Air Plan Approval; NC; Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill and Rocky Mount Areas Limited Maintenance Plans for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS, 7970-7978 [2022-02718]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
7970
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
accident avoidance. FAA experience has
clearly established that an ASAP can
produce safety-related data that is not
available from any other source. For
example, ASAP reports concerning
altitude deviations have identified
common causal factors that produce
such incidents. Receipt of this
previously unavailable information has
provided the FAA with an improved
basis for modifying procedures, policies,
and regulations in order to improve
safety and efficiency.
E. Summary of why withholding such
information from disclosure would be
consistent with the FAA’s safety and
security responsibilities, including a
statement as to the circumstances under
which, and a summary of why,
withholding such information from
disclosure would not be consistent with
the FAA’s safety and security
responsibilities, as described in 14 CFR
193.9.
Withholding ASAP information from
disclosure is consistent with the FAA’s
safety and security responsibilities
because, unless the FAA can provide
assurance that it will not be disclosed,
the FAA will likely not receive the
information. If the FAA does not receive
the information, the FAA will be
hampered in efforts to understand
safety-related issues within an eligible
entity’s operational environment and
ensure safety improvements that receipt
of the information otherwise enables.
The FAA may disclose information
submitted to the agency that is
designated as protected under part 193
when withholding it would not be
consistent with the FAA’s safety and
security responsibilities under the
circumstances described in 14 CFR
193.9(a)(1)–(4). For example, to explain
the need for changes in FAA policies,
procedures, and regulations, the FAA
may disclose de-identified (i.e., no
eligible entity or employee identity) and
summarized information that has been
derived from ASAP information or
extracted from reports under ASAP. The
FAA may disclose de-identified or
summarized ASAP information that
identifies a systemic problem in the
aviation system when other people need
to be advised of the problem in order to
take corrective action.
F. Summary of how the FAA will
distinguish information protected under
part 193 from information the FAA
receives from other sources.
The process for distinguishing
information from the eligible entities as
protected will remain unchanged. All
employee ASAP reports are clearly
labeled as such. A single report must be
signed by all employees seeking the
enforcement incentives available under
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Feb 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
an ASAP for the event. Any such
employee must submit a separate signed
report.
Any other information received by the
FAA from the eligible entity concerning
the content of ASAP reports (such as
statistical analyses, program review
reports, and trend information), must be
clearly labeled as follows in order to be
protected under this designation:
WARNING: The information in this
document may be protected from
disclosure under 49 U.S.C., section
40123 and 14 CFR part 193.
G. Proposed Designation.
Accordingly, the FAA hereby
proposes to designate the previously
described information to be protected
from disclosure in accordance with 49
U.S.C. 40123 and 14 CFR part 193,
when submitted pursuant to an
approved ASAP program.
V. Comments Invited
The FAA invites interested persons to
comment on the proposed amended
designation by submitting written
comments, data, views. The Agency also
invites comments relating to the
economic, environmental, energy, or
federalism, impacts that might result
from adopting the proposal in this
notice.
The FAA will file in the docket all
comments it receives, as well as a report
summarizing each substantive public
contact with FAA personnel concerning
this proposed designation. Before taking
action on this proposed designation, the
FAA will consider all comments it
receives on or before the closing date for
comments. The FAA will consider
comments filed after the comment
period has closed if it is possible to do
so without incurring expense or delay.
The Agency may change this proposal
in light of the comments it receives.
VI. Availability of Proposed
Designation
An electronic copy of the proposed
designation may be obtained from the
internet by—
1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (https://www.regulations.gov);
2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and
Policies web page at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies; or
3. Accessing the Government
Publishing Office’s web page at https://
www.govinfo.gov.
Issued in Washington, DC.
Robert C. Carty,
Acting Executive Director, Flight Standards
Service.
[FR Doc. 2022–02726 Filed 2–10–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2021–0062; FRL–9504–01–
R4]
Air Plan Approval; NC; Great Smoky
Mountains National Park, RaleighDurham-Chapel Hill and Rocky Mount
Areas Limited Maintenance Plans for
the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
state implementation plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of
North Carolina, through the North
Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, Division of Air
Quality (NCDAQ), in a letter dated
September 22, 2020. The SIP revisions
include the 1997 8-hour ozone national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)
Limited Maintenance Plans (LMPs) for
the Great Smoky Mountains National
Park (GSMNP), Raleigh-Durham-Chapel
Hill (Triangle) and Rocky Mount, North
Carolina Areas (collectively, ‘‘Areas’’).
EPA is proposing to approve the LMPs
for the Areas because each LMP
provides for the maintenance of the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS within each
of the Areas through the end of the
second 10-year portion of the
maintenance period. The effect of this
action would be to make certain
commitments related to maintenance of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the
Areas federally-enforceable as part of
the North Carolina SIP.
DATES: Written comments must be
received at the address below on or
before March 14, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2021–0062 at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
EPA may publish any comment received
to its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. EPA will generally
not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM
11FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dianna Myers, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
The telephone number is (404) 562–
9207. Ms. Myers can also be reached via
electronic mail at myers.dianna@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
I. Summary of EPA’s Proposed Action
II. Background
III. North Carolina’s SIP Submittals
IV. EPA’s Evaluation of North Carolina’s SIP
Submittals
A. Attainment Emissions Inventory
B. Maintenance Demonstration
C. Monitoring Network and Verification of
Continued Attainment
D. Contingency Plan
E. Conclusion
V. Transportation Conformity and General
Conformity
VI. Proposed Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Summary of EPA’s Proposed Action
In accordance with the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act), EPA is proposing to
approve the GSMNP, Triangle and
Rocky Mount LMPs for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, adopted and submitted
by NCDAQ as revisions to the North
Carolina SIP on September 22, 2020. On
April 15, 2004, EPA published a final
rule designating the GSMNP, Triangle
and Rocky Mount Areas nonattainment
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.1
Subsequently, EPA approved
maintenance plans and redesignated the
Triangle, GSMNP, and Rocky Mount
Areas attainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.2
The Areas’ LMPs for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, submitted by NCDAQ
on September 22, 2020, are designed to
maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
within the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky
Mount Areas through the end of the
second 10-year portion of the
maintenance period beyond
redesignation. EPA is proposing to
1 See
69 FR 23857.
72 FR 72948 (December 26, 2007), 74 FR
63995 (December 7, 2009), and 71 FR 64891
(November 6, 2006).
2 See
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Feb 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
approve the plans because they meet all
applicable requirements under CAA
sections 110 and 175A.
As a general matter, the GSMNP,
Triangle and Rocky Mount LMPs for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS rely on the
same control measures and contingency
provisions to maintain the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS during the second 10year portion of each area’s maintenance
period as the maintenance plans
submitted by NCDAQ for the first 10year period.
II. Background
Ground-level ozone is formed when
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile
organic compounds (VOC) react in the
presence of sunlight. These two
pollutants, referred to as ozone
precursors, are emitted by many types of
pollution sources, including on- and offroad motor vehicles and engines, power
plants and industrial facilities, and
smaller area sources such as lawn and
garden equipment and paints. Scientific
evidence indicates that adverse public
health effects occur following exposure
to ozone, particularly in children and
adults with lung disease. Breathing air
containing ozone can reduce lung
function and inflame airways, which
can increase respiratory symptoms and
aggravate asthma and other lung
diseases.
Ozone exposure also has been
associated with increased susceptibility
to respiratory infections, medication
use, doctor visits, and emergency
department visits and hospital
admissions for individuals with lung
disease. Children are at increased risk
from exposure to ozone because their
lungs are still developing and they are
more likely to be active outdoors, which
increases their exposure.3
In 1979, under section 109 of the
CAA, EPA established primary and
secondary NAAQS for ozone at 0.12
parts per million (ppm), averaged over
a 1-hour period. See 44 FR 8202
(February 8, 1979). On July 18, 1997,
EPA revised the primary and secondary
NAAQS for ozone to set the acceptable
level of ozone in the ambient air at 0.08
ppm, averaged over an 8-hour period.
See 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997).4 EPA
set the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on
7971
scientific evidence demonstrating that
ozone causes adverse health effects at
lower concentrations and over longer
periods of time than was understood
when the pre-existing 1-hour ozone
NAAQS was set. EPA determined that
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS would be
more protective of human health,
especially in children and adults who
are active outdoors, and individuals
with a pre-existing respiratory disease,
such as asthma.
Following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, EPA is required by the
CAA to designate areas throughout the
nation as attaining or not attaining the
NAAQS. On April 15, 2004, EPA
designated the GSMNP, Triangle and
Rocky Mount Areas nonattainment for
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The
GSMNP nonattainment area included
portions of Haywood and Swain
Counties. The Triangle nonattainment
area included Durham, Franklin,
Granville, Johnston, Orange, Person and
Wake Counties in their entirety and the
Townships of Baldwin, Center, New
Hope and Williams in Chatham County.
The Rocky Mount nonattainment area
included Edgecombe and Nash Counties
in their entirety. The designations
became effective on June 15, 2004.5
Similarly, on May 21, 2012, EPA
designated areas as unclassifiable/
attainment or nonattainment for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA
designated the counties and townships
that comprised the Areas as
unclassifiable/attainment for the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS. These designations
became effective on July 20, 2012.6 In
addition, on November 16, 2017, areas
were designated for the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. The counties and
townships that comprised the Areas
were designated as attainment/
unclassifiable for the 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, with an effective date on
January 16, 2018.7
A state may submit a request to
redesignate a nonattainment area that is
attaining a NAAQS, and, if the area has
met other required criteria described in
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, EPA
may approve the area’s redesignation to
attainment.8 One of the criteria for
5 See
3 See
‘‘Fact Sheet, Proposal to Revise the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone,’’ January
6, 2010, and 75 FR 2938 (January 19, 2010).
4 In March 2008, EPA completed another review
of the primary and secondary ozone NAAQS and
tightened them further by lowering the level for
both to 0.075 ppm. See 73 FR 16436 (March 27,
2008). Additionally, in October 2015, EPA
completed a review of the primary and secondary
ozone NAAQS and tightened them by lowering the
level for both to 0.070 ppm. See 80 FR 65292
(October 26, 2015).
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
69 FR 23858.
77 FR 30088.
7 See 82 FR 54232.
8 Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA sets out the
requirements for redesignating a nonattainment area
to attainment. They include attainment of the
NAAQS, full approval of the applicable SIP
pursuant to CAA section 110(k), determination that
improvement in air quality is a result of permanent
and enforceable reductions in emissions,
demonstration that the state has met all applicable
section 110 and part D requirements, and a fully
6 See
E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM
Continued
11FEP1
7972
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
redesignation is to have an approved
maintenance plan under CAA section
175A. The maintenance plan must
demonstrate that the area will continue
to maintain the NAAQS for the period
extending 10 years after redesignation,
and it must contain such additional
measures as necessary to ensure
maintenance and such contingency
provisions as necessary to assure that
violations of the NAAQS will be
promptly corrected. At the end of the
eighth year after the effective date of
redesignation, the state must also
submit a second maintenance plan to
ensure ongoing maintenance of the
NAAQS for an additional ten years
pursuant to CAA section 175A(b) (i.e.,
ensuring maintenance for 20 years after
redesignation).
EPA has published long-standing
guidance for states on developing
maintenance plans.9 The Calcagni
memo provides that states may
generally demonstrate maintenance by
either performing air quality modeling
to show that the future mix of sources
and emission rates will not cause a
violation of the NAAQS or by showing
that projected future emissions of a
pollutant and its precursors will not
exceed the level of emissions during a
year when the area was attaining the
NAAQS (i.e., attainment year
inventory). See Calcagni memo at page
9. EPA clarified in three subsequent
guidance memos that certain areas
could meet the CAA section 175A
requirement to provide for maintenance
by showing that the area was unlikely
to violate the NAAQS in the future,
using information such as the area’s
design value 10 being well below the
standard and the area having a
historically stable design value.11 EPA
refers to a maintenance plan containing
this streamlined demonstration as an
LMP.
EPA has interpreted CAA section
175A as permitting the LMP option
because section 175A of the Act does
not define how areas may demonstrate
approved maintenance plan under CAA section
175A.
9 See John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, EPA Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, ‘‘Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’
September 4, 1992 (Calcagni memo).
11 See ‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan Option for
Nonclassifiable Ozone Nonattainment Areas’’ from
Sally L. Shaver, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards (OAQPS), dated November 16, 1994;
‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan Option for
Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas’’ from
Joseph Paisie, OAQPS, dated October 6, 1995; and
‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate
PM10 Nonattainment Areas’’ from Lydia Wegman,
OAQPS, dated August 9, 2001. Copies of these
guidance memoranda can be found in the docket for
this proposed rulemaking.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Feb 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
maintenance, and in EPA’s experience
implementing the various NAAQS,
areas that qualify for an LMP and have
approved LMPs have rarely, if ever,
experienced subsequent violations of
the NAAQS. As noted in the LMP
guidance memoranda, states seeking an
LMP must still submit the other
maintenance plan elements outlined in
the Calcagni memo, including: An
attainment emissions inventory,
provisions for the continued operation
of the ambient air quality monitoring
network, verification of continued
attainment, and a contingency plan in
the event of a future violation of the
NAAQS. Moreover, states seeking an
LMP must still submit their section
175A maintenance plan as a revision to
their SIP, with all attendant notice and
comment procedures. While the LMP
guidance memoranda were originally
written with respect to certain
NAAQS,12 EPA has extended the LMP
interpretation of section 175A to other
NAAQS and pollutants not specifically
covered by the previous guidance
memos.13
In this case, EPA is proposing to
approve the Areas’ LMPs for the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS, because the State
has made a showing, consistent with
EPA’s prior LMP guidance, that the
Areas’ ozone concentrations are well
below the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
and have been historically stable and
that it has met the other maintenance
plan requirements. NCDAQ has
submitted the LMPs for the GSMNP,
Triangle and Rocky Mount 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS maintenance areas to
fulfill the second maintenance plan
requirement in the Act. EPA’s
evaluation of the Areas’ LMPs for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is presented
below.
On July 24, 2009, NCDAQ submitted
to EPA a request to redesignate the
GSMNP Area to attainment for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. This submittal
included a plan to provide for
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in the GSMNP Area through
2020 as a revision to the North Carolina
SIP. EPA approved the GSMNP
Maintenance Plan and the State’s
request to redesignate the GSMNP Area
to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS effective January 6, 2010.14 On
12 The prior memos addressed: Unclassifiable
areas under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS,
nonattainment areas for the PM10 (particulate matter
with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10
microns) NAAQS, and nonattainment for the carbon
monoxide (CO) NAAQS.
13 See, e.g., 79 FR 41900 (July 18, 2014) (Approval
of second ten-year LMP for Grant County 1971 SO2
maintenance area).
14 See 74 FR 63995 (December 7, 2009).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
June 7, 2007, NCDAQ submitted to EPA
a request to redesignate the Triangle
Area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. This submittal included
a plan to provide for maintenance of the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the
Triangle Area through 2017 as a revision
to the North Carolina SIP. EPA
approved the Triangle Maintenance
Plan and the State’s request to
redesignate the Triangle Area to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS effective December 26, 2007.15
On June 19, 2006, NCDAQ submitted to
EPA a request to redesignate the Rocky
Mount Area to attainment for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. This submittal
included a plan to provide for
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in the Rocky Mount Area
through 2017 as a revision to the North
Carolina SIP. EPA approved the Rocky
Mount Maintenance Plan and the State’s
request to redesignate the Rocky Mount
Area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS effective January 5,
2007.16
Under CAA section 175A(b), states
must submit a revision to the first
maintenance plan eight years after
redesignation to provide for
maintenance of the NAAQS for ten
additional years following the end of the
first 10-year period. EPA’s final
implementation rule for the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS revoked the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS and stated that one
consequence of revocation was that
areas that had been redesignated to
attainment (i.e., maintenance areas) for
the 1997 NAAQS no longer needed to
submit second 10-year maintenance
plans under CAA section 175A(b).17
In South Coast Air Quality
Management District v. EPA, the United
States Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit)
vacated EPA’s interpretation that,
because of the revocation of the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS, second
maintenance plans were not required for
‘‘orphan maintenance areas,’’ i.e., areas
that had been redesignated to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS maintenance areas and were
designated attainment for the 2008
ozone NAAQS. South Coast, 882 F.3d
1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018). Thus, states with
these ‘‘orphan maintenance areas’’
under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
must submit maintenance plans for the
second maintenance period.
Accordingly, on September 22, 2020,
North Carolina submitted a second
maintenance plan for the GSMNP,
15 See
72 FR 72948 (December 26, 2007).
71 FR 64891 (November 6, 2006).
17 See 80 FR 12264, 12315 (March 6, 2015).
16 See
E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM
11FEP1
7973
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas that
show that the Areas are expected to
remain in attainment of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS through the following
dates: GSMNP Area through January 6,
2030; Rocky Mount Area through
January 5, 2027; and Triangle Area
through December 26, 2027.
In recognition of the continuing
record of air quality monitoring data
showing ambient 8-hour ozone
concentrations in the Areas are well
below the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
NCDAQ chose the LMP option for the
development of the Areas’ second 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS maintenance
plans. On September 22, 2020, NCDAQ
adopted and submitted the second 10year 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance
plans to EPA as revisions to the North
Carolina SIP.
III. North Carolina’s SIP Submittals
As mentioned above, on September
22, 2020, NCDAQ submitted the
GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount
LMPs for the 1997 8-Hour ozone
NAAQS to EPA as revisions to the North
Carolina SIP. The submittal includes the
LMPs, air quality data, emissions
inventory information, and appendices,
as well as evidence of adoption of the
plan by NCDAQ. Appendices to the
plan include comments and responses
between EPA and NCDAQ;
documentation of notice, hearing, and
public participation prior to adoption of
the plan by NCDAQ on September 22,
2020; and an explanation that North
Carolina’s LMP submittals for the
remainder of the 20-year maintenance
period for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in the remaining GSMNP,
Triangle and Rocky Mount 1997 8-hour
ozone areas are in response to the Court
overturning aspects of EPA’s
Implementation Plan rule. In addition,
the LMPs went through interagency
consultation.
The GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky
Mount LMPs for the 1997 8-Hour ozone
NAAQS each include same or similar
emission reduction strategies as each
Area’s first 10-year Maintenance Plan,
as well as additional emissions
reduction measures to provide for the
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS through the following dates:
GSMNP Area through January 6, 2030;
Rocky Mount Area through January 5,
2027; and Triangle Area through
December 26, 2027. Specifically, the
measures upon which the second 10year LMPs for the Areas rely include the
continuation of the Clean Air Bill/
Vehicle Emissions Inspection and
Maintenance Program,18 Clean
Smokestacks Act, and the Open Burning
Rule found in Chapter 15A NCAC
02D.1903. Each Area’s LMP also relies
on continued implementation of federal
measures (e.g., Tier 2 Motor Vehicle
Emission and Fuel Standards; Heavyduty Gasoline and Diesel Highway
Vehicle Standards; Large Nonroad
Diesel Engine Standards; Nonroad
Spark-Ignition Engine and Recreational
Engine Standards; Tier 3 Motor Vehicle
Emission and Fuel Standards; 19 and the
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)
Consent Decree).
IV. EPA’s Evaluation of North
Carolina’s SIP Submittals
EPA has reviewed the Areas’ LMPs for
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, which
is designed to maintain the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS within the Areas through
the end of the 20-year period beyond
redesignation, as required under CAA
section 175A(b). The following is a
summary of EPA’s interpretation of the
section 1745A requirements 20 and
EPA’s evaluation of how each
requirement is met.
A. Attainment Emissions Inventory
For maintenance plans, a state should
develop a comprehensive, accurate
inventory of actual emissions for an
attainment year to identify the level of
emissions which is sufficient to
maintain the NAAQS. A state should
develop this inventory consistent with
EPA’s most recent guidance on
emissions inventory development. For
ozone, the inventory should be based on
typical summer day emissions of VOCs
and NOX, as these pollutants are
precursors to ozone formation. The
GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount
LMPs include an ozone attainment
inventory for each of the Areas that
reflect typical summer day emissions for
2014. Table 1 presents a summary of the
inventory for 2014 contained in the
LMPs.
TABLE 1—AVERAGE SUMMER DAY 2014 NOX AND VOC EMISSIONS BY SECTOR (TONS/DAY) IN GSMNP, TRIANGLE AND
ROCKY MOUNT
2014
Maintenance area
Sector
NOX
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
GSMNP .........................................................................
Fire ................................................................................
Nonpoint .......................................................................
Nonroad ........................................................................
Onroad ..........................................................................
Point ..............................................................................
0.000
0.000
0.002
0.184
0.000
0.000
0.039
0.029
0.245
0.000
Total .......................................................................
0.186
0.313
18 On September 25, 2018, EPA approved removal
of 26 counties from North Carolina’s expanded
Inspection and Maintenance program. The removal
affected the following counties subject to this
action: Haywood, Granville, Orange, Chatham,
Edgecombe, and Nash. See 83 FR 48383. On
September 11, 2019, EPA published a final rule
approving revisions to North Carolina’s expanded
Inspection and Maintenance model year coverage
for vehicles in 22 counties. The revision affected
the following counties subject to this action:
Durham, Johnston, Franklin and Wake. See 84 FR
47889.
19 See 79 FR 23414 (April 28, 2014).
20 See Calcagni memo.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Feb 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
VOC
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM
11FEP1
7974
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—AVERAGE SUMMER DAY 2014 NOX AND VOC EMISSIONS BY SECTOR (TONS/DAY) IN GSMNP, TRIANGLE AND
ROCKY MOUNT—Continued
2014
Maintenance area
Sector
NOX
Rocky Mount .................................................................
Triangle .........................................................................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
The Emissions Inventory section of
the LMPs for the GSMNP, Triangle and
Rocky Mount Areas describes the
methods, models and assumptions used
to develop the attainment inventory.
These estimates were derived from
emissions values provided by EPA for
use in developing maintenance plans for
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.22 For
the Rocky Mount Area, NCDAQ used
the emissions summaries generated by
EPA from the 2014 Version 7.1
modeling platform.23 Because EPA’s
emissions estimates are provided at the
county level and the GSMNP and
Triangle Areas include one or more
partial counties, NCDAQ developed
methodologies to estimate the
proportion of county emissions
occurring in these maintenance areas.
These methodologies utilize a
combination of more specific locational
data as well as local expert judgment.24
The emissions data in the 2014v7.1
platform are primarily based on the
2014NEIv1 for point sources, nonpoint
sources, commercial marine vessels
(CMV), onroad and nonroad mobile
sources, and fires. The GSMNP and
Triangle area estimates reflect some
adjustments to EPA’s estimates as
21 The totals represented in the table may be
slightly different than the inventories in the LMPs
based on rounding convention.
22 U.S. EPA, ‘‘1997 Ozone NAAQS Air Quality
Monitoring and Modeling Data’’ downloaded from
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/201811/ozone_1997_naaqs_air_qual_monitoring_and_
modeling_data_nov_19_2018_1.xlsx, accessed April
2020.
23 U.S. EPA, ‘‘Air Emissions Modeling, 2014
Version 7.1 Platform,’’ is available from https://
www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/2014-version71-platform, accessed April 2020 (note that the
version 7 platform, which included 2028
projections is not available on EPA’s website).
24 NCDAQ also coordinated with the National
Park Service for the GSMNP area.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Feb 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
Fire ................................................................................
Nonpoint .......................................................................
Nonroad ........................................................................
Onroad ..........................................................................
Point ..............................................................................
0.005
1.382
1.453
8.841
2.938
0.055
5.895
0.946
4.391
1.576
Total .......................................................................
14.619
12.863
Fire ................................................................................
Nonpoint .......................................................................
Nonroad ........................................................................
Onroad ..........................................................................
Point ..............................................................................
0.014
6.103
14.970
64.856
40.457
0.146
51.294
15.782
32.603
7.383
Total 21 ...................................................................
126.400
107.208
described on pages 11 through 16 of the
submittal.
Based on our review of the methods,
models, and assumptions used by DAQ
to develop the VOC and NOX estimates,
we propose to find that the Areas’ LMPs
include a comprehensive, reasonably
accurate inventory of actual ozone
precursor emissions in attainment year
2014, and propose to conclude that the
plans’ inventories are acceptable for the
purposes of a subsequent maintenance
plan under CAA section 175A(b).
B. Maintenance Demonstration
The maintenance demonstration
requirement is considered to be satisfied
in an LMP if the state can provide
sufficient weight of evidence indicating
that air quality in the area is well below
the level of the NAAQS, that past air
quality trends have been shown to be
stable, and that the probability of the
area experiencing a violation over the
second 10-year maintenance period is
low.25 These criteria are evaluated
below with regard to the GSMNP,
Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas.
1. Evaluation of Ozone Air Quality
Levels
To attain the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, the three-year average of the
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average ozone concentrations (design
value) at each monitor within an area
must not exceed 0.08 ppm. Based on the
rounding convention described in 40
CFR part 50, Appendix I, the NAAQS is
attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm
(84 parts per billion or ‘‘ppb’’) 26 or
25 See
Calcagni Memo.
set the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in ppm.
To convert ppm to ppb the decimal is moved three
places to the right (i.e., 0.084 ppm is equal to 84
ppb). NCDAQ provided the values in ppb for easy
reference.
26 EPA
PO 00000
VOC
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
below. EPA has evaluated the quality
assured and certified 2017–2019
monitoring data (which was the most
recent data at the time of submission)
and determined that the 2017–2019
design values for the Areas are as
follows: 63 ppb, or 75 percent of the
level of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
for the GSMNP Area; 64 ppb, or 74
percent of the level of the NAAQS for
the Triangle Area; and 61 ppb, or 73
percent of the level of the NAAQS for
the Rocky Mount Area. In addition, EPA
evaluated the quality assured and
certified 2018–2020 monitoring data
(which is the current most recent
monitoring data) and determined that
the 2018–2020 design values for the
Areas are as follows: 62 ppb, or 74
percent of the level of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for the GSMNP Area; 60
ppb, or 71 percent of the level of the
NAAQS for the Triangle Area; and 58
ppb, or 69 percent of the level of the
NAAQS for the Rocky Mount Area.
Consistent with prior guidance, EPA
believes that if the most recent air
quality design value for the area is at a
level that is well below the NAAQS
(e.g., below 85 percent of the NAAQS,
or in this case below 71 ppb), then EPA
considers the state to have met the
section 175A requirement for a
demonstration that the area will
maintain the NAAQS for the requisite
period. Such a demonstration assumes
continued applicability of prevention of
significant deterioration requirements
and any control measures already in the
SIP, and that Federal measures will
remain in place through the end of the
second 10-year maintenance period,
absent a showing consistent with
section 110(l) that such measures are
not necessary to assure maintenance.
E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM
11FEP1
7975
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
Table 2 presents the design values for
each monitor in the GSMNP, Triangle
and Rocky Mount Areas over the 2011–
2020 period.27 As shown in Table 2, all
sites have been well below the level of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS since the
2009–2011 design value, and the most
current design value for each of the
Areas is below 85 percent of the
NAAQS, consistent with prior LMP
guidance.
TABLE 2—1997 8-HOUR OZONE NAAQS DESIGN VALUES (ppb) AT MONITORING SITES IN THE GSMNP, TRIANGLE AND
ROCKY MOUNT AREAS FOR THE 2011–2020 TIME PERIOD
2009–
2011
DV
2010–
2012
DV
2011–
2013
DV
2012–
2014
DV
2013–
2015
DV
2014–
2016
DV
2015–
2017
DV
2016–
2018
DV
2017–
2019
DV
2018–
2020
DV
37–087–0004
( a)
( a)
(a)
( a)
( a)
(a)
(a)
( a)
( a)
(a)
37–087–0008
37–087–0035
37–087–0036
37–173–0002
37–173–0007
37–037–0004
37–063–0013
37–063–0015
37–069–0001
37–077–0001
37–101–0002
37–145–0003
37–183–0014
37–183–0016
37–065–0099
a 65
a 65
(* b)
67
62
(*)
66
(*)
70
69
72
71
70
71
73
70
(* b)
68
62
(*)
65
(*)
72
71
72
74
74
72
75
71
61
(* b)
65
58
(*)
61
(*)
68
68
69
70
69
68
71
69
60
67
65
57
58
59
(*)
66
64
66
67
66
65
65
65
60
65
64
57
59
58
(*)
61
61
63
63
61
63
62
62
62
66
65
60
61
(*)
(*)
62
(*)
64
65
63
65
(*)
(* b)
61
64
64
60
58
(*)
(*)
61
(*)
64
63
61
66
(*)
62
61
63
64
60
58
(*)
(*)
62
(*)
65
63
62
66
(*)
62
59
62
63
58
(* c)
(*)
(*)
61
(*)
64
61
62
64
(*)
61
58
61
62
56
58
(*)
(*)
59
(*)
60
59
59
60
(*)
58
Location
County
1997 Ozone
NAAQS area
AQS Site ID
SW Corner of Roof
Haywood Co
Health Department
Building.
Waynesville School ...
Frying Pan Mountain
Purchase Knob .........
Bryson City ...............
Acquoni Rd ...............
Pittsboro ....................
Duke Street d .............
Durham d Armory ......
Franklinton ................
Butner .......................
West Johnston Co ....
Bushy Fork ................
Millbrook School .......
Fuquay-Varina ..........
Leggett ......................
Haywood ............
GSMNP ................
Haywood ............
Haywood ............
Haywood ............
Swain .................
Swain .................
Chatham ............
Durham ..............
Durham ..............
Franklin ..............
Granville ............
Johnston ............
Person ...............
Wake .................
Wake .................
Edgecombe .......
GSMNP ................
GSMNP ................
GSMNP ................
GSMNP ................
GSMNP ................
Triangle ................
Triangle ................
Triangle ................
Triangle ................
Triangle ................
Triangle ................
Triangle ................
Triangle ................
Triangle ................
Rocky Mount ........
a The monitor at the Haywood County Health Department building was discontinued in 2011 due to remodeling. The monitor was moved across the street to an elementary school (the Waynesville School monitor). EPA approved combining the data from the two sites to provide design values for 2009–2011 and 2010–2012.
b This design value did not meet the three–year completeness requirement of 90%.
c This design value did not meet the three–year completeness requirement of 90% due to instrument malfunctions with various components of the analytic system
during much of July and August 2017.
d The DAQ decided to consolidate the Duke Street ozone monitor and Durham Health PM monitors at one site, located across the street from the Duke Street location. EPA approved combining the data from the two sites to provide design values for 2005–2007 and 2006–2008.
* These monitors were either discontinued or had incomplete data.
As discussed above, the GSMNP,
Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas have
maintained air quality well below the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS over the
past ten years. Additionally, the design
value data shown within Table 2
illustrates that ozone levels have been
relatively stable over this timeframe,
with a modest downward trend. For
example, the data within Table 2
indicates that the largest, year over year
change in design value in these ten
years was 4 ppb for the GSMNP Area,
which occurred between the 2012
design value and 2013 design value at
monitor 37–087–0008 (Waynesville
School) and at monitor 37–173–0002
(Bryson City), representing
approximately a 6 percent decrease; 6
ppb for the Triangle Area, which
occurred between the 2013 design value
and 2014 design value at monitor 37–
183–0016 (Fuquay-Varina), representing
approximately an 8 percent decrease;
and 4 ppb for the Rocky Mount Area,
which occurred between the 2013
design value and 2014 design value at
monitor 37–065–0099 (Leggett),
representing approximately a 6 percent
decrease.
Furthermore, overall trends in design
values for the Areas between 2011–2020
indicates decreases in the monitored
ozone concentrations. See, e.g., Table 2,
above. The overall downward trend in
design values for the GSMNP Area for
monitor 37–087–0036 (Purchase Knob)
was from 67 ppb to 62 ppb, a 7 percent
decrease; the overall downward trend in
the Triangle Area for monitor 37–077–
0001 (Butner) was from 72 ppb to 60
ppb, a 17 percent decrease; and the
overall downward trend for the only
Rocky Mount monitor 37–065–0099
27 NCDAQ provided monitoring data for years
2001 through 2019 and projected 2023 design
values for each monitor as supporting weight of
evidence. The values can be found on Page 8 of the
submittal. The monitoring data shows the general
downward trend in design values at the monitoring
sites. The data also shows the highest design value
projected in 2023 is 53.8 ppb, 57.5 ppb and 51.3
ppb for GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount,
respectively.
Therefore, the GSMNP, Triangle and
Rocky Mount Areas are eligible for the
LMP option, and EPA proposes to find
that the long record of monitored ozone
concentrations that attain the NAAQS,
together with the continuation of
existing VOC and NOX emissions
control programs, adequately provide
for the maintenance of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS in the Areas through the
second 10-year maintenance period and
beyond.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2. Stability of Ozone Levels
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Feb 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(Leggett) was from 70 ppb to 58 ppb, a
17 percent decrease.
The downward trend in ozone levels,
coupled with the relatively small, yearover-year variation in ozone design
values, makes it reasonable to conclude
that the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky
Mount Areas will not exceed the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS during the second
10-year maintenance period.
3. Projected Emissions
Although under the LMP option there
is no requirement to project emissions
over the maintenance period, NCDAQ
included an analysis of ozone precursor
emissions trends expected over the
course of the second maintenance
period. NCDAQ provided a VOC and
NOX emissions trends analysis from
2014 to 2028. The year 2014 was
selected as a baseline for the projection
because that is the most recent year for
which a complete set of data is available
from the EPA’s National Emissions
Inventory (NEI) database.28 Projected
28 The 2017 NEI is currently available, however
the 2014 NEI was the most recent NEI available at
the time the second maintenance plan was
developed by the State, and therefore, the 2014 NEI
was used.
E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM
11FEP1
7976
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
emissions data for the year 2028 were
obtained from EPA.29
The emissions projection trends show
that between 2014 and 2028, VOC
emissions are estimated to fall by 67
percent within the GSMNP Area; 28
percent in the Triangle Area; and 27
percent in the Rocky Mount Area. The
emissions projection trends show that
between 2014 and 2028, NOX emissions
are estimated to fall by 80 percent in the
GSMNP Area; 52 percent in the Triangle
Area; and 68 percent in the Rocky
Mount Area. These projected declining
emissions trends further support the
proposed conclusion that it is unlikely
that the Areas would violate the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS in the future. Table
3 presents a summary of projected
emissions for 2028 contained in the
maintenance plan.30
TABLE 3—AVERAGE SUMMER DAY PROJECTED 2028 NOX AND VOC EMISSIONS BY SECTOR
[Tons/year]
2028
Maintenance area
Sector
NOX
GSMNP .........................................................................
Rocky Mount .................................................................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Triangle .........................................................................
Fire 31 ............................................................................
Nonpoint .......................................................................
Nonroad ........................................................................
Onroad ..........................................................................
Point ..............................................................................
0.000
0.000
0.001
0.036
0.000
0.000
0.032
0.017
0.055
0.000
Total .......................................................................
0.037
0.104
Fire ................................................................................
Nonpoint .......................................................................
Nonroad ........................................................................
Onroad ..........................................................................
Point ..............................................................................
0.005
1.133
0.807
1.804
0.892
0.055
6.667
0.903
0.983
0.774
Total .......................................................................
4.641
9.382
Fire ................................................................................
Nonpoint .......................................................................
Nonroad ........................................................................
Onroad ..........................................................................
Point ..............................................................................
0.012
5.867
9.167
15.113
30.654
0.128
45.769
14.533
10.646
5.631
Total 32 ...................................................................
60.813
76.707
this action regarding interstate transport
obligations for any state.
In addition to the long history of
monitored ozone concentrations in
these Areas that are well-below the
NAAQS, additional supporting
information that the Areas are expected
to continue to maintain the NAAQS can
be found in an analysis of future year
design values that EPA recently
completed for the Revised Cross-State
Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Update for
the 2008 Ozone NAAQS.33 The
modeled-projected analysis for monitors
in the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky
Mount Areas, made for the year 2023,
resulted in fewer than five days with
modeled ozone concentrations greater
than or equal to 60 ppb, indicating that
future-year design values are expected
to remain well below the NAAQS. EPA
is not proposing to make any finding in
C. Monitoring Network and Verification
of Continued Attainment
EPA periodically reviews the ozone
monitoring network that NCDAQ
operates and maintains in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58. This network plan,
which is submitted annually to EPA, is
consistent with the ambient air quality
monitoring network assessment. The
annual network plan developed by
NCDAQ follows a public notification
and review process. EPA has reviewed
and approved the 2020 Ambient Air
Monitoring Network Plan (‘‘2020
Annual Network Plan’’).34
To verify the attainment status of the
Areas over the maintenance period, the
maintenance plan should contain
29 https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/
2014-2016-version-7-air-emissions-modelingplatforms. EPA’s emissions projections to 2028
were made from the 2011 NEI, as that iteration of
the NEI was the most recently available version
when the projection work was performed. Although
this projection does not correspond exactly with the
end of the second ten-year maintenance period, it
provides additional support for EPA’s proposed
finding that the Area will maintain the NAAQS due
to its low and historically stable design values. See
the Emissions Inventory section of the LMP for
additional information regarding the 2028
projections.
30 The inventory documentation for this platform
can be found here: https://www.epa.gov/airemissionsmodeling/2011-version-63-platform.
31 The DAQ replaced the 2028 fire sector
emissions, which reflected estimates carried
forward from the 2011 NEI, with values carried
forward from the 2014 NEI.
32 The totals represented in the table may be
slightly different based on rounding convention.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Feb 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
VOC
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
provisions for continued operation of an
appropriate, EPA-approved monitoring
network in accordance with 40 CFR part
58. As noted above, NCDAQ’s
monitoring network in the Areas have
been approved by EPA in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58, and the State has
committed to continue to maintain a
network in accordance with EPA
requirements. EPA proposes to find that
NCDAQ’s monitoring network is
adequate to verify continued attainment
of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in
each of the Areas.
D. Contingency Plan
Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires
that a maintenance plan include
contingency provisions. The purpose of
such contingency provisions is to
prevent future violations of the NAAQS
33 On April 30, 2021, EPA published the final
Revised CSAPR Update using updated modeling
that focused on analytic years 2023 and 2028 and
an interpolation analysis of these modeling results
to generate air quality and contribution values for
the 2021 analytic year. See 86 FR 23054. https://
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-04-30/pdf/
2021-05705.pdf.
34 The letter approving the network plan is in the
docket for this proposed rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM
11FEP1
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
or to promptly remedy any NAAQS
violations that might occur during the
maintenance period. These contingency
measures are required to be
implemented expeditiously once they
are triggered by a future violation of the
NAAQS or some other trigger. The state
should identify specific triggers which
will be used to determine when the
contingency measures need to be
implemented.
The LMPs state that the two main
elements of the North Carolina
contingency plans are tracking and
triggering mechanisms to determine
when control measures are needed, and
a process for developing and adopting
appropriate control measures. There are
three potential triggers for the
contingency plans. The primary trigger
of each plan will be a violation of the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS at any of the
maintenance area monitors. The
secondary trigger will be a monitored air
quality pattern that suggests an actual
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS violation
may be imminent. The tertiary trigger
will be a monitored fourth highest
exceedance of the NAAQS. Upon either
the primary or secondary triggers being
activated, NCDAQ will commence
analyses to determine what additional
measures, if any, will be necessary to
attain or maintain the ozone standard. If
activation of either the primary or
secondary triggers occurs, each plan
provides a regulatory adoption process
for revising emission control strategies.
Activation of the tertiary trigger will
result in an analysis to understand the
cause of the exceedance and to identify
voluntary measures if needed. The
primary trigger date will be 60 days
from the date on which an ozone
monitor in a maintenance area records
a 4th highest value that, when averaged
with the two previous ozone seasons’
fourth highest values, results in a 3-year
average equal to or greater than 85 ppb.
The secondary trigger date will be 60
days from the date on which an ozone
monitor in a maintenance area records
a 4th highest value of 85 ppb or greater
for which the previous season had a 4th
highest value of 85 ppb or greater. The
tertiary trigger date will be 60 days from
the date on which an ozone monitor in
a maintenance area records a 4th highest
value of 85 ppb or greater.35
The DAQ commits to begin
implementing as expeditiously as
practicable, but no later than 24 months
of the primary or secondary trigger, at
least one control measure that is
35 See
the Contingency Plan Section of each LMP
for further information regarding the contingency
plan, including measures that North Carolina will
consider for adoption if any of the triggers are
activated.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Feb 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
determined to be most appropriate for
reducing NOX emissions to attain and
maintain the standard based on the
analyses performed.
EPA proposes to find that the
contingency provisions in North
Carolina’s second maintenance plans for
the 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS meet
the requirements of the CAA section
175A(d).
E. Conclusion
EPA proposes to find that the
GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount
LMPs for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS include an approvable update
of the various elements (including
attainment inventory, assurance of
adequate monitoring and verification of
continued attainment, and contingency
provisions) of the initial EPA-approved
Maintenance Plans for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. EPA also proposes to
find that the GSMNP, Triangle and
Rocky Mount Areas, qualify for the LMP
option, and adequately demonstrate
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS through the documentation of
monitoring data showing maximum
1997 8-hour ozone levels well below the
NAAQS and historically stable design
values. EPA believes the GSMNP,
Triangle and Rocky Mount LMPs for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, which
retain all existing control measures, are
sufficient to provide for maintenance of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in each
of the Areas over the second
maintenance period (i.e., through
January 6, 2030 for the GSMNP Area,
through January 5, 2027 for the Rocky
Mount Area, and through December 26,
2027 for the Triangle Area) and thereby
satisfy the requirements for such plans
under CAA section 175A(b). EPA is
therefore proposing to approve North
Carolina’s September 22, 2020,
submission of each Area’s LMP for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS as a revision
to the North Carolina SIP.
V. Transportation Conformity and
General Conformity
Transportation conformity is required
by section 176(c) of the CAA.
Conformity to a SIP means that
transportation activities will not
produce new air quality violations,
worsen existing violations or delay
timely attainment of the NAAQS. See
CAA 176(c)(1)(A) and (B). EPA’s
transportation conformity rule at 40 CFR
part 93 subpart A requires that
transportation plans, programs and
projects conform to SIPs and establishes
the criteria and procedures for
determining whether they conform. The
conformity rule generally requires a
demonstration that emissions from the
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
7977
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and
the Transportation Improvement
Program (TIP) are consistent with the
motor vehicles emissions budget
(MVEB) contained in the control
strategy SIP revision or maintenance
plan. See 40 CFR 93.101, 93.118, and
93.124. A MVEB is defined as ‘‘the
portion of the total allowable emissions
defined in the submitted or approved
control strategy implementation plan
revision or maintenance plan for a
certain date for the purpose of meeting
reasonable further progress milestones
or demonstrating attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS, for any
criteria pollutant or its precursors,
allocated to highway and transit vehicle
use and emissions’’ See 40 CFR 93.101.
Under the conformity rule, LMP areas
may demonstrate conformity without a
regional emissions analysis. See 40 CFR
93.109(e). EPA made findings that the
MVEBs in the first 10-years of the 1997
8-hour zone maintenance plan for the
GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount
Areas were adequate for transportation
conformity purposes. In a Federal
Register notice published on December
7, 2009, EPA notified the public of the
adequacy finding for the GSMNP Area
through final rulemaking; the adequacy
determination for GSMNP Area became
effective on January 6, 2010. See 74 FR
63995. In a Federal Register notice
published on December 26, 2007, EPA
notified the public of the adequacy
finding for the Triangle Area through
final rulemaking; the adequacy
determination for the Triangle Area
became effective on December 26, 2007.
See 72 FR 72948. In a Federal Register
notice published on November 6, 2006,
EPA notified the public of the adequacy
finding for the Rocky Mount Area
through direct final rulemaking; the
adequacy determination for the Rocky
Mount Area became effective on January
5, 2007. See 71 FR 64891.36
After approval of or an adequacy
finding for each of these LMPs, there is
no requirement to meet the budget test
pursuant to the transportation
conformity rule for the respective
maintenance area. All actions that
would require a transportation
conformity determination for the
GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount
Areas under EPA’s transportation
conformity rule provisions are
considered to have already satisfied the
regional emissions analysis and ‘‘budget
test’’ requirements in 40 CFR 93.118 as
36 NCDAQ submitted a SIP revision to update the
MVEBs for the Rocky Mount Area on February 7,
2011. EPA approved the updated MVEBs on
September 27, 2012. See 77 FR 59335. The approval
was made through direct final rulemaking and
became effective on November 26, 2012.
E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM
11FEP1
7978
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2022 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
a result of EPA’s adequacy finding for
these LMPs. See 69 FR 40004 (July 1,
2004).
However, because LMP areas are still
maintenance areas, certain aspects of
transportation conformity
determinations still will be required for
transportation plans, programs, and
projects. Specifically, for such
determinations, RTPs, TIPs and
transportation projects still will have to
demonstrate that they are fiscally
constrained (40 CFR 93.108), meet the
criteria for consultation (40 CFR 93.105)
and Transportation Control Measure
implementation in the conformity rule
provisions (40 CFR 93.113), as well as
meet the hot-spot requirements for
projects (40 CFR 93.116).37
Additionally, conformity
determinations for RTPs and TIPs must
be determined no less frequently than
every four years, and conformity of plan
and TIP amendments and transportation
projects is demonstrated in accordance
with the timing requirements specified
in 40 CFR 93.104. In addition, in order
for projects to be approved they must
come from a currently conforming RTP
and TIP. See 40 CFR 93.114 and 40 CFR
93.115.
VI. Proposed Actions
Under sections 110(k) and 175A of the
CAA and for the reasons set forth above,
EPA is proposing to approve the
GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount
LMPs for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, submitted by NCDAQ on
September 22, 2020, as revisions to the
North Carolina SIP. EPA is proposing to
approve the LMPs because each LMP
includes an acceptable update of the
various elements of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS Maintenance Plans
approved by EPA for the first 10-year
period (including emissions inventory,
assurance of adequate monitoring and
verification of continued attainment,
and contingency provisions), and
retains the relevant portions of the SIP.
EPA also finds that the GSMNP,
Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas,
former nonattainment areas for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS, qualify for the
LMP option, and therefore, the Areas’
LMPs adequately demonstrate
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS through documentation of
monitoring data showing maximum
1997 8-hour ozone levels well below the
NAAQS and continuation of existing
control measures. EPA believes each of
the Areas’ 1997 8-Hour Ozone LMPs to
37 A conformity determination that meets other
applicable criteria in Table 1 of paragraph (b) of this
section (93.109(e)) is still required, including the
hot-spot requirements for projects in CO, PM10, and
fine particulate matter (PM2.5) areas.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:37 Feb 10, 2022
Jkt 256001
be sufficient to provide for maintenance
of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS over
the second 10-year maintenance periods
(which extends through January 6, 2030
for the GSMNP Area, through January 5,
2027 for the Rocky Mount Area; and
through December 26, 2027 for the
Triangle Area), and thereby satisfy the
requirements for such a plan under CAA
section 175A(b).
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
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. These actions merely propose
to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
these proposed actions:
• Are not significant regulatory
actions 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 information
collection burdens under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are certified as not having
significant economic impacts on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Do not contain any unfunded
mandates 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
• Do not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
These SIP revisions are not proposed
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), nor will it impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 3, 2022.
Daniel Blackman,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2022–02718 Filed 2–10–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R05–OAR–2021–0949; FRL–9532–01–
R5]
Air Plan Approval; Ohio;
Redesignation of the Ohio Portion of
the Cincinnati, Ohio-Kentucky Area to
Attainment of the 2015 Ozone Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to find that
the Cincinnati, Ohio-Kentucky area
(Area) is attaining the 2015 8-hour
ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS or standard) and to
approve a request from the Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA) to redesignate the Ohio portion
of the Area to attainment for the 2015
ozone NAAQS because the request
meets the statutory requirements for
redesignation under the Clean Air Act
(CAA). The Area includes Butler,
Clermont, Hamilton, and Warren
Counties in Ohio and Boone, Campbell,
and Kenton Counties in Kentucky.
OEPA submitted this request on
December 21, 2021. EPA is also
proposing to approve, as a revision to
the Ohio State Implementation Plan
(SIP), the state’s plan for maintaining
the 2015 8-hour ozone standard through
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM
11FEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 29 (Friday, February 11, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7970-7978]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-02718]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2021-0062; FRL-9504-01-R4]
Air Plan Approval; NC; Great Smoky Mountains National Park,
Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill and Rocky Mount Areas Limited Maintenance
Plans for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve state implementation plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
State of North Carolina, through the North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Air Quality (NCDAQ), in
a letter dated September 22, 2020. The SIP revisions include the 1997
8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) Limited
Maintenance Plans (LMPs) for the Great Smoky Mountains National Park
(GSMNP), Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill (Triangle) and Rocky Mount, North
Carolina Areas (collectively, ``Areas''). EPA is proposing to approve
the LMPs for the Areas because each LMP provides for the maintenance of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS within each of the Areas through the end of
the second 10-year portion of the maintenance period. The effect of
this action would be to make certain commitments related to maintenance
of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Areas federally-enforceable as
part of the North Carolina SIP.
DATES: Written comments must be received at the address below on or
before March 14, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2021-0062 at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary
[[Page 7971]]
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dianna Myers, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is
(404) 562-9207. Ms. Myers can also be reached via electronic mail at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Summary of EPA's Proposed Action
II. Background
III. North Carolina's SIP Submittals
IV. EPA's Evaluation of North Carolina's SIP Submittals
A. Attainment Emissions Inventory
B. Maintenance Demonstration
C. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
D. Contingency Plan
E. Conclusion
V. Transportation Conformity and General Conformity
VI. Proposed Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Summary of EPA's Proposed Action
In accordance with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), EPA is proposing
to approve the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount LMPs for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, adopted and submitted by NCDAQ as revisions to the North
Carolina SIP on September 22, 2020. On April 15, 2004, EPA published a
final rule designating the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\1\ Subsequently, EPA
approved maintenance plans and redesignated the Triangle, GSMNP, and
Rocky Mount Areas attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 69 FR 23857.
\2\ See 72 FR 72948 (December 26, 2007), 74 FR 63995 (December
7, 2009), and 71 FR 64891 (November 6, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Areas' LMPs for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, submitted by NCDAQ
on September 22, 2020, are designed to maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS within the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas through the end
of the second 10-year portion of the maintenance period beyond
redesignation. EPA is proposing to approve the plans because they meet
all applicable requirements under CAA sections 110 and 175A.
As a general matter, the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount LMPs for
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS rely on the same control measures and
contingency provisions to maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS during
the second 10-year portion of each area's maintenance period as the
maintenance plans submitted by NCDAQ for the first 10-year period.
II. Background
Ground-level ozone is formed when oxides of nitrogen
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) react in the
presence of sunlight. These two pollutants, referred to as ozone
precursors, are emitted by many types of pollution sources, including
on- and off-road motor vehicles and engines, power plants and
industrial facilities, and smaller area sources such as lawn and garden
equipment and paints. Scientific evidence indicates that adverse public
health effects occur following exposure to ozone, particularly in
children and adults with lung disease. Breathing air containing ozone
can reduce lung function and inflame airways, which can increase
respiratory symptoms and aggravate asthma and other lung diseases.
Ozone exposure also has been associated with increased
susceptibility to respiratory infections, medication use, doctor
visits, and emergency department visits and hospital admissions for
individuals with lung disease. Children are at increased risk from
exposure to ozone because their lungs are still developing and they are
more likely to be active outdoors, which increases their exposure.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See ``Fact Sheet, Proposal to Revise the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for Ozone,'' January 6, 2010, and 75 FR 2938
(January 19, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1979, under section 109 of the CAA, EPA established primary and
secondary NAAQS for ozone at 0.12 parts per million (ppm), averaged
over a 1-hour period. See 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). On July 18,
1997, EPA revised the primary and secondary NAAQS for ozone to set the
acceptable level of ozone in the ambient air at 0.08 ppm, averaged over
an 8-hour period. See 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997).\4\ EPA set the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS based on scientific evidence demonstrating that ozone
causes adverse health effects at lower concentrations and over longer
periods of time than was understood when the pre-existing 1-hour ozone
NAAQS was set. EPA determined that the 8-hour ozone NAAQS would be more
protective of human health, especially in children and adults who are
active outdoors, and individuals with a pre-existing respiratory
disease, such as asthma.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ In March 2008, EPA completed another review of the primary
and secondary ozone NAAQS and tightened them further by lowering the
level for both to 0.075 ppm. See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
Additionally, in October 2015, EPA completed a review of the primary
and secondary ozone NAAQS and tightened them by lowering the level
for both to 0.070 ppm. See 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, EPA is required
by the CAA to designate areas throughout the nation as attaining or not
attaining the NAAQS. On April 15, 2004, EPA designated the GSMNP,
Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. The GSMNP nonattainment area included portions of Haywood and
Swain Counties. The Triangle nonattainment area included Durham,
Franklin, Granville, Johnston, Orange, Person and Wake Counties in
their entirety and the Townships of Baldwin, Center, New Hope and
Williams in Chatham County. The Rocky Mount nonattainment area included
Edgecombe and Nash Counties in their entirety. The designations became
effective on June 15, 2004.\5\ Similarly, on May 21, 2012, EPA
designated areas as unclassifiable/attainment or nonattainment for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA designated the counties and townships that
comprised the Areas as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. These designations became effective on July 20, 2012.\6\
In addition, on November 16, 2017, areas were designated for the 2015
8-hour ozone NAAQS. The counties and townships that comprised the Areas
were designated as attainment/unclassifiable for the 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, with an effective date on January 16, 2018.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See 69 FR 23858.
\6\ See 77 FR 30088.
\7\ See 82 FR 54232.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A state may submit a request to redesignate a nonattainment area
that is attaining a NAAQS, and, if the area has met other required
criteria described in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, EPA may approve
the area's redesignation to attainment.\8\ One of the criteria for
[[Page 7972]]
redesignation is to have an approved maintenance plan under CAA section
175A. The maintenance plan must demonstrate that the area will continue
to maintain the NAAQS for the period extending 10 years after
redesignation, and it must contain such additional measures as
necessary to ensure maintenance and such contingency provisions as
necessary to assure that violations of the NAAQS will be promptly
corrected. At the end of the eighth year after the effective date of
redesignation, the state must also submit a second maintenance plan to
ensure ongoing maintenance of the NAAQS for an additional ten years
pursuant to CAA section 175A(b) (i.e., ensuring maintenance for 20
years after redesignation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA sets out the requirements
for redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment. They include
attainment of the NAAQS, full approval of the applicable SIP
pursuant to CAA section 110(k), determination that improvement in
air quality is a result of permanent and enforceable reductions in
emissions, demonstration that the state has met all applicable
section 110 and part D requirements, and a fully approved
maintenance plan under CAA section 175A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has published long-standing guidance for states on developing
maintenance plans.\9\ The Calcagni memo provides that states may
generally demonstrate maintenance by either performing air quality
modeling to show that the future mix of sources and emission rates will
not cause a violation of the NAAQS or by showing that projected future
emissions of a pollutant and its precursors will not exceed the level
of emissions during a year when the area was attaining the NAAQS (i.e.,
attainment year inventory). See Calcagni memo at page 9. EPA clarified
in three subsequent guidance memos that certain areas could meet the
CAA section 175A requirement to provide for maintenance by showing that
the area was unlikely to violate the NAAQS in the future, using
information such as the area's design value \10\ being well below the
standard and the area having a historically stable design value.\11\
EPA refers to a maintenance plan containing this streamlined
demonstration as an LMP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management
Division, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' September 4, 1992 (Calcagni memo).
\11\ See ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable
Ozone Nonattainment Areas'' from Sally L. Shaver, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), dated November 16, 1994;
``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO
Nonattainment Areas'' from Joseph Paisie, OAQPS, dated October 6,
1995; and ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate
PM10 Nonattainment Areas'' from Lydia Wegman, OAQPS,
dated August 9, 2001. Copies of these guidance memoranda can be
found in the docket for this proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has interpreted CAA section 175A as permitting the LMP option
because section 175A of the Act does not define how areas may
demonstrate maintenance, and in EPA's experience implementing the
various NAAQS, areas that qualify for an LMP and have approved LMPs
have rarely, if ever, experienced subsequent violations of the NAAQS.
As noted in the LMP guidance memoranda, states seeking an LMP must
still submit the other maintenance plan elements outlined in the
Calcagni memo, including: An attainment emissions inventory, provisions
for the continued operation of the ambient air quality monitoring
network, verification of continued attainment, and a contingency plan
in the event of a future violation of the NAAQS. Moreover, states
seeking an LMP must still submit their section 175A maintenance plan as
a revision to their SIP, with all attendant notice and comment
procedures. While the LMP guidance memoranda were originally written
with respect to certain NAAQS,\12\ EPA has extended the LMP
interpretation of section 175A to other NAAQS and pollutants not
specifically covered by the previous guidance memos.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The prior memos addressed: Unclassifiable areas under the
1-hour ozone NAAQS, nonattainment areas for the PM10
(particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10
microns) NAAQS, and nonattainment for the carbon monoxide (CO)
NAAQS.
\13\ See, e.g., 79 FR 41900 (July 18, 2014) (Approval of second
ten-year LMP for Grant County 1971 SO2 maintenance area).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this case, EPA is proposing to approve the Areas' LMPs for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, because the State has made a showing,
consistent with EPA's prior LMP guidance, that the Areas' ozone
concentrations are well below the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and have been
historically stable and that it has met the other maintenance plan
requirements. NCDAQ has submitted the LMPs for the GSMNP, Triangle and
Rocky Mount 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS maintenance areas to fulfill the
second maintenance plan requirement in the Act. EPA's evaluation of the
Areas' LMPs for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is presented below.
On July 24, 2009, NCDAQ submitted to EPA a request to redesignate
the GSMNP Area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This
submittal included a plan to provide for maintenance of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS in the GSMNP Area through 2020 as a revision to the North
Carolina SIP. EPA approved the GSMNP Maintenance Plan and the State's
request to redesignate the GSMNP Area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS effective January 6, 2010.\14\ On June 7, 2007, NCDAQ
submitted to EPA a request to redesignate the Triangle Area to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This submittal included a
plan to provide for maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the
Triangle Area through 2017 as a revision to the North Carolina SIP. EPA
approved the Triangle Maintenance Plan and the State's request to
redesignate the Triangle Area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS effective December 26, 2007.\15\ On June 19, 2006, NCDAQ
submitted to EPA a request to redesignate the Rocky Mount Area to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This submittal included a
plan to provide for maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the
Rocky Mount Area through 2017 as a revision to the North Carolina SIP.
EPA approved the Rocky Mount Maintenance Plan and the State's request
to redesignate the Rocky Mount Area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS effective January 5, 2007.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See 74 FR 63995 (December 7, 2009).
\15\ See 72 FR 72948 (December 26, 2007).
\16\ See 71 FR 64891 (November 6, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under CAA section 175A(b), states must submit a revision to the
first maintenance plan eight years after redesignation to provide for
maintenance of the NAAQS for ten additional years following the end of
the first 10-year period. EPA's final implementation rule for the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS revoked the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and stated that
one consequence of revocation was that areas that had been redesignated
to attainment (i.e., maintenance areas) for the 1997 NAAQS no longer
needed to submit second 10-year maintenance plans under CAA section
175A(b).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See 80 FR 12264, 12315 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In South Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA, the United
States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C.
Circuit) vacated EPA's interpretation that, because of the revocation
of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, second maintenance plans were not
required for ``orphan maintenance areas,'' i.e., areas that had been
redesignated to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS maintenance
areas and were designated attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. South
Coast, 882 F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018). Thus, states with these ``orphan
maintenance areas'' under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS must submit
maintenance plans for the second maintenance period. Accordingly, on
September 22, 2020, North Carolina submitted a second maintenance plan
for the GSMNP,
[[Page 7973]]
Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas that show that the Areas are expected to
remain in attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS through the
following dates: GSMNP Area through January 6, 2030; Rocky Mount Area
through January 5, 2027; and Triangle Area through December 26, 2027.
In recognition of the continuing record of air quality monitoring
data showing ambient 8-hour ozone concentrations in the Areas are well
below the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, NCDAQ chose the LMP option for the
development of the Areas' second 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS maintenance
plans. On September 22, 2020, NCDAQ adopted and submitted the second
10-year 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plans to EPA as revisions to the
North Carolina SIP.
III. North Carolina's SIP Submittals
As mentioned above, on September 22, 2020, NCDAQ submitted the
GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount LMPs for the 1997 8-Hour ozone NAAQS to
EPA as revisions to the North Carolina SIP. The submittal includes the
LMPs, air quality data, emissions inventory information, and
appendices, as well as evidence of adoption of the plan by NCDAQ.
Appendices to the plan include comments and responses between EPA and
NCDAQ; documentation of notice, hearing, and public participation prior
to adoption of the plan by NCDAQ on September 22, 2020; and an
explanation that North Carolina's LMP submittals for the remainder of
the 20-year maintenance period for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the
remaining GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount 1997 8-hour ozone areas are
in response to the Court overturning aspects of EPA's Implementation
Plan rule. In addition, the LMPs went through interagency consultation.
The GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount LMPs for the 1997 8-Hour ozone
NAAQS each include same or similar emission reduction strategies as
each Area's first 10-year Maintenance Plan, as well as additional
emissions reduction measures to provide for the maintenance of the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS through the following dates: GSMNP Area through
January 6, 2030; Rocky Mount Area through January 5, 2027; and Triangle
Area through December 26, 2027. Specifically, the measures upon which
the second 10-year LMPs for the Areas rely include the continuation of
the Clean Air Bill/Vehicle Emissions Inspection and Maintenance
Program,\18\ Clean Smokestacks Act, and the Open Burning Rule found in
Chapter 15A NCAC 02D.1903. Each Area's LMP also relies on continued
implementation of federal measures (e.g., Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emission
and Fuel Standards; Heavy-duty Gasoline and Diesel Highway Vehicle
Standards; Large Nonroad Diesel Engine Standards; Nonroad Spark-
Ignition Engine and Recreational Engine Standards; Tier 3 Motor Vehicle
Emission and Fuel Standards; \19\ and the Tennessee Valley Authority
(TVA) Consent Decree).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ On September 25, 2018, EPA approved removal of 26 counties
from North Carolina's expanded Inspection and Maintenance program.
The removal affected the following counties subject to this action:
Haywood, Granville, Orange, Chatham, Edgecombe, and Nash. See 83 FR
48383. On September 11, 2019, EPA published a final rule approving
revisions to North Carolina's expanded Inspection and Maintenance
model year coverage for vehicles in 22 counties. The revision
affected the following counties subject to this action: Durham,
Johnston, Franklin and Wake. See 84 FR 47889.
\19\ See 79 FR 23414 (April 28, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. EPA's Evaluation of North Carolina's SIP Submittals
EPA has reviewed the Areas' LMPs for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
which is designed to maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS within the
Areas through the end of the 20-year period beyond redesignation, as
required under CAA section 175A(b). The following is a summary of EPA's
interpretation of the section 1745A requirements \20\ and EPA's
evaluation of how each requirement is met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See Calcagni memo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Attainment Emissions Inventory
For maintenance plans, a state should develop a comprehensive,
accurate inventory of actual emissions for an attainment year to
identify the level of emissions which is sufficient to maintain the
NAAQS. A state should develop this inventory consistent with EPA's most
recent guidance on emissions inventory development. For ozone, the
inventory should be based on typical summer day emissions of VOCs and
NOX, as these pollutants are precursors to ozone formation.
The GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount LMPs include an ozone attainment
inventory for each of the Areas that reflect typical summer day
emissions for 2014. Table 1 presents a summary of the inventory for
2014 contained in the LMPs.
Table 1--Average Summer Day 2014 NOX and VOC Emissions by Sector (Tons/Day) in GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014
Maintenance area Sector -------------------------------
NOX VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSMNP......................................... Fire............................ 0.000 0.000
Nonpoint........................ 0.000 0.039
Nonroad......................... 0.002 0.029
Onroad.......................... 0.184 0.245
Point........................... 0.000 0.000
-------------------------------
Total........................ 0.186 0.313
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 7974]]
Rocky Mount................................... Fire............................ 0.005 0.055
Nonpoint........................ 1.382 5.895
Nonroad......................... 1.453 0.946
Onroad.......................... 8.841 4.391
Point........................... 2.938 1.576
-------------------------------
Total........................ 14.619 12.863
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Triangle...................................... Fire............................ 0.014 0.146
Nonpoint........................ 6.103 51.294
Nonroad......................... 14.970 15.782
Onroad.......................... 64.856 32.603
Point........................... 40.457 7.383
-------------------------------
Total \21\................... 126.400 107.208
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Emissions Inventory section of the LMPs for the GSMNP, Triangle
and Rocky Mount Areas describes the methods, models and assumptions
used to develop the attainment inventory. These estimates were derived
from emissions values provided by EPA for use in developing maintenance
plans for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\22\ For the Rocky Mount Area,
NCDAQ used the emissions summaries generated by EPA from the 2014
Version 7.1 modeling platform.\23\ Because EPA's emissions estimates
are provided at the county level and the GSMNP and Triangle Areas
include one or more partial counties, NCDAQ developed methodologies to
estimate the proportion of county emissions occurring in these
maintenance areas. These methodologies utilize a combination of more
specific locational data as well as local expert judgment.\24\ The
emissions data in the 2014v7.1 platform are primarily based on the
2014NEIv1 for point sources, nonpoint sources, commercial marine
vessels (CMV), onroad and nonroad mobile sources, and fires. The GSMNP
and Triangle area estimates reflect some adjustments to EPA's estimates
as described on pages 11 through 16 of the submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ The totals represented in the table may be slightly
different than the inventories in the LMPs based on rounding
convention.
\22\ U.S. EPA, ``1997 Ozone NAAQS Air Quality Monitoring and
Modeling Data'' downloaded from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-11/ozone_1997_naaqs_air_qual_monitoring_and_modeling_data_nov_19_2018_1.xlsx, accessed April 2020.
\23\ U.S. EPA, ``Air Emissions Modeling, 2014 Version 7.1
Platform,'' is available from https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/2014-version-71-platform, accessed April 2020 (note that
the version 7 platform, which included 2028 projections is not
available on EPA's website).
\24\ NCDAQ also coordinated with the National Park Service for
the GSMNP area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of the methods, models, and assumptions used by
DAQ to develop the VOC and NOX estimates, we propose to find
that the Areas' LMPs include a comprehensive, reasonably accurate
inventory of actual ozone precursor emissions in attainment year 2014,
and propose to conclude that the plans' inventories are acceptable for
the purposes of a subsequent maintenance plan under CAA section
175A(b).
B. Maintenance Demonstration
The maintenance demonstration requirement is considered to be
satisfied in an LMP if the state can provide sufficient weight of
evidence indicating that air quality in the area is well below the
level of the NAAQS, that past air quality trends have been shown to be
stable, and that the probability of the area experiencing a violation
over the second 10-year maintenance period is low.\25\ These criteria
are evaluated below with regard to the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount
Areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Calcagni Memo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Evaluation of Ozone Air Quality Levels
To attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the three-year average of
the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations
(design value) at each monitor within an area must not exceed 0.08 ppm.
Based on the rounding convention described in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix
I, the NAAQS is attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm (84 parts per
billion or ``ppb'') \26\ or below. EPA has evaluated the quality
assured and certified 2017-2019 monitoring data (which was the most
recent data at the time of submission) and determined that the 2017-
2019 design values for the Areas are as follows: 63 ppb, or 75 percent
of the level of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the GSMNP Area; 64 ppb,
or 74 percent of the level of the NAAQS for the Triangle Area; and 61
ppb, or 73 percent of the level of the NAAQS for the Rocky Mount Area.
In addition, EPA evaluated the quality assured and certified 2018-2020
monitoring data (which is the current most recent monitoring data) and
determined that the 2018-2020 design values for the Areas are as
follows: 62 ppb, or 74 percent of the level of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS for the GSMNP Area; 60 ppb, or 71 percent of the level of the
NAAQS for the Triangle Area; and 58 ppb, or 69 percent of the level of
the NAAQS for the Rocky Mount Area. Consistent with prior guidance, EPA
believes that if the most recent air quality design value for the area
is at a level that is well below the NAAQS (e.g., below 85 percent of
the NAAQS, or in this case below 71 ppb), then EPA considers the state
to have met the section 175A requirement for a demonstration that the
area will maintain the NAAQS for the requisite period. Such a
demonstration assumes continued applicability of prevention of
significant deterioration requirements and any control measures already
in the SIP, and that Federal measures will remain in place through the
end of the second 10-year maintenance period, absent a showing
consistent with section 110(l) that such measures are not necessary to
assure maintenance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ EPA set the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in ppm. To convert ppm
to ppb the decimal is moved three places to the right (i.e., 0.084
ppm is equal to 84 ppb). NCDAQ provided the values in ppb for easy
reference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 7975]]
Table 2 presents the design values for each monitor in the GSMNP,
Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas over the 2011-2020 period.\27\ As shown
in Table 2, all sites have been well below the level of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS since the 2009-2011 design value, and the most current
design value for each of the Areas is below 85 percent of the NAAQS,
consistent with prior LMP guidance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ NCDAQ provided monitoring data for years 2001 through 2019
and projected 2023 design values for each monitor as supporting
weight of evidence. The values can be found on Page 8 of the
submittal. The monitoring data shows the general downward trend in
design values at the monitoring sites. The data also shows the
highest design value projected in 2023 is 53.8 ppb, 57.5 ppb and
51.3 ppb for GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount, respectively.
Table 2--1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Design Values (ppb) at Monitoring Sites in the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas for the 2011-2020 Time Period
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1997 Ozone NAAQS 2009-2011 2010-2012 2011-2013 2012-2014 2013-2015 2014-2016 2015-2017 2016-2018 2017-2019 2018-2020
Location County area AQS Site ID DV DV DV DV DV DV DV DV DV DV
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SW Corner of Roof Haywood Co Haywood.......... GSMNP............ 37-087-0004 (\a\) (\a\) (\a\) (\a\) (\a\) (\a\) (\a\) (\a\) (\a\) (\a\)
Health Department Building.
Waynesville School............ Haywood.......... GSMNP............ 37-087-0008 \a\ 65 \a\ 65 61 60 60 62 61 61 59 58
Frying Pan Mountain........... Haywood.......... GSMNP............ 37-087-0035 (* \b\) (* \b\) (* \b\) 67 65 66 64 63 62 61
Purchase Knob................. Haywood.......... GSMNP............ 37-087-0036 67 68 65 65 64 65 64 64 63 62
Bryson City................... Swain............ GSMNP............ 37-173-0002 62 62 58 57 57 60 60 60 58 56
Acquoni Rd.................... Swain............ GSMNP............ 37-173-0007 (*) (*) (*) 58 59 61 58 58 (* \c\) 58
Pittsboro..................... Chatham.......... Triangle......... 37-037-0004 66 65 61 59 58 (*) (*) (*) (*) (*)
Duke Street \d\............... Durham........... Triangle......... 37-063-0013 (*) (*) (*) (*) (*) (*) (*) (*) (*) (*)
Durham \d\ Armory............. Durham........... Triangle......... 37-063-0015 70 72 68 66 61 62 61 62 61 59
Franklinton................... Franklin......... Triangle......... 37-069-0001 69 71 68 64 61 (*) (*) (*) (*) (*)
Butner........................ Granville........ Triangle......... 37-077-0001 72 72 69 66 63 64 64 65 64 60
West Johnston Co.............. Johnston......... Triangle......... 37-101-0002 71 74 70 67 63 65 63 63 61 59
Bushy Fork.................... Person........... Triangle......... 37-145-0003 70 74 69 66 61 63 61 62 62 59
Millbrook School.............. Wake............. Triangle......... 37-183-0014 71 72 68 65 63 65 66 66 64 60
Fuquay-Varina................. Wake............. Triangle......... 37-183-0016 73 75 71 65 62 (*) (*) (*) (*) (*)
Leggett....................... Edgecombe........ Rocky Mount...... 37-065-0099 70 71 69 65 62 (* \b\) 62 62 61 58
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ The monitor at the Haywood County Health Department building was discontinued in 2011 due to remodeling. The monitor was moved across the street to an elementary school (the Waynesville
School monitor). EPA approved combining the data from the two sites to provide design values for 2009-2011 and 2010-2012.
\b\ This design value did not meet the three-year completeness requirement of 90%.
\c\ This design value did not meet the three-year completeness requirement of 90% due to instrument malfunctions with various components of the analytic system during much of July and August
2017.
\d\ The DAQ decided to consolidate the Duke Street ozone monitor and Durham Health PM monitors at one site, located across the street from the Duke Street location. EPA approved combining the
data from the two sites to provide design values for 2005-2007 and 2006-2008.
* These monitors were either discontinued or had incomplete data.
Therefore, the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas are eligible
for the LMP option, and EPA proposes to find that the long record of
monitored ozone concentrations that attain the NAAQS, together with the
continuation of existing VOC and NOX emissions control
programs, adequately provide for the maintenance of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS in the Areas through the second 10-year maintenance period
and beyond.
2. Stability of Ozone Levels
As discussed above, the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas have
maintained air quality well below the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS over the
past ten years. Additionally, the design value data shown within Table
2 illustrates that ozone levels have been relatively stable over this
timeframe, with a modest downward trend. For example, the data within
Table 2 indicates that the largest, year over year change in design
value in these ten years was 4 ppb for the GSMNP Area, which occurred
between the 2012 design value and 2013 design value at monitor 37-087-
0008 (Waynesville School) and at monitor 37-173-0002 (Bryson City),
representing approximately a 6 percent decrease; 6 ppb for the Triangle
Area, which occurred between the 2013 design value and 2014 design
value at monitor 37-183-0016 (Fuquay-Varina), representing
approximately an 8 percent decrease; and 4 ppb for the Rocky Mount
Area, which occurred between the 2013 design value and 2014 design
value at monitor 37-065-0099 (Leggett), representing approximately a 6
percent decrease.
Furthermore, overall trends in design values for the Areas between
2011-2020 indicates decreases in the monitored ozone concentrations.
See, e.g., Table 2, above. The overall downward trend in design values
for the GSMNP Area for monitor 37-087-0036 (Purchase Knob) was from 67
ppb to 62 ppb, a 7 percent decrease; the overall downward trend in the
Triangle Area for monitor 37-077-0001 (Butner) was from 72 ppb to 60
ppb, a 17 percent decrease; and the overall downward trend for the only
Rocky Mount monitor 37-065-0099 (Leggett) was from 70 ppb to 58 ppb, a
17 percent decrease.
The downward trend in ozone levels, coupled with the relatively
small, year-over-year variation in ozone design values, makes it
reasonable to conclude that the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas
will not exceed the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS during the second 10-year
maintenance period.
3. Projected Emissions
Although under the LMP option there is no requirement to project
emissions over the maintenance period, NCDAQ included an analysis of
ozone precursor emissions trends expected over the course of the second
maintenance period. NCDAQ provided a VOC and NOX emissions
trends analysis from 2014 to 2028. The year 2014 was selected as a
baseline for the projection because that is the most recent year for
which a complete set of data is available from the EPA's National
Emissions Inventory (NEI) database.\28\ Projected
[[Page 7976]]
emissions data for the year 2028 were obtained from EPA.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ The 2017 NEI is currently available, however the 2014 NEI
was the most recent NEI available at the time the second maintenance
plan was developed by the State, and therefore, the 2014 NEI was
used.
\29\ https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/2014-2016-version-7-air-emissions-modeling-platforms. EPA's emissions
projections to 2028 were made from the 2011 NEI, as that iteration
of the NEI was the most recently available version when the
projection work was performed. Although this projection does not
correspond exactly with the end of the second ten-year maintenance
period, it provides additional support for EPA's proposed finding
that the Area will maintain the NAAQS due to its low and
historically stable design values. See the Emissions Inventory
section of the LMP for additional information regarding the 2028
projections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The emissions projection trends show that between 2014 and 2028,
VOC emissions are estimated to fall by 67 percent within the GSMNP
Area; 28 percent in the Triangle Area; and 27 percent in the Rocky
Mount Area. The emissions projection trends show that between 2014 and
2028, NOX emissions are estimated to fall by 80 percent in
the GSMNP Area; 52 percent in the Triangle Area; and 68 percent in the
Rocky Mount Area. These projected declining emissions trends further
support the proposed conclusion that it is unlikely that the Areas
would violate the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the future. Table 3
presents a summary of projected emissions for 2028 contained in the
maintenance plan.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ The inventory documentation for this platform can be found
here: https://www.epa.gov/air-emissionsmodeling/2011-version-63-platform.
Table 3--Average Summer Day Projected 2028 NOX and VOC Emissions by Sector
[Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2028
Maintenance area Sector -------------------------------
NOX VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GSMNP......................................... Fire \31\....................... 0.000 0.000
Nonpoint........................ 0.000 0.032
Nonroad......................... 0.001 0.017
Onroad.......................... 0.036 0.055
Point........................... 0.000 0.000
-------------------------------
Total........................ 0.037 0.104
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rocky Mount................................... Fire............................ 0.005 0.055
Nonpoint........................ 1.133 6.667
Nonroad......................... 0.807 0.903
Onroad.......................... 1.804 0.983
Point........................... 0.892 0.774
-------------------------------
Total........................ 4.641 9.382
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Triangle...................................... Fire............................ 0.012 0.128
Nonpoint........................ 5.867 45.769
Nonroad......................... 9.167 14.533
Onroad.......................... 15.113 10.646
Point........................... 30.654 5.631
-------------------------------
Total \32\................... 60.813 76.707
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the long history of monitored ozone concentrations
in these Areas that are well-below the NAAQS, additional supporting
information that the Areas are expected to continue to maintain the
NAAQS can be found in an analysis of future year design values that EPA
recently completed for the Revised Cross-State Air Pollution Rule
(CSAPR) Update for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS.\33\ The modeled-projected
analysis for monitors in the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas,
made for the year 2023, resulted in fewer than five days with modeled
ozone concentrations greater than or equal to 60 ppb, indicating that
future-year design values are expected to remain well below the NAAQS.
EPA is not proposing to make any finding in this action regarding
interstate transport obligations for any state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ The DAQ replaced the 2028 fire sector emissions, which
reflected estimates carried forward from the 2011 NEI, with values
carried forward from the 2014 NEI.
\32\ The totals represented in the table may be slightly
different based on rounding convention.
\33\ On April 30, 2021, EPA published the final Revised CSAPR
Update using updated modeling that focused on analytic years 2023
and 2028 and an interpolation analysis of these modeling results to
generate air quality and contribution values for the 2021 analytic
year. See 86 FR 23054. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-04-30/pdf/2021-05705.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
EPA periodically reviews the ozone monitoring network that NCDAQ
operates and maintains in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. This network
plan, which is submitted annually to EPA, is consistent with the
ambient air quality monitoring network assessment. The annual network
plan developed by NCDAQ follows a public notification and review
process. EPA has reviewed and approved the 2020 Ambient Air Monitoring
Network Plan (``2020 Annual Network Plan'').\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ The letter approving the network plan is in the docket for
this proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To verify the attainment status of the Areas over the maintenance
period, the maintenance plan should contain provisions for continued
operation of an appropriate, EPA-approved monitoring network in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58. As noted above, NCDAQ's monitoring
network in the Areas have been approved by EPA in accordance with 40
CFR part 58, and the State has committed to continue to maintain a
network in accordance with EPA requirements. EPA proposes to find that
NCDAQ's monitoring network is adequate to verify continued attainment
of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in each of the Areas.
D. Contingency Plan
Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include
contingency provisions. The purpose of such contingency provisions is
to prevent future violations of the NAAQS
[[Page 7977]]
or to promptly remedy any NAAQS violations that might occur during the
maintenance period. These contingency measures are required to be
implemented expeditiously once they are triggered by a future violation
of the NAAQS or some other trigger. The state should identify specific
triggers which will be used to determine when the contingency measures
need to be implemented.
The LMPs state that the two main elements of the North Carolina
contingency plans are tracking and triggering mechanisms to determine
when control measures are needed, and a process for developing and
adopting appropriate control measures. There are three potential
triggers for the contingency plans. The primary trigger of each plan
will be a violation of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS at any of the
maintenance area monitors. The secondary trigger will be a monitored
air quality pattern that suggests an actual 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
violation may be imminent. The tertiary trigger will be a monitored
fourth highest exceedance of the NAAQS. Upon either the primary or
secondary triggers being activated, NCDAQ will commence analyses to
determine what additional measures, if any, will be necessary to attain
or maintain the ozone standard. If activation of either the primary or
secondary triggers occurs, each plan provides a regulatory adoption
process for revising emission control strategies. Activation of the
tertiary trigger will result in an analysis to understand the cause of
the exceedance and to identify voluntary measures if needed. The
primary trigger date will be 60 days from the date on which an ozone
monitor in a maintenance area records a 4th highest value that, when
averaged with the two previous ozone seasons' fourth highest values,
results in a 3-year average equal to or greater than 85 ppb. The
secondary trigger date will be 60 days from the date on which an ozone
monitor in a maintenance area records a 4th highest value of 85 ppb or
greater for which the previous season had a 4th highest value of 85 ppb
or greater. The tertiary trigger date will be 60 days from the date on
which an ozone monitor in a maintenance area records a 4th highest
value of 85 ppb or greater.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ See the Contingency Plan Section of each LMP for further
information regarding the contingency plan, including measures that
North Carolina will consider for adoption if any of the triggers are
activated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The DAQ commits to begin implementing as expeditiously as
practicable, but no later than 24 months of the primary or secondary
trigger, at least one control measure that is determined to be most
appropriate for reducing NOX emissions to attain and
maintain the standard based on the analyses performed.
EPA proposes to find that the contingency provisions in North
Carolina's second maintenance plans for the 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS
meet the requirements of the CAA section 175A(d).
E. Conclusion
EPA proposes to find that the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount LMPs
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS include an approvable update of the
various elements (including attainment inventory, assurance of adequate
monitoring and verification of continued attainment, and contingency
provisions) of the initial EPA-approved Maintenance Plans for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA also proposes to find that the GSMNP, Triangle
and Rocky Mount Areas, qualify for the LMP option, and adequately
demonstrate maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS through the
documentation of monitoring data showing maximum 1997 8-hour ozone
levels well below the NAAQS and historically stable design values. EPA
believes the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount LMPs for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, which retain all existing control measures, are sufficient
to provide for maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in each of
the Areas over the second maintenance period (i.e., through January 6,
2030 for the GSMNP Area, through January 5, 2027 for the Rocky Mount
Area, and through December 26, 2027 for the Triangle Area) and thereby
satisfy the requirements for such plans under CAA section 175A(b). EPA
is therefore proposing to approve North Carolina's September 22, 2020,
submission of each Area's LMP for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS as a
revision to the North Carolina SIP.
V. Transportation Conformity and General Conformity
Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the CAA.
Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not
produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations or delay
timely attainment of the NAAQS. See CAA 176(c)(1)(A) and (B). EPA's
transportation conformity rule at 40 CFR part 93 subpart A requires
that transportation plans, programs and projects conform to SIPs and
establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether they
conform. The conformity rule generally requires a demonstration that
emissions from the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) are consistent with the motor
vehicles emissions budget (MVEB) contained in the control strategy SIP
revision or maintenance plan. See 40 CFR 93.101, 93.118, and 93.124. A
MVEB is defined as ``the portion of the total allowable emissions
defined in the submitted or approved control strategy implementation
plan revision or maintenance plan for a certain date for the purpose of
meeting reasonable further progress milestones or demonstrating
attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS, for any criteria pollutant or
its precursors, allocated to highway and transit vehicle use and
emissions'' See 40 CFR 93.101.
Under the conformity rule, LMP areas may demonstrate conformity
without a regional emissions analysis. See 40 CFR 93.109(e). EPA made
findings that the MVEBs in the first 10-years of the 1997 8-hour zone
maintenance plan for the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas were
adequate for transportation conformity purposes. In a Federal Register
notice published on December 7, 2009, EPA notified the public of the
adequacy finding for the GSMNP Area through final rulemaking; the
adequacy determination for GSMNP Area became effective on January 6,
2010. See 74 FR 63995. In a Federal Register notice published on
December 26, 2007, EPA notified the public of the adequacy finding for
the Triangle Area through final rulemaking; the adequacy determination
for the Triangle Area became effective on December 26, 2007. See 72 FR
72948. In a Federal Register notice published on November 6, 2006, EPA
notified the public of the adequacy finding for the Rocky Mount Area
through direct final rulemaking; the adequacy determination for the
Rocky Mount Area became effective on January 5, 2007. See 71 FR
64891.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ NCDAQ submitted a SIP revision to update the MVEBs for the
Rocky Mount Area on February 7, 2011. EPA approved the updated MVEBs
on September 27, 2012. See 77 FR 59335. The approval was made
through direct final rulemaking and became effective on November 26,
2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After approval of or an adequacy finding for each of these LMPs,
there is no requirement to meet the budget test pursuant to the
transportation conformity rule for the respective maintenance area. All
actions that would require a transportation conformity determination
for the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas under EPA's
transportation conformity rule provisions are considered to have
already satisfied the regional emissions analysis and ``budget test''
requirements in 40 CFR 93.118 as
[[Page 7978]]
a result of EPA's adequacy finding for these LMPs. See 69 FR 40004
(July 1, 2004).
However, because LMP areas are still maintenance areas, certain
aspects of transportation conformity determinations still will be
required for transportation plans, programs, and projects.
Specifically, for such determinations, RTPs, TIPs and transportation
projects still will have to demonstrate that they are fiscally
constrained (40 CFR 93.108), meet the criteria for consultation (40 CFR
93.105) and Transportation Control Measure implementation in the
conformity rule provisions (40 CFR 93.113), as well as meet the hot-
spot requirements for projects (40 CFR 93.116).\37\ Additionally,
conformity determinations for RTPs and TIPs must be determined no less
frequently than every four years, and conformity of plan and TIP
amendments and transportation projects is demonstrated in accordance
with the timing requirements specified in 40 CFR 93.104. In addition,
in order for projects to be approved they must come from a currently
conforming RTP and TIP. See 40 CFR 93.114 and 40 CFR 93.115.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ A conformity determination that meets other applicable
criteria in Table 1 of paragraph (b) of this section (93.109(e)) is
still required, including the hot-spot requirements for projects in
CO, PM10, and fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Proposed Actions
Under sections 110(k) and 175A of the CAA and for the reasons set
forth above, EPA is proposing to approve the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky
Mount LMPs for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, submitted by NCDAQ on
September 22, 2020, as revisions to the North Carolina SIP. EPA is
proposing to approve the LMPs because each LMP includes an acceptable
update of the various elements of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
Maintenance Plans approved by EPA for the first 10-year period
(including emissions inventory, assurance of adequate monitoring and
verification of continued attainment, and contingency provisions), and
retains the relevant portions of the SIP.
EPA also finds that the GSMNP, Triangle and Rocky Mount Areas,
former nonattainment areas for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, qualify for
the LMP option, and therefore, the Areas' LMPs adequately demonstrate
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS through documentation of
monitoring data showing maximum 1997 8-hour ozone levels well below the
NAAQS and continuation of existing control measures. EPA believes each
of the Areas' 1997 8-Hour Ozone LMPs to be sufficient to provide for
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS over the second 10-year
maintenance periods (which extends through January 6, 2030 for the
GSMNP Area, through January 5, 2027 for the Rocky Mount Area; and
through December 26, 2027 for the Triangle Area), and thereby satisfy
the requirements for such a plan under CAA section 175A(b).
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 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. These actions merely
propose to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
For that reason, these proposed actions:
Are not significant regulatory actions 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 information collection burdens under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Are certified as not having significant economic impacts
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Do not contain any unfunded mandates 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
Do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
These SIP revisions are not proposed to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 3, 2022.
Daniel Blackman,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2022-02718 Filed 2-10-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
