Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; SC; Redesignation of the Charlotte-Rock Hill 2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment, 61775-61789 [2015-26022]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
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 information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. 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.
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 during normal business
hours at the Air Protection Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
Copies of the State submittal are
available at the Delaware Department of
Natural Resources and Environmental
Control, 89 Kings Highway, P.O. Box
1401, Dover, Delaware 19903.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Rehn, (215) 814–2176, or by email
at rehn.brian@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For
further information, please see the
information provided in the direct final
action, with the same title, that is
located in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’
section of this Federal Register
publication. Please note that if EPA
receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
this rule to approve Delaware’s Low
Emission Vehicle Program and if that
provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment.
Dated: September 29, 2015.
Shawn M. Garvin,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2015–25955 Filed 10–13–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0298; FRL–9935–59–
Region 4]
Air Plan Approval and Air Quality
Designation; SC; Redesignation of the
Charlotte-Rock Hill 2008 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area to Attainment
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
On April 17, 2015, the State
of South Carolina, through the South
Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Control (SC DHEC),
submitted a request for the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
to redesignate the South Carolina
portion of the bi-state Charlotte-Rock
Hill, North Carolina-South Carolina
2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area
(the entire area is hereinafter referred to
as the ‘‘bi-State Charlotte Area’’ or
‘‘Area’’ and the South Carolina portion
is hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘York
County Area’’) to attainment for the
2008 8-hour ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and to
approve a State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision containing a maintenance
plan for the York County Area. EPA is
proposing to determine that the bi-State
Charlotte Area is continuing to attain
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS; to
approve the State’s plan for maintaining
attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone
standard in the Area, including the
motor vehicle emission budgets
(MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and
volatile organic compounds (VOC) for
the years 2014 and 2026 for the York
County Area, into the SIP; and to
redesignate the York County Area to
attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. EPA is also notifying the
public of the status of EPA’s adequacy
determination for the MVEBs for the
York County Area.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61775
Comments must be received on
or before November 13, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2015–0298, by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: R4-ARMS@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562–9019.
4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2015–
0298,’’ Air Regulatory Management
Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms.
Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation 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–2015–
0298. 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
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
61776
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
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
may not be 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 Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kelly Sheckler of the Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mrs.
Sheckler may be reached by phone at
(404) 562–9222, or via electronic mail at
sheckler.kelly@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Table of Contents
I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to
take?
II. What is the background for EPA’s
proposed actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation?
IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions?
V. What is EPA’s analysis of the request?
VI. What is EPA’s analysis of South
Carolina’s proposed NOX and VOC
MVEBs for the York County Area?
VII. What is the status of EPA’s adequacy
determination for the proposed NOX and
VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 for the
York County Area?
VIII. What is the effect of EPA’s proposed
actions?
IX. Proposed Actions
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
I. What are the actions EPA is
proposing to take?
EPA is proposing to take the following
three separate but related actions, one of
which involves multiple elements: (1)
To determine that the bi-state Charlotte
Area is continuing to attain the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS; 1 (2) to approve
South Carolina’s plan for maintaining
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
(maintenance plan), including the
associated MVEBs for the York County
Area, into the South Carolina SIP; and
(3) to redesignate the York County Area
to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. EPA is also notifying the
public of the status of EPA’s adequacy
determination for the MVEBs for the
York County Area. The bi-state
Charlotte Area consists of Mecklenburg
County in its entirety and portions of
Cabarrus, Gaston, Iredell, Lincoln,
Rowan and Union Counties, North
Carolina; and a portion of York County,
South Carolina. On April 16, 2015, the
State of North Carolina provided a
redesignation request and maintenance
plan for its portion of the bi-state
Charlotte Area. EPA approved North
Carolina’s redesignation request and
maintenance plan in a separate action.
See 80 FR 44873 (July 28, 2015).
Today’s proposed actions are
summarized below and described in
greater detail throughout this notice of
proposed rulemaking.
EPA is making the preliminarily
determination that the bi-state Charlotte
Area is continuing to attain the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS based on recent
air quality data and proposing to
approve South Carolina’s maintenance
plan for its portion of the bi-state
Charlotte Area as meeting the
requirements of section 175A (such
approval being one of the CAA criteria
for redesignation to attainment status).
The maintenance plan is designed to
keep the bi-state Charlotte Area in
attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS through 2026. The maintenance
plan includes 2014 and 2026 MVEBs for
NOX and VOC for the York County Area
for transportation conformity purposes.
EPA is proposing to approve these
MVEBs and incorporate them into the
South Carolina SIP.
EPA also proposes to determine that
the South Carolina portion of the bistate Charlotte Area has met the
requirements for redesignation under
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
Accordingly, in this action, EPA is
1 In an action published on July 28, 2015, EPA
determined that the bi-state Charlotte Area was
attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone standard when the
Agency redesignated the North Carolina portion of
this Area. See 80 FR 44873.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
proposing to approve a request to
change the legal designation of the
portion of York County that is included
in the bi-state Charlotte Area to
attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
EPA is also notifying the public of the
status of EPA’s adequacy process for the
2014 and 2026 NOX and VOC MVEBs
for the York County Area. The
Adequacy comment period began on
May 14, 2015, with EPA’s posting of the
availability of South Carolina’s
submission on EPA’s Adequacy Web
site (https://www.epa.gov/otaq/
stateresources/transconf/
currsips.htm#york-cnty). The Adequacy
comment period for these MVEBs closed
on June 15, 2015. No comments, adverse
or otherwise, were received through the
Adequacy process. Please see section
VII of this proposed rulemaking for
further explanation of this process and
for more details on the MVEBs.
In summary, today’s notice of
proposed rulemaking is in response to
South Carolina’s April 17, 2015,
redesignation request and associated SIP
submission that address the specific
issues summarized above and the
necessary elements described in section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA for
redesignation of the South Carolina
portion of the Area to attainment for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
II. What is the background for EPA’s
proposed actions?
On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated
a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.075
parts per million (ppm). See 73 FR
16436 (March 27, 2008). Under EPA’s
regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS is attained when
the 3-year average of the annual fourth
highest daily maximum 8-hour average
ambient air quality ozone
concentrations is less than or equal to
0.075 ppm. See 40 CFR 50.15. Ambient
air quality monitoring data for the 3year period must meet a data
completeness requirement. The ambient
air quality monitoring data
completeness requirement is met when
the average percent of days with valid
ambient monitoring data is greater than
90 percent, and no single year has less
than 75 percent data completeness as
determined in Appendix I of part 50.
Upon promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, the CAA requires EPA
to designate as nonattainment any area
that is violating the NAAQS, based on
the three most recent years of complete,
quality assured, and certified ambient
air quality data at the conclusion of the
designation process. The bi-state
Charlotte Area was designated
nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
ozone NAAQS on May 21, 2012
(effective July 20, 2012) using 2009–
2011 ambient air quality data. See 77 FR
30088 (May 21, 2012). At the time of
designation, the bi-state Charlotte Area
was classified as a marginal
nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. In the final
implementation rule for the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS (SIP Implementation
Rule),2 EPA established ozone
nonattainment area attainment dates
based on Table 1 of section 181(a) of the
CAA. This established an attainment
date three years after the July 20, 2012,
effective date for areas classified as
marginal areas for the 2008 8-hour
ozone nonattainment designations.
Therefore, the bi-state Charlotte Area’s
attainment date is July 20, 2015.
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
III. What are the criteria for
redesignation?
The CAA provides the requirements
for redesignating a nonattainment area
to attainment. Specifically, section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for
redesignation providing that: (1) The
Administrator determines that the area
has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2)
the Administrator has fully approved
the applicable implementation plan for
the area under section 110(k); (3) the
Administrator determines that the
improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP
and applicable Federal air pollutant
control regulations and other permanent
and enforceable reductions; (4) the
Administrator has fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area as
meeting the requirements of section
175A; and, (5) the state containing such
area has met all requirements applicable
to the area for purposes of redesignation
under section 110 and part D of the
CAA.
On April 16, 1992, EPA provided
guidance on redesignation in the
General Preamble for the
Implementation of title I of the CAA
Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498),
2 This rule, entitled Implementation of the 2008
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone:
State Implementation Plan Requirements and
published at 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015),
addresses a range of nonattainment area SIP
requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, including
requirements pertaining to attainment
demonstrations, reasonable further progress (RFP),
reasonably available control technology (RACT),
reasonably available control measures (RACM),
major new source review (NSR), emission
inventories, and the timing of SIP submissions and
of compliance with emission control measures in
the SIP. This rule also addresses the revocation of
the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the anti-backsliding
requirements that apply when the 1997 ozone
NAAQS are revoked.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
and supplemented this guidance on
April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has
provided further guidance on processing
redesignation requests in the following
documents:
1. ‘‘Ozone and Carbon Monoxide
Design Value Calculations,’’
Memorandum from Bill Laxton,
Director, Technical Support Division,
June 18, 1990;
2. ‘‘Maintenance Plans for
Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,’’
Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief,
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs
Branch, April 30, 1992;
3. ‘‘Contingency Measures for Ozone
and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,’’ Memorandum from G.
T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1,
1992;
4. ‘‘Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4,
1992 (hereafter referred to as the
‘‘Calcagni Memorandum’’);
5. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Actions Submitted in Response to Clean
Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,’’
Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management
Division, October 28, 1992;
6. ‘‘Technical Support Documents
(TSDs) for Redesignation of Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment
Areas,’’ Memorandum from G. T. Helms,
Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide
Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;
7. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Requirements for Areas Submitting
Requests for Redesignation to
Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After
November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum
from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting
Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, September 17, 1993;
8. ‘‘Use of Actual Emissions in
Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone
and CO Nonattainment Areas,’’
Memorandum from D. Kent Berry,
Acting Director, Air Quality
Management Division, November 30,
1993;
9. ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part
D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary
D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994;
and
10. ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress,
Attainment Demonstration, and Related
Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment
Areas Meeting the Ozone National
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61777
Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’
Memorandum from John S. Seitz,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, May 10, 1995.
IV. Why is EPA proposing these
actions?
On April 17, 2015, the State of South
Carolina, through SC DHEC, requested
that EPA redesignate the South Carolina
portion of the Area to attainment for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA’s
evaluation indicates that the entire bistate Charlotte Area has attained the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and that the
South Carolina portion of the Area
meets the requirements for
redesignation as set forth in section
107(d)(3)(E), including the maintenance
plan requirements under section 175A
of the CAA. As a result, EPA is
proposing to take the three related
actions summarized in section I of this
notice.
V. What is EPA’s analysis of the
request?
As stated above, in accordance with
the CAA, EPA proposes in this action to:
(1) Determine that the bi-state Charlotte
Area is continuing to attain the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS; (2) approve South
Carolina’s plan for maintaining the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Area,
including the associated MVEBs, into
the South Carolina SIP; and (3)
redesignate the South Carolina portion
of the Area to attainment for the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS. The five
redesignation criteria provided under
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) are discussed
in greater detail for the Area in the
following paragraphs of this section.
Criteria (1)—The Bi-State Charlotte Area
Has Attained the 2008 8-Hour Ozone
NAAQS
For redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment, the CAA requires
EPA to determine that the area has
attained the applicable NAAQS (CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). For ozone, an
area may be considered to be attaining
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS if it
meets the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
as determined in accordance with 40
CFR 50.15 and Appendix I of part 50,
based on three complete, consecutive
calendar years of quality-assured air
quality monitoring data. To attain the
NAAQS, the 3-year average of the
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average ozone concentrations measured
at each monitor within an area over
each year must not exceed 0.075 ppm.
Based on the data handling and
reporting convention described in 40
CFR part 50, Appendix I, the NAAQS
are attained if the design value is 0.075
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
61778
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
ppm or below. The data must be
collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and
recorded in the EPA Air Quality System
(AQS). The monitors generally should
have remained at the same location for
the duration of the monitoring period
required for demonstrating attainment.
In its final action redesignating the
North Carolina portion of the bi-state
Charlotte Area to attainment for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, EPA
finalized its determination that the bistate Charlotte Area was attaining that
standard in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58 at that time. EPA concluded that
the design values for each monitor in
the Area for the years 2012–2014 are
less than or equal to 0.075 ppm, that the
data from these monitors during this
time period meet the data quality and
completeness requirements and are
recorded in AQS, and that preliminary
2015 monitoring data available at the
time of the final action indicates that the
bi-state Charlotte Area continues to
attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
See 80 FR 44874–44875. EPA has
reviewed preliminary monitoring data
available since the time of the Agency’s
redesignation of the North Carolina
portion of the Area and proposes to find
that the bi-state Charlotte Area is
continuing to attain the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.3 For informational
purposes, the fourth-highest 8-hour
ozone values at each monitor for 2012,
2013, 2014, and the 3-year averages of
these values (i.e., design values), are
summarized in Table 1, below.
TABLE 1—2012–2014 DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE BI-STATE CHARLOTTE AREA ∧
[Parts per million]
4th Highest 8-hour Ozone Value
(ppm)
Location
County
Monitor ID
2012
Lincoln County Replacing
Iron Station.
Garinger High School .........
Westinghouse Blvd .............
29 N at Mecklenburg Cab
Co.
Rockwell ..............................
Enochville School * ..............
Monroe Middle School ........
3-Year Design
Values
(ppm)
2013
2014
2012–2014
Lincoln ................................
37–109–0004
0.076
0.064
0.064
0.068
Mecklenburg .......................
Mecklenburg .......................
Mecklenburg .......................
37–119–0041
37–119–1005
37–119–1009
0.080
0.073
0.085
0.067
0.062
0.066
0.065
0.063
0.068
0.070
0.066
0.073
Rowan ................................
Rowan ................................
Union ..................................
37–159–0021
37–159–0022
37–179–0003
0.080
0.077
0.075
0.062
0.063
0.062
0.064
........................
0.067
0.068
........................
0.068
* Monitoring data for 2014 is not available because the monitor was shut down in 2014.
∧ There is a monitor in York County that is located outside of the designated nonattainment area.
The 3-year design value for 2012–
2014 for the bi-state Charlotte Area is
0.073 ppm,4 which meets the NAAQS.
EPA will not take final action to
approve the redesignation if the 3-year
design value exceeds the NAAQS prior
to EPA finalizing the redesignation. The
monitors used to determine the
attainment status for the bi-state
Charlotte Area are all located in North
Carolina; no monitors are located in the
South Carolina portion of the Area. As
discussed in more detail below, the
State of North Carolina has committed
to continue monitoring in the bi-state
Charlotte Area in accordance with 40
CFR part 58.5
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Criteria (2)—South Carolina Has a Fully
Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) for
the South Carolina Portion of the Area;
and Criteria (5)—South Carolina Has
Met All Applicable Requirements Under
Section 110 and Part D of Title I of the
CAA
For redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment, the CAA requires
EPA to determine that the state has met
3 This preliminary data is available at EPA’s air
data Web site: https://aqsdr1.epa.gov/aqsweb/
aqstmp/airdata/download_files.html#Daily. The list
of monitors in the bi-state Charlotte Area is
available under the Designated Area field in Table
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
all applicable requirements under
section 110 and part D of title I of the
CAA (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)) and
that the state has a fully approved SIP
under section 110(k) for the area (CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). EPA proposes
to find that South Carolina has met all
applicable SIP requirements for the
South Carolina portion of the Area
under section 110 of the CAA (general
SIP requirements) for purposes of
redesignation. Additionally, EPA
proposes to find that the South Carolina
SIP satisfies the criterion that it meets
applicable SIP requirements for
purposes of redesignation under part D
of title I of the CAA in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). Further, EPA
proposes to determine that the SIP is
fully approved with respect to all
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these
determinations, EPA ascertained which
requirements are applicable to the South
Carolina portion of the Area and, if
applicable, that they are fully approved
under section 110(k). SIPs must be fully
approved only with respect to
requirements that were applicable prior
to submittal of the complete
redesignation request.
5 of the Ozone detailed information file at https://
www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html.
4 The monitor with the highest 3-year design
value is considered the design value for the Area.
5 See also EPA’s proposed rulemaking notice
associated with the redesignation of the North
Carolina portion of the Area. 80 FR 29250, 29259
(May 21, 2015).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
a. The South Carolina Portion of the
Area Has Met All Applicable
Requirements Under Section 110 and
Part D of the CAA
General SIP requirements. General SIP
elements and requirements are
delineated in section 110(a)(2) of title I,
part A of the CAA. These requirements
include, but are not limited to, the
following: Submittal of a SIP that has
been adopted by the state after
reasonable public notice and hearing;
provisions for establishment and
operation of appropriate procedures
needed to monitor ambient air quality;
implementation of a source permit
program; provisions for the
implementation of part C requirements
(Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD)) and provisions for the
implementation of part D requirements
(NSR permit programs); provisions for
air pollution modeling; and provisions
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
for public and local agency participation
in planning and emission control rule
development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs
contain certain measures to prevent
sources in a state from significantly
contributing to air quality problems in
another state. To implement this
provision, EPA has required certain
states to establish programs to address
the interstate transport of air pollutants.
The section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements
for a state are not linked with a
particular nonattainment area’s
designation and classification in that
state. EPA believes that the
requirements linked with a particular
nonattainment area’s designation and
classifications are the relevant measures
to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation
request. The transport SIP submittal
requirements, where applicable,
continue to apply to a state regardless of
the designation of any one particular
area in the state. Thus, EPA does not
believe that the CAA’s interstate
transport requirements should be
construed to be applicable requirements
for purposes of redesignation.
In addition, EPA believes other
section 110 elements that are neither
connected with nonattainment plan
submissions nor linked with an area’s
attainment status are applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation. The area will still be
subject to these requirements after the
area is redesignated. The section 110
and part D requirements which are
linked with a particular area’s
designation and classification are the
relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request. This
approach is consistent with EPA’s
existing policy on applicability (i.e., for
redesignations) of conformity and
oxygenated fuels requirements, as well
as with section 184 ozone transport
requirements. See Reading,
Pennsylvania, proposed and final
rulemakings (61 FR 53174–53176,
October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7,
2008); Cleveland–Akron–Loraine, Ohio,
final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7,
1996); and Tampa, Florida, final
rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, December
7, 1995). See also the discussion on this
issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio,
redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19,
2000), and in the Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, redesignation (66 FR
50399, October 19, 2001).
Title I, Part D, applicable SIP
requirements. Section 172(c) of the CAA
sets forth the basic requirements of
attainment plans for nonattainment
areas that are required to submit them
pursuant to section 172(b). Subpart 2 of
part D, which includes section 182 of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
61779
the CAA, establishes specific
requirements for ozone nonattainment
areas depending on the area’s
nonattainment classification. As
provided in Subpart 2, a marginal ozone
nonattainment area, such as the South
Carolina portion of the Area, must
submit an emissions inventory that
complies with section 172(c)(3), but the
specific requirements of section 182(a)
apply in lieu of the demonstration of
attainment (and contingency measures)
required by section 172(c). See 42 U.S.C.
7511a(a). A thorough discussion of the
requirements contained in sections
172(c) and 182 can be found in the
General Preamble for Implementation of
Title I (57 FR 13498).
Section 182(a) Requirements. Section
182(a)(1) requires states to submit a
comprehensive, accurate, and current
inventory of actual emissions from
sources of VOC and NOx emitted within
the boundaries of the ozone
nonattainment area. South Carolina
provided an emissions inventory for the
South Carolina portion of the Area to
EPA in an August 8, 2014, SIP
submission. On June 12, 2015, EPA
published a direct final rule to approve
this emissions inventory into the
SIP.6 See 80 FR 33413 (direct final rule)
and 80 FR 33460 (associated proposed
rule).
Under section 182(a)(2)(A), states
with ozone nonattainment areas that
were designated prior to the enactment
of the 1990 CAA amendments were
required to submit, within six months of
classification, all rules and corrections
to existing VOC RACT rules that were
required under section 172(b)(3) of the
CAA (and related guidance) prior to the
1990 CAA amendments. The South
Carolina portion of the Area is not
subject to the section 182(a)(2) RACT
‘‘fix up’’ because it was designated as
nonattainment after the enactment of
the 1990 CAA amendments.
Section 182(a)(2)(B) requires each
state with a marginal ozone
nonattainment area that implemented,
or was required to implement, an
inspection and maintenance (I/M)
program prior to the 1990 CAA
amendments to submit a SIP revision
providing for an I/M program no less
stringent than that required prior to the
1990 amendments or already in the SIP
at the time of the amendments,
whichever is more stringent. The South
Carolina portion of the Area is not
subject to the section 182(a)(2)(B)
because it was designated as
nonattainment after the enactment of
the 1990 CAA amendments and did not
have an I/M program in place prior to
those amendments.
Regarding the permitting and offset
requirements of section 182(a)(2)(C) and
section 182(a)(4), South Carolina
currently has a fully-approved part D
NSR program in place. However, EPA
has determined that areas being
redesignated need not comply with the
requirement that a NSR program be
approved prior to redesignation,
provided that the area demonstrates
maintenance of the NAAQS without
part D NSR, because PSD requirements
will apply after redesignation. A more
detailed rationale for this view is
described in a memorandum from Mary
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air
and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994,
entitled, ‘‘Part D New Source Review
Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.’’ South
Carolina’s PSD program will become
applicable in the South Carolina portion
of the Area upon redesignation to
attainment.
Section 182(a)(3) requires states to
submit periodic inventories and
emissions statements. Section
182(a)(3)(A) requires states to submit a
periodic inventory every three years. As
discussed below in the section of this
notice titled Criteria (4)(e), Verification
of Continued Attainment, the State will
continue to update its emissions
inventory at least once every three
years. Under section 182(a)(3)(B), each
state with an ozone nonattainment area
must submit a SIP revision requiring
emissions statements to be submitted to
the state by sources within that
nonattainment area. South Carolina
provided a SIP revision to EPA on
August 22, 2014, addressing the section
182(a)(3)(B) emissions statements
requirement, and on June 12, 2015, EPA
published a direct final rule to approve
this SIP revision.7 See 80 FR 33413
(direct final rule) and 80 FR 33460
(associated proposed rule).
Section 176 Conformity
Requirements. Section 176(c) of the
CAA requires states to establish criteria
and procedures to ensure that federally
supported or funded projects conform to
the air quality planning goals in the
applicable SIP. The requirement to
determine conformity applies to
transportation plans, programs, and
projects that are developed, funded, or
approved under title 23 of the United
States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal
Transit Act (transportation conformity)
as well as to all other federally
6 This direct final rule was effective on July 13,
2015, because EPA did not receive any adverse
comment during the public comment period.
7 This direct final rule was effective on July 13,
2015, because EPA did not receive any adverse
comment during the public comment period.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
61780
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
supported or funded projects (general
conformity). State transportation
conformity SIP revisions must be
consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation,
enforcement, and enforceability that
EPA promulgated pursuant to its
authority under the CAA.
EPA interprets the conformity SIP
requirements 8 as not applying for
purposes of evaluating a redesignation
request under section 107(d) because
state conformity rules are still required
after redesignation and Federal
conformity rules apply where state rules
have not been approved. See Wall v.
EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001)
(upholding this interpretation); see also
60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995)
(redesignation of Tampa, Florida).
Nonetheless, South Carolina has an
approved conformity SIP for the South
Carolina portion of the Area. See 74 FR
37168 (July 28, 2009). Thus, the South
Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte
Area has satisfied all applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation under section 110 and
part D of title I of the CAA.
b. The South Carolina Portion of the BiState Charlotte Area Has a Fully
Approved Applicable SIP Under Section
110(k) of the CAA
EPA has fully approved the applicable
South Carolina SIP for the South
Carolina portion of the Area under
section 110(k) of the CAA for all
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation. EPA may rely on prior
SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request (see Calcagni
Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern
Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v.
Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–90 (6th Cir.
1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426) plus any
additional measures it may approve in
conjunction with a redesignation action
(see 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and
citations therein). South Carolina has
adopted and submitted, and EPA has
fully approved at various times,
provisions addressing the various SIP
elements applicable for the ozone
NAAQS. See 80 FR 11136 (March 2,
2015); 76 FR 41111 (July 13, 2011).
As indicated above, EPA believes that
the section 110 elements that are neither
connected with nonattainment plan
submissions nor linked to an area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable
requirements for purposes of
8 CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to
submit revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain
Federal criteria and procedures for determining
transportation conformity. Transportation
conformity SIPs are different from the MVEBs that
are established in control strategy SIPs and
maintenance plans.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
redesignation. EPA has approved all
part D requirements applicable for
purposes of this redesignation. As noted
above, EPA has approved South
Carolina’s August 8, 2014, emissions
inventory SIP revision, and its August
22, 2014, emissions statements SIP
revision. See 80 FR 33413.
Criteria (3)—The Air Quality
Improvement in the Bi-State Charlotte
Area Is Due to Permanent and
Enforceable Reductions in Emissions
Resulting From Implementation of the
SIP and Applicable Federal Air
Pollution Control Regulations and Other
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
For redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment, the CAA requires
EPA to determine that the air quality
improvement in the area is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
implementation of the SIP, applicable
Federal air pollution control
regulations, and other permanent and
enforceable reductions (CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). EPA has preliminarily
determined that South Carolina has
demonstrated that the observed air
quality improvement in the bi-state
Charlotte Area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from Federal measures and
from state measures adopted into the
SIP. EPA does not believe that the
decrease in ozone concentrations in the
bi-state Charlotte Area is due to
unusually favorable meteorological
conditions.9
State and Federal measures enacted in
recent years have resulted in permanent
emission reductions. Most of these
emission reductions are enforceable
through regulations. The state measures
that have been implemented to date and
identified by South Carolina as
permanent and enforceable measures
include Regulation 61–62.2—
Prohibition of Open Burning and
Regulation 61–62.5—Control of Oxides
of Nitrogen. These measures are
approved in the federally-approved SIP
and thus are permanent and
enforceable. The Federal measures that
have been implemented include the
following:
Tier 2 vehicle and fuel standards.
Implementation began in 2004 and as
newer, cleaner cars enter the national
fleet, these standards continue to
significantly reduce NOx emissions. The
standards require all passenger vehicles
in any manufacturer’s fleet to meet an
average standard of 0.07 grams of NOx
per mile. Additionally, in January 2006
the sulfur content of gasoline was
9 See
PO 00000
80 FR 44875–44877.
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
required to be on average 30 ppm which
assists in lowering the NOx emissions.
Most gasoline sold in South Carolina
prior to January 2006 had a sulfur
content of about 300 ppm.10 EPA
expects that these standards will reduce
NOx emissions from vehicles by
approximately 74 percent by 2030,
translating to nearly 3 million tons
annually by 2030.11
Large non-road diesel engines rule.
This rule was promulgated in 2004, and
is being phased in between 2008
through 2014. This rule will also reduce
the sulfur content in the nonroad diesel
fuel. When fully implemented, this rule
will reduce NOX, VOC, particulate
matter, and carbon monoxide. These
emission reductions are federally
enforceable. EPA issued this rule in
June 2004, which applies to diesel
engines used in industries, such as
construction, agriculture, and mining. It
is estimated that compliance with this
rule will cut NOX emissions from nonroad diesel engines by up to 90 percent
nationwide. The non-road diesel rule
was fully implemented by 2010.
Heavy-duty gasoline and diesel
highway vehicle standards. EPA issued
this rule in January 2001 (66 FR 5002).
This rule includes standards limiting
the sulfur content of diesel fuel, which
went into effect in 2004. A second phase
took effect in 2007, which further
reduced the highway diesel fuel sulfur
content to 15 ppm, leading to additional
reductions in combustion NOX and VOC
emissions. EPA expects that this rule
will achieve a 95 percent reduction in
NOX emissions from diesel trucks and
buses and will reduce NOX emissions by
2.6 million tons by 2030 when the
heavy-duty vehicle fleet is completely
replaced with newer heavy-duty
vehicles that comply with these
emission standards.12
Medium and heavy duty vehicle fuel
consumption and GHG standards.
These standards require on-road
vehicles to achieve a 7 percent to 20
percent reduction in CO2 emissions and
fuel consumption by 2018. The decrease
in fuel consumption will result in a 7
percent to 20 percent decrease in NOX
emissions.
10 South Carolina also identified Tier 3 Motor
Vehicle Emissions and Fuel Standards as a federal
measure. EPA issued this rule in April 28, 2014,
which applies to light duty passenger cars and
trucks. EPA promulgated this rule to reduce air
pollution from new passenger cars and trucks
beginning in 2017. Tier 3 emission standards will
lower sulfur content of gasoline and lower the
emissions standards.
11 EPA, Regulatory Announcement, EPA420–F–
99–051 (December 1999), available at: https://
www.epa.gov/tier2/documents/f99051.pdf.
12 66 FR 5002, 5012 (January 18, 2001).
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Nonroad spark-ignition engines and
recreational engines standards. The
nonroad spark-ignition and recreational
engine standards, effective in July 2003,
regulate NOX, hydrocarbons, and carbon
monoxide from groups of previously
unregulated nonroad engines. These
engine standards apply to large sparkignition engines (e.g., forklifts and
airport ground service equipment),
recreational vehicles (e.g., off-highway
motorcycles and all-terrain-vehicles),
and recreational marine diesel engines
sold in the United States and imported
after the effective date of these
standards. When all of the nonroad
spark-ignition and recreational engine
standards are fully implemented, an
overall 72 percent reduction in
hydrocarbons, 80 percent reduction in
NOX, and 56 percent reduction in
carbon monoxide emissions are
expected by 2020. These controls reduce
ambient concentrations of ozone, carbon
monoxide, and fine particulate matter.
National Program for greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions and Fuel Economy
Standards. The federal GHG and fuel
economy standards apply to light-duty
cars and trucks in model years 2012–
2016 (phase 1) and 2017–2025 (phase 2).
The final standards are projected to
result in an average industry fleet-wide
level of 163 grams/mile of carbon
dioxide (CO2) which is equivalent to
54.5 miles per gallon (mpg) if achieved
exclusively through fuel economy
improvements. The fuel economy
standards result in less fuel being
consumed, and therefore less NOX
emissions released.
Reciprocating Internal Combustion
Engine (RICE) National Emissions
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAP).13 The RICE NESHAP is
expected to result in a small decrease in
VOC emissions. RICE owners and
operators had to comply with the
NESHAP by May 3, 2013.
NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998
(63 FR 57356), EPA issued the NOX SIP
Call requiring the District of Columbia
and 22 states to reduce emissions of
NOX, a precursor to ozone pollution,
and providing a mechanism (the NOX
Budget Trading Program) that states
could use to achieve those reductions.
Affected states were required to comply
with Phase I of the SIP Call beginning
in 2004 and Phase II beginning in 2007.
By the end of 2008, ozone season
emissions from sources subject to the
NOX SIP Call dropped by 62 percent
from 2000 emissions levels. All NOX SIP
13 This NESHAP is expected to result in a small
decrease in VOC emissions. Boilers must comply
with the NESHAP by January 31, 2016, for all states
except North Carolina which has a compliance date
in May 2019.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
Call states have SIPs that currently
satisfy their obligations under the NOX
SIP Call; the NOX SIP Call reduction
requirements are being met; and EPA
will continue to enforce the
requirements of the NOX SIP Call.
Emission reductions resulting from
regulations developed in response to the
NOX SIP Call are therefore permanent
and enforceable for the purposes of
today’s action.
CAIR/CSAPR. In its redesignation
request and maintenance plan, the State
identified the Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR) and the Cross-State Air Pollution
Rule (CSAPR) as two measures that
contributed to permanent and
enforceable emissions reductions. CAIR
created regional cap-and-trade programs
to reduce SO2 and NOX emissions in 27
eastern states, including South Carolina,
that contributed to downwind
nonattainment and maintenance of the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 70 FR 25162
(May 12, 2005). EPA approved South
Carolina’s CAIR regulations into the
South Carolina SIP on October 16, 2009.
See 74 FR 53167. In 2008, the United
States Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit)
initially vacated CAIR, North Carolina
v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008),
but ultimately remanded the rule to EPA
without vacatur to preserve the
environmental benefits provided by
CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d
1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). On August
8, 2011 (76 FR 48208), acting on the DC
Circuit’s remand, EPA promulgated
CSAPR to replace CAIR and thus to
address the interstate transport of
emissions contributing to nonattainment
and interfering with maintenance of the
two air quality standards covered by
CAIR as well as the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
CSAPR requires substantial reductions
of SO2 and NOX emissions from electric
generating units (EGUs) in 28 states in
the Eastern United States.
The DC Circuit’s initial vacatur of
CSAPR 14 was reversed by the United
States Supreme Court on April 29, 2014,
and the case was remanded to the DC
Circuit to resolve remaining issues in
accordance with the high court’s ruling.
EPA v. EME Homer City Generation,
L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). On remand,
the D.C. Circuit affirmed CSAPR in most
respects, but invalidated without
vacating some of the CSAPR budgets as
to a number of states. EME Homer City
Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118
(D.C. Cir. 2015). The remanded budgets
include the Phase 2 sulfur dioxide (SO2)
and NOX ozone season emissions
14 EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696
F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
61781
budgets for South Carolina. This
litigation ultimately delayed
implementation of CSAPR for three
years, from January 1, 2012, when
CSAPR’s cap-and-trade programs were
originally scheduled to replace the CAIR
cap-and-trade programs, to January 1,
2015. Thus, the rule’s Phase 2 budgets
were originally promulgated to begin on
January 1, 2014, and are now scheduled
to begin on January 1, 2017. CSAPR will
continue to operate under the existing
emissions budgets until EPA addresses
the D.C. Circuit’s remand.
Although the State identified CAIR
and CSAPR as measures that
contributed to permanent and
enforceable emissions reductions, EPA
is proposing to approve the
redesignation of the South Carolina
portion of the bi-State Charlotte Area
without relying on those measures as
having led to attainment of the 2008
ozone NAAQS or contributing to
maintenance of that standard. In so
doing, we are proposing to determine
that the DC Circuit’s invalidation of the
South Carolina CSAPR Phase 2 ozone
season NOX and SO2 emissions budgets
does not bar today’s proposed
redesignation.15
The improvement in ozone air quality
in the Area from 2011 (a year when the
design value for the Area was above the
NAAQS) to 2014 (a year when the
design value was below the NAAQS) is
not due to CSAPR emissions reductions
because, as noted above, CSAPR did not
go into effect until January 1, 2015, after
the Area was already attaining the
standard. As a general matter, because
CSAPR is CAIR’s replacement,
emissions reductions associated with
CAIR will for most areas be made
permanent and enforceable through
implementation of CSAPR. However,
EPA has preliminarily determined that
the vast majority of reductions in
emissions in the South Carolina portion
of the Area from 2011–2014 were due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in mobile source VOC and NOX
emissions. In addition, EPA’s analysis of
EGU emissions data from CAIR-subject
sources in South Carolina, none of
which are located in the South Carolina
portion of the Charlotte Area, further
support our proposed determination
that attainment of the 2008 ozone
NAAQS in the Area was not due to
CAIR reductions from South Carolina
EGUs.
As summarized at the end of this
section, EPA found that from 2011 to
15 The Court’s holding regarding South Carolina’s
SO2 CSAPR emissions budget is irrelevant to
today’s action because SO2 is not an ozone
precursor.
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
61782
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
2014, mobile source emission
reductions accounted for 82 percent of
the total NOX reductions and 85 percent
of the total VOC reductions in the South
Carolina portion of the Area. As laid out
in the State’s maintenance
demonstration, NOX and VOC emissions
in the South Carolina portion of the
Area are projected to continue their
downward trend through the end of the
first maintenance plan period, driven
entirely by mobile source measures.16
From 2014 to 2026, the State projected
that all of the emissions decreases in the
South Carolina portion of the Area
would be due to mobile source
measures based on EPA-approved
mobile source modeling.
Furthermore, emissions data from
EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division
(CAMD) summarized in Table 3 shows
that NOX emissions from CAIR-subject
EGUs in South Carolina were already
below the NOX ozone season CAIR
budget by 2011, when the design value
for the Area was above the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. EPA believes that the
additional decreases in NOX emissions
from South Carolina EGUs in 2012–2014
were largely due to the retirement of
several coal- and oil-fired EGUs during
that time period. See Table 4. These
retirements are permanent and
enforceable, regardless of the rationale
behind the shutdowns. Because these
retired units were subject to CAIR, even
if CAIR was partially responsible for
attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in
the South Carolina portion of the Area,
CAIR’s part in that attainment has been
made permanent and enforceable
through retirements that will endure.17
Given the particular facts and
circumstances associated with this Area,
EPA does not believe that the DC
Circuit’s recent invalidation of South
Carolina’s CSAPR Phase 2 NOX ozone
season and SO2 budgets, which replaced
CAIR’s NOX ozone season and SO2
budgets, is a bar to EPA’s redesignation
of the South Carolina portion of the
Area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
TABLE 3—COMPARISON OF SOUTH CAROLINA EGU ANNUAL NOX OZONE SEASON BUDGET AND NOX OZONE SEASON
EMISSIONS FROM SOUTH CAROLINA EGUS
South Carolina EGU NOX ozone season emissions
South Carolina EGU CAIR NOX ozone season annual budget
(2009–2014)
2011
2012
2013
2014
15,249 ..............................................................................................................
13,036
8,817
6,491
7,237
2011 Ozone
season NOX
emissions
(tons)
Retirement
date
TABLE 4—SOUTH CAROLINA EGUS THAT RETIRED DURING 2011–2014
Facility name
Unit
H B Robinson ..............................................................................................................................
W S Lee .......................................................................................................................................
W S Lee .......................................................................................................................................
Canadys Steam ...........................................................................................................................
Canadys Steam ...........................................................................................................................
Canadys Steam ...........................................................................................................................
Dolphus M Grainger ....................................................................................................................
Dolphus M Grainger ....................................................................................................................
Jefferies .......................................................................................................................................
Jefferies .......................................................................................................................................
1
1
2
CAN1
CAN2
CAN3
1
2
3
4
378
166
181
492
515
769
186
192
423
418
2012
2014
2014
2012
2013
2013
2012
2012
2012
2012
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
As mentioned above, the State
measures that have been implemented
include the following: 18
Prohibition of Open Burning: Effective
in 2004, Regulation 61–62.2 prohibits
the certain open burning activities
during the ozone season for additional
control of NOX emissions.
Control of Oxides of Nitrogen:
Effective in 2004, Regulation 61–62.5,
Standard 5.2—Control of Oxides of
Nitrogen, applies to new and existing
stationary sources that emit or have the
potential to emit NOX generated from
fuel combustion. This regulation sets
standards for new construction based on
Best Available Control Technology
(BACT) standards from the national
RACT/BACT/LAER clearinghouse. For
new sources, the regulation is primarily
directed at smaller sources that fall
below the prevention of significance
deterioration (PSD) thresholds and
therefore otherwise be exempt for NOX
controls.19
EPA evaluated the ozone precursor
emissions data in the South Carolina
portion of the Area and found that there
were significant reductions in these
emissions in multiple source categories
from 2011 to 2014 during ozone season.
The emissions data show that from 2011
to 2014, NOX and VOC emissions
16 Although the State listed CAIR and CSAPR as
permanent and enforceable measures, the State’s
maintenance demonstration does not include
emissions reductions from these programs because
there are no EGUs in the South Carolina portion of
the Area.
17 EPA expects that NO emissions from South
X
Carolina EGUs will continue to decrease with the
scheduled retirement of two coal- and/or oil-fired
EGUs by the end of 2018 and the switch from coal
and/or oil to natural gas at two additional EGUs.
None of these units are located in the Charlotte
Area.
18 EPA incorporated these two measures into the
SIP in 2005. See 70 FR 50195 (August 26, 2005).
19 South Carolina stated that neighboring states
have adopted measures to improve regional air
quality, noting that North Carolina has
implemented the state-wide Clean Smokestacks Act
which sets a cap on NOX and sulfur dioxide
emissions. North Carolina’s Clean Smokestacks Act
requires coal-fired power plants to reduce annual
NOX emissions by 77 percent by 2009, and to
reduce annual SO2 emissions by 49 percent by 2009
and 73 percent by 2013. This law set a NOX
emissions cap of 56,000 tons/year for 2009 and SO2
emissions caps of 250,000 tons/year and 130,000
tons/year for 2009 and 2013, respectively. The
public utilities cannot meet these emission caps by
purchasing emission credits. EPA approved the
statewide emissions caps as part of the North
Carolina SIP on September 26, 2011. In 2013, the
power plants subject to this law had combined NOX
emissions of 38,857 tons per year, well below the
56,000 tons per year cap. The emissions cap has
been met in all subsequent years as well and is
enforceable at both the federal and state level.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:29 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
61783
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
decreased in the point source, area
source, and mobile source categories
and that the decrease in mobile source
NOX emissions accounted for
approximately 82 percent of the total
NOX emissions reductions and
approximately 85 percent of the total
VOC emissions reductions. It is not
necessary for every change in emissions
between the nonattainment year and the
attainment year to be permanent and
enforceable. Rather, the CAA requires
that improvement in air quality
necessary for the area to attain the
relevant NAAQS must be reasonably
attributable to permanent and
enforceable emission reductions in
emissions.
TABLE 5—NOX EMISSIONS FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA PORTION OF THE CHARLOTTE 2008 OZONE NAAQS
NONATTAINMENT AREA
[Tons per summer day]
Year
Point source
2011 .....................................................................................
2014 .....................................................................................
Area source
4.71
4.54
On-road
0.93
0.91
11.43
10.04
Non-road
Total
2.63
2.50
19.70
17.85
TABLE 6—VOC EMISSIONS FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA PORTION OF THE CHARLOTTE 2008 OZONE NAAQS
NONATTAINMENT AREA
[Tons per summer day]
Year
Point source
2011 .....................................................................................
2014 .....................................................................................
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
The emissions reductions identified
in Tables 5 and 6 are attributable to
numerous measures implemented
during this period, including the
permanent and enforceable mobile
source measures discussed above such
as the Tier 2 vehicle and fuel standards,
the large non-road diesel engines rule,20
heavy-duty gasoline and diesel highway
vehicle standards,21 medium and heavy
duty vehicle fuel consumption and GHG
standards,22 non-road spark-ignitions
and recreational standards,23 and the
national program for GHG emissions
and fuel economy standards. These
mobile source measures have resulted
in, and continue to result in, large
reductions in NOX emissions over time
due to fleet turnover (i.e., the
replacement of older vehicles that
predate the standards with newer
vehicles that meet the standards). For
example, implementation of the Tier 2
standards began in 2004, and as newer,
cleaner cars enter the national fleet,
these standards continue to significantly
reduce NOX emissions. EPA expects that
these standards will reduce NOX
emissions from vehicles by
approximately 74 percent by 2030,
translating to nearly 3 million tons
20 EPA estimated that compliance with this rule
will cut NOX emissions from non-road diesel
engines by up to 90 percent nationwide.
21 Implementation of this rule is expected to
achieve a 95 percent reduction in NOX emissions
from diesel trucks and buses.
22 When fully implemented in 2018, this rule is
expected to reduce NOX emissions from the covered
vehicles by 20 percent.
23 When fully implemented, the standards will
result in an 80 percent reduction in NOX by 2020.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
Area source
4.02
3.80
6.93
6.89
annually by 2030.24 Implementation of
the heavy-duty gasoline and diesel
highway vehicle standards rule also
began in 2004. EPA projects a 2.6
million ton reduction in NOX emissions
by 2030 when the heavy-duty vehicle
fleet is completely replaced with newer
heavy-duty vehicles that comply with
these emission standards.25
The State calculated the on-road and
non-road mobile source emissions
contained in Tables 5 and 6 using EPAapproved models and procedures that
account for the Federal mobile source
measures identified above, fleet
turnover, and increased population.26 27
Because the model does not include any
additional mobile source measures, the
reductions in mobile source emissions
quantified in the Area between 2011
and 2014 are the result of the permanent
24 EPA, Regulatory Announcement, EPA420–F–
99–051 (December 1999), available at: https://
www.epa.gov/tier2/documents/f99051.pdf.
25 66 FR 5002, 5012 (January 18, 2001).
26 South Carolina used EPA’s MOVES2014 model
to calculate on-road emissions factors and EPA’s
NONROAD 2008a model to quantify off-road
emissions.
27 South Carolina used the interagency
consultation process required by 40 CFR part 93
(known as the Transportation Conformity Rule)
which requires EPA, the United States Department
of Transportation, metropolitan planning
organizations, state departments of transportation,
and State and local air quality agencies to work
together to develop applicable implementation
plans. The on-road emissions were generated by an
aggregate of the vehicle activity (generated from the
travel demand model) on individual roadways
multiplied by the appropriate emissions factor from
MOVES2014. The assumptions which are included
in the travel demand model, such as population,
were reviewed through the interagency consultation
process.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
On-road
5.30
3.93
Non-road
1.78
1.70
Total
18.03
16.32
and enforceable mobile source measures
listed above.
Improvements in air quality in the bistate Charlotte area are due to real,
permanent and enforceable reductions
in NOX emissions resulting from state
and federal measures. EPA is proposing
to approve the redesignation request
and related SIP revisions for the York
County portion of the bi-state Charlotte
Area.
Criteria (4)—The South Carolina Portion
of the Area Has a Fully Approved
Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section
175A of the CAA
For redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment, the CAA requires
EPA to determine that the area has a
fully approved maintenance plan
pursuant to section 175A of the CAA
(CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In
conjunction with its request to
redesignate the South Carolina portion
of the Area to attainment for the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS, SC DHEC
submitted a SIP revision to provide for
the maintenance of the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after
the effective date of redesignation to
attainment. EPA believes that this
maintenance plan meets the
requirements for approval under section
175A of the CAA.
a. What is required in a maintenance
plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth
the elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. Under
section 175A, the plan must
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
61784
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
demonstrate continued attainment of
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10
years after the Administrator approves a
redesignation to attainment. Eight years
after the redesignation, the state must
submit a revised maintenance plan
demonstrating that attainment will
continue to be maintained for the 10
years following the initial 10-year
period. To address the possibility of
future NAAQS violations, the
maintenance plan must contain
contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to assure prompt correction of
any future 2008 8-hour ozone violations.
The Calcagni Memorandum provides
further guidance on the content of a
maintenance plan, explaining that a
maintenance plan should address five
requirements: The attainment emissions
inventory, maintenance demonstration,
monitoring, verification of continued
attainment, and a contingency plan. As
is discussed more fully below, EPA has
preliminarily determined that South
Carolina’s maintenance plan includes
all the necessary components and is
thus proposing to approve it as a
revision to the South Carolina SIP.
b. Attainment Emissions Inventory
As discussed above, EPA determined
that the bi-state Charlotte Area had
attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
at the time that it redesignated the North
Carolina portion of the Area to
attainment. See 80 FR 44874–44875.
EPA has reviewed preliminary
monitoring data available since the time
of the Agency’s redesignation of the
North Carolina portion of the Area and
proposes to find that the bi-state
Charlotte Area continues to attain the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. South
Carolina selected 2014 as the base year
(i.e., attainment emissions inventory
year) for developing a comprehensive
emissions inventory for NOX and VOC,
for which projected emissions could be
developed for 2018, 2022, and 2026.
The attainment inventory identifies a
level of emissions in the Area that is
sufficient to attain the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. South Carolina began
development of the attainment
inventory by first generating a baseline
emissions inventory for the State’s
portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area.
The projected summer day emission
inventories have been estimated using
projected rates of growth in population,
traffic, economic activity, and other
parameters. In addition to comparing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
the final year of the plan (2026) to the
base year (2014), South Carolina
compared interim years to the baseline
to demonstrate that these years are also
expected to show continued
maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone
standard.
The emissions inventory is composed
of four major types of sources: Point,
area, on-road mobile, and non-road
mobile. South Carolina also included
event sources (i.e., fires) in the
inventory. The complete descriptions of
how the inventories were developed are
discussed in Appendices A–E of the
April 17, 2015, submittal, which can be
found in the docket for this action. Point
source emissions are tabulated from
data collected by direct on-site
measurements of emissions or from
mass balance calculations utilizing
emission factors from EPA’s AP–42 or
stack test results. For each projected
year’s inventory, point sources are
adjusted by growth factors based on
economic forecasting for the energy
sector. Airport and helipad emissions
reported were obtained from the EPA’s
2011 National Emission Inventory and
grown based on York County population
growth.
For area sources, emissions are
estimated by multiplying an emission
factor by some known indicator of
collective activity such as production,
number of employees, or population.
South Carolina started with the 2011
NEI for area sources reported at the York
County level, then allocated the
emissions to the portion of the county
within the bi-state Charlotte Area by the
proportion of the York County
population within the Area. For each
projected year’s inventory, area source
emissions are grown by information
such as population growth, energy
consumption by sector, or county
business patterns from the Census.
The non-road mobile sources
emissions are calculated using EPA’s
nonroad portion of the Motor Vehicle
Emission Simulator (MOVES2014)
model, with the exception of the
emissions associated with railroad
locomotives, which were obtained from
EPA’s 2011 NEI v1. For each projected
year’s inventory, the emissions are
estimated using growth factors based on
York County population growth.
For highway mobile sources, South
Carolina ran EPA’s MOVES2014 mobile
model to calculate emissions. The
MOVES2014 model includes the road
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
class vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as an
input file and can directly output the
estimated emissions. For each projected
year’s inventory, the highway mobile
sources emissions are calculated by
running the MOVES mobile model for
the future year with the projected VMT
to generate emissions that take into
consideration expected Federal tailpipe
standards, fleet turnover, and new fuels.
The events inventory, consisting of
wildfires and prescribed fires, was first
based on EPA’s 2011 NEI v1, which
utilized a model for predicting emission
from fires based on factors such as the
area burned, fuel load available, burn
efficiency, and emission factors.
Emissions from fires were not grown for
the maintenance and interim years due
to the unpredictability of projecting
wildfires.
The 2014 NOX and VOC emissions for
the South Carolina portion of the Area,
as well as the emissions for other years,
were developed consistent with EPA
guidance and are summarized in Tables
7 through 9 of the following subsection
discussing the maintenance
demonstration. See Appendices A–E of
the April 17, 2015, submission for more
detailed information on the emissions
inventory.
c. Maintenance Demonstration
The maintenance plan associated with
the redesignation request includes a
maintenance demonstration that:
(i) Shows compliance with and
maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS by providing information to
support the demonstration that current
and future emissions of NOX and VOC
remain at or below 2014 emissions
levels.
(ii) Uses 2014 as the attainment year
and includes future emissions inventory
projections for 2018, 2022, and 2026.
(iii) Identifies an ‘‘out year’’ at least 10
years after the time necessary for EPA to
review and approve the maintenance
plan. Per 40 CFR part 93, NOX and VOC
MVEBs were established for the last
year (2026) of the maintenance plan (see
section VII below). Additionally, SC
DHEC opted to establish MVEBs for an
interim year (2014).
(iv) Provides actual (2014) and
projected emissions inventories, in tons
per summer day (tpsd), for the South
Carolina portion of the Area, as shown
in Tables 7 through 9, below.
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
61785
TABLE 7—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED TYPICAL SUMMER DAY NOX EMISSIONS (tpsd) FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA PORTION
OF THE AREA
Sector
2014
2018
2022
2026
Point .................................................................................................................
Area .................................................................................................................
Non-road ..........................................................................................................
On-road ............................................................................................................
Event sources ..................................................................................................
4.54
0.91
2.50
10.04
0.04
4.57
0.92
1.91
6.65
0.04
4.59
0.92
1.58
4.61
0.04
4.62
0.92
1.43
3.39
0.04
Total * ........................................................................................................
18.03
14.09
11.74
10.40
TABLE 8—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED TYPICAL SUMMER DAY VOC EMISSIONS (tpsd) FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA PORTION
OF THE AREA
Sector
2014
2018
2022
2026
Point .................................................................................................................
Area .................................................................................................................
Non-road ..........................................................................................................
On-road ............................................................................................................
Event sources ..................................................................................................
3.80
6.89
1.70
3.93
0.42
3.83
7.30
1.46
2.79
0.42
3.84
7.54
1.39
2.15
0.42
3.86
7.80
1.40
1.74
0.42
Total * ........................................................................................................
16.74
15.80
15.34
15.22
TABLE 9—EMISSION ESTIMATES FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA PORTION OF THE AREA
VOC
(tpsd)
Year
2014 .........................................................................................................................................................................
2018 .........................................................................................................................................................................
2022 .........................................................................................................................................................................
2026 .........................................................................................................................................................................
Difference from 2014 to 2026 ..................................................................................................................................
Tables 7 through 9 summarize the
2014 and future projected emissions of
NOX and VOC from the South Carolina
portion of the Area. In situations where
local emissions are the primary
contributor to nonattainment, the
NAAQS should not be violated in the
future as long as emissions from within
the nonattainment area remain at or
below the baseline with which
attainment was achieved. South
Carolina has projected emissions as
described previously and determined
that emissions in the South Carolina
portion of the Area will remain below
those in the attainment year inventory
for the duration of the maintenance
plan.
As discussed in section VII of this
proposed rulemaking, a safety margin is
the difference between the attainment
level of emissions (from all sources) and
the projected level of emissions (from
all sources) in the maintenance plan.
The attainment level of emissions is the
level of emissions during one of the
years in which the area met the NAAQS.
16.74
15.80
15.34
15.22
¥1.52
NOX
(tpsd)
18.03
14.09
11.74
10.40
¥7.63
South Carolina selected 2014 as the
attainment emissions inventory year for
the South Carolina portion of the Area.
South Carolina calculated safety
margins in its submittal for year 2018,
2022, and 2026. Because the initial
MVEB year of 2014 is also the base year
for the maintenance plan inventory,
there is no safety margin, therefore, no
adjustments were made to the MVEB for
2014. The State has allocated a portion
of the 2026 safety margin to the 2026
MVEBs for the York County Area.
TABLE 10—NEW SAFETY MARGINS FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA PORTION OF THE AREA
VOC
(tpsd)
Year
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2014
2018
2022
2026
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................................................................................
The State decided to allocate 100
percent of the 2026 safety margin to the
2026 MVEBs to allow for unanticipated
growth in VMT, changes and
uncertainty in vehicle mix assumptions,
etc., that will influence the emission
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
estimations. SC DHEC has allocated 7.63
tpd (6,922 kg/day) to the 2026 NOX
MVEB and 1.52 tpd (1,379 kg/day) to
the 2026 VOC MVEB. After allocation of
100 percent of the available safety
margin, there is no remaining safety
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
N/A
¥0.94
¥1.40
¥1.52
NOX
(tpsd)
N/A
¥3.94
¥6.29
¥7.63
margin for NOX and VOC. This
allocation and the resulting safety
margin for the South Carolina portion of
the Area are discussed further in section
VI of this proposed rulemaking along
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
61786
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
with the MVEBs to be used for
transportation conformity proposes.
d. Monitoring Network
There are currently seven monitors
measuring ozone in the bi-state
Charlotte Area. All of these monitors are
operated by the State of North Carolina
or Mecklenburg County. There are no
South Carolina monitors in the bi-state
Charlotte Area. Specifically, North
Carolina operates four of the monitors in
the bi-state Charlotte Area, whereas the
Mecklenburg County Air Quality Office
operates three of the monitors in
Mecklenburg County. The State of North
Carolina, through the North Carolina
Department of Air Quality has
committed to continue operation of all
monitors in the North Carolina portion
of the bi-state Charlotte Area (which
happens to be all of the monitors in the
bi-state Charlotte Area) in compliance
with 40 CFR part 58 and have thus
addressed the requirement for
monitoring. EPA approved North
Carolina’s commitment to continuing
monitoring as part of the Agency’s
action to redesignate the North Carolina
portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area to
attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. See 80 FR 44873 (July 28,
2015). EPA approved North Carolina’s
monitoring plan on November 25, 2013.
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
The State of South Carolina, through
SC DHEC, has the legal authority to
enforce and implement the
requirements of the South Carolina
portion of the Area 2008 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan. This includes the
authority to adopt, implement, and
enforce any subsequent emissions
control contingency measures
determined to be necessary to correct
future ozone attainment problems.
Additionally, under the Consolidated
Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) and
Air Emissions Reporting Requirements
(AERR), SC DHEC is required to develop
a comprehensive, annual, statewide
emissions inventory every three years
that is due twelve to eighteen months
after the completion of the inventory
year. The AERR inventory years match
the base year and final year of the
inventory for the maintenance plan, and
are within one or two years of the
interim inventory years of the
maintenance plan. Therefore, SC DHEC
commits to compare the CERR and
AERR inventories as they are developed
with the maintenance plan to determine
if additional steps are necessary for
continued maintenance of the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS in this Area.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
f. Contingency Measures in the
Maintenance Plan
Section 175A of the CAA requires that
a maintenance plan include such
contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to assure that the state will
promptly correct a violation of the
NAAQS that occurs after redesignation.
The maintenance plan should identify
the contingency measures to be adopted,
a schedule and procedure for adoption
and implementation, and a time limit
for action by the state. A state should
also identify specific indicators to be
used to determine when the
contingency measures need to be
implemented. The maintenance plan
must include a requirement that a state
will implement all measures with
respect to control of the pollutant that
were contained in the SIP before
redesignation of the area to attainment
in accordance with section 175A(d).
In the April 17, 2015 submittal, South
Carolina affirms that all programs
instituted by the State will remain
enforceable and that sources are
prohibited from reducing emissions
controls following the redesignation of
the Area. The contingency plan
included in the submittal includes a
triggering mechanism to determine
when contingency measures are needed
and a process of developing and
implementing appropriate control
measures. The primary trigger of the
contingency plan will be a quality
assured/quality controlled (QA/QC)
design value that exceeds the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS (i.e., when the
three-year average of the 4th highest
values is equal to or greater than 0.076
ppm at any monitor in the Area). If the
QA/QC data indicates a violating design
value, the triggering event will be the
date of the design value violation, not
the final QA/QC date.
Additionally, SC DHEC will be
evaluating periodic emissions
inventories and comparing them to the
projected inventories. If the emissions
reported in these inventories exceed the
projected emissions in the maintenance
plan by more than 10 percent, SC DHEC
will investigate the cause for these
differences and develop a strategy for
addressing them.
Finally, SC DHEC commits to
implement, within 24 months of a
trigger, at least one of the control
measures listed below or other
contingency measures that may be
determined to be more appropriate
based on the analyses performed.28 At
28 If SC DHEC determines that a longer schedule
is required to implement specific contingency
measures, then, upon selection of the appropriate
measures, SC DHEC will notify EPA of the proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
least one of the following contingency
measures will be adopted and
implemented upon a primary triggering
event:
• NOX Reasonably Available Control
Technology on stationary sources not
subject to existing requirements;
• Implementation of diesel retrofit
programs, including incentives for
performing retrofits for fleet vehicle
operations;
• Alternative fuel programs for fleet
vehicle operations;
• Gas can and lawnmower
replacement programs;
• Voluntary engine idle reductions
programs;
• SC DHEC’s Take a Break from
Exhaust program; and,
• Other measures deemed appropriate
at the time as a result of advances in
control technologies.
EPA has concluded that the
maintenance plan adequately addresses
the five basic components of a
maintenance plan: The attainment
emissions inventory, maintenance
demonstration, monitoring, verification
of continued attainment, and a
contingency plan. Therefore, the
maintenance plan SIP revision
submitted by South Carolina for the
State’s portion of the Area meets the
requirements of section 175A of the
CAA and is approvable.
VI. What is EPA’s analysis of South
Carolina’s proposed NOX and VOC
MVEBs for the York County Area?
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new
transportation plans, programs, and
projects, such as the construction of
new highways, must ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e.,
be consistent with) the part of the state’s
air quality plan that addresses pollution
from cars and trucks. Conformity to the
SIP means that transportation activities
will not cause new air quality
violations, worsen existing violations, or
delay timely attainment of the NAAQS
or any interim milestones. If a
transportation plan does not conform,
most new projects that would expand
the capacity of roadways cannot go
forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93
set forth EPA policy, criteria, and
procedures for demonstrating and
assuring conformity of such
transportation activities to a SIP. The
regional emissions analysis is one, but
not the only, requirement for
implementing transportation
conformity. Transportation conformity
schedule and provide sufficient information to
demonstrate that the proposed measures are a
prompt correction of the triggering event. Any
extension would be subject to EPA’s approval of the
SIP revision containing the required contingency
measure.
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
is a requirement for nonattainment and
maintenance areas. Maintenance areas
are areas that were previously
nonattainment for a particular NAAQS
but have since been redesignated to
attainment with an approved
maintenance plan for that NAAQS.
Under the CAA, states are required to
submit, at various times, control strategy
SIPs and maintenance plans for
nonattainment areas. These control
strategy SIPs (including RFP and
attainment demonstration requirements)
and maintenance plans create MVEBs
for criteria pollutants and/or their
precursors to address pollution from
cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a
MVEB must be established for the last
year of the maintenance plan. A state
may adopt MVEBs for other years as
well. The MVEB is the portion of the
61787
conformity rule, a maintenance plan
must establish MVEBs for the last year
of the maintenance plan (in this case,
2026). See 40 CFR 93.118. The
consensus formed during the
interagency consultation process was
that another MVEB should be set for the
York County, SC maintenance plan base
year of 2014.
Accordingly, SC DHEC established
MVEBs based on the latest MPO
jurisdictional boundaries such that
MVEBs are established for that portion
of York County which is within the
RFATS MPO as part of the bi-state
Charlotte Area. Table 11, below,
provides the NOX and VOC MVEBs in
kilograms per day (kg/day),29 for 2014
and 2026.
total allowable emissions in the
maintenance demonstration that is
allocated to highway and transit vehicle
use and emissions. See 40 CFR 93.101.
The MVEB serves as a ceiling on
emissions from an area’s planned
transportation system. The MVEB
concept is further explained in the
preamble to the November 24, 1993,
Transportation Conformity Rule (58 FR
62188). The preamble also describes
how to establish the MVEB in the SIP
and how to revise the MVEB.
As part of the interagency
consultation process on setting MVEBs,
SC DHEC held conference calls with the
Rock Hill Fort Mill Area Transportation
Study (RFATS) Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO) to determine what
years to set MVEBs for the Area.
According to the transportation
TABLE 11—YORK COUNTY AREA MVEBS
[kg/day]
2014
2026
NOX
Base Emissions ...............................................................................................
Safety Margin Allocated to MVEB ...................................................................
Conformity MVEB ............................................................................................
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
VII. What is the status of EPA’s
adequacy determination for the
proposed NOX and VOC MVEBs for
2014 and 2026 for the York County
Area?
When reviewing submitted ‘‘control
strategy’’ SIPs or maintenance plans
containing MVEBs, EPA may
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
NOX
9,112
........................
9,112
3,566
........................
3,566
3,076
6,922
9,998
VOC
1,576
1,379
2,955
affirmatively find the MVEB contained
therein adequate for use in determining
transportation conformity. Once EPA
affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB
is adequate for transportation
conformity purposes, that MVEB must
be used by state and Federal agencies in
determining whether proposed
transportation projects conform to the
SIP as required by section 176(c) of the
CAA.
EPA’s substantive criteria for
determining adequacy of a MVEB are set
out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The process
for determining adequacy consists of
three basic steps: Public notification of
a SIP submission, a public comment
period, and EPA’s adequacy
determination. This process for
determining the adequacy of submitted
MVEBs for transportation conformity
purposes was initially outlined in EPA’s
May 14, 1999, guidance, ‘‘Conformity
Guidance on Implementation of March
2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision.’’
EPA adopted regulations to codify the
adequacy process in the Transportation
Conformity Rule Amendments for the
‘‘New 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards and
Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing
Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments—Response to Court
Decision and Additional Rule Change,’’
on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004).
Additional information on the adequacy
process for transportation conformity
purposes is available in the proposed
rule entitled, ‘‘Transportation
Conformity Rule Amendments:
Response to Court Decision and
Additional Rule Changes,’’ 68 FR 38974,
38984 (June 30, 2003).
As discussed earlier, South Carolina’s
April 17, 2015, maintenance plan
includes NOX and VOC MVEBs for the
York County Area for 2014, an interim
year of the maintenance plan, and 2026,
the last year of the maintenance plan.
EPA is reviewing the NOX and VOC s
MVEBs through the adequacy process.
The York County Area NOX and VOC
MVEBs, opened for public comment on
EPA’s adequacy Web site on May 14,
2015, found at: https://www.epa.gov/
otaq/stateresources/transconf/
currsips.htm. The EPA public comment
period on adequacy for the MVEBs for
2014 and 2026 for the York County Area
closed on June 15, 2015. No comments,
adverse or otherwise, were received
during EPA’s adequacy process for the
MVEBs associated with South Carolina’s
maintenance plan.
conversion was done utilizing the ‘‘CONVERT’’
As mentioned above, South Carolina
has chosen to allocate a portion of the
available safety margin to the NOX and
VOC MVEBs for 2026 for the York
County Area.
Through this rulemaking, EPA is
proposing to approve the MVEBs for
NOX and VOC for 2014 and 2026 for the
York County Area because EPA believes
that the Area maintains the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS with the emissions at the
levels of the budgets. Once the MVEBs
for the York County Area are approved
or found adequate (whichever is
completed first), they must be used for
future conformity determinations. After
thorough review, EPA has preliminary
determined that the budgets meet the
adequacy criteria, as outlined in 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4), and is proposing to
approve the budgets because they are
consistent with maintenance of the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS through 2026.
29 The conversion to kilograms used the actual
emissions reported in the MOVES model. The
VOC
function in an EXCEL spreadsheet. The conversion
factor is 907.1847.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
61788
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
EPA intends to make its
determination on the adequacy of the
2014 and 2026 MVEBs for the York
County Area for transportation
conformity purposes in the near future
by completing the adequacy process that
was started on May 14, 2015. After EPA
finds the 2014 and 2026 MVEBs
adequate or approves them, the new
MVEBs for NOX and VOC must be used
for future transportation conformity
determinations. For required regional
emissions analysis years that involve
2014 through 2026, the applicable 2014
MVEBs will be used and for 2026 and
beyond, the applicable budgets will be
the new 2026 MVEBs established in the
maintenance plan, as defined in section
VI of this proposed rulemaking.
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
VIII. What is the effect of EPA’s
proposed actions?
EPA’s proposed actions establish the
basis upon which EPA may take final
action on the issues being proposed for
approval today. Approval of South
Carolina’s redesignation request would
change the legal designation of the
portion of York County within the
South Carolina portion of the bi-state
Charlotte Area, as found at 40 CFR part
81, from nonattainment to attainment
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Approval of South Carolina’s associated
SIP revision would also incorporate a
plan for maintaining the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS in the Area through 2026
into the SIP. This maintenance plan
includes contingency measures to
remedy any future violations of the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS and procedures
for evaluation of potential violations.
The maintenance plan also establishes
NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and
2026 for the York County Area. The
MVEBs are listed in Table 11 in Section
VI. Additionally, EPA is notifying the
public of the status of EPA’s adequacy
determination for the newly-established
NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and
2026 for the York County Area.
IX. Proposed Actions
EPA is taking three separate but
related actions regarding the
redesignation and maintenance of the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the
South Carolina portion of the Area. EPA
is proposing to determine that the entire
bi-state Charlotte Area is continuing to
attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
EPA is also proposing to approve the
maintenance plan for the South Carolina
portion of the Area, including the NOX
and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026,
into the South Carolina SIP (under CAA
section 175A). The maintenance plan
demonstrates that the Area will
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
continue to maintain the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS and that the budgets
meet all of the adequacy criteria
contained in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and
(5). Further, as part of this action, EPA
is describing the status of its adequacy
determination for the NOX and VOC
MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 in accordance
with 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1). Within 24
months from the publication date of
EPA’s final rule for this action, the
transportation partners will need to
demonstrate conformity to the new NOX
and VOC MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR
93.104(e)(3).
Additionally, EPA is proposing to
determine that the South Carolina
portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area has
met the criteria under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On this
basis, EPA is proposing to approve
South Carolina’s redesignation request
for the South Carolina portion of the
Area. If finalized, approval of the
redesignation request would change the
official designation of that portion of
York County that is included in the bistate Charlotte Area, as found at 40 CFR
part 81, from nonattainment to
attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
X. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an
area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a
maintenance plan under section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the
status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory
requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by state law. A redesignation to
attainment does not in and of itself
create any new requirements, but rather
results in the applicability of
requirements contained in the CAA for
areas that have been redesignated to
attainment. Moreover, the Administrator
is required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
See 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, these proposed
actions merely propose to approve state
law as meeting Federal requirements
and do not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. For this reason, these
proposed actions:
• Are not a significant regulatory
action subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• are 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.);
• do 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);
• do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• are 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
• will not have disproportionate
human health or environmental effects
under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR
7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed action for
the state of South Carolina does not
have Tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000). The Catawba Indian
Nation Reservation is located within the
State of South Carolina. Pursuant to the
Catawba Indian Claims Settlement Act,
S.C. Code Ann. 27–16–120, ‘‘all state
and local environmental laws and
regulations apply to the [Catawba Indian
Nation] and Reservation and are fully
enforceable by all relevant state and
local agencies and authorities.’’
However, because no tribal lands are
located within the South Carolina
portion of the Area, this action is not
approving any specific state
requirement into the SIP that would
apply to Tribal lands. Therefore, EPA
has determined that this proposed rule
does not have substantial direct effects
on an Indian Tribe. EPA notes today’s
action will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt
Tribal law.
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules
List of Subjects
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 52
srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:17 Oct 10, 2015
Jkt 238001
61789
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control.
Dated: October 1, 2015.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2015–26022 Filed 10–13–15; 8:45 am]
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\14OCP1.SGM
14OCP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 198 (Wednesday, October 14, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61775-61789]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26022]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0298; FRL-9935-59-Region 4]
Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; SC; Redesignation
of the Charlotte-Rock Hill 2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to
Attainment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 17, 2015, the State of South Carolina, through the
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC
DHEC), submitted a request for the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) to redesignate the South Carolina portion of the bi-state
Charlotte-Rock Hill, North Carolina-South Carolina 2008 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area (the entire area is hereinafter referred to as the
``bi-State Charlotte Area'' or ``Area'' and the South Carolina portion
is hereinafter referred to as the ``York County Area'') to attainment
for the 2008 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
containing a maintenance plan for the York County Area. EPA is
proposing to determine that the bi-State Charlotte Area is continuing
to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS; to approve the State's plan for
maintaining attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone standard in the Area,
including the motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen
oxides (NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) for the
years 2014 and 2026 for the York County Area, into the SIP; and to
redesignate the York County Area to attainment for the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. EPA is also notifying the public of the status of EPA's
adequacy determination for the MVEBs for the York County Area.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 13, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2015-0298, by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: R4-ARMS@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562-9019.
4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0298,'' Air Regulatory Management
Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Air
Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation 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-
2015-0298. 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
[[Page 61776]]
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 may not be 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 Air Regulatory Management
Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you contact the person listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Sheckler of the Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Mrs. Sheckler may be reached by phone at (404) 562-9222, or
via electronic mail at sheckler.kelly@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to take?
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation?
IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions?
V. What is EPA's analysis of the request?
VI. What is EPA's analysis of South Carolina's proposed
NOX and VOC MVEBs for the York County Area?
VII. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the
proposed NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 for the York
County Area?
VIII. What is the effect of EPA's proposed actions?
IX. Proposed Actions
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to take?
EPA is proposing to take the following three separate but related
actions, one of which involves multiple elements: (1) To determine that
the bi-state Charlotte Area is continuing to attain the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS; \1\ (2) to approve South Carolina's plan for maintaining
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (maintenance plan), including the
associated MVEBs for the York County Area, into the South Carolina SIP;
and (3) to redesignate the York County Area to attainment for the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also notifying the public of the status of
EPA's adequacy determination for the MVEBs for the York County Area.
The bi-state Charlotte Area consists of Mecklenburg County in its
entirety and portions of Cabarrus, Gaston, Iredell, Lincoln, Rowan and
Union Counties, North Carolina; and a portion of York County, South
Carolina. On April 16, 2015, the State of North Carolina provided a
redesignation request and maintenance plan for its portion of the bi-
state Charlotte Area. EPA approved North Carolina's redesignation
request and maintenance plan in a separate action. See 80 FR 44873
(July 28, 2015). Today's proposed actions are summarized below and
described in greater detail throughout this notice of proposed
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In an action published on July 28, 2015, EPA determined that
the bi-state Charlotte Area was attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone
standard when the Agency redesignated the North Carolina portion of
this Area. See 80 FR 44873.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is making the preliminarily determination that the bi-state
Charlotte Area is continuing to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
based on recent air quality data and proposing to approve South
Carolina's maintenance plan for its portion of the bi-state Charlotte
Area as meeting the requirements of section 175A (such approval being
one of the CAA criteria for redesignation to attainment status). The
maintenance plan is designed to keep the bi-state Charlotte Area in
attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 2026. The maintenance
plan includes 2014 and 2026 MVEBs for NOX and VOC for the
York County Area for transportation conformity purposes. EPA is
proposing to approve these MVEBs and incorporate them into the South
Carolina SIP.
EPA also proposes to determine that the South Carolina portion of
the bi-state Charlotte Area has met the requirements for redesignation
under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Accordingly, in this action, EPA
is proposing to approve a request to change the legal designation of
the portion of York County that is included in the bi-state Charlotte
Area to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
EPA is also notifying the public of the status of EPA's adequacy
process for the 2014 and 2026 NOX and VOC MVEBs for the York
County Area. The Adequacy comment period began on May 14, 2015, with
EPA's posting of the availability of South Carolina's submission on
EPA's Adequacy Web site (https://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm#york-cnty). The Adequacy comment period for
these MVEBs closed on June 15, 2015. No comments, adverse or otherwise,
were received through the Adequacy process. Please see section VII of
this proposed rulemaking for further explanation of this process and
for more details on the MVEBs.
In summary, today's notice of proposed rulemaking is in response to
South Carolina's April 17, 2015, redesignation request and associated
SIP submission that address the specific issues summarized above and
the necessary elements described in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA for
redesignation of the South Carolina portion of the Area to attainment
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed actions?
On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of
0.075 parts per million (ppm). See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). Under
EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is
attained when the 3-year average of the annual fourth highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less
than or equal to 0.075 ppm. See 40 CFR 50.15. Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet a data completeness
requirement. The ambient air quality monitoring data completeness
requirement is met when the average percent of days with valid ambient
monitoring data is greater than 90 percent, and no single year has less
than 75 percent data completeness as determined in Appendix I of part
50.
Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the CAA requires EPA
to designate as nonattainment any area that is violating the NAAQS,
based on the three most recent years of complete, quality assured, and
certified ambient air quality data at the conclusion of the designation
process. The bi-state Charlotte Area was designated nonattainment for
the 2008 8-hour
[[Page 61777]]
ozone NAAQS on May 21, 2012 (effective July 20, 2012) using 2009-2011
ambient air quality data. See 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012). At the time
of designation, the bi-state Charlotte Area was classified as a
marginal nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In the
final implementation rule for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (SIP
Implementation Rule),\2\ EPA established ozone nonattainment area
attainment dates based on Table 1 of section 181(a) of the CAA. This
established an attainment date three years after the July 20, 2012,
effective date for areas classified as marginal areas for the 2008 8-
hour ozone nonattainment designations. Therefore, the bi-state
Charlotte Area's attainment date is July 20, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ This rule, entitled Implementation of the 2008 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan
Requirements and published at 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015), addresses
a range of nonattainment area SIP requirements for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS, including requirements pertaining to attainment
demonstrations, reasonable further progress (RFP), reasonably
available control technology (RACT), reasonably available control
measures (RACM), major new source review (NSR), emission
inventories, and the timing of SIP submissions and of compliance
with emission control measures in the SIP. This rule also addresses
the revocation of the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the anti-backsliding
requirements that apply when the 1997 ozone NAAQS are revoked.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. What are the criteria for redesignation?
The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA
allows for redesignation providing that: (1) The Administrator
determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the
Administrator has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for
the area under section 110(k); (3) the Administrator determines that
the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable
SIP and applicable Federal air pollutant control regulations and other
permanent and enforceable reductions; (4) the Administrator has fully
approved a maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of
section 175A; and, (5) the state containing such area has met all
requirements applicable to the area for purposes of redesignation under
section 110 and part D of the CAA.
On April 16, 1992, EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the
General Preamble for the Implementation of title I of the CAA
Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on
April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on
processing redesignation requests in the following documents:
1. ``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations,''
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, Director, Technical Support Division, June
18, 1990;
2. ``Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief,
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;
3. ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
4. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the
``Calcagni Memorandum'');
5. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response
to Clean Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
6. ``Technical Support Documents (TSDs) for Redesignation of Ozone
and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G. T.
Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;
7. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On
or After November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17,
1993;
8. ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for
Ozone and CO Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from D. Kent Berry,
Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, November 30, 1993;
9. ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14,
1994; and
10. ``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and
Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Memorandum from John S. Seitz,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 1995.
IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions?
On April 17, 2015, the State of South Carolina, through SC DHEC,
requested that EPA redesignate the South Carolina portion of the Area
to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA's evaluation
indicates that the entire bi-state Charlotte Area has attained the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS, and that the South Carolina portion of the Area
meets the requirements for redesignation as set forth in section
107(d)(3)(E), including the maintenance plan requirements under section
175A of the CAA. As a result, EPA is proposing to take the three
related actions summarized in section I of this notice.
V. What is EPA's analysis of the request?
As stated above, in accordance with the CAA, EPA proposes in this
action to: (1) Determine that the bi-state Charlotte Area is continuing
to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS; (2) approve South Carolina's
plan for maintaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Area, including
the associated MVEBs, into the South Carolina SIP; and (3) redesignate
the South Carolina portion of the Area to attainment for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. The five redesignation criteria provided under CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E) are discussed in greater detail for the Area in
the following paragraphs of this section.
Criteria (1)--The Bi-State Charlotte Area Has Attained the 2008 8-Hour
Ozone NAAQS
For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). For ozone, an area may be
considered to be attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS if it meets the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.15
and Appendix I of part 50, based on three complete, consecutive
calendar years of quality-assured air quality monitoring data. To
attain the NAAQS, the 3-year average of the fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations measured at each monitor
within an area over each year must not exceed 0.075 ppm. Based on the
data handling and reporting convention described in 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix I, the NAAQS are attained if the design value is 0.075
[[Page 61778]]
ppm or below. The data must be collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and recorded in the EPA Air Quality
System (AQS). The monitors generally should have remained at the same
location for the duration of the monitoring period required for
demonstrating attainment.
In its final action redesignating the North Carolina portion of the
bi-state Charlotte Area to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
EPA finalized its determination that the bi-state Charlotte Area was
attaining that standard in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 at that time.
EPA concluded that the design values for each monitor in the Area for
the years 2012-2014 are less than or equal to 0.075 ppm, that the data
from these monitors during this time period meet the data quality and
completeness requirements and are recorded in AQS, and that preliminary
2015 monitoring data available at the time of the final action
indicates that the bi-state Charlotte Area continues to attain the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 44874-44875. EPA has reviewed preliminary
monitoring data available since the time of the Agency's redesignation
of the North Carolina portion of the Area and proposes to find that the
bi-state Charlotte Area is continuing to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.\3\ For informational purposes, the fourth-highest 8-hour ozone
values at each monitor for 2012, 2013, 2014, and the 3-year averages of
these values (i.e., design values), are summarized in Table 1, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ This preliminary data is available at EPA's air data Web
site: https://aqsdr1.epa.gov/aqsweb/aqstmp/airdata/download_files.html#Daily. The list of monitors in the bi-state
Charlotte Area is available under the Designated Area field in Table
5 of the Ozone detailed information file at https://www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html.
Table 1--2012-2014 Design Value Concentrations for the Bi-State Charlotte Area [caret]
[Parts per million]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4th Highest 8-hour Ozone Value (ppm) 3-Year Design
------------------------------------------------ Values (ppm)
Location County Monitor ID ---------------
2012 2013 2014 2012-2014
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lincoln County Replacing Iron Station..... Lincoln..................... 37-109-0004 0.076 0.064 0.064 0.068
Garinger High School...................... Mecklenburg................. 37-119-0041 0.080 0.067 0.065 0.070
Westinghouse Blvd......................... Mecklenburg................. 37-119-1005 0.073 0.062 0.063 0.066
29 N at Mecklenburg Cab Co................ Mecklenburg................. 37-119-1009 0.085 0.066 0.068 0.073
Rockwell.................................. Rowan....................... 37-159-0021 0.080 0.062 0.064 0.068
Enochville School *....................... Rowan....................... 37-159-0022 0.077 0.063 .............. ..............
Monroe Middle School...................... Union....................... 37-179-0003 0.075 0.062 0.067 0.068
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Monitoring data for 2014 is not available because the monitor was shut down in 2014.
[caret] There is a monitor in York County that is located outside of the designated nonattainment area.
The 3-year design value for 2012-2014 for the bi-state Charlotte
Area is 0.073 ppm,\4\ which meets the NAAQS. EPA will not take final
action to approve the redesignation if the 3-year design value exceeds
the NAAQS prior to EPA finalizing the redesignation. The monitors used
to determine the attainment status for the bi-state Charlotte Area are
all located in North Carolina; no monitors are located in the South
Carolina portion of the Area. As discussed in more detail below, the
State of North Carolina has committed to continue monitoring in the bi-
state Charlotte Area in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The monitor with the highest 3-year design value is
considered the design value for the Area.
