
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 119 (Thursday, June 20, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37118-37122]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14507]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0961; FRL-9824-5]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Carbon Monoxide Limited 
Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve changes to the North 
Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the State of 
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NC 
DENR), on August 2, 2012. Specifically, the State submitted limited 
maintenance plan updates for carbon monoxide (CO), showing continued 
attainment of the 8-hour CO national ambient air quality standard for 
the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Areas. EPA is approving 
this SIP revision because the State has demonstrated that the revision 
is consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

DATES: This rule will be effective July 22, 2013.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket 
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0961. All documents in the docket 
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the 
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential 
Business Information or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available 
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are 
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard 
copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the 
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of 
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding federal 
holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development 
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management 
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 
Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404) 
562-9043. Mr. Lakeman can be reached via electronic mail at 
lakeman.sean@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Analysis of the State's Submittal
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Analysis of the State's Submittal

    Section 175A of the Clean Air Act (CAA) contains four subsections 
(i.e., 175A(a)-(d)) pertaining to maintenance plans. Section 175A(a) 
establishes requirements for the maintenance plans associated with 
initial SIP redesignation requests. North Carolina previously addressed 
the 175A(a) requirements for the CO NAAQS and the State's redesignation 
requests and associated maintenance plans were ultimately approved by 
EPA for all three of North Carolina's CO areas as a result. See 59 FR 
48399 and 60 FR 39258.
    Section 175A(b) requires states to submit an update to the 
maintenance plan eight years following the original redesignation to 
attainment. For the section 175A(b) update, the state must outline 
methods for maintaining the pertinent NAAQS for ten years after the 
expiration of the ten-year period as referred to in subsection (a) 
(i.e., North Carolina's maintenance plan updates must outline methods 
for maintaining the CO NAAQS through 2015). NC DENR satisfied the 
requirements for the second maintenance plans for all of its CO 
maintenance areas, and EPA subsequently approved NC DENR's second 
maintenance plan for each of the State's CO maintenance areas. See 71 
FR 14817, March 24, 2006. Although North Carolina has previously 
satisfied the requirements for the 175A(b) maintenance plan updates for 
all of its CO areas, the State has elected to convert these maintenance 
plans to limited maintenance plans.\1\ A summary of EPA's analysis for 
this revision is provided below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A limited maintenance plan generally includes all the 
elements for a full section 175A maintenance plan except that a 
limited maintenance plan is not required to include motor vehicle 
emissions budgets for transportation conformity purposes. For more 
details on limited maintenance plans see the October 6, 1995, 
Memorandum from Joseph W. Praise to the Air Branch Chiefs, Regions 
I-X, entitled ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable 
CO Nonattainment Areas.'' A copy of the October 6, 1995, Memorandum 
is included in the docket for today's rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, with respect to the remaining sub-sections of section 
175A, EPA notes that sub-section (c) does not apply to this rulemaking, 
given that EPA has previously redesignated the Charlotte, Raleigh/
Durham, and Winston-Salem areas to attainment for CO. Section 175A(d), 
which includes the contingency provisions requirements associated with 
maintenance plans, is relevant to today's revision and is addressed in 
section A4, below.

A. Consistency With the October 6, 1995, Memorandum

    EPA's interpretation of section 175A of the CAA, as it pertains to 
limited maintenance plans for CO, is contained in the October 6, 1995, 
Memorandum from Joseph W. Praise to the Air Branch Chiefs, Regions I-X, 
entitled ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO 
Nonattainment Areas.'' See the docket for today's

[[Page 37119]]

rulemaking for a copy of this memorandum. North Carolina addressed the 
five major elements of that policy, as follows:
1. Attainment Inventory
    The state is required to develop an attainment emissions inventory 
to identify a level of emissions in the area which is sufficient to 
attain the CO NAAQS. This inventory should be consistent with EPA's 
most recent guidance on emission inventories for nonattainment areas 
available at the time the SIP is developed and should include the 
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data 
showing attainment. It should be based on actual ``typical CO season 
day'' emissions for all source classifications (i.e., stationary point 
and area sources and nonroad and onroad mobile sources) for the 
attainment year. In its August 2, 2012, submittal, NC DENR provided a 
comprehensive CO emissions inventory for nonroad mobile, onroad mobile, 
point, and area sources for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-
Salem CO Maintenance Areas.
    NC DENR collected or developed the point source emissions inventory 
from stationary sources that have the potential to emit more than five 
tons per year of CO emissions from a single facility and are required 
to have an operating permit. The stationary area source inventory is 
estimated on a county level and consisted of those sources whose 
emissions are relatively small, but due to the large number of sources, 
the collective emissions could be significant. North Carolina estimated 
the stationary area source emissions by multiplying an emission factor 
by some known indicator of collective activity (such as fuel usage, 
number of households, or population). For on-road mobile source 
emissions, NC DENR used EPA's Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES) 
model version 2010a (MOVES2010a), released in August 2010, for 
estimating vehicle emissions.
    Nonroad mobile sources are pieces of equipment that can move but do 
not use roadways (e.g. lawn mowers, construction equipment, railroad 
locomotives, and aircraft). The emissions from this category are 
calculated at the county level using EPA's NONROAD2008s nonroad mobile 
model, with the exception of railroad locomotives and aircraft engines. 
The railroad locomotives and aircraft engines are estimated by taking 
an activity and multiplying by an emission factor.
    Table 1 displays the 2010 attainment year emissions inventory as 
required for the limited maintenance plans. Appendix B of North 
Carolina's SIP submittal provides detailed discussions regarding the 
development of emissions for the four emission source classifications, 
and is provided in the docket for today's rulemaking.

                           Table 1--2010 CO Emissions (tons/day) for Maintenance Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             County                Point source     Area source       On-Road         Nonroad          Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Durham..........................            0.97            1.54          186.00           19.04          207.55
Wake............................            1.17            4.26          642.97           70.62          719.02
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................            2.14            5.80          828.97           89.66          926.57
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Winston-Salem Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forsyth.........................            2.22            1.41          244.16           23.97          271.76
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Charlotte Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mecklenburg.....................            2.39            4.21          724.39          114.71          845.70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Maintenance Demonstration
    In the October 6, 1995, Memorandum, EPA stated that the maintenance 
demonstration requirement is considered to be satisfied for 
nonclassifiable areas if the monitoring data shows that the area is 
meeting the air quality criteria for limited maintenance areas (i.e., 
85 percent of the eight hour CO NAAQS, or 7.65 parts per million 
(ppm)). EPA determined in this same memorandum that there is no 
requirement to protect emissions over the maintenance period. Instead, 
EPA believes that if the area begins the maintenance period at, or 
below, 7.65 ppm (85 percent of the 8-hour CO NAAQS), the applicability 
of prevention of significant deterioration requirements, control 
measures already in the SIP, and other federal measures should provide 
adequate assurance of maintenance throughout the maintenance period. 
Monitoring data from 2008-2011 shows all three areas below the 8-hour 
CO NAAQS values. See Table 2 below. All monitoring levels are well 
below the 85 percent threshold of 7.65 ppm and therefore the State has 
satisfied the maintenance demonstration requirement for a limited 
maintenance plan for each of its CO maintenance areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Direct Final Rulemaking on February 22, 2013, listed the 
Wake County 2009 design value as 1.3 ppm. See 78 FR 12238. The value 
reported by the State was actually 1.2 ppm and the change is 
reflected in this final rulemaking.

                            Table 2--CO 8-Hour Monitored Concentration Design Values
                                                      [ppm]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             County                 Monitor ID         2009            2010            2011         8-Hr NAAQS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wake............................       371830014          \2\1.3             1.3             1.4               9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 37120]]

 
                                         Winston-Salem Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forsyth.........................       370670023             1.7             1.9             2.1               9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Charlotte Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mecklenburg.....................       371190041             1.7             1.7             1.5               9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
    Once an area has been redesignated, the state should continue to 
operate an appropriate air quality monitoring network, in accordance 
with 40 CFR part 58, to verify the attainment status of the area. This 
is particularly important for areas using a limited maintenance plan 
because there will be no cap on emissions. In accordance with 40 CFR 
part 58, NC DENR commits to continue monitoring CO at the existing 
regulatory monitors in the three CO maintenance areas to ensure that CO 
concentrations remain well below the 7.65 ppm threshold for limited 
maintenance plans. The State's monitoring plan for 2012 can be found at 
the following site: http://www.ncair.org/monitor/monitoring_plan/new_plan/2012_NCDAQ_Network_Plan.pdf. EPA has determined that the State 
has satisfied the monitoring network and verification of continued 
attainment requirements for the limited maintenance plans.
4. Contingency Plan
    Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include 
contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct any violation 
of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation of an area. The October 6, 
1995, Memorandum further requires that the contingency provisions 
identify the measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for 
adoption and implementation, and a specific time limit for action by 
the state.
    In its August 2, 2012, submittal, NC DENR committed to the same 
contingency measures that EPA previously approved on March 24, 2006 (71 
FR 14817) and a subsequent clarification on June 19, 2007 (72 FR 
33692). The State pre-adopted an oxygenated fuels program with minimum 
oxygen content by weight of 2.7 for Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and 
Winston-Salem maintenance areas as a contingency measure for the CO 
maintenance plan. The oxygenated fuel program is required under the CAA 
for the Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem areas as a required control 
measure prior to the attainment redesignation. Charlotte was placed 
under the oxygenated fuel program for effective area-wide CO emission 
reduction and to ease State implementation efforts. The contingency 
measure triggering date will be no more than 60 days after an ambient 
air quality violation is monitored. NC DENR will commence an analysis 
and regulation development process during this time. The State will 
consider the following control measures:
    a. Amending the oxygenated fuels program by adopting oxygenate 
content of 2.0 percent to 2.7 percent by weight, or activate of the 2.7 
percent by eight pre-adopted contingency measure, or 2.7 percent to 3.1 
percent by weight;
    b. expanding coverage of oxygenated fuels to include counties where 
a strong commuting pattern into the core maintenance area exists;
    c. alternative fuel vehicle programs to include compressed natural 
gas and electric vehicles; and,
    d. employee commute options programs.

NC DENR committed to implement at least one of the control measures 
within 24 months of the trigger, or as expeditiously as practicable. 
EPA has determined that the State has satisfied the contingency plan 
requirements pursuant to section 175A(d) of the CAA as well as those of 
the October 6, 1995, Memorandum.
5. Conformity Determination Under the Limited Maintenance Plan
    The transportation conformity rule of November 24, 1993 (58 FR 
62188), and the general conformity rule of November 30, 1993 (58 FR 
63214), apply to nonattainment areas and maintenance areas operating 
under the maintenance plans. Under either rule, one means of 
demonstrating conformity of federal actions is to indicate that 
expected emissions from planned actions are consistent with the 
emissions budget for the area.
    EPA's October 6, 1995, Memorandum states that emissions budgets in 
limited maintenance plan areas may be treated as essentially not 
constraining for the length of the maintenance period because it is 
unreasonable to expect that such an area will experience so much growth 
in that period that a violation of the CO NAAQS would result. In other 
words, EPA concluded that, for these areas, emissions need not be 
capped for the maintenance period.
    In accordance with the transportation conformity rule, approval of 
a limited maintenance plan only removes the requirement to conduct a 
regional emissions analysis as part of the conformity determination. 
The requirement to demonstrate conformity per the requirements in Table 
1 of 40 CFR 93.109 still applies. Additionally, federally funded 
projects are still subject to project level transportation conformity 
analysis requirements. However, no regional modeling analysis would be 
required.
    Transportation partners should note this approval of these limited 
maintenance plans in future transportation conformity determinations. 
Additionally, while the approvals of these limited maintenance plans 
waives the requirements for a regional emissions analysis for the CO 
NAAQS, as mentioned above, it does not waive other conformity 
requirements for the CO standard for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and 
Winston-Salem areas, and it does not waive transportation conformity 
requirement for other pollutants/precursors for which these areas may 
be designated nonattainment or redesigned to attainment with a full 
maintenance plan.

II. Response to Comments

    On February 22, 2013 (78 FR 12267), EPA published a direct final 
rule approving North Carolina's August 2, 2012, SIP submission for a 
limited maintenance plan update for CO, showing continued attainment of 
the 8-hour CO NAAQS for the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem

[[Page 37121]]

Areas. EPA published an accompanying proposed approval in the event 
that comments were received such that the direct final rule needed to 
be withdrawn. Specifically, in the direct final rule, EPA stated that 
if adverse comments were received by March 25, 2013, the rule would be 
withdrawn and not take effect, but that the proposed rule would still 
remain in effect and that an additional public comment period would not 
be instituted if EPA could sufficiently address any comments received 
on the direct final rulemaking. On March 25, 2013, EPA received 
comments from a single commenter. The comments could be interpreted as 
adverse and, therefore, EPA withdrew the direct final rule. A summary 
of the comments received and EPA's response is provided below.
    Comment: The commenter stated ``were studies conducted to establish 
the criteria for labeling as a maintenance area? Is there something 
geographic and standard about this area.''
    Response: This comment is outside of the scope of today's action. 
Nonetheless, EPA notes that the process to designate a maintenance area 
under the CO NAAQS involves an evaluation of specific criteria to 
determine whether an area is in compliance or out of compliance with 
the CO NAAQS. If an area is determined to be out of compliance, EPA 
then determines an appropriate boundary for the area and designates the 
area as a ``nonattainment'' area. The designation process for CO areas 
was completed in the early 1990's. The Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and 
Winston-Salem Areas were all designated as nonattainment for the CO 
NAAQS. Once an area is designated nonattainment, an area can be 
redesignated to ``attainment'' (i.e., meaning that the area is in 
compliance of the NAAQS), if it meets the criteria of section 
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. All three of the North Carolina areas were 
redesignated to ``attainment'' for the CO NAAQS and are thus considered 
``maintenance'' areas. See 59 FR 48399 and 60 FR 39258.
    Comment: The commenter questioned whether the emissions parameters 
are ``constricting the water vapor potential'' and whether the 
emissions tolerances are ``excessive considering most dealerships are 
manufacturing cars that use alternative energies and have done so for 
approximately 10 years now[?]''
    Response: The on-road mobile source emissions inventory in North 
Carolina's limited maintenance plans for the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham 
and Winston-Salem Areas were developed according to EPA guidelines and 
with the MOVES emissions model. The MOVES model can be used to estimate 
exhaust and evaporative emissions as well as brake and tire wear 
emissions from all types of on-road vehicles. The MOVES model 
incorporates substantial new emissions test data and accounts for 
changes in vehicle technology and regulations as well as improved 
understanding of in-use emission levels and the factors that influence 
them. NC DENR appropriately utilized the MOVES model to estimate the 
on-road mobile source emissions for the limited maintenance plan for 
all applicable vehicles and technologies, for the Charlotte, Raleigh/
Durham and Winston-Salem Areas.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving the aforementioned changes to the State of North 
Carolina SIP, because they are consistent with the CAA, and EPA's 
policy related to limited maintenance plans.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State 
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country, and EPA 
notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal 
governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by August 19, 2013. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor 
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may 
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or 
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are 
encouraged to file any comment in response to the parallel notice of 
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules 
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate 
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can 
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed 
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to

[[Page 37122]]

enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: June 7, 2013.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart II--North Carolina

0
2. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by adding a new entry for ``8-Hour 
Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan for Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham 
and Winston-Salem Maintenance Area'' at the end of the table to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.1770  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                                                  EPA-Approved North Carolina Non-Regulatory Provisions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                            Federal Register
              Provision                     State effective date              EPA approval date                 citation               Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Limited        August 2, 2012.................  6/20/2013......................  [Insert citation of      .......................
 Maintenance Plan for Charlotte,                                                                         publication]
 Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem
 Maintenance Area.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2013-14507 Filed 6-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


