70516 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

9. What are the physiological and 

psychological needs of bears in 

captivity, and would bear-specific 

standards address them? 

10. Is there evidence that a captive 

bear housed in a particular type of 

enclosure is more prone to disease or 

injury, or more likely to develop 

aggressive behavior habits than captive 

bears housed in a different type of 

enclosure? 

11. Should persons holding bears in 

captivity be required to provide bears 

with the means to self-groom, with 

enclosure mates, with the opportunity 

and means to hibernate, and with pools? 

12. Should there be a prohibition on 

the sale or transportation of infant or 

young bears in captivity? 

13. Should exhibitors and dealers be 

required to house captive bear cubs with 

their mothers until after they are 

naturally weaned? 

14. Should exhibitors and dealers be 

prohibited from declawing captive 

bears? 

15. Should exhibitors and dealers be 

prohibited from permitting public 

feeding of captive bears? 

We encourage the submission of 

scientific data, studies, or research to 

support your comments and position, 

including scientific data or research that 

supports any industry or professional 

standards that pertain to the care of 

bears. We also invite data on the costs 

and benefits associated with any 

recommendations. We will consider all 

comments and recommendations we 

receive. 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 2131–2159; 7 CFR 

2.22, 2.80, and 371.7. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 20th day of 

November 2013. 

Kevin Shea, 

Administrator, Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–28312 Filed 11–25–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0501; FRL 9902– 

27–Region 5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a revision to the Illinois state 

implementation plan (SIP). The 

submission amends the Illinois 

Administrative Code by updating the 

definition of ‘‘Volatile organic material 

(VOM) or Volatile organic compound 

(VOC)’’ to add trans-1,3,3,3-tetraflouropropene (HFO–1234ze) to the list 

of compounds excluded from the 

definition of VOM or VOC. This 

revision is based on EPA’s 2012 

rulemaking which added HFO–1234ze 

to the list of chemical compounds that 

are excluded from the Federal definition 

of VOC because of their negligible 

contribution to the formation of 

tropospheric ozone. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 26, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2013–0501, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: blakley.pamela@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 692–2450. 

4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, 

Control Strategies Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, 

Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

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

Federal holidays. 

Please see the direct final rule which 

is located in the Rules section of this 

Federal Register for detailed 

instructions on how to submit 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Charles Hatten, Environmental 

Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6031, 

hatten.charles@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules section of this issue of the 

Federal Register, EPA is approving the 

state’s SIP submittal as a direct final 

rule without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. A detailed rationale for the 

approval is set forth in the direct final 

rule. If no adverse comments are 

received in response to this rule, no 

further activity is contemplated. If EPA 

receives adverse comments, the direct 

final rule will be withdrawn and all 

public comments received will be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on this proposed rule. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule, and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. For additional information, 

see the direct final rule which is located 

in the Rules section of this issue of the 

Federal Register. 

Dated: October 17, 2013. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2013–27705 Filed 11–25–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0562; FRL–9903–16– 

Region 4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; North Carolina: 

Non-Interference Demonstration for 

Removal of Federal Low-Reid Vapor 

Pressure Requirement for the 

Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point 

Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

the State of North Carolina’s April 12, 

2013, State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision associated with the currently 

approved maintenance plan addressing 

the 1997 8-hour national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS) for the 

Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point 

(Triad) Area. Specifically, North 

Carolina’s revision, including updated 

modeling, shows that the Triad Area 

would continue to maintain the 1997 8- 

hour ozone standard if the currently 

applicable Federal Reid Vapor Pressure 

(RVP) standard for gasoline of 7.8 

pounds per square inch (psi) were 

modified to 9.0 psi for four portions 

(Davidson, Forsyth, Guilford and Davie 

Counties) of the ‘‘Triad Area’’ during the 

high-ozone season. The State has 

included a technical demonstration 

with the revision to demonstrate that a 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 70517 

1As discussed further below, a separate 

rulemaking is required for relaxation of the current 

requirement to use gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi 

in the Area. This action proposes EPA’s evaluation 

of the approvability of Florida’s revision to the 

maintenance plan pursuant to section 110(l). The 

decision regarding removal of Federal RVP 

requirements pursuant to section 211(h) in the Area 

includes other considerations evaluated at the 

discretion of the Administrator. As such, the 

determination regarding whether to remove the 

Area from those areas subject to the section 211(h) 

requirements is made through a separate rule 

making action. 

less-stringent RVP standard of 9.0 psi in 

these portions of this area would not 

interfere with continued maintenance of 

the 1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS or any 

other applicable standard. Approval of 

this SIP revision is a prerequisite for 

EPA’s consideration of an amendment 

to the regulations to remove the 

aforementioned portions of the Triad 

Area from the list of areas that are 

currently subject to the Federal 7.8 psi 

RVP requirements. In addition, the 

revised on-road mobile and non-road 

mobile source emissions modeling 

associated with the requested 

modification to the RVP standard results 

in the use of the updated Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Simulator (MOVES) and 

NONROAD2008 models which are the 

most current versions of modeling 

systems available for these sources. EPA 

has preliminarily determined that North 

Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP revision 

with respect to the revisions to the 

modeling and associated technical 

demonstration associated with the 

State’s request for the removal of the 

Federal RVP requirements, and with 

respect to the updated on-road mobile, 

non-road mobile and area source 

emissions, is consistent with the 

applicable provisions of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA or Act). Should EPA decide 

to remove the subject portions of the 

Triad Area from those areas subject to 

the 7.8 psi Federal RVP requirements, 

such action will occur in a subsequent 

rulemaking. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before December 26, 

2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R04–OAR–2013–0562 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4–RDS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0562, 

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 No. EPA–R04–OAR–2013– 

0562. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

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

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

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

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sean Lakeman 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. Mr. 

Lakeman may be reached by phone at 

(404) 562–9043, or via electronic mail at 

lakeman.sean@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What is being proposed? 

II. What is the background of the Triad Area? 

III. What is the history of the gasoline 

volatility requirement? 

IV. What are the section 110(l) requirements? 

V. What is EPA’s analysis of North Carolina’s 

submittal? 

VI. Proposed Action 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is being proposed? 

The Triad Area in North Carolina is 

currently designated attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Area 

was redesignated from nonattainment of 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on April 

2, 2008. See 73 FR 17897. This 

rulemaking proposes to approve a 

revision to the Section 110(a)(1) 

Maintenance Plan for 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard for the Triad Area submitted 

by the North Carolina Department of 

Environment and Natural Resources (NC 

DENR). Specifically, EPA is proposing 

to approve revisions to the maintenance 

plan, including updated modeling, that 

show the Triad Area can continue to 

maintain the 1997 ozone standard 

without reliance on emissions 

reductions based upon the use of 

gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi in any 

of the Triad Area counties during the 

high ozone season—June 1 through 

September 15.1 EPA is also proposing to 

conclude that the new modeling 

demonstrates that the area would 

continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard with the use of gasoline with 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
70518 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

2 In addition to a less stringent RVP standard, the 

new modeling also utilizes updated models for onroad and off-road mobile emission sources. 

3An EAC is an agreement between a State, local 

governments and EPA to implement measures not 

necessarily required by the Act in order to achieve 

cleaner air as soon as possible. The program was 

designed for areas that approach or monitor 

exceedances of the 8-hour ozone standard, but are 

in attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 

an RVP of 9.0 psi throughout the Triad 

Area during the high ozone season. 

Consistent with section 110(l) of the 

Act, EPA also proposes to conclude that 

the use of gasoline with an RVP of 9.0 

psi throughout the Triad Area during 

the high ozone season would not 

interfere with other applicable 

requirements. 

The new modeling conducted by 

North Carolina to account for the 

proposed relaxation of the applicable 

RVP standard in portions of the Triad 

Area also results in changes to the onroad mobile, non-road mobile and area 

source emissions associated with the 

maintenance plan.2 As such, the North 

Carolina revision updates the on-road 

mobile, non-road mobile and area 

source emissions for the Triad Area. 

EPA is also proposing approval of this 

revision. 

This preamble is hereafter organized 

into five parts. Section II provides the 

background of the Triad Area 

designation status with respect to the 

various Ozone NAAQS. Section III 

describes the applicable history of 

federal gasoline regulation. Section IV 

provides the Agency’s policy regarding 

relaxation of the volatility standards. 

Section V provides EPA’s analysis of the 

information submitted by North 

Carolina to support a relaxation of the 

more stringent volatility standard in the 

Triad Area and revisions to the on-road 

mobile, nonroad mobile and area source 

emissions associated with Maintenance 

Plan for the Triad Area and provides 

EPA’s analysis regarding the proposed 

revision. 

II. What is the background of the Triad 

Area? 

On November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694), 

EPA designated the Counties of 

Davidson, Forsyth and Guilford in their 

entirety and the portion of Davie County 

bounded by the Yadkin River, 

Dutchmans Creek, North Carolina 

Highway 801, Fulton Creek and back to 

Yadkin River in the Triad Area as 

Moderate nonattainment for the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS. Among the requirements 

applicable to nonattainment areas for 

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was the 

requirement to meet certain volatility 

standards (known as Reid Vapor 

Pressure or RVP) for gasoline sold 

commercially. See 55 FR 23658 (June 

11, 1990). As discussed in greater detail 

below, as part of the RVP requirements 

associated with the nonattainment 

designation, gasoline sold in the Triad 

1-hour nonattainment area could not 

exceed 7.8 psi RVP during the highozone season months. 

Following implementation of the 7.8 

psi RVP requirement in the Triad Area, 

on September 9, 1993, the Triad Area 

was redesignated to attainment for the 

1-hour ozone NAAQS, based on 1989– 

1992 ambient air quality monitoring 

data. See 58 FR 47391. North Carolina’s 

November 13, 1992, 1-hour ozone 

redesignation request did not include a 

request for the removal of the 7.8 psi 

RVP standard. The requirements 

remained in place for the Area when it 

was designated nonattainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS that was 

promulgated on July 18, 1997, and later 

designated attainment for the 2008 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS that was 

promulgated March 12, 2008. See 77 FR 

30088, May 21, 2012. 

On April 30, 2004, EPA designated 

and classified areas for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS (69 FR 23857) 

unclassifiable/attainment or 

nonattainment for the new 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. The Triad Area was designated 

as nonattainment with a deferred 

effective date as part of the Early Action 

Compact (EAC) 3 program. (For more 

information on the EAC program, see, 

http://www.epa.gov/airquality/eac/

fs20080331_eac.html.) The GreensboroWinston Salem-High Point 

nonattainment-deferred EAC Area for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

expanded the Triad Area to include the 

entire county of Davie, and Alamance, 

Caswell, Randolph, and Rockingham 

Counties in their entirety. The 

Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point 

EAC Area attained the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS with a design value of 

0.083 parts per million (ppm) using 

three years of quality assured data for 

the years of 2005–2007. On February 6, 

2008, EPA proposed that 13 

nonattainment areas with deferred 

effective dates, including the 

Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point 

Area, be designated attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 73 FR 

6863. These areas met all of the 

milestones of the EAC program and 

demonstrated that they were in 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS as of December 31, 2007. This 

rulemaking was finalized on April 2, 

2008. See 73 FR 17897. Effective April 

15, 2008, the Greensboro-Winston 

Salem-High Point EAC Area was 

designated as attainment for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. However, these 

attainment areas consequently were 

required to submit a 10-year 

maintenance plan under section 

110(a)(1) of the CAA. As required, these 

plans provide for continued attainment 

and maintenance of the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years from 

the effective date of these areas’ 

designation as attainment for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. These plans also 

include components illustrating how 

each area will continue to attain the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and 

provided contingency measures. 

III. What is the history of the gasoline 

volatility requirement? 

On August 19, 1987 (52 FR 31274), 

EPA determined that gasoline 

nationwide had become increasingly 

volatile, causing an increase in 

evaporative emissions from gasolinepowered vehicles and equipment. 

Evaporative emissions from gasoline, 

referred to as volatile organic 

compounds (VOC), are precursors to the 

formation of tropospheric ozone and 

contribute to the nation’s ground-level 

ozone problem. Exposure to groundlevel ozone can reduce lung function 

(thereby aggravating asthma or other 

respiratory conditions), increase 

susceptibility to respiratory infection, 

and may contribute to premature death 

in people with heart and lung disease. 

The most common measure of fuel 

volatility that is useful in evaluating 

gasoline evaporative emissions is RVP. 

Under section 211(c) of CAA, EPA 

promulgated regulations on March 22, 

1989 (54 FR 11868), that set maximum 

limits for the RVP of gasoline sold 

during the high ozone season. These 

regulations constituted Phase I of a twophase nationwide program, which was 

designed to reduce the volatility of 

commercial gasoline during the summer 

ozone control season. On June 11, 1990 

(55 FR 23658), EPA promulgated more 

stringent volatility controls as Phase II 

of the volatility control program. These 

requirements established maximum 

RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8 psi 

(depending on the State, the month, and 

the area’s initial ozone attainment 

designation with respect to the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS during the high ozone 

season). 

