Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 11083 

to withdraw and permanently retire 240 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX) allowances 

from the State’s 2005 new source 

allowance set aside under the NOX

Budget Trading Program. On February 

13, 2008 (73 FR 8197), EPA approved 

the State’s rule revisions, in Ohio 

Administrative Code (OAC) rule 3745– 

14–05, into the Ohio state 

implementation plan (SIP). EPA was 

subsequently sued on our action, and on 

June 5, 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals 

for the Sixth Circuit vacated our 

February 13, 2008 rulemaking. As a 

result, we are amending the codification 

of the SIP in the Code of Federal 

Regulations to reflect the court’s 

decision. Because our prior rulemaking 

was vacated by the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, our action 

today is merely a ministerial action to 

reflect the court’s decision, which 

imposes no requirements or costs. 

Therefore, under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), 

notice and public comment is 

unnecessary. For similar reasons, EPA 

has good cause to waive the 30 day 

delayed effective date under 5 U.S.C. 

553(d)(3). This rule is effective upon 

publication in the Federal Register. 

II. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is revising the codification of the 

Ohio SIP by removing a reference to 

revisions to OAC 3745–14–05 that were 

previously incorporated into the Ohio 

SIP at 40 CFR 52.1870(c)(142). EPA had 

incorporated these revisions to OAC 

3745–14–05 into Ohio’s SIP in 

rulemaking dated February 13, 2008 

(73 FR 8197), but the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 

subsequently vacated this action. 

Therefore, in this action, we are 

removing and reserving the pertinent 

paragraph from the Code of Federal 

Regulations. Reserving this paragraph is 

a technical change to the codification of 

the SIP. This action does not alter any 

other Ohio SIP rulemaking actions, and 

Ohio is not obligated to take any further 

action as a result of this action. 

III. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action merely revises the Code of 

Federal Regulations to reflect the effect 

of a federal court order and it does not 

impose any requirements. 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 Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by May 2, 2011. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this action for 

the purposes of judicial review nor does 

it extend the time within which a 

petition for judicial review may be filed, 

and shall not postpone the effectiveness 

of such rule or action. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Oxides of Nitrogen, Oxides of Nitrogen 

Budget Trading Program. 

Dated: February 14, 2011. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart KK—Ohio 

§ 52.1870 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 52.1870 is amended by 

removing and reserving paragraph 

(c)(142). 

[FR Doc. 2011–4373 Filed 2–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2010–0168; FRL–9271–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of 

Missouri 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve revisions to the 

Missouri State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) submitted April 10, 2009. The 

revision includes two new rules which 

implement restrictions on the idling of 

heavy duty diesel vehicles in the Kansas 

City Metropolitan Area and in the St. 

Louis Ozone Nonattainment Area. EPA 

is approving this revision because the 

standards and requirements set by the 

rules will strengthen the Missouri SIP. 

EPA’s approval of this SIP revision is 

being done in accordance with the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

11084 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective May 2, 2011, without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

comment by March 31, 2011. If EPA 

receives adverse comment, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2010–0168, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: bhesania.amy@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or Hand Delivery: Amy 

Bhesania, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Air Planning and Development 

Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas 

City, Kansas 66101. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2010– 

0168. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The http:// 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Air Planning and Development Branch, 

901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, 

Kansas 66101. The Regional Office’s 

official hours of business are Monday 

through Friday, 8:00 to 4:30 excluding 

Federal holidays. The interested persons 

wanting to examine these documents 

should make an appointment with the 

office at least 24 hours in advance. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amy Bhesania at (913) 551–7147 or by 

e-mail at bhesania.amy@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or 

‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What revisions is EPA approving? 

II. Why is EPA approving Missouri’s SIP 

revision? 

III. Have the requirements for approval of a 

SIP revision been met? 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What revisions Is EPA approving? 

On April 10, 2009, Missouri 

submitted to EPA for approval into the 

SIP two new rules, 10 CSR 10–2.385 

Control of Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle 

Idling Emissions for the Kansas City 

Ozone Maintenance Area and 10 CSR 

10–5.385 Control of Heavy Duty Diesel 

Vehicle Idling Emissions for the St. 

Louis Ozone Nonattainment Area. These 

new rules limit the amount of time a 

heavy duty diesel vehicle will be 

permitted to idle while parked or while 

waiting to load or unload. 

These rules apply to owners or 

operators of commercial, public and 

institutional heavy duty diesel vehicles 

(those having a gross vehicle weight 

rating (GVWR) of greater than 10,000 

pounds) that are designed to operate on 

public streets and highways, whether or 

not the vehicles are operated on public 

roadways. These regulations set a time 

limit of five consecutive minutes idling 

time (i.e., when a vehicle’s engine is on, 

but it is not in gear) in any sixty minute 

period. On November 29, 2010, 

Missouri requested to withdraw 

subsection (3)(A) of both rules from the 

April 2009 request. Subsection (3)(A) 

states that owners or operators of 

passenger load/unload locations shall 

not cause or allow vehicles covered by 

this rule to idle for more than five 

minutes in any sixty minute period. 

Missouri found that there was a 

discrepancy between subsection (3)(A) 

and section (1). Section (1), 

Applicability, does not mention that the 

rules apply to owners or operators of 

passenger load/unload locations. 

Missouri did not intend for passenger 

load/unload locations to be subject to 

this rule and thus requested to 

withdraw subsection (3)(A) to clarify. 

As a result, EPA is not taking action to 

approve subsection (3)(A). 

The regulations do specify 

exemptions to the idling limit for 

certain vehicle types and situations. 

These exemptions include: road traffic 

conditions; safety or emergency uses; 

police, fire, ambulance, public safety 

and other law enforcement vehicles; 

service and repair needs; state or 

Federal inspections; mechanical work; 

armored vehicles; bus idling for 

passenger comfort (no greater than 

fifteen minutes in any sixty minute 

period); vehicles idling for purposes of 

using sleeper berth compartments; 

mechanical difficulties; agricultural 

operations incidentally operated or 

moved upon public roads; vehicles 

using auxiliary equipment powered by 

the engine; and freight load/unload 

locations (no greater than thirty minutes 

in any sixty minute period). 

Persons violating this rule may be 

assessed penalties under state law in 

accordance with the penalty provisions 

under sections 643.010–643, RSMo. 

Enforcement of this regulation will 

follow Missouri’s Guidance for 

Enforcing the Idle Rules supplied to 

EPA as clarification on June 4, 2010. 

Therefore, EPA has determined that the 

rule meets applicable criteria for 

enforceability of SIP requirements. 

II. Why is EPA approving Missouri’s 

SIP revision? 

The rule 10 CSR 10–2.385 Control of 

Heavy Duty Diesel Vehicle Idling 

Emissions for the Kansas City Ozone 

Maintenance Area was included as a 

contingency measure in the Kansas City 

Maintenance Area 8-hour Maintenance 

Plan for the Control of Ozone. The 

contingency measure provision in the 

plan required the state to implement the 

idle reduction regulations upon 

violation of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard. This plan was approved by 

EPA and effective on October 9, 2007. 

A violation of the standard occurred 

during the 2007 ozone season thus 

triggering the adoption of the rule. The 

10 CSR 10–5.385 Control of Heavy Duty 

Diesel Vehicle Idling Emissions for the 

St. Louis Ozone Nonattainment Area 

was adopted by the state to be 

consistent with the Kansas City 

Maintenance Area provisions and was 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 11085 

not required to be adopted as part of an 

existing SIP measure or contingency 

requirement. 

These rules will result in reduced 

emissions of pollutants that contribute 

to ozone and fine particulate matter. 

Specifically, these rules lead to 

elimination of such pollutants resulting 

from unnecessary extended idling of 

heavy-duty diesel vehicles. The 

pollutants reduced by these regulations 

are volatile organic compounds, 

nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, and 

fine particulate matter. The approval of 

this rule will strengthen the Missouri 

SIP and assist the state in meeting and 

maintaining compliance with air quality 

standards, including the standard for 

ground level ozone. 

Missouri’s rule is generally consistent 

with EPA’s ‘‘Model State Idling Law’’ 

(EPA420–S–06–001, April 2006). This 

model rule was developed with input 

from the states and industry to address 

idling issues in a consistent and 

understandable manner from state to 

state, to aid in compliance. 

III. Have the requirements for approval 

of a SIP revision been met? 

The state submittal has met the public 

notice requirements for SIP submissions 

in accordance with 40 CFR 51.102. The 

submittal also satisfied the 

completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, 

appendix V. In addition, the revision 

meets the substantive SIP requirements 

of the CAA, including section 110 and 

implementing regulations. 

IV. What action Is EPA taking? 

EPA is taking final action to approve 

the request to amend the Missouri SIP 

to include Missouri rules 10 CSR 10– 

2.385 Control of Heavy Duty Diesel 

Vehicle Idling Emissions for the Kansas 

City Ozone Maintenance Area and 10 

CSR 10–5.385 Control of Heavy Duty 

Diesel Vehicle Idling Emissions for the 

St. Louis Ozone Nonattainment Area. 

The State regulations became effective 

February 28, 2009. 

We are processing this action as a 

direct final action because the revisions 

make routine changes to the existing 

rules which are noncontroversial. 

Therefore, we do not anticipate any 

adverse comments. Please note that if 

EPA receives adverse comments on part 

of this rule and if that part can be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

EPA may adopt as final those parts of 

the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. 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 Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by May 2, 2011. 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 a 

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 enforce its 

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Motor 

carriers, Motor vehicles, Motor vehicle 

pollution, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: February 16, 2011. 

Karl Brooks, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart AA—Missouri 

■ 2. In § 52.1320 the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by adding new entries in 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES

11086 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 40 / Tuesday, March 1, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

numerical order for 10–2.385 under 

Chapter 2 and 10–5.385 under Chapter 

5 to read as follows: 

§ 52.1320 Identification of Plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI REGULATIONS

Missouri citation Title State effective 

date EPA approval date Explanation 

Missouri Department of Natural Resources Chapter 2—Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the Kansas City 

Metropolitan Area 

*******

10–2.385 ................................. Control of Heavy Duty Diesel 

Vehicle Idling Emissions.

02/28/09 03/01/11 [insert FR page number where the document begins].Subsection (3)(A) is not 

SIP approved. 

* * * * * * * 

Chapter 5—Air Quality Standards and Air Pollution Control Regulations for the St. Louis Metropolitan Area 

*******

10–5.385 ................................. Control of Heavy Duty Diesel 

Vehicle Idling Emissions.

02/28/09 03/01/11 [insert FR page number where the document begins].Subsection (3)(A) is not 

SIP approved. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–4368 Filed 2–28–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2010–0003; MO 

92210–0–0009–B4] 

RIN 1018–AW55 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Designation of Critical 

Habitat for Carex lutea (Golden Sedge) 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), designate 

critical habitat for the Carex lutea 

(golden sedge) under the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973, as amended. In 

total, approximately 202 acres (82 

hectares) in 8 units located in Onslow 

and Pender Counties, North Carolina 

fall within the boundaries of the critical 

habitat designation. 

DATES: This final rule becomes effective 

on March 31, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: This final rule and the 

associated final economic analysis are 

available on the Internet at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Comments and 

materials received, as well as supporting 

documentation used in preparing this 

final rule, are available for public 

inspection, by appointment, during 

normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Raleigh Fish and 

Wildlife Office, 551–F Pylon Drive, 

Raleigh, NC 27636; telephone 919–856– 

4520; facsimile 919–856–4556. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pete 

Benjamin, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Raleigh Fish and 

Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES). If you 

use a telecommunications device for the 

deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

It is our intent to discuss in this final 

rule only those topics directly relevant 

to the development and designation of 

critical habitat for Carex lutea under the 

Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). For more 

information on the taxonomy, biology, 

and ecology of Carex lutea, refer to the 

final listing rule published in the 

Federal Register on January 23, 2002 

(67 FR 3120). Information on the 

associated draft economic analysis 

(DEA) for the proposed rule to designate 

critical habitat was published in the 

Federal Register on August 3, 2010 (75 

FR 45592). 

Species Description, Life History, 

Distribution, Ecology and Habitat 

Carex lutea is a perennial member of 

the sedge family (Cyperaceae). Fertile 

culms (stems) may reach 39 in (1 m) or 

more in height. The yellowish green 

leaves are grass-like, with those of the 

culm mostly basal and up to 11 in (28 

cm) in length, while those of the 

vegetative shoots reach a length of 25.6 

in (65 cm). 

The species is endemic to Onslow and 

Pender Counties in the Black River 

section of the Coastal Plain Province of 

North Carolina. The North Carolina 

Natural Heritage Program (NCNHP) 

recognizes eight populations made up of 

17 distinct locations or element 

occurrences. All of the locations occur 

within a 16- by 5-mile (26- by 8- 

kilometer) area, extending southwest 

from the community of Maple Hill. 

Carex lutea generally occurs on fine 

sandy loam, loamy fine sands, and fine 

sands with a pH of 5.5 to 7.2, and with 

a mean of 6.7. These soils are moist to 

saturated to periodically inundated. 

Carex lutea occurs in the Pine Savanna 

(Very Wet Clay Variant) natural 

community type (Schafale 1994, p. 136). 

Community structure is characterized 

by an open to sparse canopy dominated 

by pond pine (Pinus serotina), and 

usually with some longleaf pine (P. 

palustris) and pond cypress (Taxodium 

ascendens). 

Carex lutea is threatened by fire 

suppression; habitat alteration such as 

land conversion for residential, 

commercial, or industrial development; 

mining; drainage for silviculture and 

agriculture; highway expansion; and 

herbicide use along utility and highway 

rights-of-way. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES