Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 46881 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

http://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. 

http://www.regulations.gov is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, and EPA 

will not know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the public 

comment. 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: The index to the docket for 

this action is available electronically at 

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

copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, California. While 

all documents in the docket are listed in 

the index, some information may be 

publicly available only at the hard copy 

location (e.g., copyrighted material), and 

some may not be publicly available in 

either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the 

hard copy materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Idalia Perez, EPA Region IX, (415) 972– 

3248, perez.idalia@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

proposal addresses the following local 

rules: Rule 1111, Reduction of NOx 

Emissions from Natural Gas-Fired, FanType Central Furnaces, and Rule 1147, 

NOx Reductions from Miscellaneous 

Sources. In the Rules and Regulations 

section of this Federal Register, we are 

approving these local rules in a direct 

final action without prior proposal 

because we believe these SIP revisions 

are not controversial. If we receive 

adverse comments, however, we will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule and address the 

comments in subsequent action based 

on this proposed rule. Please note that 

if we receive adverse comment on an 

amendment, paragraph, or section of 

these rules and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rules, 

we may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rules that are not the subject of 

an adverse comment. 

We do not plan to open a second 

comment period, so anyone interested 

in commenting should do so at this 

time. If we do not receive adverse 

comments, no further activity is 

planned. For further information, please 

see the direct final action. 

Dated: July 7, 2010. 

Keith Takata, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2010–19056 Filed 8–3–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0504–201029; FRL– 

9185–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Extension of 

Attainment Date for the CharlotteGastonia-Rock Hill, North CarolinaSouth Carolina 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

Moderate Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The State of North Carolina, 

through the North Carolina Department 

of Environment and Natural Resources 

(NC DENR), and the State of South 

Carolina, through the South Carolina 

Department of Environmental Control 

(SC DHEC), submitted letters with a 

request for EPA to grant a one-year 

extension of the attainment date for the 

1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS) for the 

Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, North 

Carolina-South Carolina Area (hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘bi-state Charlotte 

Area’’), on April 28, 2010, and May 6, 

2010, respectively. The bi-state 

Charlotte Area consists of Cabarrus, 

Gaston, Lincoln, Mecklenburg, Rowan, 

Union and a portion of Iredell County 

(Davidson and Coddle Creek 

Townships), North Carolina; and a 

portion of York County, South Carolina. 

In today’s action, EPA is proposing to 

determine that the states of North 

Carolina and South Carolina have met 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) 

requirements to obtain a one-year 

extension to their attainment date for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 

bi-state Charlotte Area. As a result, EPA 

is proposing to approve a one-year 

extension of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

moderate attainment date for the bi-state 

Charlotte Area. Specifically, EPA is 

proposing to extend the bi-state 

Charlotte Area’s attainment date from 

June 15, 2010, to June 15, 2011. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 3, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2010–0504 by one of the following 

methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: 404–562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0504’’ 

Regulatory Development Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2010– 

0504–201029.’’ EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

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

e-mail, information that you consider to 

be CBI or otherwise protected. The 

http://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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
46882 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

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

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane 

Spann, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9029. 

Ms. Spann can also be reached via 

electronic mail at spann.jane@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

II. Today’s Action 

III. EPA’s Analysis of the States’ Requests for 

an Attainment Date Extension for the BiState Charlotte Area for the 1997 8-Hour 

Ozone NAAQS 

IV. Proposed Actions 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

A. 1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS 

Ground level ozone is not directly 

emitted by sources. Rather, emissions of 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile 

organic compounds (VOC) react in the 

presence of sunlight to form groundlevel ozone. NOX and VOC are referred 

to as precursors of ozone. The CAA 

establishes a process for air quality 

management through the NAAQS. On 

July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a 

revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.08 

parts per million (ppm). Under EPA’s 

regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS is attained when 

the 3-year average of the annual fourth 

highest daily maximum 8-hour average 

ambient air quality ozone 

concentrations is less than or equal to 

0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when 

rounding is considered) (69 FR 23857, 

April 30, 2004). Ambient air quality 

monitoring data for the 3-year period 

must meet 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 ambient 

air quality data at the conclusion of the 

designation process. The bi-state 

Charlotte Area was designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS on April 30, 2004 

(effective June 15, 2004) using 2001– 

2003 ambient air quality data (69 FR 

23857, April 30, 2004). At the time of 

designation the bi-state Charlotte Area 

was classified as a moderate 

nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. In the April 30, 2004, 

Phase I Ozone Implementation Rule, 

EPA established ozone nonattainment 

area attainment dates based on Table 1 

of section 181(a) of the CAA. This 

established an attainment date 6 years 

after the June 15, 2004, effective date for 

areas classified as moderate areas for the 

1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

designations. Therefore the bi-state 

Charlotte Area’s original attainment date 

was June 15, 2010. (See 69 FR 23951, 

April 30, 2004.) Under certain 

circumstances, the CAA allows for 

extensions of the attainment dates 

prescribed at the time of the original 

nonattainment designation. See below 

for further discussion. 

