Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 1 / Thursday, January 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 47 

■ 7. Section 123.20 is amended by 

revising paragraph (a) and paragraph (c) 

introductory text, to read as follows: 

§ 123.20 Nuclear related controls. 

(a) The provisions of this subchapter 

do not apply to articles, technical data, 

or services in Category VI, Category XVI, 

or Category XX of § 121.1 of this 

subchapter to the extent that exports of 

such articles, technical data, or services 

are controlled by the Department of 

Energy or the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission pursuant to the Atomic 

Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and 

the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 

1978, as amended, or are pursuant to a 

government transfer authorized 

pursuant to these Acts. For Department 

of Commerce controls, see 15 CFR 742.3 

and 744.2, administered pursuant to 

Section 309(c) of the Nuclear 

Nonproliferation Act of 1978, as 

amended (42 U.S.C. 2139a(c)), and 15 

CFR 744.5, none of which are subject to 

the provisions of this subchapter. 

* * * * * 

(c) A license for the export of a 

defense article, technical data, or the 

furnishing of a defense service relating 

to defense articles referred to in 

Category VI(e) or Category XX(b)(1) of 

§ 121.1 of this subchapter will not be 

granted unless the defense article, 

technical data, or defense service comes 

within the scope of an existing 

Agreement for Cooperation for Mutual 

Defense Purposes concluded pursuant 

to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as 

amended, with the government of the 

country to which the defense article, 

technical data, or defense service is to 

be exported. Licenses may be granted in 

the absence of such an agreement only: 

* * * * * 

PART 124—AGREEMENTS, OFFSHORE PROCUREMENT, AND OTHER 

DEFENSE SERVICES 

■ 8. The authority citation for part 124 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Sec. 2, 38, and 71, Pub. L. 90– 

629, 90 Stat. 744 (22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778, 

2797); 22 U.S.C. 2651a; 22 U.S.C. 2776; Pub. 

L. 105–261; Section 1261, Pub. L. 112–239; 

E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129. 

■ 9. Section 124.2 is amended by 

removing and reserving paragraphs 

(c)(5)(iii), (c)(5)(ix), and (c)(5)(xi), as 

follows: 

§ 124.2 Exemptions for training and 

military service. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(5) * * * 

(iii) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

(ix) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

(xi) [Reserved] 

* * * * * 

PART 125—LICENSES FOR THE 

EXPORT OF TECHNICAL DATA AND 

CLASSIFIED DEFENSE ARTICLES 

■ 10. The authority citation for part 125 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Secs. 2 and 38, Pub. L. 90–629, 

90 Stat. 744 (22 U.S.C. 2752, 2778); 22 U.S.C. 

2651a; E.O. 13637, 78 FR 16129. 

■ 11. Section 125.1 is amended by 

revising paragraph (e) to read as follows: 

§ 125.1 Exports subject to this part. 

* * * * * 

(e) For the export of technical data 

related to articles in Category VI(e), 

Category XVI, and Category XX(b)(1) of 

§ 121.1 of this subchapter, please see 

§ 123.20 of this subchapter. 

Rose E. Gottemoeller, 

Acting Under Secretary, Arms Control and 

International Security, Department of State. 

[FR Doc. 2013–31323 Filed 12–31–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4710–25–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0563; FRL–9904–89- 

Region 4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; North Carolina: 

Non-Interference Demonstration for 

Removal of Federal Low-Reid Vapor 

Pressure Requirement for the RaleighDurham-Chapel Hill Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving the State of 

North Carolina’s March 27, 2013, State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to 

the State’s approved Maintenance Plan 

for the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill 

1997 8-hour Ozone Maintenance Area 

(Triangle Area). Specifically, North 

Carolina’s revision, including updated 

modeling, shows that the Triangle 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 three portions 

(Wake and Durham Counties, and a 

portion of Granville County) of the 

Triangle Area during the high-ozone 

season. The State included a technical 

demonstration with the revision to 

demonstrate that the less-stringent RVP 

standard of 9.0 psi in these areas would 

not interfere with continued 

maintenance of the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(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 Triangle Area from the list of areas 

that are currently subject to the Federal 

7.8 psi RVP requirements. In addition, 

EPA is also approving changes to the 

motor vehicle emission budgets 

(MVEBs) used in the 1997 8-hour ozone 

maintenance plan for the Triangle Area. 

EPA has determined that North 

Carolina’s March 27, 2013, SIP revision 

with respect to the modeling changes 

and associated technical demonstration, 

and with respect to the updated MVEBs, 

is consistent with the applicable 

provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA or 

Act). Should EPA decide to remove the 

subject portions of the Triangle Area 

from those areas subject to the 7.8 psi 

Federal RVP requirements, such action 

will occur in a subsequent rulemaking. 

DATES: This rule will be effective on 

February 3, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2013–0563. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the www.regulations.gov 

Web site. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., Confidential Business 

Information 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 through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 

excluding federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

48 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 1 / Thursday, January 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

1See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990), 56 FR 24242 

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

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9043. 

Mr. Lakeman can be reached via 

electronic mail at lakeman.sean@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background of the Triangle Area 

II. Background of the Gasoline Volatility 

Requirement 

III. Background of Mobile Source Inventories 

and Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets 

Update 

IV. This Action 

V. Final Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background of the Triangle Area 

In 1991, the Triangle Area was 

designated as a moderate nonattainment 

area pursuant to the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 

1991). Under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, 

the Triangle nonattainment area was 

composed of Durham and Wake 

Counties, and the Dutchville Township 

portion of Granville County. 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 part of the 

RVP requirements associated with its 

nonattainment designation, gasoline 

sold in the Triangle 1-hour 

nonattainment area could not exceed 7.8 

psi RVP during the high-ozone season 

months. 

Following implementation of the 7.8 

psi RVP requirement in the Triangle 

Area, on April 18, 1994, the Area was 

redesignated to attainment for the 1- 

hour ozone standard, based on 1989– 

1992 ambient air quality monitoring 

data. See 59 FR 18300. North Carolina’s 

redesignation request for the 1-hour 

ozone Triangle Area did not, however, 

include a request for the Area to be 

removed from the list of areas subject to 

the 7.8 psi RVP standard. As such, the 

7.8 RVP requirement remained in place 

for Durham and Wake Counties, and the 

Dutchville Township portion of 

Granville County when the Triangle 

Area was designated nonattainment for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Under 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the 

Triangle Area was expanded from 

Durham and Wake Counties, and the 

Dutchville Township portion of 

Granville County to also include 

Franklin, Johnston, Orange, and Person 

Counties, the remainder of Granville 

County and Baldwin, Center, New Hope 

and Williams Townships in Chatham 

County. See 69 FR 23857 (April 30, 

2004). In 2007, the Triangle Area was 

redesignated to attainment for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 72 FR 72948, 

(December 26, 2007). The Triangle Area 

was later designated as attainment for 

the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 77 

FR 30088 (May 21, 2012). 

II. Background 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 high 

ozone 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 

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 limits of CAA 

section 211(h).1 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 in a nonattainment area 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 1 / Thursday, January 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 49 

2 In the December 26, 2007, final rule EPA also 

approved NC DENR’s determination that on-road 

emissions of VOC are insignificant for 

transportation conformity purposes. We are not 

addressing that insignificance finding in today’s 

rule. 

3A safety margin is the difference between the 

attainment level of emissions from all source 

categories (i.e., point, area, and mobile) and the 

projected level of emissions from all source 

categories. The State may choose to allocate some 

of the safety margin to the MVEBs, for 

transportation conformity purposes, so long as the 

total level of emissions from all source categories 

remains equal to or less than the attainment level 

of emissions. (40 CFR 93.124(a)). 

4The decision regarding removal of Federal RVP 

requirements pursuant to section 211(h) in the 

Triangle Area includes other considerations 

Continued 

volatility standard. As noted above, 

however, North Carolina did not request 

relaxation of the applicable 7.8 psi RVP 

standard when the Triangle 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 Triangle 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. 

III. Background of Mobile Source 

Inventories and Motor Vehicle 

Emission Budgets Update 

On June 7, 2007, the State of North 

Carolina, through NC DENR, submitted 

a final request for EPA to: (1) 

Redesignate the Triangle Area to 

attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard; and (2) approve a North 

Carolina SIP revision containing a 

maintenance plan for the Triangle Area. 

On December 26, 2007 (72 FR 72948), 

EPA approved the redesignation request 

for the Triangle Area. Additionally, EPA 

approved the 1997 8-hour ozone 

maintenance plan including nitrogen 

oxides (NOX) MVEBs for the Triangle 

Area.2 These approvals were based on 

EPA’s determination that the State of 

North Carolina had demonstrated that 

the Triangle Area met the criteria for 

redesignation to attainment specified in 

the CAA, including the determination 

that the entire Triangle Area had 

attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

At the time of original redesignation 

request, the on-road motor vehicle 

inventory was generating by the 

MOBILE6.2 model, which at the time 

was the current MVEB model. The 

change to the maintenance plan 

discussed above includes a MVEB 

generated by the MOVES model which 

has since replaced the MOBILE6.2 

model. In addition, the model used to 

calculate the original non-road 

inventory (NONROAD2005c) has also 

since been updated by a new non-road 

inventory model (NONROAD2008a). 

As a result of these new models and 

the revised emission associated with a 

relaxed RVP standard, the safety 

margin 3 calculations provided in the 

revised maintenance plan have changes 

from the previous margins included 

with the original maintenance plan. 

Therefore, North Carolina’s revision 

includes a reallocation of the safety 

margin to the NOX MVEB based upon 

the revised calculations. 

NC DENR is currently allocating 

portions of the available safety margin 

to the MVEBs to allow for unanticipated 

vehicle miles traveled growth as well as 

changes to future vehicle mix 

assumptions that influence the emission 

estimations. A total of 14,396 kilograms 

(kg) (15.87 tons per day (tpd)) and 

13,563 kg (14.95 tpd) from the available 

NOX safety margins in 2008 and 2017, 

respectively, were added to the MVEBs 

for the Triangle Area. 

IV. This Action 

On October 30, 2013 (78 FR 64896), 

EPA proposed approval of North 

Carolina’s March 27, 2013, revision to 

the State’s approved 1997 8-hour ozone 

maintenance plan for the Triangle Area. 

Specifically, North Carolina’s revision, 

including updated modeling, shows that 

the Triangle Area would continue to 

maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard if the currently applicable RVP 

standard for gasoline of 7.8 psi were 

modified to 9.0 psi during the highozone season. In addition, the revision 

included changes to the MVEBs used in 

the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance 

plan for the Triangle Area. No adverse 

comments were received on this 

proposed action and EPA is hereby 

finalizing approval of the revision. 

The Triangle Area 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 

December 26, 2007. See 72 FR 72948. 

This rulemaking approves a revision to 

the 1997 8-hour ozone Maintenance 

Plan for the Triangle Area submitted by 

the NC DENR. Specifically, EPA is 

approving changes to the maintenance 

plan, including updated modeling, that 

shows that the Triangle Area can 

continue to maintain the 1997 ozone 

standard without reliance on emission 

reductions based upon the use of 

gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi in any 

of the Triangle Area counties during the 

high ozone season—June 1 through 

September 15. EPA is also concluding 

that the new modeling demonstrates 

that the Triangle Area would continue 

to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard 

with the use of gasoline with an RVP of 

9.0 psi throughout the Triangle Area 

during the high ozone season. 

Consistent with section 110(l) of the 

Act, EPA also concludes that the use of 

gasoline with an RVP of 9.0 psi 

throughout the Maintenance Plan Areas 

during the high ozone season would not 

interfere with other applicable 

requirements of the Act. 

Section 110(l) requires that a revision 

to the SIP not interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress (as defined in section 171), or 

any other applicable requirement of the 

Act. 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 March 27, 2013, SIP revision, 

including review of section 110(l) 

requirements can be found in the 

proposed rule published on October 30, 

2013, at 78 FR 64896. 

This rulemaking approves the State’s 

revision to its existing maintenance plan 

for the Triangle Area demonstrating that 

the Area can continue to maintain the 

standard without relying upon gasoline 

with an RVP of 7.8 psi being sold in the 

Triangle 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 Triangle Area.4

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

50 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 1 / Thursday, January 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 

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. 

5 In addition to a less stringent RVP standard, the 

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

Additionally, the new modeling 

conducted by North Carolina to account 

for the requested relaxation of the 

applicable RVP standard in a portion of 

the Triangle Area also results in changes 

to the safety margin associated with the 

maintenance plan.5 As such, the North 

Carolina revision includes a reallocation 

of the safety margin among the NOx

MVEBs for the Triangle Area, which 

EPA is also approving today. 

V. Final Action 

EPA is approving the State of North 

Carolina’s March 27, 2013, revision to 

its Maintenance Plan for the Triangle 

1997 8-hour Ozone Maintenance Area. 

Specifically, EPA is approving the 

State’s showing that the Triangle Area 

can continue to maintain the 1997 

ozone standard without emissions 

reductions associated with the use of 7.8 

psi RVP gasoline in the three portions 

of the Triangle Area currently subject to 

the 7.8 psi RVP standard during the 

high ozone season—June 1 through 

September 15. 

EPA is approving the revised and 

updated modeling submitted by the 

State, which shows that the Triangle 

Area can continue to maintain the 1997 

ozone standard if the applicable RVP 

standard in the three portions of the 

Triangle Area. EPA is also approving the 

revised NOX MVEBs for 2008 and 2017 

including the revised and reallocated 

safety margin among the NOX MVEBs 

for the Triangle Area. 

EPA has determined that North 

Carolina’s March 27, 2013, SIP revision, 

including the technical demonstration 

associated with the State’s request for 

the removal of the Federal RVP 

requirements, and the updated MVEBs 

are consistent with the applicable 

provisions of the CAA. Should EPA 

decide to remove the subject portions of 

the Triangle Area from those areas 

subject to the 7.8 psi Federal RVP 

requirements, such action will occur in 

a separate, subsequent rulemaking. 

VI. 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 action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive 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 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. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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

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

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

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by March 3, 2014. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. See section 

307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements and 

Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: December 18, 2013. 

Beverly H. Banister, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR part 52, is amended as 

follows: 

PART 52—[APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart II—North Carolina 

■ 2. Section 52.1770(e), is amended by 

adding a new entry for ‘‘Supplement 

Maintenance Plan for the RaleighDurham-Chapel Hill, NC 1997 8-hour 

Ozone Maintenance Area.’’ at the end of 

the table to read as follows: 

§ 52.1770 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 1 / Thursday, January 2, 2014 / Rules and Regulations 51 

EPA-APPROVED NORTH CAROLINA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Provision State 

effective date 

EPA approval 

date Federal Register citation Explanation 

*******

Supplement Maintenance Plan for the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC 1997 8-hour Ozone Maintenance Area and RVP Standard.3/27/2013 1/2/14 [Insert citation of publication].

[FR Doc. 2013–31250 Filed 12–31–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R06–OAR–2010–0333; FRL–9904–72– 

Region 6] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Texas; 

Reasonable Further Progress Plan, 

Contingency Measures, Motor Vehicle 

Emission Budgets, and a Vehicle Miles 

Traveled Offset Analysis for the 

Houston-Galveston-Brazoria 1997 

8-Hour Severe Ozone Nonattainment 

Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving two State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 

submitted by the State of Texas on April 

1, 2010, and revised on May 6, 2013, 

containing a reasonable further progress 

(RFP) plan, RFP contingency measures 

demonstration, motor vehicle emission 

budgets (MVEBs), and a vehicle miles 

traveled (VMT) offset analysis for the 

Houston-Galveston-Brazoria (HGB) 1997 

8-hour ozone severe nonattainment area. 

EPA is approving SIP revisions in 

accordance with the requirements of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA 

regulations. 

DATES: This final rule is effective 

February 3, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA established a docket 

for this action under Docket ID Number 

EPA–R06–OAR–2010–0333. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site. Although listed in the electronic 

docket, some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., confidential business 

information (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 through 

http://www.regulations.gov or in hard 

copy for public inspection during 

normal business hours at the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, 

Dallas, Texas. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Carl Young, Air Planning Section (6PD– 

L), Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, 

Dallas, Texas 75202–2733, telephone 

(214) 665–6645; email address 

young.carl@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Throughout this document, whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. On September 9, 2013 (78 FR 

55029), EPA published a proposed 

approval of the 2010 RFP plan, RFP 

contingency measures, MVEBs, and 

VMT offset analysis for the HGB severe 

1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. 

The SIP revisions for this action were 

formally submitted by the State of Texas 

on April 1, 2010, and revised on May 6, 

2013. The SIP revisions address the RFP 

and RFP contingency measures 

requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, and establish MVEBs for 2013. 

The revision also provides a VMT offset 

analysis demonstration, a severe area 

requirement, which shows the area does 

not need any additional transportation 

control measures (TCMs) or 

transportation control strategies (TCSs) 

to keep mobile source emissions below 

the established emissions ceiling. EPA’s 

rationale for our proposed action is 

explained in the September 9, 2013 

proposed rulemaking as well as a more 

detailed description of the two 

submittals, and will not be restated 

here. EPA is approving the SIP revisions 

because they satisfy the RFP, RFP 

contingency measures, and 

transportation conformity requirements 

for MVEBs of section 110 and part D of 

the CAA and associated EPA 

regulations, and section 182(d)(1)(A) of 

the CAA. 

II. Response to Comments 

We received several comments from 

the Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality. In addition to 

supporting our proposed approval, the 

state asked for clarification to support 

consistency across TCEQ and EPA 

documents for a number of items. 

Comment 1. Table 1: Revisions to the 

2002 RFP Base Year Emissions 

Inventory on Page 55031 is not the 

original 2002 RFP Base Year. It is an 

attainment demonstration base year 

table. Table 2: RFP 2002 Baseline 

Emissions Inventory Summary is the 

revised RFP Base Year Emissions 

Inventory and is correct. Table 1 needs 

to be updated to contain the original 

base year information. 

Response 1: EPA acknowledges that 

some confusion may have occurred with 

the labeling of the base year columns in 

this table due to the fact that there were 

multiple submittals with one partial 

submittal, and with multiple references 

to base years. We have clarified Table 1 

by re-labeling the base year columns 

and republishing it below to better 

reflect the years for which the values 

were calculated. The values in the 

columns remain unchanged. 

TABLE 1—REVISIONS TO THE 2002 RFP BASE YEAR EMISSIONS INVENTORY

[Tons/day] 

Source type NOX VOC 

Submittal date Previously 

approved 

Revised 

inventory * 

Previously 

approved 

Revised 

inventory * 

Point ................................................................................................................. 339.48 339.29 297.12 316.62 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES