Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina; Inspection and Maintenance Program Updates, 69051-69057 [2014-27030]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
2. In § 25.2, revise the definition of
‘‘ATF’’ to read as follows:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
§ 25.2
40 CFR Part 52
■
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
ATF means the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
*
*
*
*
*
[EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0772; FRL–9919–10Region 4]
3. In § 25.6, revise paragraph (j) to
read as follows:
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; North Carolina;
Inspection and Maintenance Program
Updates
§ 25.6
AGENCY:
■
Accessing records in the system.
*
*
*
*
*
(j) Access to the NICS Index for
purposes unrelated to NICS background
checks required by the Brady Act.
Access to the NICS Index for purposes
unrelated to NICS background checks
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 922(t) shall be
limited to uses for the purposes of:
(1) Providing information to Federal,
state, tribal, or local criminal justice
agencies in connection with the
issuance of a firearm-related or
explosives-related permit or license,
including permits or licenses to possess,
acquire, or transfer a firearm, or to carry
a concealed firearm, or to import,
manufacture, deal in, or purchase
explosives;
(2) Responding to an inquiry from the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms,
and Explosives in connection with a
civil or criminal law enforcement
activity relating to the Gun Control Act
(18 U.S.C. Chapter 44) or the National
Firearms Act (26 U.S.C. Chapter 53); or,
(3) Disposing of firearms in the
possession of a Federal, state, tribal, or
local criminal justice agency.
*
*
*
*
*
4. In § 25.9, revise paragraph (b)(1)(i)
to read as follows:
■
§ 25.9 Retention and destruction of
records in the system.
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) NICS denied transaction records
obtained or created in the course of the
operation of the system will be retained
in the Audit Log for 10 years, after
which time they will be transferred to
an appropriate FBI-maintained
electronic database.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: November 13, 2014.
Eric H. Holder, Jr.,
Attorney General.
[FR Doc. 2014–27386 Filed 11–19–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:14 Nov 19, 2014
Jkt 235001
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final
action to approve State Implementation
Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
State of North Carolina, through the
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (NC
DENR) on January 31, 2008, May 24,
2010, October 11, 2013, and February
11, 2014, pertaining to rules for changes
to the North Carolina Inspection and
Maintenance (I/M) program.
Specifically, these SIP revisions update
the North Carolina I/M program as well
as repeal one rule that is included in the
federally-approved SIP.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective
on January 20, 2015 without further
notice, unless EPA receives relevant
adverse comment by December 22,
2014. If EPA receives such comment,
EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in
the Federal Register informing the
public that this rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2013–0772, 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–
0772,’’ Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae
Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
69051
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–
0772’’. 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
E:\FR\FM\20NOR1.SGM
20NOR1
69052
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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:
Nacosta Ward, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street,
SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The
telephone number is (404) 562–9140.
Ms. Ward can be reached via electronic
mail at ward.nacosta@epa.gov. For
information regarding the I/M program,
contact Ms. Amanetta Somerville, Air
Quality Modeling and Transportation
Section, at the same address above.
Telephone number: (404) 562–9025;
email address: somerville.amanetta@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Today’s Action
II. Background
III. EPA’s Analysis of North Carolina’s SIP
Revisions
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Today’s Action
EPA is approving four SIP revisions
submitted by NC DENR on January 31,
2008, May 24, 2010, October 11, 2013,
and February 11, 2014. Specifically,
these SIP revisions relate to changes for
North Carolina’s I/M rules as well as the
repeal of one rule (section 15A NCAC
2D .1004 within the Motor Vehicle
Emission Control Standards).
The January 31, 2008, SIP revision
submitted by NC DENR involves
multiple regulatory changes to the North
Carolina SIP. This action, however,
pertains only to the portion of North
Carolina’s January 31, 2008, SIP revision
which revises section 15A NCAC 02D
.1000, Motor Vehicle Emission Control
Standard, to account for the repeal of
regulation 15A NCAC 02D .1004,
Tailpipe Emission Standards for Carbon
Monoxide (CO) and Hydrocarbon (HC).
Regulation 15A NCAC 2D .1004, was
repealed because it is obsolete, and
today, EPA is removing this provision
from the SIP. The requirement for
tailpipe emission testing for passenger
motor vehicles has been replaced by onboard diagnostics (OBD) testing in 15A
NCAC 02D .1005. This change to North
Carolina’s I/M rules became State
effective on July 1, 2007.1
The May 24, 2010, SIP revision
submitted by NC DENR involves
1 EPA notes that OBD is more accurate than
tailpipe testing and provides for earlier detection of
vehicles that do not meet the performance
standards.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:14 Nov 19, 2014
Jkt 235001
additional changes to the North Carolina
I/M program, however, on October 11,
2013, NC DENR submitted a subsequent
SIP revision to supplement and replace
the May 24, 2010, revision. Specifically,
the May 24, 2010, submission included
changes regarding the I/M portion of the
North Carolina SIP narrative to reflect
changes to the areas impacted by the
North Carolina I/M program and the
internal procedures for the management
of the I/M program. These changes were
revised by the October 11, 2013, SIP
revision, which also amended the SIP to
reflect changes to the internal
procedures for the management of the
I/M program.
The October 11, 2013, SIP revision
submitted by NC DENR also provided a
technical demonstration of noninterference to address whether pending
changes to the State’s I/M program
would interfere with air quality in North
Carolina areas subject to the I/M
program. The pending rule changes
were triggered by North Carolina
General Assembly Session Law 2012–
199, which incorporated an exemption
from emission inspection for the three
newest model year vehicles with less
than 70,000 miles on their odometers in
all areas in the State where I/M is
required. In addition, these rule changes
were also necessitated by the North
Carolina General Assembly Session Law
2011–95, which exempted plug-in
vehicles from emission inspection
requirements.
On February 11, 2014, as a
supplement to North Carolina’s October
11, 2013, SIP revision, NC DENR
submitted a SIP revision incorporating
the necessary rule changes related to the
North Carolina General Assembly
Session Laws 2011–95 and 2012–199
statutory exemption from emission
inspection for plug-in vehicles and for
the three newest model year vehicles
with less than 70,000 miles on their
odometers in all areas in the State where
I/M is required under SIP section 15A
NCAC 02D .1000, Motor Vehicle
Emission Control Standard. Specifically
rules 15A NCAC 02D .1002, .1003,
.1005, and .1006 were amended, and
15A NCAC 02D .1009 was repealed.2
More information on EPA’s analysis
of North Carolina’s SIP revisions related
to changes in the State’s I/M program is
provided Section III of this rulemaking.