\5\ See also EPA's proposed rulemaking notice associated with
the redesignation of the North Carolina portion of the Area. 80 FR
29250, 29259 (May 21, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Criteria (2)--South Carolina Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section
110(k) for the South Carolina Portion of the Area; and Criteria (5)--
South Carolina Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110
and Part D of Title I of the CAA
For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the state has met all applicable
requirements under section 110 and part D of title I of the CAA (CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)) and that the state has a fully approved SIP
under section 110(k) for the area (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). EPA
proposes to find that South Carolina has met all applicable SIP
requirements for the South Carolina portion of the Area under section
110 of the CAA (general SIP requirements) for purposes of
redesignation. Additionally, EPA proposes to find that the South
Carolina SIP satisfies the criterion that it meets applicable SIP
requirements for purposes of redesignation under part D of title I of
the CAA in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). Further, EPA
proposes to determine that the SIP is fully approved with respect to
all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation in accordance
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these determinations, EPA
ascertained which requirements are applicable to the South Carolina
portion of the Area and, if applicable, that they are fully approved
under section 110(k). SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to
requirements that were applicable prior to submittal of the complete
redesignation request.
a. The South Carolina Portion of the Area Has Met All Applicable
Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA
General SIP requirements. General SIP elements and requirements are
delineated in section 110(a)(2) of title I, part A of the CAA. These
requirements include, but are not limited to, the following: Submittal
of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after reasonable public
notice and hearing; provisions for establishment and operation of
appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality;
implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the
implementation of part C requirements (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD)) and provisions for the implementation of part D
requirements (NSR permit programs); provisions for air pollution
modeling; and provisions
[[Page 61779]]
for public and local agency participation in planning and emission
control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA has
required certain states to establish programs to address the interstate
transport of air pollutants. The section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for
a state are not linked with a particular nonattainment area's
designation and classification in that state. EPA believes that the
requirements linked with a particular nonattainment area's designation
and classifications are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing
a redesignation request. The transport SIP submittal requirements,
where applicable, continue to apply to a state regardless of the
designation of any one particular area in the state. Thus, EPA does not
believe that the CAA's interstate transport requirements should be
construed to be applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.
In addition, EPA believes other section 110 elements that are
neither connected with nonattainment plan submissions nor linked with
an area's attainment status are applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation. The area will still be subject to these requirements
after the area is redesignated. The section 110 and part D requirements
which are linked with a particular area's designation and
classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a
redesignation request. This approach is consistent with EPA's existing
policy on applicability (i.e., for redesignations) of conformity and
oxygenated fuels requirements, as well as with section 184 ozone
transport requirements. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final
rulemakings (61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7,
2008); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458,
May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking at (60 FR 62748,
December 7, 1995). See also the discussion on this issue in the
Cincinnati, Ohio, redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and in
the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19,
2001).
Title I, Part D, applicable SIP requirements. Section 172(c) of the
CAA sets forth the basic requirements of attainment plans for
nonattainment areas that are required to submit them pursuant to
section 172(b). Subpart 2 of part D, which includes section 182 of the
CAA, establishes specific requirements for ozone nonattainment areas
depending on the area's nonattainment classification. As provided in
Subpart 2, a marginal ozone nonattainment area, such as the South
Carolina portion of the Area, must submit an emissions inventory that
complies with section 172(c)(3), but the specific requirements of
section 182(a) apply in lieu of the demonstration of attainment (and
contingency measures) required by section 172(c). See 42 U.S.C.
7511a(a). A thorough discussion of the requirements contained in
sections 172(c) and 182 can be found in the General Preamble for
Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498).
Section 182(a) Requirements. Section 182(a)(1) requires states to
submit a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual
emissions from sources of VOC and NOx emitted within the
boundaries of the ozone nonattainment area. South Carolina provided an
emissions inventory for the South Carolina portion of the Area to EPA
in an August 8, 2014, SIP submission. On June 12, 2015, EPA published a
direct final rule to approve this emissions inventory into the SIP.\6\
See 80 FR 33413 (direct final rule) and 80 FR 33460 (associated
proposed rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ This direct final rule was effective on July 13, 2015,
because EPA did not receive any adverse comment during the public
comment period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under section 182(a)(2)(A), states with ozone nonattainment areas
that were designated prior to the enactment of the 1990 CAA amendments
were required to submit, within six months of classification, all rules
and corrections to existing VOC RACT rules that were required under
section 172(b)(3) of the CAA (and related guidance) prior to the 1990
CAA amendments. The South Carolina portion of the Area is not subject
to the section 182(a)(2) RACT ``fix up'' because it was designated as
nonattainment after the enactment of the 1990 CAA amendments.
Section 182(a)(2)(B) requires each state with a marginal ozone
nonattainment area that implemented, or was required to implement, an
inspection and maintenance (I/M) program prior to the 1990 CAA
amendments to submit a SIP revision providing for an I/M program no
less stringent than that required prior to the 1990 amendments or
already in the SIP at the time of the amendments, whichever is more
stringent. The South Carolina portion of the Area is not subject to the
section 182(a)(2)(B) because it was designated as nonattainment after
the enactment of the 1990 CAA amendments and did not have an I/M
program in place prior to those amendments.
Regarding the permitting and offset requirements of section
182(a)(2)(C) and section 182(a)(4), South Carolina currently has a
fully-approved part D NSR program in place. However, EPA has determined
that areas being redesignated need not comply with the requirement that
a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation, provided that the
area demonstrates maintenance of the NAAQS without part D NSR, because
PSD requirements will apply after redesignation. A more detailed
rationale for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols,
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994,
entitled, ``Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.'' South Carolina's PSD program will become
applicable in the South Carolina portion of the Area upon redesignation
to attainment.
Section 182(a)(3) requires states to submit periodic inventories
and emissions statements. Section 182(a)(3)(A) requires states to
submit a periodic inventory every three years. As discussed below in
the section of this notice titled Criteria (4)(e), Verification of
Continued Attainment, the State will continue to update its emissions
inventory at least once every three years. Under section 182(a)(3)(B),
each state with an ozone nonattainment area must submit a SIP revision
requiring emissions statements to be submitted to the state by sources
within that nonattainment area. South Carolina provided a SIP revision
to EPA on August 22, 2014, addressing the section 182(a)(3)(B)
emissions statements requirement, and on June 12, 2015, EPA published a
direct final rule to approve this SIP revision.\7\ See 80 FR 33413
(direct final rule) and 80 FR 33460 (associated proposed rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ This direct final rule was effective on July 13, 2015,
because EPA did not receive any adverse comment during the public
comment period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 176 Conformity Requirements. Section 176(c) of the CAA
requires states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that
federally supported or funded projects conform to the air quality
planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation plans, programs, and projects that
are developed, funded, or approved under title 23 of the United States
Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity)
as well as to all other federally
[[Page 61780]]
supported or funded projects (general conformity). State transportation
conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement, and enforceability
that EPA promulgated pursuant to its authority under the CAA.
EPA interprets the conformity SIP requirements \8\ as not applying
for purposes of evaluating a redesignation request under section 107(d)
because state conformity rules are still required after redesignation
and Federal conformity rules apply where state rules have not been
approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding this
interpretation); see also 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (redesignation
of Tampa, Florida). Nonetheless, South Carolina has an approved
conformity SIP for the South Carolina portion of the Area. See 74 FR
37168 (July 28, 2009). Thus, the South Carolina portion of the bi-state
Charlotte Area has satisfied all applicable requirements for purposes
of redesignation under section 110 and part D of title I of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to submit revisions
to their SIPs to reflect certain Federal criteria and procedures for
determining transportation conformity. Transportation conformity
SIPs are different from the MVEBs that are established in control
strategy SIPs and maintenance plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. The South Carolina Portion of the Bi-State Charlotte Area Has a
Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
EPA has fully approved the applicable South Carolina SIP for the
South Carolina portion of the Area under section 110(k) of the CAA for
all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA may rely
on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request (see
Calcagni Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance
v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426)
plus any additional measures it may approve in conjunction with a
redesignation action (see 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and citations
therein). South Carolina has adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully
approved at various times, provisions addressing the various SIP
elements applicable for the ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 11136 (March 2,
2015); 76 FR 41111 (July 13, 2011).
As indicated above, EPA believes that the section 110 elements that
are neither connected with nonattainment plan submissions nor linked to
an area's nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation. EPA has approved all part D requirements
applicable for purposes of this redesignation. As noted above, EPA has
approved South Carolina's August 8, 2014, emissions inventory SIP
revision, and its August 22, 2014, emissions statements SIP revision.
See 80 FR 33413.
Criteria (3)--The Air Quality Improvement in the Bi-State Charlotte
Area Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions
Resulting From Implementation of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air
Pollution Control Regulations and Other Permanent and Enforceable
Reductions
For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the air quality improvement in the area
is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting
from implementation of the SIP, applicable Federal air pollution
control regulations, and other permanent and enforceable reductions
(CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). EPA has preliminarily determined that
South Carolina has demonstrated that the observed air quality
improvement in the bi-state Charlotte Area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from Federal measures and
from state measures adopted into the SIP. EPA does not believe that the
decrease in ozone concentrations in the bi-state Charlotte Area is due
to unusually favorable meteorological conditions.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See 80 FR 44875-44877.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
State and Federal measures enacted in recent years have resulted in
permanent emission reductions. Most of these emission reductions are
enforceable through regulations. The state measures that have been
implemented to date and identified by South Carolina as permanent and
enforceable measures include Regulation 61-62.2--Prohibition of Open
Burning and Regulation 61-62.5--Control of Oxides of Nitrogen. These
measures are approved in the federally-approved SIP and thus are
permanent and enforceable. The Federal measures that have been
implemented include the following:
Tier 2 vehicle and fuel standards. Implementation began in 2004 and
as newer, cleaner cars enter the national fleet, these standards
continue to significantly reduce NOx emissions. The
standards require all passenger vehicles in any manufacturer's fleet to
meet an average standard of 0.07 grams of NOx per mile.
Additionally, in January 2006 the sulfur content of gasoline was
required to be on average 30 ppm which assists in lowering the
NOx emissions. Most gasoline sold in South Carolina prior to
January 2006 had a sulfur content of about 300 ppm.\10\ EPA expects
that these standards will reduce NOx emissions from vehicles
by approximately 74 percent by 2030, translating to nearly 3 million
tons annually by 2030.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ South Carolina also identified Tier 3 Motor Vehicle
Emissions and Fuel Standards as a federal measure. EPA issued this
rule in April 28, 2014, which applies to light duty passenger cars
and trucks. EPA promulgated this rule to reduce air pollution from
new passenger cars and trucks beginning in 2017. Tier 3 emission
standards will lower sulfur content of gasoline and lower the
emissions standards.
\11\ EPA, Regulatory Announcement, EPA420-F-99-051 (December
1999), available at: https://www.epa.gov/tier2/documents/f99051.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Large non-road diesel engines rule. This rule was promulgated in
2004, and is being phased in between 2008 through 2014. This rule will
also reduce the sulfur content in the nonroad diesel fuel. When fully
implemented, this rule will reduce NOX, VOC, particulate
matter, and carbon monoxide. These emission reductions are federally
enforceable. EPA issued this rule in June 2004, which applies to diesel
engines used in industries, such as construction, agriculture, and
mining. It is estimated that compliance with this rule will cut
NOX emissions from non-road diesel engines by up to 90
percent nationwide. The non-road diesel rule was fully implemented by
2010.
Heavy-duty gasoline and diesel highway vehicle standards. EPA
issued this rule in January 2001 (66 FR 5002). This rule includes
standards limiting the sulfur content of diesel fuel, which went into
effect in 2004. A second phase took effect in 2007, which further
reduced the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 ppm, leading to
additional reductions in combustion NOX and VOC emissions.
EPA expects that this rule will achieve a 95 percent reduction in
NOX emissions from diesel trucks and buses and will reduce
NOX emissions by 2.6 million tons by 2030 when the heavy-
duty vehicle fleet is completely replaced with newer heavy-duty
vehicles that comply with these emission standards.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 66 FR 5002, 5012 (January 18, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medium and heavy duty vehicle fuel consumption and GHG standards.
These standards require on-road vehicles to achieve a 7 percent to 20
percent reduction in CO2 emissions and fuel consumption by
2018. The decrease in fuel consumption will result in a 7 percent to 20
percent decrease in NOX emissions.
[[Page 61781]]
Nonroad spark-ignition engines and recreational engines standards.
The nonroad spark-ignition and recreational engine standards, effective
in July 2003, regulate NOX, hydrocarbons, and carbon
monoxide from groups of previously unregulated nonroad engines. These
engine standards apply to large spark-ignition engines (e.g., forklifts
and airport ground service equipment), recreational vehicles (e.g.,
off-highway motorcycles and all-terrain-vehicles), and recreational
marine diesel engines sold in the United States and imported after the
effective date of these standards. When all of the nonroad spark-
ignition and recreational engine standards are fully implemented, an
overall 72 percent reduction in hydrocarbons, 80 percent reduction in
NOX, and 56 percent reduction in carbon monoxide emissions
are expected by 2020. These controls reduce ambient concentrations of
ozone, carbon monoxide, and fine particulate matter.
National Program for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and Fuel
Economy Standards. The federal GHG and fuel economy standards apply to
light-duty cars and trucks in model years 2012-2016 (phase 1) and 2017-
2025 (phase 2). The final standards are projected to result in an
average industry fleet-wide level of 163 grams/mile of carbon dioxide
(CO2) which is equivalent to 54.5 miles per gallon (mpg) if
achieved exclusively through fuel economy improvements. The fuel
economy standards result in less fuel being consumed, and therefore
less NOX emissions released.
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine (RICE) National Emissions
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP).\13\ The RICE NESHAP is
expected to result in a small decrease in VOC emissions. RICE owners
and operators had to comply with the NESHAP by May 3, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ This NESHAP is expected to result in a small decrease in
VOC emissions. Boilers must comply with the NESHAP by January 31,
2016, for all states except North Carolina which has a compliance
date in May 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued the
NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22
states to reduce emissions of NOX, a precursor to ozone
pollution, and providing a mechanism (the NOX Budget Trading
Program) that states could use to achieve those reductions. Affected
states were required to comply with Phase I of the SIP Call beginning
in 2004 and Phase II beginning in 2007. By the end of 2008, ozone
season emissions from sources subject to the NOX SIP Call
dropped by 62 percent from 2000 emissions levels. All NOX
SIP Call states have SIPs that currently satisfy their obligations
under the NOX SIP Call; the NOX SIP Call
reduction requirements are being met; and EPA will continue to enforce
the requirements of the NOX SIP Call. Emission reductions
resulting from regulations developed in response to the NOX
SIP Call are therefore permanent and enforceable for the purposes of
today's action.
CAIR/CSAPR. In its redesignation request and maintenance plan, the
State identified the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and the Cross-
State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) as two measures that contributed to
permanent and enforceable emissions reductions. CAIR created regional
cap-and-trade programs to reduce SO2 and NOX
emissions in 27 eastern states, including South Carolina, that
contributed to downwind nonattainment and maintenance of the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 70 FR 25162
(May 12, 2005). EPA approved South Carolina's CAIR regulations into the
South Carolina SIP on October 16, 2009. See 74 FR 53167. In 2008, the
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
(D.C. Circuit) initially vacated CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d
896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately remanded the rule to EPA without
vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits provided by CAIR, North
Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). On August 8,
2011 (76 FR 48208), acting on the DC Circuit's remand, EPA promulgated
CSAPR to replace CAIR and thus to address the interstate transport of
emissions contributing to nonattainment and interfering with
maintenance of the two air quality standards covered by CAIR as well as
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. CSAPR requires substantial reductions
of SO2 and NOX emissions from electric generating
units (EGUs) in 28 states in the Eastern United States.
The DC Circuit's initial vacatur of CSAPR \14\ was reversed by the
United States Supreme Court on April 29, 2014, and the case was
remanded to the DC Circuit to resolve remaining issues in accordance
with the high court's ruling. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P.,
134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). On remand, the D.C. Circuit affirmed CSAPR in
most respects, but invalidated without vacating some of the CSAPR
budgets as to a number of states. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v.
EPA, 795 F.3d 118 (D.C. Cir. 2015). The remanded budgets include the
Phase 2 sulfur dioxide (SO2) and NOX ozone season
emissions budgets for South Carolina. This litigation ultimately
delayed implementation of CSAPR for three years, from January 1, 2012,
when CSAPR's cap-and-trade programs were originally scheduled to
replace the CAIR cap-and-trade programs, to January 1, 2015. Thus, the
rule's Phase 2 budgets were originally promulgated to begin on January
1, 2014, and are now scheduled to begin on January 1, 2017. CSAPR will
continue to operate under the existing emissions budgets until EPA
addresses the D.C. Circuit's remand.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38
(D.C. Cir. 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the State identified CAIR and CSAPR as measures that
contributed to permanent and enforceable emissions reductions, EPA is
proposing to approve the redesignation of the South Carolina portion of
the bi-State Charlotte Area without relying on those measures as having
led to attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS or contributing to
maintenance of that standard. In so doing, we are proposing to
determine that the DC Circuit's invalidation of the South Carolina
CSAPR Phase 2 ozone season NOX and SO2 emissions
budgets does not bar today's proposed redesignation.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ The Court's holding regarding South Carolina's
SO2 CSAPR emissions budget is irrelevant to today's
action because SO2 is not an ozone precursor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The improvement in ozone air quality in the Area from 2011 (a year
when the design value for the Area was above the NAAQS) to 2014 (a year
when the design value was below the NAAQS) is not due to CSAPR
emissions reductions because, as noted above, CSAPR did not go into
effect until January 1, 2015, after the Area was already attaining the
standard. As a general matter, because CSAPR is CAIR's replacement,
emissions reductions associated with CAIR will for most areas be made
permanent and enforceable through implementation of CSAPR. However, EPA
has preliminarily determined that the vast majority of reductions in
emissions in the South Carolina portion of the Area from 2011-2014 were
due to permanent and enforceable reductions in mobile source VOC and
NOX emissions. In addition, EPA's analysis of EGU emissions
data from CAIR-subject sources in South Carolina, none of which are
located in the South Carolina portion of the Charlotte Area, further
support our proposed determination that attainment of the 2008 ozone
NAAQS in the Area was not due to CAIR reductions from South Carolina
EGUs.
As summarized at the end of this section, EPA found that from 2011
to
[[Page 61782]]
2014, mobile source emission reductions accounted for 82 percent of the
total NOX reductions and 85 percent of the total VOC
reductions in the South Carolina portion of the Area. As laid out in
the State's maintenance demonstration, NOX and VOC emissions
in the South Carolina portion of the Area are projected to continue
their downward trend through the end of the first maintenance plan
period, driven entirely by mobile source measures.\16\ From 2014 to
2026, the State projected that all of the emissions decreases in the
South Carolina portion of the Area would be due to mobile source
measures based on EPA-approved mobile source modeling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Although the State listed CAIR and CSAPR as permanent and
enforceable measures, the State's maintenance demonstration does not
include emissions reductions from these programs because there are
no EGUs in the South Carolina portion of the Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, emissions data from EPA's Clean Air Markets Division
(CAMD) summarized in Table 3 shows that NOX emissions from
CAIR-subject EGUs in South Carolina were already below the
NOX ozone season CAIR budget by 2011, when the design value
for the Area was above the 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA believes that the
additional decreases in NOX emissions from South Carolina
EGUs in 2012-2014 were largely due to the retirement of several coal-
and oil-fired EGUs during that time period. See Table 4. These
retirements are permanent and enforceable, regardless of the rationale
behind the shutdowns. Because these retired units were subject to CAIR,
even if CAIR was partially responsible for attainment of the 2008 ozone
NAAQS in the South Carolina portion of the Area, CAIR's part in that
attainment has been made permanent and enforceable through retirements
that will endure.\17\ Given the particular facts and circumstances
associated with this Area, EPA does not believe that the DC Circuit's
recent invalidation of South Carolina's CSAPR Phase 2 NOX
ozone season and SO2 budgets, which replaced CAIR's
NOX ozone season and SO2 budgets, is a bar to
EPA's redesignation of the South Carolina portion of the Area for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ EPA expects that NOX emissions from South
Carolina EGUs will continue to decrease with the scheduled
retirement of two coal- and/or oil-fired EGUs by the end of 2018 and
the switch from coal and/or oil to natural gas at two additional
EGUs. None of these units are located in the Charlotte Area.
Table 3--Comparison of South Carolina EGU Annual NOX Ozone Season Budget and NOX Ozone Season Emissions From
South Carolina EGUs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
South Carolina EGU NOX ozone season emissions
South Carolina EGU CAIR NOX ozone season -------------------------------------------------------------------
annual budget (2009-2014) 2011 2012 2013 2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15,249...................................... 13,036 8,817 6,491 7,237
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4--South Carolina EGUs That Retired During 2011-2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011 Ozone
season NOX Retirement
Facility name Unit emissions date
(tons)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H B Robinson.................................................... 1 378 2012
W S Lee......................................................... 1 166 2014
W S Lee......................................................... 2 181 2014
Canadys Steam................................................... CAN1 492 2012
Canadys Steam................................................... CAN2 515 2013
Canadys Steam................................................... CAN3 769 2013
Dolphus M Grainger.............................................. 1 186 2012
Dolphus M Grainger.............................................. 2 192 2012
Jefferies....................................................... 3 423 2012
Jefferies....................................................... 4 418 2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As mentioned above, the State measures that have been implemented
include the following: \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ EPA incorporated these two measures into the SIP in 2005.
See 70 FR 50195 (August 26, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prohibition of Open Burning: Effective in 2004, Regulation 61-62.2
prohibits the certain open burning activities during the ozone season
for additional control of NOX emissions.
Control of Oxides of Nitrogen: Effective in 2004, Regulation 61-
62.5, Standard 5.2--Control of Oxides of Nitrogen, applies to new and
existing stationary sources that emit or have the potential to emit
NOX generated from fuel combustion. This regulation sets
standards for new construction based on Best Available Control
Technology (BACT) standards from the national RACT/BACT/LAER
clearinghouse. For new sources, the regulation is primarily directed at
smaller sources that fall below the prevention of significance
deterioration (PSD) thresholds and therefore otherwise be exempt for
NOX controls.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ South Carolina stated that neighboring states have adopted
measures to improve regional air quality, noting that North Carolina
has implemented the state-wide Clean Smokestacks Act which sets a
cap on NOX and sulfur dioxide emissions. North Carolina's
Clean Smokestacks Act requires coal-fired power plants to reduce
annual NOX emissions by 77 percent by 2009, and to reduce
annual SO2 emissions by 49 percent by 2009 and 73 percent
by 2013. This law set a NOX emissions cap of 56,000 tons/
year for 2009 and SO2 emissions caps of 250,000 tons/year
and 130,000 tons/year for 2009 and 2013, respectively. The public
utilities cannot meet these emission caps by purchasing emission
credits. EPA approved the statewide emissions caps as part of the
North Carolina SIP on September 26, 2011. In 2013, the power plants
subject to this law had combined NOX emissions of 38,857
tons per year, well below the 56,000 tons per year cap. The
emissions cap has been met in all subsequent years as well and is
enforceable at both the federal and state level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA evaluated the ozone precursor emissions data in the South
Carolina portion of the Area and found that there were significant
reductions in these emissions in multiple source categories from 2011
to 2014 during ozone season. The emissions data show that from 2011 to
2014, NOX and VOC emissions
[[Page 61783]]
decreased in the point source, area source, and mobile source
categories and that the decrease in mobile source NOX
emissions accounted for approximately 82 percent of the total
NOX emissions reductions and approximately 85 percent of the
total VOC emissions reductions. It is not necessary for every change in
emissions between the nonattainment year and the attainment year to be
permanent and enforceable. Rather, the CAA requires that improvement in
air quality necessary for the area to attain the relevant NAAQS must be
reasonably attributable to permanent and enforceable emission
reductions in emissions.
Table 5--NOX Emissions for the South Carolina Portion of the Charlotte 2008 Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Area
[Tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Point source Area source On-road Non-road Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011............................ 4.71 0.93 11.43 2.63 19.70
2014............................ 4.54 0.91 10.04 2.50 17.85
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6--VOC Emissions for the South Carolina Portion of the Charlotte 2008 Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Area
[Tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Point source Area source On-road Non-road Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011............................ 4.02 6.93 5.30 1.78 18.03
2014............................ 3.80 6.89 3.93 1.70 16.32
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The emissions reductions identified in Tables 5 and 6 are
attributable to numerous measures implemented during this period,
including the permanent and enforceable mobile source measures
discussed above such as the Tier 2 vehicle and fuel standards, the
large non-road diesel engines rule,\20\ heavy-duty gasoline and diesel
highway vehicle standards,\21\ medium and heavy duty vehicle fuel
consumption and GHG standards,\22\ non-road spark-ignitions and
recreational standards,\23\ and the national program for GHG emissions
and fuel economy standards. These mobile source measures have resulted
in, and continue to result in, large reductions in NOX
emissions over time due to fleet turnover (i.e., the replacement of
older vehicles that predate the standards with newer vehicles that meet
the standards). For example, implementation of the Tier 2 standards
began in 2004, and as newer, cleaner cars enter the national fleet,
these standards continue to significantly reduce NOX
emissions. EPA expects that these standards will reduce NOX
emissions from vehicles by approximately 74 percent by 2030,
translating to nearly 3 million tons annually by 2030.\24\
Implementation of the heavy-duty gasoline and diesel highway vehicle
standards rule also began in 2004. EPA projects a 2.6 million ton
reduction in NOX emissions by 2030 when the heavy-duty
vehicle fleet is completely replaced with newer heavy-duty vehicles
that comply with these emission standards.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ EPA estimated that compliance with this rule will cut
NOX emissions from non-road diesel engines by up to 90
percent nationwide.
\21\ Implementation of this rule is expected to achieve a 95
percent reduction in NOX emissions from diesel trucks and
buses.
\22\ When fully implemented in 2018, this rule is expected to
reduce NOX emissions from the covered vehicles by 20
percent.
\23\ When fully implemented, the standards will result in an 80
percent reduction in NOX by 2020.
\24\ EPA, Regulatory Announcement, EPA420-F-99-051 (December
1999), available at: https://www.epa.gov/tier2/documents/f99051.pdf.
\25\ 66 FR 5002, 5012 (January 18, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State calculated the on-road and non-road mobile source
emissions contained in Tables 5 and 6 using EPA-approved models and
procedures that account for the Federal mobile source measures
identified above, fleet turnover, and increased
population.26 27 Because the model does not include any
additional mobile source measures, the reductions in mobile source
emissions quantified in the Area between 2011 and 2014 are the result
of the permanent and enforceable mobile source measures listed above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ South Carolina used EPA's MOVES2014 model to calculate on-
road emissions factors and EPA's NONROAD 2008a model to quantify
off-road emissions.
\27\ South Carolina used the interagency consultation process
required by 40 CFR part 93 (known as the Transportation Conformity
Rule) which requires EPA, the United States Department of
Transportation, metropolitan planning organizations, state
departments of transportation, and State and local air quality
agencies to work together to develop applicable implementation
plans. The on-road emissions were generated by an aggregate of the
vehicle activity (generated from the travel demand model) on
individual roadways multiplied by the appropriate emissions factor
from MOVES2014. The assumptions which are included in the travel
demand model, such as population, were reviewed through the
interagency consultation process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Improvements in air quality in the bi-state Charlotte area are due
to real, permanent and enforceable reductions in NOX
emissions resulting from state and federal measures. EPA is proposing
to approve the redesignation request and related SIP revisions for the
York County portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area.
Criteria (4)--The South Carolina Portion of the Area Has a Fully
Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA
For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has a fully approved
maintenance plan pursuant to section 175A of the CAA (CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In conjunction with its request to redesignate the
South Carolina portion of the Area to attainment for the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, SC DHEC submitted a SIP revision to provide for the
maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after
the effective date of redesignation to attainment. EPA believes that
this maintenance plan meets the requirements for approval under section
175A of the CAA.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
Under section 175A, the plan must
[[Page 61784]]
demonstrate continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least
10 years after the Administrator approves a redesignation to
attainment. Eight years after the redesignation, the state must submit
a revised maintenance plan demonstrating that attainment will continue
to be maintained for the 10 years following the initial 10-year period.
To address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance
plan must contain contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to assure
prompt correction of any future 2008 8-hour ozone violations. The
Calcagni Memorandum provides further guidance on the content of a
maintenance plan, explaining that a maintenance plan should address
five requirements: The attainment emissions inventory, maintenance
demonstration, monitoring, verification of continued attainment, and a
contingency plan. As is discussed more fully below, EPA has
preliminarily determined that South Carolina's maintenance plan
includes all the necessary components and is thus proposing to approve
it as a revision to the South Carolina SIP.
b. Attainment Emissions Inventory
As discussed above, EPA determined that the bi-state Charlotte Area
had attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS at the time that it
redesignated the North Carolina portion of the Area to attainment. See
80 FR 44874-44875. EPA has reviewed preliminary monitoring data
available since the time of the Agency's redesignation of the North
Carolina portion of the Area and proposes to find that the bi-state
Charlotte Area continues to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. South
Carolina selected 2014 as the base year (i.e., attainment emissions
inventory year) for developing a comprehensive emissions inventory for
NOX and VOC, for which projected emissions could be
developed for 2018, 2022, and 2026. The attainment inventory identifies
a level of emissions in the Area that is sufficient to attain the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS. South Carolina began development of the attainment
inventory by first generating a baseline emissions inventory for the
State's portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area. The projected summer
day emission inventories have been estimated using projected rates of
growth in population, traffic, economic activity, and other parameters.
In addition to comparing the final year of the plan (2026) to the base
year (2014), South Carolina compared interim years to the baseline to
demonstrate that these years are also expected to show continued
maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone standard.
The emissions inventory is composed of four major types of sources:
Point, area, on-road mobile, and non-road mobile. South Carolina also
included event sources (i.e., fires) in the inventory. The complete
descriptions of how the inventories were developed are discussed in
Appendices A-E of the April 17, 2015, submittal, which can be found in
the docket for this action. Point source emissions are tabulated from
data collected by direct on-site measurements of emissions or from mass
balance calculations utilizing emission factors from EPA's AP-42 or
stack test results. For each projected year's inventory, point sources
are adjusted by growth factors based on economic forecasting for the
energy sector. Airport and helipad emissions reported were obtained
from the EPA's 2011 National Emission Inventory and grown based on York
County population growth.
For area sources, emissions are estimated by multiplying an
emission factor by some known indicator of collective activity such as
production, number of employees, or population. South Carolina started
with the 2011 NEI for area sources reported at the York County level,
then allocated the emissions to the portion of the county within the
bi-state Charlotte Area by the proportion of the York County population
within the Area. For each projected year's inventory, area source
emissions are grown by information such as population growth, energy
consumption by sector, or county business patterns from the Census.
The non-road mobile sources emissions are calculated using EPA's
nonroad portion of the Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES2014)
model, with the exception of the emissions associated with railroad
locomotives, which were obtained from EPA's 2011 NEI v1. For each
projected year's inventory, the emissions are estimated using growth
factors based on York County population growth.
For highway mobile sources, South Carolina ran EPA's MOVES2014
mobile model to calculate emissions. The MOVES2014 model includes the
road class vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as an input file and can
directly output the estimated emissions. For each projected year's
inventory, the highway mobile sources emissions are calculated by
running the MOVES mobile model for the future year with the projected
VMT to generate emissions that take into consideration expected Federal
tailpipe standards, fleet turnover, and new fuels.
The events inventory, consisting of wildfires and prescribed fires,
was first based on EPA's 2011 NEI v1, which utilized a model for
predicting emission from fires based on factors such as the area
burned, fuel load available, burn efficiency, and emission factors.
Emissions from fires were not grown for the maintenance and interim
years due to the unpredictability of projecting wildfires.
The 2014 NOX and VOC emissions for the South Carolina
portion of the Area, as well as the emissions for other years, were
developed consistent with EPA guidance and are summarized in Tables 7
through 9 of the following subsection discussing the maintenance
demonstration. See Appendices A-E of the April 17, 2015, submission for
more detailed information on the emissions inventory.
c. Maintenance Demonstration
The maintenance plan associated with the redesignation request
includes a maintenance demonstration that:
(i) Shows compliance with and maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS by providing information to support the demonstration that
current and future emissions of NOX and VOC remain at or
below 2014 emissions levels.
(ii) Uses 2014 as the attainment year and includes future emissions
inventory projections for 2018, 2022, and 2026.
(iii) Identifies an ``out year'' at least 10 years after the time
necessary for EPA to review and approve the maintenance plan. Per 40
CFR part 93, NOX and VOC MVEBs were established for the last
year (2026) of the maintenance plan (see section VII below).
Additionally, SC DHEC opted to establish MVEBs for an interim year
(2014).
(iv) Provides actual (2014) and projected emissions inventories, in
tons per summer day (tpsd), for the South Carolina portion of the Area,
as shown in Tables 7 through 9, below.
[[Page 61785]]
Table 7--Actual and Projected Typical Summer Day NOX Emissions (tpsd) for the South Carolina Portion of the Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sector 2014 2018 2022 2026
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point........................................... 4.54 4.57 4.59 4.62
Area............................................ 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.92
Non-road........................................ 2.50 1.91 1.58 1.43
On-road......................................... 10.04 6.65 4.61 3.39
Event sources................................... 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total *..................................... 18.03 14.09 11.74 10.40
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 8--Actual and Projected Typical Summer Day VOC Emissions (tpsd) for the South Carolina Portion of the Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sector 2014 2018 2022 2026
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point........................................... 3.80 3.83 3.84 3.86
Area............................................ 6.89 7.30 7.54 7.80
Non-road........................................ 1.70 1.46 1.39 1.40
On-road......................................... 3.93 2.79 2.15 1.74
Event sources................................... 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total *..................................... 16.74 15.80 15.34 15.22
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 9--Emission Estimates for the South Carolina Portion of the Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year VOC (tpsd) NOX (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014.................................... 16.74 18.03
2018.................................... 15.80 14.09
2022.................................... 15.34 11.74
2026.................................... 15.22 10.40
Difference from 2014 to 2026............ -1.52 -7.63
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tables 7 through 9 summarize the 2014 and future projected
emissions of NOX and VOC from the South Carolina portion of
the Area. In situations where local emissions are the primary
contributor to nonattainment, the NAAQS should not be violated in the
future as long as emissions from within the nonattainment area remain
at or below the baseline with which attainment was achieved. South
Carolina has projected emissions as described previously and determined
that emissions in the South Carolina portion of the Area will remain
below those in the attainment year inventory for the duration of the
maintenance plan.
As discussed in section VII of this proposed rulemaking, a safety
margin is the difference between the attainment level of emissions
(from all sources) and the projected level of emissions (from all
sources) in the maintenance plan. The attainment level of emissions is
the level of emissions during one of the years in which the area met
the NAAQS. South Carolina selected 2014 as the attainment emissions
inventory year for the South Carolina portion of the Area. South
Carolina calculated safety margins in its submittal for year 2018,
2022, and 2026. Because the initial MVEB year of 2014 is also the base
year for the maintenance plan inventory, there is no safety margin,
therefore, no adjustments were made to the MVEB for 2014. The State has
allocated a portion of the 2026 safety margin to the 2026 MVEBs for the
York County Area.
Table 10--New Safety Margins for the South Carolina Portion of the Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year VOC (tpsd) NOX (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014.................................... N/A N/A
2018.................................... -0.94 -3.94
2022.................................... -1.40 -6.29
2026.................................... -1.52 -7.63
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State decided to allocate 100 percent of the 2026 safety margin
to the 2026 MVEBs to allow for unanticipated growth in VMT, changes and
uncertainty in vehicle mix assumptions, etc., that will influence the
emission estimations. SC DHEC has allocated 7.63 tpd (6,922 kg/day) to
the 2026 NOX MVEB and 1.52 tpd (1,379 kg/day) to the 2026
VOC MVEB. After allocation of 100 percent of the available safety
margin, there is no remaining safety margin for NOX and VOC.
This allocation and the resulting safety margin for the South Carolina
portion of the Area are discussed further in section VI of this
proposed rulemaking along
[[Page 61786]]
with the MVEBs to be used for transportation conformity proposes.
d. Monitoring Network
There are currently seven monitors measuring ozone in the bi-state
Charlotte Area. All of these monitors are operated by the State of
North Carolina or Mecklenburg County. There are no South Carolina
monitors in the bi-state Charlotte Area. Specifically, North Carolina
operates four of the monitors in the bi-state Charlotte Area, whereas
the Mecklenburg County Air Quality Office operates three of the
monitors in Mecklenburg County. The State of North Carolina, through
the North Carolina Department of Air Quality has committed to continue
operation of all monitors in the North Carolina portion of the bi-state
Charlotte Area (which happens to be all of the monitors in the bi-state
Charlotte Area) in compliance with 40 CFR part 58 and have thus
addressed the requirement for monitoring. EPA approved North Carolina's
commitment to continuing monitoring as part of the Agency's action to
redesignate the North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area
to attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 44873 (July 28,
2015). EPA approved North Carolina's monitoring plan on November 25,
2013.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
The State of South Carolina, through SC DHEC, has the legal
authority to enforce and implement the requirements of the South
Carolina portion of the Area 2008 8-hour ozone maintenance plan. This
includes the authority to adopt, implement, and enforce any subsequent
emissions control contingency measures determined to be necessary to
correct future ozone attainment problems.
Additionally, under the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule
(CERR) and Air Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR), SC DHEC is
required to develop a comprehensive, annual, statewide emissions
inventory every three years that is due twelve to eighteen months after
the completion of the inventory year. The AERR inventory years match
the base year and final year of the inventory for the maintenance plan,
and are within one or two years of the interim inventory years of the
maintenance plan. Therefore, SC DHEC commits to compare the CERR and
AERR inventories as they are developed with the maintenance plan to
determine if additional steps are necessary for continued maintenance
of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in this Area.
f. Contingency Measures in the Maintenance Plan
Section 175A of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include
such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to assure that the
state will promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. The maintenance plan should identify the contingency
measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and
implementation, and a time limit for action by the state. A state
should also identify specific indicators to be used to determine when
the contingency measures need to be implemented. The maintenance plan
must include a requirement that a state will implement all measures
with respect to control of the pollutant that were contained in the SIP
before redesignation of the area to attainment in accordance with
section 175A(d).
In the April 17, 2015 submittal, South Carolina affirms that all
programs instituted by the State will remain enforceable and that
sources are prohibited from reducing emissions controls following the
redesignation of the Area. The contingency plan included in the
submittal includes a triggering mechanism to determine when contingency
measures are needed and a process of developing and implementing
appropriate control measures. The primary trigger of the contingency
plan will be a quality assured/quality controlled (QA/QC) design value
that exceeds the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (i.e., when the three-year
average of the 4th highest values is equal to or greater than 0.076 ppm
at any monitor in the Area). If the QA/QC data indicates a violating
design value, the triggering event will be the date of the design value
violation, not the final QA/QC date.
Additionally, SC DHEC will be evaluating periodic emissions
inventories and comparing them to the projected inventories. If the
emissions reported in these inventories exceed the projected emissions
in the maintenance plan by more than 10 percent, SC DHEC will
investigate the cause for these differences and develop a strategy for
addressing them.
Finally, SC DHEC commits to implement, within 24 months of a
trigger, at least one of the control measures listed below or other
contingency measures that may be determined to be more appropriate
based on the analyses performed.\28\ At least one of the following
contingency measures will be adopted and implemented upon a primary
triggering event:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ If SC DHEC determines that a longer schedule is required to
implement specific contingency measures, then, upon selection of the
appropriate measures, SC DHEC will notify EPA of the proposed
schedule and provide sufficient information to demonstrate that the
proposed measures are a prompt correction of the triggering event.
Any extension would be subject to EPA's approval of the SIP revision
containing the required contingency measure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX Reasonably Available Control Technology on
stationary sources not subject to existing requirements;
Implementation of diesel retrofit programs, including
incentives for performing retrofits for fleet vehicle operations;
Alternative fuel programs for fleet vehicle operations;
Gas can and lawnmower replacement programs;
Voluntary engine idle reductions programs;
SC DHEC's Take a Break from Exhaust program; and,
Other measures deemed appropriate at the time as a result
of advances in control technologies.
EPA has concluded that the maintenance plan adequately addresses
the five basic components of a maintenance plan: The attainment
emissions inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring,
verification of continued attainment, and a contingency plan.
Therefore, the maintenance plan SIP revision submitted by South
Carolina for the State's portion of the Area meets the requirements of
section 175A of the CAA and is approvable.
VI. What is EPA's analysis of South Carolina's proposed NOX
and VOC MVEBs for the York County Area?
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation plans,
programs, and projects, such as the construction of new highways, must
``conform'' to (i.e., be consistent with) the part of the state's air
quality plan that addresses pollution from cars and trucks. Conformity
to the SIP means that transportation activities will not cause new air
quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely
attainment of the NAAQS or any interim milestones. If a transportation
plan does not conform, most new projects that would expand the capacity
of roadways cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth
EPA policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and assuring
conformity of such transportation activities to a SIP. The regional
emissions analysis is one, but not the only, requirement for
implementing transportation conformity. Transportation conformity
[[Page 61787]]
is a requirement for nonattainment and maintenance areas. Maintenance
areas are areas that were previously nonattainment for a particular
NAAQS but have since been redesignated to attainment with an approved
maintenance plan for that NAAQS.
Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times,
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans for nonattainment areas.
These control strategy SIPs (including RFP and attainment demonstration
requirements) and maintenance plans create MVEBs for criteria
pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from cars and
trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB must be established for the last
year of the maintenance plan. A state may adopt MVEBs for other years
as well. The MVEB is the portion of the total allowable emissions in
the maintenance demonstration that is allocated to highway and transit
vehicle use and emissions. See 40 CFR 93.101. The MVEB serves as a
ceiling on emissions from an area's planned transportation system. The
MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the November 24,
1993, Transportation Conformity Rule (58 FR 62188). The preamble also
describes how to establish the MVEB in the SIP and how to revise the
MVEB.
As part of the interagency consultation process on setting MVEBs,
SC DHEC held conference calls with the Rock Hill Fort Mill Area
Transportation Study (RFATS) Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
to determine what years to set MVEBs for the Area. According to the
transportation conformity rule, a maintenance plan must establish MVEBs
for the last year of the maintenance plan (in this case, 2026). See 40
CFR 93.118. The consensus formed during the interagency consultation
process was that another MVEB should be set for the York County, SC
maintenance plan base year of 2014.
Accordingly, SC DHEC established MVEBs based on the latest MPO
jurisdictional boundaries such that MVEBs are established for that
portion of York County which is within the RFATS MPO as part of the bi-
state Charlotte Area. Table 11, below, provides the NOX and
VOC MVEBs in kilograms per day (kg/day),\29\ for 2014 and 2026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ The conversion to kilograms used the actual emissions
reported in the MOVES model. The conversion was done utilizing the
``CONVERT'' function in an EXCEL spreadsheet. The conversion factor
is 907.1847.
Table 11--York County Area MVEBs
[kg/day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 2026
---------------------------------------------------------------
NOX VOC NOX VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Emissions.................................. 9,112 3,566 3,076 1,576
Safety Margin Allocated to MVEB................. .............. .............. 6,922 1,379
Conformity MVEB................................. 9,112 3,566 9,998 2,955
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As mentioned above, South Carolina has chosen to allocate a portion
of the available safety margin to the NOX and VOC MVEBs for
2026 for the York County Area.
Through this rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve the MVEBs for
NOX and VOC for 2014 and 2026 for the York County Area
because EPA believes that the Area maintains the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS with the emissions at the levels of the budgets. Once the MVEBs
for the York County Area are approved or found adequate (whichever is
completed first), they must be used for future conformity
determinations. After thorough review, EPA has preliminary determined
that the budgets meet the adequacy criteria, as outlined in 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4), and is proposing to approve the budgets because they are
consistent with maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS through
2026.
VII. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the
proposed NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 for the York
County Area?
When reviewing submitted ``control strategy'' SIPs or maintenance
plans containing MVEBs, EPA may affirmatively find the MVEB contained
therein adequate for use in determining transportation conformity. Once
EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate for
transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB must be used by state and
Federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation
projects conform to the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the CAA.
EPA's substantive criteria for determining adequacy of a MVEB are
set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The process for determining adequacy
consists of three basic steps: Public notification of a SIP submission,
a public comment period, and EPA's adequacy determination. This process
for determining the adequacy of submitted MVEBs for transportation
conformity purposes was initially outlined in EPA's May 14, 1999,
guidance, ``Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999,
Conformity Court Decision.'' EPA adopted regulations to codify the
adequacy process in the Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for
the ``New 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards and Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing Areas;
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments--Response to Court Decision
and Additional Rule Change,'' on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). Additional
information on the adequacy process for transportation conformity
purposes is available in the proposed rule entitled, ``Transportation
Conformity Rule Amendments: Response to Court Decision and Additional
Rule Changes,'' 68 FR 38974, 38984 (June 30, 2003).
As discussed earlier, South Carolina's April 17, 2015, maintenance
plan includes NOX and VOC MVEBs for the York County Area for
2014, an interim year of the maintenance plan, and 2026, the last year
of the maintenance plan. EPA is reviewing the NOX and VOC s
MVEBs through the adequacy process. The York County Area NOX
and VOC MVEBs, opened for public comment on EPA's adequacy Web site on
May 14, 2015, found at: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm. The EPA public comment period on adequacy for
the MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 for the York County Area closed on June 15,
2015. No comments, adverse or otherwise, were received during EPA's
adequacy process for the MVEBs associated with South Carolina's
maintenance plan.
[[Page 61788]]
EPA intends to make its determination on the adequacy of the 2014
and 2026 MVEBs for the York County Area for transportation conformity
purposes in the near future by completing the adequacy process that was
started on May 14, 2015. After EPA finds the 2014 and 2026 MVEBs
adequate or approves them, the new MVEBs for NOX and VOC
must be used for future transportation conformity determinations. For
required regional emissions analysis years that involve 2014 through
2026, the applicable 2014 MVEBs will be used and for 2026 and beyond,
the applicable budgets will be the new 2026 MVEBs established in the
maintenance plan, as defined in section VI of this proposed rulemaking.
VIII. What is the effect of EPA's proposed actions?
EPA's proposed actions establish the basis upon which EPA may take
final action on the issues being proposed for approval today. Approval
of South Carolina's redesignation request would change the legal
designation of the portion of York County within the South Carolina
portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area, as found at 40 CFR part 81,
from nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Approval of South Carolina's associated SIP revision would also
incorporate a plan for maintaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the
Area through 2026 into the SIP. This maintenance plan includes
contingency measures to remedy any future violations of the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS and procedures for evaluation of potential violations. The
maintenance plan also establishes NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014
and 2026 for the York County Area. The MVEBs are listed in Table 11 in
Section VI. Additionally, EPA is notifying the public of the status of
EPA's adequacy determination for the newly-established NOX
and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 for the York County Area.
IX. Proposed Actions
EPA is taking three separate but related actions regarding the
redesignation and maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the
South Carolina portion of the Area. EPA is proposing to determine that
the entire bi-state Charlotte Area is continuing to attain the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the maintenance plan
for the South Carolina portion of the Area, including the
NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026, into the South Carolina
SIP (under CAA section 175A). The maintenance plan demonstrates that
the Area will continue to maintain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and that
the budgets meet all of the adequacy criteria contained in 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4) and (5). Further, as part of this action, EPA is
describing the status of its adequacy determination for the
NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 in accordance with 40
CFR 93.118(f)(1). Within 24 months from the publication date of EPA's
final rule for this action, the transportation partners will need to
demonstrate conformity to the new NOX and VOC MVEBs pursuant
to 40 CFR 93.104(e)(3).
Additionally, EPA is proposing to determine that the South Carolina
portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area has met the criteria under CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation from nonattainment to attainment
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On this basis, EPA is proposing to
approve South Carolina's redesignation request for the South Carolina
portion of the Area. If finalized, approval of the redesignation
request would change the official designation of that portion of York
County that is included in the bi-state Charlotte Area, as found at 40
CFR part 81, from nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E)
are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions
of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. See 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, these proposed actions merely propose to approve state law
as meeting Federal requirements and do not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For this reason, these
proposed actions:
Are not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
are 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.);
do 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);
do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
are not economically significant regulatory actions based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
are 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
will not have disproportionate human health or
environmental effects under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February
16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed action for the state of South Carolina
does not have Tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The Catawba Indian Nation Reservation
is located within the State of South Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba
Indian Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code Ann. 27-16-120, ``all state and
local environmental laws and regulations apply to the [Catawba Indian
Nation] and Reservation and are fully enforceable by all relevant state
and local agencies and authorities.'' However, because no tribal lands
are located within the South Carolina portion of the Area, this action
is not approving any specific state requirement into the SIP that would
apply to Tribal lands. Therefore, EPA has determined that this proposed
rule does not have substantial direct effects on an Indian Tribe. EPA
notes today's action will not impose substantial direct costs on Tribal
governments or preempt Tribal law.
[[Page 61789]]
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 1, 2015.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2015-26022 Filed 10-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
