length of the maintenance period because it is
unreasonable to expect that such an area will experience so much growth
in that period that a violation of the CO NAAQS would result. In other
words, EPA concluded that, for these areas, emissions need not be
capped for the maintenance period.
In accordance with the Transportation conformity rule, approval of
a limited maintenance plan only removes the requirement to conduct a
regional emissions analysis as part of the conformity determination.
The requirement to demonstrate conformity per the requirements in
section 93.109, in Table 1 still applies. Additionally, federally
funded projects are still subject to ``Hot Spot'' analysis
requirements. However, no regional modeling analysis would be required.
Transportation partners should note that this approval of these
limited maintenance plans in future
[[Page 12242]]
transportation conformity determinations. Additionally, while this
finding waives the requirements for a regional emissions analysis for
the CO, as mentioned above, it does not waive other conformity
requirements for the CO standard for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and
Winston-Salem areas, and it does not waive transportation conformity
requirement for other pollutants/precursors for which these areas may
be designated nonattainment or redesigned to attainment with a full
maintenance plan.
The State has satisfied the conformity determination under limited
maintenance plan requirements for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and
Winston-Salem areas in this limited maintenance plan.
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the CO limited maintenance plan for the Charlotte,
Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem Areas. The State of North Carolina
has complied with the requirements of section 175A of the CAA, as
interpreted by the guidance provided in the October 6, 1995,
Memorandum. North Carolina has shown monitored levels of CO in the
three areas have been consistently well below the requisite level of
7.65 ppm for the 8-hour CO NAAQS in order to qualify for the limited
maintenance plan. North Carolina has also shown monitored values for
the 8-hour CO NAAQS have been consistently well below the NAAQS levels
from 2009-2011. EPA has made the determination that the North Carolina,
August 2, 2012, submission providing the CO limited maintenance plan
for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem Areas is
consistent with the CAA and EPA's guidance on limited maintenance
plans. This action is being taken pursuant to section 110 of the CAA.
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective April 23, 2013
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by
March 25, 2013.
If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this rule will be effective on April 23, 2013 and no
further action will be taken on the proposed rule. Please note that if
we receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of
the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are
not the subject of an adverse comment.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, 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
final 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 final action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
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 F43255, 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).
In addition, this final rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 23, 2013. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: February 11, 2013.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
[[Page 12243]]
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart II--North Carolina
0
2. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by adding a new entry for entry for
``8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan for Charlotte,
Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Maintenance Areas.'' at the end of the
table to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA Approved North Carolina Non-regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State effective EPA approval Federal Register
Provision date date citation Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Limited August 2, 2012..... 2/22/13 [Insert citation ....................
Maintenance Plan for Charlotte, of publication].
Raleigh/Durham and Winston-
Salem Maintenance Area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2013-04011 Filed 2-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