The 1990 CAA Amendments 

established a new section, 211(h), to 

address fuel volatility. Section 211(h) 

requires EPA to promulgate regulations 

making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, 

dispense, supply, offer for supply, 

transport, or introduce into commerce 

gasoline with an RVP level in excess of 

9.0 psi during the high ozone season. 

Section 211(h) prohibits EPA from 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 70519 

4See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990), 56 FR 24242 

(May 29, 1991) and 56 FR 64704 (Dec. 12, 1991). 

5The six NAAQS for which EPA establishes 

health and welfare based standards are carbon 

monoxide, lead, NO2, ozone, PM, and SO2. 

establishing a volatility standard more 

stringent than 9.0 psi in an attainment 

area, except that EPA may impose a 

lower (more stringent) standard in any 

former ozone nonattainment area 

redesignated to attainment. 

On December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), 

EPA modified the Phase II volatility 

regulations to be consistent with section 

211(h) of the CAA. The modified 

regulations prohibited the sale of 

gasoline with an RVP above 9.0 psi in 

all areas designated attainment for 

ozone, beginning in 1992. For areas 

designated as nonattainment, the 

regulations retained the original Phase II 

standards published on June 11, 1990 

(55 FR 23658). 

As stated in the preamble to the Phase 

II volatility controls and reiterated in 

the proposed change to the volatility 

standards published in 1991, EPA will 

rely on states to initiate changes to 

EPA’s volatility program that they 

believe will enhance local air quality 

and/or increase the economic efficiency 

of the program within the statutory 

limits.4 In those rulemakings, EPA 

explained that the governor of a state 

may petition EPA to set a volatility 

standard less stringent than 7.8 psi for 

some month or months in a 

nonattainment area. The petition must 

demonstrate such a change is 

appropriate because of a particular local 

economic impact and that sufficient 

alternative programs are available to 

achieve attainment and maintenance of 

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. A current 

listing of the RVP requirements for 

states can be found on EPA’s Web site 

at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/

gasolinefuels/volatility/standards.htm. 

As explained in the December 12, 

1991 (56 FR 64704), Phase II 

rulemaking, EPA believes that 

relaxation of an applicable RVP 

standard is best accomplished in 

conjunction with the redesignation 

process. In order for an ozone 

nonattainment area to be redesignated 

as an attainment area, section 107(d)(3) 

of the Act requires the state to make a 

showing, pursuant to section 175A of 

the Act, that the area is capable of 

maintaining attainment for the ozone 

NAAQS for ten years after 

redesignation. Depending on the area’s 

circumstances, this maintenance plan 

will either demonstrate that the area is 

capable of maintaining attainment for 

ten years without the more stringent 

volatility standard or that the more 

stringent volatility standard may be 

necessary for the area to maintain its 

attainment with the ozone NAAQS. 

Therefore, in the context of a request for 

redesignation, EPA will not relax the 

volatility standard unless the state 

requests a relaxation and the 

maintenance plan demonstrates, to the 

satisfaction of EPA, that the area will 

maintain attainment for ten years 

without the need for the more stringent 

volatility standard. As noted above, 

however, North Carolina did not request 

relaxation of the applicable 7.8 psi RVP 

standard when the Triad Area was 

redesignated to attainment for the either 

the 1-hour or the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. Rather, North Carolina is now 

seeking to relax the 7.8 psi RVP 

standard after the Triad Area has been 

redesignated to attainment for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. Accordingly, the 

original modeling and maintenance 

demonstration supporting the 1997 8- 

hour ozone maintenance plan must be 

revised to reflect continued attainment 

under the relaxed 9.0 psi RVP standard 

that the State has requested. 

IV. What are the section 110(l) 

requirements? 

Section 110(l) requires that a revision 

to the SIP not interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress (RFP) (as defined in section 

171), or any other applicable 

requirement of the Act. EPA’s criterion 

for determining the approvability of 

North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP 

revision is whether this requested action 

complies with section 110(l) of the 

CAA. Because the modeling associated 

with the current maintenance plan for 

North Carolina is premised in part upon 

the 7.8 psi RVP requirements, a request 

to revise the maintenance plan 

modeling to no longer rely on the 7.8 psi 

RVP requirement is subject to the 

requirements of CAA section 110(l). 

Therefore, the State must demonstrate 

that this revision will not interfere with 

the attainment or maintenance of any of 

the NAAQS or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. 

This section 110(l) non-interference 

demonstration is a case-by-case 

determination based upon the 

circumstances of each SIP revision. EPA 

interprets 110(l) as applying to all 

NAAQS that are in effect, including 

those that have been promulgated but 

for which the EPA has not yet made 

designations. The specific elements of 

the 110(l) analysis contained in the SIP 

revision depend on the circumstances 

and emissions analyses associated with 

that revision. EPA’s analysis of North 

Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP revision, 

including review of section 110(l) 

requirements is provided below. 

Finally, EPA notes that this 

rulemaking is only proposing to approve 

the State’s revision to its existing 

maintenance plan for the Triad Area 

showing that the area can continue to 

maintain the standard without relying 

upon gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi 

being sold in the Triad Area during the 

high ozone season. Consistent with CAA 

section 211(h) and the Phase II volatility 

regulations a separate rulemaking is 

required for relaxation of the current 

requirement to use gasoline with an 

RVP of 7.8 psi in the Triad Area. 

V. What is EPA’s analysis of North 

Carolina’s submittal? 

a. Overall Preliminary Conclusions for 

Non-Interference Analyses for North 

Carolina’s Request for Removal of the 

Federal RVP Requirement 

On April 12, 2013, NC DENR 

submitted a revision to the maintenance 

plan for the Triad 1-hour ozone 

maintenance area. The revision updates 

the on-road mobile, non-road mobile, 

and area source emissions that would 

result from modifying the RVP 

summertime gasoline requirement from 

7.8 psi to 9.0 psi for the Triad Area. 

North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP 

revision also includes an evaluation of 

the impact that the removal of the 7.8 

psi RVP requirement would have on 

maintenance of the 1997 and 2008 

ozone standards and on other applicable 

NAAQS. For the purposes of this 

change, EPA is making the preliminary 

determination that the applicable 

NAAQS 5 of interest for the noninterference demonstration required by 

section 110(l) of the CAA are the carbon 

monoxide (CO), ozone, particulate 

matter (PM) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) 

standards. 

VOC and NOX emissions are 

precursors for ozone and PM, and NO2

is a component of NOX. In addition, 

EPA also believes that, in this instance, 

it is appropriate to also evaluate noninterference with respect to the CO 

NAAQS. Typically, EPA would not 

expect the CO NAAQS to be affected by 

a revision to RVP requirements because 

VOC and NOX are not precursors to CO. 

The revised modeling submitted by 

North Carolina, however, demonstrates 

a slight increase in CO emissions, and 

as such, EPA believes a non-interference 

review for CO is also appropriate in this 

case. 

There are no emissions reductions 

attributable to the emissions of lead and 

sulfur dioxide (SO2) from RVP 

requirements. As a result, there is no 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
70520 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

6 In addition there was not a significant increase 

in CO and NO2 emissions. See the non-interference 

discussions below for more details. 

7The air quality design value for the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS is the 3-year average of the annual 

4th highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone 

concentration. The level of the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS is 0.075 ppm. The 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS is not met when the design value is greater 

than 0.075 ppm. 

8The Davie County monitor was moved to a new 

location and began monitoring at the new location 

in 2008. There was not enough data at this location 

to calculate a 3 year averaged design value until 

2012. 

information indicating the proposed 

revision would have any impact on 

those NAAQS. Additionally, the Triad 

Area is currently designated attainment 

for the lead NAAQS, and is continuing 

to attain the standard. As for the SO2

NAAQS, the Triad Area is not 

designated nonattainment and there is 

no available monitoring data indicating 

an exceedance of the NAAQS. 

Therefore, the analysis below focuses on 

the impact of North Carolina’s requested 

RVP change to the ozone, particulate 

matter, NO2 and CO NAAQS. 

In North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, 

SIP revision, the State provided a 

technical demonstration to support the 

request to modify the RVP summertime 

gasoline requirement from 7.8 psi to 9.0 

psi for the Triad Area. NC DENR 

provided information regarding the 

emissions trends from the maintenance 

plans for the ozone NAAQS and 

conducted a photochemical modeling 

exercise to show that modifying the RVP 

summertime gasoline requirement from 

7.8 psi to 9.0 psi would have no impact 

on the ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS.6

In the April 12, 2013, SIP revision, NC 

DENR provided an updated analysis 

utilizing EPA’s MOVES emission 

modeling system to estimate emissions 

for mobile sources. These mobile source 

emissions are used as part of the 

evaluation of the potential impacts to 

the ozone NAAQS that might result 

exclusively from changing the high 

ozone season RVP requirements from 

7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. The MOVES data 

resulted in minor increases to the onroad mobile and area source emissions. 

The State then used the MOVESgenerated revised mobile source 

emissions in the Triad Area that 

resulted from the RVP program change 

in photochemical grid modeling to 

simulate the impact on ozone formation. 

In addition to modeling the small RVP 

changes over the Triad Area, NC DENR 

also modeled the shutdown of three 

coal-fired electric generating units 

(EGUs) (Buck, Dan River, and 

Riverbend), that were located in 

counties adjacent to the Triad Area. 

Combined-cycle natural gas units have 

been built at two of these facilities 

(Buck and Dan River) replacing the now 

decommissioned coal-fired units. The 

federally-enforceable emission limits 

associated with these new combinedcycle units were included with the 

modeling conducted by NC DENR. The 

modeling shows that relaxation of the 

RVP standard to 9.0 psi would not 

interfere with continued maintenance of 

the ozone NAAQS in the Triad Area. 

b. Non-Interference Analysis for the 

Ozone NAAQS 

As previously discussed, effective 

November 6, 1991, the Triad Area 

(which consisted of Davidson, Forsyth 

and Guilford Counties in their entirety 

and a portion of Davie County) was 

designated as nonattainment for the 1- 

hour ozone NAAQS. As a 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment area, Davidson, Davie, 

Forsyth and Guilford Counties were 

subject to the federal RVP requirements 

for high ozone season gasoline to aid the 

Area with compliance with the ozone 

NAAQS. On November 13, 1992, NC 

DENR submitted a redesignation request 

and maintenance plan for the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

On February 6, 2008, EPA proposed 

that 13 nonattainment areas with 

deferred effective dates, including the 

Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point 

Area, be designated attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 73 FR 

6863. These areas met all of the 

milestones of the EAC program and 

demonstrated that they were in 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS as of December 31, 2007. 

Effective April 15, 2008, the 

Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point 

EAC Area was designated as attainment 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS with 

a design value of 0.083 ppm using three 

years of quality assured data for the 

years of 2005–2007. 

Throughout this history, there is an 

overall downward trend in ozone 

concentration in the Triad Area that can 

be attributed to Federal and State 

programs that have led to significant 

emissions reductions. The Triad Area is 

continuing to meet the 1-hour and 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS.7 With respect to 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS, based on the 

2010–2012 design values of 0.078 ppm 

and 0.076 ppm, Triad Area monitors in 

Forsyth and Guilford Counties, 

respectively, are violating the 2008 

ozone NAAQS. However, the 

preliminary 2011–2013 design values 

for Forsyth and Guilford Counties are 

0.073 ppm and 0.072 ppm, respectively. 

The 2008 ozone NAAQS is met when 

the annual fourth-highest daily 

maximum 8-hour average concentration, 

averaged over 3 years is 0.075 ppm or 

less. Currently (as shown in Table 1), all 

ozone monitors in the Triad Area are 

attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, and all but three ozone 

monitors (two located in Forsyth County 

and one located in Guilford County) are 

attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

TABLE 1—TRIAD AREA DESIGN VALUE

County 2005–2007 DV 

(ppm) 

2006–2008 DV 

(ppm) 

2007–2009 DV 

(ppm) 

2008–2010 DV 

(ppm) 

2009–2011 DV 

(ppm) 

2010–2012 DV 

(ppm) 

Caswell ..................................................... 0.077 0.079 0.076 0.073 0.070 0.073 

Davie ........................................................ 0.083 0.082 0.078 (8) ........................ 0.073 

Forsyth ..................................................... 0.081 0.081 0.077 0.076 0.075 0.078 

Guilford ..................................................... 0.082 0.082 0.079 0.076 0.074 0.076 

Rockingham ............................................. 0.078 0.080 0.078 0.075 0.071 0.073 

------- indicates no data available. 

On October 22, 2013, NC DENR 

submitted a letter to EPA describing its 

intention to early certify ozone 

monitoring data for the Triad Area 

based on 2011–2013 data. Once 

certified, this data is expected to 

demonstrate that all monitors in the 

Triad Area are attaining the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS based on 2011–2013 

data. EPA is proposing this action 

contingent on the 2011–2013 

monitoring data, showing continued 

attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 

being quality assured and certified prior 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 70521 

9See, e.g., The State of the Southern Oxidants 

Study (SOS) Policy Relevant Findings in Ozone and 

PM2.5 Pollution Research 1995–2003 (June 30, 

2004), http://www.ncsu.edu/sos/pubs/sos3/State_

of_SOS_3.pdf. 

10SMOKE, or ‘‘Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel 

Emissions’’ is an emissions processing system 

designed to create gridded, speciated, hourly 

emissions for input into a variety of air quality 

models. SMOKE supports area, biogenic, mobile 

(both onroad and nonroad), and point source 

emissions processing for criteria, particulate, and 

toxic pollutants and is integrated with the on-road 

emissions model MOBILE6 and MOVES. 

to the Agency taking final action on this 

proposed rule. 

The primary precursors for ozone are 

VOC and NOX emissions. Relaxation of 

the RVP standard from 7.8 to 9.0 psi 

results in a slight increase in emissions 

of 0.16 tons per day (tpd) (a 0.28 percent 

increase) in NOX, and 1.43 tpd (a 1.34 

percent increase) in VOC for Davidson, 

Forsyth, Guilford and Davie Counties. 

While modeling showed a slight 

increase in NOX and VOC emissions 

resulting from the use of 9.0 psi RVP 

gasoline as opposed to 7.8 psi RVP 

gasoline, the most appropriate analysis 

for purposes of evaluating noninterference is whether the increase in 

emissions would interfere with air 

quality for the Triad Area. For this 

demonstration, NC DENR chose to use 

photochemical modeling which is 

described below. 

In addition to analyzing the 

photochemical modeling provided by 

North Carolina, EPA also notes that the 

Triad Area is located within a NOXlimited region.9 A NOX-limited region is 

one in which the concentration of ozone 

is limited by the amount of NOX

emissions. As discussed above, NOX

and VOC are precursors to the formation 

of ozone in the atmosphere. In a NOXlimited area, high prevailing 

concentrations of VOC from naturallyoccurring sources are present in the 

atmosphere to contribute to ozone 

formation. Consequently, reduction of 

manmade, or anthropogenic, sources of 

VOC emissions generally do not result 

in reduced ozone formation. Instead, 

reductions of NOX emissions provide a 

more effective ozone reduction strategy 

because reduced emissions of manmade 

NOX emissions limit the amount of NOX

available in the atmosphere for ozone 

formation. These circumstances help 

support the reasonableness of the 

modeling showing that the small 

increase in VOC and even smaller 

increase in NOX from the relaxation of 

the RVP standard would not interfere 

with continued maintenance of the 

ozone NAAQS in the Triad Area. 

NC DENR utilized EPA’s Mercury and 

Air Toxics (MATS) modeling platform 

to model changes in ozone and particle 

matter pollution. The modeling years 

used in the modeling included the 2005 

base year and the 2016 future year. The 

future year 2016 was chosen because it 

is the latest MATS model data available. 

The USEPA MATS modeling platform 

was chosen because it is fairly recent, 

has undergone full model performance, 

and uses the MOVES mobile model to 

generate on-road mobile emissions. The 

USEPA MATS modeling used a national 

36 kilometer (km) domain and an 

eastern US 12 km domain. The NC 

DENR modeling was performed using 

the 12 km modeling domain. The EPA 

is currently using 12 km modeling to 

address the impacts of the proposed 

Tier 3 Motor Vehicle and Emissions 

Standards. Given that the EPA is using 

the 12 km modeling for Tier 3, NC 

DENR used the 12 km modeling to 

estimate the impacts of the change in 

summertime RVP to 9.0 psi. 

The USEPA MATS modeling 

conducted by NC DENR demonstrates 

that the relaxation of the RVP 7.8 

standard to 9.0 psi in the Triad 1-hour 

ozone maintenance area is not necessary 

to maintain the either the 1997 or 2008 

ozone NAAQS. Both the 2005 base year 

and the 2016 future year were used in 

the modeling. In the modeling NC DENR 

applied several conservative estimates 

to determine the maximum impact of 

RVP relaxation. These included: 

(1) Selecting the most populous 

county to represent on-road mobile 

emissions for the other counties. 

Guilford County was selected to 

represent the ‘‘highest’’ level of 

emissions increase expected because it 

has the greatest population of vehicles 

and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) 

within the Triad maintenance area. 

(2) Applying the maximum emissions 

increase for a given hour to the entire 

summertime period. Typically, the next 

step is to run SMOKE 10 to temporally 

and spatially allocate the MOVES 

output. However, NC DENR was unable 

to run the version of SMOKE used in the 

MATS modeling. As an alternative, for 

each pollutant, the average and 

maximum increase at any hour was 

calculated (see Table 2.3–8 of the NC 

submittal). In order to generate very 

conservative estimates of the impacts of 

the RVP relaxation, the maximum 

percent increase was applied to the 

mobile emissions for all hours of the 

June 1 to September 15 high-ozone 

season RVP period for both the 2005 

and 2016 emissions in Guilford, 

Forsyth, Davie, and Davidson Counties 

where the RVP relaxation is proposed. 

(3) Using the highest emissions 

increase for a given pollutant to 

represent VOC emissions. 

(4) The liberal application of grid 

masking (i.e., the array of grid cells 

where the RVP emissions changes were 

applied). A grid cell was included in the 

grid cell mask if as little as 20 percent 

of the cell area includes one or more of 

the counties where the RVP relaxation 

is proposed. The grid cell mask includes 

42 grid cells with an area of 6,048 km2. 

A typical application of the mask would 

include 32 grid cells with an area of 

4,608 km2. By comparison, the total area 

of the four counties is 4,935 km2. The 

20 percent threshold grid cell mask used 

in the modeling will adjust the mobile 

emissions in a larger area than the 

actual area of the four counties and will 

lead to conservative modeling results. 

NC DENR used the Community 

Multiscale Air Quality Modeling System 

(CMAQ, v.4.71) to perform the air 

quality runs. A total of six runs were 

made from March 20, 2005 to September 

30, 2005. A total of three runs were 

made using the 2005 emissions. The 

first run used the default 2005 MATS 

emissions (BASE05). The second run 

adjusted the mobile emissions due to 

the change in RVP from 7.8 psi to 9.0 

psi during the June 1 to September 15 

RVP period (RVP05). The third run for 

2005 included the RVP adjustments and 

added expected NOX changes at the 

Buck, Dan River, Riverbend power 

plants. The 2016 model runs were run 

in a similar fashion as the 2005 runs. 

The first run used the default 2016 

MATS emissions (BASE16). The second 

run adjusted the mobile emissions due 

to the change in RVP from 7.8 to 9.0 psi 

during the June 1 to September 15 RVP 

period (RVP16) and the third included 

the RVP adjustments and added 

expected NOX changes at the Buck, Dan 

River, Riverbend power plants. 

In this application, The Model 

Attainment Test Software was used to 

compute relative reduction factors 

(RRFs) for each of the sensitivity runs at 

the area monitors. The 2005 sensitivity 

runs were compared to the Base05 run, 

and the 2016 sensitivity runs were 

compared to the Base16 run. RRF values 

of 1.0005 or less would indicate less 

than a 0.05 ppb rise within the base year 

or future year modeling. The change in 

ozone for monitors in and near the Triad 

Area generated by the change in RVP in 

the 2005 base year is shown in Table 2. 

The other runs had similar results. 

There is no appreciable change in ozone 

concentrations due to the increase in 

gasoline RVP. 

See North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, 

submittal for more information on the 

modeling demonstration. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
70522 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 2—CHANGE IN OZONE CONCENTRATIONS AND RRFS IN THE 2005 BASE YEAR MODELING WITH SUMMERTIME RVP 

CHANGE TO 9.0 PSI

County 

County 

Base05 ozone 

design value 1

(ppb) 

RVP05 Ozone 

design value 2

(ppb) 

RRF 

Change from 

Base05 to 

RVP05 

(ppb) 

Caswell ............................................................................................................ 76.3 76.3 1.0002 0.0 

Davie ................................................................................................................ 81.3 81.3 1.0002 0.0 

Forsyth ............................................................................................................. 78.0 78.0 1.0004 0.0 

Forsyth ............................................................................................................. 73.0 73.0 1.0003 0.0 

Forsyth ............................................................................................................. 76.0 76.0 1.0004 0.0 

Forsyth ............................................................................................................. 80.0 80.0 1.0004 0.0 

Guilford ............................................................................................................ 77.0 77.0 1.0005 0.0 

Guilford ............................................................................................................ 82.0 82.0 1.0005 0.0 

Rockingham ..................................................................................................... 77.0 77.0 1.0003 0.0 

1 Default 2005 MATS concentrations. 

2 2005 concentrations with summertime RVP changed to 9.0 psi. 

It should also be noted that in its 

submission, North Carolina provided a 

demonstration that there is no 

appreciable change in future ozone 

design value concentrations at any of 

the area monitors when comparing 

changes in ozone concentration and 

RRFs in a future year scenario for 2016 

that modeled summertime RVP at 9.0 

psi. North Carolina’s model runs were 

done solely for the purpose of 

determining potential and relative 

impact for changes in ozone 

concentration due to a change of RVP to 

9.0 psi. More information on the MATS 

modeling can be found at http://

www.epa.gov/mats/actions.html. 

Additional details on NC DENR’s 

updates to the EPA MATS modeling 

platform to incorporate emissions in 

North Carolina are included in the 

State’s April 12, 2013, SIP revision. 

To provide a full evaluation, the State 

also compared total man-made 

(anthropogenic) emissions of VOC and 

NOX for the years 2007 (base year), 

2011, and 2018 using a RVP of 7.8 psi 

for Davidson, Forsyth, Guilford and 

Davie Counties (the remaining Counties 

are currently using a RVP of 9.0 psi) to 

emissions generated for the year 2018, 

using a RVP of 9.0 psi. 

There are four different man-made 

emission inventory source 

classifications: (1) Point, (2) area, (3) onroad mobile and (4) non-road mobile. 

(1) Point sources are those stationary 

sources that emit more than 10 tons per 

year of VOC or 100 tons per year of 

NOZX from a single facility. The source 

emissions are tabulated from data 

collected by direct on-site 

measurements of emissions or mass 

balance calculations utilizing emission 

factors from EPA’s AP–42, Compilation 

of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. For 

the projected year’s inventory, point 

sources are adjusted by growth factors 

based on Standard Industrial 

Classification codes. The growth factors 

are generated using the EPA’s Economic 

Growth Analysis System version 5.0 

(E–GAS 5.0) program. 

(2) Area sources are those stationary 

sources whose emissions are relatively 

small but due to the large number of 

these sources, the collective emissions 

could be significant (i.e., dry cleaners, 

service stations, etc.). For area sources, 

emissions are estimated by multiplying 

an emission factor by some known 

indicator of collective activity such as 

production, number of employees, or 

population. These types of emissions 

are estimated on the county level. For 

the projected year’s inventory, area 

source emissions are changed by 

population growth, projected 

production growth, or when applicable, 

by E–GAS 5.0 growth factors. 

(3) On-road mobile sources are those 

vehicles that travel on the roadways. For 

on-road mobile sources, the MOVES 

model data represent the new motor 

vehicle emission budgets for the Triad 

Area. The MOVES model uses the road 

class VMT and other operating 

conditions as input parameters to 

generate an output file that contains 

estimated emissions. For the projected 

years inventories, the on-road mobile 

sources emissions are calculated by 

running the MOVES mobile model for 

the future year with the projected VMT 

to generate emissions that take into 

consideration expected Federal tailpipe 

standards, fleet turnover and new fuel 

standards. 

(4) Non-road mobile sources are 

equipment that can move but do not use 

the roadways (i.e., lawn mowers, 

construction equipment, railroad 

locomotives, aircraft). With the 

exception of the railroad locomotives 

and aircraft engines, the emissions from 

this category are calculated using the 

EPA’s NONROAD2008a non-road 

mobile model. The railroad locomotive 

and aircraft engine emissions are 

estimated by taking an activity and 

multiply by an emission factor. All 

emissions are also estimated at the 

county level. Total off-road mobile 

source emissions represent the sum of 

emissions generated by the NONROAD 

2008a model and emissions calculated 

for aircraft and railroad locomotives. 

Despite the small increases in 

emissions projected for the lessstringent RVP standard of 9.0 psi, the 

Triad Area continues to demonstrate a 

downward trend in NOX and VOC 

emissions through 2018. Tables 3 and 4 

below provide the emissions inventory 

estimates for all source categories for the 

1-hour ozone maintenance area. 

TABLE 3—ANTHROPOGENIC VOC EMISSIONS (tpd) FOR THE TRIAD 1-HOUR MAINTENANCE AREA

County 

Based on RVP of 7.8 Based on RVP 

of 9.0 

2007 2011 2018 2018 

Davidson .......................................................................................................... 19.31 17.60 14.29 14.50 

Davie * .............................................................................................................. 8.04 7.79 8.43 8.43 

Forsyth ............................................................................................................. 36.62 32.63 32.69 33.18 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 70523 

TABLE 3—ANTHROPOGENIC VOC EMISSIONS (tpd) FOR THE TRIAD 1-HOUR MAINTENANCE AREA—Continued 

County 

Based on RVP of 7.8 Based on RVP 

of 9.0 

2007 2011 2018 2018 

Guilford ............................................................................................................ 58.31 53.71 51.10 51.83 

Total .......................................................................................................... 122.28 111.73 106.51 107.94 

* Emissions are for the entire County. 

TABLE 4—ANTHROPOGENIC NOX EMISSIONS (tpd) FOR THE TRIAD 1-HOUR MAINTENANCE AREA

County 

Based on RVP of 7.8 Based on RVP 

of 9.0 

2007 2011 2018 2018 

Davidson .......................................................................................................... 21.99 17.94 9.88 9.91 

Davie * .............................................................................................................. 6.08 4.41 2.75 2.75 

Forsyth ............................................................................................................. 35.88 24.47 16.50 16.54 

Guilford ............................................................................................................ 57.68 44.76 28.00 28.09 

Total .......................................................................................................... 121.63 91.58 57.13 57.29 

* Emissions are for the entire County. 

As Tables 3 and 4 indicate, NOX and 

VOC emissions in the Triad 1-hour 

ozone maintenance area will continue to 

decrease, even with the increase in high 

ozone season fuel RVP to 9.0 psi. The 

slight increase in emissions resulting 

from the control program change is 

being mitigated area-wide by a steady 

decrease in tailpipe emissions, which is 

the result of a cleaner new vehicle fleet 

replacing the older fleet and other 

Federal and State emissions reduction 

programs. 

In light of the current designations, 

monitoring and emissions data, and the 

submitted modeling, including the fact 

that the NOX emissions inventories are 

projected to continue to significantly 

decrease, EPA has preliminarily 

determined that the slight increase in 

NOX and VOC emissions associated 

with the request RVP change will not 

interfere with the Area’s ability to 

maintain the 1997 and 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. More details on the 

individual non-interference analyses for 

the PM2.5, NO2 and CO NAAQS are 

provided below. 

c. Non-Interference Analysis for the PM 

NAAQS 

The precursors for PM2.5 are NOX, 

SO2, VOC and ammonia. For the Triad 

Area, on-road mobile, non-road mobile 

and area sources are not considered to 

be large contributors to directly emitted 

PM2.5 or indirectly formed fine 

particulate matter less than 2.5 

micrometers (PM2.5) concentrations. As 

mentioned earlier in this rulemaking, 

the RVP requirements result in 

emissions benefits for VOC and NOX, 

and as such EPA focused on these 

precursors for the analysis of the 

potential impact of North Carolina’s SIP 

change. However, as described in North 

Carolina’s April 12, 2013, submission, 

directly emitted PM2.5 is a very small 

component of the overall PM2.5 ambient 

concentrations. Instead the primary 

species impacting PM2.5 concentrations 

are the secondarily formed sulfates and 

organic carbons. Sulfates are formed 

through the chemical reaction of SO2

and ammonia and the majority of the 

organic carbons come from natural 

sources like trees. See ‘‘Redesignation 

Demonstration and Maintenance Plan 

for the Hickory (Catawba County) and 

Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point 

(Davidson and Guilford Counties) Fine 

Particulate Matter Nonattainment 

Areas,’’ submitted to EPA on December 

18, 2009, Figure 4–2, p. 4–4, which can 

be accessed at www.regulations.gov 

using docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2009–1010. A 2009 analysis of SO2

emissions, which is a primary 

contributor to the formation of PM2.5

within North Carolina, found about 3.3 

percent of total SO2 emissions came 

from on-road, non-road and area sources 

combined, while the remaining 96.7 

percent came from point sources. 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 36852), EPA 

established an annual PM2.5 NAAQS at 

15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/

m3) based on a 3-year average of annual 

mean PM2.5 concentrations. At that time, 

EPA also established a 24-hour NAAQS 

of 65 mg/m3. See 40 CFR 50.7. On 

October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), EPA 

retained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

at 15.0 mg/m3 based on a 3-year average 

of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, 

and promulgated a new 24-hour 

NAAQS of 35 mg/m3 based on a 3-year 

average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour 

concentrations. On January 15, 2013 (78 

FR 3086), EPA established an annual 

primary PM2.5 NAAQS at 12.0 mg/m3

based on a 3-year average of annual 

mean PM2.5 concentrations. At that time, 

EPA retained the 2006 24-hour NAAQS 

at 35 mg/m3 based on a 3-year average 

of the 98th percentile of 24-hour 

concentrations. 

On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944), 

Davidson and Guilford Counties in the 

Triad Area were designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 standard and all other Counties 

were designated Unclassifiable/

Attainment. On November 13, 2009 (74 

FR 58688), all counties in the Triad 

Area were designated unclassifiable/

attainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standard. On November 18, 2011, EPA 

redesignated Davidson and Guilford 

Counties to attainment for the 1997 

annual PM2.5 standard based on the 

measured air quality data and the 10- 

year maintenance plan submitted. See 

76 FR 71455. 

As Table 5 indicates the PM2.5 annual 

and 24-hour design values demonstrate 

attainment of the respective NAAQS 

and have been decreasing. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
70524 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

11See table 5, above. 

TABLE 5—PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES

Year 2008–2010 2009–2011 2010–2012 

Annual Design Value 

Caswell ........................................................................................................................................ 9.9 8.9 8.9 

Davidson ...................................................................................................................................... 12.1 11.1 11.1 

Forsyth ......................................................................................................................................... 10.9 10.0 9.7 

Guilford ........................................................................................................................................ 10.8 9.8 9.4 

24-hour Design Value 

Caswell ........................................................................................................................................ 19 18 18 

Davidson ...................................................................................................................................... 23 21 21 

Forsyth ......................................................................................................................................... 23 21 20 

Guilford ........................................................................................................................................ 22 21 21 

EPA Annual PM2.5 NAAQS: 15 μg/m3. 

EPA 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS: 35 μg/m3. 

In light of the slight increase in VOC 

and NOX emissions from the relaxation 

of the RVP controls in Davidson, Davie, 

Forsyth and Guilford Counties, EPA has 

preliminarily determined that a change 

to the Federal RVP requirement for 

Davidson, Davie, Forsyth and Guilford 

Counties would not interfere with the 

Triad Area maintaining the 1997 PM2.5

annual or the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standards. The photochemical modeling 

analysis discussed above was also used 

to calculate the changes in PM2.5 due to 

the RVP Program change. The analysis 

showed no change in particle pollution 

at any of the monitors. 

d. Non-Interference Analysis for the 

2010 NO2 NAAQS 

On February 17, 2012 (77 FR 9532), 

EPA finalized designations for 2010 NO2

NAAQS. Counties in North Carolina, 

including those in the Triad Area, were 

designated unclassifiable/attainment for 

the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. Based on North 

Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP revision, 

the potential increase in the NOX

emissions associated with the requested 

less-stringent RVP standard is 

approximately a quarter of a ton per day 

between June 1st and September 15th. It 

is reasonable to believe that North 

Carolina’s requested change for its high 

ozone season RVP requirement would 

not cause the Area to be out of 

compliance with the 2010 NO2 NAAQS 

because the slight projected NOX

emissions increase would be mitigated 

by a steady decrease in tailpipe 

emissions, which is the result of cleaner 

new vehicle fleet replacing the older 

fleet. In light of the current designation, 

monitoring and emissions trend data 

and the submitted modeling, including 

the fact that NOX emissions inventories 

are projected to continue to significantly 

decrease,11 EPA has preliminarily 

determined that a change to the Federal 

RVP requirements for the Triad Area 

would not interfere with the continued 

decline in NOX emissions, nor with 

attainment or maintenance of the 2010 

NO2 NAAQS. 

e. Non-Interference Analysis for the CO 

NAAQS 

Forsyth County in the Triad Area was 

previously designated nonattainment for 

the 8-hour CO NAAQS. See 56 FR 

56694, November 6, 1991. 

Subsequently, Forsyth County attained 

the 8-hour CO NAAQS and was 

redesignated from nonattainment to 

attainment on September 21, 1994, 

based on the measured air quality data 

and the 10-year maintenance plan 

submitted. See 59 FR 48399. The 8-hour 

CO NAAQS is 9 ppm and the 1-hour CO 

NAAQS is 35 ppm. As provided in 

Table 6 below, monitoring data from 

2008–2011 shows Forsyth County is 

well below the 8-hour and 1-hour CO 

NAAQS. 

TABLE 6—AMBIENT AIR QUALITY CO 8-HOUR AND 1-HOUR DESIGN VALUES (PPM) 

County Monitor ID 2009 2010 2011 2012 

8-hr NAAQS 

Forsyth ................................................................................. 370670023 1.7 1.9 2.1 1.2 

1-hr NAAQS 

Forsyth ................................................................................. 370670023 2.3 2.7 2.6 1.8 

It is estimated that Triad Area on-road 

CO emissions will increase 

approximately 5 tons per day in 2016 if 

the applicable RVP requirement is 

relaxed to 9.0 psi in the Triad Area. This 

increase equates to a less than a 1.0 

percent increase in the total inventory of 

all anthropogenic sources for the Triad 

Area. In light of the slight increase in 

CO emissions EPA has preliminarily 

determined that a change to the Federal 

RVP requirement for Greensboro/

Winston-Salem/High Point would not 

interfere with the Winston-Salem/

Forsyth County Area maintaining the 

CO NAAQS. 

VI. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve the State 

of North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, 

revision to its 110(a)(1) Maintenance 

Plan for the Triad 1997 8-hour Ozone 

Maintenance Area. Specifically, EPA is 

proposing to approve the State’s 

showing that the Triad Area can 

continue to maintain the 1997 ozone 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 228 / Tuesday, November 26, 2013 / Proposed Rules 70525 

standard without emissions reductions 

associated with the use of gasoline with 

an RVP of 7.8 psi in the four Triad Area 

counties during the high ozone season— 

June 1 through September 15. 

In addition, due to the updated 

modeling reflecting a change in the 

applicable RVP standard, the North 

Carolina revision also includes an 

updated on-road mobile, non-road 

mobile and area source emissions for 

the Triad Area. EPA is also proposing 

approval of this revision. 

EPA has preliminarily determined 

that North Carolina’s April 12, 2013, SIP 

revision, including the technical 

demonstration associated with the 

State’s request for the removal of the 

Federal RVP requirements, and the 

updated on-road mobile, non-road 

mobile and area source emissions are 

consistent with the applicable 

provisions of the CAA. Should EPA 

decide to remove subject portions of the 

Triad Area from those areas subject to 

the 7.8 psi Federal RVP requirements, 

such action will occur in a separate, 

subsequent rulemaking. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submittal 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, October 7, 

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 proposed 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, Intergovernmental 

relations, Lead, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: November 12, 2013. 

Beverly H. Banister, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2013–28371 Filed 11–25–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2013–0120; 

4500030113] 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Initiation of Status Review 

of Arctic Grayling in the Upper 

Missouri River System 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of initiation of status 

review. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), under the 

authority of the Endangered Species Act 

of 1973, as amended (Act), announce 

the initiation of a status review of the 

Arctic grayling (Thymallus arcticus) 

upper Missouri River system distinct 

population segment (DPS). We conduct 

status reviews to determine whether the 

entity meets the definition of an 

endangered or threatened species under 

the Act. Following this status review, 

we will issue a proposed listing rule or 

a not warranted finding for the Arctic 

grayling upper Missouri River system 

DPS. Through this document, we 

encourage all interested parties to 

provide us information regarding the 

Arctic grayling in the upper Missouri 

River basin. 

DATES: To allow us adequate time to 

conduct this review, we request that we 

receive information no later than 

December 26, 2013. Information 

submitted electronically using the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal (see 

ADDRESSES section, below) must be 

received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on 

the closing date. After December 26, 

2013, you must submit information 

using the U.S. mail or hand-delivery 

option provided in the ADDRESSES

section below. Please note that we may 

not be able to address or incorporate 

information that we receive after the 

above requested date. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit 

information by one of the following 

methods: 

(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal 

eRulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, 

enter FWS–R6–ES–2013–0120, which is 

the docket number for this rulemaking. 

Then, in the Search panel on the left 

side of the screen, under the Document 

Type heading, click on the Proposed 

Rules link to locate this document. You 

may submit a comment by clicking on 

‘‘Comment Now!’’ 

(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail 

or hand-delivery to: Public Comments 

Processing, Attn: FWS–R6–ES–2013– 

0120; Division of Policy and Directives 

Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 

2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. 

We request that you send information 

only by the methods described above. 

We will post all submissions on 

http://www.regulations.gov. This 

generally means that we will post any 

personal information you provide us 

(see the Request for Information section 

below for more information). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jodi 

Bush, Field Supervisor, Montana Field 

Office, 585 Shepard Way, Suite 1, 

Helena, MT 59601; telephone (406) 449– 

5225, extension 205. If you use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD), please call the Federal 

Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 

1–800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1