62454 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 199 / Monday, October 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

Subpart D—Arizona 

■ 2. Section 52.120 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (c)(54)(i)(F) and 

(c)(151) to read as follows: 

§ 52.120 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(54) * * * 

(i) * * * 

* * * * * 

(F) Previously approved on September 

28, 1982, in paragraph (54)(i)(C), and 

now deleted without replacement: R9– 

3–219. 

* * * * * 

(151) The following plan revisions 

were submitted on August 15, 1994 by 

the Governor’s designee. 

(i) Incorporation by reference. 

(A) Arizona Department of 

Environmental Quality. 

(1) Rule R18–2–220, Air pollution 

emergency episodes, Department of 

Environmental Quality-Air Pollution 

Control, amended effective September 

26, 1990. 

(2) A letter from Eric C. Massey, 

Director, Air Quality, Arizona 

Department of Environmental Quality, 

to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional 

Administrator, US EPA, dated August 

30, 2012, certifying that the attached 

copy of a document titled ‘‘Procedures 

for Prevention of Emergency Episodes: 

1988 Edition’’ is a true and correct copy 

of the original and is an official 

publication of the Arizona Department 

of Environmental Quality. 

(3) ‘‘Procedures for Prevention of 

Emergency Episodes,’’ 1988 edition, 

Arizona Department of Environmental 

Quality. 

[FR Doc. 2012–25022 Filed 10–12–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2008–0177; FRL–9740–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Portion of York 

County, South Carolina Within 

Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, North 

Carolina-South Carolina 1997 8-Hour 

Ozone Nonattainment Area; 

Reasonable Further Progress Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final 

action to approve two state 

implementation plan (SIP) revisions, 

submitted by the South Carolina 

Department of Health and 

Environmental Control (SC DHEC), on 

August 31, 2007, and April 29, 2010, to 

address the reasonable further progress 

(RFP) plan requirements for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) for the portion of 

York County, South Carolina that is 

within the bi-state Charlotte-GastoniaRock Hill 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area. The CharlotteGastonia-Rock Hill, North CarolinaSouth Carolina 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area (hereafter referred to 

as the ‘‘bi-state Charlotte Area’’) is 

comprised of Cabarrus, Gaston, Lincoln, 

Mecklenburg, Rowan, Union and a 

portion of Iredell (Davidson and Coddle 

Creek Townships) Counties in North 

Carolina; and a portion of York County 

in South Carolina (hereafter referred to 

as ‘‘the York County Area’’). EPA is also 

providing the status of its adequacy 

determination for the motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (MVEB) for volatile 

organic compounds (VOC) that were 

included in South Carolina’s RFP plan. 

Further, EPA is approving these MVEB. 

These actions are being taken pursuant 

to section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act). EPA will take action on North 

Carolina’s RFP plan for its portion of the 

bi-state Charlotte Area, in a separate 

action. 

DATES: This direct final rule is effective 

December 14, 2012 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

comment by November 14, 2012. If EPA 

receives such comments, it will publish 

a timely withdrawal of the direct final 

rule in the Federal Register and inform 

the public that the rule will not take 

effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number, ‘‘EPA– 

R04–OAR–2008–0177,’’ 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–2008– 

0177,’’ 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: Ms. 

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 Number, ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR– 

2008–0177.’’ 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., 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 199 / Monday, October 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 62455 

1Originally, South Carolina submitted SIP 

revisions, including an attainment demonstration, 

on August 31, 2007, to address nonattainment 

requirements related to the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. Specifically, South Carolina submitted an 

attainment demonstration and associated RACM, a 

RFP plan, contingency measures, emissions 

statement, a 2002 base year emissions inventory 

and other planning SIP revisions related to 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 

York County Area. South Carolina withdrew the 

August 31, 2007, attainment demonstration portion 

of the SIP for the York County Area on December 

22, 2008. On April 29, 2010, South Carolina 

resubmitted the attainment demonstration SIP, and 

provided a supplement for the August 31, 2007, 

RFP plan for the York County Area. 

2South Carolina did not withdraw any elements 

related to reasonably available control technology 

Continued 

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: Ms. 

Sara Waterson of the Regulatory 

Development Section, in the 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) 562–9061. 

Ms. Sara Waterson can be reached via 

electronic mail at 

waterson.sara@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

II. What is the background for EPA’s action? 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the RFP plan 

for the York County Area? 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the 2008 VOC 

MVEB for the York County Area? 

V. What is the status of EPA’s adequacy 

determination for the 2008 VOC MVEB 

for the York County Area? 

VI. Final Action 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is approving revisions to the 

South Carolina SIP, submitted by the 

State of South Carolina through SC 

DHEC, on August 31, 2007, and April 

29, 2010, to meet RFP requirements of 

the CAA for the York County Area for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The 

RFP plan demonstrates that VOC 

emissions will be reduced by at least 15 

percent for the period of 2002 through 

2008. Additionally, EPA is approving 

the required 2008 VOC MVEB which 

were included in the York County Area 

RFP plan. EPA is taking these actions 

because they are consistent with CAA 

requirements for the requirements for 

RFP. The York County Area MVEB, 

expressed in tons per day (tpd) and 

kilograms per day (kgd), are provided in 

Table 1 below. 

TABLE 1—YORK COUNTY, SOUTH

CAROLINA* 1997 8-HOUR OZONE

VOC MVEB 

2008 2008 

York County ( partial county) VOC MVEB 

VOC 6.053 tpd 5,493 kgd 

* Represents only the portion of York County 

that is in the nonattainment area for the bistate Charlotte Area. 

EPA is also describing the status of its 

transportation conformity adequacy 

determination for the 2008 MVEB. 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

action? 

A. General Background 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a 

revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.08 

parts per million (ppm). Under EPA’s 

regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS is attained when 

the 3-year average of the annual fourth 

highest daily maximum 8-hour average 

ambient air quality ozone 

concentrations is less than or equal to 

0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when 

rounding is considered) (69 FR 23857, 

April 30, 2004). Ambient air quality 

monitoring data for the 3-year period 

must meet the data completeness 

requirement as determined in 40 CFR 

part 50, appendix I. The ambient air 

quality monitoring data completeness 

requirement is met when the average 

percent of days with valid ambient 

monitoring data is greater than 90 

percent, and no single year has less than 

75 percent data completeness. 

Upon promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS, the CAA requires EPA 

to designate as nonattainment any area 

that is violating the NAAQS, based on 

the three most recent years of ambient 

air quality data at the conclusion of the 

designation process. The bi-state 

Charlotte Area was designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS on April 30, 2004 

(effective June 15, 2004) using 2001– 

2003 ambient air quality data (69 FR 

23857, April 30, 2004). At the time of 

designation the bi-state Charlotte Area 

was classified as a moderate 

nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. In the April 30, 2004, 

Phase I Ozone Implementation Rule, 

EPA established ozone nonattainment 

area attainment dates based on Table 1 

of section 181(a) of the CAA. This 

established an attainment date six years 

after the June 15, 2004, effective date for 

areas classified as moderate areas for the 

1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

designations. Section 181 of the CAA 

explains that the attainment date for 

moderate nonattainment areas shall be 

as expeditiously as practicable, but no 

later than six years after designation, or 

June 15, 2010. Therefore, the bi-state 

Charlotte Area’s original attainment date 

was June 15, 2010. See 69 FR 23951, 

April 30, 2004. 

The bi-state Charlotte Area did not 

attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by 

June 15, 2010 (the applicable attainment 

date for moderate nonattainment areas); 

however, the Area qualified for an 

extension of the attainment date. Under 

certain circumstances, the CAA allows 

for extensions of the attainment dates 

prescribed at the time of the original 

nonattainment designation. In 

accordance with CAA section 181(a)(5), 

EPA may grant up to 2 one-year 

extensions of the attainment date under 

specified conditions. On May 31, 2011, 

EPA determined that North Carolina 

and South Carolina met the CAA 

requirements to obtain a one-year 

extension of the attainment date for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the bistate Charlotte Area. See 76 FR 31245. 

As a result, EPA extended the bi-state 

Charlotte Area’s attainment date from 

June 15, 2010, to June 15, 2011, for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

On November 15, 2011 (76 FR 70656), 

EPA determined the bi-state Charlotte 

Area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS; and subsequently, on March 7, 

2012 (77 FR 13493), EPA determined 

that the bi-state Charlotte Area attained 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the 

applicable attainment date. The 

determination of attaining data was 

based upon complete, quality-assured 

and certified ambient air monitoring 

data for the 2008–2010 period, showing 

that the Area had monitored attainment 

of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The 

requirements for the Area to submit an 

attainment demonstration and 

associated reasonably available control 

measures (RACM), RFP plan, 

contingency measures, and other 

planning SIP revisions related to 

attainment of the standard were 

suspended as a result of the 

determination of attainment, so long as 

the Area continues to attain the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS.1 See 40 CFR 

52.2125(a). 

On January 12, 2012, South Carolina 

withdrew the attainment demonstration 

submissions (except RFP, emissions 

statements, and the emissions 

inventory) as allowed by 40 CFR 51.918 

for the York County Area.2


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 
62456 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 199 / Monday, October 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

(RACT) requirements, to the extent that these 

requirements were addressed in the attainment 

demonstration submissions. 3RFP regulations are at 40 CFR 51.910. 

4Some areas that were designated as moderate or 

above for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS may have 

implemented Rate of Progress plans (i.e., plans 

similar to the RFP requirements) by which the area 

would have achieved at least a 15 percent reduction 

in VOC from an initial baseline. Such areas have the 

flexibility to met RFP requirements through a 

reduction in VOC or nitrogen oxides, after the 

initial achievement in a reduction of at least 15 

percent for VOC emissions for the area. 

5The bi-state Charlotte Area attained the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS by June 15, 2011, based on 

2008–2010 data. 

Subsequently, EPA approved South 

Carolina’s SIP revisions related to the 

emissions statements and emissions 

inventory requirements for the York 

County Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. For the EPA action related to 

the emissions statements requirements 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, see 

77 FR 37812 (June 25, 2012). For the 

EPA action related to the emissions 

inventory requirements for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS, see 77 FR 29540 

(May 18, 2012). Despite the 

determination of attainment, South 

Carolina opted to leave the SIP 

submissions related to the RFP 

requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS before EPA for action. As such, 

EPA is taking action to approve South 

Carolina’s August 31, 2007, and April 

29, 2010, SIP revisions as they related 

to the RFP requirements for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. 

B. Background for RFP 

On November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71612), 

as revised on June 8, 2007 (72 FR 

31727), EPA published a rule entitled 

‘‘Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour 

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard—Phase 2; Final Rule To 

Implement Certain Aspects of the 1990 

Amendments Relating to New Source 

Review and Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration as They Apply in Carbon 

Monoxide, Particulate Matter and Ozone 

NAAQS; Final Rule for Reformulated 

Gasoline’’ (hereafter referred to as the 

Phase 2 Rule). Section 182(b)(1) of the 

CAA and EPA’s Phase 2 Rule 3 require 

a state, for each 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area that is classified as 

moderate, to submit an emissions 

inventory and a RFP plan to show how 

the state will reduce emissions of VOC. 

The bi-state Charlotte Area had an 

attainment date of June 15, 2010 (i.e., 

that is beyond five years after 

designation), that was later extended to 

June 15, 2011. See 76 FR 31245 (May 31, 

2011). For a moderate area with an 

attainment date of more than five years 

after designation, the RFP plan must 

obtain a 15 percent reduction in ozone 

precursor emissions for the first six 

years after the baseline year (2002 

through 2008). Since the York County 

Area did not have a previous plan to 

address RFP requirements,4 the initial 

RFP requirement for the Area must be 

met through VOC reductions as required 

by the 1990 CAA Amendments. 

Pursuant to CAA section 172(c)(9), 

RFP plans must include contingency 

measures that will take effect without 

further action by the state or EPA, 

which includes additional controls that 

would be implemented if the area fails 

to reach the RFP milestones. While the 

CAA does not specify the type of 

measures or quantity of emissions 

reductions required, EPA provided 

guidance interpreting the CAA that 

implementation of these contingency 

measures would provide additional 

emissions reductions of up to 3 percent 

of the adjusted base year inventory in 

the year following the RFP milestone 

year (i.e., in this case 2008). For more 

information on contingency measures 

please see the April 16, 1992 General 

Preamble (57 FR 13498, 13510) and the 

November 29, 2005 Phase 2 8-hour 

ozone standard implementation rule (70 

FR 71612, 71650). Finally, RFP plans 

must also include a MVEB for the 

precursors for which the plan is 

developed. See Section IV of this 

rulemaking for more information on 

MVEB requirements. 

On August 31, 2007, and April 29, 

2010, South Carolina submitted RFP 

plans for the York County Area to 

address the CAA’s requirements for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The August 

31, 2007, SIP revision (as supplemented 

by the April 29, 2010, SIP revision) 

included an attainment demonstration 

plan, RFP plan for 2008 milestone year, 

contingency measures, RACT, RACM 

requirements, on-road VOC MVEB, and 

the 2002 base year emissions inventory. 

These SIP revisions were subject to 

notice and comment by the public and 

the State addressed the comments 

received on the proposed SIPs. Today’s 

rulemaking is approving only the RFP 

plan, including the associated MVEB. 

The remainder of South Carolina’s 

August 31, 2007, and April 29, 2010, 

SIP revisions were addressed by 

previous EPA actions, or by the State’s 

withdrawal of submissions that were no 

longer necessary. 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of the RFP 

plan for the York County Area? 

On August 31, 2007, and April 29, 

2010, South Carolina submitted RFP 

plans for the York County Area to 

address the CAA’s requirements for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Below 

provides EPA’s analysis of South 

Carolina’s RFP submissions. 

A. Base Year Emissions Inventory 

An emissions inventory is a 

comprehensive, accurate, current 

inventory of actual emissions from all 

sources and is required by section 

182(a)(1) of the CAA. Because the York 

County Area as part of the bi-state 

Charlotte Area did not implement the 15 

percent VOC reductions for the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS, the requirement for 

South Carolina to meet RFP is a 15 

percent VOC reduction between 2002 

and 2008 with continued progress 

toward attainment through attainment.5

EPA recommended 2002 as the base 

year emissions inventory, and is 

therefore the starting point for 

calculating RFP. South Carolina 

submitted its 2002 base year emissions 

inventory on August 31, 2007. In an 

action on May 18, 2012, EPA approved 

South Carolina’s 2002 base year 

emissions inventory for the York County 

Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

See 77 FR 29540. A summary of the 

York County Area 2002 base year 

emissions inventories is included in 

Table 2 below. 

TABLE 2—2002 POINT AND AREA SOURCES ANNUAL EMISSIONS FOR THE YORK COUNTY AREA

[Tons per summer day] 

County 

Point Area Non-road Mobile 

NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC NOX VOC 

York (partial) * .................. 11.1 7.29 2.2 7.48 4.9 3.19 13.8 6.84 

* Represents only the portion of York County that is in the nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte Area. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 199 / Monday, October 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 62457 

6The portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area that 

was classified as moderate under the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS contained the counties of Gaston and 

Mecklenburg in North Carolina. Gaston and 

Mecklenburg counties were also designated 

nonattainment as a part of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

moderate bi-state Charlotte Area. Although a 

portion of this Area was classified as moderate for 

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, a 15 percent rate of 

progress (ROP) plan was not submitted for this Area 

due to its change in attainment status. Specifically, 

North Carolina submitted a redesignation and 

maintenance plan request instead before the due 

date of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS ROP plan. 

Therefore, because the bi-state Charlotte Area did 

not implement a 15 percent ROP plan under the 1- 

hour ozone NAAQS, the Area must have VOC 

reductions totaling at least 15 percent for the first 

six years following the baseline inventory year of 

2002 in order for the RFP plan to be approved. 

As mentioned above, EPA has already 

approved this emissions inventory and 

thus is not taking comment on these 

inventories in the parallel proposal to 

today’s direct final action. 

B. Adjusted Base Year Inventory and 

2008 RFP Target Levels 

The process for determining the 

emissions baseline from which the RFP 

reductions are calculated is described in 

section 182(b)(1) of the CAA and 40 CFR 

51.910. This baseline value is the 2002 

adjusted base year inventory. Sections 

182(b)(1)(B) and (D) require the 

exclusion from the base year inventory 

of emissions benefits resulting from the 

Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program 

(FMVCP) regulations promulgated by 

January 1, 1990, and the Reid Vapor 

Pressure (RVP) regulations promulgated 

June 11, 1990 (55 FR 23666). The 

FMVCP and RVP emissions reductions 

are determined by the State using EPA’s 

on-road mobile source emissions 

modeling software, MOBILE6. The 

FMVCP and RVP emission reductions 

are then removed from the base year 

inventory by the State, resulting in an 

adjusted base year inventory. The 

emission reductions needed to satisfy 

the RFP requirement are then calculated 

from the adjusted base year inventory. 

These reductions are then subtracted 

from the adjusted base year inventory to 

establish the emissions target for the 

RFP milestone year (2008). 

For moderate areas like the York 

County Area (as part of the bi-state 

Charlotte Area),6 the CAA specifies a 15 

percent reduction in ozone precursor 

emissions over an initial six year period 

following the baseline inventory year. In 

the Phase 2 Rule, EPA interpreted this 

requirement for areas that were also 

designated nonattainment and classified 

as moderate or higher for the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS. In the Phase 2 Rule, EPA 

provided that an area classified as 

moderate or higher that has the same 

boundaries as an area, or is entirely 

composed of several areas or portions of 

areas, for which EPA fully approved a 

15 percent plan for the 1-hour NAAQS, 

is considered to have met the 

requirements of section 182(b)(1) of the 

CAA for the 8-hour NAAQS. In this 

situation, a moderate nonattainment 

area is subject to RFP under section 

172(c)(2) of the CAA and shall submit, 

no later than 3 years after designation 

for the 8-hour NAAQS, a SIP revision 

that meets the requirements of 40 CFR 

51.910(b)(2). The RFP SIP revision must 

provide for a 15 percent emission 

reduction (either nitrogen oxides (NOx) 

and/or VOC) accounting for any growth 

that occurs during the six year period 

following the baseline emissions 

inventory year, that is, 2002–2008. 

As mentioned earlier and according to 

section 182(b)(1)(D) of the CAA, 

emission reductions that resulted from 

the FMVCP and RVP rules promulgated 

prior to 1990 are not creditable for 

achieving RFP emission reductions. 

Therefore, the 2002 base year inventory 

is adjusted by subtracting the VOC and 

NOx emission reductions that are 

expected to occur between 2002 and the 

future milestone years due to the 

FMVCP and RVP rules. 

In the Phase 2 Rule, promulgated on 

November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71612), EPA 

outlines Method 1 as the process that 

states should use to show compliance 

with RFP for areas like the York County 

Area. A summary of the steps for 

Method 1 is provided below. 

• Step A is the actual anthropogenic 

base year VOC emissions inventory in 

2002. 

• Step B is to account for creditable 

emissions for RFP. 

• Step C is to calculate non-creditable 

emissions for RFP. Non-creditable 

emissions include emissions from: (1) 

Motor vehicle exhaust or evaporative 

emissions regulations promulgated by 

January 1, 1990; (2) regulations 

concerning RVP promulgated by 

November 15, 1990; (3) RACT 

corrections required prior to November 

1990; and (4) corrective inspection and 

maintenance (I/M) plan required prior 

to November 1990. 

• Step D is the 2002 base year 

emissions (Step A) minus the noncreditable emissions (Step C). 

• Step E is to calculate the 2008 target 

level VOC emissions. This is calculated 

by reducing the emissions from Step D 

by 15 percent. 

• The estimated 2008 VOC emissions 

are then compared to the 2008 target 

level VOC emissions (Step E). 

As provided in South Carolina’s 

August 31, 2007, SIP revision (as 

supplemented by the April 29, 2010, SIP 

revision), the State utilized the steps 

from Method 1 of the Phase 2 Rule. 

Specifically, South Carolina sets out its 

calculations in Section VI.B.2 of the 

August 31, 2007, plan and SC DHEC’s 

April 29, 2010, SIP revision as 

summarized below. 

1. Step A: Estimate the actual 

anthropogenic base year VOC inventory 

in 2002 with all 2002 control programs 

in place for all sources. 

South Carolina provided this 

emission inventory in Table VI–1 of the 

April 29, 2010, York County RFP plan, 

and as shown in Table 3, below. As 

mentioned above, EPA has already 

approved this inventory. See 77 FR 

29540 (May 18, 2012). 

TABLE 3—2002 VOC EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOR THE YORK COUNTY AREA

[Tons per summer day] 

Point Area Nonroad Mobile Total 

York * 7.29 7.48 3.19 6.84 24.80 

* Represents only the portion of York County that is in the nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte Area. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 
62458 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 199 / Monday, October 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

2. Step B: Using the same highway 

vehicle activity inputs used to calculate 

the actual 2002 inventory, run the 

appropriate motor vehicle emissions 

model for 2002 and for 2008 with all 

post-1990 CAA measures turned off. 

Any other local inputs for vehicle I/M 

programs should be set according to the 

program that was required to be in place 

in 1990. Fuel RVP should be set at 9.0 

or 7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) 

depending on the RVP required in the 

local area as a result of fuel RVP 

regulations promulgated in June, 1990. 

South Carolina conducted the mobile 

modeling in accordance with the 

directions outlined above for Step B. For 

the York County Area, the RVP 

requirement was set at 9.0 psi. 

Currently, I/M is not required in the 

York County Area, nor were there any 

outstanding obligations for the State to 

correct deficiencies for an existing or 

required I/M program. The York County 

Area was not designated nonattainment 

for the ozone NAAQS until June 15, 

2005, and thus did not have outstanding 

requirements related I/M. 

3. Step C: Calculate the difference 

between the 2002 and 2008 VOC 

emission factors calculated in Step B 

and multiply by the 2002 vehicle miles 

traveled. The result is the VOC emission 

calculation that will occur between 

2002 and 2008 without the benefits of 

any post-1990 CAA measures. These are 

the non-creditable reductions that occur 

over this period. 

South Carolina calculated the noncreditable emission reductions between 

2002 and 2008 by modeling its 2002 and 

2008 motor vehicle emissions with all 

post-1990 CAA measures turned off, and 

calculating the difference. This 

difference resulted in 1.00 tpd and can 

be found in Table VI–3 of the State’s 

August 31, 2007, SIP revision. 

4. Step D: Subtract the non-creditable 

reductions calculated in Step C from the 

actual anthropogenic 2002 inventory 

estimated in Step A. This adjusted VOC 

inventory is the basis for calculating the 

target level of emissions in 2008. 

The adjusted VOC inventory for 

calculating the target level of VOC 

emissions reductions for 2008 is 23.80 

tpd (i.e., 24.80 tpd (i.e., result of Step A) 

and 1.00 tpd (i.e., the result of Step C)). 

5. Step E: Reduce the adjusted VOC 

inventory calculated in Step D by 15 

percent. The result is the target level of 

VOC emissions in 2008 in order to meet 

the 2008 RFP requirement. The actual 

projected 2008 inventory for all sources 

with all control measures in place, 

including projected 2008 growth in 

activity, must be at or lower than this 

target level of emissions. 

The targeted level of emissions 

reductions for the York County Area to 

meet RFP requirements is 3.57 tpd of 

VOC (i.e, 23.80 tpd multiplied by 15 

percent). Thus the required targeted 

level of VOC emissions is 20.23 tpd for 

the York County Area. 

C. Final Analysis of South Carolina’s 

RFP Analysis for the York County Area 

As mentioned above, the required 

target level for the York County Area to 

meet the initial RFP plan requirement is 

a 15 percent reduction in VOC 

emissions for 2008 from the VOC 

emissions in 2002 (as adjusted per CAA 

requirements). Specifically, to meet this 

requirement, South Carolina needed to 

demonstrate a reduction of at least 3.57 

tpd. Table 4 below summarizes the 

results of South Carolina’s calculations 

for this RFP analysis. 

TABLE 4—YORK COUNTY AREA 15 PERCENT RFP ANALYSIS

Step from Method 1 Matrix VOC 

(tpd) 

Step A ........................ Total 2002 Base Year Anthropogenic VOC Emissions ............................................................................... 24.80 

Step C ....................... Non-Creditable VOC reductions .................................................................................................................. 1.00 

Step D ....................... 2002 Base Year minus the Non-Creditable Emissions ............................................................................... 23.80 

Step E ........................ 2008 Target Level of VOC Emissions ......................................................................................................... 20.23 

In its August 31, 2007, SIP revision, 

South Carolina calculated the 2008 VOC 

emissions inventory for the York County 

Area. This emissions inventory is 

provided below in Table 5 below. 

TABLE 5—2008 VOC EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOR THE YORK COUNTY AREA

[Tons per summer day] 

Point Area Nonroad Mobile Total 

York * .......................... 3.60 ......................................................................... 7.90 2.40 3.94 17.84 

* Represents only the portion of York County that is in the nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte Area. 

As discussed above, the required 

target for VOC emissions for the year 

2008 for South Carolina to meet the RFP 

requirements for York County is 20.23 

tpd (i.e., 15 percent reduction from the 

adjusted 2002 baseline). As revealed in 

Table 5, South Carolina calculated an 

emissions inventory of 17.84 tpd of VOC 

for York County in 2008, which is well 

below the 20.23 tpd required target. 

Thus, EPA is making the determination 

that South Carolina’s SIP revision 

demonstrates the required progress 

towards attainment for the York County 

Area as part of the bi-state Charlotte 

Area. In today’s action, EPA is 

approving South Carolina’s August 31, 

2007, and April 29, 2010, SIP revisions 

as meeting the CAA and EPA’s 

regulations regarding RFP. 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the 2008 

VOC MVEB for the York County Area? 

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new 

transportation plans, programs, and 

projects, such as the construction of 

new highways, must ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., 

be consistent with) the part of the state’s 

air quality plan that addresses pollution 

from cars and trucks. Conformity to the 

SIP means that transportation activities 

will not cause new air quality 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 199 / Monday, October 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 62459 

violations, worsen existing violations, or 

delay timely attainment of the NAAQS 

or any interim milestones. If a 

transportation plan does not conform, 

most new projects that would expand 

the capacity of roadways cannot go 

forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 

set forth EPA policy, criteria, and 

procedures for demonstrating and 

assuring conformity of such 

transportation activities to a SIP. The 

regional emissions analysis is one, but 

not the only, requirement for 

implementing transportation 

conformity. Transportation conformity 

is a requirement for nonattainment and 

maintenance areas. Maintenance areas 

are areas that were previously 

nonattainment for a particular NAAQS 

but have since been redesignated to 

attainment with an approved 

maintenance plan for that NAAQS. 

Under the CAA, states are required to 

submit, at various times, control strategy 

SIPs and maintenance plans for 

nonattainment areas. These control 

strategy SIPs (including RFP and 

attainment demonstrations) and 

maintenance plans create MVEB for 

criteria pollutants and/or their 

precursors to address pollution from 

cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a 

MVEB must be established for the target 

year and precursor pollutant of the RFP 

(i.e., in this case, for the target year of 

2008 and for VOC). A state may adopt 

MVEB for other precursors as well. The 

MVEB is the portion of the total 

allowable emissions in the RFP plan 

that is allocated to highway and transit 

vehicle use and emissions. See 40 CFR 

93.101. The MVEB serves as a ceiling on 

emissions from an area’s planned 

transportation system. The MVEB 

concept is further explained in the 

preamble to the November 24, 1993, 

Transportation Conformity Rule (58 FR 

62188). The preamble also describes 

how to establish the MVEB in the SIP 

and how to revise the MVEB. 

After interagency consultation with 

the transportation partners for the York 

County Area, South Carolina developed 

VOC MVEB for the year 2008. 

Specifically, South Carolina developed 

these MVEB, as required, for the target 

year and precursor—2008 and VOC—for 

the RFP plan. The York County Area 

MVEB for the 2008 RFP plan are based 

on the projected 2008 mobile source 

emissions accounting for all mobile 

control measures. The 2008 VOC MVEB 

are defined in Table 6 below. 

TABLE 6—YORK COUNTY, SOUTH

CAROLINA* 1997 8-HOUR OZONE

VOC MVEB 

2008 2008 

York County (partial county) VOC MVEB 

VOC 6.053 tpd 5,493 kgd 

* Represents only the portion of York County 

that is in the nonattainment area for the bistate Charlotte Area 

Through this rulemaking, EPA is 

approving the 2008 VOC MVEB for the 

York County Area because EPA has 

made the determination that the Area is 

on target to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS with the emissions at the levels 

of the budgets. Once the MVEB for the 

York County Area are approved or 

found adequate (whichever is 

completed first), they must be used for 

future conformity determinations for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 

Metropolitan Planning Organization’s 

long-range transportation plans and 

transportation improvement programs. 

After thorough review, EPA has 

previously determined that the budgets 

meet the adequacy criteria, as outlined 

in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) (see 77 FR 33454, 

June 6, 2012), and is now approving the 

budgets because they are consistent 

with RFP for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for the year 2008. 

V. What is the status of EPA’s adequacy 

determination for the 2008 VOC MVEB 

for the York County Area? 

When reviewing a submitted ‘‘control 

strategy’’ SIP, RFP or maintenance plan 

containing a MVEB, EPA may 

affirmatively find the MVEB contained 

therein adequate for use in determining 

transportation conformity. Once EPA 

affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB 

is adequate for transportation 

conformity purposes, that MVEB must 

be used by state and federal agencies in 

determining whether proposed 

transportation projects conform to the 

SIP as required by section 176(c) of the 

CAA. 

EPA’s substantive criteria for 

determining adequacy of a MVEB are set 

out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The process 

for determining adequacy consists of 

three basic steps: Public notification of 

a SIP submission, a public comment 

period, and EPA’s adequacy 

determination. This process for 

determining the adequacy of submitted 

MVEB for transportation conformity 

purposes was initially outlined in EPA’s 

May 14, 1999, guidance, ‘‘Conformity 

Guidance on Implementation of March 

2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision.’’ 

EPA adopted regulations to codify the 

adequacy process in the Transportation 

Conformity Rule Amendments for the 

‘‘New 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards and 

Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing 

Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule 

Amendments—Response to Court 

Decision and Additional Rule Change,’’ 

on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). 

Additional information on the adequacy 

process for transportation conformity 

purposes is available in the proposed 

rule entitled, ‘‘Transportation 

Conformity Rule Amendments: 

Response to Court Decision and 

Additional Rule Changes,’’ 68 FR 38974, 

38984 (June 30, 2003). 

As discussed earlier, South Carolina’s 

RFP plan submission includes VOC 

MVEB for the York County Area for the 

year 2008. EPA reviewed the VOC 

MVEB through the adequacy process. 

The South Carolina SIP submission, 

including the 2008 VOC MVEB for the 

York County Area, was open for public 

comment on EPA’s adequacy Web site 

on May 13, 2010, found at: http:// 

www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ 

transconf/currsips.htm. The EPA public 

comment period on adequacy of the 

2008 VOC MVEB for the York County 

Area closed on June 14, 2010. EPA 

received comments during the adequacy 

process. These comments were 

addressed through the adequacy 

process, and EPA’s responses to these 

comments can be found on EPA’s 

adequacy Web site. 

In a letter sent on May 25, 2012, EPA 

notified SC DHEC that the MOBILE6.2- 

based 2008 VOC MVEB for the York 

County Area were determined to be 

adequate for transportation conformity 

purposes. On June 6, 2012, EPA 

published its adequacy notice in the 

Federal Register (77 FR 33454). When 

EPA found the 2008 VOC MVEB 

adequate, this triggered a requirement 

that the new MVEB are used for future 

transportation conformity 

determinations. For required regional 

emissions analysis years beyond 2008, 

the applicable budgets are the 2008 VOC 

MVEB. The 2008 VOC MVEB are 

defined in sections I and IV of this 

rulemaking. 

VI. Final Action 

EPA is taking direct final action to 

approve portions of two SIP revisions, 

submitted on August 31, 2007, and 

April 29, 2010, by the State of South 

Carolina, through the SC DHEC to meet 

the RFP requirements for the York 

County Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. Additionally, EPA is 

approving the VOC MVEB for the York 

County Area that were including in 

South Carolina’s RFP plan. These 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 
62460 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 199 / Monday, October 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 

actions are being taken pursuant to 

section 110 of the CAA. 

EPA is publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a non-controversial 

amendment and anticipates no adverse 

comments. However, in the proposed 

rules section of this Federal Register 

publication, EPA is publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposal to approve the SIP revision 

should adverse comment be filed. This 

rule will be effective on December 14, 

2012 without further notice unless the 

Agency receives adverse comment by 

November 14, 2012. If EPA receives 

such comments, then EPA will publish 

a document withdrawing the final rule 

and informing the public that the rule 

will not take effect. All public 

comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period 

on this action. Any parties interested in 

commenting must do so at this time. If 

no such comments are received, the 

public is advised this rule will be 

effective on December 14, 2012 and no 

further action will be taken on the 

proposed rule. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this final 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 RFP for the York 

County Area does not have Tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because it does not have 

substantial direct effects on an Indian 

Tribe. The Catawba Indian Nation 

Reservation is located within the York 

County Area. Pursuant to the Catawba 

Indian Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code 

Ann. 27–16–120, ‘‘all state and local 

environmental laws and regulations 

apply to the Catawba Indian Nation and 

Reservation and are fully enforceable by 

all relevant state and local agencies and 

authorities.’’ EPA notes today’s action 

will not impose substantial direct costs 

on Tribal governments or preempt 

Tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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

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

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

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by December 14, 2012. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. See section 

307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, and Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: October 2, 2012. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart PP—South Carolina 

■ 2. Section 52.2120(e) is amended by 

adding new entries to the end of the 

table for ‘‘York County 1997 8-hour 

ozone reasonable further progress plan’’ 

and ‘‘Update for York County 1997 8- 

hour ozone reasonable further progress 

plan’’ to read as follows: 

§ 52.2120 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 199 / Monday, October 15, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 62461 

1See Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation 

Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 112–96, 126 Stat. 156 

(2012). 

2See id. Secs. 6201(a), 6202 and 6204(a); see also 

id. sec. 6001(2) (defining ‘‘700 MHz D Block 

spectrum’’) and (14) (defining ‘‘existing public 

safety broadband spectrum’’). 

3See id. sec. 6101. 

4See id. sec. 6201(a). 5See id.; 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). 

EPA-APPROVED SOUTH CAROLINA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Provision State effective 

date EPA Approval date Explanation 

*******

York County 1997 8-hour ozone reasonable further progress plan.08/31/07 10/15/12 [Insert citation of publication] .. Original submission. 

Update for York County 1997 8-hour 

ozone reasonable further progress 

plan.

04/29/10 10/15/12 [Insert citation of publication] .. Original submission updated to include 

required 2008 VOC MVEB. 

[FR Doc. 2012–25172 Filed 10–12–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Parts 0, 27, and 90 

[PS Docket 12–94; PS Docket No. 06–229; 

WT Docket 06–150; DA 12–1462] 

Implementing Public Safety Broadband 

Provisions of the Middle Class Tax 

Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: In this document, the Public 

Safety and Homeland Security Bureau 

(Bureau) of the Commission 

implemented certain provisions of the 

Middle Class Tax Relief and Job 

Creation Act of 2012 (Public Safety 

Spectrum Act) governing deployment of 

a nationwide public safety broadband 

network in the 700 MHz band. Pursuant 

to clear statutory directives, the Bureau 

reallocated the D Block (758–763/788– 

793 MHz) for ‘‘public safety services’’ 

and delete Commission rules that are 

plainly inconsistent with this revised 

allocation; deleted the rules 

establishing, providing license authority 

with respect to, and governing 

operations under the Public Safety 

Broadband License in the existing 

public safety broadband spectrum; and 

adopted rules implementing the clear 

mandate of the Public Safety Spectrum 

Act to grant a license with respect to the 

public safety broadband spectrum (763– 

768/793–798 MHz), guard band (768– 

769/798–799 MHz), and the D Block to 

the First Responder Network Authority 

(FirstNet). By eliminating any confusion 

or uncertainty about the new regulatory 

framework applicable to the public 

safety broadband network, these action 

takes further steps necessary to facilitate 

the transition of this spectrum to 

FirstNet as required by the Act. 

DATES: Effective November 14, 2012, 

except for the removal of §§ 90.18 and 

90.528 of the Commission’s rules. The 

Commission will publish a separate 

document in the Federal Register 

announcing the subsequent effective 

date of these removals. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gene Fullano, Federal Communications 

Commission, Public Safety and 

Homeland Security Bureau, 445 12th 

Street SW., Room 7–C747, Washington, 

DC 20554. Telephone: (202)–418–0492, 

email: genaro.fullano@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Report and Order, DA 12–1462, adopted 

and released September 7, 2012, the 

Bureau implements certain provisions 

of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job 

Creation Act of 2012 (‘‘Public Safety 

Spectrum Act’’ or ‘‘Act’’) 1 governing 

deployment of a nationwide public 

safety broadband network in the 700 

MHz band. The Public Safety Spectrum 

Act establishes the First Responder 

Network Authority (FirstNet) to oversee 

the construction and operation of this 

network as licensee of both the ‘‘existing 

public safety broadband spectrum’’ 

(763–769/793–799 MHz) and the 

spectrally adjacent ‘‘700 MHz D Block 

spectrum’’ (758–763/788–793 MHz).2

The Act directs the Federal 

Communications Commission (FCC or 

Commission) to reallocate the D Block 

for public safety services,3 to license the 

D Block and the existing public safety 

broadband spectrum to FirstNet 4 and to 

take other actions necessary to 

‘‘facilitate the transition’’ of the existing 

public safety broadband spectrum to 

FirstNet. 

In the Report and Order, the Bureau 

implements clear directives of Congress 

set forth in the Public Safety Spectrum 

Act. The Bureau reallocates the D Block 

for ‘‘public safety services’’ and deletes 

Commission rules that are plainly 

inconsistent with this revised 

allocation. It also deletes the 

Commission rules establishing, 

providing license authority with respect 

to, and governing operations under the 

Public Safety Broadband License in the 

existing public safety broadband 

spectrum. The Bureau replaces these 

with rules implementing the clear 

mandate of the Public Safety Spectrum 

Act to grant a license with respect to 

this spectrum and the D Block to 

FirstNet. The rule changes adopted by 

the Bureau in this order are strictly 

limited to implementation of aspects of 

that mandate that leave no room for 

agency discretion, and thus fall within 

the Bureau’s delegated authority and are 

consistent with the requirements of the 

Administrative Procedure Act.5 As 

noted below, by eliminating any 

confusion or uncertainty about the new 

regulatory framework applicable to the 

public safety broadband network, the 

Bureau’s action takes further steps 

necessary to facilitate the transition of 

this spectrum to FirstNet as the 

prospective licensee established by the 

Act;. The Report and Order is available 

at http://transition.fcc.gov/ 

Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2012/ 

db0907/DA-12-1462A1.pdf. 

This Report and Order will become 

effective November 14, 2012, except for 

the deletion of sections 90.18 and 

90.528 of the Commission’s rules. 

Following that date, the Commission 

will publish a separate notice in the 

Federal Register announcing the 

subsequent effective date of these rule 

deletions, which shall be the date of 

issuance of a license to the First 

Responder Network Authority pursuant 

to Section 6201(a) of the Middle Class 

Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012. 

Under Section 603(a) of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), the 

Commission is not required to prepare 

a final regulatory flexibility analysis 

relating to the Report and Order because 

it was not required to publish general 

notice of proposed rulemaking before 

effecting the rule changes set forth 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with