Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina: Non-Interference Demonstration for Removal of Federal Low-Reid Vapor Pressure Requirement for the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill Area, 47-51 [2013-31250]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 1 / Thursday, January 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
7. Section 123.20 is amended by
revising paragraph (a) and paragraph (c)
introductory text, to read as follows:
■
§ 123.20
Nuclear related controls.
(a) The provisions of this subchapter
do not apply to articles, technical data,
or services in Category VI, Category XVI,
or Category XX of § 121.1 of this
subchapter to the extent that exports of
such articles, technical data, or services
are controlled by the Department of
Energy or the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission pursuant to the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of
1978, as amended, or are pursuant to a
government transfer authorized
pursuant to these Acts. For Department
of Commerce controls, see 15 CFR 742.3
and 744.2, administered pursuant to
Section 309(c) of the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Act of 1978, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 2139a(c)), and 15
CFR 744.5, none of which are subject to
the provisions of this subchapter.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) A license for the export of a
defense article, technical data, or the
furnishing of a defense service relating
to defense articles referred to in
Category VI(e) or Category XX(b)(1) of
§ 121.1 of this subchapter will not be
granted unless the defense article,
technical data, or defense service comes
within the scope of an existing
Agreement for Cooperation for Mutual
Defense Purposes concluded pursuant
to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended, with the government of the
country to which the defense article,
technical data, or defense service is to
be exported. Licenses may be granted in
the absence of such an agreement only:
*
*
*
*
*
(ix) [Reserved]
*
*
*
(xi) [Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
*
PART 125—LICENSES FOR THE
EXPORT OF TECHNICAL DATA AND
CLASSIFIED DEFENSE ARTICLES
10. The authority citation for part 125
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Secs. 2 and 38, Pub. L. 90–629,
90 Stat. 744 (22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778); 22 U.S.C.
2651a; E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129.
11. Section 125.1 is amended by
revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:
■
§ 125.1
Exports subject to this part.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) For the export of technical data
related to articles in Category VI(e),
Category XVI, and Category XX(b)(1) of
§ 121.1 of this subchapter, please see
§ 123.20 of this subchapter.
Rose E. Gottemoeller,
Acting Under Secretary, Arms Control and
International Security, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2013–31323 Filed 12–31–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710–25–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0563; FRL–9904–89Region 4]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; North Carolina:
Non-Interference Demonstration for
Removal of Federal Low-Reid Vapor
Pressure Requirement for the RaleighDurham-Chapel Hill Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
PART 124—AGREEMENTS, OFFSHORE PROCUREMENT, AND OTHER
DEFENSE SERVICES
AGENCY:
8. The authority citation for part 124
continues to read as follows:
SUMMARY:
■
Authority: Sec. 2, 38, and 71, Pub. L. 90–
629, 90 Stat. 744 (22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778,
2797); 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 22 U.S.C. 2776; Pub.
L. 105–261; Section 1261, Pub. L. 112–239;
E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129.
9. Section 124.2 is amended by
removing and reserving paragraphs
(c)(5)(iii), (c)(5)(ix), and (c)(5)(xi), as
follows:
■
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
§ 124.2 Exemptions for training and
military service.
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(5) * * *
(iii) [Reserved]
*
*
*
*
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
*
17:09 Dec 31, 2013
Jkt 232001
EPA is approving the State of
North Carolina’s March 27, 2013, State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to
the State’s approved Maintenance Plan
for the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill
1997 8-hour Ozone Maintenance Area
(Triangle Area). Specifically, North
Carolina’s revision, including updated
modeling, shows that the Triangle 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 three portions
(Wake and Durham Counties, and a
portion of Granville County) of the
Triangle Area during the high-ozone
season. The State included a technical
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
47
demonstration with the revision to
demonstrate that the less-stringent RVP
standard of 9.0 psi in these areas would
not interfere with continued
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(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 Triangle Area from the list of areas
that are currently subject to the Federal
7.8 psi RVP requirements. In addition,
EPA is also approving changes to the
motor vehicle emission budgets
(MVEBs) used in the 1997 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan for the Triangle Area.
EPA has determined that North
Carolina’s March 27, 2013, SIP revision
with respect to the modeling changes
and associated technical demonstration,
and with respect to the updated MVEBs,
is consistent with the applicable
provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA or
Act). Should EPA decide to remove the
subject portions of the Triangle Area
from those areas subject to the 7.8 psi
Federal RVP requirements, such action
will occur in a subsequent rulemaking.
DATES: This rule will be effective on
February 3, 2014.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR–
2013–0563. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov
Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30
excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street
E:\FR\FM\02JAR1.SGM
02JAR1
48
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 1 / Thursday, January 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The
telephone number is (404) 562–9043.
Mr. Lakeman can be reached via
electronic mail at lakeman.sean@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Background of the Triangle Area
II. Background of the Gasoline Volatility
Requirement
III. Background of Mobile Source Inventories
and Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
Update
IV. This Action
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background of the Triangle Area
In 1991, the Triangle Area was
designated as a moderate nonattainment
area pursuant to the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6,
1991). Under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS,
the Triangle nonattainment area was
composed of Durham and Wake
Counties, and the Dutchville Township
portion of Granville County. 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 part of the
RVP requirements associated with its
nonattainment designation, gasoline
sold in the Triangle 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 Triangle
Area, on April 18, 1994, the Area was
redesignated to attainment for the 1hour ozone standard, based on 1989–
1992 ambient air quality monitoring
data. See 59 FR 18300. North Carolina’s
redesignation request for the 1-hour
ozone Triangle Area did not, however,
include a request for the Area to be
removed from the list of areas subject to
the 7.8 psi RVP standard. As such, the
7.8 RVP requirement remained in place
for Durham and Wake Counties, and the
Dutchville Township portion of
Granville County when the Triangle
Area was designated nonattainment for
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Under
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the
Triangle Area was expanded from
Durham and Wake Counties, and the
Dutchville Township portion of
Granville County to also include
Franklin, Johnston, Orange, and Person
Counties, the remainder of Granville
County and Baldwin, Center, New Hope
and Williams Townships in Chatham
County. See 69 FR 23857 (April 30,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Dec 31, 2013
Jkt 232001
2004). In 2007, the Triangle Area was
redesignated to attainment for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 72 FR 72948,
(December 26, 2007). The Triangle Area
was later designated as attainment for
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 77
FR 30088 (May 21, 2012).
II. Background 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 high
ozone 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
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
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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 limits of CAA
section 211(h).1 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 in a nonattainment area 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
1 See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990), 56 FR 24242
(May 29, 1991) and 56 FR 64704 (Dec. 12, 1991).
E:\FR\FM\02JAR1.SGM
02JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 1 / Thursday, January 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
volatility standard. As noted above,
however, North Carolina did not request
relaxation of the applicable 7.8 psi RVP
standard when the Triangle 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 Triangle 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.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
III. Background of Mobile Source
Inventories and Motor Vehicle
Emission Budgets Update
On June 7, 2007, the State of North
Carolina, through NC DENR, submitted
a final request for EPA to: (1)
Redesignate the Triangle Area to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard; and (2) approve a North
Carolina SIP revision containing a
maintenance plan for the Triangle Area.
On December 26, 2007 (72 FR 72948),
EPA approved the redesignation request
for the Triangle Area. Additionally, EPA
approved the 1997 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan including nitrogen
oxides (NOX) MVEBs for the Triangle
Area.2 These approvals were based on
EPA’s determination that the State of
North Carolina had demonstrated that
the Triangle Area met the criteria for
redesignation to attainment specified in
the CAA, including the determination
that the entire Triangle Area had
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
At the time of original redesignation
request, the on-road motor vehicle
inventory was generating by the
MOBILE6.2 model, which at the time
was the current MVEB model. The
change to the maintenance plan
discussed above includes a MVEB
generated by the MOVES model which
has since replaced the MOBILE6.2
model. In addition, the model used to
calculate the original non-road
inventory (NONROAD2005c) has also
since been updated by a new non-road
inventory model (NONROAD2008a).
As a result of these new models and
the revised emission associated with a
relaxed RVP standard, the safety
2 In the December 26, 2007, final rule EPA also
approved NC DENR’s determination that on-road
emissions of VOC are insignificant for
transportation conformity purposes. We are not
addressing that insignificance finding in today’s
rule.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Dec 31, 2013
Jkt 232001
margin 3 calculations provided in the
revised maintenance plan have changes
from the previous margins included
with the original maintenance plan.
Therefore, North Carolina’s revision
includes a reallocation of the safety
margin to the NOX MVEB based upon
the revised calculations.
NC DENR is currently allocating
portions of the available safety margin
to the MVEBs to allow for unanticipated
vehicle miles traveled growth as well as
changes to future vehicle mix
assumptions that influence the emission
estimations. A total of 14,396 kilograms
(kg) (15.87 tons per day (tpd)) and
13,563 kg (14.95 tpd) from the available
NOX safety margins in 2008 and 2017,
respectively, were added to the MVEBs
for the Triangle Area.
IV. This Action
On October 30, 2013 (78 FR 64896),
EPA proposed approval of North
Carolina’s March 27, 2013, revision to
the State’s approved 1997 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan for the Triangle Area.
Specifically, North Carolina’s revision,
including updated modeling, shows that
the Triangle Area would continue to
maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard if the currently applicable RVP
standard for gasoline of 7.8 psi were
modified to 9.0 psi during the highozone season. In addition, the revision
included changes to the MVEBs used in
the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance
plan for the Triangle Area. No adverse
comments were received on this
proposed action and EPA is hereby
finalizing approval of the revision.
The Triangle Area is currently
designated attainment for the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS. The Area was
redesignated from nonattainment of the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on
December 26, 2007. See 72 FR 72948.
This rulemaking approves a revision to
the 1997 8-hour ozone Maintenance
Plan for the Triangle Area submitted by
the NC DENR. Specifically, EPA is
approving changes to the maintenance
plan, including updated modeling, that
shows that the Triangle Area can
continue to maintain the 1997 ozone
standard without reliance on emission
reductions based upon the use of
gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi in any
of the Triangle Area counties during the
high ozone season—June 1 through
3 A safety margin is the difference between the
attainment level of emissions from all source
categories (i.e., point, area, and mobile) and the
projected level of emissions from all source
categories. The State may choose to allocate some
of the safety margin to the MVEBs, for
transportation conformity purposes, so long as the
total level of emissions from all source categories
remains equal to or less than the attainment level
of emissions. (40 CFR 93.124(a)).
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
49
September 15. EPA is also concluding
that the new modeling demonstrates
that the Triangle Area would continue
to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard
with the use of gasoline with an RVP of
9.0 psi throughout the Triangle Area
during the high ozone season.
Consistent with section 110(l) of the
Act, EPA also concludes that the use of
gasoline with an RVP of 9.0 psi
throughout the Maintenance Plan Areas
during the high ozone season would not
interfere with other applicable
requirements of the Act.
Section 110(l) requires that a revision
to the SIP not interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further
progress (as defined in section 171), or
any other applicable requirement of the
Act. 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 March 27, 2013, SIP revision,
including review of section 110(l)
requirements can be found in the
proposed rule published on October 30,
2013, at 78 FR 64896.
This rulemaking approves the State’s
revision to its existing maintenance plan
for the Triangle Area demonstrating that
the Area can continue to maintain the
standard without relying upon gasoline
with an RVP of 7.8 psi being sold in the
Triangle 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 Triangle Area.4
4 The decision regarding removal of Federal RVP
requirements pursuant to section 211(h) in the
Triangle Area includes other considerations
E:\FR\FM\02JAR1.SGM
Continued
02JAR1
50
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 1 / Thursday, January 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Additionally, the new modeling
conducted by North Carolina to account
for the requested relaxation of the
applicable RVP standard in a portion of
the Triangle Area also results in changes
to the safety margin associated with the
maintenance plan.5 As such, the North
Carolina revision includes a reallocation
of the safety margin among the NOx
MVEBs for the Triangle Area, which
EPA is also approving today.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
V. Final Action
EPA is approving the State of North
Carolina’s March 27, 2013, revision to
its Maintenance Plan for the Triangle
1997 8-hour Ozone Maintenance Area.
Specifically, EPA is approving the
State’s showing that the Triangle Area
can continue to maintain the 1997
ozone standard without emissions
reductions associated with the use of 7.8
psi RVP gasoline in the three portions
of the Triangle Area currently subject to
the 7.8 psi RVP standard during the
high ozone season—June 1 through
September 15.
EPA is approving the revised and
updated modeling submitted by the
State, which shows that the Triangle
Area can continue to maintain the 1997
ozone standard if the applicable RVP
standard in the three portions of the
Triangle Area. EPA is also approving the
revised NOX MVEBs for 2008 and 2017
including the revised and reallocated
safety margin among the NOX MVEBs
for the Triangle Area.
EPA has determined that North
Carolina’s March 27, 2013, SIP revision,
including the technical demonstration
associated with the State’s request for
the removal of the Federal RVP
requirements, and the updated MVEBs
are consistent with the applicable
provisions of the CAA. Should EPA
decide to remove the subject portions of
the Triangle Area from those areas
subject to the 7.8 psi Federal RVP
requirements, such action will occur in
a separate, subsequent rulemaking.
VI. 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 action
merely approves state law as meeting
evaluated at the discretion of the Administrator. As
such, the determination regarding whether to
remove the Area from those areas subject to the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Dec 31, 2013
Jkt 232001
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 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 rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
section 211(h) requirements is made through a
separate rule making action.
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by March 3, 2014. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section
307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements and
Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: December 18, 2013.
Beverly H. Banister,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52, is amended as
follows:
PART 52—[APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart II—North Carolina
2. Section 52.1770(e), is amended by
adding a new entry for ‘‘Supplement
Maintenance Plan for the RaleighDurham-Chapel Hill, NC 1997 8-hour
Ozone Maintenance Area.’’ at the end of
the table to read as follows:
■
§ 52.1770
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
5 In addition to a less stringent RVP standard, the
new modeling also utilizes updated models for onroad and off-road mobile emission sources.
E:\FR\FM\02JAR1.SGM
02JAR1
51
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 1 / Thursday, January 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
EPA-APPROVED NORTH CAROLINA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS
State
effective date
Provision
*
*
*
Supplement Maintenance Plan for the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC 1997 8-hour Ozone Maintenance Area and RVP Standard.
[FR Doc. 2013–31250 Filed 12–31–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R06–OAR–2010–0333; FRL–9904–72–
Region 6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Texas;
Reasonable Further Progress Plan,
Contingency Measures, Motor Vehicle
Emission Budgets, and a Vehicle Miles
Traveled Offset Analysis for the
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria 1997
8-Hour Severe Ozone Nonattainment
Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving two State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the State of Texas on April
1, 2010, and revised on May 6, 2013,
containing a reasonable further progress
(RFP) plan, RFP contingency measures
demonstration, motor vehicle emission
budgets (MVEBs), and a vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) offset analysis for the
Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) 1997
8-hour ozone severe nonattainment area.
EPA is approving SIP revisions in
accordance with the requirements of the
Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA
regulations.
DATES: This final rule is effective
February 3, 2014.
ADDRESSES: EPA established a docket
for this action under Docket ID Number
EPA–R06–OAR–2010–0333. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
EPA approval
date
Federal Register citation
1/2/14
*
*
[Insert citation of publication].
*
3/27/2013
site. Although listed in the electronic
docket, some information is not publicly
available, i.e., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy for public inspection during
normal business hours at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700,
Dallas, Texas.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Carl Young, Air Planning Section (6PD–
L), Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700,
Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, telephone
(214) 665–6645; email address
young.carl@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Throughout this document, whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. On September 9, 2013 (78 FR
55029), EPA published a proposed
approval of the 2010 RFP plan, RFP
contingency measures, MVEBs, and
VMT offset analysis for the HGB severe
1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area.
The SIP revisions for this action were
formally submitted by the State of Texas
on April 1, 2010, and revised on May 6,
2013. The SIP revisions address the RFP
and RFP contingency measures
requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, and establish MVEBs for 2013.
The revision also provides a VMT offset
analysis demonstration, a severe area
requirement, which shows the area does
not need any additional transportation
control measures (TCMs) or
transportation control strategies (TCSs)
Explanation
*
to keep mobile source emissions below
the established emissions ceiling. EPA’s
rationale for our proposed action is
explained in the September 9, 2013
proposed rulemaking as well as a more
detailed description of the two
submittals, and will not be restated
here. EPA is approving the SIP revisions
because they satisfy the RFP, RFP
contingency measures, and
transportation conformity requirements
for MVEBs of section 110 and part D of
the CAA and associated EPA
regulations, and section 182(d)(1)(A) of
the CAA.
II. Response to Comments
We received several comments from
the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality. In addition to
supporting our proposed approval, the
state asked for clarification to support
consistency across TCEQ and EPA
documents for a number of items.
Comment 1. Table 1: Revisions to the
2002 RFP Base Year Emissions
Inventory on Page 55031 is not the
original 2002 RFP Base Year. It is an
attainment demonstration base year
table. Table 2: RFP 2002 Baseline
Emissions Inventory Summary is the
revised RFP Base Year Emissions
Inventory and is correct. Table 1 needs
to be updated to contain the original
base year information.
Response 1: EPA acknowledges that
some confusion may have occurred with
the labeling of the base year columns in
this table due to the fact that there were
multiple submittals with one partial
submittal, and with multiple references
to base years. We have clarified Table 1
by re-labeling the base year columns
and republishing it below to better
reflect the years for which the values
were calculated. The values in the
columns remain unchanged.
TABLE 1—REVISIONS TO THE 2002 RFP BASE YEAR EMISSIONS INVENTORY
[Tons/day]
Source type
Previously
approved
Submittal date
Point .................................................................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Dec 31, 2013
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
VOC
NOX
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Revised
inventory *
339.48
E:\FR\FM\02JAR1.SGM
339.29
02JAR1
Previously
approved
297.12
Revised
inventory *
316.62
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 1 (Thursday, January 2, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47-51]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-31250]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0563; FRL-9904-89-Region 4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North
Carolina: Non-Interference Demonstration for Removal of Federal Low-
Reid Vapor Pressure Requirement for the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving the State of North Carolina's March 27, 2013,
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to the State's approved
Maintenance Plan for the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill 1997 8-hour Ozone
Maintenance Area (Triangle Area). Specifically, North Carolina's
revision, including updated modeling, shows that the Triangle 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 three portions (Wake and Durham Counties, and a portion of
Granville County) of the Triangle Area during the high-ozone season.
The State included a technical demonstration with the revision to
demonstrate that the less-stringent RVP standard of 9.0 psi in these
areas would not interfere with continued maintenance of the 1997 8-hour
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (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 Triangle Area from the list of areas
that are currently subject to the Federal 7.8 psi RVP requirements. In
addition, EPA is also approving changes to the motor vehicle emission
budgets (MVEBs) used in the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the
Triangle Area. EPA has determined that North Carolina's March 27, 2013,
SIP revision with respect to the modeling changes and associated
technical demonstration, and with respect to the updated MVEBs, is
consistent with the applicable provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA or
Act). Should EPA decide to remove the subject portions of the Triangle
Area from those areas subject to the 7.8 psi Federal RVP requirements,
such action will occur in a subsequent rulemaking.
DATES: This rule will be effective on February 3, 2014.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0563. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential
Business Information or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street
[[Page 48]]
SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404) 562-
9043. Mr. Lakeman can be reached via electronic mail at
lakeman.sean@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background of the Triangle Area
II. Background of the Gasoline Volatility Requirement
III. Background of Mobile Source Inventories and Motor Vehicle
Emission Budgets Update
IV. This Action
V. Final Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background of the Triangle Area
In 1991, the Triangle Area was designated as a moderate
nonattainment area pursuant to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694
(November 6, 1991). Under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the Triangle
nonattainment area was composed of Durham and Wake Counties, and the
Dutchville Township portion of Granville County. 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 part of the RVP requirements associated with its
nonattainment designation, gasoline sold in the Triangle 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
Triangle Area, on April 18, 1994, the Area was redesignated to
attainment for the 1-hour ozone standard, based on 1989-1992 ambient
air quality monitoring data. See 59 FR 18300. North Carolina's
redesignation request for the 1-hour ozone Triangle Area did not,
however, include a request for the Area to be removed from the list of
areas subject to the 7.8 psi RVP standard. As such, the 7.8 RVP
requirement remained in place for Durham and Wake Counties, and the
Dutchville Township portion of Granville County when the Triangle Area
was designated nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Under the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the Triangle Area was expanded from Durham and
Wake Counties, and the Dutchville Township portion of Granville County
to also include Franklin, Johnston, Orange, and Person Counties, the
remainder of Granville County and Baldwin, Center, New Hope and
Williams Townships in Chatham County. See 69 FR 23857 (April 30, 2004).
In 2007, the Triangle Area was redesignated to attainment for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 72 FR 72948, (December 26, 2007). The Triangle
Area was later designated as attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012).
II. Background 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 high ozone 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 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
limits of CAA section 211(h).\1\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 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
in a nonattainment area 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
[[Page 49]]
volatility standard. As noted above, however, North Carolina did not
request relaxation of the applicable 7.8 psi RVP standard when the
Triangle 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 Triangle 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.
III. Background of Mobile Source Inventories and Motor Vehicle Emission
Budgets Update
On June 7, 2007, the State of North Carolina, through NC DENR,
submitted a final request for EPA to: (1) Redesignate the Triangle Area
to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard; and (2) approve a
North Carolina SIP revision containing a maintenance plan for the
Triangle Area. On December 26, 2007 (72 FR 72948), EPA approved the
redesignation request for the Triangle Area. Additionally, EPA approved
the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan including nitrogen oxides
(NOX) MVEBs for the Triangle Area.\2\ These approvals were
based on EPA's determination that the State of North Carolina had
demonstrated that the Triangle Area met the criteria for redesignation
to attainment specified in the CAA, including the determination that
the entire Triangle Area had attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In the December 26, 2007, final rule EPA also approved NC
DENR's determination that on-road emissions of VOC are insignificant
for transportation conformity purposes. We are not addressing that
insignificance finding in today's rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the time of original redesignation request, the on-road motor
vehicle inventory was generating by the MOBILE6.2 model, which at the
time was the current MVEB model. The change to the maintenance plan
discussed above includes a MVEB generated by the MOVES model which has
since replaced the MOBILE6.2 model. In addition, the model used to
calculate the original non-road inventory (NONROAD2005c) has also since
been updated by a new non-road inventory model (NONROAD2008a).
As a result of these new models and the revised emission associated
with a relaxed RVP standard, the safety margin \3\ calculations
provided in the revised maintenance plan have changes from the previous
margins included with the original maintenance plan. Therefore, North
Carolina's revision includes a reallocation of the safety margin to the
NOX MVEB based upon the revised calculations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ A safety margin is the difference between the attainment
level of emissions from all source categories (i.e., point, area,
and mobile) and the projected level of emissions from all source
categories. The State may choose to allocate some of the safety
margin to the MVEBs, for transportation conformity purposes, so long
as the total level of emissions from all source categories remains
equal to or less than the attainment level of emissions. (40 CFR
93.124(a)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NC DENR is currently allocating portions of the available safety
margin to the MVEBs to allow for unanticipated vehicle miles traveled
growth as well as changes to future vehicle mix assumptions that
influence the emission estimations. A total of 14,396 kilograms (kg)
(15.87 tons per day (tpd)) and 13,563 kg (14.95 tpd) from the available
NOX safety margins in 2008 and 2017, respectively, were
added to the MVEBs for the Triangle Area.
IV. This Action
On October 30, 2013 (78 FR 64896), EPA proposed approval of North
Carolina's March 27, 2013, revision to the State's approved 1997 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan for the Triangle Area. Specifically, North
Carolina's revision, including updated modeling, shows that the
Triangle Area would continue to maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard
if the currently applicable RVP standard for gasoline of 7.8 psi were
modified to 9.0 psi during the high-ozone season. In addition, the
revision included changes to the MVEBs used in the 1997 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan for the Triangle Area. No adverse comments were
received on this proposed action and EPA is hereby finalizing approval
of the revision.
The Triangle Area 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 December 26, 2007. See 72 FR 72948. This
rulemaking approves a revision to the 1997 8-hour ozone Maintenance
Plan for the Triangle Area submitted by the NC DENR. Specifically, EPA
is approving changes to the maintenance plan, including updated
modeling, that shows that the Triangle Area can continue to maintain
the 1997 ozone standard without reliance on emission reductions based
upon the use of gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi in any of the Triangle
Area counties during the high ozone season--June 1 through September
15. EPA is also concluding that the new modeling demonstrates that the
Triangle Area would continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard
with the use of gasoline with an RVP of 9.0 psi throughout the Triangle
Area during the high ozone season. Consistent with section 110(l) of
the Act, EPA also concludes that the use of gasoline with an RVP of 9.0
psi throughout the Maintenance Plan Areas during the high ozone season
would not interfere with other applicable requirements of the Act.
Section 110(l) requires that a revision to the SIP not interfere
with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress (as defined in section 171), or any other applicable
requirement of the Act. 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 March 27, 2013, SIP revision, including review of section
110(l) requirements can be found in the proposed rule published on
October 30, 2013, at 78 FR 64896.
This rulemaking approves the State's revision to its existing
maintenance plan for the Triangle Area demonstrating that the Area can
continue to maintain the standard without relying upon gasoline with an
RVP of 7.8 psi being sold in the Triangle 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
Triangle Area.\4\
[[Page 50]]
Additionally, the new modeling conducted by North Carolina to account
for the requested relaxation of the applicable RVP standard in a
portion of the Triangle Area also results in changes to the safety
margin associated with the maintenance plan.\5\ As such, the North
Carolina revision includes a reallocation of the safety margin among
the NOx MVEBs for the Triangle Area, which EPA is also
approving today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The decision regarding removal of Federal RVP requirements
pursuant to section 211(h) in the Triangle 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.
\5\ In addition to a less stringent RVP standard, the new
modeling also utilizes updated models for on-road and off-road
mobile emission sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Final Action
EPA is approving the State of North Carolina's March 27, 2013,
revision to its Maintenance Plan for the Triangle 1997 8-hour Ozone
Maintenance Area. Specifically, EPA is approving the State's showing
that the Triangle Area can continue to maintain the 1997 ozone standard
without emissions reductions associated with the use of 7.8 psi RVP
gasoline in the three portions of the Triangle Area currently subject
to the 7.8 psi RVP standard during the high ozone season--June 1
through September 15.
EPA is approving the revised and updated modeling submitted by the
State, which shows that the Triangle Area can continue to maintain the
1997 ozone standard if the applicable RVP standard in the three
portions of the Triangle Area. EPA is also approving the revised
NOX MVEBs for 2008 and 2017 including the revised and
reallocated safety margin among the NOX MVEBs for the
Triangle Area.
EPA has determined that North Carolina's March 27, 2013, SIP
revision, including the technical demonstration associated with the
State's request for the removal of the Federal RVP requirements, and
the updated MVEBs are consistent with the applicable provisions of the
CAA. Should EPA decide to remove the subject portions of the Triangle
Area from those areas subject to the 7.8 psi Federal RVP requirements,
such action will occur in a separate, subsequent rulemaking.
VI. 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
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 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 rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by March 3, 2014. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements and Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: December 18, 2013.
Beverly H. Banister,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52, is amended as follows:
PART 52--[APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart II--North Carolina
0
2. Section 52.1770(e), is amended by adding a new entry for
``Supplement Maintenance Plan for the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC
1997 8-hour Ozone Maintenance Area.'' at the end of the table to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
[[Page 51]]
EPA-Approved North Carolina Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State EPA approval Federal Register
Provision effective date date citation Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Supplement Maintenance Plan for 3/27/2013 1/2/14 [Insert citation of .....................
the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, publication].
NC 1997 8-hour Ozone Maintenance
Area and RVP Standard.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2013-31250 Filed 12-31-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