2 While
North Carolina’s submission provides
changes to regulation 15A NCAC 02D .1006 and a
repeal of 15A NCAC 02D .1009, these regulations
were never incorporated into the federallyapproved SIP and thus no action on EPA’s part is
needed related to the changes for regulation 15A
NCAC 02D .1006, and the repeal of 15A NCAC 02D
.1009.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
II. Background
The North Carolina I/M program
began in 1982 in Mecklenburg County.
From 1986 through 1991 the program
expanded to include eight additional
counties (Wake, Forsyth, Guilford,
Durham, Gaston, Cabarrus, Orange and
Union County) based on a ‘‘tail-pipe’’
emissions test. In 1999, the North
Carolina General Assembly passed
legislation to expand the coverage area
for the I/M program in the State in order
to gain additional emission reductions
to achieve the 1997 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standards
in the State. The vehicle testing
requirements in these expanded
counties were OBD requirements rather
than tail-pipe testing requirements.
Starting in October 2002, the original
nine counties converted from tail-pipe
testing to the new OBD emission testing
for all model year (MY) 1996 and newer
light duty gasoline vehicles and
continued tail-pipe testing of MY 1995
and older vehicles. The program began
to expand from nine counties starting in
July 2003 to a total of 48 counties (the
nine original counties plus Alamance,
Brunswick, Buncombe, Burke, Caldwell,
Carteret, Catawba, Chatham, Cleveland,
Craven, Cumberland, Davidson,
Edgecombe, Franklin, Granville,
Harnett, Haywood, Henderson,
Johnston, Lee, Lenoir, Moore, Nash,
New Hanover, Onslow, Orange, Pitt,
Randolph, Robeson, Rockingham,
Rutherford, Stanly, Stokes, Surry, Wake,
Wayne, Wilkes, and Wilson) on July 1,
2006. At the time of full implementation
of the OBD program, inspection stations
were performing the OBD emissions test
on MY 1996 and newer vehicles, and
tailpipe testing on MY 1995 and older
vehicles were discontinued.
EPA most recently approved changes
to North Carolina’s I/M program in the
SIP on October 30, 2002. See 67 FR
66056. Since that time, North Carolina
has submitted additional changes to its
program, which EPA is now acting
upon. Specifically, North Carolina
submitted SIP revisions related to the
State’s I/M program on January 31,
2008, May 24, 2010, October 11, 2013,
and February 11, 2014. EPA’s analysis
of the aforementioned North Carolina
SIP revisions related to changes in the
State’s I/M program is provided Section
III of this rulemaking.
III. EPA’s Analysis of North Carolina’s
SIP Revisions
Through SIP revisions provided on
January 31, 2008, May 24, 2010, October
11, 2013, and February 11, 2014, NC
DENR requested that EPA take action to
update the State’s implementation plan
E:\FR\FM\20NOR1.SGM
20NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
to include changes for the I/M program
in North Carolina. For any changes to
provisions that are already included in
the federally-approved SIP, EPA must
consider section 110(l) of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act). Section 110(l) of the
CAA 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. The 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 SIP
revisions related to changes for the I/M
program, including review of section
110(l) requirements, is provided below.
On October 11, 2013, NC DENR
submitted a SIP revision to provide the
non-interference technical
demonstration related to the changes for
North Carolina’s I/M program that
resulted from the passage of North
Carolina General Assembly Session
Laws 2011–95 and 2012–199 as well as
the other revisions described herein to
the State’s I/M program, such as the
discontinuation of tailpipe testing MY
1995 and older vehicles. This noninterference demonstration also
accounts for the previous repeal of
regulation 15A NCAC 02D .1004, where
applicable. Specifically, this
demonstration considers the changes to
the State’s I/M program in three
geographical areas that cover the entire
48 counties where the I/M program is
required. The three geographical areas
are as follows: The Charlotte Area; the
Greensboro Area; and the remainder of
the 48 counties not covered in the
Charlotte and Greensboro Area analyses.
More information on the noninterference demonstration and EPA’s
analysis for each Area is described
below.
a. Analysis of the Non-Interference
Demonstration for the Charlotte Area
As indicated above, on October 11,
2013, NC DENR provided a technical
demonstration with modeling to
account for changes to the North
Carolina I/M program in the seven
county Charlotte Area.3 Specifically, the
technical demonstration modifies the
existing 175A(a) maintenance plan for
the Charlotte Area to account for
changes to the I/M program including
the exemption of the three newest
model year vehicles under 70,000 miles
and plug in vehicles for this area, and
69053
the change in I/M compliance rate from
95 percent to 96 percent. North
Carolina’s October 11, 2013, SIP
revision includes an evaluation of the
impact that the increase in model year
exemptions would have on the
attainment and or maintenance of the
1997 and 2008 ozone standards and on
other applicable NAAQS.
Specifically, North Carolina’s October
11, 2013, SIP revision includes a
technical demonstration which revised
mobile source emissions modeling using
EPA’s approved models—Motor Vehicle
Emissions Simulator (MOVES) 2010b—
to demonstrate non-interference for the
SIP revisions to expand the I/M
exemptions and to account for the
increase in the I/M compliance rate
from 95 percent to 96 percent. In that
technical demonstration, NC DENR
provided information regarding the
emissions projections from the I/M
program changes for carbon monoxide
and for the precursor of ozone (i.e.,
nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile
organic compounds (VOCs)). To
determine these emissions, NC DENR’s
demonstration compared the current 95
percent I/M compliance rate and the 1
model year exemption emissions
inventory to the 96 percent I/M
compliance rate and the 3 model year
exemption for the Charlotte Area. This
comparison for the Charlotte Area is
shown below in Table 1.
TABLE 1—CHANGES IN EMISSIONS FOR CHARLOTTE AREA
Current I/M
program
(95% compliance
rate, 1 year
exemption)
Emissions
(kg/day)
Target I/M
program
(96% compliance
rate, 3 year
exemption)
98,157
48,545
1,047,712
98,122
48,523
1,047,737
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
NOX ............................................................................................................................
VOC ...........................................................................................................................
CO ..............................................................................................................................
