58210 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

VI. Proposed Action 

Pursuant to sections 179 and 

181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA, EPA is 

proposing to determine that the 

Washington Area has attained the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS by its moderate 

area attainment date, June 15, 2010. If 

EPA finalizes this determination, the 

requirements to submit an attainment 

demonstration and associated RACM, 

RFP plan, contingency measures, and 

any other planning requirements related 

to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS will be suspended, as provided 

in 40 CFR section 51.918, so long as the 

area continues to attain the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. EPA is soliciting public 

comments on the issues discussed in 

this document. These comments will be 

considered before taking final action. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

proposes to approve state law 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 Clean Air Act; 

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, these proposed 

determinations of attainment of the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 

Washington Area do not have Tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because this proposed action 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 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: August 31, 2011. 

W.C. Early, 

Garvin, Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2011–24098 Filed 9–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2009–1010–201063; FRL– 

9467–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; North Carolina: 

Redesignation of the HickoryMorganton-Lenoir 1997 Annual Fine 

Particulate Matter Nonattainment Area 

to Attainment 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

SIP revisions submitted on December 

18, 2009, and December 22, 2010 

(supplemental submission) by the State 

of North Carolina, through the North 

Carolina Department of Environment 

and Natural Resources (NC DENR), 

Division of Air Quality (DAQ), to 

support North Carolina’s request to 

redesignate the Hickory-MorgantonLenoir fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

nonattainment area (hereafter the 

‘‘Hickory Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’) to 

attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS). The Hickory Area is 

comprised of Catawba County in its 

entirety. EPA is now proposing four 

separate but related actions. First, EPA 

is proposing to approve the December 

18, 2009, PM2.5 redesignation request, 

including the December 22, 2010, Motor 

Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES) 

mobile model supplement for the 

Hickory Area, provided that EPA takes 

final action to approve specific 

provisions of the North Carolina Clean 

Smokestacks Act (NCCSA). Second, 

EPA is proposing to approve North 

Carolina’s 2008 emissions inventory for 

the Hickory Area under section 

172(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or 

Act). Third, subject to the same proviso 

regarding the NCCSA and final approval 

of the 2008 emissions inventory, EPA is 

proposing to approve the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan for the 

Hickory Area, including the 2008 

baseline emissions inventory, and the 

motor vehicle emission budgets 

(MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides (NOX) for 

the years 2011 and 2021, and the mobile 

insignificance determination for direct 

PM2.5 for the Hickory Area. EPA is also 

describing the status of its 

transportation conformity adequacy 

determination for the new 2011 and 

2021 MVEBs for NOX that are contained 

in the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

maintenance plan for the Hickory Area. 

Fourth and separate from the action to 

redesignate the Hickory Area, EPA is 

proposing to determine that the Area 

has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS by its applicable attainment 

date of April 5, 2010. These proposed 

actions are being taken pursuant to the 

CAA and its implementing regulations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 20, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2009–1010, 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–2009–1010, 

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. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 58211 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. 

Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

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

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2009– 

1010. 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 

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: Joel 

Huey, 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. Joel Huey 

may be reached by phone at (404) 562– 

9104 or via electronic mail at 

huey.joel@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 the effect of EPA’s proposed 

actions? 

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

VII. What is EPA’s analysis of North 

Carolina’s proposed direct PM2.5

insignificance determination and the 

proposed NOX MVEBs for the Hickory 

area? 

VIII. What is the status of EPA’s adequacy 

determination for the proposed NOX

MVEBs for 2011 and 2021 and for the 

Direct PM2.5 insignificance 

determination for the Hickory area? 

IX. What is EPA’s analysis of the proposed 

2008 base year emissions inventory for 

the Hickory area? 

X. Proposed Actions on the Redesignation 

Request and Maintenance Plan SIP 

Revision Including Proposed Approval 

of the 2011 and 2021 NOX MVEBs and 

for the Insignificance Determination for 

the Hickory Area 

XI. Proposed Action on the Determination 

that the Hickory Area Has Attained the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by Its Applicable 

Attainment Date 

XII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What are the actions EPA is 

proposing to take? 

EPA is proposing to take the following 

four separate but related actions, some 

of which involve multiple elements: (1) 

To redesignate the Hickory Area to 

attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS, provided EPA approves the 

emissions inventory submitted with the 

maintenance plan as well as the 

NCCSA, which is the subject of separate 

Federal rulemaking action; (2) to 

approve, under section 172(c)(3) of the 

CAA, the emissions inventory submitted 

with the maintenance plan; (3) to 

approve into the North Carolina SIP, 

under section 175A of the CAA, 

Hickory’s 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

maintenance plan, including the 

associated MVEBs (EPA is also notifying 

the public of the status of EPA’s 

adequacy determination for the Hickory 

Area MVEBs); and (4) to determine, 

pursuant to section 179(c) of the CAA, 

that the Hickory Area attained the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS by its attainment date of 

April 5, 2010. 

On January 5, 2010, at 75 FR 230, EPA 

determined that the Hickory Area was 

attaining the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA 

is now proposing to determine that the 

Area is continuing to attain the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS and to take several 

additional related actions regarding the 

Area, which are summarized below and 

described in greater detail throughout 

this notice of proposed rulemaking. 

First, EPA proposes to determine that, 

if EPA’s proposed approvals of the 2008 

baseline emissions inventory for the 

Hickory Area and the NCCSA Federal 

rulemaking action are finalized, the 

Area has met the requirements for 

redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) 

of the CAA. In this action, EPA is 

proposing to approve a request to 

change the legal designation of Catawba 

County in the Hickory Area from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The 

emissions inventory is being proposed 

for approval today, and the NCCSA 

rules were proposed for approval in a 

separate action on June 22, 2011 (76 FR 

36468). 

Second, EPA is proposing to approve 

North Carolina’s 2008 emissions 

inventory for the Hickory Area (under 

CAA section 172(c)(3)). North Carolina 

selected 2008 as the attainment 

emissions inventory year for the 

Hickory Area. This attainment inventory 

identifies a level of emissions in the 

Area that is sufficient to attain the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and is a current, 

comprehensive inventory that meets the 

requirements of section 172(c)(3). 

Third, subject to EPA’s final approval 

of the NCCSA into the SIP, EPA is 

proposing to approve North Carolina’s 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

maintenance plan for the Hickory Area 

as meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 175A (such approval being one 

of the CAA criteria for redesignation to 

attainment status). The maintenance 

plan is designed to help keep the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58212 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1 In response to legal challenges of the annual 

standard promulgated in 2006, the United States 

Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit (D.C. Circuit) remanded this NAAQS to EPA 

for further consideration. See American Farm 

Bureau Federation and National Pork Producers 

Council, et al. v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (D.C. Cir. 2009). 

However, given that the 1997 and 2006 annual 

NAAQS are essentially identical, attainment of the 

1997 Annual NAAQS would also indicate 

attainment of the remanded 2006 Annual NAAQS. 

Hickory Area in attainment of the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2021. 

Consistent with the CAA, the 

maintenance plan that EPA is proposing 

to approve today also includes NOx 

MVEBs for the years 2011 and 2021 and 

an insignificance determination for the 

mobile source contribution of direct 

PM2.5 to the air quality problem in the 

Hickory Area. EPA is proposing to 

approve into the North Carolina SIP the 

2011 and 2021 MVEBs that are included 

as part of North Carolina’s maintenance 

plan for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

and the insignificance determination for 

the mobile source contribution of direct 

PM2.5 emissions in the Area. 

On a related matter to this third 

action, EPA is also notifying the public 

of the status of EPA’s adequacy process 

(Adequacy) for the newly-established 

NOx MVEBs for 2011 and 2021 for the 

Hickory Area and the mobile source 

insignificance determination for direct 

PM2.5 emissions. The Adequacy 

comment period for the Hickory Area 

2011 and 2021 MVEBs began on 

November 23, 2010, with EPA’s posting 

of the availability of this submittal on 

EPA’s Adequacy Web site (http:// 

www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ 

transconf/currsips.htm). The Adequacy 

comment period for these MVEBs and 

the insignificance determination for 

direct PM2.5 emission contribution from 

motor vehicles closed on December 23, 

2010, and EPA received no adverse 

comments. Please see section VIII of this 

proposed rulemaking for further 

explanation of this process and for more 

details on the MVEBs determination and 

the insignificance determination. 

Fourth and separate from the action to 

redesignate the Area, EPA is proposing 

to determine, based on quality-assured 

and certified monitoring data for the 

2007–2009 monitoring period, that the 

Hickory Area has attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its applicable 

attainment date of April 5, 2010. 

Today’s notice of proposed 

rulemaking is in response to North 

Carolina’s December 18, 2009, SIP 

submittal and subsequent supplement of 

December 22, 2010. Those documents 

address the specific issues summarized 

above and the necessary elements 

described in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the 

CAA for redesignation of the Hickory 

Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed actions? 

Fine particle pollution can be emitted 

directly or formed secondarily in the 

atmosphere. The main precursors of 

PM2.5 are sulfur dioxide (SO2), NOx, 

ammonia and volatile organic 

compounds (VOCs). Unless otherwise 

noted by the State or EPA, ammonia and 

VOCs are presumed to be insignificant 

contributors to PM2.5 formation, 

whereas SO2 and NOX are presumed to 

be significant contributors to PM2.5

formation. Sulfates are a type of 

secondary particle formed from SO2

emissions of power plants and 

industrial facilities. Nitrates, another 

common type of secondary particle, are 

formed from NOx emissions of power 

plants, automobiles, and other 

combustion sources. 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated 

the first air quality standards for PM2.5. 

EPA promulgated an annual standard at 

a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter 

(μg/m3), based on a three-year average of 

annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. In 

the same rulemaking, EPA promulgated 

a 24-hour standard of 65 μg/m3, based 

on a three-year average of the 98th 

percentile of 24-hour concentrations. On 

October 17, 2006, at 71 FR 61144, EPA 

retained the annual average NAAQS at 

15 μg/m3 but revised the 24-hour 

NAAQS to 35 μg/m3, based again on the 

three-year average of the 98th percentile 

of 24-hour concentrations.1 Under EPA 

regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 

primary and secondary 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS are attained when the 

annual arithmetic mean concentration, 

as determined in accordance with 40 

CFR part 50, Appendix N, is less than 

or equal to 15.0 μg/m3 at all relevant 

monitoring sites in the subject area over 

a 3-year period. 

On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, and 

as supplemented on April 14, 2005, at 

70 FR 19844, EPA designated the 

Hickory Area as nonattainment for the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. In that 

action, EPA defined the 1997 PM2.5

Hickory Area to include Catawba 

County in its entirety. On November 13, 

2009, at 74 FR 58688, EPA promulgated 

designations for the 24-hour standard 

established in 2006, designating the 

Hickory Area as attaining this NAAQS. 

That action clarified that the Hickory 

Area was also attaining the 24-hour 

NAAQS promulgated in 1997. EPA did 

not promulgate designations for the 

annual average NAAQS promulgated in 

2006 since the NAAQS was essentially 

identical to the annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

promulgated in 1997. Therefore, the 

Hickory Area is designated 

nonattainment only for the annual 

NAAQS promulgated in 1997, and 

today’s action only addresses this 

designation. 

All 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS areas were 

designated under subpart 1 of title I, 

part D, of the CAA. Subpart 1 contains 

the general requirements for 

nonattainment areas for any pollutant 

governed by a NAAQS and is less 

prescriptive than the other subparts of 

title I, part D. On April 25, 2007, at 72 

FR 20664, EPA promulgated its PM2.5

Implementation Rule, codified at 40 

CFR part 51, subpart Z, in which the 

Agency provided guidance for state and 

tribal plans to implement the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. This rule, at 40 CFR 

51.1004(c), specifies some of the 

regulatory consequences of attaining the 

NAAQS, as discussed below. 

On May 12, 2005, EPA published the 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which 

addressed the interstate transport 

requirements of the CAA and required 

states to significantly reduce SO2 and 

NOx emissions from power plants (70 

FR 25162). The associated Federal 

Implementation Plans (FIPs) were 

published on April 28, 2006 (71 FR 

25328). However, on July 11, 2008, the 

D.C. Circuit Court issued its decision to 

vacate and remand both CAIR and the 

associated CAIR FIPs in their entirety 

(North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836 

(D.C. Cir., 2008)). EPA petitioned for 

rehearing, and the Court issued an order 

remanding CAIR to EPA without 

vacating either CAIR or the CAIR FIPs 

(North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 

(D.C. Cir., 2008)). The Court left CAIR in 

place to ‘‘temporarily preserve the 

environmental values covered by CAIR’’ 

until EPA replaces it with a rule 

consistent with the Court’s opinion (id. 

at 1178). The Court directed EPA to 

‘‘remedy CAIR’s flaws’’ consistent with 

its July 11, 2008, opinion but declined 

to impose a schedule on EPA for 

completing that action (id). As a result 

of these court rulings, the power plant 

emission reductions that resulted solely 

from the development, promulgation, 

and implementation of CAIR, and the 

associated contribution to air quality 

improvement that occurred solely as a 

result of CAIR in the Hickory Area 

could not be considered to be 

permanent. 

On August 8, 2011, EPA published 

the Cross State Air Pollution Rule 

(CSAPR) in the Federal Register under 

the title, ‘‘Federal Implementation Plans 

to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine 

Particulate Matter and Ozone in 27 

States; Correction of SIP Approvals for 

22 States’’ (hereafter the ‘‘Cross-State 

Air Pollution Rule’’ (CSAPR)) (76 FR 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 58213 

48208, August 8, 2011) to address 

interstate transport of emissions and 

resulting secondary air pollutants and to 

replace CAIR. The CAIR emission 

reduction requirements limit emissions 

in North Carolina and states upwind of 

North Carolina through 2011 and the 

CSAPR requires similar or greater 

reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 

and beyond. The emission reductions 

that the CSAPR mandates may be 

considered to be permanent and 

enforceable. In turn, the air quality 

improvement in the Hickory Area that 

has resulted from EGU emission 

reductions associated with CAIR (as 

well as the substantial further air quality 

improvement that would be expected to 

result from full implementation of the 

CSAPR) may also be considered to be 

permanent and enforceable. EPA 

proposes that the requirement in section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii) has now been met 

because the emission reduction 

requirements of CAIR address emissions 

through 2011 and EPA has now 

promulgated CSAPR which requires 

similar or greater reductions in the 

relevant areas in 2012 and beyond. 

Because the emission reduction 

requirements of CAIR are enforceable 

through the 2011 control period, and 

because CSAPR has now been 

promulgated to address the 

requirements previously addressed by 

CAIR and gets similar or greater 

reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 

and beyond, EPA is proposing to 

determine that the emission reductions 

that led to attainment in the Hickory 

nonattainment area can now be 

considered permanent and enforceable. 

Therefore, EPA propose to find that the 

transport requirement of CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii) has been met for the 

Hickory Area. 

The 3-year ambient air quality data for 

2006–2008 indicated no violations of 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS for the Hickory 

Area. As a result, on December 18, 2009, 

and as supplemented on December, 22, 

2010, North Carolina requested 

redesignation of the Hickory Area to 

attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS. The redesignation request 

included three years of complete, 

quality-assured ambient air quality data 

for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for 

2006–2008, indicating that the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS had been 

achieved for the Hickory Area. Under 

the CAA, nonattainment areas may be 

redesignated to attainment if sufficient, 

complete, quality-assured data is 

available for the Administrator to 

determine that the area has attained the 

standard and the area meets the other 

CAA redesignation requirements in 

section 107(d)(3)(E). From 2005 through 

the present, the monitored annual 

average PM2.5 values for the Hickory 

Area have declined such that the Area 

is attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS. On January 5, 2010, EPA 

determined that the Hickory Area had 

attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

(75 FR 230). While annual PM2.5

concentrations are dependent on a 

variety of conditions, the overall 

downtrend in annual PM2.5

concentrations in the Hickory Area can 

be attributed to the reduction of SO2

emissions, as will be discussed in more 

detail in section VI of this proposed 

rulemaking. EPA is now proposing to 

find that the Hickory Area continues to 

attain the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

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 provided the following 

criteria are met: (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 under section 110 and part 

D of title I of the CAA. 

EPA has provided guidance on 

redesignation in the General Preamble 

for the Implementation of title I of the 

CAA Amendments of 1990 (April 16, 

1992, 57 FR 13498, and supplemented 

on April 28, 1992, 57 FR 18070) and has 

provided further guidance on processing 

redesignation requests in the following 

documents: 

1. ‘‘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’’); 

2. ‘‘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; and 

3. ‘‘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. 

IV. Why is EPA proposing these 

actions? 

On December 18, 2009, and as 

supplemented on December 22, 2010, 

the State of North Carolina, through 

DAQ, requested redesignation of the 

Hickory Area to attainment for the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA’s evaluation 

indicates that the Hickory Area has 

attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS. If EPA finalizes approval of the 

emissions inventory and the NCCSA 

rulemaking, the Area will meet the 

requirements for redesignation 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 first three 

related actions previously summarized. 

The fourth action, to determine that 

the Area has attained the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS by its attainment date, is 

being proposed in accordance with 

section 179(c)(1) of the CAA based upon 

EPA’s review of the data for 2007–2009. 

Section 179(c)(1) reads as follows: ‘‘As 

expeditiously as practicable after the 

applicable attainment date for any 

nonattainment area, but not later than 6 

months after such date, the 

Administrator shall determine, based on 

the area’s air quality as of the attainment 

date, whether the area attained the 

standard by that date.’’ EPA proposes to 

determine that the Area attained the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its 

applicable attainment date of April 5, 

2010. 

V. 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 North Carolina submittal 

being proposed for approval today. 

Approval of North Carolina’s 

redesignation request would change the 

legal designation of Catawba County in 

North Carolina for the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 CFR part 81, 

from nonattainment to attainment. 

Approval of North Carolina’s request 

would also incorporate into the North 

Carolina SIP a plan for maintaining the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the 

Hickory Area through 2021. The 

maintenance plan includes, among 

other components, contingency 

measures to remedy potential future 

violations of the 1997 Annual PM2.5

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58214 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

2The values in Table 1 represent the most current 

quality assured, quality controlled and certified 

ambient air monitoring data available in the EPA 

AQS database and therefore differ slightly from the 

values submitted in the North Carolina 

redesignation request. 

3The preliminary PM2.5 ambient air quality data 

for 2010 for the Hickory Area indicates that the 

Area is attaining the NAAQS with 2008–2010 

design values. This preliminary data includes 

complete data from all quarters of 2010 but has not 

yet been certified and is thus subject to change. 

NAAQS. Approval of North Carolina’s 

maintenance plan would also result in 

approval of the NOX MVEBs and the 

direct PM2.5 mobile source 

insignificance determination. The 

maintenance plan also establishes NOx 

MVEBs for 2011 and 2021 for the 

Hickory Area of 3,996,601 kilograms per 

year (kg/yr) and 2,236,028 kg/yr, 

respectively. Final action would also 

approve the Area’s emissions inventory 

under section 172(c)(3). Additionally, 

EPA is notifying the public of the status 

of its adequacy determination for the 

NOX MVEBs for 2011 and 2021 and the 

direct PM2.5 mobile source 

insignificance determination pursuant 

to 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1). 

VI. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

request? 

As stated above, in accordance with 

the CAA, EPA proposes in today’s 

action to: (1) Redesignate the Hickory 

Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS; (2) approve the Hickory 

Area emissions inventory submitted 

with the maintenance plan; (3) approve 

into the North Carolina SIP Hickory’s 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

maintenance plan, including the 

associated MVEBs; and (4) determine 

that the Hickory Area attained the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS by its attainment date of 

April 5, 2010. The first three of these 

actions are based upon EPA’s 

determination that the Hickory Area 

continues to attain the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS and that all other 

redesignation criteria have been met for 

the Hickory Area, provided EPA 

approves the emissions inventory 

submitted with the maintenance plan 

and the NCCSA rulemaking. 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. 

The fourth action, EPA’s determination 

that the Hickory Area attained the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS by its attainment date of 

April 5, 2010, is discussed in section XI. 

Criteria (1)—The Hickory Area Has 

Attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 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)). EPA is 

proposing to determine that the Hickory 

Area continues to attain the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. For PM2.5, an 

area may be considered to be attaining 

the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS if it 

meets the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, 

as determined in accordance with 40 

CFR 50.7 and Appendix N of part 50, 

based on three complete, consecutive 

calendar years of quality-assured air 

quality monitoring data. To attain these 

NAAQS, the 3-year average of the 

annual arithmetic mean concentration, 

as determined in accordance with 40 

CFR part 50, Appendix N, is less than 

or equal to 15.0 μg/m3 at all relevant 

monitoring sites in the subject area over 

a 3-year period. The relevant 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. 

On January 5, 2010, at 75 FR 230, EPA 

determined that the Hickory Area was 

attaining the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA 

reviewed PM2.5 monitoring data from 

monitoring sites in the Hickory Area for 

the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the 

2006–2008 and the 2007–2009 periods. 

These data have been quality-assured 

and are recorded in AQS. The annual 

arithmetic mean PM2.5 concentrations 

for the 2006–2008, and the 2007–2009 

periods, and the 3-year averages of these 

values (i.e., design values) are 

summarized in Table 1.2 EPA has 

reviewed more recent data which 

indicate that the Hickory Area continues 

to attain the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. The 

design values for 2007–2009 and 2008– 

2010 are also included in Table 1 and 

demonstrate that the Hickory Area 

continues to meet the PM2.5 NAAQS and 

that the ambient concentrations of PM2.5

are continuing to decrease in the Area. 

TABLE 1—DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE HICKORY 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NONATTAINMENT AREA

[μg/m3] 

County Site name Monitor ID 

Annual average PM2.5 concentrations 

(μg/m 3) 

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 3

Catawba Hickory 37–035–0004 15.18 14.62 12.75 10.32 11.23 

Three-year PM2.5 design values (μg/m3) 

2006–2008 2007–2009 2008–2010 

Catawba Hickory 37–035–0004 14.2 12.6 11.4 

The 3-year design value (2006–2008) 

submitted by North Carolina for 

redesignation of the Hickory Area is 

14.2 μg/m3, which meets the NAAQS as 

described above. Preliminary 2010 air 

quality data that are available in AQS, 

but not yet certified, indicate that the 

Area continues to attain the PM2.5

NAAQS. As mentioned above, on 

January 5, 2010 (75 FR 230) EPA 

published a clean data determination for 

the Hickory Area for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. In today’s action, EPA is 

proposing to determine that the Area is 

continuing to attain the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. EPA will not go forward with 

the redesignation if the Area does not 

continue to attain until the time that 

EPA finalizes the redesignation. As 

discussed in more detail below, the 

State of North Carolina has committed 

to continue monitoring in the Area in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 58215 

4On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued 

a NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia 

and 22 states to reduce emissions of NOX in order 

to reduce the transport of ozone and ozone 

precursors. In compliance with EPA’s NOX SIP Call, 

North Carolina developed rules governing the 

control of NOX emissions from Electric Generating 

Units (EGUs), major non-EGU industrial boilers, 

major cement kilns, and internal combustion 

engines. On December 27, 2002, EPA approved 

North Carolina’s rules as fulfilling Phase I (67 FR 

78987). 

5On May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162), EPA 

promulgated CAIR which required 28 upwind 

States and the District of Columbia to revise their 

SIPs to include control measures that would reduce 

emissions of SO2 and NOX. Various aspects of CAIR 

rule were petitioned in court and on December 23, 

2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit remanded CAIR to EPA (see North 

Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008)) 

which left CAIR in place to ‘‘temporarily preserve 

the environmental values covered by CAIR’’ until 

EPA replaces it with a rule consistent with the 

Court’s ruling. The Court directed EPA to remedy 

various areas of the rule that were petitioned 

consistent with its July 11, 2008 (see North Carolina 

v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836 (D.C. Cir., July 11, 2008)), 

opinion, but declined to impose a schedule on EPA 

for completing that action. Id. Therefore, CAIR is 

currently in effect in North Carolina. 

Criteria (5)—North Carolina Has met all 

Applicable Requirements Under Section 

110 and Part D of Title I of the CAA; 

and Criteria (2)—North Carolina Has a 

Fully Approved SIP Under Section 

110(k) for the Hickory Area 

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 North Carolina has met all 

applicable SIP requirements for the 

Hickory Area under section 110 of the 

CAA (general SIP requirements) for 

purposes of redesignation. EPA also 

proposes to find that the North Carolina 

SIP satisfies the criterion that it meet 

applicable SIP requirements for 

purposes of redesignation under part D 

of title I of the CAA (requirements 

specific to 1997 Annual PM2.5

nonattainment areas). Further, EPA 

proposes to determine that the SIP is 

fully approved with respect to all 

requirements applicable under section 

110(k). In making these determinations, 

EPA ascertained which requirements are 

applicable to the Area and, if applicable, 

that they are fully approved under the 

CAA. For the purposes of review of the 

State’s redesignation request, the SIP 

needs only to be fully approved with 

respect to requirements that were 

applicable prior to submittal of the 

complete redesignation request. 

a. Hickory Area Has Met All Applicable 

Requirements Under Section 110 and 

Part D of Title I of the CAA 

General SIP requirements. Section 

110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA delineates 

the general requirements for a SIP, 

which include enforceable emissions 

limitations and other control measures, 

means, or techniques; provisions for the 

establishment and operation of 

appropriate devices necessary to collect 

data on ambient air quality; and 

programs to enforce the limitations. 

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 

(New Source Review (NSR) permit 

programs); provisions for air pollution 

modeling; and provisions 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 

(e.g., NOX SIP Call,4 CAIR,5 and the 

CSAPR). 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. However, 

as discussed later in this notice, 

addressing pollutant transport from 

other states is an important part of an 

area’s maintenance demonstration. 

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, 

1997); 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). 

EPA has not yet completed 

rulemaking on a submittal from North 

Carolina dated April 1, 2008, addressing 

‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ elements required 

under CAA section 110(a)(2). However, 

these are statewide requirements that 

are not a consequence of the 

nonattainment status of the Hickory 

Area. As stated above, EPA believes that 

section 110 elements not linked to an 

area’s nonattainment status are not 

applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. Therefore, 

notwithstanding the fact that EPA has 

not yet completed rulemaking on North 

Carolina’s submittal for the PM2.5

infrastructure SIP elements of section 

110(a)(2), EPA believes it has approved 

all SIP elements under section 110 that 

must be approved as a prerequisite for 

redesignating the Hickory Area to 

attainment. 

Title I, Part D requirements. EPA 

proposes that with approval of North 

Carolina’s base year emissions 

inventory, which is part of the 

maintenance plan submittal, the North 

Carolina SIP will meet applicable SIP 

requirements under part D of title I of 

the CAA. As discussed in greater detail 

below, EPA believes the emissions 

inventory is approvable because the 

2008 direct PM2.5, SO2, and NOX

emissions for North Carolina were 

developed consistent with EPA 

guidance for emissions inventories and 

represent a comprehensive, accurate 

and current inventory as required by 

section 172(c)(3). 

Part D, subpart 1 applicable SIP 

requirements. EPA has determined that 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58216 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

6CAA 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. 

if the approval of the base year 

emissions inventories, discussed in 

section IX of this rulemaking, is 

finalized, the North Carolina SIP will 

meet the applicable SIP requirements 

for the Hickory Area for purposes of 

redesignation under title I, part D of the 

CAA. Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the 

basic nonattainment requirements 

applicable to all nonattainment areas. 

All areas that were designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS were designated under 

this subpart of the CAA, and the 

requirements applicable to them are 

contained in sections 172 and 176. 

For purposes of evaluating this 

redesignation request, the applicable 

part D, subpart 1 SIP requirements for 

all nonattainment areas are contained in 

sections 172(c)(1)–(9) and in section 

176. A thorough discussion of the 

requirements contained in section 172 

can be found in the General Preamble 

for Implementation of title I (57 FR 

13498, April 16, 1992). 

Subpart 1 Section 172 Requirements. 

Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for 

all nonattainment areas to provide for 

the implementation of all reasonably 

available control measures (RACM) as 

expeditiously as practicable and to 

provide for attainment of the national 

primary ambient air quality standards. 

EPA interprets this requirement to 

impose a duty on all nonattainment 

areas to consider all available control 

measures and to adopt and implement 

such measures as are reasonably 

available for implementation in each 

area as components of the area’s 

attainment demonstration. Under 

section 172, states with nonattainment 

areas must submit plans providing for 

timely attainment and meeting a variety 

of other requirements. However, 

pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1004(c), EPA’s 

January 5, 2010, determination that the 

Hickory Area was attaining the PM2.5

standard suspended North Carolina’s 

obligation to submit most of the 

attainment planning requirements that 

would otherwise apply. Specifically, the 

determination of attainment suspended 

North Carolina’s obligation to submit an 

attainment demonstration and planning 

SIPs to provide for reasonable further 

progress (RFP), reasonable available 

control measures, and contingency 

measures under section 172(c)(9). 

The General Preamble for 

Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498, 

April 16, 1992) also discusses the 

evaluation of these requirements in the 

context of EPA’s consideration of a 

redesignation request. The General 

Preamble sets forth EPA’s view of 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

evaluating redesignation requests when 

an area is attaining a standard (General 

Preamble for Implementation of Title I 

(57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992)). 

Because attainment has been reached 

in the Hickory Area, no additional 

measures are needed to provide for 

attainment, and section 172(c)(1) 

requirements for an attainment 

demonstration and RACM are no longer 

considered to be applicable for purposes 

of redesignation as long as the Area 

continues to attain the standard until 

redesignation. See also 40 CFR 

51.1004(c). 

The RFP plan requirement under 

section 172(c)(2) is defined as progress 

that must be made toward attainment. 

This requirement is not relevant for 

purposes of redesignation because EPA 

has determined that the Hickory Area 

has monitored attainment of the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. See General 

Preamble, 57 FR 13564. See also 40 CFR 

51.1004 (c). In addition, because the 

Hickory Area has attained the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and is no longer 

subject to a RFP requirement, the 

requirement to submit the section 

172(c)(9) contingency measures is not 

applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. Id. 

Section 172(c)(3) requires submission 

and approval of a comprehensive, 

accurate, and current inventory of actual 

emissions. As part of North Carolina’s 

redesignation request for the Hickory 

Area, North Carolina submitted a 2008 

base year emissions inventory. As 

discussed below in section IX, EPA is 

proposing to approve the 2008 base year 

inventory submitted with the 

redesignation request as meeting the 

section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory 

requirement. 

Section 172(c)(4) requires the 

identification and quantification of 

allowable emissions for major new and 

modified stationary sources to be 

allowed in an area, and section 172(c)(5) 

requires source permits for the 

construction and operation of new and 

modified major stationary sources 

anywhere in the nonattainment area. 

EPA has determined that, since PSD 

requirements will apply after 

redesignation, 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. 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.’’ North 

Carolina has demonstrated that the 

Hickory Area will be able to maintain 

the NAAQS without part D NSR in 

effect and therefore North Carolina need 

not have fully approved part D NSR 

programs prior to approval of the 

redesignation request. Nonetheless, 

North Carolina currently has a fullyapproved part D NSR program in place. 

North Carolina’s PSD program will 

become effective in the Hickory Area 

upon redesignation to attainment. 

Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to 

contain control measures necessary to 

provide for attainment of the NAAQS. 

Because attainment has been reached, 

no additional measures are needed to 

provide for attainment. 

Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to 

meet the applicable provisions of 

section 110(a)(2). As noted above, EPA 

believes the North Carolina SIP meets 

the requirements of section 110(a)(2) 

applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. 

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 

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 6 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, 

Tampa, Florida). Thus, the Hickory Area 

has satisfied all applicable requirements 

for purposes of redesignation under 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 58217 

section 110 and part D of title I of the 

CAA. 

b. The Hickory Area Has a Fully 

Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 

110(k) of the CAA 

If EPA issues a final approval of the 

base year emissions inventories, EPA 

will have fully approved the applicable 

North Carolina SIP for the Hickory Area 

under section 110(k) of the CAA for all 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS. 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). 

Following passage of the CAA of 1970, 

North Carolina has adopted and 

submitted, and EPA has fully approved 

at various times, provisions addressing 

the various 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

SIP elements applicable in the Hickory 

Area (April 17, 1980, 45 FR 26038; 

August 27, 1981, 46 FR 43137; October 

11, 1985, 50 FR 41501; November 19, 

1986, 51 FR 41786; and December 19, 

1986, 51 FR 45468). 

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. In addition, EPA believes 

that since the part D subpart 1 

requirements did not become due prior 

to submission of the redesignation 

request, they are also not applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 

F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004); 68 FR 25424, 

25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of 

the St. Louis-East St. Louis Area to 

attainment of the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS). With the approval of the 

emissions inventory, EPA will have 

approved all Part D subpart 1 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

this redesignation. 

Criteria (3)—The Air Quality 

Improvement in the Hickory Area 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS Nonattainment 

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 and 

applicable Federal air pollution control 

regulations and other permanent and 

enforceable reductions (CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). EPA believes North 

Carolina has demonstrated that the 

observed air quality improvement in the 

Hickory Area is due to permanent and 

enforceable reductions resulting from 

implementation of the SIP, Federal 

measures, and other state adopted 

measures. 

Fine particulate matter, or PM2.5, 

refers to airborne particles less than or 

equal to 2.5 micrometers in diameter. 

Although treated as a single pollutant, 

fine particles come from many different 

sources and are composed of many 

different compounds. One of the largest 

components of PM2.5 in the southeastern 

United States is sulfate, which is formed 

through various chemical reactions from 

the precursor SO2. The other major 

component of PM2.5 is organic carbon, 

which originates predominantly from 

biogenic emission sources. Nitrate, 

which is formed from the precursor 

NOX, is also a component of PM2.5. 

Crustal materials from windblown dust 

and elemental carbon from combustion 

sources are less significant contributors 

to total PM2.5. 

State and Federal measures enacted in 

recent years have resulted in permanent 

emission reductions. Most of these 

emission reductions are enforceable 

through regulations. A few nonregulatory measures also result in 

emission reductions. 

The Federal measures that have been 

implemented include: 

Tier 2 vehicle standards. In addition 

to requiring NOX controls, the Tier 2 

rule reduced the allowable sulfur 

content of gasoline to 30 parts per 

million (ppm) starting in January of 

2006. Most gasoline sold in North 

Carolina prior to this had a sulfur 

content of approximately 300 ppm. 

Heavy-duty gasoline and diesel 

highway vehicle standards. The second 

phase of the standards and testing 

procedures, which began in 2007, 

reduces particulate matter (PM) and 

NOX from heavy-duty highway engines 

and also reduces highway diesel fuel 

sulfur content to 15 ppm. The total 

program is expected to achieve a 90 and 

95 percent reduction in PM and NOX

emissions from heavy-duty highway 

engines, respectively. 

Nonroad spark-ignition engines and 

recreational engines standards. Tier 1 of 

this standard, implemented in 2004, and 

Tier 2, implemented in 2007, have 

reduced and will continue to reduce PM 

emissions. 

Large nonroad diesel engine 

standards. Promulgated in 2004, this 

rule is being phased in between 2008 

and 2014. This rule will reduce sulfur 

content in nonroad diesel fuel and, 

when fully implemented, will reduce 

NOX and direct PM2.5 emissions by over 

90 percent from these engines. 

CAIR and the Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR). As previously 

discussed, the remanded CAIR, 

originally promulgated to reduce 

transported pollution, was left in place 

to ‘‘temporarily preserve the 

environmental values covered by CAIR’’ 

until EPA replaced it with a rule 

consistent with the Court’s opinion. To 

remedy CAIR’s flaws, EPA promulgated 

the final CSAPR on August 8, 2011. 

CSAPR addresses the interstate 

transport requirements of the CAA with 

respect to the 1997 ozone, 1997 PM2.5

and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. As noted 

previously, the requirements of CAIR 

address emissions thru the 2011 control 

period and CSAPR requires similar or 

greater emission reductions in the 

relevant areas in 2012 and beyond. 

The state measures that have been 

implemented to date and relied upon by 

North Carolina to demonstrate 

attainment and/or maintenance include: 

NCCSA. The primary state-adopted 

measure is the NCCSA, enacted in June 

2002. The NCCSA includes a schedule 

of system-wide caps on emissions of 

NOX and SO2, the first of which became 

effective in 2007, and has no provision 

for the trading of pollution credits from 

one utility to another. According to 

North Carolina, this rule requires coalfired power plants in the State to reduce 

annual NOX emissions from 245,000 

tons in 1998 to 56,000 tons by 2009 (a 

77 percent reduction) and to reduce 

annual SO2 emissions from 489,000 tons 

in 1998 to 250,000 tons by 2009 (a 49 

percent reduction), and further SO2

reductions to 130,000 tons in 2013 (a 73 

percent reduction). Although there are 

no power plants located within the 

Hickory Area, there are power plants 

located around the Area. On August 21, 

2009, North Carolina submitted a SIP 

revision to incorporate specific 

provisions of the NCCSA into the 

Federally approved SIP. On June 22, 

2011, EPA proposed approval of the 

NCCSA rules as a revision to the SIP 

and expects to take final action on it in 

a rulemaking separate from today’s 

proposed action but prior to any final 

action on this redesignation. 

Another significant rulemaking which 

has led to permanent and enforceable 

reductions is the NOX SIP Call rule. 

This rule was predicted to reduce 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58218 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

7Electric Power Annual 2009, DOE/EIA– 

0348(2009), North Carolina Electricity Profile, 

Tables 5 and 7. April 2011. 

summertime NOX emissions from power 

plants and other industries by over 60 

percent in North Carolina by 2006. See 

Table III–5 of NOX SIP Call, 63 FR 

57356, 57434 (October 27, 1998). These 

emission reductions are state and 

Federally enforceable. 

Table 2 presents the annual emissions 

from North Carolina sources as recorded 

in EPA’s acid rain database. Since 2002, 

when the NOX controls started coming 

on-line to meet the NOX SIP Call, and 

later to meet the NCCSA, the annual 

NOX emissions from subject sources 

have decreased dramatically from 

145,706 tons per year (tpy) in 2002 to 

61,669 tpy in 2008. In 2009 the 

emissions decreased to 44,506 tpy— 

down more than 69 percent from 2002. 

Between 2005 and 2008, the annual SO2

emissions from the utilities in North 

Carolina decreased by more than half 

from 500,936 tpy to 227,030 tpy, or 

nearly 274,000 tons reduced. In 2009 

the emissions were again halved, down 

76 percent from 2002. The decline in 

SO2 emissions has coincided with a 

decline in annual PM2.5 concentrations 

across North Carolina. 

TABLE 2—ANNUAL EMISSIONS FROM ALL NC SOURCES IN THE EPA CLEAN AIR MARKETS DATABASE

Year Annual SO2

emissions (tons) 

Annual NOX

emissions (tons) 

2002 ................................................................................................................................................................. 462,993 145,706 

2003 ................................................................................................................................................................. 462,041 135,879 

2004 ................................................................................................................................................................. 472,320 124,079 

2005 ................................................................................................................................................................. 500,936 114,300 

2006 ................................................................................................................................................................. 462,143 108,584 

2007 ................................................................................................................................................................. 370,827 64,770 

2008 ................................................................................................................................................................. 227,030 61,669 

2009 ................................................................................................................................................................. 110,948 44,506 

Other state measures have been 

implemented that are state enforceable 

but not a part of the Federallyenforceable SIP. Such measures 

contribute to reductions in pollutant 

emissions, although to a lesser extent 

than the ones identified above, and 

include the following: 

Clean Air Bill. This state legislation 

expanded the inspection and 

maintenance program from 9 counties to 

48 counties and was phased in for the 

Hickory Area from July 1, 2002, through 

July 1, 2003. This program reduces NOX, 

VOC, and carbon monoxide (CO) 

emissions. 

Open burning. This regulation, 

originally approved in 1997, prohibits 

the burning of man-made materials 

throughout the State. Additionally, this 

regulation prohibits open burning of 

yard waste in areas for which the DAQ 

forecasts an air quality action day. The 

open burning regulation will reduce 

PM2.5 emissions, as well as NOX, VOC 

and CO emissions. 

Diesel Retrofits. As part of the North 

Carolina Mobile Source Emission 

Reduction Grants program, a number of 

cities, counties and school districts have 

installed diesel oxidation catalysts or 

diesel particulate filters on their diesel 

equipment. The vehicles that have been 

retrofitted include school buses and 

county fleet trucks used for solid waste 

pickup. These types of filters are 

designed to reduce PM engine 

emissions, and when used with ultra 

low sulfur diesel fuel, NOX and VOC 

emissions are also reduced. Even though 

these emission reductions are voluntary 

and not enforceable, they are still 

considered permanent reductions. 

Diesel Emissions Reduction Act 

(DERA). DERA provides new diesel 

emissions reduction grant authority for 

EPA. This funding is used to achieve 

significant reductions in diesel 

emissions that improve air quality and 

protect public health. The DERA funds 

that the DAQ has received have been 

used to retrofit, repower, or replace 

existing diesel engines from on-road and 

nonroad mobile source vehicles and 

equipment. This program will reduce 

PM, NOX, and VOC emissions. Even 

though these emission reductions are 

voluntary, they are still considered 

permanent reductions once a retrofit is 

completed. To date, North Carolina has 

retrofitted over 6,000 diesel school 

buses. In addition to impacting local 

emissions in the nonattainment area, 

most of these measures impact 

emissions statewide. 

EPA agrees with North Carolina’s 

assessment that, although PM2.5 and 

PM2.5 precursor reductions within the 

nonattainment area have contributed to 

improved air quality, the majority of the 

improvement in ambient PM2.5

concentrations has resulted from 

reductions in SO2 emissions from instate coal-fired power plants due to the 

NCCSA. The annual emissions from 

these facilities have significantly 

decreased since 2005, with over 250,000 

tons of SO2 emission reductions in 2008 

compared to 2005. EPA’s analysis of 

emissions data available in from the 

Clean Air Markets Division Web site 

(http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/) shows 

that the statewide reductions in SO2

emissions are much greater than any 

decreases in emissions that can be 

attributed to decreases in demand 

associated with reductions in operating 

hours or heat inputs at North Carolina 

power plants. While coal-fired electric 

power generation in North Carolina 

decreased 4.8 percent from 2005 to 

2008,7 SO2 emissions from coal-fired 

electric power plants declined 46.0 

percent during the same period. 

The NCCSA reductions took place 

beginning in 2006, the first year of the 

3-year attainment period submitted by 

North Carolina for redesignation of the 

Hickory Area. Since the final 

compliance date for the NCCSA SO2

emissions caps is 2013, future design 

values are expected to continue to 

decline below the 2006–2008 attaining 

design values. The significant statewide 

reductions in utility SO2 emissions will 

be permanent and enforceable upon 

EPA’s approval of the NCCSA rules into 

the North Carolina SIP. Further, EPA 

does not have any information to 

suggest that the decrease in ambient 

PM2.5 concentrations in the Hickory 

Area is due to unusually favorable 

meteorological conditions. Additionally, 

the emission reductions resulting from 

the NCCSA discussed above are of a 

greater magnitude than any influence 

that could be expected from 

meteorology. The 250,000 tons of SO2

emission reductions since 2005 

represents a greater than 41 percent 

reduction of statewide SO2 emissions. It 

is reasonable to expect that such 

significant reductions have reduced 

ambient PM2.5 levels throughout the 

State—including in the Hickory Area. 

Indeed, every PM2.5 monitor in the State 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 58219 

8http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html. 9PM2.5 MVEBs are not required for the Hickory 

Area due to the insignificance determination for the 

motor vehicle PM2.5 contribution. 

has shown a consistent downward trend 

during the period from 2006–2009.8

Criteria (4)—The Hickory 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 Hickory Area to 

attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS, DAQ submitted a SIP revision 

to provide for the maintenance of the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for at least 

10 years after the effective date of 

redesignation to attainment. EPA 

believes 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 

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 

which demonstrates 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 1997 Annual PM2.5

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 

finds that North Carolina’s maintenance 

plan includes all the necessary 

components and is thus proposing to 

approve it as a revision to the North 

Carolina SIP, provided that EPA takes 

final action to approve the NCCSA 

rules. 

b. Attainment Emissions Inventory 

The Hickory Area first attained the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS based on 

monitoring data for the 3-year period 

2006–2008. North Carolina selected 

2008 as the attainment emissions 

inventory year in part because it was 

already in the process of developing 

some emissions inventory data for this 

year. The attainment inventory 

identifies a level of emissions in the 

Area that is sufficient to attain the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. North Carolina 

began development of the attainment 

inventory by first generating a baseline 

emissions inventory for the Hickory 

Area. As noted above, the year 2008 was 

chosen as the base year for developing 

a comprehensive emissions inventory 

for primary PM2.5, SO2, and NOX, for 

which projected emissions could be 

developed for 2011, 2014, 2017, and 

2021. In addition to comparing the final 

year of the plan, 2021, to the base year, 

2008, North Carolina compared interim 

years to the 2008 baseline to 

demonstrate that these years are also 

expected to show continued 

maintenance of the annual PM2.5

standard. 

The emissions inventories are 

composed of four major types of 

sources: point, area, on-road mobile, 

and non-road mobile. The future year 

emissions inventories have been 

estimated using projected rates of 

growth in population, traffic, economic 

activity, expected control programs, and 

other parameters. Non-road mobile 

emissions estimates were based on the 

EPA’s NONROAD2008, a non-road 

mobile model, with the exception of 

railroad locomotive and aircraft engine 

emissions. The railroad locomotive and 

aircraft engine emissions were estimated 

by taking activity data, such as landings 

and takeoffs, and multiplying by an 

emission factor. On-road mobile source 

emissions were calculated using EPA’s 

MOVES mobile emission factors model. 

The 2008 SO2, NOX and PM2.5 emissions 

for the Hickory Area, as well as the 

emissions for other years, were 

developed consistent with EPA 

guidance and are summarized in Tables 

3 and 4 of the following subsection 

discussing the maintenance 

demonstration. 

c. Maintenance Demonstration 

The December 18, 2009, final 

submittal and December 22, 2010, 

supplement included a maintenance 

plan for the Hickory Area. This 

demonstration: 

(i) Shows compliance with and 

maintenance of the annual PM2.5

standard by providing information to 

support the demonstration that current 

and future emissions of SO2, NOx and 

PM2.5 remain at or below 2008 SO2, 

NOX, and PM2.5 emissions levels. 

(ii) Uses 2008 as the attainment year 

and includes future emission inventory 

projections for 2011, 2014, 2017, and 

2021, as shown in Tables 3 and 4 below. 

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

years (and beyond) after the time 

necessary for EPA to review and 

approve the maintenance plan. Per 40 

CFR part 93, NOX MVEBs were 

established for the last year (2021) of the 

maintenance plan.9 Additionally, North 

Carolina chose, through interagency 

consultation, to establish NOX MVEBs 

for 2011 (see section VII below). 

(iv) Provides, as shown in Table 4 

below, the actual and projected 

emissions inventories, in tpy, for the 

Hickory Area. 

TABLE 3—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED NOX, SO2, AND PM2.5 EMISSIONS FROM ALL SOURCE CATEGORIES FOR CATAWBA

COUNTY IN THE HICKORY AREA (TPY) 

2008 2011 2014 2017 2021 

NOX

Point ...................................................................................................................... 13310 10549 10548 10548 10548 

Area ...................................................................................................................... 662 614 566 520 454 

On-road Mobile ..................................................................................................... 4982 4005 3240 2591 2054 

Non-road Mobile ................................................................................................... 1173 922 700 551 453 

Total ............................................................................................................... 20127 16090 15054 14210 13509 

SO2

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58220 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

10SIP submittal figures 2–2 and 4–1. 

11EPA’s National Emissions Inventory data is 

available on the Web site: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ 

chief/eiinformation.html. The acid rain database 

can be accessed on EPA’s Clean Air Markets 

Division Web site: http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/ 

. 

12Alabama, et al. v. TVA, No. 3:11–CV–00170, 

(E.D. TN 2011) (Consent Decree), available at http: 

//www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/decrees/civil/ 

caa/tvacoal-fired-cd.pdf. 

TABLE 3—ACTUAL AND PROJECTED NOX, SO2, AND PM2.5 EMISSIONS FROM ALL SOURCE CATEGORIES FOR CATAWBA

COUNTY IN THE HICKORY AREA (TPY)—Continued 

2008 2011 2014 2017 2021 

Point ...................................................................................................................... 6189 6187 6186 6184 6183 

Area ...................................................................................................................... 2263 2037 1808 1580 1277 

On-road Mobile ..................................................................................................... 35 20 18 19 20 

Non-road Mobile ................................................................................................... 18 6 4 3 4 

Total ............................................................................................................... 8505 8250 8016 7786 7484 

PM2.5

Point ...................................................................................................................... 6976 6975 6975 6973 6971 

Area ...................................................................................................................... 682 658 629 606 559 

On-road Mobile ..................................................................................................... 166 127 107 89 73 

Non-road Mobile ................................................................................................... 70 67 57 46 38 

Total ............................................................................................................... 7894 7827 7768 7714 7641 

TABLE 4—EMISSIONS AND MAINTENANCE SUMMARY FOR THE HICKORY PM2.5 NONATTAINMENT AREA

Year NOX (tpy) SO2 (tpy) PM2.5

(tpy) 

2008 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 20,127 8,505 7,894 

2011 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 16,090 8,250 7,827 

2014 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 15,054 8,016 7,768 

2017 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 14,210 7,786 7,714 

2021 ..................................................................................................................................................................... 13,509 7,484 7,641 

Difference from 2008 to 2021 .............................................................................................................................. ¥6,618 ¥1,021 ¥253 

Tables 3 and 4 summarize the 2008 

and future projected emissions of direct 

PM2.5 and precursors from the counties 

in the Hickory Area. In situations where 

local emissions are the primary 

contributor to nonattainment, the 

ambient air quality standard 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. In the Hickory Area, however, 

the preponderance of the nonattainment 

problem is due to SO2 emissions from 

power plants outside the nonattainment 

area, but within North Carolina. As 

shown by the speciation data in the 

State’s submittal,10 sulfates are one of 

the largest contributors to ambient PM2.5

in the Hickory Area and in the State as 

a whole, contributing about 30 percent 

of the total PM2.5 mass. Sulfates are 

formed through various SO2 reactions in 

the atmosphere. According to EPA’s 

National Emissions Inventory for 2005 

and Clean Air Markets Division acid 

rain database, over 90 percent of SO2

emissions in North Carolina were from 

stationary point sources, greater than 80 

percent of which were from power 

plants reporting to the acid rain 

program.11 Organic carbon, which also 

contributes about 30 percent of the total 

PM2.5 mass in the Hickory Area, is 

predominately attributed to biogenic 

emission sources. The next largest 

contributor in the Hickory Area is an 

‘‘other’’ group that is attributed to water, 

sea salts, and other trace materials and 

which accounts for about 17 percent of 

the mass. 

Because the most significant sources 

contributing to ambient PM2.5 levels in 

the Hickory Area are utilities located 

outside the nonattainment area, but 

within North Carolina, reductions in 

emissions from these point sources 

provide the greatest potential for 

reductions in ambient PM2.5

concentrations. For this reason, the 

State presented information in its 

submittal (as discussed above in the 

section on permanent and enforceable 

reductions) showing that the NCCSA 

requires these sources to reduce their 

emissions by substantial amounts that 

are more than sufficient for the Hickory 

Area to demonstrate attainment and 

maintenance of the PM2.5 NAAQS at 

issue here. EPA has proposed 

rulemaking action to approve specific 

provisions of the NCCSA into the North 

Carolina SIP, and final approval would 

assure that power plants within North 

Carolina will remain sufficiently 

regulated to provide for continued 

maintenance as required by CAA 

section 175A. 

With regard to emissions generated 

outside North Carolina which have the 

potential to impact the Hickory Area, 

EPA notes several recent emissions 

reductions that have occurred or will 

occur in nearby states. First, On April 

14, 2011, EPA announced a settlement 

with the Tennessee Valley Authority 

(TVA) to resolve alleged Clean Air Act 

violations at 11 of its coal-fired plants 

in Alabama, Kentucky, and 

Tennessee.12 The settlement will 

require TVA to invest a TVA estimated 

$3 billion to $5 billion on new and 

upgraded state-of-the-art pollution 

controls. When fully implemented, the 

pollution controls and other required 

actions will address 92 percent of TVA’s 

coal-fired power plant capacity, 

reducing emissions of NOX by 69 

percent and SO2 by 67 percent from 

TVA’s 2008 emission levels. The 

settlement will also significantly reduce 

particulate matter and carbon dioxide 

(CO2) emissions. The consent decree 

also requires that operation of 18 coalfired units at the Johnsonville, John 

Sevier, and Widows Creek plants be 

phased out by 2017. 

Second, the State of Georgia has 

recently passed a multi-pollutant rule to 

reduce NOX and SO2 emissions from 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 58221 

13 Georgia Rule 391–3–1–.02(2)(uuu), ‘‘SO2

Emissions from Electric Utility Steam Generating 

Units,’’ was first adopted by the Georgia Board of 

Natural Resources January 28, 2009, with an 

amendment adopted June 24, 2009. 

14U.S. et al. v. Va. Elec. & Power Co., No. 1:03– 

cv–00517–LMB (E.D. Va. 2003) (Consent Decree), 

available at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ 

resources/decrees/civil/caa/vepcocd.pdf. 

15U.S. et al. v. American Elec. Power Serv. Corp., 

No C2–99–1250 (E.D. Ohio 2007) (Consent Decree), 

available at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ 

resources/decrees/civil/caa/americanelectricpowercd.pdf. 

16Conversion factor from grams to tons = 907185 

grams per ton. 

many of its coal-fired EGUs.13 Third, the 

consent decrees for Dominion Power 14

and American Electric Power (AEP) 15 in 

the Commonwealth of Virginia require 

further controls of NOX and SO2

emissions at those power plants. On 

April 21, 2003, the Department of 

Justice and EPA announced a settlement 

against Virginia Electric and Power 

Company (VEPCO a subsidiary of 

Dominion Resources, Inc.). This 

settlement requires VEPCO, one of the 

nation’s largest coal-fired electric 

utilities, to install new pollution control 

equipment and to upgrade existing 

controls on several units in its system, 

thus resulting in substantial air 

pollution reductions. The settlement 

covers eight VEPCO plants, six in 

Virginia and two in West Virginia, 

comprising twenty electricity-generating 

units. These eight plants emitted over 

350,000 tons of SO2 and NOX in 2000. 

The settlement will reduce these 

emissions to approximately 86,500 tpy 

SO2 and 26,000 tpy NOX. On October 9, 

2007, the United States, along with eight 

individual states and thirteen citizen 

groups, announced a settlement 

agreement with AEP that that mandates 

emissions reductions at sixteen of AEP’s 

coal-fired power plants (46 units) 

located in Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, 

Virginia, and West Virginia. NOX

emissions from subject plants will be 

reduced by greater than 68 percent by 

2016 as compared to 2006 levels. 

Likewise, by 2018 SO2 emissions will 

decrease by greater than 78 percent as 

compared to 2006 levels. 

Finally, EPA has recently finalized 

the CSAPR to regulate interstate 

transport of power plant emissions. 

EPA’s modeling for the final rule 

indicates that the Hickory Area would 

maintain the NAAQS into the future in 

the absence of the rule. The 2012 base 

case run, which simulates air quality 

without CAIR and without a transport 

rule, assumes a 4 million ton increase in 

SO2 regionally. A 2014 base case run 

also assumes no CAIR, but does include 

additional enforceable controls that are 

required to occur between 2012 and 

2014. Based on these modeling 

assessments, PM2.5 concentrations in the 

Hickory Area are still projected to 

decrease to 12.9 μg/m3 in 2012 and 12.1 

μg/m3 in 2014. Though not necessary for 

demonstrating attainment and 

maintenance in the Hickory Area, the 

final CSAPR will result in additional 

reductions of NOX and SO2 emissions 

that cross state lines. EPA estimates that 

by 2014, power plants in the covered 

states will reduce annual emissions of 

SO2 by about 2.2 million tons beyond 

what would have been achieved at that 

time under CAIR. By 2014, we estimate 

that NOX emissions in covered states 

will be about 500,000 tons lower than 

emissions would have been under CAIR. 

Based on the analysis described 

above, EPA has concluded that impacts 

on air quality from emissions 

transported across state lines have been 

adequately addressed for the Hickory 

Area and that the Hickory Area will 

maintain the annual PM2.5 standard 

through 2021. Furthermore, the final 

CSAPR mandates even greater 

reductions than have already occurred 

and, more importantly, any reductions 

in PM2.5 in the Hickory Area from the 

final CSAPR will be in excess of those 

needed to maintain the Annual PM2.5

NAAQS. 

A maintenance plan requires the state 

to show that projected future year 

emissions will not exceed the level of 

emissions which led the Area to attain 

the NAAQS. North Carolina has 

projected emissions as described 

previously and determined that 

emissions in the Hickory Area will 

remain below those in the attainment 

year inventory until 2021. 

As discussed further 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. North Carolina 

has decided to allocate a portion of the 

available safety margin to the Area’s 

NOX MVEBs for 2011 and 2021 for the 

Hickory Area and has calculated the 

safety margin in its submittal. 

Specifically, a total of 363,327 kg/year 16

(400 tpy) and 372,671 kg/year (411 tpy) 

of the available NOX safety margins are 

allocated to the 2011 and 2021 MVEB, 

respectively. The remaining safety 

margins for NOX are 3,637 tpy and 6,207 

tpy for 2011 and 2021, respectively. 

This allocation and the resulting 

available safety margin for the Hickory 

Area are discussed further in section VII 

of this proposed rulemaking. 

d. Monitoring Network 

There are currently three monitors 

measuring PM2.5 in the Hickory Area. 

The State of North Carolina, through 

DAQ, has committed to continue 

operation of the monitors in the Hickory 

Area in compliance with 40 CFR part 58 

and have thus addressed the 

requirement for monitoring. EPA 

approved North Carolina’s 2010 

monitoring plan on September 22, 2010. 

e. Verification of Continued Attainment 

The State of North Carolina, through 

DAQ, has the legal authority to enforce 

and implement the requirements of the 

Hickory Area 1997 Annual PM2.5

Maintenance plan. This includes the 

authority to adopt, implement and 

enforce any subsequent emissions 

control contingency measures 

determined to be necessary to correct 

future PM2.5 attainment problems. 

DAQ will track the progress of the 

maintenance plan by performing future 

reviews of triennial emission 

inventories for the Hickory Area using 

the latest emissions factors, models and 

methodologies. For these periodic 

inventories, DAQ will review the 

assumptions made for the purpose of 

the maintenance demonstration 

concerning projected growth of activity 

levels. If any of these assumptions 

appear to have changed substantially, 

the DAQ will re-project emissions for 

the Hickory Area. 

f. Contingency Measures in the 

Maintenance Plan 

The contingency measures are 

designed to promptly correct a violation 

of the NAAQS that occurs after 

redesignation. 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). 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58222 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

17 In a letter dated May 20, 2011, North Carolina 

provided additional clarification on the timing and 

content of their contingency plan. In the letter, 

North Carolina clarified that it is there intent to take 

corrective measures to address a violation of the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS within 18–24 months 

of the violation. This letter is available in the docket 

EPA–R04–OAR–2009–1011 on the http:// 

www.regulations.gov Web site. 

18At this time, there is not an approved method 

for determining emission reductions from a Diesel 

Inspection and Maintenance program. Therefore, 

there is no technical basis to award emission credits 

for a heavy duty diesel inspection and maintenance 

program in the SIP. However, we do not want to 

preclude future technical changes that may make 

awarding such emission credits possible. If it is 

necessary to implement contingency measures for 

this area, North Carolina, in coordination with EPA, 

will evaluate the feasibility of this program as a 

contingency measure at that time. If a technical 

basis for emission credits is not available, other 

contingency measures will need to be implemented. 

In the December 18, 2009, submittal, 

North Carolina affirms that all programs 

instituted by the State and EPA for PM 

control will remain enforceable and that 

sources are prohibited from reducing 

emissions controls following the 

redesignation of the Area. The 

contingency plan included in the 

December 18, 2009, submittal includes 

a 3-step triggering mechanism to 

determine when contingency measures 

are needed and a process of developing 

and implementing appropriate control 

measures. The secondary and tertiary 

triggers are pre-violation triggers and 

thus activation does not necessarily 

mean a violation of the actual annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS has occurred or will 

occur. The pre-violation triggers allow 

the State to begin evaluating the causes 

of increased ambient PM2.5

concentrations and take corrective 

action to prevent a future violation. In 

the contingency plan, North Carolina 

has committed to taking action on the 

activation of a primary or secondary 

trigger. These triggers and the actions 

resulting from them are discussed more 

fully below. 

The primary trigger will occur when 

the certified 3-year average of the 

average annual ambient concentration is 

greater than 15.0 μg/m3 at any monitor 

in the maintenance area. The resulting 

trigger date will be 60 days after the date 

that the State observes an annual 

average concentration that, when 

averaged with the previous two annual 

average PM2.5 concentrations, would 

result in a 3-year design value greater 

than 15.0 μg/m3. North Carolina has 

identified a secondary warning trigger to 

occur when the State finds that the 

rolling twelve-quarter average 

monitored PM2.5 levels exceed the PM2.5

NAAQS in the Hickory Area (noncalendar year basis). The trigger date 

will be 60 days from the date that the 

State observes that the rolling 12-quarter 

average is greater than 15.0 μg/m3. A 

tertiary (third type of) trigger will be 

activated when a monitor in the Hickory 

Area has an annual average greater than 

15.0 μg/m3. In addition to the triggers 

indicated above, North Carolina will 

track regional emissions submitted 

annually for large sources or every three 

years for other sources through the 

Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule 

and Air Emissions Reporting Rule and 

compare them to the projected 

inventories and attainment year 

inventory. North Carolina commits to 

review theses emissions inventories and 

evaluate assumptions made to project 

emissions in the maintenance plan to 

determine if unexpected growth in NOX, 

SO2 or PM2.5 in the Area will jeopardize 

maintenance of the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS. 

Once a primary or secondary trigger is 

activated, DAQ will commence analysis, 

including trajectory analysis, and 

emissions inventory assessment to 

determine emission control measures 

that will be required to attain or 

maintain the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS. PM2.5 speciation data from the 

speciation trends network monitors will 

also be reviewed to help determine 

which control measures would be most 

effective. If it is determined that the 

violation or exceedance of the PM2.5

NAAQS is due to sources outside of 

North Carolina, then DAQ will consult 

with EPA on its findings and 

determinations on what contingency 

measures will be implemented to reduce 

emissions. If EPA and DAQ agree that 

the violation or exceedance was due to 

sources outside of North Carolina, DAQ 

will consult with regulatory authorities 

from contributing up-wind sources to 

determine additional actions to be 

implemented.17

If DAQ determines that a violation or 

exceedance occurred due to sources 

within North Carolina, then by 

November 1 of the year following the 

year which caused the primary or 

secondary trigger activation, the State 

will complete sufficient analysis to 

begin adoption of necessary rules for 

ensuring attainment and maintenance of 

the annual PM2.5 NAAQS. If the rules 

are still needed, they would become 

State effective within 7 months after the 

November 1 analysis (by the following 

July 1), unless legislative review is 

required. Each adopted rule will include 

a schedule that will require compliance 

with the rule no later than 2 years after 

adoption of the rule. 

At least one of the following 

contingency measures will be adopted 

and implemented upon a primary or 

secondary triggering event: 

• Continued implementation of 

previously adopted controls (NCCSA 

and diesel retrofits) which have not yet 

been realized but are sufficient to 

address the violation (and in excess of 

emissions reductions considered for 

maintenance); 

• Reasonably Available Control 

Technology on stationary sources in the 

Hickory Area; 

• Diesel inspection and maintenance 

program; 18

• Implementation of diesel retrofit 

programs, including incentives for 

performing retrofits; 

• Additional controls in upwind 

areas within North Carolina. 

When a tertiary trigger is activated, 

DAQ will commence analyses including 

meteorological evaluation, trajectory 

analyses, and emissions inventory 

assessment to understand why an 

annual exceedance of the standard has 

occurred. DAQ will work with the local 

air awareness program and develop an 

outreach plan to identify any additional 

voluntary measures that can be 

implemented and implement the plan 

during the following summer. 

As designed, a tertiary trigger will 

always occur before a primary trigger 

because it is based on an annual 

average, whereas the primary trigger is 

based on an average of three consecutive 

annual averages. This means DAQ will 

commence analyzing the cause of higher 

ambient PM2.5 levels in the Area well 

before an actual NAAQS violation 

occurs. Further, a secondary trigger is 

likely to occur before a primary trigger 

because it is determined at the end of 

each calendar quarter based on a rolling 

12-quarter average. This means that if 

the Area were to experience a NAAQS 

violation, DAQ will have likely already 

commenced the process for adoption of 

control measures as described above. 

EPA is now making the preliminary 

determination that the contingency 

measures outlined above in North 

Carolina’s contingency plan are 

adequate and ensure that the State will 

promptly correct any future violation of 

the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the 

Hickory Area. 

EPA has concluded that the Hickory 

Area maintenance plan adequately 

addresses the five basic components of 

a maintenance plan: Attainment 

inventory, maintenance demonstration, 

monitoring network, verification of 

continued attainment, and a 

contingency plan. Provided that EPA 

takes final rulemaking to approve the 

NCCSA, the maintenance plan SIP 

revision submitted by the State of North 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 58223 

19 In the July 1, 2004, final rule, provisions for 

insignificance determinations were outlined in 40 

CFR 93.109(k). EPA revised 40 CFR 93.109 in its 

March 24, 2010 final rule (75 FR 14260) and the 

provisions for insignificance determinations are 

now located at 40 CFR 93.109(m). 

Carolina for the Hickory Area meets the 

requirements of section 175A of the 

CAA and is approvable. 

VII. What Is EPA’s Analysis of North 

Carolina’s Proposed Direct PM2.5

Insignificance Determination and the 

Proposed NOX MVEBs for the Hickory 

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 

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) and 

maintenance plans create MVEBs for 

criteria pollutants and/or their 

precursors to address pollution from 

cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, an 

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. 

Today’s actions address two related 

elements regarding on-road motor 

vehicle emissions and the requirement 

to establish MVEBs. First, EPA is 

proposing to find that the direct PM2.5

emission contribution from motor 

vehicles to PM2.5 pollution in the 

Hickory Area is insignificant. The result 

of this determination, if finalized, is that 

North Carolina will not need to develop 

an MVEB for direct PM2.5 for the 

Hickory Area and the MPO will not 

need to perform a regional emissions 

analysis for direct PM2.5 when it 

demonstrates conformity. See below for 

further information on the 

insignificance determination. Second, 

EPA is proposing to approve the NOX

MVEBs for the Hickory Area. 

Direct PM2.5 insignificance. For motor 

vehicle emissions budgets to be 

approvable, they must meet, at a 

minimum, EPA’s adequacy criteria (40 

CFR 93.118(e)(4)). In certain instances, 

the Transportation Conformity Rule 

allows areas to forgo establishment of an 

MVEB where it is demonstrated that the 

regional motor vehicle emissions for a 

particular pollutant or precursor are an 

insignificant contributor to the air 

quality problem in an area. The general 

criteria for insignificance 

determinations can be found in 40 CFR 

93.109(m). Insignificance 

determinations are based on a number 

of factors, including (1) The percentage 

of motor vehicle emissions in context of 

the total SIP inventory; (2) the current 

state of air quality as determined by 

monitoring data for that NAAQS; (3) the 

absence of SIP motor vehicle control 

measures; and (4) historical trends and 

future projections of the growth of 

motor vehicle emissions. EPA’s 

rationale for the providing for 

insignificance determinations is 

described in the July 1, 2004, revision 

to the Transportation Conformity Rule 

at 69 FR 40004.19 Specifically, the 

rationale is explained on page 40061 

under the subsection entitled ‘‘XXIII. B. 

Areas With Insignificant Motor Vehicle 

Emissions.’’ Any insignificance 

determination under review of EPA is 

subject to the adequacy and approval 

process for EPA’s action on the SIP. 

Through the adequacy and SIP 

approval process, EPA may find that a 

SIP demonstrates that regional motor 

vehicle emissions are an insignificant 

contributor to the air quality problem 

for the pollutant or precursor at issue. 

In the case of the Hickory Area, EPA 

made its insignificance determination 

for directly emitted PM2.5 as part of the 

adequacy process on May 2, 2011 (76 FR 

24475). As a result of EPA’s 

insignificance determination, the 

Hickory Area was no longer required to 

perform regional emissions analyses for 

directly emitted PM2.5 as part of future 

PM2.5 conformity determinations for the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS until such 

time that EPA reviewed and took action 

on Hickory redesignation request for the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS (the subject 

of this proposed action). Upon the 

effective date of EPA’s adequacy 

determination, Federal regulations no 

longer require a regional emissions 

analysis (for the purpose of 

transportation conformity 

implementation) for the relevant 

pollutant or precursor. Areas with 

insignificant regional motor vehicle 

emissions for a pollutant or precursor 

are still required to make a conformity 

determination that satisfies other 

relevant conformity requirements. 

Additionally, such areas are required to 

satisfy the regional emissions analysis 

requirements for pollutants or 

precursors for which EPA has not made 

a determination of insignificance. 

The maintenance plan for the Hickory 

Area, included as part of the SIP 

revision, contains MVEBs for NOx and 

an insignificance determination for the 

direct PM2.5 contribution of motor 

vehicles to the air quality problem in 

the Hickory Area. As part of the 

preparation for its redesignation request, 

North Carolina consulted with the 

interagency consultation group for the 

Hickory Area regarding the direct PM2.5

insignificance determination. For the 

purposes of regional emissions analysis, 

the information provided by North 

Carolina supports EPA’s proposal to 

determine that the PM2.5 contribution 

from motor vehicles to PM2.5 pollution 

in the Hickory Area is insignificant. The 

information provided by North Carolina 

to EPA, as part of the SIP revision, 

addresses each of the factors listed in 40 

CFR 93.109(m) and is summarized 

below. The 2009 on-road PM2.5

emissions account for less than two 

percent of the total direct PM2.5 from all 

sources in the Hickory Area SIP 

inventory. In addition, direct PM2.5

emissions from on-road mobile sources 

decreased by 25 percent from 2002– 

2009 (100 tpy to 75 tpy) while vehicle 

miles traveled (VMT) increased 14 

percent during the same time frame. As 

shown in Table 3 above, North 

Carolina’s maintenance plan 

demonstrates that on-road PM2.5

emissions will continue to decrease 

through 2021, the end of the 

maintenance plan for the Hickory Area. 

In addition, since 2006, the PM2.5

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58224 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

annual average concentration has 

decreased by 32 percent such that the 

Area is now attaining the Annual PM2.5

NAAQS with a 2007–2009 design value 

of 12.6 μg/m3, well below the standard 

of 15.0 μg/m3. According to information 

provided by North Carolina, point 

sources contributed nearly 97 percent of 

the emissions in future years in the 

Hickory Area. Support for these 

percentages is found in Figure 4.5.2–3, 

located in the supplemental Appendix 

C.3—Mobile Source Inventory 

Documentation North Carolina’s 

submittal (available in the Docket for 

this proposed rulemaking). In addition, 

North Carolina conducted a sensitivity 

analysis that doubled the PM2.5

emissions from on-road mobile sources 

in 2008 which indicated a negligible 

difference (0.04 μg/m3) in the PM2.5

modeling design value in Catawba 

County. As a result, the information 

provided by North Carolina indicates 

that the direct PM2.5 contribution from 

on-road mobile sources to PM2.5

pollution is insignificant for the Hickory 

Area. 

With regard to the factor relating to 

the absence of motor vehicle control 

measures in the SIP, EPA considered the 

existence of a vehicle inspection and 

maintenance program in the North 

Carolina SIP and its implementation in 

Catawba County comprising the Hickory 

Area. The program, which was added to 

the North Carolina SIP to control 

precursors of ozone rather than as a 

PM2.5 control measure, is currently 

being implemented in the Hickory Area. 

After evaluating the information 

provided by North Carolina and 

weighing the factors for the 

insignificance determination outlined in 

40 CFR 93.109(m), EPA is now 

proposing to approve North Carolina’s 

determination that the direct PM2.5

contribution from motor vehicle 

emissions to the PM2.5 pollution 

problem in the Hickory Area is 

insignificant. EPA’s insignificance 

finding should be considered and 

specifically noted in the transportation 

conformity documentation that is 

prepared for the Area. 

After interagency consultation with 

the transportation partners for the 

Hickory Area, North Carolina has 

developed MVEBs for NOX for the entire 

Area. North Carolina developed these 

MVEBs, as required, for the last year of 

its maintenance plan—2021. 

Additionally, the State of North 

Carolina has elected to develop MVEBs 

for the year 2011. The MVEBs reflect the 

total on-road emissions for 2011 and 

2021, plus a safety margin that is based 

on an allocation from the available NOX

safety margin. Under 40 CFR 93.101, the 

safety margin is the difference between 

the emissions level needed for 

attainment (from all sources) and the 

projected level of emissions (from all 

sources) in the maintenance plan. The 

safety margin can be allocated to the 

transportation sector, however, the total 

emissions must remain below the 

attainment level. These MVEBs and 

allocation from the safety margin were 

developed in consultation with the 

transportation partners and were 

calculated to account for uncertainties 

in population growth, changes in 

modeled vehicle miles traveled and new 

emission factor models. The NOX

MVEBs for the Hickory Area are defined 

in Table 5 below. 

TABLE 5—HICKORY AREA NOX MVEBS

[kg/year] 

2011 2021 

On-Road Mobile Emissions ..................................................................................................................................... 3,633,274 1,863,357 

Safety Margin Allocated to MVEB ........................................................................................................................... 363,327 372,671 

NOX Conformity MVEB ............................................................................................................................................ 3,996,601 2,236,028 

As mentioned above, the Hickory 

Area has chosen to allocate a portion of 

the available safety margin to the NOX

MVEBs for the years 2011 and 2021. A 

total of 363,327 kg/year (400 tpy) and 

372,671 kg/year (411 tpy) of the 

available NOX safety margins are 

allocated to the 2011 and 2021 MVEB, 

respectively. Thus, the remaining safety 

margins in 2011 and 2021 are 4,524 tpy 

and 7,093 tpy, respectively. 

Through this rulemaking, EPA is 

proposing to approve the MVEBs for 

NOX for 2011 and 2021, including the 

allocation from the NOX safety margins, 

for the Hickory Area because EPA has 

made the preliminary determination 

that the Area maintains the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS with the 

emissions at the levels of the budgets. 

Once the MVEBs for the Hickory Area 

are approved or found adequate 

(whichever is completed first), they 

must be used for future conformity 

determinations and the MPOs must use 

the MOVES model in future PM2.5

conformity determinations for their 

long-range transportation plans and 

transportation improvement programs. 

After thorough review, EPA has 

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 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2021. 

VIII. What is the status of EPA’s 

adequacy determination for the 

proposed NOX MVEBs for 2011 and 

2021 and for the direct PM2.5

insignificance determination for the 

Hickory Area? 

When reviewing a submitted ‘‘control 

strategy’’ SIP or maintenance plan 

containing an MVEB, EPA may 

affirmatively find the MVEB contained 

therein adequate for use in determining 

transportation conformity. Once EPA 

affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB 

is adequate for transportation 

conformity purposes, that MVEB must 

be used by state and Federal agencies in 

determining whether proposed 

transportation projects conform to the 

SIP as required by section 176(c) of the 

CAA. 

EPA’s substantive criteria for 

determining adequacy of an 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 58225 

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, North Carolina’s 

maintenance plan submission includes 

NOX MVEBs for the Hickory Area for 

the years 2011 and 2021. EPA reviewed 

the NOX MVEBs through the adequacy 

process. The North Carolina SIP 

submission, including the Hickory Area 

NOX MVEBs, was open for public 

comment on EPA’s adequacy Web site 

on November 23, 2010, found at: 

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

stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm. 

The EPA public comment period on 

adequacy NOX MVEBs for 2011 and 

2021 for Hickory Area closed on 

December 23, 2010. EPA did not receive 

any comments on the adequacy of the 

MVEBs, nor did EPA receive any 

requests for the SIP submittal. 

In a letter sent on February 3, 2011, 

EPA notified North Carolina DAQ that 

the MOVES based 2011 and 2021 

MVEBs for the Hickory Area were 

determined to be adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes. On 

May 2, 2011, EPA published its 

adequacy notice in the Federal Register 

(76 FR 24475). When EPA finds the 

2011 and 2021 MVEBs adequate or 

approves them, the new MVEBs for NOX

must be used for future transportation 

conformity determinations. For required 

regional emissions analysis years prior 

to 2011, the applicable budgets are the 

2009 MVEBs and direct PM2.5

insignificance determination from the 

attainment demonstration, which have 

already been found adequate through 

another action. (75 FR 9204 and 75 FR 

26751). For required regional emissions 

analysis years that involve 2011–2020, 

the applicable budgets will be the new 

2011 MVEBs. For required regional 

emissions analysis years that involve 

2021 or beyond, the applicable budgets 

will be the new 2021 MVEBs. The 2011 

and 2021 MVEBs are defined in section 

VII of this proposed rulemaking. 

IX. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

proposed 2008 base year emissions 

inventory for the Hickory Area? 

As discussed in section VI above, 

section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires 

areas to submit a comprehensive, 

accurate and current emissions 

inventory. As part of North Carolina’s 

request to redesignate the Hickory Area, 

the State submitted a 2008 base year 

emissions inventory to meet this 

requirement. Emissions contained in the 

submittal cover the general source 

categories of point sources, area sources, 

on-road mobile sources, and non-road 

mobile sources. All emission summaries 

were accompanied by source-specific 

descriptions of emission calculation 

procedures and sources of input data. 

On December 22, 2010, DAQ provided 

EPA with a supplemental SIP revision 

to update the on-road mobile emissions 

by replacing the on-road mobile 

emissions that were prepared with 

MOBILE6.2 with on-road emissions that 

were prepared using the new MOVES 

emissions model. North Carolina’s 

submittal documents 2008 emissions in 

the Hickory Area in units of tpy. Table 

6 below provides a summary of the 2008 

emissions of direct PM2.5, NOX, and SO2

for the Hickory Area. For emissions in 

other years, refer to Tables 3 and 4. 

TABLE 6—HICKORY AREA 2008 EMISSIONS FOR PM2.5, NOX, AND SO2

[tpy (percent total)] 

Source PM2.5 NOX SO2

Point Source Total ............................................................................................... 6,976 [88.4] 13,310 [66.1] 6,189 [72.8] 

Area Source Total ................................................................................................ 682 [8.6] 662 [3.3] 2,263 [26.6] 

On-Road Mobile Source Total ............................................................................. 166 [2.1] 4,982 [24.8] 35 [0.4] 

Non-Road Mobile Source Total ........................................................................... 70 [0.9] 1,173 [5.8] 18 [0.2] 

Total for all Sources ..................................................................................... 7,894 20,127 8,505 

In today’s notice, EPA is proposing to 

approve this 2008 base year inventory as 

meeting the section 172(c)(3) emissions 

inventory requirement. 

X. Proposed Actions on the 

Redesignation Request and 

Maintenance Plan SIP Revision 

Including Approval of the NOX MVEBs 

for 2011 and 2021 and the Direct PM2.5

Insignificance Determination for the 

Hickory Area 

EPA previously determined that the 

Hickory Area was attaining the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS on January 5, 2010, at 75 

FR 230. EPA is now taking four separate 

but related actions regarding the Area’s 

redesignation and maintenance of the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Three of 

the actions are discussed in this section 

and the fourth is discussed in the next 

section. 

First, EPA is proposing to determine, 

based on complete, quality-assured and 

certified monitoring data for the 2007– 

2009 monitoring period, and after 

review of preliminary data in AQS for 

2008–2010, that the Hickory Area 

continues to attain the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS. Provided that EPA takes 

final action to approve the NCSSA and, 

under section 172(c)(3), the 2008 base 

emissions inventory, EPA is proposing 

to determine that the Hickory Area has 

met the criteria under CAA section 

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

nonattainment to attainment for the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. On this 

basis, EPA is proposing to approve 

North Carolina’s redesignation request 

for the Hickory Area. 

Second, EPA is proposing to approve 

North Carolina’s 2008 emissions 

inventory for the Hickory Area (under 

section CAA 172(c)(3)). North Carolina 

selected 2008 as the attainment 

emissions inventory year for the 

Hickory Area. This attainment inventory 

identifies a level of emissions in the 

Area that is sufficient to attain the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and also is a 

current, comprehensive inventory that 

meets the requirements of section 

172(c)(3). 

Third, subject to final approval of the 

NCCSA rules, EPA is proposing to 

approve North Carolina’s submitted 

maintenance plan for the Hickory Area, 

including the NOX MVEBs for 2011 and 

2021 and the insignificance 

determination for the direct PM2.5

contribution of motor vehicles to PM2.5

pollution, as meeting the requirements 

of section 175A of the CAA. The 

maintenance plan demonstrates that the 

Area will continue to maintain the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and the budgets 

meet all of the adequacy criteria 

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

(5). Further, as part of today’s action, 

EPA is describing the status of its 

adequacy determination for the NOX

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58226 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 182 / Tuesday, September 20, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

MVEBs for 2011 and 2021 and the 

mobile source direct PM2.5

insignificance determination for the 

PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with 40 

CFR 93.118(f)(1). On May 2, 2011, EPA 

published its adequacy notice in the 

Federal Register (76 FR 24472). Within 

24 months from the effective date of 

EPA’s adequacy determination, the 

transportation partners will need to 

demonstrate conformity to the new NOX

MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e) 

and will need to document the mobile 

source direct PM2.5 insignificance 

determination for the PM2.5 NAAQS in 

future conformity determinations (76 FR 

24475). 

If finalized, approval of the 

redesignation request would change the 

official designation of Catawba County 

in the Hickory Area for the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 CFR part 81, 

from nonattainment to attainment. EPA 

is also proposing to approve into the 

North Carolina SIP the maintenance 

plan for the Hickory Area, the emissions 

inventory submitted with the 

maintenance plan, and the 2011 and 

2021 MVEBs. EPA is proposing to take 

these actions if and when EPA finalizes, 

after notice and comment rulemaking, 

its approval of the NCSSA rules as a 

revision to the North Carolina SIP. 

XI. Proposed Action on the 

Determination That the Hickory Area 

Has Attained the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by 

Its Applicable Attainment Date 

The fourth action EPA is proposing 

today is to determine, based on qualityassured and certified monitoring data 

for the 2007–2009 monitoring period, 

that the Hickory Area attained the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its applicable 

attainment date of April 5, 2010. This 

determination is being proposed in 

accordance with section 179(c)(1) of the 

CAA and EPA regulations. 

XII. 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. 

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 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 ‘‘significant regulatory 

action[s]’’ subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• 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 an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Are not a significant regulatory 

action 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 

• Do 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 proposed 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 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, and Particulate matter. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control. 

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

Dated: September 9, 2011. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2011–24103 Filed 9–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

46 CFR Part 28 

[Docket No. USCG–2011–0887] 

RIN 1625–AB61 

Waiver of Citizenship Requirements for 

Crewmembers on Commercial Fishing 

Vessels; Correction 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; 

correction. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects the 

Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) 

to a proposed rule published in the 

Federal Register on August 18, 2011, 

entitled ‘‘Waiver of Citizenship 

Requirements for Crewmembers on 

Commercial Fishing Vessels.’’ This 

correction provides correct information 

with regard to the RIN. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or e-mail Mr. David Belliveau, 

Office of Vessel Activities (CG–5433), 

Coast Guard; telephone 202–372–1247, 

e-mail David.J.Belliveau@uscg.mil. 

Correction 

In the Federal Register of August 18, 

2011, in FR Vol. 76, No. 160, on page 

51317, in the first column, correct the 

RIN to read: RIN 1625–AB61. 

Dated: September 14, 2011. 

Kathryn G. Sinniger, 

Chief, Office of Regulations and 

Administrative Law. 

[FR Doc. 2011–24055 Filed 9–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS