```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 199 (Monday, October 15, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62454-62461]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25172]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2008-0177; FRL-9740-9]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Portion of 
York County, South Carolina Within Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, North 
Carolina-South Carolina 1997 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area; 
Reasonable Further Progress Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve two state 
implementation plan (SIP) revisions, submitted by the South Carolina 
Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC), on August 31, 
2007, and April 29, 2010, to address the reasonable further progress 
(RFP) plan requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air 
quality standards (NAAQS) for the portion of York County, South 
Carolina that is within the bi-state Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill 1997 
8-hour ozone nonattainment area. The Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, 
North Carolina-South Carolina 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area 
(hereafter referred to as the ``bi-state Charlotte Area'') is comprised 
of Cabarrus, Gaston, Lincoln, Mecklenburg, Rowan, Union and a portion 
of Iredell (Davidson and Coddle Creek Townships) Counties in North 
Carolina; and a portion of York County in South Carolina (hereafter 
referred to as ``the York County Area''). EPA is also providing the 
status of its adequacy determination for the motor vehicle emissions 
budgets (MVEB) for volatile organic compounds (VOC) that were included 
in South Carolina's RFP plan. Further, EPA is approving these MVEB. 
These actions are being taken pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air 
Act (CAA or Act). EPA will take action on North Carolina's RFP plan for 
its portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area, in a separate action.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective December 14, 2012 without 
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by November 14, 
2012. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely 
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform 
the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number, ``EPA-
R04-OAR-2008-0177,'' by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: 404-562-9019.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2008-0177,'' Regulatory Development Section, 
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, 
Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides 
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such 
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours 
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are 
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal 
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID Number, ``EPA-R04-
OAR-2008-0177.'' EPA's policy is that all comments received will be 
included in the public docket without change and may be made available 
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through 
www.regulations.gov or email, information that you consider to be CBI 
or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an 
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without 
going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public 
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning 
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,

[[Page 62455]]

Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you 
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official 
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding 
federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sara Waterson of the Regulatory 
Development Section, in the Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The 
telephone number is (404) 562-9061. Ms. Sara Waterson can be reached 
via electronic mail at waterson.sara@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What action is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for EPA's action?
III. What is EPA's analysis of the RFP plan for the York County 
Area?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the 2008 VOC MVEB for the York County 
Area?
V. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the 2008 
VOC MVEB for the York County Area?
VI. Final Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving revisions to the South Carolina SIP, submitted by 
the State of South Carolina through SC DHEC, on August 31, 2007, and 
April 29, 2010, to meet RFP requirements of the CAA for the York County 
Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The RFP plan demonstrates that 
VOC emissions will be reduced by at least 15 percent for the period of 
2002 through 2008. Additionally, EPA is approving the required 2008 VOC 
MVEB which were included in the York County Area RFP plan. EPA is 
taking these actions because they are consistent with CAA requirements 
for the requirements for RFP. The York County Area MVEB, expressed in 
tons per day (tpd) and kilograms per day (kgd), are provided in Table 1 
below.

    Table 1--York County, South Carolina* 1997 8-Hour Ozone VOC MVEB
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   2008                    2008
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 York County ( partial county) VOC MVEB
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               VOC               6.053 tpd               5,493 kgd
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents only the portion of York County that is in the
  nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte Area.

EPA is also describing the status of its transportation conformity 
adequacy determination for the 2008 MVEB.

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

A. General Background

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 
0.08 parts per million (ppm). Under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 
50, the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is attained when the 3-year average of 
the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ambient air 
quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 
0.084 ppm when rounding is considered) (69 FR 23857, April 30, 2004). 
Ambient air quality monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet the 
data completeness requirement as determined in 40 CFR part 50, appendix 
I. The ambient air quality monitoring data completeness requirement is 
met when the average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data 
is greater than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent 
data completeness.
    Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the CAA requires EPA 
to designate as nonattainment any area that is violating the NAAQS, 
based on the three most recent years of ambient air quality data at the 
conclusion of the designation process. The bi-state Charlotte Area was 
designated nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on April 30, 
2004 (effective June 15, 2004) using 2001-2003 ambient air quality data 
(69 FR 23857, April 30, 2004). At the time of designation the bi-state 
Charlotte Area was classified as a moderate nonattainment area for the 
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In the April 30, 2004, Phase I Ozone 
Implementation Rule, EPA established ozone nonattainment area 
attainment dates based on Table 1 of section 181(a) of the CAA. This 
established an attainment date six years after the June 15, 2004, 
effective date for areas classified as moderate areas for the 1997 8-
hour ozone nonattainment designations. Section 181 of the CAA explains 
that the attainment date for moderate nonattainment areas shall be as 
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than six years after 
designation, or June 15, 2010. Therefore, the bi-state Charlotte Area's 
original attainment date was June 15, 2010. See 69 FR 23951, April 30, 
2004.
    The bi-state Charlotte Area did not attain the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS by June 15, 2010 (the applicable attainment date for moderate 
nonattainment areas); however, the Area qualified for an extension of 
the attainment date. Under certain circumstances, the CAA allows for 
extensions of the attainment dates prescribed at the time of the 
original nonattainment designation. In accordance with CAA section 
181(a)(5), EPA may grant up to 2 one-year extensions of the attainment 
date under specified conditions. On May 31, 2011, EPA determined that 
North Carolina and South Carolina met the CAA requirements to obtain a 
one-year extension of the attainment date for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS for the bi-state Charlotte Area. See 76 FR 31245. As a result, 
EPA extended the bi-state Charlotte Area's attainment date from June 
15, 2010, to June 15, 2011, for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    On November 15, 2011 (76 FR 70656), EPA determined the bi-state 
Charlotte Area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS; and subsequently, 
on March 7, 2012 (77 FR 13493), EPA determined that the bi-state 
Charlotte Area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the applicable 
attainment date. The determination of attaining data was based upon 
complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air monitoring data for 
the 2008-2010 period, showing that the Area had monitored attainment of 
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The requirements for the Area to submit an 
attainment demonstration and associated reasonably available control 
measures (RACM), RFP plan, contingency measures, and other planning SIP 
revisions related to attainment of the standard were suspended as a 
result of the determination of attainment, so long as the Area 
continues to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\1\ See 40 CFR 
52.2125(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Originally, South Carolina submitted SIP revisions, 
including an attainment demonstration, on August 31, 2007, to 
address nonattainment requirements related to the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS. Specifically, South Carolina submitted an attainment 
demonstration and associated RACM, a RFP plan, contingency measures, 
emissions statement, a 2002 base year emissions inventory and other 
planning SIP revisions related to attainment of the 1997 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS for the York County Area. South Carolina withdrew the 
August 31, 2007, attainment demonstration portion of the SIP for the 
York County Area on December 22, 2008. On April 29, 2010, South 
Carolina resubmitted the attainment demonstration SIP, and provided 
a supplement for the August 31, 2007, RFP plan for the York County 
Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 12, 2012, South Carolina withdrew the attainment 
demonstration submissions (except RFP, emissions statements, and the 
emissions inventory) as allowed by 40 CFR 51.918 for the York County 
Area.\2\

[[Page 62456]]

Subsequently, EPA approved South Carolina's SIP revisions related to 
the emissions statements and emissions inventory requirements for the 
York County Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For the EPA action 
related to the emissions statements requirements for the 1997 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS, see 77 FR 37812 (June 25, 2012). For the EPA action 
related to the emissions inventory requirements for the 1997 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS, see 77 FR 29540 (May 18, 2012). Despite the determination 
of attainment, South Carolina opted to leave the SIP submissions 
related to the RFP requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS before 
EPA for action. As such, EPA is taking action to approve South 
Carolina's August 31, 2007, and April 29, 2010, SIP revisions as they 
related to the RFP requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ South Carolina did not withdraw any elements related to 
reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements, to the 
extent that these requirements were addressed in the attainment 
demonstration submissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Background for RFP

    On November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71612), as revised on June 8, 2007 (72 
FR 31727), EPA published a rule entitled ``Final Rule To Implement the 
8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard--Phase 2; Final Rule 
To Implement Certain Aspects of the 1990 Amendments Relating to New 
Source Review and Prevention of Significant Deterioration as They Apply 
in Carbon Monoxide, Particulate Matter and Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for 
Reformulated Gasoline'' (hereafter referred to as the Phase 2 Rule). 
Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA and EPA's Phase 2 Rule \3\ require a 
state, for each 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area that is classified 
as moderate, to submit an emissions inventory and a RFP plan to show 
how the state will reduce emissions of VOC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ RFP regulations are at 40 CFR 51.910.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The bi-state Charlotte Area had an attainment date of June 15, 2010 
(i.e., that is beyond five years after designation), that was later 
extended to June 15, 2011. See 76 FR 31245 (May 31, 2011). For a 
moderate area with an attainment date of more than five years after 
designation, the RFP plan must obtain a 15 percent reduction in ozone 
precursor emissions for the first six years after the baseline year 
(2002 through 2008). Since the York County Area did not have a previous 
plan to address RFP requirements,\4\ the initial RFP requirement for 
the Area must be met through VOC reductions as required by the 1990 CAA 
Amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Some areas that were designated as moderate or above for the 
1-hour ozone NAAQS may have implemented Rate of Progress plans 
(i.e., plans similar to the RFP requirements) by which the area 
would have achieved at least a 15 percent reduction in VOC from an 
initial baseline. Such areas have the flexibility to met RFP 
requirements through a reduction in VOC or nitrogen oxides, after 
the initial achievement in a reduction of at least 15 percent for 
VOC emissions for the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to CAA section 172(c)(9), RFP plans must include 
contingency measures that will take effect without further action by 
the state or EPA, which includes additional controls that would be 
implemented if the area fails to reach the RFP milestones. While the 
CAA does not specify the type of measures or quantity of emissions 
reductions required, EPA provided guidance interpreting the CAA that 
implementation of these contingency measures would provide additional 
emissions reductions of up to 3 percent of the adjusted base year 
inventory in the year following the RFP milestone year (i.e., in this 
case 2008). For more information on contingency measures please see the 
April 16, 1992 General Preamble (57 FR 13498, 13510) and the November 
29, 2005 Phase 2 8-hour ozone standard implementation rule (70 FR 
71612, 71650). Finally, RFP plans must also include a MVEB for the 
precursors for which the plan is developed. See Section IV of this 
rulemaking for more information on MVEB requirements.
    On August 31, 2007, and April 29, 2010, South Carolina submitted 
RFP plans for the York County Area to address the CAA's requirements 
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The August 31, 2007, SIP revision (as 
supplemented by the April 29, 2010, SIP revision) included an 
attainment demonstration plan, RFP plan for 2008 milestone year, 
contingency measures, RACT, RACM requirements, on-road VOC MVEB, and 
the 2002 base year emissions inventory. These SIP revisions were 
subject to notice and comment by the public and the State addressed the 
comments received on the proposed SIPs. Today's rulemaking is approving 
only the RFP plan, including the associated MVEB. The remainder of 
South Carolina's August 31, 2007, and April 29, 2010, SIP revisions 
were addressed by previous EPA actions, or by the State's withdrawal of 
submissions that were no longer necessary.

III. What is EPA's analysis of the RFP plan for the York County Area?

    On August 31, 2007, and April 29, 2010, South Carolina submitted 
RFP plans for the York County Area to address the CAA's requirements 
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Below provides EPA's analysis of South 
Carolina's RFP submissions.

A. Base Year Emissions Inventory

    An emissions inventory is a comprehensive, accurate, current 
inventory of actual emissions from all sources and is required by 
section 182(a)(1) of the CAA. Because the York County Area as part of 
the bi-state Charlotte Area did not implement the 15 percent VOC 
reductions for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the requirement for South 
Carolina to meet RFP is a 15 percent VOC reduction between 2002 and 
2008 with continued progress toward attainment through attainment.\5\ 
EPA recommended 2002 as the base year emissions inventory, and is 
therefore the starting point for calculating RFP. South Carolina 
submitted its 2002 base year emissions inventory on August 31, 2007. In 
an action on May 18, 2012, EPA approved South Carolina's 2002 base year 
emissions inventory for the York County Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS. See 77 FR 29540. A summary of the York County Area 2002 base 
year emissions inventories is included in Table 2 below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The bi-state Charlotte Area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS by June 15, 2011, based on 2008-2010 data.

                                     Table 2--2002 Point and Area Sources Annual Emissions for the York County Area
                                                                  [Tons per summer day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Point                       Area                      Non-road                     Mobile
                 County                  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               NOX           VOC           NOX           VOC           NOX           VOC           NOX           VOC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
York (partial) *........................         11.1          7.29           2.2          7.48           4.9          3.19          13.8          6.84
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents only the portion of York County that is in the nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte Area.

[[Page 62457]]

As mentioned above, EPA has already approved this emissions inventory 
and thus is not taking comment on these inventories in the parallel 
proposal to today's direct final action.

B. Adjusted Base Year Inventory and 2008 RFP Target Levels

    The process for determining the emissions baseline from which the 
RFP reductions are calculated is described in section 182(b)(1) of the 
CAA and 40 CFR 51.910. This baseline value is the 2002 adjusted base 
year inventory. Sections 182(b)(1)(B) and (D) require the exclusion 
from the base year inventory of emissions benefits resulting from the 
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP) regulations promulgated 
by January 1, 1990, and the Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) regulations 
promulgated June 11, 1990 (55 FR 23666). The FMVCP and RVP emissions 
reductions are determined by the State using EPA's on-road mobile 
source emissions modeling software, MOBILE6. The FMVCP and RVP emission 
reductions are then removed from the base year inventory by the State, 
resulting in an adjusted base year inventory. The emission reductions 
needed to satisfy the RFP requirement are then calculated from the 
adjusted base year inventory. These reductions are then subtracted from 
the adjusted base year inventory to establish the emissions target for 
the RFP milestone year (2008).
    For moderate areas like the York County Area (as part of the bi-
state Charlotte Area),\6\ the CAA specifies a 15 percent reduction in 
ozone precursor emissions over an initial six year period following the 
baseline inventory year. In the Phase 2 Rule, EPA interpreted this 
requirement for areas that were also designated nonattainment and 
classified as moderate or higher for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. In the 
Phase 2 Rule, EPA provided that an area classified as moderate or 
higher that has the same boundaries as an area, or is entirely composed 
of several areas or portions of areas, for which EPA fully approved a 
15 percent plan for the 1-hour NAAQS, is considered to have met the 
requirements of section 182(b)(1) of the CAA for the 8-hour NAAQS. In 
this situation, a moderate nonattainment area is subject to RFP under 
section 172(c)(2) of the CAA and shall submit, no later than 3 years 
after designation for the 8-hour NAAQS, a SIP revision that meets the 
requirements of 40 CFR 51.910(b)(2). The RFP SIP revision must provide 
for a 15 percent emission reduction (either nitrogen oxides (NOx) and/
or VOC) accounting for any growth that occurs during the six year 
period following the baseline emissions inventory year, that is, 2002-
2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area that was 
classified as moderate under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS contained the 
counties of Gaston and Mecklenburg in North Carolina. Gaston and 
Mecklenburg counties were also designated nonattainment as a part of 
the 1997 8-hour ozone moderate bi-state Charlotte Area. Although a 
portion of this Area was classified as moderate for the 1-hour ozone 
NAAQS, a 15 percent rate of progress (ROP) plan was not submitted 
for this Area due to its change in attainment status. Specifically, 
North Carolina submitted a redesignation and maintenance plan 
request instead before the due date of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS ROP 
plan. Therefore, because the bi-state Charlotte Area did not 
implement a 15 percent ROP plan under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the 
Area must have VOC reductions totaling at least 15 percent for the 
first six years following the baseline inventory year of 2002 in 
order for the RFP plan to be approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned earlier and according to section 182(b)(1)(D) of the 
CAA, emission reductions that resulted from the FMVCP and RVP rules 
promulgated prior to 1990 are not creditable for achieving RFP emission 
reductions. Therefore, the 2002 base year inventory is adjusted by 
subtracting the VOC and NOx emission reductions that are expected to 
occur between 2002 and the future milestone years due to the FMVCP and 
RVP rules.
    In the Phase 2 Rule, promulgated on November 29, 2005 (70 FR 
71612), EPA outlines Method 1 as the process that states should use to 
show compliance with RFP for areas like the York County Area. A summary 
of the steps for Method 1 is provided below.
     Step A is the actual anthropogenic base year VOC emissions 
inventory in 2002.
     Step B is to account for creditable emissions for RFP.
     Step C is to calculate non-creditable emissions for RFP. 
Non-creditable emissions include emissions from: (1) Motor vehicle 
exhaust or evaporative emissions regulations promulgated by January 1, 
1990; (2) regulations concerning RVP promulgated by November 15, 1990; 
(3) RACT corrections required prior to November 1990; and (4) 
corrective inspection and maintenance (I/M) plan required prior to 
November 1990.
     Step D is the 2002 base year emissions (Step A) minus the 
non-creditable emissions (Step C).
     Step E is to calculate the 2008 target level VOC 
emissions. This is calculated by reducing the emissions from Step D by 
15 percent.
     The estimated 2008 VOC emissions are then compared to the 
2008 target level VOC emissions (Step E).
    As provided in South Carolina's August 31, 2007, SIP revision (as 
supplemented by the April 29, 2010, SIP revision), the State utilized 
the steps from Method 1 of the Phase 2 Rule. Specifically, South 
Carolina sets out its calculations in Section VI.B.2 of the August 31, 
2007, plan and SC DHEC's April 29, 2010, SIP revision as summarized 
below.
1. Step A: Estimate the actual anthropogenic base year VOC inventory in 
2002 with all 2002 control programs in place for all sources.
    South Carolina provided this emission inventory in Table VI-1 of 
the April 29, 2010, York County RFP plan, and as shown in Table 3, 
below. As mentioned above, EPA has already approved this inventory. See 
77 FR 29540 (May 18, 2012).

                         Table 3--2002 VOC Emissions Inventory for the York County Area
                                              [Tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Point               Area             Nonroad             Mobile             Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        York *               7.29               7.48               3.19               6.84              24.80
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents only the portion of York County that is in the nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte Area.

[[Page 62458]]

2. Step B: Using the same highway vehicle activity inputs used to 
calculate the actual 2002 inventory, run the appropriate motor vehicle 
emissions model for 2002 and for 2008 with all post-1990 CAA measures 
turned off. Any other local inputs for vehicle I/M programs should be 
set according to the program that was required to be in place in 1990. 
Fuel RVP should be set at 9.0 or 7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) 
depending on the RVP required in the local area as a result of fuel RVP 
regulations promulgated in June, 1990.
    South Carolina conducted the mobile modeling in accordance with the 
directions outlined above for Step B. For the York County Area, the RVP 
requirement was set at 9.0 psi. Currently, I/M is not required in the 
York County Area, nor were there any outstanding obligations for the 
State to correct deficiencies for an existing or required I/M program. 
The York County Area was not designated nonattainment for the ozone 
NAAQS until June 15, 2005, and thus did not have outstanding 
requirements related I/M.
3. Step C: Calculate the difference between the 2002 and 2008 VOC 
emission factors calculated in Step B and multiply by the 2002 vehicle 
miles traveled. The result is the VOC emission calculation that will 
occur between 2002 and 2008 without the benefits of any post-1990 CAA 
measures. These are the non-creditable reductions that occur over this 
period.
    South Carolina calculated the non-creditable emission reductions 
between 2002 and 2008 by modeling its 2002 and 2008 motor vehicle 
emissions with all post-1990 CAA measures turned off, and calculating 
the difference. This difference resulted in 1.00 tpd and can be found 
in Table VI-3 of the State's August 31, 2007, SIP revision.
4. Step D: Subtract the non-creditable reductions calculated in Step C 
from the actual anthropogenic 2002 inventory estimated in Step A. This 
adjusted VOC inventory is the basis for calculating the target level of 
emissions in 2008.
    The adjusted VOC inventory for calculating the target level of VOC 
emissions reductions for 2008 is 23.80 tpd (i.e., 24.80 tpd (i.e., 
result of Step A) and 1.00 tpd (i.e., the result of Step C)).
5. Step E: Reduce the adjusted VOC inventory calculated in Step D by 15 
percent. The result is the target level of VOC emissions in 2008 in 
order to meet the 2008 RFP requirement. The actual projected 2008 
inventory for all sources with all control measures in place, including 
projected 2008 growth in activity, must be at or lower than this target 
level of emissions.
    The targeted level of emissions reductions for the York County Area 
to meet RFP requirements is 3.57 tpd of VOC (i.e, 23.80 tpd multiplied 
by 15 percent). Thus the required targeted level of VOC emissions is 
20.23 tpd for the York County Area.

C. Final Analysis of South Carolina's RFP Analysis for the York County 
Area

    As mentioned above, the required target level for the York County 
Area to meet the initial RFP plan requirement is a 15 percent reduction 
in VOC emissions for 2008 from the VOC emissions in 2002 (as adjusted 
per CAA requirements). Specifically, to meet this requirement, South 
Carolina needed to demonstrate a reduction of at least 3.57 tpd. Table 
4 below summarizes the results of South Carolina's calculations for 
this RFP analysis.

            Table 4--York County Area 15 Percent RFP Analysis
------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Step from Method 1                Matrix              VOC (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step A........................  Total 2002 Base Year               24.80
                                 Anthropogenic VOC
                                 Emissions.
Step C........................  Non-Creditable VOC                  1.00
                                 reductions.
Step D........................  2002 Base Year minus the           23.80
                                 Non-Creditable
                                 Emissions.
Step E........................  2008 Target Level of VOC           20.23
                                 Emissions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its August 31, 2007, SIP revision, South Carolina calculated the 
2008 VOC emissions inventory for the York County Area. This emissions 
inventory is provided below in Table 5 below.

                         Table 5--2008 VOC Emissions Inventory for the York County Area
                                              [Tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    Point              Area           Nonroad         Mobile           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
York *....................  3.60................            7.90            2.40            3.94           17.84
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents only the portion of York County that is in the nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte Area.

    As discussed above, the required target for VOC emissions for the 
year 2008 for South Carolina to meet the RFP requirements for York 
County is 20.23 tpd (i.e., 15 percent reduction from the adjusted 2002 
baseline). As revealed in Table 5, South Carolina calculated an 
emissions inventory of 17.84 tpd of VOC for York County in 2008, which 
is well below the 20.23 tpd required target. Thus, EPA is making the 
determination that South Carolina's SIP revision demonstrates the 
required progress towards attainment for the York County Area as part 
of the bi-state Charlotte Area. In today's action, EPA is approving 
South Carolina's August 31, 2007, and April 29, 2010, SIP revisions as 
meeting the CAA and EPA's regulations regarding RFP.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of the 2008 VOC MVEB for the York County 
Area?

    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation plans, 
programs, and projects, such as the construction of new highways, must 
``conform'' to (i.e., be consistent with) the part of the state's air 
quality plan that addresses pollution from cars and trucks. Conformity 
to the SIP means that transportation activities will not cause new air 
quality

[[Page 62459]]

violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of 
the NAAQS or any interim milestones. If a transportation plan does not 
conform, most new projects that would expand the capacity of roadways 
cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, 
criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity of 
such transportation activities to a SIP. The regional emissions 
analysis is one, but not the only, requirement for implementing 
transportation conformity. Transportation conformity is a requirement 
for nonattainment and maintenance areas. Maintenance areas are areas 
that were previously nonattainment for a particular NAAQS but have 
since been redesignated to attainment with an approved maintenance plan 
for that NAAQS.
    Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times, 
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans for nonattainment areas. 
These control strategy SIPs (including RFP and attainment 
demonstrations) and maintenance plans create MVEB for criteria 
pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from cars and 
trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB must be established for the target 
year and precursor pollutant of the RFP (i.e., in this case, for the 
target year of 2008 and for VOC). A state may adopt MVEB for other 
precursors as well. The MVEB is the portion of the total allowable 
emissions in the RFP plan that is allocated to highway and transit 
vehicle use and emissions. See 40 CFR 93.101. The MVEB serves as a 
ceiling on emissions from an area's planned transportation system. The 
MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the November 24, 
1993, Transportation Conformity Rule (58 FR 62188). The preamble also 
describes how to establish the MVEB in the SIP and how to revise the 
MVEB.
    After interagency consultation with the transportation partners for 
the York County Area, South Carolina developed VOC MVEB for the year 
2008. Specifically, South Carolina developed these MVEB, as required, 
for the target year and precursor--2008 and VOC--for the RFP plan. The 
York County Area MVEB for the 2008 RFP plan are based on the projected 
2008 mobile source emissions accounting for all mobile control 
measures. The 2008 VOC MVEB are defined in Table 6 below.

    Table 6--York County, South Carolina* 1997 8-Hour Ozone VOC MVEB
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   2008                    2008
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  York County (partial county) VOC MVEB
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               VOC               6.053 tpd               5,493 kgd
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents only the portion of York County that is in the
  nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte Area

    Through this rulemaking, EPA is approving the 2008 VOC MVEB for the 
York County Area because EPA has made the determination that the Area 
is on target to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS with the emissions 
at the levels of the budgets. Once the MVEB for the York County Area 
are approved or found adequate (whichever is completed first), they 
must be used for future conformity determinations for the 1997 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS for the Metropolitan Planning Organization's long-range 
transportation plans and transportation improvement programs. After 
thorough review, EPA has previously determined that the budgets meet 
the adequacy criteria, as outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) (see 77 FR 
33454, June 6, 2012), and is now approving the budgets because they are 
consistent with RFP for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the year 2008.

V. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the 2008 VOC 
MVEB for the York County Area?

    When reviewing a submitted ``control strategy'' SIP, RFP or 
maintenance plan containing a MVEB, EPA may affirmatively find the MVEB 
contained therein adequate for use in determining transportation 
conformity. Once EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate 
for transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB must be used by state 
and federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation 
projects conform to the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the CAA.
    EPA's substantive criteria for determining adequacy of a MVEB are 
set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The process for determining adequacy 
consists of three basic steps: Public notification of a SIP submission, 
a public comment period, and EPA's adequacy determination. This process 
for determining the adequacy of submitted MVEB for transportation 
conformity purposes was initially outlined in EPA's May 14, 1999, 
guidance, ``Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999, 
Conformity Court Decision.'' EPA adopted regulations to codify the 
adequacy process in the Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for 
the ``New 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards and Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing Areas; 
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments--Response to Court Decision 
and Additional Rule Change,'' on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). Additional 
information on the adequacy process for transportation conformity 
purposes is available in the proposed rule entitled, ``Transportation 
Conformity Rule Amendments: Response to Court Decision and Additional 
Rule Changes,'' 68 FR 38974, 38984 (June 30, 2003).
    As discussed earlier, South Carolina's RFP plan submission includes 
VOC MVEB for the York County Area for the year 2008. EPA reviewed the 
VOC MVEB through the adequacy process. The South Carolina SIP 
submission, including the 2008 VOC MVEB for the York County Area, was 
open for public comment on EPA's adequacy Web site on May 13, 2010, 
found at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm. The EPA public comment period on adequacy of the 2008 VOC 
MVEB for the York County Area closed on June 14, 2010. EPA received 
comments during the adequacy process. These comments were addressed 
through the adequacy process, and EPA's responses to these comments can 
be found on EPA's adequacy Web site.
    In a letter sent on May 25, 2012, EPA notified SC DHEC that the 
MOBILE6.2-based 2008 VOC MVEB for the York County Area were determined 
to be adequate for transportation conformity purposes. On June 6, 2012, 
EPA published its adequacy notice in the Federal Register (77 FR 
33454). When EPA found the 2008 VOC MVEB adequate, this triggered a 
requirement that the new MVEB are used for future transportation 
conformity determinations. For required regional emissions analysis 
years beyond 2008, the applicable budgets are the 2008 VOC MVEB. The 
2008 VOC MVEB are defined in sections I and IV of this rulemaking.

VI. Final Action

    EPA is taking direct final action to approve portions of two SIP 
revisions, submitted on August 31, 2007, and April 29, 2010, by the 
State of South Carolina, through the SC DHEC to meet the RFP 
requirements for the York County Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 
Additionally, EPA is approving the VOC MVEB for the York County Area 
that were including in South Carolina's RFP plan. These

[[Page 62460]]

actions are being taken pursuant to section 110 of the CAA.
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a non-controversial amendment and anticipates no 
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this 
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document 
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should 
adverse comment be filed. This rule will be effective on December 14, 
2012 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comment 
by November 14, 2012. If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will 
publish a document withdrawing the final rule and informing the public 
that the rule will not take effect. All public comments received will 
then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed 
rule. EPA will not institute a second comment period on this action. 
Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. If no 
such comments are received, the public is advised this rule will be 
effective on December 14, 2012 and no further action will be taken on 
the proposed rule.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this final action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this RFP for the York County Area does not have Tribal 
implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 
November 9, 2000), because it does not have substantial direct effects 
on an Indian Tribe. The Catawba Indian Nation Reservation is located 
within the York County Area. Pursuant to the Catawba Indian Claims 
Settlement Act, S.C. Code Ann. 27-16-120, ``all state and local 
environmental laws and regulations apply to the Catawba Indian Nation 
and Reservation and are fully enforceable by all relevant state and 
local agencies and authorities.'' EPA notes today's action will not 
impose substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal 
law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by December 14, 2012. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor 
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may 
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or 
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are 
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of 
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules 
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate 
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can 
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed 
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to 
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, and Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: October 2, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart PP--South Carolina

0
2. Section 52.2120(e) is amended by adding new entries to the end of 
the table for ``York County 1997 8-hour ozone reasonable further 
progress plan'' and ``Update for York County 1997 8-hour ozone 
reasonable further progress plan'' to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

[[Page 62461]]

                              EPA-Approved South Carolina Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          State effective
               Provision                       date             EPA Approval date             Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
York County 1997 8-hour ozone                    08/31/07  10/15/12 [Insert citation   Original submission.
 reasonable further progress plan.                          of publication].
Update for York County 1997 8-hour               04/29/10  10/15/12 [Insert citation   Original submission
 ozone reasonable further progress plan.                    of publication].            updated to include
                                                                                        required 2008 VOC MVEB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2012-25172 Filed 10-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
```