Table 1 above indicates an emissions
benefit for the changes to North
Carolina’s I/M program with regard to
the ozone precursor emissions (i.e., NOX
and VOC), and a slight emissions
increase with regards to emissions for
CO. There is no difference in emissions
anticipated as a result of North Carolina
I/M program changes for particulate
matter (PM), lead, sulfur dioxide (SO2)
or nitrogen dioxide (NO2). Accordingly,
in this action, EPA is making the
determination that the applicable
NAAQS 4 of interest for the noninterference demonstration required by
section 110(l) of the CAA are the ozone
and CO standards.
In addition to the information
provided in North Carolina’s technical
demonstration, EPA reviewed the most
recent preliminary ozone air quality
data for the Charlotte Area, and it
appears that the Area is currently
monitoring attaining levels for all ozone
NAAQS (including the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for which the area is
currently designated nonattainment).
While the Charlotte Area is currently a
nonattainment area for ozone, the
changes to North Carolina’s I/M
3 The Charlotte Area is comprised of
Mecklenburg, Cabarrus, Gaston, Lincoln, Rowan,
Union and Iredell Counties.
13:14 Nov 19, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
¥35
¥22
24
program are not anticipated to increase
emissions in ozone precursors (i.e., VOC
and NOX—see Table 1 above), so EPA
does not expect these changes to
interfere with the Area’s ability to attain
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA
also notes that the Charlotte Area has
not been designated for the SO2
NAAQS, and is currently designated
unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,
the 2008 Lead NAAQS and the 2010
NO2 NAAQS.
The Charlotte Area is also in
attainment of the CO NAAQS and has
4 The six NAAQS for which EPA establishes
health and welfare based standards are CO, Lead,
NO2, Ozone, PM, and Sulfur Dioxide.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Difference
between 95%
and 96%
compliance rate
E:\FR\FM\20NOR1.SGM
20NOR1
69054
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
current monitoring levels of CO well
below the standard. Even though there
is a slight emissions increase from this
rule change for CO emissions, given the
Charlotte Area’s CO monitoring levels
that are well below the CO NAAQS,
EPA does not believe that the slight
increase in CO emissions will cause the
Area to come out of compliance with
the CO NAAQS.5 Consequently, EPA
has concluded that the new modeling
associated with these changes
demonstrates that the changes for North
Carolina’s I/M program in the seven
counties in the Charlotte Area will not
interfere with the Area’s ability to attain
and maintain the NAAQS.
b. Analysis of the Non-Interference
Demonstration for the Greensboro Area
In its October 11, 2013, SIP revision,
NC DENR provided a technical
demonstration with modeling to
account for changes to the North
Carolina I/M program in the threecounty Greensboro Area 6 similar to the
demonstration that was conducted for
the Charlotte Area to account for the
same changes to North Carolina’s I/M
program. Table 2 provides the changes
in emissions that will result from the
changes to North Carolina’s I/M
program in the Greensboro Area.
TABLE 2—CHANGES IN EMISSIONS FOR GREENSBORO AREA
Current I/M
program
(95% compliance
rate, 1 year
exemption)
Emissions
(kg/day)
Target I/M
program
(96% compliance
rate, 3 year
exemption)
36,157
19,965
492,801
36,143
19,954
492,720
NOX ............................................................................................................................
VOC ...........................................................................................................................
CO ..............................................................................................................................
Table 2 above indicates an emissions
benefit for the changes to North
Carolina’s I/M program with regard to
the ozone precursor emissions (i.e., NOX
and VOC), and for CO. There is no
difference in emissions anticipated as a
result of North Carolina I/M program
changes for PM, Lead, SO2 or NO2. In
this action, EPA is making the
determination that the applicable
NAAQS of interest for the noninterference demonstration required by
section 110(l) of the CAA are the ozone
and CO standards.
In addition to the information
provided in North Carolina’s technical
demonstration, EPA reviewed the most
recent preliminary ozone air quality
data for the Greensboro Area, and it
appears that the area is monitoring
attaining levels for all ozone NAAQS.
The Greensboro Area has not been
designated for the SO2 NAAQS, and is
currently designated unclassifiable/
attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS,
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2008 Lead
NAAQS, the 2008 8-hour Ozone
NAAQS and the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.
Consequently, EPA has concluded that
the new modeling associated with these
changes demonstrates that the changes
for North Carolina’s I/M program in the
three counties of the Greensboro Area
will not interfere with the Area’s ability
to attain and maintain the NAAQS.
Difference
between 95%
and 96%
compliance rate
¥15
¥11
¥82
c. Analysis of the Non-Interference
Demonstration of the Remaining
Counties Area
NC DENR provided a technical
demonstration with modeling to
account for changes to the North
Carolina I/M program in the 38 counties
outside of the seven Charlotte Area
counties and the three Greensboro Area
counties (hereafter referred to as the
‘‘Remaining Counties Area’’) 7 in its
October 11, 2013, SIP revision. Table 3
provides the changes in emissions that
will result from the change to North
Carolina’s I/M program in the
Remaining Counties.
TABLE 3—CHANGES IN EMISSIONS FOR REMAINING COUNTIES AREA
Current I/M
program
(95% compliance
rate, 1 year
exemption)
Emissions
(kg/day)
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
NOX ............................................................................................................................
VOC ...........................................................................................................................
CO ..............................................................................................................................
Target I/M
program
(96% compliance
rate, 3 year
exemption)
226,196
115,443
2,560,587
226,113
115,384
2,560,367
Difference
between 95%
and 96%
compliance rate
¥83
¥59
¥220
Table 3 above indicates an emissions
benefit for the changes to North
Carolina’s I/M program with regard to
the ozone precursor emissions (i.e., NOX
and VOC), and for CO. There is no
difference in emissions anticipated as a
result of North Carolina I/M program
changes for PM, Lead, SO2 or NO2. In
this action, EPA is making the
determination that the applicable
NAAQS of interest for the noninterference demonstration required by
section 110(l) of the CAA are the ozone
and CO standards.
In addition to the information
provided in North Carolina’s technical
demonstration, EPA reviewed the most
recent preliminary ozone air quality
data for this Area, and it appears that
the Remaining Counties Area is
monitoring attaining levels for all ozone
NAAQS. The Remaining Counties Area
has not been designated for the SO2
NAAQS, and is currently designated
5 Based upon the projected CO emissions increase
of 24 kg/day, the difference in CO emissions per
day of the target I/M Program represents an increase
of only 0.002291% over CO emissions under the
Current I/M Program.
6 The Greensboro Area is comprised of Guilford,
Forsyth, and Davidson Counties.
7 The remaining counties include: Alamance,
Brunswick, Buncombe, Burke, Caldwell, Carteret,
Catawba, Chatham, Cleveland, Craven, Cumberland,
Durham, Edgecombe, Franklin, Granville, Harnett,
Haywood, Henderson, Johnston, Lee, Lenoir,
Moore, Nash, New Hanover, Onslow, Orange, Pitt,
Randolph, Robeson, Rockingham, Rutherford,
Stanly, Stokes, Surry, Wake, Wayne, Wilkes, and
Wilson Counties.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:14 Nov 19, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20NOR1.SGM
20NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,
the 2008 Lead NAAQS, the 2008 8-hour
Ozone NAAQS and the 2010 NO2
NAAQS. Consequently, EPA has
concluded that the new modeling
associated with these changes
demonstrates that the changes for North
Carolina’s I/M program in the
Remaining Counties Area will not
interfere with the Area’s ability to attain
and maintain the NAAQS.
d. Conclusion
Based upon the above analysis, EPA’s
overall conclusion with regards to North
Carolina’s changes to the State’s I/M
program is that these changes are
consistent with the CAA and will not
interfere with any of the affected Areas’
ability to attain and maintain the
NAAQS. While the individual area
69055
analyses appear to demonstrate that
these changes provide an overall
emissions benefit for each Area, the
benefit is even more pronounced when
the total emission reductions from the
entire area covered by the North
Carolina I/M program are considered.
Table 4 below provides the changes in
emissions that will result from the
change to North Carolina’s I/M program
in all of the affected counties.
TABLE 4—CHANGES IN EMISSIONS FOR ALL AFFECTED COUNTIES
Current I/M
program
(95% compliance
rate, 1 year
exemption)
Emissions
(kg/day)
NOX ............................................................................................................................
VOC ...........................................................................................................................
CO ..............................................................................................................................
Table 4 above indicates an emissions
benefit for the changes to North
Carolina’s I/M program with regard to
the ozone precursor emissions (i.e., NOX
and VOC), and for CO.8 This provides
further support for EPA’s overall
determination that the changes to North
Carolina’s I/M program will not
interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS, or any
other applicable requirement of the
CAA.
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving changes to North
Carolina’s I/M program as provided in
SIP revisions dated January 31, 2008,
May 24, 2010, October 11, 2013, and
February 11, 2014. First, EPA is
approving the repeal of regulation 15A
NCAC 02D .1004 as provided in North
Carolina’s January 31, 2008. EPA has
made the determination that the repeal
of this regulation is acceptable because
it is obsolete and replaced by OBD. This
change to the program was accounted
for in North Carolina’s modeling
included with the October 11, 2013,
non-interference demonstrations. EPA is
also approving North Carolina’s rule
changes as provided in North Carolina’s
May 24, 2010, and February 11, 2014,
SIP revisions, which are also supported
by the State’s technical non-interference
demonstration provided through the
October 11, 2013 SIP revision. EPA has
made the determination that North
Carolina’s technical non-interference
demonstration supports a conclusion
that these rule changes will not interfere
8 As noted above, there are no difference in
emissions anticipated as a result of North Carolina’s
I/M program changes for PM, Lead, SO2 or NO2.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:14 Nov 19, 2014
Jkt 235001
Target I/M
program
(96% compliance
rate, 3 year
exemption)
360,510
183,953
4,101,100
360,377
183,860
4,100,823
with air quality goals in areas in North
Carolina. EPA has also made the
determination that these SIP revisions
with regard to the aforementioned
provisions are approvable because they
are consistent with section 110 of the
CAA.
EPA is publishing this rule without
prior proposal because the Agency
views these actions as non-controversial
revisions and anticipates no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed
rules section of this Federal Register
publication, EPA is publishing a
separate document that will serve as the
proposal to approve the SIP revision
should relevant adverse comment be
filed. This rule will be effective on
January 20, 2015 without further notice
unless the Agency receives relevant
adverse comment by December 22,
2014. If EPA receives such comments,
EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. EPA will address all
relevant adverse comments received
during the comment period in a
subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period on this action.
Any parties interested in commenting
must do so by December 22, 2014. If no
such comments are received, this rule
will be effective on January 20, 2015
and no further action will be taken on
the proposed rule.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable federal regulations.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Difference
between 95%
and 96%
compliance rate
¥133
¥92
¥277
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 final action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
E:\FR\FM\20NOR1.SGM
20NOR1
69056
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
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).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), nor will it 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 January 20, 2015. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section
307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 23, 2014.
V. Anne Heard,
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. In § 52.1770:
a. Table 1 in paragraph (c) is amended
by revising the entries for ‘‘Sect .1002,’’
‘‘Sect .1003,’’ and ‘‘Sect .1005;’’ and
removing the entry for ‘‘Sect .1004.’’
■ b. In paragraph (e), the table is
amended by adding a new entry ‘‘NonInterference Demonstration for the
North Carolina Inspection and
Maintenance Program’’ at the end of the
table.
The revisions and addition read as
follows:
■
■
§ 52.1770
*
Identification of plan
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
TABLE 1—EPA APPROVED NORTH CAROLINA REGULATIONS
State citation
State effective
date
Title/subject
Subchapter 2D
*
*
*
*
*
Applicability ................................
Sect .1003 ..................................
Definitions ...................................
2/1/2014
Sect .1005 ..................................
On-Board Diagnostic Standards
1/1/2014
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Motor Vehicle Emissions Control Standard
*
*
Sect .1002 ..................................
*
Explanation
Air Pollution Control Requirements
*
Section .1000
EPA approval date
*
1/1/2014
*
*
*
11/20/2014 [Insert Federal Register citation].
11/20/2014 [Insert Federal Register citation].
11/20/2014 [Insert Federal Register citation].
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
EPA APPROVED NORTH CAROLINA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS
State effective
date
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Provision
*
*
Non-Interference Demonstration for the
North Carolina Inspection and Maintenance Program.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:57 Nov 19, 2014
Jkt 235001
EPA approval
date
*
10/11/2013
*
11/20/2014
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Federal Register citation
*
*
[Insert Federal Register citation].
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\20NOR1.SGM
20NOR1
Explanation
*
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
[FR Doc. 2014–27030 Filed 11–19–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 54
[WC Docket No. 13–184; FCC 14–99]
Modernization of the Schools and
Libraries ‘‘E-Rate’’ Program
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule; announcement of
effective date.
AGENCY:
On July 23, 2014, the Federal
Communications Commission
(Commission) released a document
which contained information collection
requirements for the schools and
libraries universal service mechanism
(E-rate) which required approval from
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB). The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) granted approval on
October 27, 2014, under emergency
processing for certain of the information
collection requirements contained in the
Report and Order as required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501–3520).
DATES: The amendments to
§§ 54.502(b)(3) and (5), 54.504(a), and
54.516(a) through (c), in WC Docket No.
13–184, FCC 14–99, that appeared in the
Federal Register at 79 FR 49160 on
August 19, 2014, and revised the
information collection OMB 3060–0806
as approved by OMB are effective
November 20, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa
Hone, Wireline Competition Bureau at
(202) 418–7400 or TTY (202) 418–0484.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Federal Communications Commission
has received OMB approval for the
changes to E-rate rules contained in
information collection OMB Control No:
3060–0806; Description of Services
Requested and Certification; Description
of Services Requested and Certification
Instructions; Services Ordered and
Certification; Services Ordered and
Certification Instructions (FCC Form
470 and Instructions; FCC Form 471 and
Instructions). The information
collection was revised in the Report and
Order and Further Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking in WC Docket 13–184
which appears at 79 FR 49160, August
19, 2014. The rules adopted in the
Report and Order that contain new or
modified information collection
requirements were not to become
effective until approved by the Office of
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:14 Nov 19, 2014
Jkt 235001
Management and Budget. Through this
document, the Commission announces
that it has received this approval (OMB
Control No: 3060–0806, Expiration Date
April 30, 2015) and that §§ 54.502(b)(3)
and (5), 54.504(a), and 54.516(a) through
(c) are effective November 20, 2014.
Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501–3520, an
agency may not conduct or sponsor a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid control
number. Notwithstanding any other
provisions of law, no person shall be
subject to any penalty for failing to
comply with the collection of
information subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act that does not display a
valid control number. Questions
concerning the OMB control numbers
and expiration dates should be directed
to Leslie F. Smith, Federal
Communications Commission, (202)
418–0217 or via the Internet at
Leslie.Smith@fcc.gov.
Federal Communications Commission.
Marlene H. Dortch,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014–27462 Filed 11–19–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[DA 13–2003; MB Docket No. 11–167; RM–
11645]
Radio Broadcasting Services;
Altamont, Oregon
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Audio Division, at the
request of Threshold Communications,
substitutes FM Channel 235C1 for
Channel 249C1 at Altamont, Oregon.
Channel 235C1 can be allotted at
Altamont in compliance with the
Commission’s minimum distance
separation requirements with a site
restriction of 20 km (12.6 miles)
northeast of Altamont, at 42–08–37
North Latitude and 121–30–19 West
Longitude.
DATES: Effective November 20, 2014,
and applicable November 11, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Deborah A. Dupont, Media Bureau,
(202) 418–2700.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
synopsis of the Commission’s Report
and Order, MB Docket No. 11–167,
adopted September 26, 2013, and
released September 27, 2013. The full
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
69057
text of this Commission decision is
available for inspection and copying
during normal business hours in the
FCC Information Center, Portals II, 445
12th Street SW., Room CY–A257,
Washington, DC 20554. The complete
text of this decision also may be
purchased from the Commission’s
duplicating contractor, Best Copy and
Printing, Inc., 445 12th Street SW.,
Room CY–B402, Washington, DC,
20554, (800) 378–3160, or via the
company’s Web site, www.bcpiweb.com.
This document does not contain
proposed information collection
requirements subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–
13. In addition, therefore, it does not
contain any proposed information
collection burden ‘‘for small business
concerns with fewer than 25
employees,’’ pursuant to the Small
Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002,
Public Law 107–198, see 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(4). The Commission will send a
copy of this Report and Order in a
report to be sent to Congress and the
Government Accountability Office
pursuant to the Congressional Review
Act, see U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Radio, Radio broadcasting.
Federal Communications Commission.
Nazifa Sawez
Assistant Chief, Audio Division, Media
Bureau.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Federal Communications
Commission amends 47 CFR part 73 as
follows:
PART 73—RADIO BROADCAST
SERVICES
1. The authority citation for part 73
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334, 336.
§ 73.202
[Amended]
2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM
Allotments under Oregon is amended by
removing Channel 249C1 at Altamont;
and by adding Channel 235C1 at
Altamont.
■
[FR Doc. 2014–27529 Filed 11–19–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
E:\FR\FM\20NOR1.SGM
20NOR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 224 (Thursday, November 20, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 69051-69057]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27030]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0772; FRL-9919-10-Region 4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North
Carolina; Inspection and Maintenance Program Updates
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to approve State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the State of North Carolina, through the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NC DENR) on January
31, 2008, May 24, 2010, October 11, 2013, and February 11, 2014,
pertaining to rules for changes to the North Carolina Inspection and
Maintenance (I/M) program. Specifically, these SIP revisions update the
North Carolina I/M program as well as repeal one rule that is included
in the federally-approved SIP.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective on January 20, 2015 without
further notice, unless EPA receives relevant adverse comment by
December 22, 2014. If EPA receives such comment, EPA will publish a
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that
this rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2013-0772, 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-2013-0772,'' Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. ``EPA-R04-OAR-
2013-0772''. 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
[[Page 69052]]
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: Nacosta Ward, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404)
562-9140. Ms. Ward can be reached via electronic mail at
ward.nacosta@epa.gov. For information regarding the I/M program,
contact Ms. Amanetta Somerville, Air Quality Modeling and
Transportation Section, at the same address above. Telephone number:
(404) 562-9025; email address: somerville.amanetta@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Today's Action
II. Background
III. EPA's Analysis of North Carolina's SIP Revisions
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Today's Action
EPA is approving four SIP revisions submitted by NC DENR on January
31, 2008, May 24, 2010, October 11, 2013, and February 11, 2014.
Specifically, these SIP revisions relate to changes for North
Carolina's I/M rules as well as the repeal of one rule (section 15A
NCAC 2D .1004 within the Motor Vehicle Emission Control Standards).
The January 31, 2008, SIP revision submitted by NC DENR involves
multiple regulatory changes to the North Carolina SIP. This action,
however, pertains only to the portion of North Carolina's January 31,
2008, SIP revision which revises section 15A NCAC 02D .1000, Motor
Vehicle Emission Control Standard, to account for the repeal of
regulation 15A NCAC 02D .1004, Tailpipe Emission Standards for Carbon
Monoxide (CO) and Hydrocarbon (HC). Regulation 15A NCAC 2D .1004, was
repealed because it is obsolete, and today, EPA is removing this
provision from the SIP. The requirement for tailpipe emission testing
for passenger motor vehicles has been replaced by on-board diagnostics
(OBD) testing in 15A NCAC 02D .1005. This change to North Carolina's I/
M rules became State effective on July 1, 2007.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA notes that OBD is more accurate than tailpipe testing
and provides for earlier detection of vehicles that do not meet the
performance standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The May 24, 2010, SIP revision submitted by NC DENR involves
additional changes to the North Carolina I/M program, however, on
October 11, 2013, NC DENR submitted a subsequent SIP revision to
supplement and replace the May 24, 2010, revision. Specifically, the
May 24, 2010, submission included changes regarding the I/M portion of
the North Carolina SIP narrative to reflect changes to the areas
impacted by the North Carolina I/M program and the internal procedures
for the management of the I/M program. These changes were revised by
the October 11, 2013, SIP revision, which also amended the SIP to
reflect changes to the internal procedures for the management of the I/
M program.
The October 11, 2013, SIP revision submitted by NC DENR also
provided a technical demonstration of non-interference to address
whether pending changes to the State's I/M program would interfere with
air quality in North Carolina areas subject to the I/M program. The
pending rule changes were triggered by North Carolina General Assembly
Session Law 2012-199, which incorporated an exemption from emission
inspection for the three newest model year vehicles with less than
70,000 miles on their odometers in all areas in the State where I/M is
required. In addition, these rule changes were also necessitated by the
North Carolina General Assembly Session Law 2011-95, which exempted
plug-in vehicles from emission inspection requirements.
On February 11, 2014, as a supplement to North Carolina's October
11, 2013, SIP revision, NC DENR submitted a SIP revision incorporating
the necessary rule changes related to the North Carolina General
Assembly Session Laws 2011-95 and 2012-199 statutory exemption from
emission inspection for plug-in vehicles and for the three newest model
year vehicles with less than 70,000 miles on their odometers in all
areas in the State where I/M is required under SIP section 15A NCAC 02D
.1000, Motor Vehicle Emission Control Standard. Specifically rules 15A
NCAC 02D .1002, .1003, .1005, and .1006 were amended, and 15A NCAC 02D
.1009 was repealed.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ While North Carolina's submission provides changes to
regulation 15A NCAC 02D .1006 and a repeal of 15A NCAC 02D .1009,
these regulations were never incorporated into the federally-
approved SIP and thus no action on EPA's part is needed related to
the changes for regulation 15A NCAC 02D .1006, and the repeal of 15A
NCAC 02D .1009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information on EPA's analysis of North Carolina's SIP
revisions related to changes in the State's I/M program is provided
Section III of this rulemaking.
II. Background
The North Carolina I/M program began in 1982 in Mecklenburg County.
From 1986 through 1991 the program expanded to include eight additional
counties (Wake, Forsyth, Guilford, Durham, Gaston, Cabarrus, Orange and
Union County) based on a ``tail-pipe'' emissions test. In 1999, the
North Carolina General Assembly passed legislation to expand the
coverage area for the I/M program in the State in order to gain
additional emission reductions to achieve the 1997 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standards in the State. The vehicle
testing requirements in these expanded counties were OBD requirements
rather than tail-pipe testing requirements. Starting in October 2002,
the original nine counties converted from tail-pipe testing to the new
OBD emission testing for all model year (MY) 1996 and newer light duty
gasoline vehicles and continued tail-pipe testing of MY 1995 and older
vehicles. The program began to expand from nine counties starting in
July 2003 to a total of 48 counties (the nine original counties plus
Alamance, Brunswick, Buncombe, Burke, Caldwell, Carteret, Catawba,
Chatham, Cleveland, Craven, Cumberland, Davidson, Edgecombe, Franklin,
Granville, Harnett, Haywood, Henderson, Johnston, Lee, Lenoir, Moore,
Nash, New Hanover, Onslow, Orange, Pitt, Randolph, Robeson, Rockingham,
Rutherford, Stanly, Stokes, Surry, Wake, Wayne, Wilkes, and Wilson) on
July 1, 2006. At the time of full implementation of the OBD program,
inspection stations were performing the OBD emissions test on MY 1996
and newer vehicles, and tailpipe testing on MY 1995 and older vehicles
were discontinued.
EPA most recently approved changes to North Carolina's I/M program
in the SIP on October 30, 2002. See 67 FR 66056. Since that time, North
Carolina has submitted additional changes to its program, which EPA is
now acting upon. Specifically, North Carolina submitted SIP revisions
related to the State's I/M program on January 31, 2008, May 24, 2010,
October 11, 2013, and February 11, 2014. EPA's analysis of the
aforementioned North Carolina SIP revisions related to changes in the
State's I/M program is provided Section III of this rulemaking.
III. EPA's Analysis of North Carolina's SIP Revisions
Through SIP revisions provided on January 31, 2008, May 24, 2010,
October 11, 2013, and February 11, 2014, NC DENR requested that EPA
take action to update the State's implementation plan
[[Page 69053]]
to include changes for the I/M program in North Carolina. For any
changes to provisions that are already included in the federally-
approved SIP, EPA must consider section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act). Section 110(l) of the CAA 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. The 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 SIP revisions
related to changes for the I/M program, including review of section
110(l) requirements, is provided below.
On October 11, 2013, NC DENR submitted a SIP revision to provide
the non-interference technical demonstration related to the changes for
North Carolina's I/M program that resulted from the passage of North
Carolina General Assembly Session Laws 2011-95 and 2012-199 as well as
the other revisions described herein to the State's I/M program, such
as the discontinuation of tailpipe testing MY 1995 and older vehicles.
This non-interference demonstration also accounts for the previous
repeal of regulation 15A NCAC 02D .1004, where applicable.
Specifically, this demonstration considers the changes to the State's
I/M program in three geographical areas that cover the entire 48
counties where the I/M program is required. The three geographical
areas are as follows: The Charlotte Area; the Greensboro Area; and the
remainder of the 48 counties not covered in the Charlotte and
Greensboro Area analyses. More information on the non-interference
demonstration and EPA's analysis for each Area is described below.
a. Analysis of the Non-Interference Demonstration for the Charlotte
Area
As indicated above, on October 11, 2013, NC DENR provided a
technical demonstration with modeling to account for changes to the
North Carolina I/M program in the seven county Charlotte Area.\3\
Specifically, the technical demonstration modifies the existing 175A(a)
maintenance plan for the Charlotte Area to account for changes to the
I/M program including the exemption of the three newest model year
vehicles under 70,000 miles and plug in vehicles for this area, and the
change in I/M compliance rate from 95 percent to 96 percent. North
Carolina's October 11, 2013, SIP revision includes an evaluation of the
impact that the increase in model year exemptions would have on the
attainment and or maintenance of the 1997 and 2008 ozone standards and
on other applicable NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Charlotte Area is comprised of Mecklenburg, Cabarrus,
Gaston, Lincoln, Rowan, Union and Iredell Counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, North Carolina's October 11, 2013, SIP revision
includes a technical demonstration which revised mobile source
emissions modeling using EPA's approved models--Motor Vehicle Emissions
Simulator (MOVES) 2010b--to demonstrate non-interference for the SIP
revisions to expand the I/M exemptions and to account for the increase
in the I/M compliance rate from 95 percent to 96 percent. In that
technical demonstration, NC DENR provided information regarding the
emissions projections from the I/M program changes for carbon monoxide
and for the precursor of ozone (i.e., nitrogen oxides (NOX)
and volatile organic compounds (VOCs)). To determine these emissions,
NC DENR's demonstration compared the current 95 percent I/M compliance
rate and the 1 model year exemption emissions inventory to the 96
percent I/M compliance rate and the 3 model year exemption for the
Charlotte Area. This comparison for the Charlotte Area is shown below
in Table 1.
Table 1--Changes in Emissions for Charlotte Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current I/M Target I/M
program (95% program (96% Difference
Emissions (kg/day) compliance rate, compliance rate, between 95% and
1 year 3 year 96% compliance
exemption) exemption) rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX.................................................... 98,157 98,122 -35
VOC.................................................... 48,545 48,523 -22
CO..................................................... 1,047,712 1,047,737 24
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 above indicates an emissions benefit for the changes to
North Carolina's I/M program with regard to the ozone precursor
emissions (i.e., NOX and VOC), and a slight emissions
increase with regards to emissions for CO. There is no difference in
emissions anticipated as a result of North Carolina I/M program changes
for particulate matter (PM), lead, sulfur dioxide (SO2) or
nitrogen dioxide (NO2). Accordingly, in this action, EPA is
making the determination that the applicable NAAQS \4\ of interest for
the non-interference demonstration required by section 110(l) of the
CAA are the ozone and CO standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The six NAAQS for which EPA establishes health and welfare
based standards are CO, Lead, NO2, Ozone, PM, and Sulfur
Dioxide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the information provided in North Carolina's
technical demonstration, EPA reviewed the most recent preliminary ozone
air quality data for the Charlotte Area, and it appears that the Area
is currently monitoring attaining levels for all ozone NAAQS (including
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for which the area is currently designated
nonattainment). While the Charlotte Area is currently a nonattainment
area for ozone, the changes to North Carolina's I/M program are not
anticipated to increase emissions in ozone precursors (i.e., VOC and
NOX--see Table 1 above), so EPA does not expect these
changes to interfere with the Area's ability to attain the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. EPA also notes that the Charlotte Area has not been
designated for the SO2 NAAQS, and is currently designated
unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2008 Lead NAAQS and the 2010 NO2
NAAQS.
The Charlotte Area is also in attainment of the CO NAAQS and has
[[Page 69054]]
current monitoring levels of CO well below the standard. Even though
there is a slight emissions increase from this rule change for CO
emissions, given the Charlotte Area's CO monitoring levels that are
well below the CO NAAQS, EPA does not believe that the slight increase
in CO emissions will cause the Area to come out of compliance with the
CO NAAQS.\5\ Consequently, EPA has concluded that the new modeling
associated with these changes demonstrates that the changes for North
Carolina's I/M program in the seven counties in the Charlotte Area will
not interfere with the Area's ability to attain and maintain the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Based upon the projected CO emissions increase of 24 kg/day,
the difference in CO emissions per day of the target I/M Program
represents an increase of only 0.002291% over CO emissions under the
Current I/M Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Analysis of the Non-Interference Demonstration for the Greensboro
Area
In its October 11, 2013, SIP revision, NC DENR provided a technical
demonstration with modeling to account for changes to the North
Carolina I/M program in the three-county Greensboro Area \6\ similar to
the demonstration that was conducted for the Charlotte Area to account
for the same changes to North Carolina's I/M program. Table 2 provides
the changes in emissions that will result from the changes to North
Carolina's I/M program in the Greensboro Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The Greensboro Area is comprised of Guilford, Forsyth, and
Davidson Counties.
Table 2--Changes in Emissions for Greensboro Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current I/M Target I/M
program (95% program (96% Difference
Emissions (kg/day) compliance rate, compliance rate, between 95% and
1 year 3 year 96% compliance
exemption) exemption) rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX.................................................... 36,157 36,143 -15
VOC.................................................... 19,965 19,954 -11
CO..................................................... 492,801 492,720 -82
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2 above indicates an emissions benefit for the changes to
North Carolina's I/M program with regard to the ozone precursor
emissions (i.e., NOX and VOC), and for CO. There is no
difference in emissions anticipated as a result of North Carolina I/M
program changes for PM, Lead, SO2 or NO2. In this
action, EPA is making the determination that the applicable NAAQS of
interest for the non-interference demonstration required by section
110(l) of the CAA are the ozone and CO standards.
In addition to the information provided in North Carolina's
technical demonstration, EPA reviewed the most recent preliminary ozone
air quality data for the Greensboro Area, and it appears that the area
is monitoring attaining levels for all ozone NAAQS. The Greensboro Area
has not been designated for the SO2 NAAQS, and is currently
designated unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS, the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2008 Lead NAAQS, the 2008
8-hour Ozone NAAQS and the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. Consequently, EPA
has concluded that the new modeling associated with these changes
demonstrates that the changes for North Carolina's I/M program in the
three counties of the Greensboro Area will not interfere with the
Area's ability to attain and maintain the NAAQS.
c. Analysis of the Non-Interference Demonstration of the Remaining
Counties Area
NC DENR provided a technical demonstration with modeling to account
for changes to the North Carolina I/M program in the 38 counties
outside of the seven Charlotte Area counties and the three Greensboro
Area counties (hereafter referred to as the ``Remaining Counties
Area'') \7\ in its October 11, 2013, SIP revision. Table 3 provides the
changes in emissions that will result from the change to North
Carolina's I/M program in the Remaining Counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The remaining counties include: Alamance, Brunswick,
Buncombe, Burke, Caldwell, Carteret, Catawba, Chatham, Cleveland,
Craven, Cumberland, Durham, Edgecombe, Franklin, Granville, Harnett,
Haywood, Henderson, Johnston, Lee, Lenoir, Moore, Nash, New Hanover,
Onslow, Orange, Pitt, Randolph, Robeson, Rockingham, Rutherford,
Stanly, Stokes, Surry, Wake, Wayne, Wilkes, and Wilson Counties.
Table 3--Changes in Emissions for Remaining Counties Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current I/M Target I/M
program (95% program (96% Difference
Emissions (kg/day) compliance rate, compliance rate, between 95% and
1 year 3 year 96% compliance
exemption) exemption) rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX.................................................... 226,196 226,113 -83
VOC.................................................... 115,443 115,384 -59
CO..................................................... 2,560,587 2,560,367 -220
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3 above indicates an emissions benefit for the changes to
North Carolina's I/M program with regard to the ozone precursor
emissions (i.e., NOX and VOC), and for CO. There is no
difference in emissions anticipated as a result of North Carolina I/M
program changes for PM, Lead, SO2 or NO2. In this
action, EPA is making the determination that the applicable NAAQS of
interest for the non-interference demonstration required by section
110(l) of the CAA are the ozone and CO standards.
In addition to the information provided in North Carolina's
technical demonstration, EPA reviewed the most recent preliminary ozone
air quality data for this Area, and it appears that the Remaining
Counties Area is monitoring attaining levels for all ozone NAAQS. The
Remaining Counties Area has not been designated for the SO2
NAAQS, and is currently designated
[[Page 69055]]
unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2008 Lead NAAQS, the 2008 8-hour Ozone
NAAQS and the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. Consequently, EPA has
concluded that the new modeling associated with these changes
demonstrates that the changes for North Carolina's I/M program in the
Remaining Counties Area will not interfere with the Area's ability to
attain and maintain the NAAQS.
d. Conclusion
Based upon the above analysis, EPA's overall conclusion with
regards to North Carolina's changes to the State's I/M program is that
these changes are consistent with the CAA and will not interfere with
any of the affected Areas' ability to attain and maintain the NAAQS.
While the individual area analyses appear to demonstrate that these
changes provide an overall emissions benefit for each Area, the benefit
is even more pronounced when the total emission reductions from the
entire area covered by the North Carolina I/M program are considered.
Table 4 below provides the changes in emissions that will result from
the change to North Carolina's I/M program in all of the affected
counties.
Table 4--Changes in Emissions for All Affected Counties
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current I/M Target I/M
program (95% program (96% Difference
Emissions (kg/day) compliance rate, compliance rate, between 95% and
1 year 3 year 96% compliance
exemption) exemption) rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX.................................................... 360,510 360,377 -133
VOC.................................................... 183,953 183,860 -92
CO..................................................... 4,101,100 4,100,823 -277
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4 above indicates an emissions benefit for the changes to
North Carolina's I/M program with regard to the ozone precursor
emissions (i.e., NOX and VOC), and for CO.\8\ This provides
further support for EPA's overall determination that the changes to
North Carolina's I/M program will not interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS, or any other applicable requirement of the
CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ As noted above, there are no difference in emissions
anticipated as a result of North Carolina's I/M program changes for
PM, Lead, SO2 or NO2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving changes to North Carolina's I/M program as
provided in SIP revisions dated January 31, 2008, May 24, 2010, October
11, 2013, and February 11, 2014. First, EPA is approving the repeal of
regulation 15A NCAC 02D .1004 as provided in North Carolina's January
31, 2008. EPA has made the determination that the repeal of this
regulation is acceptable because it is obsolete and replaced by OBD.
This change to the program was accounted for in North Carolina's
modeling included with the October 11, 2013, non-interference
demonstrations. EPA is also approving North Carolina's rule changes as
provided in North Carolina's May 24, 2010, and February 11, 2014, SIP
revisions, which are also supported by the State's technical non-
interference demonstration provided through the October 11, 2013 SIP
revision. EPA has made the determination that North Carolina's
technical non-interference demonstration supports a conclusion that
these rule changes will not interfere with air quality goals in areas
in North Carolina. EPA has also made the determination that these SIP
revisions with regard to the aforementioned provisions are approvable
because they are consistent with section 110 of the CAA.
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views these actions as non-controversial revisions and
anticipates no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section
of this Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate
document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision
should relevant adverse comment be filed. This rule will be effective
on January 20, 2015 without further notice unless the Agency receives
relevant adverse comment by December 22, 2014. If EPA receives such
comments, EPA will publish a document withdrawing the final rule and
informing the public that the rule will not take effect. EPA will
address all relevant adverse comments received during the comment
period in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will
not institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so by December 22, 2014. If no such
comments are received, this rule will be effective on January 20, 2015
and no further action will be taken on the proposed rule.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves State law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State
law. For that reason, this final action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because
[[Page 69056]]
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).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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 January 20, 2015. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 23, 2014.
V. Anne Heard,
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. In Sec. 52.1770:
0
a. Table 1 in paragraph (c) is amended by revising the entries for
``Sect .1002,'' ``Sect .1003,'' and ``Sect .1005;'' and removing the
entry for ``Sect .1004.''
0
b. In paragraph (e), the table is amended by adding a new entry ``Non-
Interference Demonstration for the North Carolina Inspection and
Maintenance Program'' at the end of the table.
The revisions and addition read as follows:
Sec. 52.1770 Identification of plan
* * * * *
(c) * * *
Table 1--EPA Approved North Carolina Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State EPA approval
State citation Title/subject effective date date Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subchapter 2D Air Pollution Control Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section .1000 Motor Vehicle Emissions Control Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sect .1002.................... Applicability.... 1/1/2014 11/20/2014 ...........................
[Insert Federal
Register
citation].
Sect .1003.................... Definitions...... 2/1/2014 11/20/2014 ...........................
[Insert Federal
Register
citation].
Sect .1005.................... On-Board 1/1/2014 11/20/2014 ...........................
Diagnostic [Insert Federal
Standards. Register
citation].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA Approved North Carolina Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State EPA approval Federal Register
Provision effective date date citation Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Non-Interference Demonstration 10/11/2013 11/20/2014 [Insert Federal
for the North Carolina Register
Inspection and Maintenance citation].
Program.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 69057]]
[FR Doc. 2014-27030 Filed 11-19-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
