ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTIONAGENCY 40 CFR Part 81
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Extension of Attainment Date for the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, North CarolinaSouth Carolina 1997 8-Hour Ozone Moderate Nonattainment Area



### AGENCY: Envhonmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

### ACTION: Proposed rule. 

### SUMMARY: The State of North Carolina, through the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NC DENR), and the Stateof South Carolina, through the South Carolina Department of Environmental Control (SC DHEC), submittedletters with a request forEPA to grant a one-year extension of the attainment date for the 1997 &hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) forthe Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, North Carolina-South Carolina Area (hereafter referred to as the "bi-state Charlotte Area"), on April 28,2010, and May 6,2010, respectively. The bi-state CharlotteArea consists of Cabarms, Gaston, Lincoln,Mecklenburg, Rowan, Union Counties and a portion of Iredell County (Davidson and Coddle Creek Townships), North Carolina, and a portion of York County, South Carolina. In today's action, EPA is proposing to detenninethat the states of North Carolina and South Carolinahave met the Clean Air Act (CWor the Act) requirements to obtain a one-year extension to their attainment date for the 1997 &hour ozone NAAQS for the bi-state Charlotte Area. As a result, EPA is proposing to approve a one-year extension of the 1997 8-hourozonemoderate attainment date for the bi-state Charlotte Area. Specifically,EPA is proposing to

,J extend the bi-state Charlotte Area's attainment date from June 15,2010, to June 15,2011.



### DATES: Comments must be received on or before [insert date 30 davs after date of publication in the Federal Register].



### ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identifiedby Docket 

### IDNo. EPA-R04-OAR-2010- 0504by one of the followingmethods: 1. www.rermlations.g;ov: Follow the on-line instructions for submittingcomments. 2. 

### E-mail: beniamin.lvnorae @epa.~ov.

4. Mail: "EPA-R04-OAR-2010- 0504" Regulatory Development Section,Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

### EnvironmentalProtection Agency, Region 4,61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. 5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. EnvironmentalProtectionAgency, Region 4,61Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's offcialhorn of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holidays.

Instructions: Direct your commentsto Docket ID No. "EPA-R04-OAR-2010-0504-201029. EPAs policy is that all comments received will be included 

### in the public docket without change 2and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes informationclaimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other informationwhose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

### Do not submit through www.rePulations.gov or e-mail, information that you considerto be CBI or otherwise protected. The www.rermlations.eov website 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 emailcomment directly to 

### EPA without going through www.regulations.~ov, your e-mail address will be automaticallycaptured 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 informationin the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROMyou submit. If 

### EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, 

### EPA may not be able to consideryour comment. Electronicfiles 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 

### htt~://www.e~a.~ov/e~ahome/dockets.htrn.

Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www.regulations.mv 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 availableonly inhard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronicallyin www.repulations.~ov or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides andToxics ManagementDivision, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4,61Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. 

### EPA requests that 

### if at all possible, you contact the person listed 

### in the 

### FOR FURTHER 

### INFORMATIONCONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's officialhours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 

### 430,excluding federalholidays.



### FOR FURTHER 

### INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane Spann,Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides 

### and Toxics Management Division, U.S. EjlviromentalProtection Agency, Region 4,61Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303- 8960. The telephone number 

### is (404) 562-9029. Ms. Span.. can also be reached via electronic 

### mail at s~ann.iane@e~a.~ov.



### SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background 11. 

### Today's Action 

### HI. EPA's 

### Analysis ofthe States' Requestsfor an AttainmentDate 

### Extension for the 

### biState 

### Charlotte Area for the 1997 

### 8-Hour Ozone

### NAAQS IV, Proposed Actions 

### V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. 

### Background A. 1997 

### &Hour Ozone

### NAAQSGround level ozone is not directly emitted by sources. Rather, emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) react 

### in the presence of sunlightto form ground-Ievel ozone. NOx and VOC 

### are referred to as precursors of ozone. The CAA establishes
a process for 

### air quality management through the NAAQS. On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated
a revised 8-hourozone NAAQS of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). Under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 1997 &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 a data completeness requirement. 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 pekent, and no single year has less than 75percent data completeness ddetennined in Appendix I of part 50. Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the CAArequires 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 CharlotteArea


### 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, Aprd 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,
I EPA established ozone nonattainment area attainmentdates based on Table 1of section 181(a) of the CAA. This established an attainment date 6 years afterthe June 15,2004;effective date for areas classified

### as moderate 

### areas for the 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment designations.Therefore the bi-state Charlotte Area's original attainment date was June 15,2010. (See 69 

### FR 23951, April 30,2004.) Under certain circumstances, the CAA allows for extensionsof the attainment dates prescribed at the time of the original nonattainrnentdesignation. Seebelow for 

### further discussion. As a point of clarification, EPA issued a revised %hour ozone NAAQS in 2008. EPA subsequently reconsidered the 2008 NAAQS, and proposed 

### a new %hour ozoneNAAQS in January 2010. 

### Fi %hour ozoneNAAQS are expected to be effective

### in August 2010. The current proposed action,however, is being taken with regard to the 1997 8-hour ozoneNAAQS. Requirementsfor the bi-state CharlotteArea for the 2010 8-hour ozone NAAQS will be addressedin the 

### future. 

### B. CAA Requirementsfor 

### One-YearExtension Requests Section 181(b)(2)(A)requires the Administrator, within six months of the attainment date, to determine whether an ozone nonattainment area attained the NAAQS. CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) states that, for areas classified as marginal, moderate, or serious, 

### if the Administrator determinesthat the area did not attain the standardby its attainment date, the area must be reclassified to the next classification. However, CAA Section 181(a)(5)provides an exemption from these reclassification requirements. Under this provision, EPA may grant up to 2 one-year extensions of the attainment date under specified conditions. Specifically, Section 181 (a)@) states: Upon applicationby any State, the Administratormay extend for 1additional year (hereinafterreferred to as the "ExtensionYear") the date specsed in table 1of paragraph (1)of this subsection if--

### (A) the State has complied with all requirements and commitments pertaining to the
area 

### in the applicableimplementationplan, and (B) no more than 1exceedance of the national ambient air quality standard level for
ozone has occurred 

### in the area 

### in the year preceding the Extension 

### Year. 42 U.S.C. 7511(a)(5). With regard to the first element, "applicable implementation plan" is defined 

### in Section 302(q) of the CAA as, "the portion (orportions) of the implementationplan,
or most recent revision thereof, which has been approved under Section7410 of this title, or promulgated under Section 7410(c) of this title, or promulgated or approved pursuant to regulations promulgated under Section 7601(d) of this title and which implements the relevant requirements of this chapter." 42 U.S.C. 7602(q). The language in section 181(a)(5)(B) reflects the form of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, which is exceedancebased and does notreflect the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, which is concentrationbased. Because section 181(a)(5)(B) does not reflectthe form of the 8-hour NAAQS and application would produce 

### an absurd result, EPA interprets this provision 

### in a
manner consistent with Congressional intent but reflectingthe form of the 1997 &hour NAAQS. Therefore, EPA adopted an interpretation that under both section 172(a)(2)(C) and 181(a)(5), 

### an
area will be eligible for the first of the one-year extensions under the &hourNAAQS if, for the attainmentyear, the area's 4' highest daily &hour average is 0.084 ppm or less. The area will be eligiblefor the second extension if the area's 4&highest daily &hour value averaged over both the original attainmentyear and the first extension year is 0.084 ppm or less. No more than 

### 2 one-year extensionsmay be issued for a singlenonattainment area. EPA interprets the CAA and implementing regulations to allow the granting of a oneyear extensionunder the following minimumconditions: (1)the staterequests a one-yearextension; 

### (2) all requirements and commitments 

### in the EPA-approved 

### SIP for the area have been complied with: and (3) the area has a 4&highest daily 8-how average of 0.084 ppm or less for the attainment year (or 

### an area's 4L highest daily 8-hour value averaged over both the original attainment year and the first extensionyear is 0.084ppm or less, if a second one-year extension is requested).



### IL Today's Actions EPA is proposing to determine that North Carolina and South Carolina have met the CAA requirements to obtain a one-year extensionof theattainment date forthe 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for the bi-state CharlotteArea. As a 

### result, EPA is proposing to extend the bistate CharlotteArea's attainment date fromJune 15,2010, to June 15,2011, for the 1997&hour ,ozone NAAQS. EPA's proposed actions are based upon complete, quality assured, quality controlled, and certified ambient 

### air monitoring data for 2009, and onEPA's preliminary de)ermination that the States are meeting their federally-approved implementationplans. If today's proposed actions are finalized, the bi-state Charlotte Area's attainment date for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS will be extended one-year fromJune 15,2010, to June 15,2011.

111. EPA's Analysis of the States' Requests for 

### an Attainment Date Extensionfor the 

### biState CharlotteAreafor the 1997 &Hour Ozone

### NAAQS As mentioned above, EPA interprets the CAA and implementing regulations to allow the grantingof a one-year extension under the following

### minimum conditions: (1) the staterequests a one-year extension; (2) all requirements and commitments 

### in the EPA-approved SIP for the
area have been complied with; and (3) the area has a 4&highest daily 8-hour average of 0.084 8
1

. %ppm or less for the attainment year (or an area's 4m highest daily 8-hour value averaged over both the original attainment year and the firstextension year is 0.084 ppm or less, if a second one-year extension is requested). Below provides EPA's analysis ofhow North Carolina and South Carolinahave met these 

### minimum requ&ments.



### (1 The State(s) request(s) 

### a oneyear extension. The State of North Carolina, through NC 

### DENR,and the State of SouthCarolina, through SCDHEC, submitted letters on April 28,2010, and May 6,2010, respectively, requesting that EPA grant a one-yearextension of the attainment date for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the bi-state Charlotte Area. Both letters contained certifications that each state is complying witb all requirements and commitments pertaining to the bi-state Charlotte Area 

### in the applicable implementation plan; and that the bi-state CharlotteArea 

### has 

### a 4th highest daily 8- hour average of 0.084 ppm or less for the attainment year (ie., 2009) for this initialrequest for
an extension. EPA's analysis of the ceaifcations 

### from North Carolina and SouthCarolina, and of the ambient air quality monitoring data for the bi-state CharlotteArea for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS (i.e., in relation to the States' attainment date extensionrequest) is provided below.
(2) All requirements 

### and commitments in the EPA-approved

### SIPfor the area have been complied 

### with. 

### Inthe letters submittedby NC 

### DENR and SC 

### DHEC, on April 28,2010, and May 6, 2010, respectively, both statesdiscuss implementationof state measures in the SIP. One of the required elements for a one-year extensionrequired under Section 181(a)(5)of the CAA is that 9the State has complied with allrequirements and commitments pertaining to the area in the applicable implementation plan (as that term is defined in Section 302(q) of the CAA). EPA has conducted 

### an independent review of whether both North Carolina and South Carolina are in compliance with the applicable implementationplans for the bi-state CharlotteArea as intended by Section 181(a)(S)(A)of the CAA, and has made the preliminary determination that both states
are in compliance. 

### This preliminary determinirtion is based on EPA's belief tliat both states are cmently meeting the EPA-approved implementationplans for the bi-state CharlotteArea. While both states previously had outstandingrequirements related to the 1997 8-hour ozone attainment demonstrations for the bi-state Charlotte Area, both states have provided the necessary SIP submittals. Nonetheless, EPA does not and did not view submission or approval of these attainment demonstrations as relevant for meeting the "applicable implementation plans" for the bi-state Charlotte Area with regard to Section 181(a)(5)(A)of the CAA. Nonetheless, on May 27, 20101,letters were sent to the Governors ofNorth Carolina and South Carolina acknowledging submission of the attainment demonstrationsfor the bi-state Charlotte Area. EPA's May 27,2010, letters also announcedEPA's determinationthat the attainment demonstration submissions provided by North Carolina and South Carolina were complete pursuant to Section 110(k)(l) of the CAA and the "Criteria for Determiningthe Completeness of Plan Submissions," 

### as described in 40 CFR part 

### 51,Appendix V, and thus EPA stopped the sanctions clocksthat were running for the States' previous failure to provide these required submissions. EPA is currently reviewing the approvability of these attainment demonstration

In EPA's May 27,2010, lettas to the GovernsofNorth Carolinaand South Carolina regardingthe stoppage of the sanctions clocks for the f~nding offailureto submit for the bi-state Charlotte attainmentdemonstration for the 1997 %hourozone NAAQS, EPA inadvertentlyindicated the dates ofthe North Carolina attainment demonstration submissions were November 12,2008,and April 5,2009; and the dates of the SouthCarolina attainment demonstrationsubmissionswere November 13.2008, and April 29,2009. EPA has since sent a follow up letter correctingthe dates of the submission for North Carolinaas November 12,2009,andApril 5,2010; and for South Carolina as November 13,2009, and April 29,2010.submissions 

### and will make its 

### final determination on approvability'through a separate rulemaking in the Federal Register.
(3) 

### The area 

### has a 4&

### highest daily 

### 8-hoar average of 0.084 

### ppm 

### or less 

### for the attainmentyear. In the letters submitted by NC 

### DENR and SC DHEC, on April 28,2010, and May 6, 2010, respectively,both states have certified that the 4th highest daily %hour average ozone concentrationfor the bi-state CharlotteArea in 2009 was below 0.084ppm, and that the 2009
ozone data which are included in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) meets necessary quality control and quality assurance requirements. Table 1 provides the 2009 4&highest concentrations at the monitors in the bi-state CharlotteArea.

Table 1

# -2009 4' Highest Concentrations for the bi-state Charlotte Area

EPA has reviewed the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS ambient air quality monitoring data Monitoring site2 Arrowood CountyLie Crouse Enochville Garinger (Plaza) Monroe Rockwell

for the bi-state CharlotteArea, consistentwith the requirements contained in 40 

### CFR part 50 and

While York County, South Carolina does have an ozone monitor, this monitor is not included in the portion ofthe bi-state CharlotteArea that iscurrentlydesignated nonattainmentfor ozone and thus is not relevautfor consideration of the attainmentdate extensionrequests. However, the 4' maximum highestconcentrationin 2009 for the York County, South Carolina ozone monitor is 0.62ppm

### -well below 0.084ppm. 11 County Mecklenburg County, NC Mecklenburg County,NC 

### LincolnCounty, NC Rowan County, NC Mecklenburg County, NC Union County, NC Rowan County, NC 2009 41bHighest Concentration (ppm)" 0.068 0.071 0.065 0.073 0.069 0.067 0.071

### as recorded in the EPA AQS database. On the basis of that review, EPA has preliminarily concluded that for the attainment year, 2009, the bi-state Charlotte Area's 4b highest daily 8- hour average concentration was 0.073 ppm which is below the &hour ozone standard of 0.08 ppm (effectively 0.084 ppm). As was explained above, the statutoryelements for a 1-yearextensionhave been met. As
aresuit, 

### EPA 

### is proposing approval of North Carolina and South Carolina's attainment date extension requests for the bi-state CharlotteArea for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.



### IV. Proposed Actions EPA is proposing to approveNorth Carolina's April 28,2010, and South Carolina's May 6,2010, requests for EPA to grant a one-year extension (fromJune 15,2010, to June 15,2011) of the bi-state Charlotte

### Area attainmentdate for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS because EPA believes that both Noah Carolina and South Carolinahave met the statutoryrequirements for such 

### an extension. EPA's belief is based on its preliminary detenninationthat both states are in compliance of the requirements and commitments associated with the EPA-approved implementationplans, and on the belief that the 4m highest daily 8-hour ozone average concentration for 2009 for the bi-state Charlotte.Area

### is below the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
as required by the CAA. As provided in 40 

### CFR 51.907, if EPA finalizes this action, it will extend, by one year, the deadlineby which the bi-state Charlotte Area must attain the 1997 8- hour ozoneNAAQS. 

### It will also extend the timeframe by which EPA must make 

### an attainment determinationfor the area. EPA notes that this proposed action only relates to the initial oneyear extension. As noted in Section 181(a)(5)of the CAA, areas may qualify for up to 2 oneyear extensions. If requested at a future date, EPA will make a determinationof theappropriatenessof 

### a second one-year extension for the bi-state CharlotteArea for the 1997 8- hour ozone NAAQS in a separaterulemaking.


### VI. Statutory 

### andExecutive Order 

### Reviews Under the CAA, the Administratoris required to approve SIP submissions and requests that comply with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

### 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

### Thus,in reviewing states' requests for an extension of the 1997 8- hour ozone NAAQS attainment

### date forthe bi-state CharlotteArea, EPA's role is to approve the state's request, provided that it meets the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves a staterequest for an extension of the 1997 8-hourozone NAAQS attainment

9 date as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additionalrequirements beyond those imposedby state law. For that reason, this proposed action: is not a "significant regulatory action" subjectto review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 

### FR 51735, October4,1993);

+ e does not impose 

### an information collectionburden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory FlexibilityAct (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); does not contain any unfunded mandate or sigolficantlyor uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (PublicLaw

does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 

### FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

### - *= is not an economically sigruficantregulatory action based onhealth or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,April 23,1997); is not a ~i~cant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 1321 1 

### (66 

### FR 28355, May 22,2001); is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d)of the National Technology Transfer 

### and AdvancementAct 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 authorityto address, as appropriate, disproportionate

### human health or environmentaleffects, 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 specifiedby 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 in40 

### CFRPart 81 

### Aii pollution control, National 

### parks, Wilderness areas.


### Authority: 

### 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

# ,k# J

# Qq.

Bever y H. Banister Acting 

### RegionalAdministrator, 

### Region 4.