Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 110 / Friday, June 7, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34303 

River between Davis Camp and Rotary 

Park in Bullhead City, AZ. 

(b) Enforcement Period. This section 

will be enforced from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. 

on August 10, 2013. Before the effective 

period, the Coast Guard will publish a 

Local Notice to Mariners (LNM). If the 

event concludes prior to the scheduled 

termination time, the Captain of the Port 

will cease enforcement of this safety 

zone and will announce that fact via 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners. 

(c) Definitions. The following 

definition applies to this section: 

designated representative, means any 

commissioned, warrant, or petty officer 

of the Coast Guard on board Coast 

Guard, Coast Guard Auxiliary, and 

local, state, and federal law enforcement 

vessels who have been authorized to act 

on the behalf of the Captain of the Port. 

(d) Regulations. (1) Entry into, transit 

through or anchoring within this safety 

zone is prohibited unless authorized by 

the Captain of the Port of San Diego or 

his designated representative. 

(2) Mariners can request permission to 

transit through the safety zone from the 

Patrol Commander. The Patrol 

Commander can be contacted on VHF– 

FM channels 16 and 23. 

(3) All persons and vessels shall 

comply with the instructions of the 

Coast Guard Captain of the Port or his 

designated representative. 

(4) Upon being hailed by U.S. Coast 

Guard patrol personnel by siren, radio, 

flashing light, or other means, the 

operator of a vessel shall proceed as 

directed. 

(5) The Coast Guard may be assisted 

by other federal, state, or local agencies. 

Dated: May 24, 2013. 

S.M. Mahoney, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the 

Port San Diego. 

[FR Doc. 2013–13519 Filed 6–6–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2009–0140; FRL–9820–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; North Carolina; 

Removal of Stage II Gasoline Vapor 

Recovery Program 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

changes to the North Carolina State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the State of North Carolina Department 

of Environment and Natural Resources 

(NC DENR), Division of Air Quality on 

September 18, 2009, for the purpose of 

removing Stage II vapor control 

requirements for new and upgraded 

gasoline dispensing facilities in the 

State. The September 18, 2009, SIP 

revision also addresses several nonStage II related rule changes. However, 

action on the other portions for the 

September 18, 2009, SIP revision is 

being addressed in a separate 

rulemaking action. EPA has 

preliminarily determined that North 

Carolina’s September 18, 2009, SIP 

revision regarding the Stage II vapor 

control requirements is approvable 

because it is consistent with the Clean 

Air Act (CAA or Act). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before July 8, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2009–0140, 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–2009– 

0140’’—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, 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 to 4:30, excluding federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2009– 

0140. 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 to 4:30, 

excluding federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kelly Sheckler, Air Quality Modeling 

and Transportation 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) 562–9222. 

Ms. Sheckler can be reached via 

electronic mail at 

sheckler.kelly@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
34304 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 110 / Friday, June 7, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1North Carolina’s SIP revision also make changes 

to Rule 15A NCAC 02Q.0102—Activities Exempted 

from permit requirements regarding New Source 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Analysis of State’s Submittal 

III. Proposed Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Review 

I. Background 

EPA, under the CAA Amendments of 

1990, designated (pursuant to section 

107(d)(1)) and classified certain 

counties in North Carolina, either in 

their entirety or portions thereof, as 

‘‘moderate’’ ozone nonattainment areas 

for the 1-hour ozone national ambient 

air quality standards (NAAQS). 

Specifically, the Charlotte-Gastonia 

Area (comprised of Gaston and 

Mecklenburg Counties); GreensboroWinston-Salem-High Point Area 

(comprised of Davidson, Davis (partial), 

Forsyth and Guilford Counties); and 

Raleigh-Durham Area (comprised of 

Durham, Granville (partial), and Wake 

Counties) were all designated as 

‘‘moderate’’ ozone nonattainment areas 

for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. The 

designations were based on the Areas’ 1- 

hour ozone design values for the 1987– 

1989 three-year period. The ‘‘moderate’’ 

classification triggered various statutory 

requirements for these Areas including 

included the Stage II vapor recovery 

requirements pursuant to section 

182(b)(3) of the CAA. 

Prior to the deadline for 

implementing the requirement of 

section 182(b)(3) of the CAA, the 

Charlotte-Gastonia, GreensboroWinston-Salem-High Point and the 

Raleigh-Durham Areas in North 

Carolina attained the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS. North Carolina had 

implemented all measures required at 

the time for moderate ozone 

nonattainment areas under the CAA, 

and with three years of data (1990– 

1992), demonstrated compliance with 

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Subsequently, NC DENR submitted to 

EPA a 1-hour ozone maintenance plan 

and request for redesignation for the 

three moderate nonattainment areas. As 

part of the associated maintenance 

plans, North Carolina provided 

contingency measures that included 

regulation 15A North Carolina 

Administrative Code (NCAC) 02D.0953 

(hereafter referred to as rule .0953), 

entitled Vapor Return Piping for Stage 

II Vapor Recovery, for all new or 

improved gasoline tanks. In addition, 

rule 15A–02D.0954, entitled Stage II 

Vapor Recovery (hereafter referred to as 

rule .0954), as part of the contingency 

measures that were also included in the 

1-hour ozone maintenance plans. These 

contingency measures were never 

activated as the Areas continued to 

attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA 

approved the redesignation requests and 

the maintenance plans for the CharlotteGastonia Area on July 5, 1995 (60 FR 

34859), Greensboro-Winston-SalemHigh Point Area on September 9, 1993 

(58 FR 47391), and the Raleigh-Durham 

Area on April 18, 1994 (59 FR 18300). 

II. Analysis of the State’s Submittal 

EPA’s primary consideration for 

determining the approvability of North 

Carolina’s request to remove Stage II 

vapor control requirements from the 

contingency measures in its SIP for the 

Charlotte-Gastonia, GreensboroWinston-Salem-High Point, and RaleighDurham Areas is whether these 

requested actions comply with section 

110(l) of the CAA. Below is EPA’s 

analysis of these considerations. 

a. Federal Requirements for Stage II 

States were required to adopt Stage II 

rules for all areas classified as 

‘‘moderate’’ or worse under section 

182(b)(3) of the CAA. However, section 

202(a)(6) of the CAA states that ‘‘the 

requirements of section 182(b)(3) 

(relating to Stage II gasoline vapor 

recovery) for areas classified under 

section 181 as moderate for ozone shall 

not apply after the promulgation of such 

[ORVR] standards.’’ ORVR regulations 

were promulgated by EPA on April 6, 

1994. See 59 FR 16262, and 40 CFR 

86.001 and .098. As a result, the CAA 

no longer requires moderate areas to 

impose Stage II controls under section 

182(b)(3), and such areas may seek SIP 

revisions to remove such requirements 

from their SIP, subject to section 110(l) 

of the Act. EPA’s policy memorandum 

related to ORVR, dated March 9, 1993, 

and June 23, 1993, provided further 

guidance on an allowance for removing 

Stage II requirements from certain areas. 

The policy memorandum dated March 

9, 1993, states ‘‘[w]hen onboard rules 

are promulgated, a State may withdraw 

its Stage II rules for moderate areas from 

the SIP (or from consideration as a SIP 

revisions) consistent with its obligation 

under sections 182(b)(3) and 202(a)(6), 

so long as withdrawal will not interfere 

with any other applicable requirements 

of the Act.’’ Because North Carolina 

included Stage II requirements as 

contingency measures in its 

maintenance plans and is now 

requesting to remove these 

requirements, this action is subject to 

section 110(l) of the CAA. 

Section 110(l) of the Act provides that 

EPA cannot approve a SIP revision if 

that revision interferes with any 

applicable requirement regarding 

attainment, reasonable further progress 

(RFP) or any requirement established in 

the CAA. EPA can, however, approve a 

SIP revision that removes or modifies 

control measures in the SIP once states 

make a ‘‘noninterference’’ 

demonstration that such a removal or 

modification will not interfere with 

attainment of the NAAQS, RFP or any 

other CAA requirement. As such, North 

Carolina must make a demonstration of 

noninterference in order to remove the 

Stage II requirements from its SIP in 

relation to the Charlotte-Gastonia, 

Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point, 

and Raleigh-Durham Areas. 

b. Current Air Quality Status for the 

Charlotte-Gastonia, GreensboroWinston-Salem-High Point, and RaleighDurham Areas 

All areas in the State are currently 

designated as attainment for the carbon 

monoxide and fine particulate matter 

NAAQS. Effective July 20, 2013, EPA 

designated the Greensboro-WinstonSalem-High Point and Raleigh-Durham 

Areas as attainment for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. The Charlotte-Gastonia 

Area was designated as nonattainment 

for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in 

association with other counties in the 

Region, including a portion of a county 

in South Carolina. The designations for 

the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS were 

effective July 20, 2012. See 77 FR 30088. 

c. Non-Interference Demonstration 

On September 18, 2009, NC DENR 

submitted a SIP revision requesting 

removal of the Stage II vapor recovery 

requirements for new and upgraded 

gasoline dispensing facilities from the 

North Carolina SIP. North Carolina’s 

September 18, 2009, SIP revision 

includes changes to rules .0953—Vapor 

Return Piping for Stage II Vapor 

Recovery and .0954—Stage II Vapor 

Recovery, which EPA approved into the 

North Carolina SIP as contingency 

measures in the 1-hour ozone 

maintenance plans in association with 

the redesignation of three North 

Carolina Areas: Charlotte-Gastonia Area 

(July 5, 1995); Greensboro-Winston 

Salem-High Point Area (September 9, 

1993); and Raleigh-Durham Area (April 

18, 1994). Specifically, NC DENR’s 

September 18, 2009, SIP revision 

proposes to repeal or remove from the 

SIP rules .0953 and .0954, which 

provide Stage II vapor control 

requirements for new and upgraded 

gasoline dispensing facilities. 

Additionally, the removal of rules 

.0953 and .0954 triggered subsequent 

amendments 1 of rules 15A NCAC 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 110 / Friday, June 7, 2013 / Proposed Rules 34305 

Performance Standards and Rule 15A NCAC 

02D.1110—National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants. EPA is not taking action 

in today’s action to approve these changes and 

these rules are not currently part of North Carolina’s 

federally-approved SIP. 

02D.0902(d)—Applicability (hereafter 

referred to as rule .0902(d)), 15A NCAC 

02D.0909—Compliance schedules for 

Sources in new nonattainment Areas 

(hereafter referred to as rule .0909), and 

15A NCAC 02D.0952—Petitions for 

Alterative Controls for RACT (hereafter 

referred to as rule .0952) in North 

Carolina’s SIP. NC DENR’s September 

18, 2009, SIP revision, changes rules 

.0902(d), .0909, and .0952. to remove 

subparagraphs referencing the repealed 

Stage II rules .0953 and .0954. 

EPA’s consideration to approve North 

Carolina’s removal of the Stage II 

requirements is contingent on the 

applicability of a section 110(l) 

noninterference demonstration. North 

Carolina never realized emission 

reductions in the Charlotte-Gastonia, 

Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point, 

and Raleigh-Durham Areas as a result of 

the Stage II requirements that the State 

included as a contingency measure in 

the SIP. Thus removing this requirement 

from the contingency measures will not 

impact emissions of volatile organic 

compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides 

in the aforementioned Areas. 

Additionally, since the time of EPA’s 

approval of these requirements in North 

Carolina’s SIP as contingency measures 

for the Charlotte-Gastonia, GreensboroWinston-Salem-High Point, and RaleighDurham Areas, EPA has made a 

determination that ORVR is in 

‘‘widespread use’’ nationwide. 

Specifically, on May 16, 2012, EPA 

made a determination that ORVR was in 

widespread use throughout the motor 

vehicle fleet for purposes of controlling 

motor vehicle refueling emissions. In 

that rulemaking, EPA estimated that 

approximately 70 percent of all vehicles 

would be equipped with on-board 

systems to capture these vapors by the 

end of 2012, thus rendering the use of 

Stage II vapor recovery systems 

redundant because, beyond that date, 

the refueling emissions of the motor 

vehicle fleet are controlled through 

widespread use of ORVR. 

EPA is proposing to approve North 

Carolina’s September 18, 2009, SIP 

revision to remove Stage II rules .0953 

and .0954 from the North Carolina SIP, 

and to amend rules .0902(d), .0909, and 

.0952, to reflect the removal of rules 

.0953 and .0954 in the State’s 

implementation plan because the 

Agency has preliminarily determined 

that this revision is consistent with 

section 110(l) of the CAA and will not 

interfere with the relevant requirements 

in the Charlotte-Gastonia, GreensboroWinston-Salem-High Point, and RaleighDurham Areas. 

EPA also considered this SIP revision 

in relation to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of 

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

prohibits facilities within the State from 

emitting any air pollutants in amounts 

which will contribute significantly to 

nonattainment in, or interfere with 

maintenance by, any other State with 

respect to any such national primary or 

secondary ambient air quality standards. 

The only CAA-regulated pollutant 

emitted by refueling vehicles is VOC, 

which is a precursor of ozone, and its 

emissions are mitigated by the use of 

vehicles equipped with ORVR. As 

previously mentioned, EPA has 

previously determined that ORVR is 

now in widespread use and accordingly 

EPA views removal of the Stage II 

requirements from North Carolina’s SIP 

as not contributing significantly to 

nonattainment in, or interfering with 

maintenance by, any other State with 

respect to a national primary or 

secondary ambient air quality standard. 

III. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve the SIP 

revision submitted by North Carolina for 

the purpose of removing Stage II vapor 

control requirements for new and 

upgraded gasoline dispensing facilities 

in the Charlotte-Gastonia, GreensboroWinston-Salem-High Point, and RaleighDurham Areas. Specifically, this action 

proposes to remove Stage II rules .0953 

and .0954 from the North Carolina SIP, 

and to amend at rules .0902(d), .0909, 

and .0952 to reflect the removal of rules 

.0953 and .0954 in the State’s 

implementation plan. EPA has 

preliminarily determined that North 

Carolina’s September 18, 2009, SIP 

revision related to the State’s Stage II 

rules is consistent with the CAA and 

EPA’s regulations and guidance. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this 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, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: May 28, 2013. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2013–13610 Filed 6–6–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1