5088 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

1The Kansas rule allows an additional one psi for 

gasoline containing 9 to 10% ethanol. 

2The CAA allows an additional one psi for 

gasoline containing up to 15% ethanol. 

3The 1-hour ozone NAAQS was originally 

promulgated as a photochemical oxidant standard. 

See 36 FR 8186 (April 30, 1971). In 1979, the EPA 

substituted the word ‘‘ozone’’ for ‘‘photochemical 

oxidant’’. See 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). In 

doing so, the EPA stated that ‘‘(t)he intent of the 

standard (total-oxidant reduction), the control 

strategies, and the index of progress toward 

attainment (measured ozone levels) remain 

unchanged.’’ Id. at 8203. 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where the 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 and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: November 23, 2020. 

John Busterud, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2021–00358 Filed 1–15–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R07–OAR–2020–0711; FRL–10019– 

24–Region 7] 

Air Plan Approval; Kansas; Removal of 

Kansas City, Kansas Reid Vapor 

Pressure Fuel Requirement 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of 

revision to the Kansas State 

Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted 

by the Kansas Department of Health and 

the Environment (KDHE) on December 

9, 2020. The proposed revision removes 

the Kansas City, Kansas seven pounds 

per square inch Reid Vapor Pressure 

(RVP) Fuel requirement which required 

gasoline sold in the Kansas City, Kansas 

area to have a seven pounds per square 

inch Reid Vapor Pressure from June 1 to 

September 15. The rest of the state is 

subject to the Clean Air Act (CAA) nine 

pounds per square inch Reid Vapor 

Pressure from June 1 to September 15. 

If approved the Kansas City, Kansas area 

would be subject to the Clean Air Act 

Reid Vapor Pressure Fuel requirement. 

In addition, EPA anticipates issuing a 

separate proposal for the Missouri side 

of the Kansas City metro area. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 18, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– 

OAR–2020–0711 to https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the Docket ID No. for this 

rulemaking. Comments received will be 

posted without change to https://

www.regulations.gov/, including any 

personal information provided. For 

detailed instructions on sending 

comments and additional information 

on the rulemaking process, see the 

‘‘Written Comments’’ heading of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jed 

Wolkins, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 7 Office, Air Quality 

Planning Branch, 11201 Renner 

Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219; 

telephone number: (913) 551–7588; 

email address: wolkins.jed@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

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

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Written Comments 

II. What is being addressed in this document? 

III. Have the requirements for approval of a 

SIP revision been met? 

IV. Background 

V. What is the EPA’s analysis of Kansas’ SIP 

request? 

VI. What action is the EPA taking? 

VII. Incorporation by Reference 

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Written Comments 

Submit your comments, identified by 

Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2020– 

0711, at https://www.regulations.gov. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

The EPA may publish any comment 

received to its public docket. Do not 

submit electronically any information 

you consider to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

II. What is being addressed in this 

document? 

The EPA is proposing to approve a 

revision to the Kansas SIP, submitted by 

the KDHE on December 9, 2020. The 

proposed revision removes the Kansas 

City, Kansas; Johnson and Wyandotte 

Counties; 7.0 Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) 

Fuel requirement. The approved SIP, 

K.A.R. 28–19–719, requires gasoline 

sold in the two counties to have a RVP 

of seven pounds per square inch (psi) or 

less from June 1 through September 15.1

If the SIP revision is approved, the 

Kansas City, Kansas area would be 

subject to the CAA RVP requirement of 

nine psi or less from June 1 through 

September 15.2 Kansas has asked EPA to 

remove K.A.R. 28–19–719 Fuel 

Volatility from the SIP. 

III. Have the requirements for approval 

of a SIP revision been met? 

The State submission has met the 

public notice requirements for SIP 

submissions in accordance with 40 CFR 

51.102. The submission also satisfied 

the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 

51, appendix V. The State provided 

public notice on this SIP revision from 

August 27, 2020 to November 4, 2020 

and received eight comments. Kansas 

adequately responded to all eight 

comments, as noted in the State 

submission included in the docket for 

this action, but did not make any 

changes to the removal based on the 

comments received. 

In addition, as explained below, the 

revision meets the substantive SIP 

requirements of the CAA, including 

section 110 and implementing 

regulations. 

IV. Background 

The EPA established a 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS in 1971.3 36 FR 8186 (April 30, 

1971). On March 3, 1978, the EPA 

designated Johnson and Wyandotte 

counties (hereinafter referred to in this 

document as the ‘‘Kanas City area’’) in 

nonattainment of the 1971 1-hour ozone 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 5089 

4The Kansas rule allowed an additional one psi 

for gasoline containing 9 to 10% ethanol. See 62 FR 

36212 (July 7, 1997). 

5The Kansas rule allows an additional one psi for 

gasoline containing 9 to 10% ethanol. See 67 FR 

6655 (February 13, 2002). 

6As vehicle owners purchase new vehicles, the 

older vehicles slowly are removed from the vehicles 

on the road. A used vehicle maybe purchased and 

driven by several owners, but eventually the older, 

more polluting vehicles are removed from the road. 

Manufacturers’ fleets in 1994 are allowed 0.6 gram/ 

mile NOX emissions. Manufacturers’ fleets in 2004 

are allowed 0.07 gram/mile NoX emissions. 

Manufacturers’ fleets in 2025 will be allowed 0.03 

gram/mile NOX emissions. 

7Control of Air Pollution From Motor Vehicles: 

Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards 

(See 79 FR 23414, April 28, 2014.) 

NAAQS, as required by the CAA 

Amendments of 1977. 43 FR 8996 

(March 3, 1978). On February 8, 1979, 

the EPA revised the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS, referred to as the 1979 ozone 

NAAQS. 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). 

The EPA redesignated the Kansas City 

area to attainment of the 1979 1-hour 

ozone standard and approved the ozone 

maintenance plan on July 23, 1992. 57 

FR 27936 (June 23, 1992). Pursuant to 

section 175A of the CAA, the first 10- 

year maintenance period for the 1-hour 

ozone standard began on July 23, 1992, 

the effective date of the redesignation 

approval. 

In 1995, the Kansas City area violated 

the 1979 1-hour ozone standard. Kansas 

revised the control strategy and 

contingency measures in the 

maintenance plan, which was approved 

on December 30, 2002. 67 FR 66058 

(October 30, 2002). The revised control 

strategy included K.A.R. 28–19–719, 

Fuel Volatility. 

On May 2, 1997, Kansas adopted the 

seven and two tenths (7.2) pounds per 

square inch (psi) Reid Vapor Pressure 

(RVP) limit from June 1 to September 

15.4 EPA approved this rule into the SIP 

on July 7, 1997. 62 FR 36212 (July 7, 

1997). Following a violation of the 

ozone standard for the three-year period 

of 1995–1997, on April 3, 2001, Kansas 

revised the rule to seven (7.0) psi limit 

from June 1 to September 15.5 EPA 

approved this rule into the SIP on 

February 13, 2002. 67 FR 6655 

(February 13, 2002. 

On April 30, 2004, the EPA published 

a final rule in the Federal Register 

stating the 1979 ozone NAAQS would 

no longer apply (i.e., would be revoked) 

for an area one year after the effective 

date of the area’s designation for the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. 69 FR 23951 (April 

30, 2004). The Kansas City Area was 

designated as an unclassifiable area for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

effective June 15, 2004. See id. 

However, on May 3, 2005, EPA 

published a final rule designating the 

Kansas City area as an attainment area 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

based on new monitoring data. See 70 

FR 22801 (May 3, 2005). The effective 

date of the revocation of the 1979 1-hour 

ozone standard for the Kansas City area 

was June 15, 2005. See 70 FR 44470 

(August 3, 2005). Kansas achieved the 

required maintenance of the 1979 1- 

hour ozone standard in 2014. 

On, December 9, 2020, Kansas 

requested that the EPA remove K.A.R. 

28–19–719 from the SIP. Section 110(l) 

of the CAA prohibits EPA from 

approving a SIP revision that interferes 

with any applicable requirement 

concerning attainment and reasonable 

further progress (RFP), or any other 

applicable requirement of the CAA. 

V. What is the EPA’s analysis of 

Kansas’ SIP request 

EPA is making the preliminary 

determination that the ozone NAAQS is 

the primary focus for the 

noninterference demonstration required 

by section 110(l) of the CAA because the 

RVP requirements results primarily in 

emissions benefits for VOCs and NOX. 

VOCs and NOX emissions are precursors 

for ozone. NOX emissions are precursors 

for particulate matter. NO2 is a 

component of NOX. There are no 

emissions reductions attributable to the 

emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), 

lead and sulfur dioxide (SO2) from RVP 

requirements. 

In Kansas’ December 9, 2020 

submission the State provided a 

technical demonstration to support the 

request to remove Kansas’ 7.0 psi RVP 

requirement from the active measures 

portions of the Kansas SIP. In that 

technical demonstration, Kansas 

provided Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Simulator (MOVES) results, modeling 

the emissions of VOCs and NOX

associated with changing the high ozone 

season RVP requirements from the statelevel requirement of 7.0 psi to the 

federal requirement of 9.0 psi. EPA 

evaluated the state’s assumptions and 

inputs used in MOVES, and EPA finds 

the state analysis is appropriate. 

Specifically, KDHE compared what the 

projected emissions in the year 2020 

(the year the program is requested to be 

rescinded) would be, assuming a RVP 

level of 7.0 psi and 9.0 psi, respectively, 

in two separate modeling simulations. 

The comparison revealed an increase in 

emissions of 0.07 tons for NOX and 0.37 

tons for VOC, per ozone season day, 

would result from the change to the 

federal requirement from June 1 through 

September 15. While the modeling 

showed a slight increase in NOX and 

VOC emissions resulting from the use of 

9.0 psi RVP as opposed to 7.0 psi, the 

most appropriate analysis is whether 

emissions in the future years would 

increase and potentially interfere with 

maintenance of the NAAQS. The State 

compared actual emissions from 2017 

using a RVP of 7.0 psi to emissions 

modelled for the years 2020 using a RVP 

of 9.0 psi. Table 1 below provides the 

results of this analysis. 

TABLE 1—COMPARATIVE EMISSIONS FOR CHANGE TO RVP 

2017 7.0 psi RVP 

(tons per ozone 

season day) 

2020 7.0 psi RVP 

(tons per ozone 

season day) 

2020 9.0 psi RVP 

(tons per ozone 

season day) 

Decrease in 2020 

9.0 psi RVP 

compared to 

2017 7.0 psi RVP 

(tons per ozone 

season day) 

NOX .......................................................................................... 29.42 22.42 22.49 6.93 

VOC ......................................................................................... 19.26 16.88 17.25 2.01 

As Table 1 indicates, NOX and VOC 

emissions in the Kansas City Area 

would decrease from 2017 to 2020, even 

with the increase due to ozone season 

fuel RVP of 9.0 psi. The modeling 

demonstration shows the slight increase 

in emissions is being mitigated areawide by a steady decrease in tailpipe 

emissions. This is the result of a cleaner 

new vehicle fleet replacing the older 

fleet 6 and the decrease in the sulfur 

content in gasoline as required by EPA’s 

Tier 3 motor vehicle emission and fuel 

standards, which were implemented 

beginning on January 1, 2017.7


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
5090 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

8Based on the most recent quality assured data 

design values (2017–2019). The monitor in question 

is on the Missouri side of the Kansas City. The 

highest 4th high value on the Kansas side of Kansas 

City was 62 ppb. 

The Kansas City, Kansas area is 

designated attainment/unclassifiable or 

attainment for the 1979, 1997, 2008, and 

2015 ozone standards. While the 1979 

maintenance plan is approved into the 

SIP, the 1979 NAAQS has been revoked 

for the Kansas City area. There are no 

other ozone maintenance plans for the 

Kansas City area in the SIP. The highest 

monitor design value in the Kansas City 

area is 68 parts per billion (ppb), which 

is below the 2015 ozone NAAQS of 70 

ppb.8 Based on the state’s modeling 

analysis, along with air quality data, 

EPA is making the preliminary 

determination that the slight increase in 

NOX and VOC emissions resulting from 

the use of 9.0 psi RVP fuel will not 

interfere with the Kansas City area’s 

ability to maintain the ozone NAAQS, 

or any other applicable requirement. 

The EPA is making this determination 

based on MOVES modeling that 

indicates that on-road VOC and NOX

emissions in 2020 with gasoline meeting 

the 9.0 psi RVP requirement remain 

below the emissions levels in 2017, a 

year in which the area’s design value 

was also below the 2015 ozone standard 

of 70 ppb. 

The Kansas City area is designated as 

attainment or unclassifiable for the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5, 2012 annual PM2.5, 1971 

annual NO2, and 2010 1-hour NO2

standards. There are no maintenance 

plans for any of these standards. The 

highest PM2.5 design value is 79% of the 

standard. The highest NO2 design value 

is 42% of the standard. As discussed 

above the area has a decrease from 2017 

to 2020 NOX and VOC emissions. Based 

on this data together with air quality 

data, EPA is making the preliminary 

determination that the slight increase in 

NOX and VOC emissions in 2020 and 

the downward trend in on-road VOC 

and NOX emissions resulting from this 

change will not interfere with the Area’s 

ability to maintain the any PM2.5 or NO2

NAAQS, or any other applicable 

requirement. 

The Kansas City area is designated as 

attainment or unclassifiable for the SO2

standards. There are no maintenance 

plans for any of these standards. The 

most recent (2017–2019) highest SO2

design value is less than 8% of the 

standard. The RVP standard has no 

effect on SO2 emissions. Based on this 

data together with air quality data, EPA 

is making the preliminary determination 

that the change will not interfere with 

the Area’s ability to attain or maintain 

the SO2 NAAQS, or any other applicable 

requirement. 

The Kansas City area is designated as 

attainment or unclassifiable for the CO 

and lead standards. There are no 

maintenance plans for any of these 

standards. The highest CO design value 

is less than 18% of the standard. There 

is no lead monitoring in the area. The 

RVP standard has no effect on CO or 

lead emissions. Based on this data 

together with air quality data, EPA is 

making the preliminary determination 

that the change will not interfere with 

the area’s ability to maintain the CO or 

lead NAAQS, or any other applicable 

requirement. 

Kansas has no federal Class I areas. 

EPA is making the preliminary 

determination that the small emission 

increase will not interfere with 

reasonable progress towards natural 

visibility in surrounding states Class I 

areas that Kansas might impact due to 

the small magnitude of emissions 

increase. 

VI. What action is the EPA taking? 

We are proposing to approve Kansas’ 

removal of the state RVP requirement 

from the SIP for the Kansas City, Kansas 

area. As discussed above the removal of 

the RVP requirement will not affect the 

area’s ability to attain or maintain any 

air quality standard. We are processing 

this as a proposed action because we are 

soliciting comments on this proposed 

action. Final rulemaking will occur after 

consideration of any comments. 

VII. Incorporation by Reference 

In this document, the EPA is 

proposing to amend regulatory text that 

includes incorporation by reference. As 

described in the proposed amendments 

to 40 CFR part 52 set forth below, the 

EPA is proposing to remove provisions 

of the EPA-Approved Kansas 

Regulations from the Kansas State 

Implementation Plan, which is 

incorporated by reference in accordance 

with the requirements of 1 CFR part 51. 

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act (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, the EPA’s role is to 

approve state choices, provided that 

they meet the criteria of the CAA. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 

FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory 

action because SIP approvals are 

exempted under Executive Order 12866. 

• 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 the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTA) because this 

rulemaking does not involve technical 

standards; 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). 

The 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 and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 11 / Tuesday, January 19, 2021 / Proposed Rules 5091 

1 DAQ supplemented the September 18, 2009, 

submittal in a letter dated June 7, 2019, which 

includes the correct redline/strikeout of the 

regulatory changes and final regulations that 

became state effective on January 1, 2009. This 

letter is available in the docket for this proposed 

rulemaking. 

2The State submitted the revisions following the 

readoption of several air regulations. These include: 

.0801, .0802, .0803, .0804, .0805, .0806, .0807, 

.0809, .0901, and .0902, and were submitted 

pursuant to North Carolina’s 10-year regulatory 

readoption process at North Carolina General 

Statute 150B–21.3A. 

3 In the table of North Carolina regulations 

federally approved into the SIP at 40 CFR 

52.1770(c), 15A NCAC 02Q is referred to as 

‘‘Subchapter 2Q Air Quality Permits.’’ 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: December 21, 2020. 

James Gulliford, 

Regional Administrator, Region 7. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the EPA proposes to amend 

40 CFR part 52 as set forth below: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart R—Kansas 

§ 52.870 [Amended] 

■ 2. In § 52.870, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by removing the entry 

‘‘K.A.R. 28–19–719’’ under the heading 

‘‘Volatile Organic Compound 

Emissions’’. 

■ 3. In § 52.873, paragraph (a) is revised 

to read as follows: 

§ 52.873 Approval status. 

(a) Kansas rule K.A.R. 28–19–719 was 

rescinded on February 18, 2021. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2021–00179 Filed 1–15–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2020–0187; FRL–10016– 

71–Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; North Carolina; 

Revisions to Exclusionary Rules and 

Permit Exemptions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

portions of revisions to a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the State of North Carolina through the 

North Carolina Department of 

Environmental Quality, Division of Air 

Quality (DAQ), on September 18, 2009, 

and July 10, 2019. These SIP revisions 

seek to modify the State’s rules that 

define the categories of facilities that are 

exempted from Title V permitting 

requirements by limiting their potential 

emissions (‘‘exclusionary rules’’) and 

the categories of facilities that are 

exempted from the State’s rules that 

address the permitting requirements for 

non-Title V facilities (‘‘permit 

exemption rules’’). EPA is proposing to 

approve this revision pursuant to the 

Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 18, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2020–0187 at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

EPA may publish any comment received 

to its public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. EPA will generally 

not consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Pearlene Williams, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air and 

Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 

Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

Ms. Williams can be reached via 

telephone at (404) 562–9144, or via 

electronic mail at williams.pearlene@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

A. Submittal—September 18, 2009 

On September 18, 2009, DAQ 

submitted revisions to 15A North 

Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 

Subchapter 02Q, Section .0902, 

Temporary Crushers,1 for review and 

approval into the SIP. These changes are 

part of North Carolina’s permit 

exemption rules at Section .0900 that 

define the categories of facilities that are 

exempted from the State’s regulations 

that address the permitting 

requirements for non-Title V facilities. 

These changes are discussed in more 

detail in Section II. 

B. Submittal—July 10, 2019 

On July 10, 2019, DAQ submitted SIP 

revisions to EPA with changes to the 

following rules in 15A NCAC 02Q 

Section .0800 that define the categories 

of facilities that are exempted from Title 

V permitting requirements by limiting 

their potential emissions: Section .0801, 

Purpose and Scope; Section .0802, 

Gasoline Service Stations and 

Dispensing Facilities; Section .0803, 

Coating, Solvent Cleaning, Graphic Arts 

Operations; Section .0804, Dry Cleaning 

Facilities; Section .0805, Grain 

Elevators; Section .0806, Cotton Gins; 

and Section .0807, Emergency 

Generators; and Section .0809, Concrete 

Batch Plants.2 The July 10, 2019, SIP 

revisions also contain changes to the 

following permit exemption rules: 

Section .0901, Purpose and Scope; and 

Section .0902, Temporary Crushers. 

These changes are discussed in more 

detail in Section II. 

II. Analysis of the State Submittals 

The revisions that are the subject of 

this proposed rulemaking make changes 

to exclusionary rules and permit 

exemption rules under Subchapter 2Q 3

of the North Carolina SIP. These 

changes revise the recordkeeping and 

reporting requirements of the 

exclusionary rules; remove Section 

.0809, Concrete Batch Plants; revise the 

provisions of Section .0902, Temporary 

Crushers; and revise language and 

reformat the regulatory citations 

contained in the exclusionary and 

permit exemption rules. Detailed 

descriptions of the changes are provided 

below. 

Section .0801, Purpose and Scope, is 

revised to modify language and reformat 

the regulatory citations of this section. 

In addition, the recordkeeping and 

reporting requirement exemptions are 

removed. New paragraphs have been 

created using the existing text of this 

section. The language changes in this 

section pertain to updates to subjectverb agreements and word tense. EPA is 

proposing to approve these changes to 

these rules because they are 

grammatical and organizational in 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS