37118 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

1A limited maintenance plan generally includes 

all the elements for a full section 175A maintenance 

plan except that a limited maintenance plan is not 

required to include motor vehicle emissions 

budgets for transportation conformity purposes. For 

more details on limited maintenance plans see the 

October 6, 1995, Memorandum from Joseph W. 

Praise to the Air Branch Chiefs, Regions I–X, 

entitled ‘‘Limited Maintenance Plan Option for 

Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas.’’ A copy 

of the October 6, 1995, Memorandum is included 

in the docket for today’s rulemaking. 

other officers operating Coast Guard 

vessels, and Federal, state, and local 

officers designated by or assisting the 

Captain of the Port Charleston in the 

enforcement of the regulated areas. 

(c) Regulations. (1) All persons and 

vessels are prohibited from entering, 

transiting through, anchoring in, or 

remaining within the regulated areas 

unless authorized by the Captain of the 

Port Charleston or a designated 

representative. 

(2) Persons and vessels desiring to 

enter, transit through, anchor in, or 

remain within the regulated areas may 

contact the Captain of the Charleston by 

telephone at (843) 740–7050, or a 

designated representative via VHF radio 

on channel 16, to request authorization. 

If authorization to enter, transit through, 

anchor in, or remain within the 

regulated areas is granted by the Captain 

of the Port Charleston or a designated 

representative, all persons and vessels 

receiving such authorization must 

comply with the instructions of the 

Captain of the Port Charleston or a 

designated representative. 

(3) The Coast Guard will provide 

notice of the regulated areas by 

Broadcast Notice to Mariners, Marine 

Safety Information Bulletins, and onscene designated representatives. 

(d) Effective date. This rule is 

effective from 9 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. on 

July 4, 2013. 

Dated: June 6, 2013. 

M.F. White, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Charleston. 

[FR Doc. 2013–14666 Filed 6–19–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0961; FRL–9824–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and 

Winston-Salem Carbon Monoxide 

Limited Maintenance Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to 

approve changes to the North Carolina 

State Implementation Plan (SIP), 

submitted by the State of North Carolina 

Department of Environment and Natural 

Resources (NC DENR), on August 2, 

2012. Specifically, the State submitted 

limited maintenance plan updates for 

carbon monoxide (CO), showing 

continued attainment of the 8-hour CO 

national ambient air quality standard for 

the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and 

Winston-Salem Areas. EPA is approving 

this SIP revision because the State has 

demonstrated that the revision is 

consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act). 

DATES: This rule will be effective July 

22, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR–

2012–0961. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the www.regulations.gov 

Web site. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., Confidential Business 

Information or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 

excluding federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Sean Lakeman, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9043. 

Mr. Lakeman can be reached via 

electronic mail at 

lakeman.sean@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Analysis of the State’s Submittal 

II. Response to Comments 

III. Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Analysis of the State’s Submittal 

Section 175A of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) contains four subsections (i.e., 

175A(a)–(d)) pertaining to maintenance 

plans. Section 175A(a) establishes 

requirements for the maintenance plans 

associated with initial SIP redesignation 

requests. North Carolina previously 

addressed the 175A(a) requirements for 

the CO NAAQS and the State’s 

redesignation requests and associated 

maintenance plans were ultimately 

approved by EPA for all three of North 

Carolina’s CO areas as a result. See 59 

FR 48399 and 60 FR 39258. 

Section 175A(b) requires states to 

submit an update to the maintenance 

plan eight years following the original 

redesignation to attainment. For the 

section 175A(b) update, the state must 

outline methods for maintaining the 

pertinent NAAQS for ten years after the 

expiration of the ten-year period as 

referred to in subsection (a) (i.e., North 

Carolina’s maintenance plan updates 

must outline methods for maintaining 

the CO NAAQS through 2015). NC 

DENR satisfied the requirements for the 

second maintenance plans for all of its 

CO maintenance areas, and EPA 

subsequently approved NC DENR’s 

second maintenance plan for each of the 

State’s CO maintenance areas. See 71 FR 

14817, March 24, 2006. Although North 

Carolina has previously satisfied the 

requirements for the 175A(b) 

maintenance plan updates for all of its 

CO areas, the State has elected to 

convert these maintenance plans to 

limited maintenance plans.1 A summary 

of EPA’s analysis for this revision is 

provided below. 

Finally, with respect to the remaining 

sub-sections of section 175A, EPA notes 

that sub-section (c) does not apply to 

this rulemaking, given that EPA has 

previously redesignated the Charlotte, 

Raleigh/Durham, and Winston-Salem 

areas to attainment for CO. Section 

175A(d), which includes the 

contingency provisions requirements 

associated with maintenance plans, is 

relevant to today’s revision and is 

addressed in section A4, below. 

A. Consistency With the October 6, 

1995, Memorandum 

EPA’s interpretation of section 175A 

of the CAA, as it pertains to limited 

maintenance plans for CO, is contained 

in the October 6, 1995, Memorandum 

from Joseph W. Praise to the Air Branch 

Chiefs, Regions I–X, entitled ‘‘Limited 

Maintenance Plan Option for 

Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment 

Areas.’’ See the docket for today’s 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 37119 

2The Direct Final Rulemaking on February 22, 

2013, listed the Wake County 2009 design value as 

1.3 ppm. See 78 FR 12238. The value reported by the State was actually 1.2 ppm and the change is 

reflected in this final rulemaking. 

rulemaking for a copy of this 

memorandum. North Carolina 

addressed the five major elements of 

that policy, as follows: 

1. Attainment Inventory 

The state is required to develop an 

attainment emissions inventory to 

identify a level of emissions in the area 

which is sufficient to attain the CO 

NAAQS. This inventory should be 

consistent with EPA’s most recent 

guidance on emission inventories for 

nonattainment areas available at the 

time the SIP is developed and should 

include the emissions during the time 

period associated with the monitoring 

data showing attainment. It should be 

based on actual ‘‘typical CO season day’’ 

emissions for all source classifications 

(i.e., stationary point and area sources 

and nonroad and onroad mobile 

sources) for the attainment year. In its 

August 2, 2012, submittal, NC DENR 

provided a comprehensive CO 

emissions inventory for nonroad mobile, 

onroad mobile, point, and area sources 

for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and 

Winston-Salem CO Maintenance Areas. 

NC DENR collected or developed the 

point source emissions inventory from 

stationary sources that have the 

potential to emit more than five tons per 

year of CO emissions from a single 

facility and are required to have an 

operating permit. The stationary area 

source inventory is estimated on a 

county level and consisted of those 

sources whose emissions are relatively 

small, but due to the large number of 

sources, the collective emissions could 

be significant. North Carolina estimated 

the stationary area source emissions by 

multiplying an emission factor by some 

known indicator of collective activity 

(such as fuel usage, number of 

households, or population). For on-road 

mobile source emissions, NC DENR 

used EPA’s Motor Vehicle Emission 

Simulator (MOVES) model version 

2010a (MOVES2010a), released in 

August 2010, for estimating vehicle 

emissions. 

Nonroad mobile sources are pieces of 

equipment that can move but do not use 

roadways (e.g. lawn mowers, 

construction equipment, railroad 

locomotives, and aircraft). The 

emissions from this category are 

calculated at the county level using 

EPA’s NONROAD2008s nonroad mobile 

model, with the exception of railroad 

locomotives and aircraft engines. The 

railroad locomotives and aircraft 

engines are estimated by taking an 

activity and multiplying by an emission 

factor. 

Table 1 displays the 2010 attainment 

year emissions inventory as required for 

the limited maintenance plans. 

Appendix B of North Carolina’s SIP 

submittal provides detailed discussions 

regarding the development of emissions 

for the four emission source 

classifications, and is provided in the 

docket for today’s rulemaking. 

TABLE 1—2010 CO EMISSIONS (TONS/DAY) FOR MAINTENANCE AREAS

County Point source Area source On-Road Nonroad Total 

Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area 

Durham ................................................................................ 0.97 1.54 186.00 19.04 207.55 

Wake .................................................................................... 1.17 4.26 642.97 70.62 719.02 

Total .............................................................................. 2.14 5.80 828.97 89.66 926.57 

Winston-Salem Maintenance Area 

Forsyth ................................................................................. 2.22 1.41 244.16 23.97 271.76 

Charlotte Maintenance Area 

Mecklenburg ......................................................................... 2.39 4.21 724.39 114.71 845.70 

2. Maintenance Demonstration 

In the October 6, 1995, Memorandum, 

EPA stated that the maintenance 

demonstration requirement is 

considered to be satisfied for 

nonclassifiable areas if the monitoring 

data shows that the area is meeting the 

air quality criteria for limited 

maintenance areas (i.e., 85 percent of 

the eight hour CO NAAQS, or 7.65 parts 

per million (ppm)). EPA determined in 

this same memorandum that there is no 

requirement to protect emissions over 

the maintenance period. Instead, EPA 

believes that if the area begins the 

maintenance period at, or below, 7.65 

ppm (85 percent of the 8-hour CO 

NAAQS), the applicability of prevention 

of significant deterioration 

requirements, control measures already 

in the SIP, and other federal measures 

should provide adequate assurance of 

maintenance throughout the 

maintenance period. Monitoring data 

from 2008–2011 shows all three areas 

below the 8-hour CO NAAQS values. 

See Table 2 below. All monitoring levels 

are well below the 85 percent threshold 

of 7.65 ppm and therefore the State has 

satisfied the maintenance demonstration 

requirement for a limited maintenance 

plan for each of its CO maintenance 

areas. 

TABLE 2—CO 8-HOUR MONITORED CONCENTRATION DESIGN VALUES

[ppm] 

County Monitor ID 2009 2010 2011 8-Hr NAAQS 

Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area 

Wake .................................................................................... 371830014 21.3 1.3 1.4 9 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

37120 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 2—CO 8-HOUR MONITORED CONCENTRATION DESIGN VALUES—Continued 

[ppm] 

County Monitor ID 2009 2010 2011 8-Hr NAAQS 

Winston-Salem Maintenance Area 

Forsyth ................................................................................. 370670023 1.7 1.9 2.1 9 

Charlotte Maintenance Area 

Mecklenburg ......................................................................... 371190041 1.7 1.7 1.5 9 

3. Monitoring Network and Verification 

of Continued Attainment 

Once an area has been redesignated, 

the state should continue to operate an 

appropriate air quality monitoring 

network, in accordance with 40 CFR 

part 58, to verify the attainment status 

of the area. This is particularly 

important for areas using a limited 

maintenance plan because there will be 

no cap on emissions. In accordance with 

40 CFR part 58, NC DENR commits to 

continue monitoring CO at the existing 

regulatory monitors in the three CO 

maintenance areas to ensure that CO 

concentrations remain well below the 

7.65 ppm threshold for limited 

maintenance plans. The State’s 

monitoring plan for 2012 can be found 

at the following site: http:// 

www.ncair.org/monitor/ 

monitoring_plan/new_plan/ 

2012_NCDAQ_Network_Plan.pdf. EPA 

has determined that the State has 

satisfied the monitoring network and 

verification of continued attainment 

requirements for the limited 

maintenance plans. 

4. Contingency Plan 

Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires 

that a maintenance plan include 

contingency provisions, as necessary, to 

promptly correct any violation of the 

NAAQS that occurs after redesignation 

of an area. The October 6, 1995, 

Memorandum further requires that the 

contingency provisions identify the 

measures to be adopted, a schedule and 

procedure for adoption and 

implementation, and a specific time 

limit for action by the state. 

In its August 2, 2012, submittal, NC 

DENR committed to the same 

contingency measures that EPA 

previously approved on March 24, 2006 

(71 FR 14817) and a subsequent 

clarification on June 19, 2007 (72 FR 

33692). The State pre-adopted an 

oxygenated fuels program with 

minimum oxygen content by weight of 

2.7 for Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and 

Winston-Salem maintenance areas as a 

contingency measure for the CO 

maintenance plan. The oxygenated fuel 

program is required under the CAA for 

the Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem 

areas as a required control measure 

prior to the attainment redesignation. 

Charlotte was placed under the 

oxygenated fuel program for effective 

area-wide CO emission reduction and to 

ease State implementation efforts. The 

contingency measure triggering date 

will be no more than 60 days after an 

ambient air quality violation is 

monitored. NC DENR will commence an 

analysis and regulation development 

process during this time. The State will 

consider the following control 

measures: 

a. Amending the oxygenated fuels 

program by adopting oxygenate content 

of 2.0 percent to 2.7 percent by weight, 

or activate of the 2.7 percent by eight 

pre-adopted contingency measure, or 

2.7 percent to 3.1 percent by weight; 

b. expanding coverage of oxygenated 

fuels to include counties where a strong 

commuting pattern into the core 

maintenance area exists; 

c. alternative fuel vehicle programs to 

include compressed natural gas and 

electric vehicles; and, 

d. employee commute options 

programs. 

NC DENR committed to implement at 

least one of the control measures within 

24 months of the trigger, or as 

expeditiously as practicable. EPA has 

determined that the State has satisfied 

the contingency plan requirements 

pursuant to section 175A(d) of the CAA 

as well as those of the October 6, 1995, 

Memorandum. 

5. Conformity Determination Under the 

Limited Maintenance Plan 

The transportation conformity rule of 

November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188), and 

the general conformity rule of November 

30, 1993 (58 FR 63214), apply to 

nonattainment areas and maintenance 

areas operating under the maintenance 

plans. Under either rule, one means of 

demonstrating conformity of federal 

actions is to indicate that expected 

emissions from planned actions are 

consistent with the emissions budget for 

the area. 

EPA’s October 6, 1995, Memorandum 

states that emissions budgets in limited 

maintenance plan areas may be treated 

as essentially not constraining for the 

length of the maintenance period 

because it is unreasonable to expect that 

such an area will experience so much 

growth in that period that a violation of 

the CO NAAQS would result. In other 

words, EPA concluded that, for these 

areas, emissions need not be capped for 

the maintenance period. 

In accordance with the transportation 

conformity rule, approval of a limited 

maintenance plan only removes the 

requirement to conduct a regional 

emissions analysis as part of the 

conformity determination. The 

requirement to demonstrate conformity 

per the requirements in Table 1 of 40 

CFR 93.109 still applies. Additionally, 

federally funded projects are still 

subject to project level transportation 

conformity analysis requirements. 

However, no regional modeling analysis 

would be required. 

Transportation partners should note 

this approval of these limited 

maintenance plans in future 

transportation conformity 

determinations. Additionally, while the 

approvals of these limited maintenance 

plans waives the requirements for a 

regional emissions analysis for the CO 

NAAQS, as mentioned above, it does 

not waive other conformity 

requirements for the CO standard for the 

Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and 

Winston-Salem areas, and it does not 

waive transportation conformity 

requirement for other pollutants/ 

precursors for which these areas may be 

designated nonattainment or redesigned 

to attainment with a full maintenance 

plan. 

II. Response to Comments 

On February 22, 2013 (78 FR 12267), 

EPA published a direct final rule 

approving North Carolina’s August 2, 

2012, SIP submission for a limited 

maintenance plan update for CO, 

showing continued attainment of the 8- 

hour CO NAAQS for the Charlotte, 

Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 37121 

Areas. EPA published an accompanying 

proposed approval in the event that 

comments were received such that the 

direct final rule needed to be 

withdrawn. Specifically, in the direct 

final rule, EPA stated that if adverse 

comments were received by March 25, 

2013, the rule would be withdrawn and 

not take effect, but that the proposed 

rule would still remain in effect and that 

an additional public comment period 

would not be instituted if EPA could 

sufficiently address any comments 

received on the direct final rulemaking. 

On March 25, 2013, EPA received 

comments from a single commenter. 

The comments could be interpreted as 

adverse and, therefore, EPA withdrew 

the direct final rule. A summary of the 

comments received and EPA’s response 

is provided below. 

Comment: The commenter stated 

‘‘were studies conducted to establish the 

criteria for labeling as a maintenance 

area? Is there something geographic and 

standard about this area.’’ 

Response: This comment is outside of 

the scope of today’s action. Nonetheless, 

EPA notes that the process to designate 

a maintenance area under the CO 

NAAQS involves an evaluation of 

specific criteria to determine whether an 

area is in compliance or out of 

compliance with the CO NAAQS. If an 

area is determined to be out of 

compliance, EPA then determines an 

appropriate boundary for the area and 

designates the area as a 

‘‘nonattainment’’ area. The designation 

process for CO areas was completed in 

the early 1990’s. The Charlotte, Raleigh/ 

Durham and Winston-Salem Areas were 

all designated as nonattainment for the 

CO NAAQS. Once an area is designated 

nonattainment, an area can be 

redesignated to ‘‘attainment’’ (i.e., 

meaning that the area is in compliance 

of the NAAQS), if it meets the criteria 

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

three of the North Carolina areas were 

redesignated to ‘‘attainment’’ for the CO 

NAAQS and are thus considered 

‘‘maintenance’’ areas. See 59 FR 48399 

and 60 FR 39258. 

Comment: The commenter questioned 

whether the emissions parameters are 

‘‘constricting the water vapor potential’’ 

and whether the emissions tolerances 

are ‘‘excessive considering most 

dealerships are manufacturing cars that 

use alternative energies and have done 

so for approximately 10 years now[?]’’ 

Response: The on-road mobile source 

emissions inventory in North Carolina’s 

limited maintenance plans for the 

Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and 

Winston-Salem Areas were developed 

according to EPA guidelines and with 

the MOVES emissions model. The 

MOVES model can be used to estimate 

exhaust and evaporative emissions as 

well as brake and tire wear emissions 

from all types of on-road vehicles. The 

MOVES model incorporates substantial 

new emissions test data and accounts 

for changes in vehicle technology and 

regulations as well as improved 

understanding of in-use emission levels 

and the factors that influence them. NC 

DENR appropriately utilized the 

MOVES model to estimate the on-road 

mobile source emissions for the limited 

maintenance plan for all applicable 

vehicles and technologies, for the 

Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and 

Winston-Salem Areas. 

III. Final Action 

EPA is approving the aforementioned 

changes to the State of North Carolina 

SIP, because they are consistent with 

the CAA, and EPA’s policy related to 

limited maintenance plans. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by State law. For that 

reason, this 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, and EPA notes that it will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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

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

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

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by August 19, 2013. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file any comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

37122 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 119 / Thursday, June 20, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

enforce its requirements. See section 

307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: June 7, 2013. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart II—North Carolina 

■ 2. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by 

adding a new entry for ‘‘8-Hour Carbon 

Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan for 

Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and 

Winston-Salem Maintenance Area’’ at 

the end of the table to read as follows: 

§ 52.1770 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED NORTH CAROLINA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Provision State effective date EPA approval date Federal Register citation Explanation 

*******

8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan 

for Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem 

Maintenance Area.

August 2, 2012 ...... 6/20/2013 ............... [Insert citation of publication] 

[FR Doc. 2013–14507 Filed 6–19–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0274; FRL–9825–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; New York; 

Infrastructure SIP for the 1997 8-Hour 

Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 Fine 

Particulate Matter Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving certain 

elements of New York’s State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 

submitted to demonstrate that the State 

meets the requirements of section 

110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) for the 1997 8-hour ozone and 

the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS). Section 

110(a) of the CAA requires that each 

state adopt and submit a SIP for the 

implementation, maintenance and 

enforcement of each NAAQS 

promulgated by the EPA and is 

commonly referred to as an 

infrastructure SIP. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule is 

effective on July 22, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0274. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region II Office, Air Programs Branch, 

290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 

New York 10007–1866. The Air 

Programs Branch dockets are available 

from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. The Air Programs Branch 

telephone number is 212–637–4249. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kirk 

J. Wieber, Air Programs Branch, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10007–1866, (212) 637–4249, or by 

email at wieber.kirk@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background and Purpose 

Under CAA section 110(a)(1), states 

are required to submit plans called state 

implementation plans (SIPs) that 

provide for the implementation, 

maintenance and enforcement of each 

NAAQS and are referred to as 

infrastructure SIPs. 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(1). 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated new 

and revised NAAQS for 8-hour ozone 

(62 FR 38856) and PM2.5 (62 FR 38652). 

EPA strengthened the 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS on October 17, 2006 (71 FR 

61144). The 14 elements required to be 

addressed in infrastructure SIPs are as 

follows: (1) Emission limits and other 

control measures; (2) ambient air quality 

monitoring/data system; (3) program for 

enforcement of control measures; (4) 

interstate transport; (5) adequate 

resources; (6) stationary source 

monitoring system; (7) emergency 

power; (8) future SIP revisions; (9) 

consultation with government officials; 

(10) public notification; (11) prevention 

of significant deterioration (PSD) and 

visibility protection; (12) air quality 

modeling/data; (13) permitting fees; and 

(14) consultation/participation by 

affected local entities. 

EPA is acting on three New York SIP 

submittals, dated December 13, 2007, 

October 2, 2008 and March 15, 2010, 

which address the section 110 

infrastructure requirements for the three 

NAAQS: The 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, the 1997 annual and 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. This action does not 

address the requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 ozone and 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, since they were 

addressed in previous rulemakings. See 

January 24, 2008 (73 FR 4109). 

Additionally, this action does not 

address the requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, which also was addressed in a 

previous EPA rulemaking. See July 20, 

2011 (76 FR 43153). Two elements 

identified in section 110(a)(2) are not 

governed by the three year submission 

deadline of section 110(a)(1) because 

SIPs incorporating necessary local 

nonattainment area controls are not due 

within three years after promulgation of 

a new or revised NAAQS, but rather due 

at the time that the nonattainment area 

plan requirements are due pursuant to 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES