69082 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 

192. 

(c) Effective and enforcement period. 

This security zone is in effect 

permanently but will only be enforced 

when deemed necessary by the COTP. 

Anyone, including members of federal 

or state law enforcement agencies, may 

request that this security zone be 

enforced. 

(d) Notification. The COTP will notify 

the public of the enforcement of this 

security zone by publishing a Notice of 

Enforcement (NOE) in the Federal 

Register and via the other means listed 

in 33 CFR 165.7. Such notifications will 

include the date and times of 

enforcement, along with any predetermined conditions of entry. 

(e) COTP representative. The COTP’s 

representative may be any Coast Guard 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer 

or any Federal, state, or local law 

enforcement officer who has been 

designated by the COTP to act on the 

COTP’s behalf. The COTP’s 

representative may be on a Coast Guard 

vessel, a Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel, 

a state or local law enforcement vessel, 

or a location on shore. 

Dated: November 5, 2014. 

J.C. O’Connor III, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Boston. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27160 Filed 11–19–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2014–0444; FRL–9919–49– 

Region 4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; North Carolina 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 

2008 Lead National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

the July 20, 2012, State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) submission, provided by the 

North Carolina Department of 

Environment and Natural Resources (NC 

DENR), Division of Air Quality 

(NCDAQ) for inclusion into the North 

Carolina SIP. This proposal pertains to 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) 

infrastructure requirements for the 2008 

Lead national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS). The CAA requires 

that each state adopt and submit a SIP 

for the implementation, maintenance, 

and enforcement of each NAAQS 

promulgated by EPA, which is 

commonly referred to as an 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP. NCDAQ certified 

that the North Carolina SIP contains 

provisions that ensure the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and 

maintained in North Carolina (hereafter 

referred to as an ‘‘infrastructure SIP 

submission’’). With the exception of 

provisions pertaining to prevention of 

significant deterioration (PSD) 

permitting and state boards 

requirements, EPA is proposing to 

determine that North Carolina’s 

infrastructure SIP submission, provided 

to EPA on July 20, 2012, addresses the 

required infrastructure elements for the 

2008 Lead NAAQS. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before December 22, 

2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2014–0444, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4–RDS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2014– 

0444,’’ Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2014– 

0444. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zuri 

Farngalo, 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) 562–9152. 

Mr. Farngalo can be reached via 

electronic mail at farngalo.zuri@

epa.gov. 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Proposed Rules 69083 

1 In these infrastructure SIP submissions states 

generally certify evidence of compliance with 

sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA through a 

combination of state regulations and statutes, some 

of which have been incorporated into the federallyapproved SIP. In addition, certain federallyapproved, non-SIP regulations may also be 

appropriate for demonstrating compliance with 

sections 110(a)(1) and (2). Unless otherwise 

indicated, the Title 15A regulations of the North 

Carolina Administrative Code (‘‘15A NCAC’’) cited 

throughout this rulemaking have either been 

approved, or submitted for approval into North 

Carolina’s federally-approved SIP. The North 

Carolina General Statutes (‘‘NCGS’’) cited 

throughout this rulemaking, however, are not 

approved into the North Carolina SIP unless 

otherwise indicated. 

2Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are 

not governed by the three year submission deadline 

of section 110(a)(1) because SIPs incorporating 

necessary local nonattainment area controls are not 

due within three years after promulgation of a new 

or revised NAAQS, but rather due at the time the 

nonattainment area plan requirements are due 

pursuant to section 172. These requirements are: (1) 

Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C) to the 

extent that subsection refers to a permit program as 

required in part D Title I of the CAA, and (2) 

submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(I) which 

pertain to the nonattainment planning requirements 

of part D, Title I of the CAA. Today’s proposed 

rulemaking does not address infrastructure 

elements related to section 110(a)(2)(I) or the 

nonattainment planning requirements of 

110(a)(2)(C). 

3This rulemaking only addresses requirements 

for this element as they relate to attainment areas. 

4As mentioned above, this element is not 

relevant to today’s proposed rulemaking. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. What elements are required under 

Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? 

III. What is EPA’s approach to the review of 

infrastructure SIP submissions? 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of how North 

Carolina addressed the elements of 

Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) 

‘‘Infrastructure’’ provisions? 

V. Proposed Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On October 5, 1978, EPA promulgated 

primary and secondary NAAQS for Lead 

under section 109 of the Act. See 43 FR 

46246. Both primary and secondary 

standards were set at a level of 1.5 

micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3), 

measured as lead in total suspended 

particulate matter (Pb-TSP), not to be 

exceeded by the maximum arithmetic 

mean concentration averaged over a 

calendar quarter. This standard was 

based on the August 7, 1977 Air Quality 

Criteria for Lead. On November 12, 2008 

(75 FR 81126), EPA issued a final rule 

to revise the primary and secondary 

Lead NAAQS. The revised primary and 

secondary Lead NAAQS were revised to 

0.15 mg/m3. By statute, SIPs meeting the 

requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and 

(2) are to be submitted by states within 

three years after promulgation of a new 

or revised NAAQS. Sections 110(a)(1) 

and (2) require states to address basic 

SIP requirements, including emissions 

inventories, monitoring, and modeling 

to assure attainment and maintenance of 

the NAAQS. States were required to 

submit such SIPs to EPA no later than 

October 15, 2011, for the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS.1

Today’s action is proposing to 

approve North Carolina’s infrastructure 

submission for the applicable 

requirements of the Lead NAAQS, with 

the exception of preconstruction PSD 

permitting requirements for major 

sources of sections 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 

of D(i), and (J) and the state board 

requirements of 110(E)(ii). With respect 

to North Carolina’s infrastructure SIP 

submission related to the provisions 

pertaining to the PSD permitting 

requirements for major sources of 

section 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 of D(i), and 

(J), and the state board requirements 

complying with section 128 of the CAA 

for 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), EPA is not proposing 

any action today regarding these 

requirements. EPA will act on these 

portions of North Carolina’s submission 

in a separate action. This action is not 

approving any specific rule, but rather 

proposing that North Carolina’s already 

approved SIP meets certain CAA 

requirements. 

II. What elements are required under 

Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

states to submit SIPs to provide for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of a new or revised 

NAAQS within three years following 

the promulgation of such NAAQS, or 

within such shorter period as EPA may 

prescribe. Section 110(a) imposes the 

obligation upon states to make a SIP 

submission to EPA for a new or revised 

NAAQS, but the contents of that 

submission may vary depending upon 

the facts and circumstances. In 

particular, the data and analytical tools 

available at the time the state develops 

and submits the SIP for a new or revised 

NAAQS affects the content of the 

submission. The contents of such SIP 

submissions may also vary depending 

upon what provisions the state’s 

existing SIP already contains. In the 

case of the 2008 Lead NAAQS, states 

typically have met the basic program 

elements required in section 110(a)(2) 

through earlier SIP submissions in 

connection with the 1978 Lead NAAQS. 

More specifically, section 110(a)(1) 

provides the procedural and timing 

requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) 

lists specific elements that states must 

meet for ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP 

requirements related to a newly 

established or revised NAAQS. As 

mentioned above, these requirements 

include SIP infrastructure elements 

such as modeling, monitoring, and 

emissions inventories that are designed 

to assure attainment and maintenance of 

the NAAQS. The requirements that are 

the subject of this proposed rulemaking 

are listed below 2 and in EPA’s October 

14, 2011, memorandum entitled 

‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements 

Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and 

110(a)(2) for the 2008 Lead (Pb) National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS)’’ (2011 Lead Infrastructure SIP 

Guidance). 

• 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and 

other control measures. 

• 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality 

monitoring/data system. 

• 110(a)(2)(C): Program for 

enforcement, prevention of significant 

deterioration (PSD) and new source 

review (NSR).3

• 110(a)(2)(D): Interstate and 

international transport provisions. 

• 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate personnel, 

funding, and authority. 

• 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source 

monitoring and reporting. 

• 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency episodes. 

• 110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions. 

• 110(a)(2)(I): Nonattainment area 

plan or plan revision under part D.4

• 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with 

government officials, public 

notification, and PSD and visibility 

protection. 

• 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/

data. 

• 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees. 

• 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/

participation by affected local entities. 

III. What is EPA’s approach to the 

review of infrastructure SIP 

submissions? 

EPA is acting upon the SIP 

submission from North Carolina that 

addresses the infrastructure 

requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) 

and 110(a)(2) for the 2008 Lead NAAQS. 

Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states 

must make SIP submissions ‘‘within 3 

years (or such shorter period as the 

Administrator may prescribe) after the 

promulgation of a national primary 

ambient air quality standard (or any 

revision thereof),’’ and these SIP 

submissions are to provide for the 

‘‘implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement’’ of such NAAQS. The 

statute directly imposes on states the 

duty to make these SIP submissions, 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
69084 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

5For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides 

that states must provide assurances that they have 

adequate legal authority under state and local law 

to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C) provides 

that states must have a SIP-approved program to 

address certain sources as required by part C of title 

I of the CAA; and section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that 

states must have legal authority to address 

emergencies as well as contingency plans that are 

triggered in the event of such emergencies. 

6See, e.g., ‘‘Rule To Reduce Interstate Transport 

of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air 

Interstate Rule); Revisions to Acid Rain Program; 

Revisions to the NOX SIP Call; Final Rule,’’ 70 FR 

25162, at 25163–65 (May 12, 2005) (explaining 

relationship between timing requirement of section 

110(a)(2)(D) versus section 110(a)(2)(I)). 

7EPA notes that this ambiguity within section 

110(a)(2) is heightened by the fact that various 

subparts of part D set specific dates for submission 

of certain types of SIP submissions in designated 

nonattainment areas for various pollutants. Note, 

e.g., that section 182(a)(1) provides specific dates 

for submission of emissions inventories for the 

ozone NAAQS. Some of these specific dates are 

necessarily later than three years after promulgation 

of the new or revised NAAQS. 

8See, e.g., ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Revisions to 

the New Source Review (NSR) State 

Implementation Plan (SIP); Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment 

New Source Review (NNSR) Permitting,’’ 78 FR 

4339 (January 22, 2013) (EPA’s final action 

approving the structural PSD elements of the New 

Mexico SIP submitted by the State separately to 

meet the requirements of EPA’s 2008 PM2.5 NSR 

rule), and ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; New Mexico; 

Infrastructure and Interstate Transport 

Requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,’’ (78 FR 

4337) (January 22, 2013) (EPA’s final action on the 

infrastructure SIP for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS). 

9On December 14, 2007, the State of Tennessee, 

through the Tennessee Department of Environment 

and Conservation, made a SIP revision to EPA 

demonstrating that the State meets the requirements 

of sections 110(a)(1) and (2). EPA proposed action 

for infrastructure SIP elements (C) and (J) on 

January 23, 2012 (77 FR 3213) and took final action 

on March 14, 2012 (77 FR 14976). On April 16, 

2012 (77 FR 22533) and July 23, 2012 (77 FR 

42997), EPA took separate proposed and final 

actions on all other section 110(a)(2) infrastructure 

SIP elements of Tennessee’s December 14, 2007 

submittal. 

10For example, implementation of the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS required the deployment of a system of 

new monitors to measure ambient levels of that new 

indicator species for the new NAAQS. 

and the requirement to make the 

submissions is not conditioned upon 

EPA’s taking any action other than 

promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. 

Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of 

specific elements that ‘‘each such plan’’ 

submission must address. 

EPA has historically referred to these 

SIP submissions made for the purpose 

of satisfying the requirements of CAA 

sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as 

‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ submissions. 

Although the term ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ 

does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses 

the term to distinguish this particular 

type of SIP submission from 

submissions that are intended to satisfy 

other SIP requirements under the CAA, 

such as ‘‘nonattainment SIP’’ or 

‘‘attainment plan SIP’’ submissions to 

address the nonattainment planning 

requirements of part D of title I of the 

CAA, ‘‘regional haze SIP’’ submissions 

required by EPA rule to address the 

visibility protection requirements of 

CAA section 169A, and nonattainment 

new source review permit program 

submissions to address the permit 

requirements of CAA, title I, part D. 

Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing 

and general requirements for 

infrastructure SIP submissions, and 

section 110(a)(2) provides more details 

concerning the required contents of 

these submissions. The list of required 

elements provided in section 110(a)(2) 

contains a wide variety of disparate 

provisions, some of which pertain to 

required legal authority, some of which 

pertain to required substantive program 

provisions, and some of which pertain 

to requirements for both authority and 

substantive program provisions.5 EPA 

therefore believes that while the timing 

requirement in section 110(a)(1) is 

unambiguous, some of the other 

statutory provisions are ambiguous. In 

particular, EPA believes that the list of 

required elements for infrastructure SIP 

submissions provided in section 

110(a)(2) contains ambiguities 

concerning what is required for 

inclusion in an infrastructure SIP 

submission. 

The following examples of 

ambiguities illustrate the need for EPA 

to interpret some section 110(a)(1) and 

section 110(a)(2) requirements with 

respect to infrastructure SIP 

submissions for a given new or revised 

NAAQS. One example of ambiguity is 

that section 110(a)(2) requires that 

‘‘each’’ SIP submission must meet the 

list of requirements therein, while EPA 

has long noted that this literal reading 

of the statute is internally inconsistent 

and would create a conflict with the 

nonattainment provisions in part D of 

title I of the Act, which specifically 

address nonattainment SIP 

requirements.6 Section 110(a)(2)(I) 

pertains to nonattainment SIP 

requirements and part D addresses 

when attainment plan SIP submissions 

to address nonattainment area 

requirements are due. For example, 

section 172(b) requires EPA to establish 

a schedule for submission of such plans 

for certain pollutants when the 

Administrator promulgates the 

designation of an area as nonattainment, 

and section 107(d)(1)(B) allows up to 

two years, or in some cases three years, 

for such designations to be 

promulgated.7 This ambiguity illustrates 

that rather than apply all the stated 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) in a 

strict literal sense, EPA must determine 

which provisions of section 110(a)(2) 

are applicable for a particular 

infrastructure SIP submission. 

Another example of ambiguity within 

sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) with 

respect to infrastructure SIPs pertains to 

whether states must meet all of the 

infrastructure SIP requirements in a 

single SIP submission, and whether EPA 

must act upon such SIP submission in 

a single action. Although section 

110(a)(1) directs states to submit ‘‘a 

plan’’ to meet these requirements, EPA 

interprets the CAA to allow states to 

make multiple SIP submissions 

separately addressing infrastructure SIP 

elements for the same NAAQS. If states 

elect to make such multiple SIP 

submissions to meet the infrastructure 

SIP requirements, EPA can elect to act 

on such submissions either individually 

or in a larger combined action.8

Similarly, EPA interprets the CAA to 

allow it to take action on the individual 

parts of one larger, comprehensive 

infrastructure SIP submission for a 

given NAAQS without concurrent 

action on the entire submission. For 

example, EPA has sometimes elected to 

act at different times on various 

elements and sub-elements of the same 

infrastructure SIP submission.9

Ambiguities within sections 110(a)(1) 

and 110(a)(2) may also arise with 

respect to infrastructure SIP submission 

requirements for different NAAQS. 

Thus, EPA notes that not every element 

of section 110(a)(2) would be relevant, 

or as relevant, or relevant in the same 

way, for each new or revised NAAQS. 

The states’ attendant infrastructure SIP 

submissions for each NAAQS therefore 

could be different. For example, the 

monitoring requirements that a state 

might need to meet in its infrastructure 

SIP submission for purposes of section 

110(a)(2)(B) could be very different for 

different pollutants because the content 

and scope of a state’s infrastructure SIP 

submission to meet this element might 

be very different for an entirely new 

NAAQS than for a minor revision to an 

existing NAAQS.10

EPA notes that interpretation of 

section 110(a)(2) is also necessary when 

EPA reviews other types of SIP 

submissions required under the CAA. 

Therefore, as with infrastructure SIP 

submissions, EPA also has to identify 

and interpret the relevant elements of 

section 110(a)(2) that logically apply to 

these other types of SIP submissions. 

For example, section 172(c)(7) requires 

that attainment plan SIP submissions 

required by part D have to meet the 

‘‘applicable requirements’’ of section 

110(a)(2). Thus, for example, attainment 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Proposed Rules 69085 

11EPA notes, however, that nothing in the CAA 

requires EPA to provide guidance or to promulgate 

regulations for infrastructure SIP submissions. The 

CAA directly applies to states and requires the 

submission of infrastructure SIP submissions, 

regardless of whether or not EPA provides guidance 

or regulations pertaining to such submissions. EPA 

elects to issue such guidance in order to assist 

states, as appropriate. 

12 ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements Required 

under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 

110(a)(2) for the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS),’’ Memorandum 

from Stephen D. Page, October 14, 2001. 

13Although not intended to provide guidance for 

purposes of infrastructure SIP submissions for the 

2008 Lead NAAQS, EPA notes that, following the 

2011 Lead Infrastructure SIP Guidance, EPA issued 

the ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean 

Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2).’’ 

Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 

2013. This 2013 guidance provides 

recommendations for air agencies’ development and 

the EPA’s review of infrastructure SIPs for the 2008 

ozone primary and secondary NAAQS, the 2010 

primary nitrogen dioxide (NO2) NAAQS, the 2010 

primary sulfur dioxide (SO2) NAAQS, and the 2012 

primary fine particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS, as 

well as infrastructure SIPs for new or revised 

NAAQS promulgated in the future. 

14For example, EPA issued a SIP call to Utah to 

address specific existing SIP deficiencies related to 

the treatment of excess emissions during SSM 

events. See ‘‘Finding of Substantial Inadequacy of 

Implementation Plan; Call for Utah State 

Implementation Plan Revisions,’’ 74 FR 21639 

(April 18, 2011). 

15EPA has used this authority to correct errors in 

past actions on SIP submissions related to PSD 

programs. See ‘‘Limitation of Approval of 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions 

Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in 

State Implementation Plans; Final Rule,’’ 75 FR 

82536 (December 30, 2010). EPA has previously 

used its authority under CAA section 110(k)(6) to 

remove numerous other SIP provisions that the 

Agency determined it had approved in error. See, 

e.g., 61 FR 38664 (July 25, 1996) and 62 FR 34641 

(June 27, 1997) (corrections to American Samoa, 

Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 

FR 67062 (November 16, 2004) (corrections to 

California SIP); and 74 FR 57051 (November 3, 

2009) (corrections to Arizona and Nevada SIPs). 

16See, e.g., EPA’s disapproval of a SIP submission 

from Colorado on the grounds that it would have 

included a director’s discretion provision 

inconsistent with CAA requirements, including 

section 110(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., 75 FR 42342 at 42344 

Continued 

plan SIP submissions must meet the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) 

regarding enforceable emission limits 

and control measures and section 

110(a)(2)(E)(i) regarding air agency 

resources and authority. By contrast, it 

is clear that attainment plan SIP 

submissions required by part D would 

not need to meet the portion of section 

110(a)(2)(C) that pertains to the PSD 

program required in part C of title I of 

the CAA, because PSD does not apply 

to a pollutant for which an area is 

designated nonattainment and thus 

subject to part D planning requirements. 

As this example illustrates, each type of 

SIP submission may implicate some 

elements of section 110(a)(2) but not 

others. 

Given the potential for ambiguity in 

some of the statutory language of section 

110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2), EPA 

believes that it is appropriate to 

interpret the ambiguous portions of 

section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) 

in the context of acting on a particular 

SIP submission. In other words, EPA 

assumes that Congress could not have 

intended that each and every SIP 

submission, regardless of the NAAQS in 

question or the history of SIP 

development for the relevant pollutant, 

would meet each of the requirements, or 

meet each of them in the same way. 

Therefore, EPA has adopted an 

approach under which it reviews 

infrastructure SIP submissions against 

the list of elements in section 110(a)(2), 

but only to the extent each element 

applies for that particular NAAQS. 

Historically, EPA has elected to use 

guidance documents to make 

recommendations to states for 

infrastructure SIPs, in some cases 

conveying needed interpretations on 

newly arising issues and in some cases 

conveying interpretations that have 

already been developed and applied to 

individual SIP submissions for 

particular elements.11 EPA issued the 

Lead Infrastructure SIP Guidance on 

October 14, 2011.12 EPA developed this 

document to provide states with up-todate guidance for the 2008 Lead 

infrastructure SIPs. Within this 

guidance, EPA describes the duty of 

states to make infrastructure SIP 

submissions to meet basic structural SIP 

requirements within three years of 

promulgation of a new or revised 

NAAQS. EPA also made 

recommendations about many specific 

subsections of section 110(a)(2) that are 

relevant in the context of infrastructure 

SIP submissions. The guidance also 

discusses the substantively important 

issues that are germane to certain 

subsections of section 110(a)(2). 

Significantly, EPA interprets sections 

110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) such that 

infrastructure SIP submissions need to 

address certain issues and need not 

address others. Accordingly, EPA 

reviews each infrastructure SIP 

submission for compliance with the 

applicable statutory provisions of 

section 110(a)(2), as appropriate.13

EPA’s approach to review of 

infrastructure SIP submissions is to 

identify the CAA requirements that are 

logically applicable to that submission. 

EPA believes that this approach to the 

review of a particular infrastructure SIP 

submission is appropriate, because it 

would not be reasonable to read the 

general requirements of section 

110(a)(1) and the list of elements in 

110(a)(2) as requiring review of each 

and every provision of a state’s existing 

SIP against all requirements in the CAA 

and EPA regulations merely for 

purposes of assuring that the state in 

question has the basic structural 

elements for a functioning SIP for a new 

or revised NAAQS. Because SIPs have 

grown by accretion over the decades as 

statutory and regulatory requirements 

under the CAA have evolved, they may 

include some outmoded provisions and 

historical artifacts. These provisions, 

while not fully up to date, nevertheless 

may not pose a significant problem for 

the purposes of ‘‘implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement’’ of a 

new or revised NAAQS when EPA 

evaluates adequacy of the infrastructure 

SIP submission. EPA believes that a 

better approach is for states and EPA to 

focus attention on those elements of 

section 110(a)(2) of the CAA most likely 

to warrant a specific SIP revision due to 

the promulgation of a new or revised 

NAAQS or other factors. 

Finally, EPA believes that its 

approach with respect to infrastructure 

SIP requirements is based on a 

reasonable reading of sections 110(a)(1) 

and 110(a)(2) because the CAA provides 

other avenues and mechanisms to 

address specific substantive deficiencies 

in existing SIPs. These other statutory 

tools allow EPA to take appropriately 

tailored action, depending upon the 

nature and severity of the alleged SIP 

deficiency. Section 110(k)(5) authorizes 

EPA to issue a ‘‘SIP call’’ whenever the 

Agency determines that a state’s SIP is 

substantially inadequate to attain or 

maintain the NAAQS, to mitigate 

interstate transport, or to otherwise 

comply with the CAA.14 Section 

110(k)(6) authorizes EPA to correct 

errors in past actions, such as past 

approvals of SIP submissions.15

Significantly, EPA’s determination that 

an action on a state’s infrastructure SIP 

submission is not the appropriate time 

and place to address all potential 

existing SIP deficiencies does not 

preclude EPA’s subsequent reliance on 

provisions in section 110(a)(2) as part of 

the basis for action to correct those 

deficiencies at a later time. For example, 

although it may not be appropriate to 

require a state to eliminate all existing 

inappropriate director’s discretion 

provisions in the course of acting on an 

infrastructure SIP submission, EPA 

believes that section 110(a)(2)(A) may be 

among the statutory bases that EPA 

relies upon in the course of addressing 

such deficiency in a subsequent 

action.16


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
69086 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

(July 21, 2010) (proposed disapproval of director’s 

discretion provisions); 76 FR 4540 (Jan. 26, 2011) 

(final disapproval of such provisions). 

17On February 22, 2013, EPA published a 

proposed action in the Federal Register entitled, 

‘‘State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition 

for Rulemaking; Findings of Substantial 

Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend Provisions 

Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of 

Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction; Proposed 

Rule.’’ 78 FR 12459. 

18On occasion, proposed changes to the 

monitoring network are evaluated outside of the 

network plan approval process in accordance with 

40 CFR Part 58. 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of how 

North Carolina addressed the elements 

of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) 

‘‘infrastructure’’ provisions? 

The North Carolina infrastructure 

submission addresses the provisions of 

sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as described 

below. 

1. 110(a)(2)(A) Emission limits and 

other control measures: There are 

several provisions within the North 

Carolina General Statutes (NCGS) and 

the North Carolina Administrative Code 

(NCAC) that provide NCDAQ with the 

necessary authority to adopt and enforce 

air quality controls, which include 

enforceable emission limitations and 

other control measures. Rules 15A 

NCAC 2D .0600 ‘‘Monitoring: 

Recordkeeping: Reporting;’’ 15A NCAC 

2D .1600 ‘‘General Conformity;’’ 15A 

NCAC 2D .2200 ‘‘Special Orders;’’ and, 

15A NCAC 2D .2600 ‘‘Source Testing,’’ 

provide enforceable emission limits and 

other control measures, means, and 

techniques. In addition, NCGS 143– 

215.107(a)(5), ‘‘Air quality standards 

and classifications,’’ provides North 

Carolina with the authority to ‘‘develop 

and adopt emission control standards as 

in the judgment of the Commission may 

be necessary to prohibit, abate, or 

control air pollution commensurate 

with established air quality standards.’’ 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that these provisions and 

North Carolina’s practices are adequate 

to protect the 2008 Lead NAAQS in the 

State. 

In this action, EPA is not proposing to 

approve or disapprove any existing 

State provisions with regard to excess 

emissions during SSM of operations at 

a facility. EPA believes that a number of 

states have SSM provisions which are 

contrary to the CAA and existing EPA 

guidance, ‘‘State Implementation Plans: 

Policy Regarding Excess Emissions 

During Malfunctions, Startup, and 

Shutdown’’ (September 20, 1999), and 

the Agency plans to address such state 

regulations in the future.17 In the 

meantime, EPA encourages any state 

having a deficient SSM provision to take 

steps to correct it as soon as possible. 

Additionally, in this action, EPA is 

not proposing to approve or disapprove 

any existing State rules with regard to 

director’s discretion or variance 

provisions. In the meantime, EPA 

encourages any state having a director’s 

discretion or variance provision which 

is contrary to the CAA and EPA 

guidance to take steps to correct the 

deficiency as soon as possible. 

2. 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient air quality 

monitoring/data system: SIPs are 

required to provide for the 

establishment and operation of ambient 

air quality monitors; the compilation 

and analysis of ambient air quality data; 

and the submission of these data to EPA 

upon request. NCGS 143–215.107(a)(2), 

‘‘Air quality standards and 

classifications,’’ along with the North 

Carolina Annual Monitoring Network 

Plan, provide for an ambient air quality 

monitoring system in the State, which 

includes the monitoring of lead at 

appropriate locations throughout the 

state using the EPA approved Federal 

Reference Method or equivalent 

monitors. NCGS 143–215.107(a)(2) also 

provides North Carolina with the 

statutory authority to ‘‘determine by 

means of field sampling and other 

studies, including the examination of 

available data collected by any local, 

State or federal agency or any person, 

the degree of air contamination and air 

pollution in the State and the several 

areas of the State.’’ The monitors are all 

part of the Air Quality Systems (AQS) 

and identification numbers. Annually, 

States develop and submit to EPA for 

approval statewide ambient monitoring 

network plans consistent with the 

requirements of 40 CFR Parts 50, 53, 

and 58. The annual network plan 

involves an evaluation of any proposed 

changes to the monitoring network, 

includes the annual ambient monitoring 

network design plan and a certified 

evaluation of the agency’s ambient 

monitors and auxiliary support 

equipment.18 The latest monitoring 

network plan approved for North 

Carolina was submitted to EPA on July 

2, 2013, and on November 25, 2013, 

EPA approved this plan. North 

Carolina’s approved monitoring network 

plan can be accessed at 

www.regulations.gov using Docket ID 

No. EPA–R04–OAR–2014–0444. EPA 

has made the preliminary determination 

that North Carolina’s SIP and practices 

are adequate for the ambient air quality 

monitoring and data system related to 

the 2008 Lead NAAQS. 

3. 110(a)(2)(C) Program for 

enforcement, prevention of significant 

deterioration (PSD) and new source 

review (NSR): Section 110(a)(2)(C) 

requires that the SIPs include a program 

to provide for the enforcement of the 

measures described in section 

110(a)(2)(A), and regulation of the 

modification and construction of any 

stationary source within the areas 

covered by the plan as necessary to 

assure that national ambient air quality 

standards are achieved, including a 

permit program. In this action, EPA is 

proposing to approve North Carolina’s 

infrastructure SIP submission for the 

2008 Lead NAAQS with respect to the 

general requirement in section 

110(a)(2)(C) to include a program in the 

SIP that provides for the enforcement of 

emission limits and control measures, 

the regulation of minor sources and 

modifications, and the enforcement of 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs) emission 

limits to assist in the protection of air 

quality in nonattainment, attainment or 

unclassifiable areas. To meet these 

obligations, North Carolina cited 

regulations 15A NCAC 2D. 0500 

‘‘Emissions Control Standards;’’ 2D. 

0530 ‘‘Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration;’’ and, 2D. 0531 ‘‘Sources 

in Nonattainment Area,’’ each of which 

pertain to the construction of any new 

major stationary source or any project at 

an existing major stationary source in an 

area designated as attainment or 

unclassifiable. EPA will be acting on the 

preconstruction PSD permitting 

program requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(C) in a separate action. 

Enforcement: NCDAQ’s abovedescribed, SIP-approved regulations 

provide for enforcement of VOC and 

NOX emission limits and control 

measures and construction permitting 

for new or modified stationary sources. 

Preconstruction PSD Permitting for 

Major Sources: With respect to North 

Carolina’s infrastructure SIP submission 

related to the preconstruction PSD 

permitting requirements for major 

sources of section 110(a)(2)(C), EPA is 

not proposing any action today 

regarding these requirements and 

instead will act on this portion of the 

submission in a separate action. 

Regulation of minor sources and 

modifications: Section 110(a)(2)(C) also 

requires the SIP to include provisions 

that govern the minor source preconstruction program that regulates 

emissions of the 2008 Lead NAAQS. 

Regulation 15A NCAC 2Q .0300 

‘‘Construction Operation Permits,’’ 

governs the preconstruction permitting 

of modifications and construction of 

minor stationary sources. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that North Carolina’s SIP 

and practices are adequate for 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Proposed Rules 69087 

19The one facility in North Carolina that has lead 

emissions greater than 0.5 tpy is the Saint Gobain 

Containers facility located at 2201 Firestone Pkwy 

Ne, Wilson, NC 27893. The lead emissions from this 

facility are .53 tpy. 

enforcement of control measures and 

regulation of minor sources and 

modifications related to the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS. 

4. 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and (ii) Interstate 

and International transport provisions: 

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) has two 

components; 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 

110(a)(2)(D)(II). Each of these 

components have two subparts resulting 

in four distinct components, commonly 

referred to as ‘‘prongs,’’ that must be 

addressed in infrastructure SIP 

submissions. The first two prongs, 

which are codified in section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that 

prohibit any source or other type of 

emissions activity in one state from 

contributing significantly to 

nonattainment of the NAAQS in another 

state (‘‘prong 1’’), and interfering with 

maintenance of the NAAQS in another 

state (‘‘prong 2’’). The third and fourth 

prongs, which are codified in section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that 

prohibit emissions activity in one state 

interfering with measures required to 

prevent significant deterioration of air 

quality in another state (‘‘prong 3’’), or 

to protect visibility in another state 

(‘‘prong 4’’). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) 

requires SIPs to include provisions 

insuring compliance with sections 115 

and 126 of the Act, relating to interstate 

and international pollution abatement. 

With respect to North Carolina’s 

infrastructure SIP submission related to 

the interstate transport requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3), EPA 

is not proposing any action today 

regarding this requirement and instead 

will act on this portion of the 

submission in a separate action. 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) prongs 1 and 2: 

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires 

infrastructure SIP submissions to 

include provisions prohibiting any 

source or other type of emissions 

activity in one state from contributing 

significantly to nonattainment in, or 

interfering with maintenance of the 

NAAQS in another state. The physical 

properties of lead prevent lead 

emissions from experiencing that same 

travel or formation phenomena as PM2.5

and ozone for interstate transport as 

outlined in prongs 1 and 2. More 

specifically, there is a sharp decrease in 

the lead concentrations, at least in the 

coarse fraction, as the distance from a 

lead source increases. EPA believes that 

the requirements of prongs 1 and 2 can 

be satisfied through a state’s assessment 

as to whether a lead source located 

within its State in close proximity to a 

state border has emissions that 

contribute significantly to the 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the NAAQS in the 

neighboring state. For example, EPA’s 

experience suggests that sources located 

more than two miles from the state 

border or that sources that emit less 

than 0.5 tpy generally appear unlikely to 

contribute significantly to the 

nonattainment in another state. North 

Carolina has one lead source that has 

emissions which exceed 0.5 tons per 

year (tpy), however, the source is 

located approximately 45 miles from the 

State border.19 As a result of its distance 

to the border, EPA believes it is unlikely 

to contribute significantly to the 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the NAAQS in another 

state. Therefore, EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that North 

Carolina’s SIP meets the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) Prong 3: With 

respect to North Carolina’s 

infrastructure SIP submission related to 

the interstate transport requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) prong 3, EPA 

is not proposing any action today 

regarding these requirements and will 

act on this portion of the submission in 

a separate action. 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) prong 4: With regard 

to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), the 

visibility sub-element, referred to as 

prong 4, significant visibility impacts 

from stationary source lead emissions 

are expected to be limited to short 

distances from the source. Lead 

stationary sources in North Carolina are 

located distances from Class I areas such 

that visibility impacts are negligible. 

The 2011 Lead Infrastructure SIP 

Guidance notes that the lead constituent 

of PM would likely not travel far enough 

to affect Class 1 areas and that the 

visibility provisions of the CAA do not 

directly regulate lead. EPA therefore 

does not expect states to address 

visibility in lead infrastructure 

submittals. Thus, EPA concludes there 

are no new applicable visibility 

protection obligations under section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) as a result of the 2008 

Lead NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA has 

preliminarily determined that the North 

Carolina SIP meets the relevant 

visibility requirements of prong 4 of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii)—Interstate and 

International transport provisions: 

Regulations 15A NCAC 2D .0530 

‘‘Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration’’ and 15A NCAC 2D .0531 

‘‘Sources of Nonattainment Areas’’ 

provide how NCDAQ will notify 

neighboring states of potential impacts 

from new or modified sources 

consistent with the requirements of 40 

CFR 51.166. In addition, North Carolina 

does not have any pending obligation 

under sections 115 and 126 of the CAA. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that North Carolina’s SIP 

and practices are adequate for insuring 

compliance with the applicable 

requirements relating to interstate and 

international pollution abatement for 

the 2008 Lead NAAQS. 

6. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate personnel, 

funding, and authority. Section 

110(a)(2)(E) requires that each 

implementation plan provide (i) 

necessary assurances that the State will 

have adequate personnel, funding, and 

authority under state law to carry out its 

implementation plan, (ii) that the State 

comply with the requirements 

respecting State Boards pursuant to 

section 128 of the Act, and (iii) 

necessary assurances that, where the 

State has relied on a local or regional 

government, agency, or instrumentality 

for the implementation of any plan 

provision, the State has responsibility 

for ensuring adequate implementation 

of such plan provisions. EPA is 

proposing to approve North Carolina’s 

SIP as meeting the requirements of subelements 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii). EPA 

will act on sub-element (ii) in separate 

action. EPA’s rationale for today’s 

proposal respecting sub-element (i) and 

(iii) is described in turn below. 

To satisfy the requirements of sections 

110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii), North Carolina’s 

infrastructure SIP submission cites 

regulation 15A NCAC 2Q. 0200 ‘‘Permit 

Fees,’’ which provides the mechanism 

by which stationary sources that emit 

air pollutants pay a fee based on the 

quantity of emissions emitted. State 

statutes NCGS 143–215.3 ‘‘General 

powers of Commission and Department: 

auxiliary powers,’’ and NCGS 143– 

215.107(a)(1) ‘‘Air quality standards and 

classifications’’ provide NCDAQ with 

the statutory authority ‘‘[t]o prepare and 

develop, after proper study, a 

comprehensive plan or plans for the 

prevention, abatement and control of air 

pollution in the State or in any 

designated area of the State.’’ As further 

evidence of the adequacy of NCDAQ’s 

resources, EPA submitted a letter to 

North Carolina on February 28, 2014, 

outlining 105 grant commitments and 

the current status of these commitments 

for fiscal year 2013. The letter EPA 

submitted to North Carolina can be 

accessed at www.regulations.gov using 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2014– 

0444. Annually, states update these 

grant commitments based on current SIP 

requirements, air quality planning, and 

applicable requirements related to the 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
69088 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

NAAQS. North Carolina satisfactorily 

met all commitments agreed to in the 

Air Planning Agreement for fiscal year 

2013, therefore North Carolina’s grants 

were finalized and closed out. 

With respect to North Carolina’s 

infrastructure SIP submission related to 

the state board requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii), EPA is not proposing 

any action today regarding this 

requirement and will act on this portion 

of the submission in a separate action. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that North Carolina has 

adequate resources for implementation 

of sections 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii) of the 

2008 Lead NAAQS. 

7. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary source 

monitoring and reporting: North 

Carolina’s infrastructure SIP submission 

describes how the State establishes 

requirements for emissions compliance 

testing and utilizes emissions sampling 

and analysis. It further describes how 

the State ensures the quality of its data 

through observing emissions and 

monitoring operations. NCDAQ uses 

these data to track progress towards 

maintaining the NAAQS, develop 

control and maintenance strategies, 

identify sources and general emission 

levels, and determine compliance with 

emission regulations and additional 

EPA requirements. These requirements 

are incorporated into the SIP at 15A 

NCAC 2D .0604 ‘‘Exceptions to 

Monitoring and Reporting 

Requirements;’’ 15A NCAC 2D .0605 

‘‘General Recordkeeping and Reporting 

Requirements;’’ 15A NCAC 2D .0611 

‘‘Monitoring Emissions from Other 

Sources;’’ 15A NCAC 2D .0612 

‘‘Alternative Monitoring and Reporting 

Procedures;’’ 15A NCAC 2D .0613 

‘‘Quality Assurance Program;’’ and, 15A 

NCAC 2D .0614 ‘‘Compliance Assurance 

Monitoring.’’ In addition, Rule 15A 

NCAC 2D .0605(c) ‘‘General 

Recordkeeping and Reporting 

Requirements,’’ allows for the use of 

credible evidence in the event that the 

NCDAQ Director has evidence that a 

source is violating an emission standard 

or permit condition, the Director may 

require that the owner or operator of any 

source submit to the Director any 

information necessary to determine the 

compliance status of the source. In 

addition, EPA is unaware of any 

provision preventing the use of credible 

evidence in the North Carolina SIP. 

Stationary sources are required to 

submit periodic emissions reports to the 

State by Rule 15A NCAC 2Q .0207 

‘‘Annual Emissions Reporting.’’ In 

addition, North Carolina is required to 

submit emissions data to EPA for 

purposes of the National Emissions 

Inventory (NEI). The NEI is EPA’s 

central repository for air emissions data. 

EPA published the Air Emissions 

Reporting Rule (AERR) on December 5, 

2008, which modified the requirements 

for collecting and reporting air 

emissions data. See 73 FR 76539. The 

AERR shortened the time states had to 

report emissions data from 17 to 12 

months, giving states one calendar year 

to submit emissions data. All states are 

required to submit a comprehensive 

emissions inventory every three years 

and report emissions for certain larger 

sources annually through EPA’s online 

Emissions Inventory System. States 

report emissions data for the six criteria 

pollutants and the precursors that form 

them—NOX, sulfur dioxide, ammonia, 

lead, carbon monoxide, particulate 

matter, and volatile organic compounds. 

Many states also voluntarily report 

emissions of hazardous air pollutants. 

North Carolina made its latest update to 

the 2011 NEI on June 3, 2014. EPA 

compiles the emissions data, 

supplementing it where necessary, and 

releases it to the general public through 

the Web site http://www.epa.gov/ttn/

chief/eiinformation.html. EPA has made 

the preliminary determination that 

North Carolina’s SIP and practices are 

adequate for the stationary source 

monitoring systems obligations for the 

2008 Lead NAAQS. 

7. 110(a)(2)(G)—Emergency episodes: 

This section requires that states 

demonstrate authority comparable with 

section 303 of the CAA and adequate 

contingency plans to implement such 

authority. North Carolina’s 

infrastructure SIP submission cites 15A 

NCAC 2D .0300 ‘‘Air Pollution 

Emergencies’’ as identifying air 

pollution emergency episodes and 

preplanned abatement strategies, and 

providing the means to implement 

emergency air pollution episode 

measures. In addition, NCGS 143– 

215.3(a)(12) provides NC DENR with the 

authority to declare an emergency when 

it finds that a generalized condition of 

water or air pollution which is causing 

imminent danger to the health or safety 

of the public. This statute also allows, 

in the absence of a generalized 

condition of air pollution, should the 

Secretary find ‘‘that the emissions from 

one or more air contaminant sources 

. . . is causing imminent danger to 

human health and safety or to fish and 

wildlife, he may with the concurrence 

of the Governor order the person or 

persons responsible for the operation or 

operations in question to immediately 

reduce or discontinue the emissions of 

air contaminants . . . or to take such 

other measures as are, in his judgment, 

necessary.’’ EPA also notes that NCDAQ 

maintains a Web site that provides the 

public with notice of the health hazards 

associated with Lead NAAQS 

exceedances, measures the public can 

take to help prevent such exceedances, 

and the ways in which the public can 

participate in the regulatory process. 

See http://www.ncair.org/news/. EPA 

has made the preliminary determination 

that North Carolina’s SIP and practices 

are adequate to satisfy the emergency 

powers obligations of the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS. 

8. 110(a)(2)(H) Future SIP revisions: 

NCDAQ is responsible for adopting air 

quality rules and revising SIPs as 

needed to attain or maintain the 

NAAQS in North Carolina. Statutes 

NCGS 143–215.107(a)(1) and (a)(10) 

grant NCDAQ the broad authority to 

implement the CAA, and as such, 

provides NCDAQ the authority to 

prepare and develop, after proper study, 

a comprehensive plan for the prevention 

of air pollution. These statutes also 

provide NCDAQ the ability and 

authority to respond to calls for SIP 

revisions, and has provided a number of 

SIP revisions over the years for 

implementation of the NAAQS. 

Accordingly, EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that North 

Carolina’s SIP and practices adequately 

demonstrate a commitment to provide 

future SIP revisions related to the 2008 

Lead NAAQS, when necessary. 

9. 110(a)(2)(J): EPA is proposing to 

approve North Carolina’s infrastructure 

SIP for the 2008 Lead NAAQS with 

respect to the general requirement in 

section 110(a)(2)(J) to include a program 

in the SIP that provides for meeting the 

applicable consultation requirements of 

section 121, the public notification 

requirements of section 127, and 

visibility protection. With respect to 

North Carolina’s infrastructure SIP 

submission related to the 

preconstruction PSD permitting 

requirements, EPA is not proposing any 

action today regarding these 

requirements and instead will act on 

these portions of the submission in a 

separate action. EPA’s rationale for 

applicable consultation requirements of 

section 121, the public notification 

requirements of section 127, and 

visibility is described below. 

110(a)(2)(J)(121 consultation) 

Consultation with government officials: 

15A NCAC 2D.1600 ‘‘General 

Conformity;’’ 15A NCAC 2D .2000 

‘‘Transportation Conformity;’’ and15A 

NCAC 2D .0531 ‘‘Sources in 

Nonattainment Areas,’’ along with the 

Regional Haze SIP Plan (which allows 

for consultation between appropriate 

state, local, and tribal air pollution 

control agencies as well as the 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Proposed Rules 69089 

corresponding Federal Land Managers), 

provide for consultation with 

government officials whose jurisdictions 

might be affected by SIP development 

activities. These consultation 

procedures were developed in 

coordination with the transportation 

partners in the State and are consistent 

with the approaches used for 

development of mobile inventories for 

SIPs. Implementation of transportation 

conformity as outlined in the 

consultation procedures requires 

NCDAQ to consult with federal, state 

and local transportation and air quality 

agency officials on the development of 

motor vehicle emissions budgets. EPA 

has made the preliminary determination 

that North Carolina’s SIP and practices 

adequately demonstrate that the State 

meets applicable requirements related to 

consultation with government officials 

for the 2008 Lead NAAQS when 

necessary. 

110(a)(2)(J) (127 public notification) 

Public notification: 15A NCAC 2D .0300 

‘‘Air Pollution Emergencies’’ provides 

North Carolina with the authority to 

declare an emergency and notify the 

public accordingly when it finds that a 

generalized condition of water or air 

pollution which is causing imminent 

danger to the health or safety of the 

public. In addition, the North Carolina 

SIP process affords the public an 

opportunity to participate in regulatory 

and other efforts to improve air quality 

by holding public hearings for 

interested persons to appear and submit 

written or oral comments. For example, 

15A NCAC 2D .0530 ‘‘Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration,’’ requires the 

owners and operators of major 

stationary sources and major 

modifications to apply for and receive, 

as appropriate, a permit as described in 

15A NCAC 02Q .0300. 15A NCAC 02Q. 

306 provides for public notice for 

comments with an opportunity to 

request a public hearing on the draft 

permits required pursuant to 15A NCAC 

2D. 0530. EPA also notes that NCDAQ 

maintains a Web site that provides the 

public with notice of the health hazards 

associated with Lead NAAQS 

exceedances, measures the public can 

take to help prevent such exceedances, 

and the ways in which the public can 

participate in the regulatory process. 

See http://www.ncair.org/news/. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that North Carolina’s SIP 

and practices adequately demonstrate 

the State’s ability to provide public 

notification related to the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS when necessary. 

110(a)(2)(J) PSD and Visibility 

Protection: The 2011 Lead Infrastructure 

SIP Guidance notes that EPA does not 

generally treat the visibility protection 

aspects of section 110(a)(2)(J) as 

applicable for purposes of the 

infrastructure SIP approval process. 

EPA recognizes that states are subject to 

visibility protection and regional haze 

program requirements under Part C of 

the Act (which includes sections 169A 

and 169B). However, in the event of the 

establishment of a new primary 

NAAQS, the visibility protection and 

regional haze program requirements 

under part C do not change. Thus, EPA 

concludes there are no new applicable 

visibility protection obligations under 

section 110(a)(2)(J) as a result of the 

2008 Lead NAAQS, and as such, EPA is 

proposing to approve section 110(a)(2)(J) 

of NC DENR’s infrastructure SIP 

submission as it relates to visibility 

protection. 

10. 110(a)(2)(K) Air quality and 

modeling/data: 15A NCAC 2D .0530 

‘‘Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration’’ and 15A NCAC 2D .0531 

‘‘Sources in Nonattainment Areas,’’ 

require that air modeling be conducted 

in accordance with 40 CFR part 51, 

Appendix W ‘‘Guideline on Air Quality 

Models.’’ These regulations demonstrate 

that North Carolina has the authority to 

perform air quality modeling and to 

provide relevant data for the purpose of 

predicting the effect on ambient air 

quality of the 2008 Lead NAAQS. 

Additionally, North Carolina supports a 

regional effort to coordinate the 

development of emissions inventories 

and conduct regional modeling for 

several NAAQS, including the 2008 

Lead NAAQS, for the Southeastern 

states. Taken as a whole, North 

Carolina’s air quality regulations 

demonstrate that NCDAQ has the 

authority to provide relevant data for 

the purpose of predicting the effect on 

ambient air quality of the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS. EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that North Carolina’s SIP 

and practices adequately demonstrate 

the State’s ability to provide for air 

quality and modeling, along with 

analysis of the associated data, related 

to the 2008 Lead NAAQS when 

necessary. 

11. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting fees: This 

element necessitates that the SIP require 

the owner or operator of each major 

stationary source to pay to the 

permitting authority, as a condition of 

any permit required under the CAA, a 

fee sufficient to cover (i) the reasonable 

costs of reviewing and acting upon any 

application for such a permit, and (ii) if 

the owner or operator receives a permit 

for such source, the reasonable costs of 

implementing and enforcing the terms 

and conditions of any such permit (not 

including any court costs or other costs 

associated with any enforcement 

action), until such fee requirement is 

superseded with respect to such sources 

by the Administrator’s approval of a fee 

program under title V. 

To satisfy these requirements, North 

Carolina’s infrastructure SIP submission 

cites NCGS 143–215.3 ‘‘General powers 

of Commission and Department; 

auxiliary Powers,’’ which directs 

NCDAQ to require a processing fee in an 

amount sufficient for the reasonable cost 

of reviewing and acting upon PSD and 

NNSR permits. Regulation 15A NCAC 

2Q .0200 ‘‘Permit Fees,’’ implements 

this directive and requires the owner or 

operator of each major stationary source 

to pay to the permitting authority, as a 

condition of any permit required under 

the CAA, a sufficient fee to cover the 

costs of the permitting program. 

Additionally, North Carolina has a fully 

approved title V operating permit 

program at that covers the cost of 

implementation and enforcement of 

PSD and NNSR permits after they have 

been issued. EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that North 

Carolina’s practices adequately provide 

for permitting fees related to the 2008 

Lead NAAQS, when necessary. 

12. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation/

participation by affected local entities: 

This element requires states to provide 

for consultation and participation in SIP 

development by local political 

subdivisions affected by the SIP. North 

Carolina 15A NCAC 2D .0530 

‘‘Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration,’’ and NCGS 150B–21.1 

and –21.2 authorize and require NCDAQ 

to advise, consult, cooperate and enter 

into agreements with other agencies of 

the state, the Federal Government, other 

states, interstate agencies, groups, 

political subdivisions, and industries 

affected by the provisions of this act, 

rules, or policies of the Department. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that North Carolina’s SIP 

and practices adequately demonstrate 

consultation with affected local entities 

related to the 2008 Lead NAAQS, when 

necessary. 

V. Proposed Action 

With the exception of the PSD 

permitting requirements for major 

sources of sections 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 

of (D)(i), and (J), and the state board 

requirements of section 110(a)(E)(ii), 

EPA is proposing to approve that 

NCDAQ’s infrastructure SIP submission, 

submitted June 20, 2012, for the 2008 

Lead NAAQS meets the above described 

infrastructure SIP requirements. EPA is 

proposing to approve these portions of 

North Carolina’s infrastructure SIP 

submission for the Lead NAAQS 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
69090 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 224 / Thursday, November 20, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

because these aspects of the submission 

are consistent with section 110 of the 

CAA. EPA will address those portions of 

North Carolina’s infrastructure SIP 

submission not acted upon through this 

notice in a separate action. 

VI. 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. Accordingly, this proposed 

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 proposed 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, the North Carolina SIP is 

not approved to apply on any Indian 

reservation land or in any other area 

where EPA or an Indian tribe has 

demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), nor will it impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Lead, and Recordkeeping 

requirements. 

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

Dated: November 7, 2014. 

V. Anne Heard, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27504 Filed 11–19–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0772; FRL–9919–09– 

Region 4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; North Carolina; 

Inspection and Maintenance Program 

Updates 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

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 on January 31, 

2008, May 24, 2010, October 11, 2013, 

and February 11, 2014, pertaining to 

rules for changes for the North Carolina 

Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) 

program. Specifically, these SIP 

revisions update the North Carolina I/M 

program as well as repeal one rule from 

the federally-approved SIP. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before December 22, 

2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2013–0772, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4–RDS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2013– 

0772,’’ Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, 

Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, 

Georgia 30303–8960. Such deliveries are 

only accepted during the Regional 

Office’s normal hours of operation. The 

Regional Office’s official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2013– 

0772. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information whose disclosure is 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS