78266 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 248 / Thursday, December 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

Applicable geographic area Year Tons per 

day NOX

Tons per 

day VOCs 

Lancaster 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area ......................................................................................... 2009 3.2 5.5 

Lancaster 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area ......................................................................................... 2018 3.6 7.7 

■ 4. Section 52.2052 is added to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.2052 Motor vehicle emissions 

budgets for Pennsylvania ozone areas. 

As of December 26, 2013, EPA 

approves the following revised 2009 and 

2018 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets 

(MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and 

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) for 

the Lancaster 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

Maintenance Area submitted by the 

Secretary of the Pennsylvania 

Department of Environmental 

Protection: 

Applicable geographic area Year Tons per 

day NOX

Tons per 

day VOCs 

Lancaster 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area ......................................................................................... 2009 35.18 14.29 

Lancaster 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area ......................................................................................... 2018 20.57 10.14 

[FR Doc. 2013–30714 Filed 12–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0629; FRL–9904–43– 

Region–4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; North Carolina; 

Transportation Conformity 

Memorandum of Agreement Update 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve a revision to the North 

Carolina State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) submitted on July 12, 2013, 

through the North Carolina Department 

of Environment and Natural Resources 

(NC DENR). This submission consists of 

memorandum of agreements (MOAs) 

establishing transportation conformity 

criteria and procedures related to 

interagency consultation, conflict 

resolution, public participation and 

enforceability of certain transportationrelated control measures and mitigation 

measures. This action streamlines the 

conformity process to allow direct 

consultation among agencies at the 

Federal, state and local levels. This 

action is being taken pursuant to section 

110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). 

DATES: This direct final rule is effective 

on February 24, 2014 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

comment by January 27, 2014. If EPA 

receives such comments, it will publish 

a timely withdrawal of the direct final 

rule in the Federal Register and inform 

the public that the rule will not take 

effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R04–OAR–2013–0629 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-Mail: R4-RDS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0629, 

Regulatory Development Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. 

Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

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

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2013– 

0629. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

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

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Air Quality 

Modeling and Transportation 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 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 248 / Thursday, December 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 78267 

1Conformity first appeared as a requirement in 

the CAA in the 1977 amendments (Pub. L. 95–95). 

Although the Act did not define conformity, it 

stated that no Federal department could engage in, 

support in any way or provide financial assistance 

for, license or permit, or approve any activity which 

did not conform to a SIP which has been approved 

or promulgated. 

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: 

Kelly Sheckler, Air Quality Modeling 

and Transportation 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. Ms. 

Sheckler’s telephone number is 404– 

562–9222. She can also be reached via 

electronic mail at Sheckler.kelly@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

II. Background for this Action 

III. EPA’s Analysis of North Carolina’s 

Submittal 

IV. Final Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is taking direct final action to 

approve NC DENR’s July 12, 2013 SIP 

submission, which consists of MOAs 

establishing transportation conformity 

criteria and procedures related to 

interagency consultation, conflict 

resolution, public participation and 

enforceability of certain transportationrelated control measures and mitigation 

measures in the State of North Carolina 

and its SIP pursuant to the sections 110 

and 176 of the CAA. Pursuant to section 

110 of the CAA, EPA is approving into 

the North Carolina SIP the July 12, 2013, 

transportation conformity MOAs. 

II. Background for This Action 

A. What is transportation conformity? 

Transportation conformity is required 

under section 176(c) of the CAA to 

ensure that federally supported highway 

projects, transit projects, and other 

activities are consistent with (conform 

to) the purpose of the SIP. Conformity 1

currently applies to areas that are 

designated nonattainment and to areas 

that have been redesignated to 

attainment after 1990 (maintenance 

areas) with plans developed under 

section 175A of the Act, for 

transportation-related criteria pollutants 

including ozone, particulate matter (e.g., 

PM2.5 and PM10), carbon monoxide, and 

nitrogen dioxide. 

The 1990 Amendments to the CAA 

expanded the scope and content of the 

conformity concept by defining 

conformity to a SIP. Section 176(c) of 

the Act defines conformity as 

conformity to the SIP’s purpose of 

eliminating or reducing the severity and 

number of violations of the national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 

and achieving expeditious attainment of 

such standards. Also, the CAA provides 

that no Federal activity will: (1) Cause 

or contribute to any new violation of 

any NAAQS in any area, (2) increase the 

frequency or severity of any existing 

violation of any standard in any area, or 

(3) delay timely attainment of any 

standard or any required interim 

emission reductions or other milestones 

in any area. The requirements of section 

176(c) of the CAA apply to all 

departments, agencies and 

instrumentalities of the Federal 

government. Transportation conformity 

refers only to the conformity of 

transportation plans, programs and 

projects that are funded or approved 

under title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal 

Transit Act (49 U.S.C. Chapter 53). EPA 

was required to issue criteria and 

procedures for determining conformity 

of transportation plans, programs, and 

projects to a SIP pursuant to section 

176(c) of the CAA. The CAA also 

required the procedures to include a 

requirement that each state submit a 

revision to its SIP to include conformity 

criteria and procedures. 

B. Why are states required to submit a 

transportation conformity SIP? 

EPA promulgated the first federal 

transportation conformity criteria and 

procedures (‘‘Conformity Rule’’) on 

November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188) 

which was codified at 40 CFR part 51, 

subpart T and 40 CFR part 93. Among 

other things, the rule required states to 

address all provisions of the conformity 

rule in their SIPs, frequently referred to 

as ‘‘conformity SIPs.’’ Under 40 CFR 

51.390, most sections of the conformity 

rule were required to be copied 

verbatim into the SIP. The rule has been 

subsequently revised on August 7, 1995 

(60 FR 40098), August 15, 1997 (62 FR 

43780) November 14, 1995 (60 FR 

57179), April 10, 2000 (65 FR 18911), 

and August 6, 2002 (67 FR 50808). 

On August 10, 2005, the ‘‘Safe, 

Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 

Users’’ (SAFETEA–LU) was signed into 

law. SAFETEA–LU revised section 

176(c) of the CAA transportation 

conformity provisions by streamlining 

the requirements for conformity SIPs. 

Under SAFETEA–LU, states are 

required to address and tailor only three 

sections of the rule in their conformity 

SIPs: 40 CFR 93.105, 40 CFR 

93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 40 CFR 93.125(c). In 

general, states are no longer required to 

submit conformity SIP revisions that 

address the other sections of the 

conformity rule. These changes took 

effect on August 10, 2005, when 

SAFETEA–LU was signed into law. 

States may also choose to develop, in 

place of adopting federal regulations, a 

MOA which establishes the roles and 

procedures for transportation 

conformity. The MOA must include the 

detailed consultation procedures 

developed for that particular area. The 

MOAs are enforceable through the 

signature of all the transportation and 

air quality agencies, including the U.S. 

Department of Transportation (USDOT) 

Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA), Federal Transit 

Administration (FTA) and EPA. 

C. How does transportation conformity 

work? 

The Federal or state transportation 

conformity rule applies to applicable 

NAAQS nonattainment and 

maintenance areas in the state. The 

Metropolitan Planning Organization 

(MPO), the state department of 

transportation (DOT) (in absence of a 

MPO), State and local air quality 

agencies, EPA and the USDOT are 

involved in the process of making 

conformity determinations. Conformity 

determinations are made on programs 

and plans such as transportation 

improvement programs (TIP), 

transportation plans, and transportation 

projects. The projected emissions that 

will result from implementation of the 

transportation plans and programs are 

calculated and compared to the motor 

vehicle emissions budget (MVEB) 

established in the SIP. The calculated 

emissions must be equal to or smaller 

than the federally approved MVEB in 

order for the USDOT to make a positive 

conformity determination with respect 

to the SIP. 

Pursuant to Federal regulations, when 

an area is designated nonattainment for 

a transportation-related NAAQS, the 

state is required to submit a 

transportation conformity SIP one year 

after the effective date of the 

nonattainment area (NAA) designations. 

See Section 40 CFR 51.390(c). 

Previously, North Carolina established, 

and EPA subsequently approved, a 

transportation conformity SIP to address 

areas that were designated 

nonattainment or previously designated 

nonattainment for the carbon monoxide 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
78268 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 248 / Thursday, December 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

2 Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties in the 

Charlotte-Gastonia Area; Durham and Wake 

Counties, and a portion of Granville County in the 

Raleigh-Durham Area; and Davidson, Forsyth and 

Guilford Counties, and a portion of Davie County 

in the Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point Area 

were previously designated nonattainment for the 

1-hour ozone standard and thus, implemented 

transportation conformity for the 1-hour ozone 

standard. However, EPA subsequently revoked the 

1-hour ozone NAAQS for all these areas as part of 

the transition to the new 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, and because these areas had long 

complied with the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, 

transportation conformity ceased to apply in these 

Areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 

3The Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill 1997 8-hour 

ozone area consists of Cabarrus, Gaston, Lincoln, 

Mecklenburg, Rowan, and Union Counties in their 

entireties, and a portion of Iredell County in North 

Carolina, and a portion of York County in South 

Carolina. 

4The Great Smoky National Park 1997 8-hour 

ozone area consists for a portion of Haywood and 

Swain Counties. 

5The Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill 1997 8-hour 

ozone area consists of Durham, Franklin, Granville, 

Orange, Johnston, Person and Wake Counties, in 

their entireties, and a portion of Chatham County. 

6The Rocky Mount 1997 8-hour ozone area 

consists of Edgecombe and Nash Counties in their 

entireties. 

7EAC areas entered into compacts with EPA 

whereby the areas agreed to reduce ozone pollution 

earlier than required by the CAA and meet specific 

milestones, in exchange for a deferred effective date 

for nonattainment designations for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. See 69 FR 23858, 23864–23869. 

8The Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point 1997 

annual PM2.5 area consists of Davidson and Guilford 

Counties in their entireties. 

9The Hickory 1997 annual PM2.5 area consists of 

Catawba County in its entirety. 

(CO) and 1-hour ozone 2 NAAQS. See 67 

FR 32549 (December 27, 2002) for EPA’s 

rulemaking related to approval on North 

Carolina’s transportation conformity 

SIP. North Carolina’s July 12, 2013, SIP 

revision updates and replaces North 

Carolina’s previously-approved 

transportation conformity SIP. 

Effective January 6, 1992 (59 FR 

56694), EPA designated four counties in 

North Carolina as nonattainment for the 

CO NAAQS. Specifically, EPA 

designated the following areas as 

nonattainment for the CO NAAQS: (1) 

Durham and Wake Counties in the 

Raleigh-Durham Area; (2) Forsyth 

County in the Winston-Salem Area; and 

(3) Mecklenburg County in the Charlotte 

Area. Provided below in Section III(a), 

(c) and (e) are more details related to 

transportation conformity for the 

aforementioned areas for the CO 

NAAQS. 

On June 15, 2004 (69 FR 23858), EPA 

designated seven areas in North 

Carolina as nonattainment for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. Specifically, EPA 

designated the following areas as 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS: (1) the bi-state CharlotteGastonia-Rock Hill, NC–SC; (2) 

Fayetteville, NC; (3) GreensboroWinston Salem-High Point, NC; (4) 

Great Smoky National Park (North 

Carolina portion); (5) HickoryMorganton-Lenoir, NC; (6) RaleighDurham-Chapel Hill, NC; and (7) Rocky 

Mount, NC. Nonattainment designations 

became effective June 15, 2004, for the 

bi-state Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock-Hill, 

NC–SC; 3 Great Smoky National Park; 4

Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill, NC; 5 and 

Rocky Mount, NC6 areas. As Early 

Action Compact (EAC) Areas,7

nonattainment designations were 

deferred for the Fayetteville, NC; 

Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point, 

NC; and Hickory-Morganton-Lenoir, NC 

areas and, because these areas met all 

the requirements for EAC Areas, they 

were never effectively nonattainment for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As 

such, these EAC Areas were not 

required to meet transportation 

conformity requirements for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. Provided below in 

Section III(a)–(f) are more details related 

to transportation conformity for the 

Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock-Hill, NC–SC; 

Great Smoky National Park, RaleighDurham-Chapel Hill, NC, and Rocky 

Mount, NC areas for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

Effective April 5, 2005, EPA 

designated two areas in North Carolina 

as nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. Specifically, EPA designated 

the following areas as nonattainment for 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS: (1) GreensboroWinston Salem-High Point, NC;8 and (2) 

Hickory, NC.9 See 70 FR 944. Provided 

below in Section III(c) and (d) are more 

details related to transportation 

conformity for the Greensboro-Winston 

Salem-High Point, NC; and Hickory, NC 

areas for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

On April 30, 2012, EPA designated 

the bi-state Charlotte area 

nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088. 

Provided below in Section III(a) are 

more details related to transportation 

conformity for the bi-state Charlotte for 

the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

III. EPA Analysis of North Carolina’s 

Submittal 

EPA’s Transportation Conformity rule 

requires the states to develop their own 

processes and procedures which meet 

the criteria in 40 CFR 93.105 for 

interagency consultation and resolution 

of conflicts among the federal, state, and 

local agencies. The SIP revision must 

include processes and procedures to be 

followed by the MPO, state DOT, and 

the USDOT in consulting with the state 

and local air quality agencies and EPA 

before making conformity 

determinations. The conformity SIP 

revision must also include processes 

and procedures for the state and local 

air quality agencies and EPA to 

coordinate the development of 

applicable SIPs with MPOs, state DOTS, 

and the USDOT. Additionally, the SIP 

revision must include provisions 

addressing the enforceability of certain 

transportation-related control measures 

and mitigation measures. 

On July 12, 2013, the State of North 

Carolina, through NC DENR, submitted 

its ‘‘Conformity SIP’’ for the applicable 

transportation-related NAAQS. 

Specifically, North Carolina requested 

EPA approval of its Conformity SIP 

which included MOAs signed by the 

federal and state transportation and air 

quality partners, and all of the MPOs in 

the state subject to transportation 

conformity requirements. The North 

Carolina Conformity SIP establishes 

new procedures for interagency 

consultation, dispute resolution, public 

participation and enforceability of 

certain transportation-related control 

measures and mitigation measures, and 

supersedes the MOA incorporated into 

the SIP on November 19, 2003. Prior to 

today, the MOAs in the SIP included 

procedures for interagency consultation 

and also incorporated EPA regulations 

in 40 CFR 93 Subpart A (July 1, 1997) 

and 62 FR 43780 (August 15, 1997) by 

reference. The MOAs that EPA is 

approving in this action no longer 

incorporate the federal conformity rules 

by reference. More details on the Areas 

that these MOAs relate to are provided 

below in this Section. 

a. Bi-State Charlotte Area 

Counties (or portions of counties) in 

the bi-state Charlotte Area comprise the 

maintenance area for the CO NAAQS; 

the nonattainment area for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS; and the 

nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. As indicated above, 

Mecklenburg County in the bi-state 

Charlotte Area for the CO NAAQS; and 

Cabarrus, Gaston, Lincoln, 

Mecklenburg, Rowan, and Union 

Counties in their entireties, and a 

portion of Iredell County in North 

Carolina, and a portion of York County 

in South Carolina in the bi-state 

Charlotte Area for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS are required to 

implement transportation conformity 

requirements. Effective July 20, 2013, 

EPA revoked the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for the purpose of 

transportation conformity as part of the 

transition between the implementation 

of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and 

2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 248 / Thursday, December 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 78269 

30160. As such, the bi-state Charlotte 

Area is no longer required to implement 

transportation conformity requirements 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

There are 3 MPOs within the bi-state 

Charlotte Area for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS, and a portion of the 

nonattainment area that is not within 

the jurisdiction of a MPO. The MPOs in 

the bi-state Charlotte Area include the 

Mecklenburg-Union MPO (MUMPO), 

the Cabarrus-Rowan Urban MPO, and 

Gaston Urban Area MPO. The areas that 

are not within the jurisdiction of a MPO 

are known as ‘‘donut’’ areas. The State 

DOT is responsible for implementation 

of transportation conformity 

requirements in donut areas. For the 

purposes of transportation conformity 

requirements related to the CO NAAQS, 

MUMPO serves as the lead agency for 

the preparation, consultation, and 

distribution of the conformity 

determinations. For the purpose of 

transportation conformity requirements 

related to the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, MUMPO, Cabarrus-Rowan 

Urban MPO, Gaston Urban Area MPO 

and NC DOT coordinate and serve as the 

lead agencies for the preparation, 

consultation, and distribution of the 

conformity determinations for their 

respective portions of the bi-state 

Charlotte Area. As such, the NC DENR 

worked with MUMPO, Cabarrus-Rowan 

Urban MPO, Gaston Urban Area MPO, 

NC DOT, and the other applicable 

transportation and air quality partners 

for the Area to develop and execute 

MOAs to address the consultation and 

other applicable transportation 

conformity requirements for the Area. 

These MOAs are provided in the docket 

for today’s rulemaking. Today, EPA is 

proposing to approve the inclusion of 

the MOA for the MUMPO, CabarrusRowan Urban MPO, Gaston Urban Area 

MPO, and NC DOT into the North 

Carolina SIP. 

The State of South Carolina has 

established conformity procedures for 

the portion of York County which 

makes up the South Carolina portion of 

the bi-state Charlotte Area in its 

individual conformity SIP. EPA 

approved South Carolina’s Conformity 

SIP on July 28, 2009. See 74 FR 37168. 

North Carolina’s July 2013 SIP revision 

updates the transportation conformity 

consultation, conflict resolution and 

public participation procedures, and 

includes provisions addressing the 

enforceability of certain transportationrelated control measures and mitigation 

measures for its portion of the bi-state 

Charlotte Area. 

b. Great Smoky Mountain National Park 

Area 

Portions of Haywood and Swain 

Counties comprise the Great Smoky 

National Park maintenance area for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As 

indicated above, the Great Smoky 

Mountain National Park Area was 

required to implement transportation 

conformity requirements for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS as a maintenance 

area. As such, the NC DENR worked 

with the Great Smoky Mountain 

National Park Service, and the other 

applicable transportation and air quality 

partners for the Area to develop and 

execute a MOA to address the 

consultation and other applicable 

transportation conformity requirements 

for the Area. This MOA is provided in 

the docket for today’s rulemaking. EPA 

notes that effective July 20, 2013, the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked 

for the purpose of transportation 

conformity. See 77 FR 30160. 

Transportation conformity is, therefore, 

not currently required for the Great 

Smoky Mountain National Park Area 

under the CAA. Today, however, EPA is 

proposing to approve the inclusion of 

the MOA for the Great Smoky Mountain 

National Park Area into the North 

Carolina SIP in the event that the Area 

will be required to implement 

transportation conformity requirements 

for a future transportation-related 

NAAQS. 

c. Greensboro-Winston Salem-High 

Point Area 

Counties (or portions of counties) in 

the Greensboro-Winston Salem-High 

Point Area comprise the maintenance 

area for the CO NAAQS; and the 

maintenance area for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. As indicated above, Forsyth 

County in the Greensboro-Winston 

Salem-High Point Area for the CO 

NAAQS; and Davidson and Guilford 

Counties in the Greensboro-Winston 

Salem-High Point Area for the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS are required to 

implement transportation conformity 

requirements. Also, as mentioned above, 

the Greensboro-Winston Salem-High 

Point Area was an EAC area for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. This Area was 

designated nonattainment on June 15, 

2004, for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, with a deferred effective date. 

The Area met all of the EAC milestones 

and was ultimately never effectively 

designated nonattainment for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Area was 

therefore never required to implement 

transportation conformity requirements 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, but 

was required to continue to implement 

transportation conformity requirements 

for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the 

Area until this requirement was 

removed as a result of the Area 

successfully meeting the EAC 

milestones for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

There is one MPO, Greensboro Urban 

Area MPO, within the GreensboroWinston Salem Area for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. The MPOs for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS for the GreensboroWinston Salem Area included the 

Greensboro Urban Area MPO, High 

Point Urban Area MPO, Winston Salem 

-Forsyth’s Urban Area MPO, and 

Burlington-Graham MPO. The areas that 

are not within the jurisdiction of a MPO 

are known as ‘‘donut’’ areas. The State 

DOT is responsible for implementation 

of transportation conformity 

requirements in donut areas. For the 

purposes of transportation conformity 

requirements related to the CO NAAQS, 

the Winston Salem-Forsyth Urban Area 

MPO serves as the lead agency for the 

preparation, consultation, and 

distribution of the conformity 

determinations. For the purpose of 

transportation conformity requirements 

related to the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, the 

Greensboro Urban Area MPO 

coordinates and serves as the lead 

agencies for the preparation, 

consultation, and distribution of the 

conformity determinations for the 

Greensboro Area. 

The NC DENR worked with the 

Greensboro Urban Area MPO, High 

Point Urban Area MPO, Winston SalemForsyth’s Urban Area MPO, BurlingtonGraham MPO, the NC DOT, and the 

other applicable transportation and air 

quality partners for the Area to develop 

and execute MOAs to address the 

consultation and other applicable 

transportation conformity SIP 

requirements for the Area. These MOAs 

are provided in the docket for today’s 

rulemaking. North Carolina’s July 2013 

SIP revision updates the transportation 

conformity consultation, conflict 

resolution and public participation 

procedures, and includes provisions 

addressing the enforceability of certain 

transportation-related control measures 

and mitigation measures for the 

Greensboro-Winston Salem-High Point 

Area. Today, EPA is proposing to 

approve the inclusion of the MOAs for 

the Greensboro Area (i.e., for the 

Greensboro Urban Area MPO, and 

Winston Salem-Forsyth’s Urban Area 

MPO) in relation to PM2.5 and CO into 

the North Carolina SIP. While 

transportation conformity is not 

currently required for the remainder of 

this area under the CAA because these 

areas (i.e., the High Point Urban Area 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
78270 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 248 / Thursday, December 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

and Burlington-Graham Area) 

successfully met the EAC milestones for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, EPA is 

also proposing to approve the inclusion 

of the MOAs for these areas in the event 

that any of these areas will be required 

to implement transportation conformity 

requirements for a future transportationrelated NAAQS. 

d. Hickory Area 

The Hickory Area is a maintenance 

area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. As 

indicated above, the Hickory Area is 

required to implement transportation 

conformity requirements for the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS as a maintenance area. As 

such, the NC DENR worked with the 

Greater Hickory MPO, and other 

applicable transportation and air quality 

partners for the Area to develop and 

execute a MOA to address the 

consultation and other applicable 

transportation conformity SIP 

requirements for the Area. This MOA is 

provided in the docket for today’s 

rulemaking. North Carolina’s July 2013 

SIP revision updates the transportation 

conformity consultation, conflict 

resolution and public participation 

procedures and includes provisions 

addressing the enforceability of certain 

transportation-related control measures 

and mitigation measures for the Hickory 

Area. Today, EPA is proposing to 

approve the inclusion of the MOA for 

the Greater Hickory MPO into the North 

Carolina SIP. 

e. Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill Area 

Counties (or portions of counties) in 

the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill 

comprise a maintenance area for the CO 

NAAQS; and a maintenance area for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the Area. 

As indicated above, Durham and Wake 

Counties in the Raleigh-Durham Area 

for the CO NAAQS are required to 

implement transportation conformity 

requirements. Also mentioned above, 

Durham, Franklin, Granville, Orange, 

Johnston, Person and Wake Counties, in 

their entireties, and a portion of 

Chatham County in the RaleighDurham-Chapel Hill Area were included 

in the maintenance area for the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS, and thus required 

to implement transportation conformity 

requirements. Effective July 20, 2013, 

EPA revoked the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS for the purpose of 

transportation conformity as part of the 

transition between the implementation 

of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and 

2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR 

30160. As such, the Raleigh-DurhamChapel Hill Area is no longer required 

to implement transportation conformity 

requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

The NC DENR worked with the 

Burlington-Graham MPO, DurhamChapel Hill-Cabarrus MPO, the North 

Carolina Capital Area MPO, the NC 

DOT, and the other applicable 

transportation and air quality partners 

for the Area to develop and execute 

MOAs to address the consultation and 

other applicable transportation 

conformity SIP requirements for the 

Area. These MOAs are provided in the 

docket for today’s rulemaking. North 

Carolina’s July 2013 SIP revision 

updates the transportation conformity 

consultation, conflict resolution and 

public participation procedures, and 

includes provisions addressing the 

enforceability of certain transportationrelated control measures and mitigation 

measures for the Raleigh-DurhamChapel Hill Area. Today, EPA is 

proposing to approve the inclusion of 

the MOAs for the Raleigh-Durham Area 

(i.e., for the Durham-Chapel HillCarrboro MPO, and the North Carolina 

Capital Area MPO) in relation to CO 

into the North Carolina SIP. While 

transportation conformity is not 

currently required for the remainder of 

this area (i.e., the Burlington-Graham 

Area) under the CAA, EPA is also 

proposing to approve the inclusion of 

the MOA for the remainder of this area 

in the event that the area will be 

required to implement transportation 

conformity requirements for a future 

transportation-related NAAQS. 

f. Rocky Mount Area 

Edgecombe and Nash Counties 

comprise the Rocky Mount maintenance 

area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

As indicated above, the Rocky Mount 

Area was required to implement 

transportation conformity requirements 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS as a 

maintenance area. As such, the NC 

DENR worked with the Rocky Mount 

Urban Area MPO, and other applicable 

transportation and air quality partners 

for the Area to develop and execute a 

MOA to address the consultation and 

other applicable transportation 

conformity SIP requirements for the 

Area. This MOA is provided in the 

docket for today’s rulemaking. North 

Carolina’s July 2013 SIP revision 

updates the transportation conformity 

consultation, conflict resolution and 

public participation procedures and 

includes provisions addressing the 

enforceability of certain transportationrelated control measures and mitigation 

measures for the Rocky Mount Area. 

EPA notes that effective July 20, 2013, 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS was 

revoked for the purpose of 

transportation conformity. See 77 FR 

30160. Transportation conformity is, 

therefore, not required for the Rocky 

Mount Urban Area under the CAA. 

Today, however, EPA is proposing to 

approve the inclusion of the MOA for 

the Rocky Mount Urban Area MPO in 

the event that the Area will be required 

to implement transportation conformity 

requirements for a future transportationrelated NAAQS. 

g. Analysis of North Carolina’s MOAs 

and Conformity SIP 

The State of North Carolina developed 

its MOAs based on the elements 

contained in 40 CFR 93.105, 

93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 93.125(c) and 

included them in the SIP. As a first step, 

the State worked with the existing 

transportation planning organization’s 

interagency committees that included 

representatives from the NC DENR; NC 

DOT; the MPOs in the State; Federal 

Highway Administration—North 

Carolina Division; Federal Transit 

Administration; and the Region 4 office 

of EPA. The interagency committee met 

regularly and drafted the consultation 

procedures considering elements in 40 

CFR part 93.105, 93.122(a)(4)(ii), and 

93.125(c), and integrated the local 

procedures and processes into the 

MOAs. The resulting consultation 

process developed is unique to the State 

of North Carolina. A public notice 

announcement was issued on July 20, 

1012, indicating that the MOAs were 

available for public comment until 

August 24, 2012. No request for a public 

hearing was received. The NC DENR 

posted the MOAs on their Web site and 

provided access to the documents for 

review in person at the NC DENR 

central office in Raleigh and seven 

regional offices throughout the state. 

The final MOAs were issued by North 

Carolina on October 1, 2012, and 

subsequently submitted as a SIP 

revision to EPA on July 12, 2013, after 

signature from all signatories. 

EPA has evaluated this SIP revision 

and has determined that the State has 

met the requirements of federal 

transportation conformity rules as 

described in 40 CFR part 51, Subpart T 

and 40 CFR part 93, Subpart A. NC 

DENR has satisfied the public 

participation and comprehensive 

interagency consultation requirement 

during development and adoption of the 

MOA at the local level. Therefore, EPA 

is approving the MOAs as a revision to 

the North Carolina SIP. EPA’s rule 

requires the states to develop their own 

processes and procedures for 

interagency consultation among the 

Federal, state, and local agencies; 

resolution of conflicts; and public 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 248 / Thursday, December 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 78271 

participation meeting the criteria in 40 

CFR 93.105. The SIP revision must 

include processes and procedures to be 

followed by the MPO, state DOT, and 

US DOT in consulting with the state and 

local air quality agencies and EPA 

before making conformity 

determinations. The conformity SIP 

revision must also include processes 

and procedures for the state and local 

air quality agencies and EPA to 

coordinate the development of 

applicable SIPs with MPOs, state DOTs, 

and the USDOT. In addition, the SIP 

revision must include provisions to 

address the enforceability of certain 

transportation-related control measures 

and mitigation measures meeting the 

criteria of 40 CFR 93.122(a)(4)(ii) and 

93.125(c). 

EPA has reviewed the submittal to 

assure consistency with the CAA as 

amended by SAFETEA–LU and EPA 

regulations (40 CFR part 93 and 40 CFR 

51.390) governing applicable procedures 

for transportation conformity and 

interagency consultation and has 

concluded that the submittal is 

approvable. Details of our review are set 

forth in a technical support document 

(TSD), which has been included in the 

docket for this action. Specifically, in 

the TSD, we identify how the submitted 

procedures satisfy our requirements 

under 40 CFR 93.105 for interagency 

consultation with respect to the 

development of transportation plans 

and programs, SIPs, and conformity 

determinations, the resolution of 

conflicts, and the provision of adequate 

public consultation, and the 

requirements under 40 CFR 

93.122(a)(4)(ii) and 93.125(c) for 

enforceability of control measures and 

mitigation measures. 

IV. Final Action 

For the reasons set forth above, EPA 

is taking direct final action, pursuant to 

section 110 and 176 of the Act, to 

approve North Carolina’s July 12, 2013, 

transportation conformity SIP and 

MOAs to implement the conformity 

consultation, conflict resolution and 

public participation procedures, and 

provisions addressing the enforceability 

of certain transportation-related control 

measures and mitigation measures in 

the State of North Carolina. This action 

also establishes consultation procedures 

for all counties in North Carolina. As a 

result of this action, North Carolina’s 

previously SIP-approved conformity 

procedures for North Carolina at 67 FR 

32549 (December 27, 2002), will be 

replaced by the procedures submitted to 

EPA on July 12, 2013, and approved in 

this action. 

EPA is publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because the Agency 

views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. However, in the proposed 

rules section of this Federal Register 

publication, EPA is publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposal to approve the SIP revision 

should adverse comments be filed. This 

rule will be effective February 24, 2014 

without further notice unless the 

Agency receives adverse comments by 

January 27, 2014. 

If EPA receives such comments, then 

EPA will publish a document 

withdrawing the final rule and 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. All public comments 

received will then be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period. Parties 

interested in commenting should do so 

at this time. If no such comments are 

received, the public is advised that this 

rule will be effective on February 24, 

2014 and no further action will be taken 

on the proposed rule. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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

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

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

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by February 24, 2014. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register; rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
78272 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 248 / Thursday, December 26, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. See section 

307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, 

Incorporation by reference Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate Matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: December 10, 2013. 

Beverly H. Banister, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart II—North Carolina 

■ 2. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by 

adding a new entry at the end of the 

table for ‘‘North Carolina Transportation 

Conformity Air Quality Implementation 

Plan’’ to read as follows: 

§ 52.1770 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA APPROVED NORTH CAROLINA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Provision State effective date EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

North Carolina Transportation Conformity 

Air Quality Implementation Plan.

July 12, 2013 .......................................... December 26, 2013 [Insert citation of 

publication].

........................

[FR Doc. 2013–30542 Filed 12–24–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2008–0117; A–1–FRL– 

9904–45–Region 1] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Connecticut; Ozone Attainment 

Demonstration for the Greater 

Connecticut Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving the ozone 

attainment demonstration submitted by 

Connecticut to meet Clean Air Act 

requirements for attaining the 1997 8- 

hour ozone national ambient air quality 

standard. EPA is approving 

Connecticut’s demonstration of 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard as it relates to the Greater 

Connecticut 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area. EPA is also 

approving the reasonably available 

control measures (RACM) analysis for 

this same area. 

DATES: This rule is effective on January 

27, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R01–OAR– 

2008–0117. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the www.regulations.gov. 

Web site. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, EPA 

New England Regional Office, One 

Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, 

MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, 

you contact the contact 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 legal holidays. Copies of the 

documents relevant to this action are 

also available for public inspection 

during normal business hours, by 

appointment at the State Air Agency: 

the Bureau of Air Management, 

Department of Energy and 

Environmental Protection, State Office 

Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 

06106–1630. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard P. Burkhart, Air Quality 

Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA New England 

Regional Office, One Congress Street, 

Suite 1100 (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114– 

2023, telephone number (617) 918– 

1664, fax number (617) 918–0664, email 

Burkhart.Richard@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, wherever 

‘‘Agency,’’ ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, 

we mean the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What actions is EPA taking? 

II. Response to Comments 

III. Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What actions is EPA taking? 

EPA is approving Connecticut’s 

demonstration of attainment of the 1997 

8-hour ozone national ambient air 

quality standard (NAAQS or standard) 

for the Greater Connecticut moderate 

ozone nonattainment area, submitted on 

February 1, 2008. EPA is also approving 

the associated RACM analysis for this 

same area. 

On May 9, 2013 (78 FR 27161), EPA 

issued a notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPR) which proposed approval of 

Connecticut’s ozone attainment 

demonstrations for the 1997 ozone 

standard for two different 

nonattainment areas: (1) The Greater 

Connecticut ozone nonattainment area, 

and (2) the Connecticut portion of the 

New York-Northern New Jersey-Long 

Island, NY–NJ–CT ozone nonattainment 

area (the New York City area). The NPR 

also proposed approval of the RACM 

analyses for these areas. Today’s action 

approves the ozone attainment 

demonstration and RACM analysis for 

the Greater Connecticut area only. EPA 

is not taking action on the ozone 

attainment demonstration and the 

RACM analysis for the Connecticut 

portion of the New York City ozone 

nonattainment area at this time. 

As stated in the NPR, the EPA is 

approving Connecticut’s 1997 8-hour 

ozone attainment demonstration and 

RACM analysis, for the Greater 

Connecticut ozone nonattainment area, 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES