Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61775 

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 information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. 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. 

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 during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Delaware Department of 

Natural Resources and Environmental 

Control, 89 Kings Highway, P.O. Box 

1401, Dover, Delaware 19903. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brian Rehn, (215) 814–2176, or by email 

at rehn.brian@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For 

further information, please see the 

information provided in the direct final 

action, with the same title, that is 

located in the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ 

section of this Federal Register 

publication. Please note that if EPA 

receives adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

this rule to approve Delaware’s Low 

Emission Vehicle Program and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. 

Dated: September 29, 2015. 

Shawn M. Garvin, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2015–25955 Filed 10–13–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0298; FRL–9935–59– 

Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval and Air Quality 

Designation; SC; Redesignation of the 

Charlotte-Rock Hill 2008 8-Hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Area to Attainment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On April 17, 2015, the State 

of South Carolina, through the South 

Carolina Department of Health and 

Environmental Control (SC DHEC), 

submitted a request for the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

to redesignate the South Carolina 

portion of the bi-state Charlotte-Rock 

Hill, North Carolina-South Carolina 

2008 8-hour ozone nonattainment area 

(the entire area is hereinafter referred to 

as the ‘‘bi-State Charlotte Area’’ or 

‘‘Area’’ and the South Carolina portion 

is hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘York 

County Area’’) to attainment for the 

2008 8-hour ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and to 

approve a State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) revision containing a maintenance 

plan for the York County Area. EPA is 

proposing to determine that the bi-State 

Charlotte Area is continuing to attain 

the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS; to 

approve the State’s plan for maintaining 

attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone 

standard in the Area, including the 

motor vehicle emission budgets 

(MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and 

volatile organic compounds (VOC) for 

the years 2014 and 2026 for the York 

County Area, into the SIP; and to 

redesignate the York County Area to 

attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. EPA is also notifying the 

public of the status of EPA’s adequacy 

determination for the MVEBs for the 

York County Area. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 13, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2015–0298, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4-ARMS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2015– 

0298,’’ Air Regulatory Management 

Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation 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, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

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

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2015– 

0298. 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 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
61776 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

1 In an action published on July 28, 2015, EPA 

determined that the bi-state Charlotte Area was 

attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone standard when the 

Agency redesignated the North Carolina portion of 

this Area. See 80 FR 44873. 

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 

may not be 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 Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

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

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kelly Sheckler of the Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mrs. 

Sheckler may be reached by phone at 

(404) 562–9222, or via electronic mail at 

sheckler.kelly@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to 

take? 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed actions? 

III. What are the criteria for redesignation? 

IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions? 

V. What is EPA’s analysis of the request? 

VI. What is EPA’s analysis of South 

Carolina’s proposed NOX and VOC 

MVEBs for the York County Area? 

VII. What is the status of EPA’s adequacy 

determination for the proposed NOX and 

VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 for the 

York County Area? 

VIII. What is the effect of EPA’s proposed 

actions? 

IX. Proposed Actions 

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What are the actions EPA is 

proposing to take? 

EPA is proposing to take the following 

three separate but related actions, one of 

which involves multiple elements: (1) 

To determine that the bi-state Charlotte 

Area is continuing to attain the 2008 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS; 1 (2) to approve 

South Carolina’s plan for maintaining 

the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

(maintenance plan), including the 

associated MVEBs for the York County 

Area, into the South Carolina SIP; and 

(3) to redesignate the York County Area 

to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. EPA is also notifying the 

public of the status of EPA’s adequacy 

determination for the MVEBs for the 

York County Area. The bi-state 

Charlotte Area consists of Mecklenburg 

County in its entirety and portions of 

Cabarrus, Gaston, Iredell, Lincoln, 

Rowan and Union Counties, North 

Carolina; and a portion of York County, 

South Carolina. On April 16, 2015, the 

State of North Carolina provided a 

redesignation request and maintenance 

plan for its portion of the bi-state 

Charlotte Area. EPA approved North 

Carolina’s redesignation request and 

maintenance plan in a separate action. 

See 80 FR 44873 (July 28, 2015). 

Today’s proposed actions are 

summarized below and described in 

greater detail throughout this notice of 

proposed rulemaking. 

EPA is making the preliminarily 

determination that the bi-state Charlotte 

Area is continuing to attain the 2008 

8-hour ozone NAAQS based on recent 

air quality data and proposing to 

approve South Carolina’s maintenance 

plan for its portion of the bi-state 

Charlotte Area as meeting the 

requirements of section 175A (such 

approval being one of the CAA criteria 

for redesignation to attainment status). 

The maintenance plan is designed to 

keep the bi-state Charlotte Area in 

attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS through 2026. The maintenance 

plan includes 2014 and 2026 MVEBs for 

NOX and VOC for the York County Area 

for transportation conformity purposes. 

EPA is proposing to approve these 

MVEBs and incorporate them into the 

South Carolina SIP. 

EPA also proposes to determine that 

the South Carolina portion of the bistate Charlotte Area has met the 

requirements for redesignation under 

section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. 

Accordingly, in this action, EPA is 

proposing to approve a request to 

change the legal designation of the 

portion of York County that is included 

in the bi-state Charlotte Area to 

attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

EPA is also notifying the public of the 

status of EPA’s adequacy process for the 

2014 and 2026 NOX and VOC MVEBs 

for the York County Area. The 

Adequacy comment period began on 

May 14, 2015, with EPA’s posting of the 

availability of South Carolina’s 

submission on EPA’s Adequacy Web 

site (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/

stateresources/transconf/

currsips.htm#york-cnty). The Adequacy 

comment period for these MVEBs closed 

on June 15, 2015. No comments, adverse 

or otherwise, were received through the 

Adequacy process. Please see section 

VII of this proposed rulemaking for 

further explanation of this process and 

for more details on the MVEBs. 

In summary, today’s notice of 

proposed rulemaking is in response to 

South Carolina’s April 17, 2015, 

redesignation request and associated SIP 

submission that address the specific 

issues summarized above and the 

necessary elements described in section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA for 

redesignation of the South Carolina 

portion of the Area to attainment for the 

2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed actions? 

On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated 

a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.075 

parts per million (ppm). See 73 FR 

16436 (March 27, 2008). Under EPA’s 

regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2008 

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 

0.075 ppm. See 40 CFR 50.15. 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 percent, and no single year has less 

than 75 percent data completeness as 

determined in Appendix I of part 50. 

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 complete, 

quality assured, and certified ambient 

air quality data at the conclusion of the 

designation process. The bi-state 

Charlotte Area was designated 

nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61777 

2This rule, entitled Implementation of the 2008 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: 

State Implementation Plan Requirements and 

published at 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015), 

addresses a range of nonattainment area SIP 

requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, including 

requirements pertaining to attainment 

demonstrations, reasonable further progress (RFP), 

reasonably available control technology (RACT), 

reasonably available control measures (RACM), 

major new source review (NSR), emission 

inventories, and the timing of SIP submissions and 

of compliance with emission control measures in 

the SIP. This rule also addresses the revocation of 

the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the anti-backsliding 

requirements that apply when the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS are revoked. 

ozone NAAQS on May 21, 2012 

(effective July 20, 2012) using 2009– 

2011 ambient air quality data. See 77 FR 

30088 (May 21, 2012). At the time of 

designation, the bi-state Charlotte Area 

was classified as a marginal 

nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. In the final 

implementation rule for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS (SIP Implementation 

Rule),2 EPA established ozone 

nonattainment area attainment dates 

based on Table 1 of section 181(a) of the 

CAA. This established an attainment 

date three years after the July 20, 2012, 

effective date for areas classified as 

marginal areas for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment designations. 

Therefore, the bi-state Charlotte Area’s 

attainment date is July 20, 2015. 

III. What are the criteria for 

redesignation? 

The CAA provides the requirements 

for redesignating a nonattainment area 

to attainment. Specifically, section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for 

redesignation providing that: (1) The 

Administrator determines that the area 

has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) 

the Administrator has fully approved 

the applicable implementation plan for 

the area under section 110(k); (3) the 

Administrator determines that the 

improvement in air quality is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the applicable SIP 

and applicable Federal air pollutant 

control regulations and other permanent 

and enforceable reductions; (4) the 

Administrator has fully approved a 

maintenance plan for the area as 

meeting the requirements of section 

175A; and, (5) the state containing such 

area has met all requirements applicable 

to the area for purposes of redesignation 

under section 110 and part D of the 

CAA. 

On April 16, 1992, EPA provided 

guidance on redesignation in the 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of title I of the CAA 

Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498), 

and supplemented this guidance on 

April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has 

provided further guidance on processing 

redesignation requests in the following 

documents: 

1. ‘‘Ozone and Carbon Monoxide 

Design Value Calculations,’’ 

Memorandum from Bill Laxton, 

Director, Technical Support Division, 

June 18, 1990; 

2. ‘‘Maintenance Plans for 

Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,’’ 

Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, 

Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs 

Branch, April 30, 1992; 

3. ‘‘Contingency Measures for Ozone 

and Carbon Monoxide (CO) 

Redesignations,’’ Memorandum from G. 

T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon 

Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 

1992; 

4. ‘‘Procedures for Processing 

Requests to Redesignate Areas to 

Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John 

Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, September 4, 

1992 (hereafter referred to as the 

‘‘Calcagni Memorandum’’); 

5. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Actions Submitted in Response to Clean 

Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,’’ 

Memorandum from John Calcagni, 

Director, Air Quality Management 

Division, October 28, 1992; 

6. ‘‘Technical Support Documents 

(TSDs) for Redesignation of Ozone and 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment 

Areas,’’ Memorandum from G. T. Helms, 

Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide 

Programs Branch, August 17, 1993; 

7. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Requirements for Areas Submitting 

Requests for Redesignation to 

Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After 

November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum 

from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting 

Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation, September 17, 1993; 

8. ‘‘Use of Actual Emissions in 

Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone 

and CO Nonattainment Areas,’’ 

Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, 

Acting Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, November 30, 

1993; 

9. ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part 

D NSR) Requirements for Areas 

Requesting Redesignation to 

Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary 

D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for 

Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994; 

and 

10. ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress, 

Attainment Demonstration, and Related 

Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment 

Areas Meeting the Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’ 

Memorandum from John S. Seitz, 

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, May 10, 1995. 

IV. Why is EPA proposing these 

actions? 

On April 17, 2015, the State of South 

Carolina, through SC DHEC, requested 

that EPA redesignate the South Carolina 

portion of the Area to attainment for the 

2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA’s 

evaluation indicates that the entire bistate Charlotte Area has attained the 

2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and that the 

South Carolina portion of the Area 

meets the requirements for 

redesignation as set forth in section 

107(d)(3)(E), including the maintenance 

plan requirements under section 175A 

of the CAA. As a result, EPA is 

proposing to take the three related 

actions summarized in section I of this 

notice. 

V. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

request? 

As stated above, in accordance with 

the CAA, EPA proposes in this action to: 

(1) Determine that the bi-state Charlotte 

Area is continuing to attain the 2008 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS; (2) approve South 

Carolina’s plan for maintaining the 2008 

8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Area, 

including the associated MVEBs, into 

the South Carolina SIP; and (3) 

redesignate the South Carolina portion 

of the Area to attainment for the 2008 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. The five 

redesignation criteria provided under 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) are discussed 

in greater detail for the Area in the 

following paragraphs of this section. 

Criteria (1)—The Bi-State Charlotte Area 

Has Attained the 2008 8-Hour Ozone 

NAAQS 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the area has 

attained the applicable NAAQS (CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). For ozone, an 

area may be considered to be attaining 

the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS if it 

meets the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

as determined in accordance with 40 

CFR 50.15 and Appendix I of part 50, 

based on three complete, consecutive 

calendar years of quality-assured air 

quality monitoring data. To attain the 

NAAQS, the 3-year average of the 

fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour 

average ozone concentrations measured 

at each monitor within an area over 

each year must not exceed 0.075 ppm. 

Based on the data handling and 

reporting convention described in 40 

CFR part 50, Appendix I, the NAAQS 

are attained if the design value is 0.075 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
61778 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

3This preliminary data is available at EPA’s air 

data Web site: http://aqsdr1.epa.gov/aqsweb/

aqstmp/airdata/download_files.html#Daily. The list 

of monitors in the bi-state Charlotte Area is 

available under the Designated Area field in Table 

5 of the Ozone detailed information file at http:// 

www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html. 

4The monitor with the highest 3-year design 

value is considered the design value for the Area. 

5See also EPA’s proposed rulemaking notice 

associated with the redesignation of the North 

Carolina portion of the Area. 80 FR 29250, 29259 

(May 21, 2015). 

ppm or below. The data must be 

collected and quality-assured in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and 

recorded in the EPA Air Quality System 

(AQS). The monitors generally should 

have remained at the same location for 

the duration of the monitoring period 

required for demonstrating attainment. 

In its final action redesignating the 

North Carolina portion of the bi-state 

Charlotte Area to attainment for the 

2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, EPA 

finalized its determination that the bistate Charlotte Area was attaining that 

standard in accordance with 40 CFR 

part 58 at that time. EPA concluded that 

the design values for each monitor in 

the Area for the years 2012–2014 are 

less than or equal to 0.075 ppm, that the 

data from these monitors during this 

time period meet the data quality and 

completeness requirements and are 

recorded in AQS, and that preliminary 

2015 monitoring data available at the 

time of the final action indicates that the 

bi-state Charlotte Area continues to 

attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

See 80 FR 44874–44875. EPA has 

reviewed preliminary monitoring data 

available since the time of the Agency’s 

redesignation of the North Carolina 

portion of the Area and proposes to find 

that the bi-state Charlotte Area is 

continuing to attain the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS.3 For informational 

purposes, the fourth-highest 8-hour 

ozone values at each monitor for 2012, 

2013, 2014, and the 3-year averages of 

these values (i.e., design values), are 

summarized in Table 1, below. 

TABLE 1—2012–2014 DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE BI-STATE CHARLOTTE AREA ∧ 

[Parts per million] 

Location County Monitor ID 

4th Highest 8-hour Ozone Value 

(ppm) 

3-Year Design 

Values 

(ppm) 

2012 2013 2014 2012–2014 

Lincoln County Replacing 

Iron Station.

Lincoln ................................ 37–109–0004 0.076 0.064 0.064 0.068 

Garinger High School ......... Mecklenburg ....................... 37–119–0041 0.080 0.067 0.065 0.070 

Westinghouse Blvd ............. Mecklenburg ....................... 37–119–1005 0.073 0.062 0.063 0.066 

29 N at Mecklenburg Cab 

Co.

Mecklenburg ....................... 37–119–1009 0.085 0.066 0.068 0.073 

Rockwell .............................. Rowan ................................ 37–159–0021 0.080 0.062 0.064 0.068 

Enochville School * .............. Rowan ................................ 37–159–0022 0.077 0.063 ........................ ........................

Monroe Middle School ........ Union .................................. 37–179–0003 0.075 0.062 0.067 0.068 

* Monitoring data for 2014 is not available because the monitor was shut down in 2014. 

∧ There is a monitor in York County that is located outside of the designated nonattainment area. 

The 3-year design value for 2012– 

2014 for the bi-state Charlotte Area is 

0.073 ppm,4 which meets the NAAQS. 

EPA will not take final action to 

approve the redesignation if the 3-year 

design value exceeds the NAAQS prior 

to EPA finalizing the redesignation. The 

monitors used to determine the 

attainment status for the bi-state 

Charlotte Area are all located in North 

Carolina; no monitors are located in the 

South Carolina portion of the Area. As 

discussed in more detail below, the 

State of North Carolina has committed 

to continue monitoring in the bi-state 

Charlotte Area in accordance with 40 

CFR part 58.5

Criteria (2)—South Carolina Has a Fully 

Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) for 

the South Carolina Portion of the Area; 

and Criteria (5)—South Carolina Has 

Met All Applicable Requirements Under 

Section 110 and Part D of Title I of the 

CAA 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the state has met 

all applicable requirements under 

section 110 and part D of title I of the 

CAA (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)) and 

that the state has a fully approved SIP 

under section 110(k) for the area (CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). EPA proposes 

to find that South Carolina has met all 

applicable SIP requirements for the 

South Carolina portion of the Area 

under section 110 of the CAA (general 

SIP requirements) for purposes of 

redesignation. Additionally, EPA 

proposes to find that the South Carolina 

SIP satisfies the criterion that it meets 

applicable SIP requirements for 

purposes of redesignation under part D 

of title I of the CAA in accordance with 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). Further, EPA 

proposes to determine that the SIP is 

fully approved with respect to all 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation in accordance with 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these 

determinations, EPA ascertained which 

requirements are applicable to the South 

Carolina portion of the Area and, if 

applicable, that they are fully approved 

under section 110(k). SIPs must be fully 

approved only with respect to 

requirements that were applicable prior 

to submittal of the complete 

redesignation request. 

a. The South Carolina Portion of the 

Area Has Met All Applicable 

Requirements Under Section 110 and 

Part D of the CAA 

General SIP requirements. General SIP 

elements and requirements are 

delineated in section 110(a)(2) of title I, 

part A of the CAA. These requirements 

include, but are not limited to, the 

following: Submittal of a SIP that has 

been adopted by the state after 

reasonable public notice and hearing; 

provisions for establishment and 

operation of appropriate procedures 

needed to monitor ambient air quality; 

implementation of a source permit 

program; provisions for the 

implementation of part C requirements 

(Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD)) and provisions for the 

implementation of part D requirements 

(NSR permit programs); provisions for 

air pollution modeling; and provisions 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61779 

6This direct final rule was effective on July 13, 

2015, because EPA did not receive any adverse 

comment during the public comment period. 

7This direct final rule was effective on July 13, 

2015, because EPA did not receive any adverse 

comment during the public comment period. 

for public and local agency participation 

in planning and emission control rule 

development. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs 

contain certain measures to prevent 

sources in a state from significantly 

contributing to air quality problems in 

another state. To implement this 

provision, EPA has required certain 

states to establish programs to address 

the interstate transport of air pollutants. 

The section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements 

for a state are not linked with a 

particular nonattainment area’s 

designation and classification in that 

state. EPA believes that the 

requirements linked with a particular 

nonattainment area’s designation and 

classifications are the relevant measures 

to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation 

request. The transport SIP submittal 

requirements, where applicable, 

continue to apply to a state regardless of 

the designation of any one particular 

area in the state. Thus, EPA does not 

believe that the CAA’s interstate 

transport requirements should be 

construed to be applicable requirements 

for purposes of redesignation. 

In addition, EPA believes other 

section 110 elements that are neither 

connected with nonattainment plan 

submissions nor linked with an area’s 

attainment status are applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. The area will still be 

subject to these requirements after the 

area is redesignated. The section 110 

and part D requirements which are 

linked with a particular area’s 

designation and classification are the 

relevant measures to evaluate in 

reviewing a redesignation request. This 

approach is consistent with EPA’s 

existing policy on applicability (i.e., for 

redesignations) of conformity and 

oxygenated fuels requirements, as well 

as with section 184 ozone transport 

requirements. See Reading, 

Pennsylvania, proposed and final 

rulemakings (61 FR 53174–53176, 

October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 

2008); Cleveland–Akron–Loraine, Ohio, 

final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 

1996); and Tampa, Florida, final 

rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, December 

7, 1995). See also the discussion on this 

issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio, 

redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 

2000), and in the Pittsburgh, 

Pennsylvania, redesignation (66 FR 

50399, October 19, 2001). 

Title I, Part D, applicable SIP 

requirements. Section 172(c) of the CAA 

sets forth the basic requirements of 

attainment plans for nonattainment 

areas that are required to submit them 

pursuant to section 172(b). Subpart 2 of 

part D, which includes section 182 of 

the CAA, establishes specific 

requirements for ozone nonattainment 

areas depending on the area’s 

nonattainment classification. As 

provided in Subpart 2, a marginal ozone 

nonattainment area, such as the South 

Carolina portion of the Area, must 

submit an emissions inventory that 

complies with section 172(c)(3), but the 

specific requirements of section 182(a) 

apply in lieu of the demonstration of 

attainment (and contingency measures) 

required by section 172(c). See 42 U.S.C. 

7511a(a). A thorough discussion of the 

requirements contained in sections 

172(c) and 182 can be found in the 

General Preamble for Implementation of 

Title I (57 FR 13498). 

Section 182(a) Requirements. Section 

182(a)(1) requires states to submit a 

comprehensive, accurate, and current 

inventory of actual emissions from 

sources of VOC and NOx emitted within 

the boundaries of the ozone 

nonattainment area. South Carolina 

provided an emissions inventory for the 

South Carolina portion of the Area to 

EPA in an August 8, 2014, SIP 

submission. On June 12, 2015, EPA 

published a direct final rule to approve 

this emissions inventory into the 

SIP.6 See 80 FR 33413 (direct final rule) 

and 80 FR 33460 (associated proposed 

rule). 

Under section 182(a)(2)(A), states 

with ozone nonattainment areas that 

were designated prior to the enactment 

of the 1990 CAA amendments were 

required to submit, within six months of 

classification, all rules and corrections 

to existing VOC RACT rules that were 

required under section 172(b)(3) of the 

CAA (and related guidance) prior to the 

1990 CAA amendments. The South 

Carolina portion of the Area is not 

subject to the section 182(a)(2) RACT 

‘‘fix up’’ because it was designated as 

nonattainment after the enactment of 

the 1990 CAA amendments. 

Section 182(a)(2)(B) requires each 

state with a marginal ozone 

nonattainment area that implemented, 

or was required to implement, an 

inspection and maintenance (I/M) 

program prior to the 1990 CAA 

amendments to submit a SIP revision 

providing for an I/M program no less 

stringent than that required prior to the 

1990 amendments or already in the SIP 

at the time of the amendments, 

whichever is more stringent. The South 

Carolina portion of the Area is not 

subject to the section 182(a)(2)(B) 

because it was designated as 

nonattainment after the enactment of 

the 1990 CAA amendments and did not 

have an I/M program in place prior to 

those amendments. 

Regarding the permitting and offset 

requirements of section 182(a)(2)(C) and 

section 182(a)(4), South Carolina 

currently has a fully-approved part D 

NSR program in place. However, EPA 

has determined that areas being 

redesignated need not comply with the 

requirement that a NSR program be 

approved prior to redesignation, 

provided that the area demonstrates 

maintenance of the NAAQS without 

part D NSR, because PSD requirements 

will apply after redesignation. A more 

detailed rationale for this view is 

described in a memorandum from Mary 

Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air 

and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, 

entitled, ‘‘Part D New Source Review 

Requirements for Areas Requesting 

Redesignation to Attainment.’’ South 

Carolina’s PSD program will become 

applicable in the South Carolina portion 

of the Area upon redesignation to 

attainment. 

Section 182(a)(3) requires states to 

submit periodic inventories and 

emissions statements. Section 

182(a)(3)(A) requires states to submit a 

periodic inventory every three years. As 

discussed below in the section of this 

notice titled Criteria (4)(e), Verification 

of Continued Attainment, the State will 

continue to update its emissions 

inventory at least once every three 

years. Under section 182(a)(3)(B), each 

state with an ozone nonattainment area 

must submit a SIP revision requiring 

emissions statements to be submitted to 

the state by sources within that 

nonattainment area. South Carolina 

provided a SIP revision to EPA on 

August 22, 2014, addressing the section 

182(a)(3)(B) emissions statements 

requirement, and on June 12, 2015, EPA 

published a direct final rule to approve 

this SIP revision.7 See 80 FR 33413 

(direct final rule) and 80 FR 33460 

(associated proposed rule). 

Section 176 Conformity 

Requirements. Section 176(c) of the 

CAA requires states to establish criteria 

and procedures to ensure that federally 

supported or funded projects conform to 

the air quality planning goals in the 

applicable SIP. The requirement to 

determine conformity applies to 

transportation plans, programs, and 

projects that are developed, funded, or 

approved under title 23 of the United 

States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal 

Transit Act (transportation conformity) 

as well as to all other federally 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
61780 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

8CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to 

submit revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain 

Federal criteria and procedures for determining 

transportation conformity. Transportation 

conformity SIPs are different from the MVEBs that 

are established in control strategy SIPs and 

maintenance plans. 9See 80 FR 44875–44877. 

10South Carolina also identified Tier 3 Motor 

Vehicle Emissions and Fuel Standards as a federal 

measure. EPA issued this rule in April 28, 2014, 

which applies to light duty passenger cars and 

trucks. EPA promulgated this rule to reduce air 

pollution from new passenger cars and trucks 

beginning in 2017. Tier 3 emission standards will 

lower sulfur content of gasoline and lower the 

emissions standards. 

11EPA, Regulatory Announcement, EPA420–F– 

99–051 (December 1999), available at: http://

www.epa.gov/tier2/documents/f99051.pdf. 

12 66 FR 5002, 5012 (January 18, 2001). 

supported or funded projects (general 

conformity). State transportation 

conformity SIP revisions must be 

consistent with Federal conformity 

regulations relating to consultation, 

enforcement, and enforceability that 

EPA promulgated pursuant to its 

authority under the CAA. 

EPA interprets the conformity SIP 

requirements 8 as not applying for 

purposes of evaluating a redesignation 

request under section 107(d) because 

state conformity rules are still required 

after redesignation and Federal 

conformity rules apply where state rules 

have not been approved. See Wall v. 

EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001) 

(upholding this interpretation); see also 

60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) 

(redesignation of Tampa, Florida). 

Nonetheless, South Carolina has an 

approved conformity SIP for the South 

Carolina portion of the Area. See 74 FR 

37168 (July 28, 2009). Thus, the South 

Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte 

Area has satisfied all applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation under section 110 and 

part D of title I of the CAA. 

b. The South Carolina Portion of the BiState Charlotte Area Has a Fully 

Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 

110(k) of the CAA 

EPA has fully approved the applicable 

South Carolina SIP for the South 

Carolina portion of the Area under 

section 110(k) of the CAA for all 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. EPA may rely on prior 

SIP approvals in approving a 

redesignation request (see Calcagni 

Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern 

Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. 

Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–90 (6th Cir. 

1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426) plus any 

additional measures it may approve in 

conjunction with a redesignation action 

(see 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and 

citations therein). South Carolina has 

adopted and submitted, and EPA has 

fully approved at various times, 

provisions addressing the various SIP 

elements applicable for the ozone 

NAAQS. See 80 FR 11136 (March 2, 

2015); 76 FR 41111 (July 13, 2011). 

As indicated above, EPA believes that 

the section 110 elements that are neither 

connected with nonattainment plan 

submissions nor linked to an area’s 

nonattainment status are not applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. EPA has approved all 

part D requirements applicable for 

purposes of this redesignation. As noted 

above, EPA has approved South 

Carolina’s August 8, 2014, emissions 

inventory SIP revision, and its August 

22, 2014, emissions statements SIP 

revision. See 80 FR 33413. 

Criteria (3)—The Air Quality 

Improvement in the Bi-State Charlotte 

Area Is Due to Permanent and 

Enforceable Reductions in Emissions 

Resulting From Implementation of the 

SIP and Applicable Federal Air 

Pollution Control Regulations and Other 

Permanent and Enforceable Reductions 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the air quality 

improvement in the area is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the SIP, applicable 

Federal air pollution control 

regulations, and other permanent and 

enforceable reductions (CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). EPA has preliminarily 

determined that South Carolina has 

demonstrated that the observed air 

quality improvement in the bi-state 

Charlotte Area is due to permanent and 

enforceable reductions in emissions 

resulting from Federal measures and 

from state measures adopted into the 

SIP. EPA does not believe that the 

decrease in ozone concentrations in the 

bi-state Charlotte Area is due to 

unusually favorable meteorological 

conditions.9

State and Federal measures enacted in 

recent years have resulted in permanent 

emission reductions. Most of these 

emission reductions are enforceable 

through regulations. The state measures 

that have been implemented to date and 

identified by South Carolina as 

permanent and enforceable measures 

include Regulation 61–62.2— 

Prohibition of Open Burning and 

Regulation 61–62.5—Control of Oxides 

of Nitrogen. These measures are 

approved in the federally-approved SIP 

and thus are permanent and 

enforceable. The Federal measures that 

have been implemented include the 

following: 

Tier 2 vehicle and fuel standards. 

Implementation began in 2004 and as 

newer, cleaner cars enter the national 

fleet, these standards continue to 

significantly reduce NOx emissions. The 

standards require all passenger vehicles 

in any manufacturer’s fleet to meet an 

average standard of 0.07 grams of NOx

per mile. Additionally, in January 2006 

the sulfur content of gasoline was 

required to be on average 30 ppm which 

assists in lowering the NOx emissions. 

Most gasoline sold in South Carolina 

prior to January 2006 had a sulfur 

content of about 300 ppm.10 EPA 

expects that these standards will reduce 

NOx emissions from vehicles by 

approximately 74 percent by 2030, 

translating to nearly 3 million tons 

annually by 2030.11

Large non-road diesel engines rule. 

This rule was promulgated in 2004, and 

is being phased in between 2008 

through 2014. This rule will also reduce 

the sulfur content in the nonroad diesel 

fuel. When fully implemented, this rule 

will reduce NOX, VOC, particulate 

matter, and carbon monoxide. These 

emission reductions are federally 

enforceable. EPA issued this rule in 

June 2004, which applies to diesel 

engines used in industries, such as 

construction, agriculture, and mining. It 

is estimated that compliance with this 

rule will cut NOX emissions from nonroad diesel engines by up to 90 percent 

nationwide. The non-road diesel rule 

was fully implemented by 2010. 

Heavy-duty gasoline and diesel 

highway vehicle standards. EPA issued 

this rule in January 2001 (66 FR 5002). 

This rule includes standards limiting 

the sulfur content of diesel fuel, which 

went into effect in 2004. A second phase 

took effect in 2007, which further 

reduced the highway diesel fuel sulfur 

content to 15 ppm, leading to additional 

reductions in combustion NOX and VOC 

emissions. EPA expects that this rule 

will achieve a 95 percent reduction in 

NOX emissions from diesel trucks and 

buses and will reduce NOX emissions by 

2.6 million tons by 2030 when the 

heavy-duty vehicle fleet is completely 

replaced with newer heavy-duty 

vehicles that comply with these 

emission standards.12

Medium and heavy duty vehicle fuel 

consumption and GHG standards. 

These standards require on-road 

vehicles to achieve a 7 percent to 20 

percent reduction in CO2 emissions and 

fuel consumption by 2018. The decrease 

in fuel consumption will result in a 7 

percent to 20 percent decrease in NOX

emissions. 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61781 

13This NESHAP is expected to result in a small 

decrease in VOC emissions. Boilers must comply 

with the NESHAP by January 31, 2016, for all states 

except North Carolina which has a compliance date 

in May 2019. 

14EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 

F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). 

15The Court’s holding regarding South Carolina’s 

SO2 CSAPR emissions budget is irrelevant to 

today’s action because SO2 is not an ozone 

precursor. 

Nonroad spark-ignition engines and 

recreational engines standards. The 

nonroad spark-ignition and recreational 

engine standards, effective in July 2003, 

regulate NOX, hydrocarbons, and carbon 

monoxide from groups of previously 

unregulated nonroad engines. These 

engine standards apply to large sparkignition engines (e.g., forklifts and 

airport ground service equipment), 

recreational vehicles (e.g., off-highway 

motorcycles and all-terrain-vehicles), 

and recreational marine diesel engines 

sold in the United States and imported 

after the effective date of these 

standards. When all of the nonroad 

spark-ignition and recreational engine 

standards are fully implemented, an 

overall 72 percent reduction in 

hydrocarbons, 80 percent reduction in 

NOX, and 56 percent reduction in 

carbon monoxide emissions are 

expected by 2020. These controls reduce 

ambient concentrations of ozone, carbon 

monoxide, and fine particulate matter. 

National Program for greenhouse gas 

(GHG) emissions and Fuel Economy 

Standards. The federal GHG and fuel 

economy standards apply to light-duty 

cars and trucks in model years 2012– 

2016 (phase 1) and 2017–2025 (phase 2). 

The final standards are projected to 

result in an average industry fleet-wide 

level of 163 grams/mile of carbon 

dioxide (CO2) which is equivalent to 

54.5 miles per gallon (mpg) if achieved 

exclusively through fuel economy 

improvements. The fuel economy 

standards result in less fuel being 

consumed, and therefore less NOX

emissions released. 

Reciprocating Internal Combustion 

Engine (RICE) National Emissions 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

(NESHAP).13 The RICE NESHAP is 

expected to result in a small decrease in 

VOC emissions. RICE owners and 

operators had to comply with the 

NESHAP by May 3, 2013. 

NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 

(63 FR 57356), EPA issued the NOX SIP 

Call requiring the District of Columbia 

and 22 states to reduce emissions of 

NOX, a precursor to ozone pollution, 

and providing a mechanism (the NOX

Budget Trading Program) that states 

could use to achieve those reductions. 

Affected states were required to comply 

with Phase I of the SIP Call beginning 

in 2004 and Phase II beginning in 2007. 

By the end of 2008, ozone season 

emissions from sources subject to the 

NOX SIP Call dropped by 62 percent 

from 2000 emissions levels. All NOX SIP 

Call states have SIPs that currently 

satisfy their obligations under the NOX

SIP Call; the NOX SIP Call reduction 

requirements are being met; and EPA 

will continue to enforce the 

requirements of the NOX SIP Call. 

Emission reductions resulting from 

regulations developed in response to the 

NOX SIP Call are therefore permanent 

and enforceable for the purposes of 

today’s action. 

CAIR/CSAPR. In its redesignation 

request and maintenance plan, the State 

identified the Clean Air Interstate Rule 

(CAIR) and the Cross-State Air Pollution 

Rule (CSAPR) as two measures that 

contributed to permanent and 

enforceable emissions reductions. CAIR 

created regional cap-and-trade programs 

to reduce SO2 and NOX emissions in 27 

eastern states, including South Carolina, 

that contributed to downwind 

nonattainment and maintenance of the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 70 FR 25162 

(May 12, 2005). EPA approved South 

Carolina’s CAIR regulations into the 

South Carolina SIP on October 16, 2009. 

See 74 FR 53167. In 2008, the United 

States Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) 

initially vacated CAIR, North Carolina 

v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), 

but ultimately remanded the rule to EPA 

without vacatur to preserve the 

environmental benefits provided by 

CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 

1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). On August 

8, 2011 (76 FR 48208), acting on the DC 

Circuit’s remand, EPA promulgated 

CSAPR to replace CAIR and thus to 

address the interstate transport of 

emissions contributing to nonattainment 

and interfering with maintenance of the 

two air quality standards covered by 

CAIR as well as the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

CSAPR requires substantial reductions 

of SO2 and NOX emissions from electric 

generating units (EGUs) in 28 states in 

the Eastern United States. 

The DC Circuit’s initial vacatur of 

CSAPR 14 was reversed by the United 

States Supreme Court on April 29, 2014, 

and the case was remanded to the DC 

Circuit to resolve remaining issues in 

accordance with the high court’s ruling. 

EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, 

L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). On remand, 

the D.C. Circuit affirmed CSAPR in most 

respects, but invalidated without 

vacating some of the CSAPR budgets as 

to a number of states. EME Homer City 

Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118 

(D.C. Cir. 2015). The remanded budgets 

include the Phase 2 sulfur dioxide (SO2) 

and NOX ozone season emissions 

budgets for South Carolina. This 

litigation ultimately delayed 

implementation of CSAPR for three 

years, from January 1, 2012, when 

CSAPR’s cap-and-trade programs were 

originally scheduled to replace the CAIR 

cap-and-trade programs, to January 1, 

2015. Thus, the rule’s Phase 2 budgets 

were originally promulgated to begin on 

January 1, 2014, and are now scheduled 

to begin on January 1, 2017. CSAPR will 

continue to operate under the existing 

emissions budgets until EPA addresses 

the D.C. Circuit’s remand. 

Although the State identified CAIR 

and CSAPR as measures that 

contributed to permanent and 

enforceable emissions reductions, EPA 

is proposing to approve the 

redesignation of the South Carolina 

portion of the bi-State Charlotte Area 

without relying on those measures as 

having led to attainment of the 2008 

ozone NAAQS or contributing to 

maintenance of that standard. In so 

doing, we are proposing to determine 

that the DC Circuit’s invalidation of the 

South Carolina CSAPR Phase 2 ozone 

season NOX and SO2 emissions budgets 

does not bar today’s proposed 

redesignation.15

The improvement in ozone air quality 

in the Area from 2011 (a year when the 

design value for the Area was above the 

NAAQS) to 2014 (a year when the 

design value was below the NAAQS) is 

not due to CSAPR emissions reductions 

because, as noted above, CSAPR did not 

go into effect until January 1, 2015, after 

the Area was already attaining the 

standard. As a general matter, because 

CSAPR is CAIR’s replacement, 

emissions reductions associated with 

CAIR will for most areas be made 

permanent and enforceable through 

implementation of CSAPR. However, 

EPA has preliminarily determined that 

the vast majority of reductions in 

emissions in the South Carolina portion 

of the Area from 2011–2014 were due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in mobile source VOC and NOX

emissions. In addition, EPA’s analysis of 

EGU emissions data from CAIR-subject 

sources in South Carolina, none of 

which are located in the South Carolina 

portion of the Charlotte Area, further 

support our proposed determination 

that attainment of the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS in the Area was not due to 

CAIR reductions from South Carolina 

EGUs. 

As summarized at the end of this 

section, EPA found that from 2011 to 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
61782 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

16Although the State listed CAIR and CSAPR as 

permanent and enforceable measures, the State’s 

maintenance demonstration does not include 

emissions reductions from these programs because 

there are no EGUs in the South Carolina portion of 

the Area. 17EPA expects that NOX emissions from South 

Carolina EGUs will continue to decrease with the 

scheduled retirement of two coal- and/or oil-fired 

EGUs by the end of 2018 and the switch from coal 

and/or oil to natural gas at two additional EGUs. 

None of these units are located in the Charlotte 

Area. 

18EPA incorporated these two measures into the 

SIP in 2005. See 70 FR 50195 (August 26, 2005). 19South Carolina stated that neighboring states 

have adopted measures to improve regional air 

quality, noting that North Carolina has 

implemented the state-wide Clean Smokestacks Act 

which sets a cap on NOX and sulfur dioxide 

emissions. North Carolina’s Clean Smokestacks Act 

requires coal-fired power plants to reduce annual 

NOX emissions by 77 percent by 2009, and to 

reduce annual SO2 emissions by 49 percent by 2009 

and 73 percent by 2013. This law set a NOX

emissions cap of 56,000 tons/year for 2009 and SO2

emissions caps of 250,000 tons/year and 130,000 

tons/year for 2009 and 2013, respectively. The 

public utilities cannot meet these emission caps by 

purchasing emission credits. EPA approved the 

statewide emissions caps as part of the North 

Carolina SIP on September 26, 2011. In 2013, the 

power plants subject to this law had combined NOX

emissions of 38,857 tons per year, well below the 

56,000 tons per year cap. The emissions cap has 

been met in all subsequent years as well and is 

enforceable at both the federal and state level. 

2014, mobile source emission 

reductions accounted for 82 percent of 

the total NOX reductions and 85 percent 

of the total VOC reductions in the South 

Carolina portion of the Area. As laid out 

in the State’s maintenance 

demonstration, NOX and VOC emissions 

in the South Carolina portion of the 

Area are projected to continue their 

downward trend through the end of the 

first maintenance plan period, driven 

entirely by mobile source measures.16

From 2014 to 2026, the State projected 

that all of the emissions decreases in the 

South Carolina portion of the Area 

would be due to mobile source 

measures based on EPA-approved 

mobile source modeling. 

Furthermore, emissions data from 

EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division 

(CAMD) summarized in Table 3 shows 

that NOX emissions from CAIR-subject 

EGUs in South Carolina were already 

below the NOX ozone season CAIR 

budget by 2011, when the design value 

for the Area was above the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS. EPA believes that the 

additional decreases in NOX emissions 

from South Carolina EGUs in 2012–2014 

were largely due to the retirement of 

several coal- and oil-fired EGUs during 

that time period. See Table 4. These 

retirements are permanent and 

enforceable, regardless of the rationale 

behind the shutdowns. Because these 

retired units were subject to CAIR, even 

if CAIR was partially responsible for 

attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in 

the South Carolina portion of the Area, 

CAIR’s part in that attainment has been 

made permanent and enforceable 

through retirements that will endure.17

Given the particular facts and 

circumstances associated with this Area, 

EPA does not believe that the DC 

Circuit’s recent invalidation of South 

Carolina’s CSAPR Phase 2 NOX ozone 

season and SO2 budgets, which replaced 

CAIR’s NOX ozone season and SO2

budgets, is a bar to EPA’s redesignation 

of the South Carolina portion of the 

Area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 

TABLE 3—COMPARISON OF SOUTH CAROLINA EGU ANNUAL NOX OZONE SEASON BUDGET AND NOX OZONE SEASON

EMISSIONS FROM SOUTH CAROLINA EGUS

South Carolina EGU CAIR NOX ozone season annual budget 

(2009–2014) 

South Carolina EGU NOX ozone season emissions 

2011 2012 2013 2014 

15,249 .............................................................................................................. 13,036 8,817 6,491 7,237 

TABLE 4—SOUTH CAROLINA EGUS THAT RETIRED DURING 2011–2014 

Facility name Unit 

2011 Ozone 

season NOX

emissions 

(tons) 

Retirement 

date 

H B Robinson .............................................................................................................................. 1 378 2012 

W S Lee ....................................................................................................................................... 1 166 2014 

W S Lee ....................................................................................................................................... 2 181 2014 

Canadys Steam ........................................................................................................................... CAN1 492 2012 

Canadys Steam ........................................................................................................................... CAN2 515 2013 

Canadys Steam ........................................................................................................................... CAN3 769 2013 

Dolphus M Grainger .................................................................................................................... 1 186 2012 

Dolphus M Grainger .................................................................................................................... 2 192 2012 

Jefferies ....................................................................................................................................... 3 423 2012 

Jefferies ....................................................................................................................................... 4 418 2012 

As mentioned above, the State 

measures that have been implemented 

include the following: 18

Prohibition of Open Burning: Effective 

in 2004, Regulation 61–62.2 prohibits 

the certain open burning activities 

during the ozone season for additional 

control of NOX emissions. 

Control of Oxides of Nitrogen: 

Effective in 2004, Regulation 61–62.5, 

Standard 5.2—Control of Oxides of 

Nitrogen, applies to new and existing 

stationary sources that emit or have the 

potential to emit NOX generated from 

fuel combustion. This regulation sets 

standards for new construction based on 

Best Available Control Technology 

(BACT) standards from the national 

RACT/BACT/LAER clearinghouse. For 

new sources, the regulation is primarily 

directed at smaller sources that fall 

below the prevention of significance 

deterioration (PSD) thresholds and 

therefore otherwise be exempt for NOX

controls.19

EPA evaluated the ozone precursor 

emissions data in the South Carolina 

portion of the Area and found that there 

were significant reductions in these 

emissions in multiple source categories 

from 2011 to 2014 during ozone season. 

The emissions data show that from 2011 

to 2014, NOX and VOC emissions 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61783 

20EPA estimated that compliance with this rule 

will cut NOX emissions from non-road diesel 

engines by up to 90 percent nationwide. 

21 Implementation of this rule is expected to 

achieve a 95 percent reduction in NOX emissions 

from diesel trucks and buses. 

22When fully implemented in 2018, this rule is 

expected to reduce NOX emissions from the covered 

vehicles by 20 percent. 

23When fully implemented, the standards will 

result in an 80 percent reduction in NOX by 2020. 

24EPA, Regulatory Announcement, EPA420–F– 

99–051 (December 1999), available at: http://

www.epa.gov/tier2/documents/f99051.pdf. 

25 66 FR 5002, 5012 (January 18, 2001). 

26South Carolina used EPA’s MOVES2014 model 

to calculate on-road emissions factors and EPA’s 

NONROAD 2008a model to quantify off-road 

emissions. 

27South Carolina used the interagency 

consultation process required by 40 CFR part 93 

(known as the Transportation Conformity Rule) 

which requires EPA, the United States Department 

of Transportation, metropolitan planning 

organizations, state departments of transportation, 

and State and local air quality agencies to work 

together to develop applicable implementation 

plans. The on-road emissions were generated by an 

aggregate of the vehicle activity (generated from the 

travel demand model) on individual roadways 

multiplied by the appropriate emissions factor from 

MOVES2014. The assumptions which are included 

in the travel demand model, such as population, 

were reviewed through the interagency consultation 

process. 

decreased in the point source, area 

source, and mobile source categories 

and that the decrease in mobile source 

NOX emissions accounted for 

approximately 82 percent of the total 

NOX emissions reductions and 

approximately 85 percent of the total 

VOC emissions reductions. It is not 

necessary for every change in emissions 

between the nonattainment year and the 

attainment year to be permanent and 

enforceable. Rather, the CAA requires 

that improvement in air quality 

necessary for the area to attain the 

relevant NAAQS must be reasonably 

attributable to permanent and 

enforceable emission reductions in 

emissions. 

TABLE 5—NOX EMISSIONS FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA PORTION OF THE CHARLOTTE 2008 OZONE NAAQS 

NONATTAINMENT AREA

[Tons per summer day] 

Year Point source Area source On-road Non-road Total 

2011 ..................................................................................... 4.71 0.93 11.43 2.63 19.70 

2014 ..................................................................................... 4.54 0.91 10.04 2.50 17.85 

TABLE 6—VOC EMISSIONS FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA PORTION OF THE CHARLOTTE 2008 OZONE NAAQS 

NONATTAINMENT AREA

[Tons per summer day] 

Year Point source Area source On-road Non-road Total 

2011 ..................................................................................... 4.02 6.93 5.30 1.78 18.03 

2014 ..................................................................................... 3.80 6.89 3.93 1.70 16.32 

The emissions reductions identified 

in Tables 5 and 6 are attributable to 

numerous measures implemented 

during this period, including the 

permanent and enforceable mobile 

source measures discussed above such 

as the Tier 2 vehicle and fuel standards, 

the large non-road diesel engines rule,20

heavy-duty gasoline and diesel highway 

vehicle standards,21 medium and heavy 

duty vehicle fuel consumption and GHG 

standards,22 non-road spark-ignitions 

and recreational standards,23 and the 

national program for GHG emissions 

and fuel economy standards. These 

mobile source measures have resulted 

in, and continue to result in, large 

reductions in NOX emissions over time 

due to fleet turnover (i.e., the 

replacement of older vehicles that 

predate the standards with newer 

vehicles that meet the standards). For 

example, implementation of the Tier 2 

standards began in 2004, and as newer, 

cleaner cars enter the national fleet, 

these standards continue to significantly 

reduce NOX emissions. EPA expects that 

these standards will reduce NOX

emissions from vehicles by 

approximately 74 percent by 2030, 

translating to nearly 3 million tons 

annually by 2030.24 Implementation of 

the heavy-duty gasoline and diesel 

highway vehicle standards rule also 

began in 2004. EPA projects a 2.6 

million ton reduction in NOX emissions 

by 2030 when the heavy-duty vehicle 

fleet is completely replaced with newer 

heavy-duty vehicles that comply with 

these emission standards.25

The State calculated the on-road and 

non-road mobile source emissions 

contained in Tables 5 and 6 using EPAapproved models and procedures that 

account for the Federal mobile source 

measures identified above, fleet 

turnover, and increased population.26 27

Because the model does not include any 

additional mobile source measures, the 

reductions in mobile source emissions 

quantified in the Area between 2011 

and 2014 are the result of the permanent 

and enforceable mobile source measures 

listed above. 

Improvements in air quality in the bistate Charlotte area are due to real, 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in NOX emissions resulting from state 

and federal measures. EPA is proposing 

to approve the redesignation request 

and related SIP revisions for the York 

County portion of the bi-state Charlotte 

Area. 

Criteria (4)—The South Carolina Portion 

of the Area Has a Fully Approved 

Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 

175A of the CAA 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the area has a 

fully approved maintenance plan 

pursuant to section 175A of the CAA 

(CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In 

conjunction with its request to 

redesignate the South Carolina portion 

of the Area to attainment for the 2008 

8-hour ozone NAAQS, SC DHEC 

submitted a SIP revision to provide for 

the maintenance of the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after 

the effective date of redesignation to 

attainment. EPA believes that this 

maintenance plan meets the 

requirements for approval under section 

175A of the CAA. 

a. What is required in a maintenance 

plan? 

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth 

the elements of a maintenance plan for 

areas seeking redesignation from 

nonattainment to attainment. Under 

section 175A, the plan must 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
61784 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

demonstrate continued attainment of 

the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 

years after the Administrator approves a 

redesignation to attainment. Eight years 

after the redesignation, the state must 

submit a revised maintenance plan 

demonstrating that attainment will 

continue to be maintained for the 10 

years following the initial 10-year 

period. To address the possibility of 

future NAAQS violations, the 

maintenance plan must contain 

contingency measures as EPA deems 

necessary to assure prompt correction of 

any future 2008 8-hour ozone violations. 

The Calcagni Memorandum provides 

further guidance on the content of a 

maintenance plan, explaining that a 

maintenance plan should address five 

requirements: The attainment emissions 

inventory, maintenance demonstration, 

monitoring, verification of continued 

attainment, and a contingency plan. As 

is discussed more fully below, EPA has 

preliminarily determined that South 

Carolina’s maintenance plan includes 

all the necessary components and is 

thus proposing to approve it as a 

revision to the South Carolina SIP. 

b. Attainment Emissions Inventory 

As discussed above, EPA determined 

that the bi-state Charlotte Area had 

attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

at the time that it redesignated the North 

Carolina portion of the Area to 

attainment. See 80 FR 44874–44875. 

EPA has reviewed preliminary 

monitoring data available since the time 

of the Agency’s redesignation of the 

North Carolina portion of the Area and 

proposes to find that the bi-state 

Charlotte Area continues to attain the 

2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. South 

Carolina selected 2014 as the base year 

(i.e., attainment emissions inventory 

year) for developing a comprehensive 

emissions inventory for NOX and VOC, 

for which projected emissions could be 

developed for 2018, 2022, and 2026. 

The attainment inventory identifies a 

level of emissions in the Area that is 

sufficient to attain the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. South Carolina began 

development of the attainment 

inventory by first generating a baseline 

emissions inventory for the State’s 

portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area. 

The projected summer day emission 

inventories have been estimated using 

projected rates of growth in population, 

traffic, economic activity, and other 

parameters. In addition to comparing 

the final year of the plan (2026) to the 

base year (2014), South Carolina 

compared interim years to the baseline 

to demonstrate that these years are also 

expected to show continued 

maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone 

standard. 

The emissions inventory is composed 

of four major types of sources: Point, 

area, on-road mobile, and non-road 

mobile. South Carolina also included 

event sources (i.e., fires) in the 

inventory. The complete descriptions of 

how the inventories were developed are 

discussed in Appendices A–E of the 

April 17, 2015, submittal, which can be 

found in the docket for this action. Point 

source emissions are tabulated from 

data collected by direct on-site 

measurements of emissions or from 

mass balance calculations utilizing 

emission factors from EPA’s AP–42 or 

stack test results. For each projected 

year’s inventory, point sources are 

adjusted by growth factors based on 

economic forecasting for the energy 

sector. Airport and helipad emissions 

reported were obtained from the EPA’s 

2011 National Emission Inventory and 

grown based on York County population 

growth. 

For area sources, emissions are 

estimated by multiplying an emission 

factor by some known indicator of 

collective activity such as production, 

number of employees, or population. 

South Carolina started with the 2011 

NEI for area sources reported at the York 

County level, then allocated the 

emissions to the portion of the county 

within the bi-state Charlotte Area by the 

proportion of the York County 

population within the Area. For each 

projected year’s inventory, area source 

emissions are grown by information 

such as population growth, energy 

consumption by sector, or county 

business patterns from the Census. 

The non-road mobile sources 

emissions are calculated using EPA’s 

nonroad portion of the Motor Vehicle 

Emission Simulator (MOVES2014) 

model, with the exception of the 

emissions associated with railroad 

locomotives, which were obtained from 

EPA’s 2011 NEI v1. For each projected 

year’s inventory, the emissions are 

estimated using growth factors based on 

York County population growth. 

For highway mobile sources, South 

Carolina ran EPA’s MOVES2014 mobile 

model to calculate emissions. The 

MOVES2014 model includes the road 

class vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as an 

input file and can directly output the 

estimated emissions. For each projected 

year’s inventory, the highway mobile 

sources emissions are calculated by 

running the MOVES mobile model for 

the future year with the projected VMT 

to generate emissions that take into 

consideration expected Federal tailpipe 

standards, fleet turnover, and new fuels. 

The events inventory, consisting of 

wildfires and prescribed fires, was first 

based on EPA’s 2011 NEI v1, which 

utilized a model for predicting emission 

from fires based on factors such as the 

area burned, fuel load available, burn 

efficiency, and emission factors. 

Emissions from fires were not grown for 

the maintenance and interim years due 

to the unpredictability of projecting 

wildfires. 

The 2014 NOX and VOC emissions for 

the South Carolina portion of the Area, 

as well as the emissions for other years, 

were developed consistent with EPA 

guidance and are summarized in Tables 

7 through 9 of the following subsection 

discussing the maintenance 

demonstration. See Appendices A–E of 

the April 17, 2015, submission for more 

detailed information on the emissions 

inventory. 

c. Maintenance Demonstration 

The maintenance plan associated with 

the redesignation request includes a 

maintenance demonstration that: 

(i) Shows compliance with and 

maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS by providing information to 

support the demonstration that current 

and future emissions of NOX and VOC 

remain at or below 2014 emissions 

levels. 

(ii) Uses 2014 as the attainment year 

and includes future emissions inventory 

projections for 2018, 2022, and 2026. 

(iii) Identifies an ‘‘out year’’ at least 10 

years after the time necessary for EPA to 

review and approve the maintenance 

plan. Per 40 CFR part 93, NOX and VOC 

MVEBs were established for the last 

year (2026) of the maintenance plan (see 

section VII below). Additionally, SC 

DHEC opted to establish MVEBs for an 

interim year (2014). 

(iv) Provides actual (2014) and 

projected emissions inventories, in tons 

per summer day (tpsd), for the South 

Carolina portion of the Area, as shown 

in Tables 7 through 9, below. 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61785 

TABLE 7—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED TYPICAL SUMMER DAY NOX EMISSIONS (tpsd) FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA PORTION

OF THE AREA

Sector 2014 2018 2022 2026 

Point ................................................................................................................. 4.54 4.57 4.59 4.62 

Area ................................................................................................................. 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.92 

Non-road .......................................................................................................... 2.50 1.91 1.58 1.43 

On-road ............................................................................................................ 10.04 6.65 4.61 3.39 

Event sources .................................................................................................. 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 

Total * ........................................................................................................ 18.03 14.09 11.74 10.40 

TABLE 8—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED TYPICAL SUMMER DAY VOC EMISSIONS (tpsd) FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA PORTION

OF THE AREA

Sector 2014 2018 2022 2026 

Point ................................................................................................................. 3.80 3.83 3.84 3.86 

Area ................................................................................................................. 6.89 7.30 7.54 7.80 

Non-road .......................................................................................................... 1.70 1.46 1.39 1.40 

On-road ............................................................................................................ 3.93 2.79 2.15 1.74 

Event sources .................................................................................................. 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 

Total * ........................................................................................................ 16.74 15.80 15.34 15.22 

TABLE 9—EMISSION ESTIMATES FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA PORTION OF THE AREA

Year VOC 

(tpsd) 

NOX

(tpsd) 

2014 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 16.74 18.03 

2018 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 15.80 14.09 

2022 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 15.34 11.74 

2026 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 15.22 10.40 

Difference from 2014 to 2026 .................................................................................................................................. ¥1.52 ¥7.63 

Tables 7 through 9 summarize the 

2014 and future projected emissions of 

NOX and VOC from the South Carolina 

portion of the Area. In situations where 

local emissions are the primary 

contributor to nonattainment, the 

NAAQS should not be violated in the 

future as long as emissions from within 

the nonattainment area remain at or 

below the baseline with which 

attainment was achieved. South 

Carolina has projected emissions as 

described previously and determined 

that emissions in the South Carolina 

portion of the Area will remain below 

those in the attainment year inventory 

for the duration of the maintenance 

plan. 

As discussed in section VII of this 

proposed rulemaking, a safety margin is 

the difference between the attainment 

level of emissions (from all sources) and 

the projected level of emissions (from 

all sources) in the maintenance plan. 

The attainment level of emissions is the 

level of emissions during one of the 

years in which the area met the NAAQS. 

South Carolina selected 2014 as the 

attainment emissions inventory year for 

the South Carolina portion of the Area. 

South Carolina calculated safety 

margins in its submittal for year 2018, 

2022, and 2026. Because the initial 

MVEB year of 2014 is also the base year 

for the maintenance plan inventory, 

there is no safety margin, therefore, no 

adjustments were made to the MVEB for 

2014. The State has allocated a portion 

of the 2026 safety margin to the 2026 

MVEBs for the York County Area. 

TABLE 10—NEW SAFETY MARGINS FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA PORTION OF THE AREA

Year VOC 

(tpsd) 

NOX

(tpsd) 

2014 ......................................................................................................................................................................... N/A N/A 

2018 ......................................................................................................................................................................... ¥0.94 ¥3.94 

2022 ......................................................................................................................................................................... ¥1.40 ¥6.29 

2026 ......................................................................................................................................................................... ¥1.52 ¥7.63 

The State decided to allocate 100 

percent of the 2026 safety margin to the 

2026 MVEBs to allow for unanticipated 

growth in VMT, changes and 

uncertainty in vehicle mix assumptions, 

etc., that will influence the emission 

estimations. SC DHEC has allocated 7.63 

tpd (6,922 kg/day) to the 2026 NOX

MVEB and 1.52 tpd (1,379 kg/day) to 

the 2026 VOC MVEB. After allocation of 

100 percent of the available safety 

margin, there is no remaining safety 

margin for NOX and VOC. This 

allocation and the resulting safety 

margin for the South Carolina portion of 

the Area are discussed further in section 

VI of this proposed rulemaking along 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
61786 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

28 If SC DHEC determines that a longer schedule 

is required to implement specific contingency 

measures, then, upon selection of the appropriate 

measures, SC DHEC will notify EPA of the proposed 

schedule and provide sufficient information to 

demonstrate that the proposed measures are a 

prompt correction of the triggering event. Any 

extension would be subject to EPA’s approval of the 

SIP revision containing the required contingency 

measure. 

with the MVEBs to be used for 

transportation conformity proposes. 

d. Monitoring Network 

There are currently seven monitors 

measuring ozone in the bi-state 

Charlotte Area. All of these monitors are 

operated by the State of North Carolina 

or Mecklenburg County. There are no 

South Carolina monitors in the bi-state 

Charlotte Area. Specifically, North 

Carolina operates four of the monitors in 

the bi-state Charlotte Area, whereas the 

Mecklenburg County Air Quality Office 

operates three of the monitors in 

Mecklenburg County. The State of North 

Carolina, through the North Carolina 

Department of Air Quality has 

committed to continue operation of all 

monitors in the North Carolina portion 

of the bi-state Charlotte Area (which 

happens to be all of the monitors in the 

bi-state Charlotte Area) in compliance 

with 40 CFR part 58 and have thus 

addressed the requirement for 

monitoring. EPA approved North 

Carolina’s commitment to continuing 

monitoring as part of the Agency’s 

action to redesignate the North Carolina 

portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area to 

attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. See 80 FR 44873 (July 28, 

2015). EPA approved North Carolina’s 

monitoring plan on November 25, 2013. 

e. Verification of Continued Attainment 

The State of South Carolina, through 

SC DHEC, has the legal authority to 

enforce and implement the 

requirements of the South Carolina 

portion of the Area 2008 8-hour ozone 

maintenance plan. This includes the 

authority to adopt, implement, and 

enforce any subsequent emissions 

control contingency measures 

determined to be necessary to correct 

future ozone attainment problems. 

Additionally, under the Consolidated 

Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) and 

Air Emissions Reporting Requirements 

(AERR), SC DHEC is required to develop 

a comprehensive, annual, statewide 

emissions inventory every three years 

that is due twelve to eighteen months 

after the completion of the inventory 

year. The AERR inventory years match 

the base year and final year of the 

inventory for the maintenance plan, and 

are within one or two years of the 

interim inventory years of the 

maintenance plan. Therefore, SC DHEC 

commits to compare the CERR and 

AERR inventories as they are developed 

with the maintenance plan to determine 

if additional steps are necessary for 

continued maintenance of the 2008 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS in this Area. 

f. Contingency Measures in the 

Maintenance Plan 

Section 175A of the CAA requires that 

a maintenance plan include such 

contingency measures as EPA deems 

necessary to assure that the state will 

promptly correct a violation of the 

NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. 

The maintenance plan should identify 

the contingency measures to be adopted, 

a schedule and procedure for adoption 

and implementation, and a time limit 

for action by the state. A state should 

also identify specific indicators to be 

used to determine when the 

contingency measures need to be 

implemented. The maintenance plan 

must include a requirement that a state 

will implement all measures with 

respect to control of the pollutant that 

were contained in the SIP before 

redesignation of the area to attainment 

in accordance with section 175A(d). 

In the April 17, 2015 submittal, South 

Carolina affirms that all programs 

instituted by the State will remain 

enforceable and that sources are 

prohibited from reducing emissions 

controls following the redesignation of 

the Area. The contingency plan 

included in the submittal includes a 

triggering mechanism to determine 

when contingency measures are needed 

and a process of developing and 

implementing appropriate control 

measures. The primary trigger of the 

contingency plan will be a quality 

assured/quality controlled (QA/QC) 

design value that exceeds the 2008 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS (i.e., when the 

three-year average of the 4th highest 

values is equal to or greater than 0.076 

ppm at any monitor in the Area). If the 

QA/QC data indicates a violating design 

value, the triggering event will be the 

date of the design value violation, not 

the final QA/QC date. 

Additionally, SC DHEC will be 

evaluating periodic emissions 

inventories and comparing them to the 

projected inventories. If the emissions 

reported in these inventories exceed the 

projected emissions in the maintenance 

plan by more than 10 percent, SC DHEC 

will investigate the cause for these 

differences and develop a strategy for 

addressing them. 

Finally, SC DHEC commits to 

implement, within 24 months of a 

trigger, at least one of the control 

measures listed below or other 

contingency measures that may be 

determined to be more appropriate 

based on the analyses performed.28 At 

least one of the following contingency 

measures will be adopted and 

implemented upon a primary triggering 

event: 

• NOX Reasonably Available Control 

Technology on stationary sources not 

subject to existing requirements; 

• Implementation of diesel retrofit 

programs, including incentives for 

performing retrofits for fleet vehicle 

operations; 

• Alternative fuel programs for fleet 

vehicle operations; 

• Gas can and lawnmower 

replacement programs; 

• Voluntary engine idle reductions 

programs; 

• SC DHEC’s Take a Break from 

Exhaust program; and, 

• Other measures deemed appropriate 

at the time as a result of advances in 

control technologies. 

EPA has concluded that the 

maintenance plan adequately addresses 

the five basic components of a 

maintenance plan: The attainment 

emissions inventory, maintenance 

demonstration, monitoring, verification 

of continued attainment, and a 

contingency plan. Therefore, the 

maintenance plan SIP revision 

submitted by South Carolina for the 

State’s portion of the Area meets the 

requirements of section 175A of the 

CAA and is approvable. 

VI. What is EPA’s analysis of South 

Carolina’s proposed NOX and VOC 

MVEBs 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 

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 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61787 

29The conversion to kilograms used the actual 

emissions reported in the MOVES model. The 

conversion was done utilizing the ‘‘CONVERT’’ function in an EXCEL spreadsheet. The conversion 

factor is 907.1847. 

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 demonstration requirements) 

and maintenance plans create MVEBs 

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 last 

year of the maintenance plan. A state 

may adopt MVEBs for other years as 

well. The MVEB is the portion of the 

total allowable emissions in the 

maintenance demonstration 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. 

As part of the interagency 

consultation process on setting MVEBs, 

SC DHEC held conference calls with the 

Rock Hill Fort Mill Area Transportation 

Study (RFATS) Metropolitan Planning 

Organization (MPO) to determine what 

years to set MVEBs for the Area. 

According to the transportation 

conformity rule, a maintenance plan 

must establish MVEBs for the last year 

of the maintenance plan (in this case, 

2026). See 40 CFR 93.118. The 

consensus formed during the 

interagency consultation process was 

that another MVEB should be set for the 

York County, SC maintenance plan base 

year of 2014. 

Accordingly, SC DHEC established 

MVEBs based on the latest MPO 

jurisdictional boundaries such that 

MVEBs are established for that portion 

of York County which is within the 

RFATS MPO as part of the bi-state 

Charlotte Area. Table 11, below, 

provides the NOX and VOC MVEBs in 

kilograms per day (kg/day),29 for 2014 

and 2026. 

TABLE 11—YORK COUNTY AREA MVEBS

[kg/day] 

2014 2026 

NOX VOC NOX VOC 

Base Emissions ............................................................................................... 9,112 3,566 3,076 1,576 

Safety Margin Allocated to MVEB ................................................................... ........................ ........................ 6,922 1,379 

Conformity MVEB ............................................................................................ 9,112 3,566 9,998 2,955 

As mentioned above, South Carolina 

has chosen to allocate a portion of the 

available safety margin to the NOX and 

VOC MVEBs for 2026 for the York 

County Area. 

Through this rulemaking, EPA is 

proposing to approve the MVEBs for 

NOX and VOC for 2014 and 2026 for the 

York County Area because EPA believes 

that the Area maintains the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS with the emissions at the 

levels of the budgets. Once the MVEBs 

for the York County Area are approved 

or found adequate (whichever is 

completed first), they must be used for 

future conformity determinations. After 

thorough review, EPA has preliminary 

determined that the budgets meet the 

adequacy criteria, as outlined in 40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4), and is proposing to 

approve the budgets because they are 

consistent with maintenance of the 2008 

8-hour ozone NAAQS through 2026. 

VII. What is the status of EPA’s 

adequacy determination for the 

proposed NOX and VOC MVEBs for 

2014 and 2026 for the York County 

Area? 

When reviewing submitted ‘‘control 

strategy’’ SIPs or maintenance plans 

containing MVEBs, 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 

MVEBs 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 

April 17, 2015, maintenance plan 

includes NOX and VOC MVEBs for the 

York County Area for 2014, an interim 

year of the maintenance plan, and 2026, 

the last year of the maintenance plan. 

EPA is reviewing the NOX and VOC s 

MVEBs through the adequacy process. 

The York County Area NOX and VOC 

MVEBs, opened for public comment on 

EPA’s adequacy Web site on May 14, 

2015, found at: http://www.epa.gov/

otaq/stateresources/transconf/

currsips.htm. The EPA public comment 

period on adequacy for the MVEBs for 

2014 and 2026 for the York County Area 

closed on June 15, 2015. No comments, 

adverse or otherwise, were received 

during EPA’s adequacy process for the 

MVEBs associated with South Carolina’s 

maintenance plan. 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
61788 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

EPA intends to make its 

determination on the adequacy of the 

2014 and 2026 MVEBs for the York 

County Area for transportation 

conformity purposes in the near future 

by completing the adequacy process that 

was started on May 14, 2015. After EPA 

finds the 2014 and 2026 MVEBs 

adequate or approves them, the new 

MVEBs for NOX and VOC must be used 

for future transportation conformity 

determinations. For required regional 

emissions analysis years that involve 

2014 through 2026, the applicable 2014 

MVEBs will be used and for 2026 and 

beyond, the applicable budgets will be 

the new 2026 MVEBs established in the 

maintenance plan, as defined in section 

VI of this proposed rulemaking. 

VIII. What is the effect of EPA’s 

proposed actions? 

EPA’s proposed actions establish the 

basis upon which EPA may take final 

action on the issues being proposed for 

approval today. Approval of South 

Carolina’s redesignation request would 

change the legal designation of the 

portion of York County within the 

South Carolina portion of the bi-state 

Charlotte Area, as found at 40 CFR part 

81, from nonattainment to attainment 

for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Approval of South Carolina’s associated 

SIP revision would also incorporate a 

plan for maintaining the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS in the Area through 2026 

into the SIP. This maintenance plan 

includes contingency measures to 

remedy any future violations of the 2008 

8-hour ozone NAAQS and procedures 

for evaluation of potential violations. 

The maintenance plan also establishes 

NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 

2026 for the York County Area. The 

MVEBs are listed in Table 11 in Section 

VI. Additionally, EPA is notifying the 

public of the status of EPA’s adequacy 

determination for the newly-established 

NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 

2026 for the York County Area. 

IX. Proposed Actions 

EPA is taking three separate but 

related actions regarding the 

redesignation and maintenance of the 

2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 

South Carolina portion of the Area. EPA 

is proposing to determine that the entire 

bi-state Charlotte Area is continuing to 

attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

EPA is also proposing to approve the 

maintenance plan for the South Carolina 

portion of the Area, including the NOX

and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026, 

into the South Carolina SIP (under CAA 

section 175A). The maintenance plan 

demonstrates that the Area will 

continue to maintain the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS and that the budgets 

meet all of the adequacy criteria 

contained in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and 

(5). Further, as part of this action, EPA 

is describing the status of its adequacy 

determination for the NOX and VOC 

MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 in accordance 

with 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1). Within 24 

months from the publication date of 

EPA’s final rule for this action, the 

transportation partners will need to 

demonstrate conformity to the new NOX

and VOC MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 

93.104(e)(3). 

Additionally, EPA is proposing to 

determine that the South Carolina 

portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area has 

met the criteria under CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On this 

basis, EPA is proposing to approve 

South Carolina’s redesignation request 

for the South Carolina portion of the 

Area. If finalized, approval of the 

redesignation request would change the 

official designation of that portion of 

York County that is included in the bistate Charlotte Area, as found at 40 CFR 

part 81, from nonattainment to 

attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

X. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, redesignation of an 

area to attainment and the 

accompanying approval of a 

maintenance plan under section 

107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the 

status of a geographical area and do not 

impose any additional regulatory 

requirements on sources beyond those 

imposed by state law. A redesignation to 

attainment does not in and of itself 

create any new requirements, but rather 

results in the applicability of 

requirements contained in the CAA for 

areas that have been redesignated to 

attainment. Moreover, the Administrator 

is required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

See 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, these proposed 

actions merely propose to approve state 

law as meeting Federal requirements 

and do not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. For this reason, these 

proposed actions: 

• Are not a significant regulatory 

action subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• do not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• are 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.); 

• do 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); 

• do not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• are not economically significant 

regulatory actions based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 

• are 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 

• will not have disproportionate 

human health or environmental effects 

under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 

7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed action for 

the state of South Carolina does not 

have Tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000). The Catawba Indian 

Nation Reservation is located within the 

State of South Carolina. 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.’’ 

However, because no tribal lands are 

located within the South Carolina 

portion of the Area, this action is not 

approving any specific state 

requirement into the SIP that would 

apply to Tribal lands. Therefore, EPA 

has determined that this proposed rule 

does not have substantial direct effects 

on an Indian Tribe. EPA notes today’s 

action will not impose substantial direct 

costs on Tribal governments or preempt 

Tribal law. 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 198 / Wednesday, October 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61789 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control. 

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

Dated: October 1, 2015. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2015–26022 Filed 10–13–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS