Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina: Non-Interference Demonstration for Removal of Federal Low-Reid Vapor Pressure Requirement for the Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point Area, 70516-70525 [2013-28371]
Download as PDF
70516
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules
9. What are the physiological and
psychological needs of bears in
captivity, and would bear-specific
standards address them?
10. Is there evidence that a captive
bear housed in a particular type of
enclosure is more prone to disease or
injury, or more likely to develop
aggressive behavior habits than captive
bears housed in a different type of
enclosure?
11. Should persons holding bears in
captivity be required to provide bears
with the means to self-groom, with
enclosure mates, with the opportunity
and means to hibernate, and with pools?
12. Should there be a prohibition on
the sale or transportation of infant or
young bears in captivity?
13. Should exhibitors and dealers be
required to house captive bear cubs with
their mothers until after they are
naturally weaned?
14. Should exhibitors and dealers be
prohibited from declawing captive
bears?
15. Should exhibitors and dealers be
prohibited from permitting public
feeding of captive bears?
We encourage the submission of
scientific data, studies, or research to
support your comments and position,
including scientific data or research that
supports any industry or professional
standards that pertain to the care of
bears. We also invite data on the costs
and benefits associated with any
recommendations. We will consider all
comments and recommendations we
receive.
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131–2159; 7 CFR
2.22, 2.80, and 371.7.
Done in Washington, DC, this 20th day of
November 2013.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–28312 Filed 11–25–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
[EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0501; FRL 9902–
27–Region 5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
a revision to the Illinois state
implementation plan (SIP). The
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Nov 25, 2013
Jkt 232001
submission amends the Illinois
Administrative Code by updating the
definition of ‘‘Volatile organic material
(VOM) or Volatile organic compound
(VOC)’’ to add trans-1,3,3,3-tetraflouropropene (HFO–1234ze) to the list
of compounds excluded from the
definition of VOM or VOC. This
revision is based on EPA’s 2012
rulemaking which added HFO–1234ze
to the list of chemical compounds that
are excluded from the Federal definition
of VOC because of their negligible
contribution to the formation of
tropospheric ozone.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 26, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2013–0501, by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: blakley.pamela@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 692–2450.
4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief,
Control Strategies Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley,
Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office
normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The
Regional Office official hours of
business are Monday through Friday,
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
Please see the direct final rule which
is located in the Rules section of this
Federal Register for detailed
instructions on how to submit
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Charles Hatten, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6031,
hatten.charles@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
Final Rules section of this issue of the
Federal Register, EPA is approving the
state’s SIP submittal as a direct final
rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
received in response to this rule, no
further activity is contemplated. If EPA
receives adverse comments, the direct
final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. EPA will
not institute a second comment period.
Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph,
or section of this rule, and if that
provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment. For additional information,
see the direct final rule which is located
in the Rules section of this issue of the
Federal Register.
Dated: October 17, 2013.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2013–27705 Filed 11–25–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0562; FRL–9903–16–
Region 4]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; North Carolina:
Non-Interference Demonstration for
Removal of Federal Low-Reid Vapor
Pressure Requirement for the
Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point
Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
the State of North Carolina’s April 12,
2013, State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision associated with the currently
approved maintenance plan addressing
the 1997 8-hour national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) for the
Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point
(Triad) Area. Specifically, North
Carolina’s revision, including updated
modeling, shows that the Triad Area
would continue to maintain the 1997 8hour ozone standard if the currently
applicable Federal Reid Vapor Pressure
(RVP) standard for gasoline of 7.8
pounds per square inch (psi) were
modified to 9.0 psi for four portions
(Davidson, Forsyth, Guilford and Davie
Counties) of the ‘‘Triad Area’’ during the
high-ozone season. The State has
included a technical demonstration
with the revision to demonstrate that a
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\26NOP1.SGM
26NOP1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules
less-stringent RVP standard of 9.0 psi in
these portions of this area would not
interfere with continued maintenance of
the 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS or any
other applicable standard. Approval of
this SIP revision is a prerequisite for
EPA’s consideration of an amendment
to the regulations to remove the
aforementioned portions of the Triad
Area from the list of areas that are
currently subject to the Federal 7.8 psi
RVP requirements. In addition, the
revised on-road mobile and non-road
mobile source emissions modeling
associated with the requested
modification to the RVP standard results
in the use of the updated Motor Vehicle
Emissions Simulator (MOVES) and
NONROAD2008 models which are the
most current versions of modeling
systems available for these sources. EPA
has preliminarily determined that North
Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP revision
with respect to the revisions to the
modeling and associated technical
demonstration associated with the
State’s request for the removal of the
Federal RVP requirements, and with
respect to the updated on-road mobile,
non-road mobile and area source
emissions, is consistent with the
applicable provisions of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act). Should EPA decide
to remove the subject portions of the
Triad Area from those areas subject to
the 7.8 psi Federal RVP requirements,
such action will occur in a subsequent
rulemaking.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before December 26,
2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R04–OAR–2013–0562 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–2013–0562,
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: Ms.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:57 Nov 25, 2013
Jkt 232001
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2013–
0562. 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
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
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70517
section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sean Lakeman of the Regulatory
Development Section, in the Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mr.
Lakeman may be reached by phone at
(404) 562–9043, or via electronic mail at
lakeman.sean@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
Table of Contents
I. What is being proposed?
II. What is the background of the Triad Area?
III. What is the history of the gasoline
volatility requirement?
IV. What are the section 110(l) requirements?
V. What is EPA’s analysis of North Carolina’s
submittal?
VI. Proposed Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is being proposed?
The Triad Area in North Carolina is
currently designated attainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Area
was redesignated from nonattainment of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on April
2, 2008. See 73 FR 17897. This
rulemaking proposes to approve a
revision to the Section 110(a)(1)
Maintenance Plan for 1997 8-hour ozone
standard for the Triad Area submitted
by the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (NC
DENR). Specifically, EPA is proposing
to approve revisions to the maintenance
plan, including updated modeling, that
show the Triad Area can continue to
maintain the 1997 ozone standard
without reliance on emissions
reductions based upon the use of
gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi in any
of the Triad Area counties during the
high ozone season—June 1 through
September 15.1 EPA is also proposing to
conclude that the new modeling
demonstrates that the area would
continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard with the use of gasoline with
1 As discussed further below, a separate
rulemaking is required for relaxation of the current
requirement to use gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi
in the Area. This action proposes EPA’s evaluation
of the approvability of Florida’s revision to the
maintenance plan pursuant to section 110(l). The
decision regarding removal of Federal RVP
requirements pursuant to section 211(h) in the Area
includes other considerations evaluated at the
discretion of the Administrator. As such, the
determination regarding whether to remove the
Area from those areas subject to the section 211(h)
requirements is made through a separate rule
making action.
E:\FR\FM\26NOP1.SGM
26NOP1
70518
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
an RVP of 9.0 psi throughout the Triad
Area during the high ozone season.
Consistent with section 110(l) of the
Act, EPA also proposes to conclude that
the use of gasoline with an RVP of 9.0
psi throughout the Triad Area during
the high ozone season would not
interfere with other applicable
requirements.
The new modeling conducted by
North Carolina to account for the
proposed relaxation of the applicable
RVP standard in portions of the Triad
Area also results in changes to the onroad mobile, non-road mobile and area
source emissions associated with the
maintenance plan.2 As such, the North
Carolina revision updates the on-road
mobile, non-road mobile and area
source emissions for the Triad Area.
EPA is also proposing approval of this
revision.
This preamble is hereafter organized
into five parts. Section II provides the
background of the Triad Area
designation status with respect to the
various Ozone NAAQS. Section III
describes the applicable history of
federal gasoline regulation. Section IV
provides the Agency’s policy regarding
relaxation of the volatility standards.
Section V provides EPA’s analysis of the
information submitted by North
Carolina to support a relaxation of the
more stringent volatility standard in the
Triad Area and revisions to the on-road
mobile, nonroad mobile and area source
emissions associated with Maintenance
Plan for the Triad Area and provides
EPA’s analysis regarding the proposed
revision.
II. What is the background of the Triad
Area?
On November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694),
EPA designated the Counties of
Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford in their
entirety and the portion of Davie County
bounded by the Yadkin River,
Dutchmans Creek, North Carolina
Highway 801, Fulton Creek and back to
Yadkin River in the Triad Area as
Moderate nonattainment for the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS. Among the requirements
applicable to nonattainment areas for
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was the
requirement to meet certain volatility
standards (known as Reid Vapor
Pressure or RVP) for gasoline sold
commercially. See 55 FR 23658 (June
11, 1990). As discussed in greater detail
below, as part of the RVP requirements
associated with the nonattainment
designation, gasoline sold in the Triad
1-hour nonattainment area could not
2 In addition to a less stringent RVP standard, the
new modeling also utilizes updated models for onroad and off-road mobile emission sources.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Nov 25, 2013
Jkt 232001
exceed 7.8 psi RVP during the highozone season months.
Following implementation of the 7.8
psi RVP requirement in the Triad Area,
on September 9, 1993, the Triad Area
was redesignated to attainment for the
1-hour ozone NAAQS, based on 1989–
1992 ambient air quality monitoring
data. See 58 FR 47391. North Carolina’s
November 13, 1992, 1-hour ozone
redesignation request did not include a
request for the removal of the 7.8 psi
RVP standard. The requirements
remained in place for the Area when it
was designated nonattainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS that was
promulgated on July 18, 1997, and later
designated attainment for the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS that was
promulgated March 12, 2008. See 77 FR
30088, May 21, 2012.
On April 30, 2004, EPA designated
and classified areas for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS (69 FR 23857)
unclassifiable/attainment or
nonattainment for the new 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. The Triad Area was designated
as nonattainment with a deferred
effective date as part of the Early Action
Compact (EAC) 3 program. (For more
information on the EAC program, see,
https://www.epa.gov/airquality/eac/
fs20080331_eac.html.) The GreensboroWinston Salem-High Point
nonattainment-deferred EAC Area for
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
expanded the Triad Area to include the
entire county of Davie, and Alamance,
Caswell, Randolph, and Rockingham
Counties in their entirety. The
Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point
EAC Area attained the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS with a design value of
0.083 parts per million (ppm) using
three years of quality assured data for
the years of 2005–2007. On February 6,
2008, EPA proposed that 13
nonattainment areas with deferred
effective dates, including the
Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point
Area, be designated attainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 73 FR
6863. These areas met all of the
milestones of the EAC program and
demonstrated that they were in
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS as of December 31, 2007. This
rulemaking was finalized on April 2,
2008. See 73 FR 17897. Effective April
15, 2008, the Greensboro-Winston
Salem-High Point EAC Area was
designated as attainment for the 1997 83 An EAC is an agreement between a State, local
governments and EPA to implement measures not
necessarily required by the Act in order to achieve
cleaner air as soon as possible. The program was
designed for areas that approach or monitor
exceedances of the 8-hour ozone standard, but are
in attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
hour ozone NAAQS. However, these
attainment areas consequently were
required to submit a 10-year
maintenance plan under section
110(a)(1) of the CAA. As required, these
plans provide for continued attainment
and maintenance of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years from
the effective date of these areas’
designation as attainment for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. These plans also
include components illustrating how
each area will continue to attain the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and
provided contingency measures.
III. What is the history of the gasoline
volatility requirement?
On August 19, 1987 (52 FR 31274),
EPA determined that gasoline
nationwide had become increasingly
volatile, causing an increase in
evaporative emissions from gasolinepowered vehicles and equipment.
Evaporative emissions from gasoline,
referred to as volatile organic
compounds (VOC), are precursors to the
formation of tropospheric ozone and
contribute to the nation’s ground-level
ozone problem. Exposure to groundlevel ozone can reduce lung function
(thereby aggravating asthma or other
respiratory conditions), increase
susceptibility to respiratory infection,
and may contribute to premature death
in people with heart and lung disease.
The most common measure of fuel
volatility that is useful in evaluating
gasoline evaporative emissions is RVP.
Under section 211(c) of CAA, EPA
promulgated regulations on March 22,
1989 (54 FR 11868), that set maximum
limits for the RVP of gasoline sold
during the high ozone season. These
regulations constituted Phase I of a twophase nationwide program, which was
designed to reduce the volatility of
commercial gasoline during the summer
ozone control season. On June 11, 1990
(55 FR 23658), EPA promulgated more
stringent volatility controls as Phase II
of the volatility control program. These
requirements established maximum
RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8 psi
(depending on the State, the month, and
the area’s initial ozone attainment
designation with respect to the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS during the high ozone
season).
The 1990 CAA Amendments
established a new section, 211(h), to
address fuel volatility. Section 211(h)
requires EPA to promulgate regulations
making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale,
dispense, supply, offer for supply,
transport, or introduce into commerce
gasoline with an RVP level in excess of
9.0 psi during the high ozone season.
Section 211(h) prohibits EPA from
E:\FR\FM\26NOP1.SGM
26NOP1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules
establishing a volatility standard more
stringent than 9.0 psi in an attainment
area, except that EPA may impose a
lower (more stringent) standard in any
former ozone nonattainment area
redesignated to attainment.
On December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704),
EPA modified the Phase II volatility
regulations to be consistent with section
211(h) of the CAA. The modified
regulations prohibited the sale of
gasoline with an RVP above 9.0 psi in
all areas designated attainment for
ozone, beginning in 1992. For areas
designated as nonattainment, the
regulations retained the original Phase II
standards published on June 11, 1990
(55 FR 23658).
As stated in the preamble to the Phase
II volatility controls and reiterated in
the proposed change to the volatility
standards published in 1991, EPA will
rely on states to initiate changes to
EPA’s volatility program that they
believe will enhance local air quality
and/or increase the economic efficiency
of the program within the statutory
limits.4 In those rulemakings, EPA
explained that the governor of a state
may petition EPA to set a volatility
standard less stringent than 7.8 psi for
some month or months in a
nonattainment area. The petition must
demonstrate such a change is
appropriate because of a particular local
economic impact and that sufficient
alternative programs are available to
achieve attainment and maintenance of
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. A current
listing of the RVP requirements for
states can be found on EPA’s Web site
at: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/
gasolinefuels/volatility/standards.htm.
As explained in the December 12,
1991 (56 FR 64704), Phase II
rulemaking, EPA believes that
relaxation of an applicable RVP
standard is best accomplished in
conjunction with the redesignation
process. In order for an ozone
nonattainment area to be redesignated
as an attainment area, section 107(d)(3)
of the Act requires the state to make a
showing, pursuant to section 175A of
the Act, that the area is capable of
maintaining attainment for the ozone
NAAQS for ten years after
redesignation. Depending on the area’s
circumstances, this maintenance plan
will either demonstrate that the area is
capable of maintaining attainment for
ten years without the more stringent
volatility standard or that the more
stringent volatility standard may be
necessary for the area to maintain its
attainment with the ozone NAAQS.
4 See
55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990), 56 FR 24242
(May 29, 1991) and 56 FR 64704 (Dec. 12, 1991).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Nov 25, 2013
Jkt 232001
Therefore, in the context of a request for
redesignation, EPA will not relax the
volatility standard unless the state
requests a relaxation and the
maintenance plan demonstrates, to the
satisfaction of EPA, that the area will
maintain attainment for ten years
without the need for the more stringent
volatility standard. As noted above,
however, North Carolina did not request
relaxation of the applicable 7.8 psi RVP
standard when the Triad Area was
redesignated to attainment for the either
the 1-hour or the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. Rather, North Carolina is now
seeking to relax the 7.8 psi RVP
standard after the Triad Area has been
redesignated to attainment for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. Accordingly, the
original modeling and maintenance
demonstration supporting the 1997 8hour ozone maintenance plan must be
revised to reflect continued attainment
under the relaxed 9.0 psi RVP standard
that the State has requested.
IV. What are the section 110(l)
requirements?
Section 110(l) requires that a revision
to the SIP not interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further
progress (RFP) (as defined in section
171), or any other applicable
requirement of the Act. EPA’s criterion
for determining the approvability of
North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP
revision is whether this requested action
complies with section 110(l) of the
CAA. Because the modeling associated
with the current maintenance plan for
North Carolina is premised in part upon
the 7.8 psi RVP requirements, a request
to revise the maintenance plan
modeling to no longer rely on the 7.8 psi
RVP requirement is subject to the
requirements of CAA section 110(l).
Therefore, the State must demonstrate
that this revision will not interfere with
the attainment or maintenance of any of
the NAAQS or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA.
This section 110(l) non-interference
demonstration is a case-by-case
determination based upon the
circumstances of each SIP revision. EPA
interprets 110(l) as applying to all
NAAQS that are in effect, including
those that have been promulgated but
for which the EPA has not yet made
designations. The specific elements of
the 110(l) analysis contained in the SIP
revision depend on the circumstances
and emissions analyses associated with
that revision. EPA’s analysis of North
Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP revision,
including review of section 110(l)
requirements is provided below.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70519
Finally, EPA notes that this
rulemaking is only proposing to approve
the State’s revision to its existing
maintenance plan for the Triad Area
showing that the area can continue to
maintain the standard without relying
upon gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi
being sold in the Triad Area during the
high ozone season. Consistent with CAA
section 211(h) and the Phase II volatility
regulations a separate rulemaking is
required for relaxation of the current
requirement to use gasoline with an
RVP of 7.8 psi in the Triad Area.
V. What is EPA’s analysis of North
Carolina’s submittal?
a. Overall Preliminary Conclusions for
Non-Interference Analyses for North
Carolina’s Request for Removal of the
Federal RVP Requirement
On April 12, 2013, NC DENR
submitted a revision to the maintenance
plan for the Triad 1-hour ozone
maintenance area. The revision updates
the on-road mobile, non-road mobile,
and area source emissions that would
result from modifying the RVP
summertime gasoline requirement from
7.8 psi to 9.0 psi for the Triad Area.
North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP
revision also includes an evaluation of
the impact that the removal of the 7.8
psi RVP requirement would have on
maintenance of the 1997 and 2008
ozone standards and on other applicable
NAAQS. For the purposes of this
change, EPA is making the preliminary
determination that the applicable
NAAQS 5 of interest for the noninterference demonstration required by
section 110(l) of the CAA are the carbon
monoxide (CO), ozone, particulate
matter (PM) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
standards.
VOC and NOX emissions are
precursors for ozone and PM, and NO2
is a component of NOX. In addition,
EPA also believes that, in this instance,
it is appropriate to also evaluate noninterference with respect to the CO
NAAQS. Typically, EPA would not
expect the CO NAAQS to be affected by
a revision to RVP requirements because
VOC and NOX are not precursors to CO.
The revised modeling submitted by
North Carolina, however, demonstrates
a slight increase in CO emissions, and
as such, EPA believes a non-interference
review for CO is also appropriate in this
case.
There are no emissions reductions
attributable to the emissions of lead and
sulfur dioxide (SO2) from RVP
requirements. As a result, there is no
5 The six NAAQS for which EPA establishes
health and welfare based standards are carbon
monoxide, lead, NO2, ozone, PM, and SO2.
E:\FR\FM\26NOP1.SGM
26NOP1
70520
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules
information indicating the proposed
revision would have any impact on
those NAAQS. Additionally, the Triad
Area is currently designated attainment
for the lead NAAQS, and is continuing
to attain the standard. As for the SO2
NAAQS, the Triad Area is not
designated nonattainment and there is
no available monitoring data indicating
an exceedance of the NAAQS.
Therefore, the analysis below focuses on
the impact of North Carolina’s requested
RVP change to the ozone, particulate
matter, NO2 and CO NAAQS.
In North Carolina’s April 12, 2013,
SIP revision, the State provided a
technical demonstration to support the
request to modify the RVP summertime
gasoline requirement from 7.8 psi to 9.0
psi for the Triad Area. NC DENR
provided information regarding the
emissions trends from the maintenance
plans for the ozone NAAQS and
conducted a photochemical modeling
exercise to show that modifying the RVP
summertime gasoline requirement from
7.8 psi to 9.0 psi would have no impact
on the ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS.6
In the April 12, 2013, SIP revision, NC
DENR provided an updated analysis
utilizing EPA’s MOVES emission
modeling system to estimate emissions
for mobile sources. These mobile source
emissions are used as part of the
evaluation of the potential impacts to
the ozone NAAQS that might result
exclusively from changing the high
ozone season RVP requirements from
7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. The MOVES data
resulted in minor increases to the onroad mobile and area source emissions.
The State then used the MOVESgenerated revised mobile source
emissions in the Triad Area that
resulted from the RVP program change
in photochemical grid modeling to
simulate the impact on ozone formation.
In addition to modeling the small RVP
changes over the Triad Area, NC DENR
also modeled the shutdown of three
coal-fired electric generating units
(EGUs) (Buck, Dan River, and
Riverbend), that were located in
counties adjacent to the Triad Area.
Combined-cycle natural gas units have
been built at two of these facilities
(Buck and Dan River) replacing the now
decommissioned coal-fired units. The
federally-enforceable emission limits
associated with these new combinedcycle units were included with the
modeling conducted by NC DENR. The
modeling shows that relaxation of the
RVP standard to 9.0 psi would not
interfere with continued maintenance of
the ozone NAAQS in the Triad Area.
b. Non-Interference Analysis for the
Ozone NAAQS
As previously discussed, effective
November 6, 1991, the Triad Area
(which consisted of Davidson, Forsyth
and Guilford Counties in their entirety
and a portion of Davie County) was
designated as nonattainment for the 1hour ozone NAAQS. As a 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area, Davidson, Davie,
Forsyth and Guilford Counties were
subject to the federal RVP requirements
for high ozone season gasoline to aid the
Area with compliance with the ozone
NAAQS. On November 13, 1992, NC
DENR submitted a redesignation request
and maintenance plan for the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS.
On February 6, 2008, EPA proposed
that 13 nonattainment areas with
deferred effective dates, including the
Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point
Area, be designated attainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 73 FR
6863. These areas met all of the
milestones of the EAC program and
demonstrated that they were in
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS as of December 31, 2007.
Effective April 15, 2008, the
Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point
EAC Area was designated as attainment
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS with
a design value of 0.083 ppm using three
years of quality assured data for the
years of 2005–2007.
Throughout this history, there is an
overall downward trend in ozone
concentration in the Triad Area that can
be attributed to Federal and State
programs that have led to significant
emissions reductions. The Triad Area is
continuing to meet the 1-hour and 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS.7 With respect to
the 2008 ozone NAAQS, based on the
2010–2012 design values of 0.078 ppm
and 0.076 ppm, Triad Area monitors in
Forsyth and Guilford Counties,
respectively, are violating the 2008
ozone NAAQS. However, the
preliminary 2011–2013 design values
for Forsyth and Guilford Counties are
0.073 ppm and 0.072 ppm, respectively.
The 2008 ozone NAAQS is met when
the annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average concentration,
averaged over 3 years is 0.075 ppm or
less. Currently (as shown in Table 1), all
ozone monitors in the Triad Area are
attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, and all but three ozone
monitors (two located in Forsyth County
and one located in Guilford County) are
attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
TABLE 1—TRIAD AREA DESIGN VALUE
2005–2007 DV
(ppm)
County
2006–2008 DV
(ppm)
2007–2009 DV
(ppm)
2008–2010 DV
(ppm)
2009–2011 DV
(ppm)
2010–2012 DV
(ppm)
0.077
0.083
0.081
0.082
0.078
0.079
0.082
0.081
0.082
0.080
0.076
0.078
0.077
0.079
0.078
0.073
(8)
0.076
0.076
0.075
0.070
........................
0.075
0.074
0.071
0.073
0.073
0.078
0.076
0.073
Caswell .....................................................
Davie ........................................................
Forsyth .....................................................
Guilford .....................................................
Rockingham .............................................
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
------- indicates no data available.
On October 22, 2013, NC DENR
submitted a letter to EPA describing its
intention to early certify ozone
monitoring data for the Triad Area
based on 2011–2013 data. Once
certified, this data is expected to
demonstrate that all monitors in the
Triad Area are attaining the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS based on 2011–2013
data. EPA is proposing this action
contingent on the 2011–2013
monitoring data, showing continued
attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS,
being quality assured and certified prior
6 In addition there was not a significant increase
in CO and NO2 emissions. See the non-interference
discussions below for more details.
7 The air quality design value for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS is the 3-year average of the annual
4th highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone
concentration. The level of the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS is 0.075 ppm. The 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS is not met when the design value is greater
than 0.075 ppm.
8 The Davie County monitor was moved to a new
location and began monitoring at the new location
in 2008. There was not enough data at this location
to calculate a 3 year averaged design value until
2012.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Nov 25, 2013
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\26NOP1.SGM
26NOP1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules
70521
to the Agency taking final action on this
proposed rule.
The primary precursors for ozone are
VOC and NOX emissions. Relaxation of
the RVP standard from 7.8 to 9.0 psi
results in a slight increase in emissions
of 0.16 tons per day (tpd) (a 0.28 percent
increase) in NOX, and 1.43 tpd (a 1.34
percent increase) in VOC for Davidson,
Forsyth, Guilford and Davie Counties.
While modeling showed a slight
increase in NOX and VOC emissions
resulting from the use of 9.0 psi RVP
gasoline as opposed to 7.8 psi RVP
gasoline, the most appropriate analysis
for purposes of evaluating noninterference is whether the increase in
emissions would interfere with air
quality for the Triad Area. For this
demonstration, NC DENR chose to use
photochemical modeling which is
described below.
In addition to analyzing the
photochemical modeling provided by
North Carolina, EPA also notes that the
Triad Area is located within a NOXlimited region.9 A NOX-limited region is
one in which the concentration of ozone
is limited by the amount of NOX
emissions. As discussed above, NOX
and VOC are precursors to the formation
of ozone in the atmosphere. In a NOXlimited area, high prevailing
concentrations of VOC from naturallyoccurring sources are present in the
atmosphere to contribute to ozone
formation. Consequently, reduction of
manmade, or anthropogenic, sources of
VOC emissions generally do not result
in reduced ozone formation. Instead,
reductions of NOX emissions provide a
more effective ozone reduction strategy
because reduced emissions of manmade
NOX emissions limit the amount of NOX
available in the atmosphere for ozone
formation. These circumstances help
support the reasonableness of the
modeling showing that the small
increase in VOC and even smaller
increase in NOX from the relaxation of
the RVP standard would not interfere
with continued maintenance of the
ozone NAAQS in the Triad Area.
NC DENR utilized EPA’s Mercury and
Air Toxics (MATS) modeling platform
to model changes in ozone and particle
matter pollution. The modeling years
used in the modeling included the 2005
base year and the 2016 future year. The
future year 2016 was chosen because it
is the latest MATS model data available.
The USEPA MATS modeling platform
was chosen because it is fairly recent,
has undergone full model performance,
and uses the MOVES mobile model to
generate on-road mobile emissions. The
USEPA MATS modeling used a national
36 kilometer (km) domain and an
eastern US 12 km domain. The NC
DENR modeling was performed using
the 12 km modeling domain. The EPA
is currently using 12 km modeling to
address the impacts of the proposed
Tier 3 Motor Vehicle and Emissions
Standards. Given that the EPA is using
the 12 km modeling for Tier 3, NC
DENR used the 12 km modeling to
estimate the impacts of the change in
summertime RVP to 9.0 psi.
The USEPA MATS modeling
conducted by NC DENR demonstrates
that the relaxation of the RVP 7.8
standard to 9.0 psi in the Triad 1-hour
ozone maintenance area is not necessary
to maintain the either the 1997 or 2008
ozone NAAQS. Both the 2005 base year
and the 2016 future year were used in
the modeling. In the modeling NC DENR
applied several conservative estimates
to determine the maximum impact of
RVP relaxation. These included:
(1) Selecting the most populous
county to represent on-road mobile
emissions for the other counties.
Guilford County was selected to
represent the ‘‘highest’’ level of
emissions increase expected because it
has the greatest population of vehicles
and vehicle miles traveled (VMT)
within the Triad maintenance area.
(2) Applying the maximum emissions
increase for a given hour to the entire
summertime period. Typically, the next
step is to run SMOKE 10 to temporally
and spatially allocate the MOVES
output. However, NC DENR was unable
to run the version of SMOKE used in the
MATS modeling. As an alternative, for
each pollutant, the average and
maximum increase at any hour was
calculated (see Table 2.3–8 of the NC
submittal). In order to generate very
conservative estimates of the impacts of
the RVP relaxation, the maximum
percent increase was applied to the
mobile emissions for all hours of the
June 1 to September 15 high-ozone
season RVP period for both the 2005
and 2016 emissions in Guilford,
Forsyth, Davie, and Davidson Counties
where the RVP relaxation is proposed.
(3) Using the highest emissions
increase for a given pollutant to
represent VOC emissions.
(4) The liberal application of grid
masking (i.e., the array of grid cells
where the RVP emissions changes were
applied). A grid cell was included in the
grid cell mask if as little as 20 percent
of the cell area includes one or more of
the counties where the RVP relaxation
is proposed. The grid cell mask includes
42 grid cells with an area of 6,048 km2.
A typical application of the mask would
include 32 grid cells with an area of
4,608 km2. By comparison, the total area
of the four counties is 4,935 km2. The
20 percent threshold grid cell mask used
in the modeling will adjust the mobile
emissions in a larger area than the
actual area of the four counties and will
lead to conservative modeling results.
NC DENR used the Community
Multiscale Air Quality Modeling System
(CMAQ, v.4.71) to perform the air
quality runs. A total of six runs were
made from March 20, 2005 to September
30, 2005. A total of three runs were
made using the 2005 emissions. The
first run used the default 2005 MATS
emissions (BASE05). The second run
adjusted the mobile emissions due to
the change in RVP from 7.8 psi to 9.0
psi during the June 1 to September 15
RVP period (RVP05). The third run for
2005 included the RVP adjustments and
added expected NOX changes at the
Buck, Dan River, Riverbend power
plants. The 2016 model runs were run
in a similar fashion as the 2005 runs.
The first run used the default 2016
MATS emissions (BASE16). The second
run adjusted the mobile emissions due
to the change in RVP from 7.8 to 9.0 psi
during the June 1 to September 15 RVP
period (RVP16) and the third included
the RVP adjustments and added
expected NOX changes at the Buck, Dan
River, Riverbend power plants.
In this application, The Model
Attainment Test Software was used to
compute relative reduction factors
(RRFs) for each of the sensitivity runs at
the area monitors. The 2005 sensitivity
runs were compared to the Base05 run,
and the 2016 sensitivity runs were
compared to the Base16 run. RRF values
of 1.0005 or less would indicate less
than a 0.05 ppb rise within the base year
or future year modeling. The change in
ozone for monitors in and near the Triad
Area generated by the change in RVP in
the 2005 base year is shown in Table 2.
The other runs had similar results.
There is no appreciable change in ozone
concentrations due to the increase in
gasoline RVP.
See North Carolina’s April 12, 2013,
submittal for more information on the
modeling demonstration.
9 See, e.g., The State of the Southern Oxidants
Study (SOS) Policy Relevant Findings in Ozone and
PM2.5 Pollution Research 1995–2003 (June 30,
2004), https://www.ncsu.edu/sos/pubs/sos3/State_
of_SOS_3.pdf.
10 SMOKE, or ‘‘Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel
Emissions’’ is an emissions processing system
designed to create gridded, speciated, hourly
emissions for input into a variety of air quality
models. SMOKE supports area, biogenic, mobile
(both onroad and nonroad), and point source
emissions processing for criteria, particulate, and
toxic pollutants and is integrated with the on-road
emissions model MOBILE6 and MOVES.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Nov 25, 2013
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\26NOP1.SGM
26NOP1
70522
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—CHANGE IN OZONE CONCENTRATIONS AND RRFS IN THE 2005 BASE YEAR MODELING WITH SUMMERTIME RVP
CHANGE TO 9.0 PSI
County
Base05 ozone
design value 1
(ppb)
County
RVP05 Ozone
design value 2
(ppb)
76.3
81.3
78.0
73.0
76.0
80.0
77.0
82.0
77.0
76.3
81.3
78.0
73.0
76.0
80.0
77.0
82.0
77.0
Caswell ............................................................................................................
Davie ................................................................................................................
Forsyth .............................................................................................................
Forsyth .............................................................................................................
Forsyth .............................................................................................................
Forsyth .............................................................................................................
Guilford ............................................................................................................
Guilford ............................................................................................................
Rockingham .....................................................................................................
RRF
Change from
Base05 to
RVP05
(ppb)
1.0002
1.0002
1.0004
1.0003
1.0004
1.0004
1.0005
1.0005
1.0003
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1 Default
2 2005
2005 MATS concentrations.
concentrations with summertime RVP changed to 9.0 psi.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
It should also be noted that in its
submission, North Carolina provided a
demonstration that there is no
appreciable change in future ozone
design value concentrations at any of
the area monitors when comparing
changes in ozone concentration and
RRFs in a future year scenario for 2016
that modeled summertime RVP at 9.0
psi. North Carolina’s model runs were
done solely for the purpose of
determining potential and relative
impact for changes in ozone
concentration due to a change of RVP to
9.0 psi. More information on the MATS
modeling can be found at https://
www.epa.gov/mats/actions.html.
Additional details on NC DENR’s
updates to the EPA MATS modeling
platform to incorporate emissions in
North Carolina are included in the
State’s April 12, 2013, SIP revision.
To provide a full evaluation, the State
also compared total man-made
(anthropogenic) emissions of VOC and
NOX for the years 2007 (base year),
2011, and 2018 using a RVP of 7.8 psi
for Davidson, Forsyth, Guilford and
Davie Counties (the remaining Counties
are currently using a RVP of 9.0 psi) to
emissions generated for the year 2018,
using a RVP of 9.0 psi.
There are four different man-made
emission inventory source
classifications: (1) Point, (2) area, (3) onroad mobile and (4) non-road mobile.
(1) Point sources are those stationary
sources that emit more than 10 tons per
year of VOC or 100 tons per year of
NOZX from a single facility. The source
emissions are tabulated from data
collected by direct on-site
measurements of emissions or mass
balance calculations utilizing emission
factors from EPA’s AP–42, Compilation
of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. For
the projected year’s inventory, point
sources are adjusted by growth factors
based on Standard Industrial
Classification codes. The growth factors
are generated using the EPA’s Economic
Growth Analysis System version 5.0
(E–GAS 5.0) program.
(2) Area sources are those stationary
sources whose emissions are relatively
small but due to the large number of
these sources, the collective emissions
could be significant (i.e., dry cleaners,
service stations, etc.). For area sources,
emissions are estimated by multiplying
an emission factor by some known
indicator of collective activity such as
production, number of employees, or
population. These types of emissions
are estimated on the county level. For
the projected year’s inventory, area
source emissions are changed by
population growth, projected
production growth, or when applicable,
by E–GAS 5.0 growth factors.
(3) On-road mobile sources are those
vehicles that travel on the roadways. For
on-road mobile sources, the MOVES
model data represent the new motor
vehicle emission budgets for the Triad
Area. The MOVES model uses the road
class VMT and other operating
conditions as input parameters to
generate an output file that contains
estimated emissions. For the projected
years inventories, the on-road mobile
sources emissions are calculated by
running the MOVES mobile model for
the future year with the projected VMT
to generate emissions that take into
consideration expected Federal tailpipe
standards, fleet turnover and new fuel
standards.
(4) Non-road mobile sources are
equipment that can move but do not use
the roadways (i.e., lawn mowers,
construction equipment, railroad
locomotives, aircraft). With the
exception of the railroad locomotives
and aircraft engines, the emissions from
this category are calculated using the
EPA’s NONROAD2008a non-road
mobile model. The railroad locomotive
and aircraft engine emissions are
estimated by taking an activity and
multiply by an emission factor. All
emissions are also estimated at the
county level. Total off-road mobile
source emissions represent the sum of
emissions generated by the NONROAD
2008a model and emissions calculated
for aircraft and railroad locomotives.
Despite the small increases in
emissions projected for the lessstringent RVP standard of 9.0 psi, the
Triad Area continues to demonstrate a
downward trend in NOX and VOC
emissions through 2018. Tables 3 and 4
below provide the emissions inventory
estimates for all source categories for the
1-hour ozone maintenance area.
TABLE 3—ANTHROPOGENIC VOC EMISSIONS (tpd) FOR THE TRIAD 1-HOUR MAINTENANCE AREA
Based on RVP of 7.8
Based on RVP
of 9.0
County
2007
Davidson ..........................................................................................................
Davie * ..............................................................................................................
Forsyth .............................................................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Nov 25, 2013
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2011
19.31
8.04
36.62
E:\FR\FM\26NOP1.SGM
2018
17.60
7.79
32.63
26NOP1
14.29
8.43
32.69
2018
14.50
8.43
33.18
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules
70523
TABLE 3—ANTHROPOGENIC VOC EMISSIONS (tpd) FOR THE TRIAD 1-HOUR MAINTENANCE AREA—Continued
Based on RVP of 7.8
Based on RVP
of 9.0
County
2007
2011
2018
2018
Guilford ............................................................................................................
58.31
53.71
51.10
51.83
Total ..........................................................................................................
122.28
111.73
106.51
107.94
* Emissions are for the entire County.
TABLE 4—ANTHROPOGENIC NOX EMISSIONS (tpd) FOR THE TRIAD 1-HOUR MAINTENANCE AREA
Based on RVP of 7.8
Based on RVP
of 9.0
County
2007
2011
2018
2018
Davidson ..........................................................................................................
Davie * ..............................................................................................................
Forsyth .............................................................................................................
Guilford ............................................................................................................
21.99
6.08
35.88
57.68
17.94
4.41
24.47
44.76
9.88
2.75
16.50
28.00
9.91
2.75
16.54
28.09
Total ..........................................................................................................
121.63
91.58
57.13
57.29
* Emissions are for the entire County.
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
As Tables 3 and 4 indicate, NOX and
VOC emissions in the Triad 1-hour
ozone maintenance area will continue to
decrease, even with the increase in high
ozone season fuel RVP to 9.0 psi. The
slight increase in emissions resulting
from the control program change is
being mitigated area-wide by a steady
decrease in tailpipe emissions, which is
the result of a cleaner new vehicle fleet
replacing the older fleet and other
Federal and State emissions reduction
programs.
In light of the current designations,
monitoring and emissions data, and the
submitted modeling, including the fact
that the NOX emissions inventories are
projected to continue to significantly
decrease, EPA has preliminarily
determined that the slight increase in
NOX and VOC emissions associated
with the request RVP change will not
interfere with the Area’s ability to
maintain the 1997 and 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. More details on the
individual non-interference analyses for
the PM2.5, NO2 and CO NAAQS are
provided below.
c. Non-Interference Analysis for the PM
NAAQS
The precursors for PM2.5 are NOX,
SO2, VOC and ammonia. For the Triad
Area, on-road mobile, non-road mobile
and area sources are not considered to
be large contributors to directly emitted
PM2.5 or indirectly formed fine
particulate matter less than 2.5
micrometers (PM2.5) concentrations. As
mentioned earlier in this rulemaking,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Nov 25, 2013
Jkt 232001
the RVP requirements result in
emissions benefits for VOC and NOX,
and as such EPA focused on these
precursors for the analysis of the
potential impact of North Carolina’s SIP
change. However, as described in North
Carolina’s April 12, 2013, submission,
directly emitted PM2.5 is a very small
component of the overall PM2.5 ambient
concentrations. Instead the primary
species impacting PM2.5 concentrations
are the secondarily formed sulfates and
organic carbons. Sulfates are formed
through the chemical reaction of SO2
and ammonia and the majority of the
organic carbons come from natural
sources like trees. See ‘‘Redesignation
Demonstration and Maintenance Plan
for the Hickory (Catawba County) and
Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point
(Davidson and Guilford Counties) Fine
Particulate Matter Nonattainment
Areas,’’ submitted to EPA on December
18, 2009, Figure 4–2, p. 4–4, which can
be accessed at www.regulations.gov
using docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–
2009–1010. A 2009 analysis of SO2
emissions, which is a primary
contributor to the formation of PM2.5
within North Carolina, found about 3.3
percent of total SO2 emissions came
from on-road, non-road and area sources
combined, while the remaining 96.7
percent came from point sources.
On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 36852), EPA
established an annual PM2.5 NAAQS at
15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/
m3) based on a 3-year average of annual
mean PM2.5 concentrations. At that time,
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
EPA also established a 24-hour NAAQS
of 65 mg/m3. See 40 CFR 50.7. On
October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), EPA
retained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
at 15.0 mg/m3 based on a 3-year average
of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations,
and promulgated a new 24-hour
NAAQS of 35 mg/m3 based on a 3-year
average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations. On January 15, 2013 (78
FR 3086), EPA established an annual
primary PM2.5 NAAQS at 12.0 mg/m3
based on a 3-year average of annual
mean PM2.5 concentrations. At that time,
EPA retained the 2006 24-hour NAAQS
at 35 mg/m3 based on a 3-year average
of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations.
On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944),
Davidson and Guilford Counties in the
Triad Area were designated
nonattainment for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard and all other Counties
were designated Unclassifiable/
Attainment. On November 13, 2009 (74
FR 58688), all counties in the Triad
Area were designated unclassifiable/
attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standard. On November 18, 2011, EPA
redesignated Davidson and Guilford
Counties to attainment for the 1997
annual PM2.5 standard based on the
measured air quality data and the 10year maintenance plan submitted. See
76 FR 71455.
As Table 5 indicates the PM2.5 annual
and 24-hour design values demonstrate
attainment of the respective NAAQS
and have been decreasing.
E:\FR\FM\26NOP1.SGM
26NOP1
70524
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5—PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES
Year
2008–2010
2009–2011
2010–2012
Annual Design Value
Caswell ........................................................................................................................................
Davidson ......................................................................................................................................
Forsyth .........................................................................................................................................
Guilford ........................................................................................................................................
9.9
12.1
10.9
10.8
8.9
11.1
10.0
9.8
8.9
11.1
9.7
9.4
19
23
23
22
18
21
21
21
18
21
20
21
24-hour Design Value
Caswell ........................................................................................................................................
Davidson ......................................................................................................................................
Forsyth .........................................................................................................................................
Guilford ........................................................................................................................................
EPA Annual PM2.5 NAAQS: 15 μg/m3.
EPA 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS: 35 μg/m3.
In light of the slight increase in VOC
and NOX emissions from the relaxation
of the RVP controls in Davidson, Davie,
Forsyth and Guilford Counties, EPA has
preliminarily determined that a change
to the Federal RVP requirement for
Davidson, Davie, Forsyth and Guilford
Counties would not interfere with the
Triad Area maintaining the 1997 PM2.5
annual or the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
standards. The photochemical modeling
analysis discussed above was also used
to calculate the changes in PM2.5 due to
the RVP Program change. The analysis
showed no change in particle pollution
at any of the monitors.
d. Non-Interference Analysis for the
2010 NO2 NAAQS
On February 17, 2012 (77 FR 9532),
EPA finalized designations for 2010 NO2
NAAQS. Counties in North Carolina,
including those in the Triad Area, were
designated unclassifiable/attainment for
the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. Based on North
Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP revision,
the potential increase in the NOX
emissions associated with the requested
less-stringent RVP standard is
approximately a quarter of a ton per day
between June 1st and September 15th. It
is reasonable to believe that North
Carolina’s requested change for its high
ozone season RVP requirement would
not cause the Area to be out of
compliance with the 2010 NO2 NAAQS
because the slight projected NOX
emissions increase would be mitigated
by a steady decrease in tailpipe
emissions, which is the result of cleaner
new vehicle fleet replacing the older
fleet. In light of the current designation,
monitoring and emissions trend data
and the submitted modeling, including
the fact that NOX emissions inventories
are projected to continue to significantly
decrease,11 EPA has preliminarily
determined that a change to the Federal
RVP requirements for the Triad Area
would not interfere with the continued
decline in NOX emissions, nor with
attainment or maintenance of the 2010
NO2 NAAQS.
e. Non-Interference Analysis for the CO
NAAQS
Forsyth County in the Triad Area was
previously designated nonattainment for
the 8-hour CO NAAQS. See 56 FR
56694, November 6, 1991.
Subsequently, Forsyth County attained
the 8-hour CO NAAQS and was
redesignated from nonattainment to
attainment on September 21, 1994,
based on the measured air quality data
and the 10-year maintenance plan
submitted. See 59 FR 48399. The 8-hour
CO NAAQS is 9 ppm and the 1-hour CO
NAAQS is 35 ppm. As provided in
Table 6 below, monitoring data from
2008–2011 shows Forsyth County is
well below the 8-hour and 1-hour CO
NAAQS.
TABLE 6—AMBIENT AIR QUALITY CO 8-HOUR AND 1-HOUR DESIGN VALUES (PPM)
County
Monitor ID
2009
2010
2011
2012
8-hr NAAQS
Forsyth .................................................................................
370670023
1.7
1.9
2.1
1.2
2.3
2.7
2.6
1.8
1-hr NAAQS
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Forsyth .................................................................................
It is estimated that Triad Area on-road
CO emissions will increase
approximately 5 tons per day in 2016 if
the applicable RVP requirement is
relaxed to 9.0 psi in the Triad Area. This
increase equates to a less than a 1.0
percent increase in the total inventory of
all anthropogenic sources for the Triad
Area. In light of the slight increase in
11 See
370670023
CO emissions EPA has preliminarily
determined that a change to the Federal
RVP requirement for Greensboro/
Winston-Salem/High Point would not
interfere with the Winston-Salem/
Forsyth County Area maintaining the
CO NAAQS.
VI. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the State
of North Carolina’s April 12, 2013,
revision to its 110(a)(1) Maintenance
Plan for the Triad 1997 8-hour Ozone
Maintenance Area. Specifically, EPA is
proposing to approve the State’s
showing that the Triad Area can
continue to maintain the 1997 ozone
table 5, above.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Nov 25, 2013
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\26NOP1.SGM
26NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
standard without emissions reductions
associated with the use of gasoline with
an RVP of 7.8 psi in the four Triad Area
counties during the high ozone season—
June 1 through September 15.
In addition, due to the updated
modeling reflecting a change in the
applicable RVP standard, the North
Carolina revision also includes an
updated on-road mobile, non-road
mobile and area source emissions for
the Triad Area. EPA is also proposing
approval of this revision.
EPA has preliminarily determined
that North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP
revision, including the technical
demonstration associated with the
State’s request for the removal of the
Federal RVP requirements, and the
updated on-road mobile, non-road
mobile and area source emissions are
consistent with the applicable
provisions of the CAA. Should EPA
decide to remove subject portions of the
Triad Area from those areas subject to
the 7.8 psi Federal RVP requirements,
such action will occur in a separate,
subsequent rulemaking.
• 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 proposed 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submittal 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 proposed
action merely approves state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive 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, October 7,
1999);
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:52 Nov 25, 2013
Jkt 232001
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Lead, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 12, 2013.
Beverly H. Banister,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2013–28371 Filed 11–25–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2013–0120;
4500030113]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Initiation of Status Review
of Arctic Grayling in the Upper
Missouri River System
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of initiation of status
review.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), under the
authority of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (Act), announce
the initiation of a status review of the
Arctic grayling (Thymallus arcticus)
upper Missouri River system distinct
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70525
population segment (DPS). We conduct
status reviews to determine whether the
entity meets the definition of an
endangered or threatened species under
the Act. Following this status review,
we will issue a proposed listing rule or
a not warranted finding for the Arctic
grayling upper Missouri River system
DPS. Through this document, we
encourage all interested parties to
provide us information regarding the
Arctic grayling in the upper Missouri
River basin.
DATES: To allow us adequate time to
conduct this review, we request that we
receive information no later than
December 26, 2013. Information
submitted electronically using the
Federal eRulemaking Portal (see
ADDRESSES section, below) must be
received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on
the closing date. After December 26,
2013, you must submit information
using the U.S. mail or hand-delivery
option provided in the ADDRESSES
section below. Please note that we may
not be able to address or incorporate
information that we receive after the
above requested date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit
information by one of the following
methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter FWS–R6–ES–2013–0120, which is
the docket number for this rulemaking.
Then, in the Search panel on the left
side of the screen, under the Document
Type heading, click on the Proposed
Rules link to locate this document. You
may submit a comment by clicking on
‘‘Comment Now!’’
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
or hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–R6–ES–2013–
0120; Division of Policy and Directives
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS
2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We request that you send information
only by the methods described above.
We will post all submissions on
https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us
(see the Request for Information section
below for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jodi
Bush, Field Supervisor, Montana Field
Office, 585 Shepard Way, Suite 1,
Helena, MT 59601; telephone (406) 449–
5225, extension 205. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), please call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
1–800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\26NOP1.SGM
26NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 228 (Tuesday, November 26, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70516-70525]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28371]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0562; FRL-9903-16-Region 4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North
Carolina: Non-Interference Demonstration for Removal of Federal Low-
Reid Vapor Pressure Requirement for the Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High
Point Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve the State of North Carolina's
April 12, 2013, State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision associated
with the currently approved maintenance plan addressing the 1997 8-hour
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for the Greensboro/
Winston-Salem/High Point (Triad) Area. Specifically, North Carolina's
revision, including updated modeling, shows that the Triad Area would
continue to maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard if the currently
applicable Federal Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) standard for gasoline of
7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) were modified to 9.0 psi for four
portions (Davidson, Forsyth, Guilford and Davie Counties) of the
``Triad Area'' during the high-ozone season. The State has included a
technical demonstration with the revision to demonstrate that a
[[Page 70517]]
less-stringent RVP standard of 9.0 psi in these portions of this area
would not interfere with continued maintenance of the 1997 8-hour Ozone
NAAQS or any other applicable standard. Approval of this SIP revision
is a prerequisite for EPA's consideration of an amendment to the
regulations to remove the aforementioned portions of the Triad Area
from the list of areas that are currently subject to the Federal 7.8
psi RVP requirements. In addition, the revised on-road mobile and non-
road mobile source emissions modeling associated with the requested
modification to the RVP standard results in the use of the updated
Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) and NONROAD2008 models which
are the most current versions of modeling systems available for these
sources. EPA has preliminarily determined that North Carolina's April
12, 2013, SIP revision with respect to the revisions to the modeling
and associated technical demonstration associated with the State's
request for the removal of the Federal RVP requirements, and with
respect to the updated on-road mobile, non-road mobile and area source
emissions, is consistent with the applicable provisions of the Clean
Air Act (CAA or Act). Should EPA decide to remove the subject portions
of the Triad Area from those areas subject to the 7.8 psi Federal RVP
requirements, such action will occur in a subsequent rulemaking.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before December 26,
2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R04-OAR-2013-0562 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-2013-0562, 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: Ms. 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 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2013-0562. 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 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 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman of the Regulatory
Development Section, in the Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr.
Lakeman may be reached by phone at (404) 562-9043, or via electronic
mail at lakeman.sean@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What is being proposed?
II. What is the background of the Triad Area?
III. What is the history of the gasoline volatility requirement?
IV. What are the section 110(l) requirements?
V. What is EPA's analysis of North Carolina's submittal?
VI. Proposed Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is being proposed?
The Triad Area in North Carolina is currently designated attainment
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Area was redesignated from
nonattainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on April 2, 2008. See 73
FR 17897. This rulemaking proposes to approve a revision to the Section
110(a)(1) Maintenance Plan for 1997 8-hour ozone standard for the Triad
Area submitted by the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (NC DENR). Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve
revisions to the maintenance plan, including updated modeling, that
show the Triad Area can continue to maintain the 1997 ozone standard
without reliance on emissions reductions based upon the use of gasoline
with an RVP of 7.8 psi in any of the Triad Area counties during the
high ozone season--June 1 through September 15.\1\ EPA is also
proposing to conclude that the new modeling demonstrates that the area
would continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard with the use of
gasoline with
[[Page 70518]]
an RVP of 9.0 psi throughout the Triad Area during the high ozone
season. Consistent with section 110(l) of the Act, EPA also proposes to
conclude that the use of gasoline with an RVP of 9.0 psi throughout the
Triad Area during the high ozone season would not interfere with other
applicable requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As discussed further below, a separate rulemaking is
required for relaxation of the current requirement to use gasoline
with an RVP of 7.8 psi in the Area. This action proposes EPA's
evaluation of the approvability of Florida's revision to the
maintenance plan pursuant to section 110(l). The decision regarding
removal of Federal RVP requirements pursuant to section 211(h) in
the Area includes other considerations evaluated at the discretion
of the Administrator. As such, the determination regarding whether
to remove the Area from those areas subject to the section 211(h)
requirements is made through a separate rule making action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The new modeling conducted by North Carolina to account for the
proposed relaxation of the applicable RVP standard in portions of the
Triad Area also results in changes to the on-road mobile, non-road
mobile and area source emissions associated with the maintenance
plan.\2\ As such, the North Carolina revision updates the on-road
mobile, non-road mobile and area source emissions for the Triad Area.
EPA is also proposing approval of this revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In addition to a less stringent RVP standard, the new
modeling also utilizes updated models for on-road and off-road
mobile emission sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This preamble is hereafter organized into five parts. Section II
provides the background of the Triad Area designation status with
respect to the various Ozone NAAQS. Section III describes the
applicable history of federal gasoline regulation. Section IV provides
the Agency's policy regarding relaxation of the volatility standards.
Section V provides EPA's analysis of the information submitted by North
Carolina to support a relaxation of the more stringent volatility
standard in the Triad Area and revisions to the on-road mobile, nonroad
mobile and area source emissions associated with Maintenance Plan for
the Triad Area and provides EPA's analysis regarding the proposed
revision.
II. What is the background of the Triad Area?
On November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694), EPA designated the Counties of
Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford in their entirety and the portion of
Davie County bounded by the Yadkin River, Dutchmans Creek, North
Carolina Highway 801, Fulton Creek and back to Yadkin River in the
Triad Area as Moderate nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. Among
the requirements applicable to nonattainment areas for the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS was the requirement to meet certain volatility standards (known
as Reid Vapor Pressure or RVP) for gasoline sold commercially. See 55
FR 23658 (June 11, 1990). As discussed in greater detail below, as part
of the RVP requirements associated with the nonattainment designation,
gasoline sold in the Triad 1-hour nonattainment area could not exceed
7.8 psi RVP during the high-ozone season months.
Following implementation of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement in the
Triad Area, on September 9, 1993, the Triad Area was redesignated to
attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, based on 1989-1992 ambient air
quality monitoring data. See 58 FR 47391. North Carolina's November 13,
1992, 1-hour ozone redesignation request did not include a request for
the removal of the 7.8 psi RVP standard. The requirements remained in
place for the Area when it was designated nonattainment for the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS that was promulgated on July 18, 1997, and later
designated attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS that was
promulgated March 12, 2008. See 77 FR 30088, May 21, 2012.
On April 30, 2004, EPA designated and classified areas for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS (69 FR 23857) unclassifiable/attainment or
nonattainment for the new 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Triad Area was
designated as nonattainment with a deferred effective date as part of
the Early Action Compact (EAC) \3\ program. (For more information on
the EAC program, see, https://www.epa.gov/airquality/eac/fs20080331_eac.html.) The Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point nonattainment-
deferred EAC Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS expanded the Triad
Area to include the entire county of Davie, and Alamance, Caswell,
Randolph, and Rockingham Counties in their entirety. The Greensboro-
Winston Salem-High Point EAC Area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
with a design value of 0.083 parts per million (ppm) using three years
of quality assured data for the years of 2005-2007. On February 6,
2008, EPA proposed that 13 nonattainment areas with deferred effective
dates, including the Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point Area, be
designated attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 73 FR 6863.
These areas met all of the milestones of the EAC program and
demonstrated that they were in attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS as of December 31, 2007. This rulemaking was finalized on April
2, 2008. See 73 FR 17897. Effective April 15, 2008, the Greensboro-
Winston Salem-High Point EAC Area was designated as attainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. However, these attainment areas consequently
were required to submit a 10-year maintenance plan under section
110(a)(1) of the CAA. As required, these plans provide for continued
attainment and maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least
10 years from the effective date of these areas' designation as
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These plans also include
components illustrating how each area will continue to attain the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS and provided contingency measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ An EAC is an agreement between a State, local governments
and EPA to implement measures not necessarily required by the Act in
order to achieve cleaner air as soon as possible. The program was
designed for areas that approach or monitor exceedances of the 8-
hour ozone standard, but are in attainment for the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. What is the history of the gasoline volatility requirement?
On August 19, 1987 (52 FR 31274), EPA determined that gasoline
nationwide had become increasingly volatile, causing an increase in
evaporative emissions from gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment.
Evaporative emissions from gasoline, referred to as volatile organic
compounds (VOC), are precursors to the formation of tropospheric ozone
and contribute to the nation's ground-level ozone problem. Exposure to
ground-level ozone can reduce lung function (thereby aggravating asthma
or other respiratory conditions), increase susceptibility to
respiratory infection, and may contribute to premature death in people
with heart and lung disease.
The most common measure of fuel volatility that is useful in
evaluating gasoline evaporative emissions is RVP. Under section 211(c)
of CAA, EPA promulgated regulations on March 22, 1989 (54 FR 11868),
that set maximum limits for the RVP of gasoline sold during the high
ozone season. These regulations constituted Phase I of a two-phase
nationwide program, which was designed to reduce the volatility of
commercial gasoline during the summer ozone control season. On June 11,
1990 (55 FR 23658), EPA promulgated more stringent volatility controls
as Phase II of the volatility control program. These requirements
established maximum RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8 psi (depending on
the State, the month, and the area's initial ozone attainment
designation with respect to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS during the high
ozone season).
The 1990 CAA Amendments established a new section, 211(h), to
address fuel volatility. Section 211(h) requires EPA to promulgate
regulations making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, dispense,
supply, offer for supply, transport, or introduce into commerce
gasoline with an RVP level in excess of 9.0 psi during the high ozone
season. Section 211(h) prohibits EPA from
[[Page 70519]]
establishing a volatility standard more stringent than 9.0 psi in an
attainment area, except that EPA may impose a lower (more stringent)
standard in any former ozone nonattainment area redesignated to
attainment.
On December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), EPA modified the Phase II
volatility regulations to be consistent with section 211(h) of the CAA.
The modified regulations prohibited the sale of gasoline with an RVP
above 9.0 psi in all areas designated attainment for ozone, beginning
in 1992. For areas designated as nonattainment, the regulations
retained the original Phase II standards published on June 11, 1990 (55
FR 23658).
As stated in the preamble to the Phase II volatility controls and
reiterated in the proposed change to the volatility standards published
in 1991, EPA will rely on states to initiate changes to EPA's
volatility program that they believe will enhance local air quality
and/or increase the economic efficiency of the program within the
statutory limits.\4\ In those rulemakings, EPA explained that the
governor of a state may petition EPA to set a volatility standard less
stringent than 7.8 psi for some month or months in a nonattainment
area. The petition must demonstrate such a change is appropriate
because of a particular local economic impact and that sufficient
alternative programs are available to achieve attainment and
maintenance of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. A current listing of the RVP
requirements for states can be found on EPA's Web site at: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/gasolinefuels/volatility/standards.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990), 56 FR 24242 (May 29, 1991)
and 56 FR 64704 (Dec. 12, 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As explained in the December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), Phase II
rulemaking, EPA believes that relaxation of an applicable RVP standard
is best accomplished in conjunction with the redesignation process. In
order for an ozone nonattainment area to be redesignated as an
attainment area, section 107(d)(3) of the Act requires the state to
make a showing, pursuant to section 175A of the Act, that the area is
capable of maintaining attainment for the ozone NAAQS for ten years
after redesignation. Depending on the area's circumstances, this
maintenance plan will either demonstrate that the area is capable of
maintaining attainment for ten years without the more stringent
volatility standard or that the more stringent volatility standard may
be necessary for the area to maintain its attainment with the ozone
NAAQS. Therefore, in the context of a request for redesignation, EPA
will not relax the volatility standard unless the state requests a
relaxation and the maintenance plan demonstrates, to the satisfaction
of EPA, that the area will maintain attainment for ten years without
the need for the more stringent volatility standard. As noted above,
however, North Carolina did not request relaxation of the applicable
7.8 psi RVP standard when the Triad Area was redesignated to attainment
for the either the 1-hour or the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Rather, North
Carolina is now seeking to relax the 7.8 psi RVP standard after the
Triad Area has been redesignated to attainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. Accordingly, the original modeling and maintenance
demonstration supporting the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan must be
revised to reflect continued attainment under the relaxed 9.0 psi RVP
standard that the State has requested.
IV. What are the section 110(l) requirements?
Section 110(l) requires that a revision to the SIP not interfere
with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress (RFP) (as defined in section 171), or any other
applicable requirement of the Act. EPA's criterion for determining the
approvability of North Carolina's April 12, 2013, SIP revision is
whether this requested action complies with section 110(l) of the CAA.
Because the modeling associated with the current maintenance plan for
North Carolina is premised in part upon the 7.8 psi RVP requirements, a
request to revise the maintenance plan modeling to no longer rely on
the 7.8 psi RVP requirement is subject to the requirements of CAA
section 110(l). Therefore, the State must demonstrate that this
revision will not interfere with the attainment or maintenance of any
of the NAAQS or any other applicable requirement of the CAA.
This section 110(l) non-interference demonstration is a case-by-
case determination based upon the circumstances of each SIP revision.
EPA interprets 110(l) as applying to all NAAQS that are in effect,
including those that have been promulgated but for which the EPA has
not yet made designations. The specific elements of the 110(l) analysis
contained in the SIP revision depend on the circumstances and emissions
analyses associated with that revision. EPA's analysis of North
Carolina's April 12, 2013, SIP revision, including review of section
110(l) requirements is provided below.
Finally, EPA notes that this rulemaking is only proposing to
approve the State's revision to its existing maintenance plan for the
Triad Area showing that the area can continue to maintain the standard
without relying upon gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi being sold in the
Triad Area during the high ozone season. Consistent with CAA section
211(h) and the Phase II volatility regulations a separate rulemaking is
required for relaxation of the current requirement to use gasoline with
an RVP of 7.8 psi in the Triad Area.
V. What is EPA's analysis of North Carolina's submittal?
a. Overall Preliminary Conclusions for Non-Interference Analyses for
North Carolina's Request for Removal of the Federal RVP Requirement
On April 12, 2013, NC DENR submitted a revision to the maintenance
plan for the Triad 1-hour ozone maintenance area. The revision updates
the on-road mobile, non-road mobile, and area source emissions that
would result from modifying the RVP summertime gasoline requirement
from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi for the Triad Area. North Carolina's April 12,
2013, SIP revision also includes an evaluation of the impact that the
removal of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement would have on maintenance of the
1997 and 2008 ozone standards and on other applicable NAAQS. For the
purposes of this change, EPA is making the preliminary determination
that the applicable NAAQS \5\ of interest for the non-interference
demonstration required by section 110(l) of the CAA are the carbon
monoxide (CO), ozone, particulate matter (PM) and nitrogen dioxide
(NO2) standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The six NAAQS for which EPA establishes health and welfare
based standards are carbon monoxide, lead, NO2, ozone,
PM, and SO2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC and NOX emissions are precursors for ozone and PM,
and NO2 is a component of NOX. In addition, EPA
also believes that, in this instance, it is appropriate to also
evaluate non-interference with respect to the CO NAAQS. Typically, EPA
would not expect the CO NAAQS to be affected by a revision to RVP
requirements because VOC and NOX are not precursors to CO.
The revised modeling submitted by North Carolina, however, demonstrates
a slight increase in CO emissions, and as such, EPA believes a non-
interference review for CO is also appropriate in this case.
There are no emissions reductions attributable to the emissions of
lead and sulfur dioxide (SO2) from RVP requirements. As a
result, there is no
[[Page 70520]]
information indicating the proposed revision would have any impact on
those NAAQS. Additionally, the Triad Area is currently designated
attainment for the lead NAAQS, and is continuing to attain the
standard. As for the SO2 NAAQS, the Triad Area is not
designated nonattainment and there is no available monitoring data
indicating an exceedance of the NAAQS. Therefore, the analysis below
focuses on the impact of North Carolina's requested RVP change to the
ozone, particulate matter, NO2 and CO NAAQS.
In North Carolina's April 12, 2013, SIP revision, the State
provided a technical demonstration to support the request to modify the
RVP summertime gasoline requirement from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi for the
Triad Area. NC DENR provided information regarding the emissions trends
from the maintenance plans for the ozone NAAQS and conducted a
photochemical modeling exercise to show that modifying the RVP
summertime gasoline requirement from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi would have no
impact on the ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ In addition there was not a significant increase in CO and
NO2 emissions. See the non-interference discussions below
for more details.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the April 12, 2013, SIP revision, NC DENR provided an updated
analysis utilizing EPA's MOVES emission modeling system to estimate
emissions for mobile sources. These mobile source emissions are used as
part of the evaluation of the potential impacts to the ozone NAAQS that
might result exclusively from changing the high ozone season RVP
requirements from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. The MOVES data resulted in minor
increases to the on-road mobile and area source emissions. The State
then used the MOVES-generated revised mobile source emissions in the
Triad Area that resulted from the RVP program change in photochemical
grid modeling to simulate the impact on ozone formation. In addition to
modeling the small RVP changes over the Triad Area, NC DENR also
modeled the shutdown of three coal-fired electric generating units
(EGUs) (Buck, Dan River, and Riverbend), that were located in counties
adjacent to the Triad Area. Combined-cycle natural gas units have been
built at two of these facilities (Buck and Dan River) replacing the now
decommissioned coal-fired units. The federally-enforceable emission
limits associated with these new combined-cycle units were included
with the modeling conducted by NC DENR. The modeling shows that
relaxation of the RVP standard to 9.0 psi would not interfere with
continued maintenance of the ozone NAAQS in the Triad Area.
b. Non-Interference Analysis for the Ozone NAAQS
As previously discussed, effective November 6, 1991, the Triad Area
(which consisted of Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford Counties in their
entirety and a portion of Davie County) was designated as nonattainment
for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. As a 1-hour ozone nonattainment area,
Davidson, Davie, Forsyth and Guilford Counties were subject to the
federal RVP requirements for high ozone season gasoline to aid the Area
with compliance with the ozone NAAQS. On November 13, 1992, NC DENR
submitted a redesignation request and maintenance plan for the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS.
On February 6, 2008, EPA proposed that 13 nonattainment areas with
deferred effective dates, including the Greensboro-Winston Salem-High
Point Area, be designated attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
See 73 FR 6863. These areas met all of the milestones of the EAC
program and demonstrated that they were in attainment of the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS as of December 31, 2007. Effective April 15, 2008, the
Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point EAC Area was designated as
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS with a design value of 0.083
ppm using three years of quality assured data for the years of 2005-
2007.
Throughout this history, there is an overall downward trend in
ozone concentration in the Triad Area that can be attributed to Federal
and State programs that have led to significant emissions reductions.
The Triad Area is continuing to meet the 1-hour and 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.\7\ With respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS, based on the 2010-2012
design values of 0.078 ppm and 0.076 ppm, Triad Area monitors in
Forsyth and Guilford Counties, respectively, are violating the 2008
ozone NAAQS. However, the preliminary 2011-2013 design values for
Forsyth and Guilford Counties are 0.073 ppm and 0.072 ppm,
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The air quality design value for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS is
the 3-year average of the annual 4th highest daily maximum 8-hour
ozone concentration. The level of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is
0.075 ppm. The 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is not met when the design
value is greater than 0.075 ppm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2008 ozone NAAQS is met when the annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average concentration, averaged over 3 years is 0.075
ppm or less. Currently (as shown in Table 1), all ozone monitors in the
Triad Area are attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and all but three
ozone monitors (two located in Forsyth County and one located in
Guilford County) are attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Table 1--Triad Area Design Value
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005-2007 DV 2006-2008 DV 2007-2009 DV 2008-2010 DV 2009-2011 DV 2010-2012 DV
County (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) (ppm)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caswell................................................. 0.077 0.079 0.076 0.073 0.070 0.073
Davie................................................... 0.083 0.082 0.078 (\8\) .............. 0.073
Forsyth................................................. 0.081 0.081 0.077 0.076 0.075 0.078
Guilford................................................ 0.082 0.082 0.079 0.076 0.074 0.076
Rockingham.............................................. 0.078 0.080 0.078 0.075 0.071 0.073
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------- indicates no data available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The Davie County monitor was moved to a new location and
began monitoring at the new location in 2008. There was not enough
data at this location to calculate a 3 year averaged design value
until 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 22, 2013, NC DENR submitted a letter to EPA describing
its intention to early certify ozone monitoring data for the Triad Area
based on 2011-2013 data. Once certified, this data is expected to
demonstrate that all monitors in the Triad Area are attaining the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS based on 2011-2013 data. EPA is proposing this
action contingent on the 2011-2013 monitoring data, showing continued
attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS, being quality assured and certified
prior
[[Page 70521]]
to the Agency taking final action on this proposed rule.
The primary precursors for ozone are VOC and NOX
emissions. Relaxation of the RVP standard from 7.8 to 9.0 psi results
in a slight increase in emissions of 0.16 tons per day (tpd) (a 0.28
percent increase) in NOX, and 1.43 tpd (a 1.34 percent
increase) in VOC for Davidson, Forsyth, Guilford and Davie Counties.
While modeling showed a slight increase in NOX and VOC
emissions resulting from the use of 9.0 psi RVP gasoline as opposed to
7.8 psi RVP gasoline, the most appropriate analysis for purposes of
evaluating non-interference is whether the increase in emissions would
interfere with air quality for the Triad Area. For this demonstration,
NC DENR chose to use photochemical modeling which is described below.
In addition to analyzing the photochemical modeling provided by
North Carolina, EPA also notes that the Triad Area is located within a
NOX-limited region.\9\ A NOX-limited region is
one in which the concentration of ozone is limited by the amount of
NOX emissions. As discussed above, NOX and VOC
are precursors to the formation of ozone in the atmosphere. In a
NOX-limited area, high prevailing concentrations of VOC from
naturally-occurring sources are present in the atmosphere to contribute
to ozone formation. Consequently, reduction of manmade, or
anthropogenic, sources of VOC emissions generally do not result in
reduced ozone formation. Instead, reductions of NOX
emissions provide a more effective ozone reduction strategy because
reduced emissions of manmade NOX emissions limit the amount
of NOX available in the atmosphere for ozone formation.
These circumstances help support the reasonableness of the modeling
showing that the small increase in VOC and even smaller increase in
NOX from the relaxation of the RVP standard would not
interfere with continued maintenance of the ozone NAAQS in the Triad
Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See, e.g., The State of the Southern Oxidants Study (SOS)
Policy Relevant Findings in Ozone and PM2.5 Pollution
Research 1995-2003 (June 30, 2004), https://www.ncsu.edu/sos/pubs/sos3/State_of_SOS_3.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NC DENR utilized EPA's Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS) modeling
platform to model changes in ozone and particle matter pollution. The
modeling years used in the modeling included the 2005 base year and the
2016 future year. The future year 2016 was chosen because it is the
latest MATS model data available. The USEPA MATS modeling platform was
chosen because it is fairly recent, has undergone full model
performance, and uses the MOVES mobile model to generate on-road mobile
emissions. The USEPA MATS modeling used a national 36 kilometer (km)
domain and an eastern US 12 km domain. The NC DENR modeling was
performed using the 12 km modeling domain. The EPA is currently using
12 km modeling to address the impacts of the proposed Tier 3 Motor
Vehicle and Emissions Standards. Given that the EPA is using the 12 km
modeling for Tier 3, NC DENR used the 12 km modeling to estimate the
impacts of the change in summertime RVP to 9.0 psi.
The USEPA MATS modeling conducted by NC DENR demonstrates that the
relaxation of the RVP 7.8 standard to 9.0 psi in the Triad 1-hour ozone
maintenance area is not necessary to maintain the either the 1997 or
2008 ozone NAAQS. Both the 2005 base year and the 2016 future year were
used in the modeling. In the modeling NC DENR applied several
conservative estimates to determine the maximum impact of RVP
relaxation. These included:
(1) Selecting the most populous county to represent on-road mobile
emissions for the other counties. Guilford County was selected to
represent the ``highest'' level of emissions increase expected because
it has the greatest population of vehicles and vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) within the Triad maintenance area.
(2) Applying the maximum emissions increase for a given hour to the
entire summertime period. Typically, the next step is to run SMOKE \10\
to temporally and spatially allocate the MOVES output. However, NC DENR
was unable to run the version of SMOKE used in the MATS modeling. As an
alternative, for each pollutant, the average and maximum increase at
any hour was calculated (see Table 2.3-8 of the NC submittal). In order
to generate very conservative estimates of the impacts of the RVP
relaxation, the maximum percent increase was applied to the mobile
emissions for all hours of the June 1 to September 15 high-ozone season
RVP period for both the 2005 and 2016 emissions in Guilford, Forsyth,
Davie, and Davidson Counties where the RVP relaxation is proposed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ SMOKE, or ``Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions'' is an
emissions processing system designed to create gridded, speciated,
hourly emissions for input into a variety of air quality models.
SMOKE supports area, biogenic, mobile (both onroad and nonroad), and
point source emissions processing for criteria, particulate, and
toxic pollutants and is integrated with the on-road emissions model
MOBILE6 and MOVES.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Using the highest emissions increase for a given pollutant to
represent VOC emissions.
(4) The liberal application of grid masking (i.e., the array of
grid cells where the RVP emissions changes were applied). A grid cell
was included in the grid cell mask if as little as 20 percent of the
cell area includes one or more of the counties where the RVP relaxation
is proposed. The grid cell mask includes 42 grid cells with an area of
6,048 km\2\. A typical application of the mask would include 32 grid
cells with an area of 4,608 km\2\. By comparison, the total area of the
four counties is 4,935 km\2\. The 20 percent threshold grid cell mask
used in the modeling will adjust the mobile emissions in a larger area
than the actual area of the four counties and will lead to conservative
modeling results.
NC DENR used the Community Multiscale Air Quality Modeling System
(CMAQ, v.4.71) to perform the air quality runs. A total of six runs
were made from March 20, 2005 to September 30, 2005. A total of three
runs were made using the 2005 emissions. The first run used the default
2005 MATS emissions (BASE05). The second run adjusted the mobile
emissions due to the change in RVP from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi during the
June 1 to September 15 RVP period (RVP05). The third run for 2005
included the RVP adjustments and added expected NOX changes
at the Buck, Dan River, Riverbend power plants. The 2016 model runs
were run in a similar fashion as the 2005 runs. The first run used the
default 2016 MATS emissions (BASE16). The second run adjusted the
mobile emissions due to the change in RVP from 7.8 to 9.0 psi during
the June 1 to September 15 RVP period (RVP16) and the third included
the RVP adjustments and added expected NOX changes at the
Buck, Dan River, Riverbend power plants.
In this application, The Model Attainment Test Software was used to
compute relative reduction factors (RRFs) for each of the sensitivity
runs at the area monitors. The 2005 sensitivity runs were compared to
the Base05 run, and the 2016 sensitivity runs were compared to the
Base16 run. RRF values of 1.0005 or less would indicate less than a
0.05 ppb rise within the base year or future year modeling. The change
in ozone for monitors in and near the Triad Area generated by the
change in RVP in the 2005 base year is shown in Table 2. The other runs
had similar results. There is no appreciable change in ozone
concentrations due to the increase in gasoline RVP.
See North Carolina's April 12, 2013, submittal for more information
on the modeling demonstration.
[[Page 70522]]
Table 2--Change in Ozone Concentrations and RRFs in the 2005 Base Year Modeling With Summertime RVP Change to
9.0 psi
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
County Base05
ozone design RVP05 Ozone Change from
County value \1\ design value RRF Base05 to
(ppb) \2\ (ppb) RVP05 (ppb)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caswell......................................... 76.3 76.3 1.0002 0.0
Davie........................................... 81.3 81.3 1.0002 0.0
Forsyth......................................... 78.0 78.0 1.0004 0.0
Forsyth......................................... 73.0 73.0 1.0003 0.0
Forsyth......................................... 76.0 76.0 1.0004 0.0
Forsyth......................................... 80.0 80.0 1.0004 0.0
Guilford........................................ 77.0 77.0 1.0005 0.0
Guilford........................................ 82.0 82.0 1.0005 0.0
Rockingham...................................... 77.0 77.0 1.0003 0.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Default 2005 MATS concentrations.
\2\ 2005 concentrations with summertime RVP changed to 9.0 psi.
It should also be noted that in its submission, North Carolina provided
a demonstration that there is no appreciable change in future ozone
design value concentrations at any of the area monitors when comparing
changes in ozone concentration and RRFs in a future year scenario for
2016 that modeled summertime RVP at 9.0 psi. North Carolina's model
runs were done solely for the purpose of determining potential and
relative impact for changes in ozone concentration due to a change of
RVP to 9.0 psi. More information on the MATS modeling can be found at
https://www.epa.gov/mats/actions.html. Additional details on NC DENR's
updates to the EPA MATS modeling platform to incorporate emissions in
North Carolina are included in the State's April 12, 2013, SIP
revision.
To provide a full evaluation, the State also compared total man-
made (anthropogenic) emissions of VOC and NOX for the years
2007 (base year), 2011, and 2018 using a RVP of 7.8 psi for Davidson,
Forsyth, Guilford and Davie Counties (the remaining Counties are
currently using a RVP of 9.0 psi) to emissions generated for the year
2018, using a RVP of 9.0 psi.
There are four different man-made emission inventory source
classifications: (1) Point, (2) area, (3) on-road mobile and (4) non-
road mobile.
(1) Point sources are those stationary sources that emit more than
10 tons per year of VOC or 100 tons per year of NOZX from a
single facility. The source emissions are tabulated from data collected
by direct on-site measurements of emissions or mass balance
calculations utilizing emission factors from EPA's AP-42, Compilation
of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. For the projected year's inventory,
point sources are adjusted by growth factors based on Standard
Industrial Classification codes. The growth factors are generated using
the EPA's Economic Growth Analysis System version 5.0 (E-GAS 5.0)
program.
(2) Area sources are those stationary sources whose emissions are
relatively small but due to the large number of these sources, the
collective emissions could be significant (i.e., dry cleaners, service
stations, etc.). For area sources, emissions are estimated by
multiplying an emission factor by some known indicator of collective
activity such as production, number of employees, or population. These
types of emissions are estimated on the county level. For the projected
year's inventory, area source emissions are changed by population
growth, projected production growth, or when applicable, by E-GAS 5.0
growth factors.
(3) On-road mobile sources are those vehicles that travel on the
roadways. For on-road mobile sources, the MOVES model data represent
the new motor vehicle emission budgets for the Triad Area. The MOVES
model uses the road class VMT and other operating conditions as input
parameters to generate an output file that contains estimated
emissions. For the projected years inventories, the on-road mobile
sources emissions are calculated by running the MOVES mobile model for
the future year with the projected VMT to generate emissions that take
into consideration expected Federal tailpipe standards, fleet turnover
and new fuel standards.
(4) Non-road mobile sources are equipment that can move but do not
use the roadways (i.e., lawn mowers, construction equipment, railroad
locomotives, aircraft). With the exception of the railroad locomotives
and aircraft engines, the emissions from this category are calculated
using the EPA's NONROAD2008a non-road mobile model. The railroad
locomotive and aircraft engine emissions are estimated by taking an
activity and multiply by an emission factor. All emissions are also
estimated at the county level. Total off-road mobile source emissions
represent the sum of emissions generated by the NONROAD 2008a model and
emissions calculated for aircraft and railroad locomotives.
Despite the small increases in emissions projected for the less-
stringent RVP standard of 9.0 psi, the Triad Area continues to
demonstrate a downward trend in NOX and VOC emissions
through 2018. Tables 3 and 4 below provide the emissions inventory
estimates for all source categories for the 1-hour ozone maintenance
area.
Table 3--Anthropogenic VOC Emissions (tpd) for the Triad 1-Hour Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on RVP of 7.8 Based on RVP
------------------------------------------------ of 9.0
County ---------------
2007 2011 2018 2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Davidson........................................ 19.31 17.60 14.29 14.50
Davie *......................................... 8.04 7.79 8.43 8.43
Forsyth......................................... 36.62 32.63 32.69 33.18
[[Page 70523]]
Guilford........................................ 58.31 53.71 51.10 51.83
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 122.28 111.73 106.51 107.94
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Emissions are for the entire County.
Table 4--Anthropogenic NOX Emissions (tpd) for the Triad 1-Hour Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on RVP of 7.8 Based on RVP
------------------------------------------------ of 9.0
County ---------------
2007 2011 2018 2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Davidson........................................ 21.99 17.94 9.88 9.91
Davie *......................................... 6.08 4.41 2.75 2.75
Forsyth......................................... 35.88 24.47 16.50 16.54
Guilford........................................ 57.68 44.76 28.00 28.09
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 121.63 91.58 57.13 57.29
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Emissions are for the entire County.
As Tables 3 and 4 indicate, NOX and VOC emissions in the
Triad 1-hour ozone maintenance area will continue to decrease, even
with the increase in high ozone season fuel RVP to 9.0 psi. The slight
increase in emissions resulting from the control program change is
being mitigated area-wide by a steady decrease in tailpipe emissions,
which is the result of a cleaner new vehicle fleet replacing the older
fleet and other Federal and State emissions reduction programs.
In light of the current designations, monitoring and emissions
data, and the submitted modeling, including the fact that the
NOX emissions inventories are projected to continue to
significantly decrease, EPA has preliminarily determined that the
slight increase in NOX and VOC emissions associated with the
request RVP change will not interfere with the Area's ability to
maintain the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. More details on the
individual non-interference analyses for the PM2.5,
NO2 and CO NAAQS are provided below.
c. Non-Interference Analysis for the PM NAAQS
The precursors for PM2.5 are NOX,
SO2, VOC and ammonia. For the Triad Area, on-road mobile,
non-road mobile and area sources are not considered to be large
contributors to directly emitted PM2.5 or indirectly formed
fine particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5)
concentrations. As mentioned earlier in this rulemaking, the RVP
requirements result in emissions benefits for VOC and NOX,
and as such EPA focused on these precursors for the analysis of the
potential impact of North Carolina's SIP change. However, as described
in North Carolina's April 12, 2013, submission, directly emitted
PM2.5 is a very small component of the overall
PM2.5 ambient concentrations. Instead the primary species
impacting PM2.5 concentrations are the secondarily formed
sulfates and organic carbons. Sulfates are formed through the chemical
reaction of SO2 and ammonia and the majority of the organic
carbons come from natural sources like trees. See ``Redesignation
Demonstration and Maintenance Plan for the Hickory (Catawba County) and
Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point (Davidson and Guilford Counties)
Fine Particulate Matter Nonattainment Areas,'' submitted to EPA on
December 18, 2009, Figure 4-2, p. 4-4, which can be accessed at
www.regulations.gov using docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2009-1010. A 2009
analysis of SO2 emissions, which is a primary contributor to
the formation of PM2.5 within North Carolina, found about
3.3 percent of total SO2 emissions came from on-road, non-
road and area sources combined, while the remaining 96.7 percent came
from point sources.
On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 36852), EPA established an annual
PM2.5 NAAQS at 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\)
based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations. At that time, EPA also established a 24-hour NAAQS of
65 [mu]g/m\3\. See 40 CFR 50.7. On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), EPA
retained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS at 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\
based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations, and promulgated a new 24-hour NAAQS of 35 [mu]g/m\3\
based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations. On January 15, 2013 (78 FR 3086), EPA established an
annual primary PM2.5 NAAQS at 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\ based on a 3-
year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. At that
time, EPA retained the 2006 24-hour NAAQS at 35 [mu]g/m\3\ based on a
3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations.
On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944), Davidson and Guilford Counties in
the Triad Area were designated nonattainment for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard and all other Counties were designated
Unclassifiable/Attainment. On November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), all
counties in the Triad Area were designated unclassifiable/attainment
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard. On November 18, 2011,
EPA redesignated Davidson and Guilford Counties to attainment for the
1997 annual PM2.5 standard based on the measured air quality
data and the 10-year maintenance plan submitted. See 76 FR 71455.
As Table 5 indicates the PM2.5 annual and 24-hour design
values demonstrate attainment of the respective NAAQS and have been
decreasing.
[[Page 70524]]
Table 5--PM2.5 Design Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2008-2010 2009-2011 2010-2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual Design Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caswell......................................................... 9.9 8.9 8.9
Davidson........................................................ 12.1 11.1 11.1
Forsyth......................................................... 10.9 10.0 9.7
Guilford........................................................ 10.8 9.8 9.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
24-hour Design Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Caswell......................................................... 19 18 18
Davidson........................................................ 23 21 21
Forsyth......................................................... 23 21 20
Guilford........................................................ 22 21 21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA Annual PM2.5 NAAQS: 15 [mu]g/m\3\.
EPA 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS: 35 [mu]g/m\3\.
In light of the slight increase in VOC and NOX emissions
from the relaxation of the RVP controls in Davidson, Davie, Forsyth and
Guilford Counties, EPA has preliminarily determined that a change to
the Federal RVP requirement for Davidson, Davie, Forsyth and Guilford
Counties would not interfere with the Triad Area maintaining the 1997
PM2.5 annual or the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards.
The photochemical modeling analysis discussed above was also used to
calculate the changes in PM2.5 due to the RVP Program
change. The analysis showed no change in particle pollution at any of
the monitors.
d. Non-Interference Analysis for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS
On February 17, 2012 (77 FR 9532), EPA finalized designations for
2010 NO2 NAAQS. Counties in North Carolina, including those
in the Triad Area, were designated unclassifiable/attainment for the
2010 NO2 NAAQS. Based on North Carolina's April 12, 2013,
SIP revision, the potential increase in the NOX emissions
associated with the requested less-stringent RVP standard is
approximately a quarter of a ton per day between June 1st and September
15th. It is reasonable to believe that North Carolina's requested
change for its high ozone season RVP requirement would not cause the
Area to be out of compliance with the 2010 NO2 NAAQS because
the slight projected NOX emissions increase would be
mitigated by a steady decrease in tailpipe emissions, which is the
result of cleaner new vehicle fleet replacing the older fleet. In light
of the current designation, monitoring and emissions trend data and the
submitted modeling, including the fact that NOX emissions
inventories are projected to continue to significantly decrease,\11\
EPA has preliminarily determined that a change to the Federal RVP
requirements for the Triad Area would not interfere with the continued
decline in NOX emissions, nor with attainment or maintenance
of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See table 5, above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. Non-Interference Analysis for the CO NAAQS
Forsyth County in the Triad Area was previously designated
nonattainment for the 8-hour CO NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694, November 6,
1991. Subsequently, Forsyth County attained the 8-hour CO NAAQS and was
redesignated from nonattainment to attainment on September 21, 1994,
based on the measured air quality data and the 10-year maintenance plan
submitted. See 59 FR 48399. The 8-hour CO NAAQS is 9 ppm and the 1-hour
CO NAAQS is 35 ppm. As provided in Table 6 below, monitoring data from
2008-2011 shows Forsyth County is well below the 8-hour and 1-hour CO
NAAQS.
Table 6--Ambient Air Quality CO 8-Hour and 1-Hour Design Values (ppm)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
County Monitor ID 2009 2010 2011 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8-hr NAAQS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forsyth......................... 370670023 1.7 1.9 2.1 1.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-hr NAAQS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forsyth......................... 370670023 2.3 2.7 2.6 1.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is estimated that Triad Area on-road CO emissions will increase
approximately 5 tons per day in 2016 if the applicable RVP requirement
is relaxed to 9.0 psi in the Triad Area. This increase equates to a
less than a 1.0 percent increase in the total inventory of all
anthropogenic sources for the Triad Area. In light of the slight
increase in CO emissions EPA has preliminarily determined that a change
to the Federal RVP requirement for Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point
would not interfere with the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County Area
maintaining the CO NAAQS.
VI. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the State of North Carolina's April 12,
2013, revision to its 110(a)(1) Maintenance Plan for the Triad 1997 8-
hour Ozone Maintenance Area. Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve
the State's showing that the Triad Area can continue to maintain the
1997 ozone
[[Page 70525]]
standard without emissions reductions associated with the use of
gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi in the four Triad Area counties during
the high ozone season--June 1 through September 15.
In addition, due to the updated modeling reflecting a change in the
applicable RVP standard, the North Carolina revision also includes an
updated on-road mobile, non-road mobile and area source emissions for
the Triad Area. EPA is also proposing approval of this revision.
EPA has preliminarily determined that North Carolina's April 12,
2013, SIP revision, including the technical demonstration associated
with the State's request for the removal of the Federal RVP
requirements, and the updated on-road mobile, non-road mobile and area
source emissions are consistent with the applicable provisions of the
CAA. Should EPA decide to remove subject portions of the Triad Area
from those areas subject to the 7.8 psi Federal RVP requirements, such
action will occur in a separate, subsequent rulemaking.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submittal 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
proposed action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 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, October 7, 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 proposed 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Lead, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 12, 2013.
Beverly H. Banister,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2013-28371 Filed 11-25-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P