Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan, 37118-37122 [2013-14507]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
37118
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
other officers operating Coast Guard
vessels, and Federal, state, and local
officers designated by or assisting the
Captain of the Port Charleston in the
enforcement of the regulated areas.
(c) Regulations. (1) All persons and
vessels are prohibited from entering,
transiting through, anchoring in, or
remaining within the regulated areas
unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Charleston or a designated
representative.
(2) Persons and vessels desiring to
enter, transit through, anchor in, or
remain within the regulated areas may
contact the Captain of the Charleston by
telephone at (843) 740–7050, or a
designated representative via VHF radio
on channel 16, to request authorization.
If authorization to enter, transit through,
anchor in, or remain within the
regulated areas is granted by the Captain
of the Port Charleston or a designated
representative, all persons and vessels
receiving such authorization must
comply with the instructions of the
Captain of the Port Charleston or a
designated representative.
(3) The Coast Guard will provide
notice of the regulated areas by
Broadcast Notice to Mariners, Marine
Safety Information Bulletins, and onscene designated representatives.
(d) Effective date. This rule is
effective from 9 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. on
July 4, 2013.
Dated: June 6, 2013.
M.F. White,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Charleston.
[FR Doc. 2013–14666 Filed 6–19–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0961; FRL–9824–5]
carbon monoxide (CO), showing
continued attainment of the 8-hour CO
national ambient air quality standard for
the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and
Winston-Salem Areas. EPA is approving
this SIP revision because the State has
demonstrated that the revision is
consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA
or Act).
DATES: This rule will be effective July
22, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR–
2012–0961. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov
Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information 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 through
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:
Sean Lakeman, 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) 562–9043.
Mr. Lakeman can be reached via
electronic mail at
lakeman.sean@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and
Winston-Salem Carbon Monoxide
Limited Maintenance Plan
Table of Contents
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
I. Analysis of the State’s Submittal
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
EPA is taking final action to
approve changes to the North Carolina
State Implementation Plan (SIP),
submitted by the State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NC DENR), on August 2,
2012. Specifically, the State submitted
limited maintenance plan updates for
I. Analysis of the State’s Submittal
Section 175A of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) contains four subsections (i.e.,
175A(a)–(d)) pertaining to maintenance
plans. Section 175A(a) establishes
requirements for the maintenance plans
associated with initial SIP redesignation
requests. North Carolina previously
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:04 Jun 19, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
addressed the 175A(a) requirements for
the CO NAAQS and the State’s
redesignation requests and associated
maintenance plans were ultimately
approved by EPA for all three of North
Carolina’s CO areas as a result. 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 as
referred to in subsection (a) (i.e., North
Carolina’s maintenance plan updates
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 the
State’s CO maintenance areas. See 71 FR
14817, March 24, 2006. 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.1 A summary
of EPA’s analysis for this revision is
provided below.
Finally, with respect to the remaining
sub-sections of section 175A, EPA notes
that sub-section (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 includes the
contingency provisions requirements
associated with maintenance plans, is
relevant to today’s revision and is
addressed in section A4, below.
A. Consistency With the October 6,
1995, Memorandum
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
from Joseph W. Praise to the Air Branch
Chiefs, Regions I–X, entitled ‘‘Limited
Maintenance Plan Option for
Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment
Areas.’’ See the docket for today’s
1 A limited maintenance plan generally includes
all the elements for a full section 175A maintenance
plan except that a limited maintenance plan is not
required to include motor vehicle emissions
budgets for transportation conformity purposes. For
more details on limited maintenance plans see the
October 6, 1995, Memorandum from Joseph W.
Praise to the Air Branch Chiefs, Regions I–X,
entitled ‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan Option for
Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas.’’ A copy
of the October 6, 1995, Memorandum is included
in the docket for today’s rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
rulemaking for a copy of this
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 the SIP is developed 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 the
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 EPA’s Motor Vehicle Emission
Simulator (MOVES) model version
2010a (MOVES2010a), released in
37119
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, and aircraft). The
emissions from this category are
calculated at the county level using
EPA’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
County
Point source
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
Mecklenburg .........................................................................
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 shows 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 parts
per million (ppm)). EPA determined in
2.39
this same memorandum that there is no
requirement to protect emissions over
the maintenance period. Instead, EPA
believes that if the area begins the
maintenance period at, or below, 7.65
ppm (85 percent of the 8-hour CO
NAAQS), the applicability of prevention
of significant deterioration
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.
See Table 2 below. 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 DESIGN VALUES
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
[ppm]
County
Monitor ID
2009
2010
2011
8-Hr NAAQS
Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area
Wake ....................................................................................
2 The Direct Final Rulemaking on February 22,
2013, listed the Wake County 2009 design value as
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:04 Jun 19, 2013
Jkt 229001
371830014
21.3
1.3 ppm. See 78 FR 12238. The value reported by
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1.3
1.4
the State was actually 1.2 ppm and the change is
reflected in this final rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
9
37120
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2—CO 8-HOUR MONITORED CONCENTRATION DESIGN VALUES—Continued
[ppm]
County
Monitor ID
2009
2010
2011
8-Hr NAAQS
Winston-Salem Maintenance Area
Forsyth .................................................................................
370670023
1.7
1.9
2.1
9
1.7
1.7
1.5
9
Charlotte Maintenance Area
Mecklenburg .........................................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
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 the existing
regulatory monitors in the three CO
maintenance areas 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 plans.
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 as a
contingency measure for the CO
maintenance plan. The oxygenated fuel
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:04 Jun 19, 2013
Jkt 229001
371190041
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 the
oxygenated fuel program for effective
area-wide CO emission reduction and to
ease State implementation efforts. The
contingency measure 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; and,
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 the
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 Table 1 of 40
CFR 93.109 still applies. Additionally,
federally funded projects are still
subject to project level transportation
conformity analysis requirements.
However, no regional modeling analysis
would be required.
Transportation partners should note
this approval of these limited
maintenance plans in future
transportation conformity
determinations. Additionally, while the
approvals of these limited maintenance
plans waives the requirements for a
regional emissions analysis for the CO
NAAQS, 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.
II. Response to Comments
On February 22, 2013 (78 FR 12267),
EPA published a direct final rule
approving North Carolina’s August 2,
2012, SIP submission for a limited
maintenance plan update for CO,
showing continued attainment of the 8hour CO NAAQS for the Charlotte,
Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Areas. EPA published an accompanying
proposed approval in the event that
comments were received such that the
direct final rule needed to be
withdrawn. Specifically, in the direct
final rule, EPA stated that if adverse
comments were received by March 25,
2013, the rule would be withdrawn and
not take effect, but that the proposed
rule would still remain in effect and that
an additional public comment period
would not be instituted if EPA could
sufficiently address any comments
received on the direct final rulemaking.
On March 25, 2013, EPA received
comments from a single commenter.
The comments could be interpreted as
adverse and, therefore, EPA withdrew
the direct final rule. A summary of the
comments received and EPA’s response
is provided below.
Comment: The commenter stated
‘‘were studies conducted to establish the
criteria for labeling as a maintenance
area? Is there something geographic and
standard about this area.’’
Response: This comment is outside of
the scope of today’s action. Nonetheless,
EPA notes that the process to designate
a maintenance area under the CO
NAAQS involves an evaluation of
specific criteria to determine whether an
area is in compliance or out of
compliance with the CO NAAQS. If an
area is determined to be out of
compliance, EPA then determines an
appropriate boundary for the area and
designates the area as a
‘‘nonattainment’’ area. The designation
process for CO areas was completed in
the early 1990’s. The Charlotte, Raleigh/
Durham and Winston-Salem Areas were
all designated as nonattainment for the
CO NAAQS. Once an area is designated
nonattainment, an area can be
redesignated to ‘‘attainment’’ (i.e.,
meaning that the area is in compliance
of the NAAQS), if it meets the criteria
of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. All
three of the North Carolina areas were
redesignated to ‘‘attainment’’ for the CO
NAAQS and are thus considered
‘‘maintenance’’ areas. See 59 FR 48399
and 60 FR 39258.
Comment: The commenter questioned
whether the emissions parameters are
‘‘constricting the water vapor potential’’
and whether the emissions tolerances
are ‘‘excessive considering most
dealerships are manufacturing cars that
use alternative energies and have done
so for approximately 10 years now[?]’’
Response: The on-road mobile source
emissions inventory in North Carolina’s
limited maintenance plans for the
Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and
Winston-Salem Areas were developed
according to EPA guidelines and with
the MOVES emissions model. The
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:04 Jun 19, 2013
Jkt 229001
MOVES model can be used to estimate
exhaust and evaporative emissions as
well as brake and tire wear emissions
from all types of on-road vehicles. The
MOVES model incorporates substantial
new emissions test data and accounts
for changes in vehicle technology and
regulations as well as improved
understanding of in-use emission levels
and the factors that influence them. NC
DENR appropriately utilized the
MOVES model to estimate the on-road
mobile source emissions for the limited
maintenance plan for all applicable
vehicles and technologies, for the
Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and
Winston-Salem Areas.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving the aforementioned
changes to the State of North Carolina
SIP, because they are consistent with
the CAA, and EPA’s policy related to
limited maintenance plans.
IV. 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 action
merely approves state law as meeting
federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by State law. For that
reason, this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive 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 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
37121
• 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 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, 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 August 19, 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. Parties with
objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file any comment in
response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action
published in the proposed rules section
of today’s Federal Register, rather than
file an immediate petition for judicial
review of this direct final rule, so that
EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
and address the comment in the
proposed rulemaking. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
37122
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: June 7, 2013.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
enforce its requirements. See section
307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Subpart II—North Carolina
2. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by
adding a new entry for ‘‘8-Hour Carbon
Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan for
Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and
Winston-Salem Maintenance Area’’ at
the end of the table to read as follows:
■
§ 52.1770
*
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
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.
[FR Doc. 2013–14507 Filed 6–19–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0274; FRL–9825–1]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; New York;
Infrastructure SIP for the 1997 8-Hour
Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 Fine
Particulate Matter Standards
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving certain
elements of New York’s State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted to demonstrate that the State
meets the requirements of section
110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) for the 1997 8-hour ozone and
the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS). Section
110(a) of the CAA requires that each
state adopt and submit a SIP for the
implementation, maintenance and
enforcement of each NAAQS
promulgated by the EPA and is
commonly referred to as an
infrastructure SIP.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is
effective on July 22, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0274. All
documents in the docket are listed on
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:04 Jun 19, 2013
Jkt 229001
EPA approval date
*
August 2, 2012 ......
I. Background and Purpose
Under CAA section 110(a)(1), states
are required to submit plans called state
implementation plans (SIPs) that
provide for the implementation,
maintenance and enforcement of each
NAAQS and are referred to as
infrastructure SIPs. 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(1).
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated new
and revised NAAQS for 8-hour ozone
(62 FR 38856) and PM2.5 (62 FR 38652).
EPA strengthened the 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS on October 17, 2006 (71 FR
61144). The 14 elements required to be
addressed in infrastructure SIPs are as
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
*
6/20/2013 ...............
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., 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 through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Environmental Protection Agency,
Region II Office, Air Programs Branch,
290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York,
New York 10007–1866. The Air
Programs Branch dockets are available
from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The Air Programs Branch
telephone number is 212–637–4249.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirk
J. Wieber, Air Programs Branch,
Environmental Protection Agency, 290
Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New
York 10007–1866, (212) 637–4249, or by
email at wieber.kirk@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Federal Register citation
Sfmt 4700
Explanation
*
[Insert citation of publication]
follows: (1) Emission limits and other
control measures; (2) ambient air quality
monitoring/data system; (3) program for
enforcement of control measures; (4)
interstate transport; (5) adequate
resources; (6) stationary source
monitoring system; (7) emergency
power; (8) future SIP revisions; (9)
consultation with government officials;
(10) public notification; (11) prevention
of significant deterioration (PSD) and
visibility protection; (12) air quality
modeling/data; (13) permitting fees; and
(14) consultation/participation by
affected local entities.
EPA is acting on three New York SIP
submittals, dated December 13, 2007,
October 2, 2008 and March 15, 2010,
which address the section 110
infrastructure requirements for the three
NAAQS: The 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, the 1997 annual and 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. This action does not
address the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 ozone and
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, since they were
addressed in previous rulemakings. See
January 24, 2008 (73 FR 4109).
Additionally, this action does not
address the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS, which also was addressed in a
previous EPA rulemaking. See July 20,
2011 (76 FR 43153). Two elements
identified in section 110(a)(2) are not
governed by the three year submission
deadline of section 110(a)(1) because
SIPs incorporating necessary local
nonattainment area controls are not due
within three years after promulgation of
a new or revised NAAQS, but rather due
at the time that the nonattainment area
plan requirements are due pursuant to
E:\FR\FM\20JNR1.SGM
20JNR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 119 (Thursday, June 20, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37118-37122]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14507]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0961; FRL-9824-5]
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: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve changes to the North
Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the State of
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NC
DENR), on August 2, 2012. Specifically, the State submitted limited
maintenance plan updates for carbon monoxide (CO), showing continued
attainment of the 8-hour CO national ambient air quality standard for
the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Areas. EPA is approving
this SIP revision because the State has demonstrated that the revision
is consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).
DATES: This rule will be effective July 22, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0961. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential
Business Information 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 through 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: Sean Lakeman, 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)
562-9043. Mr. Lakeman can be reached via electronic mail at
lakeman.sean@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Analysis of the State's Submittal
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Analysis of the State's Submittal
Section 175A of the Clean Air Act (CAA) contains four subsections
(i.e., 175A(a)-(d)) pertaining to maintenance plans. Section 175A(a)
establishes requirements for the maintenance plans associated with
initial SIP redesignation requests. North Carolina previously addressed
the 175A(a) requirements for the CO NAAQS and the State's redesignation
requests and associated maintenance plans were ultimately approved by
EPA for all three of North Carolina's CO areas as a result. 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 as referred to in subsection (a)
(i.e., North Carolina's maintenance plan updates 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 the State's CO maintenance areas. See 71
FR 14817, March 24, 2006. 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.\1\ A summary of EPA's analysis for
this revision is provided below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A limited maintenance plan generally includes all the
elements for a full section 175A maintenance plan except that a
limited maintenance plan is not required to include motor vehicle
emissions budgets for transportation conformity purposes. For more
details on limited maintenance plans see the October 6, 1995,
Memorandum from Joseph W. Praise to the Air Branch Chiefs, Regions
I-X, entitled ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable
CO Nonattainment Areas.'' A copy of the October 6, 1995, Memorandum
is included in the docket for today's rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, with respect to the remaining sub-sections of section
175A, EPA notes that sub-section (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 includes the contingency provisions requirements associated with
maintenance plans, is relevant to today's revision and is addressed in
section A4, below.
A. Consistency With the October 6, 1995, Memorandum
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 from Joseph W. Praise to the Air Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X,
entitled ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO
Nonattainment Areas.'' See the docket for today's
[[Page 37119]]
rulemaking for a copy of this 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 the SIP is developed 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 the 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 EPA's Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES)
model version 2010a (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, and aircraft). The emissions from this category are
calculated at the county level using EPA'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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
County Point 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 shows 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 parts per million
(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 maintenance period at, or
below, 7.65 ppm (85 percent of the 8-hour CO NAAQS), the applicability
of prevention of significant deterioration 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. See Table 2 below. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Direct Final Rulemaking on February 22, 2013, listed the
Wake County 2009 design value as 1.3 ppm. See 78 FR 12238. The value
reported by the State was actually 1.2 ppm and the change is
reflected in this final rulemaking.
Table 2--CO 8-Hour Monitored Concentration Design Values
[ppm]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
County Monitor ID 2009 2010 2011 8-Hr NAAQS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wake............................ 371830014 \2\1.3 1.3 1.4 9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 37120]]
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 the existing
regulatory monitors in the three CO maintenance areas 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 plans.
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 as a contingency measure for the CO
maintenance plan. 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 the oxygenated fuel program for effective area-wide CO emission
reduction and to ease State implementation efforts. The contingency
measure 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; and,
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 the 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 Table
1 of 40 CFR 93.109 still applies. Additionally, federally funded
projects are still subject to project level transportation conformity
analysis requirements. However, no regional modeling analysis would be
required.
Transportation partners should note this approval of these limited
maintenance plans in future transportation conformity determinations.
Additionally, while the approvals of these limited maintenance plans
waives the requirements for a regional emissions analysis for the CO
NAAQS, 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.
II. Response to Comments
On February 22, 2013 (78 FR 12267), EPA published a direct final
rule approving North Carolina's August 2, 2012, SIP submission for a
limited maintenance plan update for CO, showing continued attainment of
the 8-hour CO NAAQS for the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem
[[Page 37121]]
Areas. EPA published an accompanying proposed approval in the event
that comments were received such that the direct final rule needed to
be withdrawn. Specifically, in the direct final rule, EPA stated that
if adverse comments were received by March 25, 2013, the rule would be
withdrawn and not take effect, but that the proposed rule would still
remain in effect and that an additional public comment period would not
be instituted if EPA could sufficiently address any comments received
on the direct final rulemaking. On March 25, 2013, EPA received
comments from a single commenter. The comments could be interpreted as
adverse and, therefore, EPA withdrew the direct final rule. A summary
of the comments received and EPA's response is provided below.
Comment: The commenter stated ``were studies conducted to establish
the criteria for labeling as a maintenance area? Is there something
geographic and standard about this area.''
Response: This comment is outside of the scope of today's action.
Nonetheless, EPA notes that the process to designate a maintenance area
under the CO NAAQS involves an evaluation of specific criteria to
determine whether an area is in compliance or out of compliance with
the CO NAAQS. If an area is determined to be out of compliance, EPA
then determines an appropriate boundary for the area and designates the
area as a ``nonattainment'' area. The designation process for CO areas
was completed in the early 1990's. The Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and
Winston-Salem Areas were all designated as nonattainment for the CO
NAAQS. Once an area is designated nonattainment, an area can be
redesignated to ``attainment'' (i.e., meaning that the area is in
compliance of the NAAQS), if it meets the criteria of section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. All three of the North Carolina areas were
redesignated to ``attainment'' for the CO NAAQS and are thus considered
``maintenance'' areas. See 59 FR 48399 and 60 FR 39258.
Comment: The commenter questioned whether the emissions parameters
are ``constricting the water vapor potential'' and whether the
emissions tolerances are ``excessive considering most dealerships are
manufacturing cars that use alternative energies and have done so for
approximately 10 years now[?]''
Response: The on-road mobile source emissions inventory in North
Carolina's limited maintenance plans for the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham
and Winston-Salem Areas were developed according to EPA guidelines and
with the MOVES emissions model. The MOVES model can be used to estimate
exhaust and evaporative emissions as well as brake and tire wear
emissions from all types of on-road vehicles. The MOVES model
incorporates substantial new emissions test data and accounts for
changes in vehicle technology and regulations as well as improved
understanding of in-use emission levels and the factors that influence
them. NC DENR appropriately utilized the MOVES model to estimate the
on-road mobile source emissions for the limited maintenance plan for
all applicable vehicles and technologies, for the Charlotte, Raleigh/
Durham and Winston-Salem Areas.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving the aforementioned changes to the State of North
Carolina SIP, because they are consistent with the CAA, and EPA's
policy related to limited maintenance plans.
IV. 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
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State
law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 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 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country, 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 August 19, 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. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file any comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
[[Page 37122]]
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: June 7, 2013.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart II--North Carolina
0
2. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by adding a new entry for ``8-Hour
Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan for Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham
and Winston-Salem Maintenance Area'' at the end of the table to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.1770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved North Carolina Non-Regulatory Provisions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Register
Provision State effective date EPA approval date citation Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Limited August 2, 2012................. 6/20/2013...................... [Insert citation of .......................
Maintenance Plan for Charlotte, publication]
Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem
Maintenance Area.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2013-14507 Filed 6-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