As a point of clarification EPA issued 

a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS in 2008. 

EPA subsequently reconsidered the 

2008 NAAQS, and proposed a new 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS in January 2010. 

Final 8-hour ozone NAAQS are 

expected to be effective in August 2010. 

The current proposed action, however, 

is being taken with regard to the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. Requirements for 

the bi-state Charlotte Area for the 2010 

8-hour ozone NAAQS will be addressed 

in the future. 

B. CAA Requirements for One-Year 

Extension Requests 

Section 181(b)(2)(A) requires the 

Administrator, within six months of the 

attainment date, to determine whether 

an ozone nonattainment area attained 

the NAAQS. CAA Section 181(b)(2)(A) 

states that, for areas classified as 

marginal, moderate, or serious, if the 

Administrator determines that the area 

did not attain the standard by its 

attainment date, the area must be 

reclassified to the next classification. 

However, CAA Section 181(a)(5) 

provides an exemption from these 

reclassification requirements. Under 

this provision, EPA may grant up to 2 

one-year extensions of the attainment 

date under specified conditions. 

Specifically, Section 181(a)(5) states: 

‘‘Upon application by any State, the 

Administrator may extend for 1 

additional year (hereinafter referred to 

as the ‘Extension Year’) the date 

specified in table 1 of paragraph (1) of 

this subsection if— 

(A) The State has complied with all 

requirements and commitments 

pertaining to the area in the applicable 

implementation plan, and 

(B) No more than 1 exceedance of the 

national ambient air quality standard 

level for ozone has occurred in the area 

in the year preceding the ‘Extension 

Year.’ 

With regard to the first element, 

‘‘applicable implementation plan’’ is 

defined in Section 302(q) of the CAA as 

the portion (or portions) of the 

implementation plan, or most recent 

revision thereof, which has been 

approved under Section 110, or 

promulgated under Section 110(c), or 

promulgated or approved pursuant to 

regulations promulgated under Section 

301(d) and which implements the 

relevant requirements of the CAA. 

The language in section 181(a)(5)(B) 

reflects the form of the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS, which is exceedance based and 

does not reflect the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, which is concentration based. 

Because section 181(a)(5)(B) does not 

reflect the form of the 8-hour NAAQS 

and application would produce an 

absurd result, EPA interprets this 

provision in a manner consistent with 

Congressional intent but reflecting the 

form of the 1997 8-hour NAAQS. 

Therefore, EPA adopted an 

interpretation that under both sections 

172(a)(2)(C) and 181(a)(5), an area will 

be eligible for the first of the one-year 

extensions under the 8-hour NAAQS if, 

for the attainment year, the area’s 4th 

highest daily 8-hour average is 0.084 

ppm or less. The area will be eligible for 

the second extension if the area’s 4th 

highest daily 8-hour value averaged over 

both the original attainment year and 

the first extension year is 0.084 ppm or 

less. No more than 2 one-year 

extensions may be issued for a single 

nonattainment area. 

EPA interprets the CAA and 

implementing regulations to allow the 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 46883 

1 In EPA’s May 27, 2010, letters to the Governors 

of North Carolina and South Carolina regarding the 

stoppage of the sanctions clocks for the finding of 

failure to submit for the bi-state Charlotte 

attainment demonstration for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, EPA inadvertently indicated the dates of 

the North Carolina attainment demonstration 

submissions were November 12, 2008, and April 5, 

2009; and the dates of the South Carolina 

attainment demonstration submissions were 

November 13, 2008, and April 29, 2009. EPA has 

since sent a follow up letter correcting the dates of 

the submission for North Carolina as November 12, 

2009, and April 5, 2010; and for South Carolina as 

November 13, 2009, and April 29, 2010. 

granting of a one-year extension under 

the following minimum conditions: (1) 

The State requests a one-year extension; 

(2) all requirements and commitments 

in the EPA-approved SIP for the area 

have been complied with; and (3) the 

area has a 4th highest daily 8-hour 

average of 0.084 ppm or less for the 

attainment year (or an area’s 4th highest 

daily 8-hour value averaged over both 

the original attainment year and the first 

extension year is 0.084 ppm or less, if 

a second one-year extension is 

requested). 

II. Today’s Actions 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

North Carolina and South Carolina have 

met the CAA requirements to obtain a 

one-year extension of the attainment 

date for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

for the bi-state Charlotte Area. As a 

result, EPA is proposing to extend the 

bi-state Charlotte Area’s attainment date 

from June 15, 2010, to June 15, 2011, for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA’s 

proposed actions are based upon 

complete, quality assured, quality 

controlled, and certified ambient air 

monitoring data for 2009, and on EPA’s 

preliminary determination that the 

States are meeting their federallyapproved implementation plans. If 

today’s proposed actions are finalized, 

the bi-state Charlotte Area’s attainment 

date for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

will be extended one-year from June 15, 

2010, to June 15, 2011. 

III. EPA’s Analysis of the State’s 

Requests for an Attainment Date 

Extension for the Bi-State Charlotte 

Area for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

NAAQS 

As mentioned above in this 

rulemaking, EPA interprets the CAA 

and implementing regulations to allow 

the granting of a one-year extension 

under the following minimum 

conditions: (1) The State requests a oneyear extension; (2) all requirements and 

commitments in the EPA-approved SIP 

for the area have been complied with; 

and (3) the area has a 4th highest daily 

8-hour average of 0.084 ppm or less for 

the attainment year (or an area’s 4th 

highest daily 8-hour value averaged over 

both the original attainment year and 

the first extension year is 0.084 ppm or 

less, if a second one-year extension is 

requested). Below provides EPA’s 

analysis of how North Carolina and 

South Carolina have met these 

minimum requirements. 

(1) The State(s) request(s) a one-year 

extension. 

The State of North Carolina, through 

NC DENR, and the State of South 

Carolina, through SC DHEC, submitted 

letters on April 28, 2010, and May 6, 

2010, respectively, requesting that EPA 

grant a one-year extension of the 

attainment date for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS for the bi-state Charlotte 

Area. Both letters contained 

certifications that each state is 

complying with all requirements and 

commitments pertaining to the bi-state 

Charlotte Area in the applicable 

implementation plan; and that the bistate Charlotte Area has a 4th highest 

daily 8-hour average of 0.084 ppm or 

less for the attainment year (i.e., 2009) 

for this initial request for an extension. 

EPA’s analysis of the certifications from 

North Carolina and South Carolina, and 

of the ambient air quality monitoring 

data for the bi-state Charlotte Area for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (i.e., in 

relation to the States’ attainment date 

extension request) is provided below. 

(2) All requirements and 

commitments in the EPA-approved SIP 

for the area have been complied with. 

In the letters submitted by NC DENR 

and SC DHEC, on April 28, 2010, and 

May 6, 2010, respectively, both states 

discuss implementation of state 

measures in the SIP. One of the required 

elements for a one-year extension 

required under Section 181(a)(5) of the 

CAA is that the State has complied with 

all requirements and commitments 

pertaining to the area in the applicable 

implementation plan. EPA has 

conducted an independent review of 

whether both North Carolina and South 

Carolina are in compliance with the 

applicable implementation plans for the 

bi-state Charlotte Area as intended by 

Section 181(a)(5)(A) of the CAA, and 

has made the preliminary determination 

that both states are in compliance. This 

preliminary determination is based on 

EPA’s belief that both states are 

currently meeting the EPA-approved 

implementation plans for the bi-state 

Charlotte Area. 

While both states previously had 

outstanding requirements related to the 

1997 8-hour ozone attainment 

demonstrations for the bi-state Charlotte 

Area, both states have provided the 

necessary SIP submittals. Nonetheless, 

EPA does not and did not view 

submission or approval of these 

attainment demonstrations as relevant 

for meeting the ‘‘applicable 

implementation plans’’ for the bi-state 

Charlotte Area with regard to Section 

181(a)(5)(A) of the CAA. However, EPA 

does note that on May 27, 2010,1 letters 

were sent to the Governors of North 

Carolina and South Carolina 

acknowledging submission of the 

attainment demonstrations for the bistate Charlotte Area. EPA’s May 27, 

2010, letters also announced EPA’s 

determination that the attainment 

demonstration submissions provided by 

North Carolina and South Carolina were 

complete pursuant to Section 110(k)(1) 

of the CAA and the ‘‘Criteria for 

Determining the Completeness of Plan 

Submissions,’’ as described in 40 CFR 

Part 51, Appendix V, and thus EPA 

stopped the sanctions clocks that were 

running for the States’ previous failure 

to provide these required submissions. 

EPA is currently reviewing the 

approvability of these attainment 

demonstration submissions and will 

make its final determination on 

approvability through a separate 

rulemaking in the Federal Register. 

(3) The area has a 4th highest daily 

8-hour average of 0.084 ppm or less for 

the attainment year. 

In the letters submitted by NC DENR 

and SC DHEC, on April 28, 2010, and 

May 6, 2010, respectively, both states 

have certified that the 4th highest daily 

8-hour average ozone concentration for 

the bi-state Charlotte Area in 2009 was 

below 0.084 ppm, and that the 2009 

ozone data which are included in EPA’s 

Air Quality System (AQS) meets 

necessary quality control and quality 

assurance requirements. Table 1 

provides the 2009 4th highest 

concentrations at the monitors in the bistate Charlotte Area. 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
46884 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 149 / Wednesday, August 4, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

2While York County, South Carolina does have 

an ozone monitor, this monitor is not included in 

the portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area that is 

currently designated nonattainment for ozone and 

thus is not relevant for consideration of the 

attainment date extension requests. However, the 

4th maximum highest concentration in 2009 for the 

York County, South Carolina ozone monitor is 0.62 

ppm—well below 0.084 ppm. 

TABLE 1—2009 4TH HIGHEST CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE BI-STATE CHARLOTTE AREA

Monitoring Site 2 County 

2009 4th Highest 

Concentration 

(ppm) 

Arrowood ................................................ Mecklenburg, County, NC ...................................................................................... 0.068 

County Line ............................................ Mecklenburg County, NC ....................................................................................... 0.071 

Crouse .................................................... Lincoln County, NC ................................................................................................. 0.065 

Enochville ............................................... Rowan County, NC ................................................................................................. 0.073 

Garinger (Plaza) ..................................... Mecklenburg County, NC ....................................................................................... 0.069 

Monroe ................................................... Union County, NC ................................................................................................... 0.067 

Rockwell ................................................. Rowan County, NC ................................................................................................. 0.071 

EPAhas reviewed the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS ambient air quality 

monitoring data for the bi-state 

Charlotte Area, consistent with the 

requirements contained in 40 CFR part 

50 and as recorded in the EPA AQS 

database. On the basis of that review, 

EPA has preliminarily concluded that 

for the attainment year, 2009, the bistate Charlotte Area’s 4th highest daily 

8-hour average concentration was 0.073 

ppm which is below the 8-hour ozone 

standard of 0.08 ppm (effectively 0.084 

ppm). 

Because the statutory provisions have 

been satisfied, EPA is proposing 

approval of North Carolina and South 

Carolina’s attainment date extension 

requests for the bi-state Charlotte Area 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

IV. Proposed Actions 

EPA is proposing to approve North 

Carolina’s April 28, 2010, and South 

Carolina’s May 6, 2010, requests for EPA 

to grant a one-year extension (from June 

15, 2010, to June 15, 2011) of the bi-state 

Charlotte Area attainment date for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS because 

EPA believes that both North Carolina 

and South Carolina have met the 

statutory requirements for such an 

extension. EPA’s belief is based on its 

preliminary determination that both 

states are in compliance of the 

requirements and commitments 

associated with the EPA-approved 

implementation plans, and on the belief 

that the 4th highest daily 8-hour ozone 

average concentration for 2009 for the 

bi-state Charlotte Area is below the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS as required by the 

CAA. As provided in 40 CFR 51.907, if 

EPA finalizes this action, it will extend, 

by one year, the deadline by which the 

bi-state Charlotte Area must attain the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. It will also 

extend the timeframe by which EPA 

must make an attainment determination 

for the area. EPA notes that this 

proposed action only relates to the 

initial one- year extension. As noted in 

Section 181(a)(5) of the CAA, areas may 

qualify for up to 2 one-year extensions. 

If requested at a future date, EPA will 

make a determination of the 

appropriateness of a second one-year 

extension for the bi-state Charlotte Area 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in a 

separate rulemaking. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve SIP submissions 

and requests that comply with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing 

states’ requests for an extension of the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS attainment 

date for the bi-state Charlotte Area, 

EPA’s role is to approve the state’s 

request, provided that it meets the 

criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 

proposed action merely approves a state 

request for an extension of the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS attainment date as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81 

Air pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

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

Dated: July 23, 2010. 

Beverly H. Banister, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2010–19141 Filed 8–3–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1