[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 119 (Wednesday, June 22, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37280-37287]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-13163]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2020-0718; FRL-9935-01-R4]


Air Plan Approval; NC: Inspection and Maintenance Program

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the 
State of North Carolina on December 14, 2020, through the North 
Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), Division of Air 
Quality (DAQ), for the purpose of removing Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham 
Counties from North Carolina's motor vehicle inspection and maintenance 
(I/M) program. The I/M Program was previously approved into the SIP for 
use as a component of the State's Nitrogen Oxides (NO<INF>X</INF>) 
Budget and Allowance Trading Program. EPA has evaluated whether this 
SIP revision would interfere with the requirements of the Clean Air Act 
(CAA or Act), including EPA regulations related to statewide 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions budgets. In summary, EPA proposes to find that 
Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham Counties would continue to attain and 
maintain the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or 
standards) after removal of the I/M program, and to rely on an 
emissions inventory comparison to inform its determination that the 
three counties would continue to attain and maintain the ozone and 
carbon monoxide (CO) NAAQS. Consequently, EPA is proposing to determine 
that North Carolina's December 14, 2020, SIP revision is consistent 
with the applicable provisions of the CAA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 22, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2020-0718 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment 
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment 
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general 
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Sheckler, Air Regulatory 
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and 
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 
Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number 
is (404) 562-9222. Ms. Sheckler can also be reached via electronic mail 
at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7f0c171a1c14131a0d51141a1313063f1a0f1e51181009"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="53203b3630383f36217d38363f3f2a133623327d343c25">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. What is being proposed?

    The DAQ submitted a SIP revision on December 14, 2020, seeking to 
remove Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham counties from North Carolina's SIP-
approved I/M program. The DAQ submitted this SIP revision in response 
to North Carolina legislation enacted in Session Law 2020-5, House Bill 
85, which amended North Carolina General Statute (NCGS) section 143-
215.107A(c) to remove these three counties from the North Carolina I/M 
Program.\1\ Specifically, the North Carolina Act requires the 
elimination of Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham counties from the I/M 
program, and the retention of the I/M program in 19 counties (Alamance, 
Buncombe, Cabarrus, Cumberland, Davidson, Durham, Forsyth, Franklin, 
Gaston, Guilford, Iredell, Johnston, Lincoln, Mecklenburg, New Hanover, 
Randolph, Rowan, Union, and Wake).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The removal becomes effective sixty days after the State's 
Secretary of the Department of Environmental Quality certifies to 
the State's Revisor of Statutes that EPA approved the SIP revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in Section II, below, sections 187(a)(4) and 182(b)(4) 
of the CAA require the implementation of an I/M program in certain 
areas classified as moderate nonattainment or higher for the ozone or 
CO NAAQS.\2\ Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham counties have never been 
designated nonattainment for ozone and CO, or any other NAAQS, and are 
currently in attainment for all NAAQS. These three counties were 
included in the State's I/M program to provide North Carolina with 
emissions credit for the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call obligations. See 67 FR 
66056 (October 30, 2002). The NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call, issued by EPA in 
1998, required some states, including North Carolina, to meet statewide 
NO<INF>X</INF> emission requirements during the ozone season (May 1 
through September 30 control period) to reduce the amount of ground 
level ozone that is transported across the eastern United States. See 
84 FR 8422 (March 8, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The I/M program was never a mandatory program pursuant to 
the CAA for Lee, Onslow, or Rockingham counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of the State's December 14, 2020, submittal requesting 
removal of Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham counties from North Carolina's 
SIP-approved I/M program, the State included a CAA section 110(l) non-
interference demonstration. Under section 110(l) of the CAA, EPA cannot 
approve a SIP revision if it would interfere with any

[[Page 37281]]

applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further 
progress (as defined by section 171 of the CAA), or any other 
applicable requirement of the CAA. Section III, below, provides EPA's 
analysis of the non-interference demonstration.
    For the reasons discussed more fully in Section III, EPA is 
proposing to find that removal of Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham counties 
from North Carolina's SIP-approved I/M program (and consequently, the 
removal of reliance on credits gained from I/M emissions reductions 
from Lee, Onslow and Rockingham counties in the State's NO<INF>X</INF> 
Budget and Allowance Trading Program) will not interfere with North 
Carolina's obligations under the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call. This proposed 
finding is based on a number of federal rules and SIP-approved State 
provisions promulgated and implemented subsequent to the 2002 approval 
of North Carolina's NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call submission. These federal 
rules and SIP provisions have created significant NO<INF>X</INF> 
emission reductions in North Carolina such that the credits gained by 
the three counties' participation in the I/M program are no longer 
needed for North Carolina to meet its NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call Statewide 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions budget. North Carolina has provided an 
analysis which supports this proposed finding, and which discusses some 
of these federal rules and SIP-approved State provisions. See Section 
III, below.
    In addition, North Carolina's SIP revision evaluates the impact 
that the removal of the I/M program for the Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham 
counties would have on the State's ability to attain and maintain the 
NAAQS. The SIP revision contains a technical demonstration with revised 
emissions calculations showing that removing the three counties from 
the I/M program will not interfere with North Carolina's attainment or 
maintenance of any NAAQS or with any other applicable requirement of 
the CAA. As discussed more fully in Section III, EPA is proposing to 
find that North Carolina's revised emissions calculations demonstrate 
that removing Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham counties from the I/M program 
will not interfere with the State's ability to attain or maintain any 
NAAQS.

II. What is the background of North Carolina's I/M program and its 
relationship to the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP call and the State's 
NO<INF>X</INF> budget and allowance trading program?

A. History of North Carolina's I/M Program

    The North Carolina I/M program began in 1982 in Mecklenburg County 
utilizing a ``tail-pipe'' emissions test. In 1984, Wake County was 
first added to the program for CO NAAQS violations. From 1986 through 
1991 the program expanded to include Cabarrus, Davidson, Durham, 
Forsyth, Gaston, Guilford, and Union Counties, to address violations of 
the ozone and/or CO NAAQS. The I/M program was also implemented in 
Orange County although it was not designated nonattainment for the 
ozone or CO NAAQS.
    In 1999, the North Carolina General Assembly (NCGA) passed 
legislation (Session law 1999-328) to expand the coverage area for the 
I/M program to gain additional emission reductions to achieve the 1997 
8-hour ozone NAAQS in the State. This legislation expanded the I/M 
program to add 38 counties between July 1, 2003, and July 1, 2006, for 
a total of 48 counties.<SUP>3 4</SUP> The I/M program in the expanded 
coverage area used on-board diagnostic (OBD) rather than tail-pipe 
testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The 38 counties added during this time period were Alamance, 
Buncombe, Brunswick, Burke, Caldwell, Carteret, Catawba, Chatham, 
Cleveland, Craven, Cumberland, Edgecombe, Franklin, Grainville, 
Harnett, Haywood, Henderson, Iredell, Lee, Lenoir, Lincoln, 
Johnston, Moore, Nash, New Hanover, Onslow, Pitt, Randolph, 
Robertson, Rockingham, Rowan, Rutherford, Stanly, Stokes, Surry, 
Wayne, Wilkes, and Wilson.
    \4\ In 2004, the Charlotte/Gastonia/Rock Hill area was 
designated as moderate nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS, which required Iredell, Lincoln, and Rowan Counties to be 
included in the I/M program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 7, 2002, North Carolina submitted a SIP revision to amend 
the I/M regulations included in the SIP at that time to, among other 
things, expand the counties subject to the I/M program as discussed 
above, and to require OBD in the subject counties for all light duty 
gasoline vehicles with a model year (MY) of 1996 and newer. 
Additionally, the SIP revision proposed to terminate the tail-pipe 
testing program on January 1, 2006, for the nine counties subject to 
continued tail-pipe testing of MY 1995 and older vehicles. EPA approved 
these changes to North Carolina's I/M program into the SIP on October 
30, 2002. See 67 FR 66056.
    In 2012, the NCGA enacted Session Law 2012-199 which required North 
Carolina and the Department of Motor Vehicles to change the I/M program 
to exempt the three newest MY vehicles with less than 70,000 miles, and 
the State subsequently submitted a SIP revision to modify the SIP 
accordingly. EPA approved this SIP revision on February 5, 2015. See 80 
FR 6455.
    In 2017, the NCGA passed Senate Bill 131, which removed 26 of the 
48 counties from the North Carolina I/M program.\5\ On November 17, 
2017, DAQ submitted to EPA a request to amend its SIP to remove the 26 
counties specified in Senate Bill 131 from the I/M program. This 
submittal also included a CAA section 110(l) demonstration providing 
support that the removal of the 26 counties from North Carolina's SIP 
approved I/M program would not interfere with continued attainment and 
maintenance of all the NAAQS or with any other applicable CAA 
requirement. EPA approved this SIP revision on September 25, 2018. See 
83 FR 48383. In 2019, EPA approved a rolling 20-year timeframe for 
vehicle MY coverage into the SIP, replacing a specific year-based 
timeframe for coverage. See 84 FR 47889 (September 11, 2019). This 
action did not change the counties subject to the I/M program. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The 26 counties removed were Brunswick, Burke, Caldwell, 
Carteret, Catawba, Chatham, Cleveland, Craven, Edgecombe, Granville, 
Harnett, Haywood, Henderson, Lenoir, Moore, Nash, Orange, Pitt, 
Robertson, Rutherford, Stanly, Stokes, Surry, Wayne, Wilkes and 
Wilson counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After all the aforementioned changes, the remaining counties in the 
North Carolina I/M program currently include Alamance, Buncombe, 
Cabarrus, Cumberland, Davidson, Durham, Franklin, Forsyth, Gaston, 
Guilford, Johnston, Iredell, Lee, Lincoln, Mecklenburg, New Hanover, 
Onslow, Randolph, Rockingham, Rowan, Union, and Wake.

B. NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call

    On August 7, 2002, North Carolina submitted a SIP revision to EPA 
as a component of its response to the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP call 
requirements. As mentioned previously, the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call 
required some states to meet statewide NO<INF>X</INF> emission 
requirements during the ozone season to reduce the amount of ground 
level ozone transported across the eastern United States. See 84 FR 
8422 (March 8, 2019). In response to the SIP Call, North Carolina's SIP 
revision expanded the I/M program from 10 counties to 48, pursuant to 
North Carolina Session Law 1999-328, Section 3.1(d), and incorporated 
the OBD test procedure.
    The expansion to the I/M program helped reduce certain criteria 
pollutants and their precursors, including NO<INF>X</INF>, by

[[Page 37282]]

identifying and requiring the repair of more high-emitting vehicles. 
The OBD test helps reduce certain criteria pollutants and their 
precursors by checking the vehicles increasingly advanced OBD systems 
to monitor the performance of a vehicle's emissions-related components 
and provides owners with an early warning of malfunctions through the 
dashboard ``check engine'' light (also known as a Malfunction Indicator 
Light). By identifying degrading parts early through the OBD system, 
owners of these vehicles can perform the type of preventative 
maintenance that extends the long-term durability of expensive 
components (catalytic converter, fuel injections, oxygen sensors, and 
transmissions).
    While the addition of 38 counties to the I/M program pursuant to 
Section 3.1(d) of the 1999 Session law was initially ratified to 
satisfy the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, it was included in the SIP with 
the new OBD testing procedure to support the establishment of emission 
credits for North Carolina's NO<INF>X</INF> budget and trading program. 
See 67 FR 66056 (October 30, 2002). On October 30, 2002, EPA approved 
the I/M rule revision and North Carolina's use of the I/M program 
credits for the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP call budget and trading program. Id. 
The ozone season I/M NO<INF>X</INF> emissions credit was 914 tons in 
2004; 2,078 tons in 2006; and 4,385 tons in 2007 and beyond.
    Subsequent to the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call, a number of federal 
rules, as well as North Carolina SIP provisions, have created 
significant NO<INF>X</INF> emission reductions in North Carolina, 
including ozone season reductions. For stationary sources, including 
large Electric Generating Units (EGUs), one of these federal rules 
included the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) in 2005 and its 
replacement in 2011, the Cross State Air Pollution Rule 
(CSAPR).<INF>6 7</INF> Consequently, any emissions reduction credits 
derived from the three counties' participation in the expanded I/M 
program are no longer needed for North Carolina to meet its Statewide 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions budget.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ CAIR created regional cap-and-trade programs to reduce 
sulfur dioxide (SO<INF>2</INF>) and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions in 28 
eastern states, including North Carolina, that contributed to 
downwind nonattainment or interfered with maintenance of the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS or the 1997 fine particulate matter 
(PM<INF>2.5</INF>) NAAQS. CAIR was challenged in federal court and 
in 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of 
Columbia (D.C. Circuit) remanded CAIR to EPA without vacatur. North 
Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3rd 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008).
    \7\ In response to the D.C. Circuit's remand of CAIR, EPA 
promulgated CSAPR to replace it. CSAPR requires 28 eastern states, 
including North Carolina, to limit their statewide emissions of 
SO<INF>2</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> in order to mitigate transported 
air pollution impacting other states' ability to attain or maintain 
four NAAQS: the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS, the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, and the 2008 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS. The CSAPR emissions limitations are defined in terms of 
maximum statewide ``budgets'' for emissions of annual SO<INF>2</INF> 
and NO<INF>X</INF>, and/or ozone-season NO<INF>X</INF> by each 
covered state's large EGUs. The CSAPR state budgets are implemented 
in two phases of generally increasing stringency, with Phase I 
budgets applying to emissions in 2015 and 2016 and the Phase 2 
budgets applying to emissions in 2017 and later years. CSAPR was 
challenged in the D.C. Circuit, and on August 12, 2012, it was 
vacated and remanded to EPA. The vacatur was subsequently reversed 
by the United States Supreme Court on April 29, 2014. EPA v. EME 
Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S.Ct. 1584 (2014). This litigation 
ultimately delayed implementation of CSAPR for three years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other federal rules that have created significant NO<INF>X</INF> 
emission reductions in the area of mobile-sources include: the Tier 2 
vehicle and fuel standards; \8\ nonroad spark ignition engines and 
recreational engine standards; heavy-duty gasoline and diesel highway 
vehicle standards; \9\ and large nonroad diesel engine standards.\10\ 
These mobile source measures, coupled with fleet turnover (i.e., the 
replacement of older vehicles that predate the standards with newer 
vehicles that meet the standards), have resulted in, and continue to 
result in, large reductions in NO<INF>X</INF> emissions over time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ The Tier 2 standards, begun in 2004, continue to 
significantly reduce NO<INF>X</INF> emissions and EPA expects that 
these standards will reduce NO<INF>X</INF> emissions from vehicles 
by approximately 74 percent by 2030 (or nearly 3 million tons 
annually by 2030). See 80 FR 44873, 44876 (July 28, 2015) (citing 
EPA, Regulatory Announcement, EPA 420-F-99-051 (December 1999).
    \9\ Also begun in 2004, implementation of this rule is expected 
to achieve a 95 percent reduction in NO<INF>X</INF> emissions from 
diesel trucks and buses by 2030. See 80 FR 44873, 44876 (July 28, 
2015).
    \10\ EPA estimated that compliance with this rule will cut 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions from non-road diesel engines by up to 90 
percent nationwide. See 80 FR 44873, 44876 (July 28, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2002, North Carolina also enacted and subsequently implemented 
its Clean Smokestacks Act (CSA), which created system-wide annual 
emissions caps on actual emissions of NO<INF>X</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF> 
from coal-fired power plants within the State, the first of which 
became effective in 2007. The CSA required certain coal-fired power 
plants in North Carolina to significantly reduce annual NO<INF>X</INF> 
emissions by 189,000 tons (or 77 percent) by 2009 (using a 1998 
baseline year). This represented about a one-third reduction of the 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions from all sources in North Carolina. See 76 FR 
36468, 36470 (June 11, 2011).\11\ The CSA's requirement to meet annual 
emissions caps and disallow the purchase of NO<INF>X</INF> credits to 
meet the caps led to a reduction of NO<INF>X</INF> emissions beyond the 
requirements of the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call even though the CSA did not 
limit emissions only during the ozone season. EPA approved the CSA 
emissions caps into North Carolina's SIP on September 26, 2011. See 76 
FR 59250.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ North Carolina indicates that the utilities reduced 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions by 83 percent as of 2017 relative to the 
1998 emissions levels. See Letter from Michael A. Abraczinskas, 
Director of the Division of Air Quality for the North Carolina 
Department of Environmental Quality, dated July 11, 2018. A copy of 
this letter is included in the docket for this proposed action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    North Carolina also has its own SIP-approved State provisions that 
have helped create significant NO<INF>X</INF> emission reductions in 
North Carolina. The majority of these rules are contained in 15A North 
Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) Subchapter 02D, Section .1400, 
Nitrogen Oxides. These rules contain NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call 
requirements and work in conjunction with the CSA to reduce 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions in the State.
    Together, implementation of these federal rules and SIP-approved 
state provisions have created significant NO<INF>X</INF> emissions 
reductions since North Carolina's NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call emissions 
budget was approved into the SIP in 2002. These federal rules and State 
provisions have significantly reduced ozone season NO<INF>X</INF> 
emissions from EGUs in particular, resulting in overall emissions 
levels well below the original NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call budget. This 
last point is illustrated in Table 1, which compares the EGU 
NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call budget to actual emissions in 2007 and 2017 
(the attainment base year), as well as 2018 and 2019. Actual EGU 
emissions in 2007 and 2017, the attainment base year, were 23 percent 
(7,274 tons) and 60 percent (18,906 tons) below the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP 
Call budget for EGUs, respectively. Notably, the entirety of the 
emissions reduction credits from the expanded I/M program (and used by 
the State in its NO<INF>X</INF> emissions budget) only totaled 4,385 
tons, of which approximately only 1,000 tons was initially needed to 
meet the overall budget.

[[Page 37283]]



              Table 1--Comparison of Ozone Season NOX SIP Call Budget to Actual Emissions for EGUs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       2007            2017            2018            2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX SIP Call Budget, Tons *.....................          31,451          31,451          31,451          31,451
Actual Emissions, Tons..........................          24,177          12,545          13,046          12,989
Below Budget, Tons..............................           7,274          18,906          18,405          18,462
Below Budget, Percent...........................              23              60              59              59
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* From EPA's proposed approval of North Carolina's NOX SIP Call submission. See 67 FR 42519 (June 24, 2002).

    Further, the State has provided modeling results showing that 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions will remain below the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call 
budgets after removal of the three counties from the I/M program. Table 
2 shows the impact of the estimated ozone season NO<INF>X</INF> 
emissions increases due to the proposed changes to the I/M program. 
Despite this increase, EPA expects NO<INF>X</INF> emissions in 2022 to 
continue to be lower than the attainment base year in 2017. This is 
further explained in Section III.C, below. As noted above, in 2019, EGU 
emissions were 18,462 tons (59 percent) below the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP 
Call budget for EGUs. The proposed change to the I/M program, combined 
with other recently approved changes to North Carolina's SIP-approved 
I/M program, would reduce the gap between the budget and actual 
emissions by 950 tons, or about 5.15 percent, to 17,512 tons below the 
NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call budget for EGUs based on 2019 EGU emissions. 
Thus, based on this EGU-focused analysis, EPA concludes that the ozone 
season NO<INF>X</INF> emissions increase associated with the proposed 
change to the expanded I/M program will not interfere with North 
Carolina's obligations under the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP call to meet its 
Statewide NO<INF>X</INF> emissions budget.

Table 2--Impact of NOX Emissions Increases Due to Proposed Changes to I/
        M Program on EGU Reductions and NOX SIP Call I/M Credits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   I/M Emissions increases from I/M program changes      Impact in tons
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Removal of 26 counties (previous action)..............               611
Revision to vehicle MY coverage in 22 counties                       311
 (previous action)....................................
Removal of three counties (this proposed action)......                28
                                                       -----------------
    Total NOX Emission Increase.......................               950
Amount NOX EGU emissions below budget in 2019 (From               18,462
 table 1 above).......................................
Emissions increases from I/M program changes..........           (-) 950
Amount below budget in 2019 after increases from I/M              17,512
 changes..............................................
NOX SIP Call Budget...................................            31,451
------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What is EPA's analysis of North Carolina's submittal?

A. Impact on the State's NOX SIP Call Obligations

    North Carolina's December 14, 2020, submittal seeks to remove 
Onslow, Lee, and Rockingham counties from the I/M program contained in 
the SIP. This removal consequently removes reliance on the I/M 
reduction credits gained from these three counties' participation in 
the I/M program in meeting the State's NO<INF>X</INF> emissions budget. 
North Carolina has indicated that it no longer needs these reduction 
credits to meet its obligation under the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call.
    In light of the analysis in Section II.B, above, EPA is proposing 
to find that North Carolina's removal of the three counties from the 
expanded I/M program contained in its SIP (and the use of I/M emissions 
reductions generated from those counties as part of the reduction 
credits in the State's NO<INF>X</INF> emissions budget) will not 
interfere with the State's obligations under the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP 
Call to meet its Statewide NO<INF>X</INF> emissions budget. Subsequent 
to the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call, the promulgation and implementation of 
a number of federal rules and SIP-approved State provisions, and in 
particular those impacting EGUs, have created significant 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions reductions in the State that are more than 
sufficient to offset the I/M reduction credits from Lee, Onslow, and 
Rockingham counties to meet its Statewide NO<INF>X</INF> emissions 
budget.

B. North Carolina's Non-Interference Analysis of Removing Three 
Counties From the I/M Program

    Section 110(l) of the CAA requires that a revision to the SIP not 
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and 
reasonable further progress (as defined in section 171), or any other 
applicable requirement of the CAA. EPA evaluates section 110(l) non-
interference demonstrations on a case-by-case basis considering the 
circumstances of each SIP revision. EPA interprets section 110(l) as 
applying to all NAAQS that are in effect, including those that have 
been promulgated but for which EPA has not yet made designations. The 
degree of analysis focused on any particular NAAQS in a non-
interference demonstration varies depending on the nature of the 
emissions associated with the proposed SIP revision. There are six 
NAAQS established to protect human health and the environment. These 
NAAQS are CO, lead, nitrogen dioxide (NO<INF>2</INF>), ozone, 
particulate matter (PM)--including PM<INF>2.5</INF> \12\ and 
PM<INF>10</INF> \13\, and SO<INF>2</INF>. Considering modern fuel types 
and the science and technology related to emissions from motor 
vehicles, EPA does not believe that there would be any changes in 
emissions of lead \14\ or

[[Page 37284]]

PM<INF>10</INF> \15\ resulting from the removal of the I/M program in 
Lee, Onslow, and Randolph counties from the North Carolina SIP. 
Furthermore, EPA does not believe that SO<INF>2</INF> air quality would 
be threatened given the mandatory use of ultra-low sulfur (ULSD) diesel 
fuel.\16\ Therefore, this section is focused on evaluating air quality 
for NO<INF>2</INF>, ozone, CO, and PM<INF>2.5</INF>. North Carolina is 
in attainment for all NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ PM<INF>2.5</INF> refers to particles with an aerodynamic 
diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers, oftentimes 
referred to as ``fine'' particles. Lee, Onslow, and Randolph 
counties have never been designated as nonattainment for the 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
    \13\ PM<INF>10</INF> refers to particles with an aerodynamic 
diameter less than or equal to 10 micrometers, which includes 
PM<INF>2.5</INF>.
    \14\ On November 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a revised lead NAAQS 
of 0.15 microgram per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\). See 73 FR 66964. 
EPA designated the entire state of North Carolina as unclassifiable/
attainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS. See 76 FR 72097 (November 22, 
2011). As of January 1, 1996, the sale of leaded fuel for use in on-
road motor vehicles was banned. Therefore, removing the I/M program 
for Lee, Onslow, and Randolph counties from the North Carolina SIP 
will not have any impact on ambient concentrations of lead.
    \15\ On March 15, 1991, EPA completed initial designations for 
the PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS. See 56 FR 11101. The current primary and 
secondary PM<INF>10</INF> NAAQS are each set at 150 [micro]g/m\3\ 
over a 24-hour average, not to be exceeded more than an average of 
once per year over a three-year period. The entire state of North 
Carolina has been designated attainment for every PM<INF>10</INF> 
standard. On-road motor vehicles do not emit PM<INF>10,</INF> 
therefore, removing the I/M program for Lee, Onslow, and Randolph 
counties from the North Carolina SIP will not have any impact on 
ambient concentrations of PM<INF>10</INF>.
    \16\ On June 22, 2010, EPA revised the 1-hour SO<INF>2</INF> 
NAAQS to 75 parts per billion (ppb) which became effective on August 
23, 2010. See 75 FR 35520. On February 25, 2019, based on a review 
of the full body of currently available scientific evidence and 
exposure/risk information, EPA retained the existing 2010 1-hour 
SO<INF>2</INF> primary NAAQS. See 84 FR 9866. All areas in the State 
are currently designated as attainment/unclassifiable for the 
SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS. In 2006, EPA finalized regulations that began 
to phase in a requirement to use ULSD, a diesel fuel with a maximum 
of 15 ppm sulfur. Since 2010, EPA's diesel standards have required 
that all highway diesel fuel vehicles use ULSD, and all highway 
diesel fuel supplied to the market is ULSD. Due to the requirements 
to use ULSD under the on-road diesel fuel standards, the amount of 
SO<INF>2</INF> emitted from on-road vehicles is already low. 
Furthermore, the I/M program in North Carolina's SIP is not designed 
to reduce emissions of SO<INF>2,</INF> and the removal of the three 
counties from the program will not have any appreciable impact on 
ambient concentrations of SO<INF>2</INF>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    North Carolina's December 14, 2020, SIP revision included a non-
interference demonstration to support the removal of the I/M program in 
Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham Counties from North Carolina's SIP-approved 
expanded I/M program. This demonstration addresses all NAAQS with a 
focus on ozone (through its precursors NO<INF>X</INF> and VOC) and CO, 
the criteria pollutants addressed by I/M programs. I/M programs are not 
designed to address lead and SO<INF>2</INF> emissions, and 
NO<INF>2</INF> is captured generally through the same measures that 
target NO<INF>X</INF> impacts.
    Both VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions contribute to the formation 
of ozone. The rate of ozone formation can be limited by either VOCs or 
NO<INF>X</INF>. When an area has high-NO<INF>X</INF> conditions and 
low-VOC conditions, the rate of ozone production is more sensitive to 
the number of VOCs and is considered a NO<INF>X</INF>-rich regime. 
Alternatively, when the atmosphere has high-VOC conditions and low-
NO<INF>X</INF> conditions, the formation of ozone is influenced by a 
NO<INF>X</INF>-limited regime, which means ozone formation is more 
sensitive to changes in NO<INF>X</INF> concentration. In North Carolina 
approximately 81 percent of the statewide VOC emissions come from 
biogenic or natural sources, which cannot be controlled. As a result, 
North Carolina is NO<INF>X</INF>-limited for ozone formation, meaning 
controlling NO<INF>X</INF> emissions is a more effective way to reduce 
the formation of ozone. In the three counties being removed, very few 
anthropogenic sources of NO<INF>X</INF> exist.
    EPA used an emissions inventory comparison to determine whether the 
three counties would maintain the ozone and CO NAAQS after removal of 
the I/M program. North Carolina provided much of this data, which it 
later supplemented with additional data for EPA. This is a long-
standing approach EPA uses to determine whether an area can maintain 
the NAAQS and is very similar to the maintenance demonstrations that 
support the redesignations of areas from nonattainment to attainment 
and the second 10-year maintenance plans. EPA has not required 
photochemical modeling or any other modeling analyses to support these 
demonstrations. In general, EPA compares future year emissions to 
emissions in a base year with an attaining design value.\17\ If the 
total future year emissions for the relevant pollutant(s) are less than 
the total base year emissions, EPA considers that to be a sufficient 
and reasonable demonstration that the area will maintain the NAAQS 
because the base year emissions are at a level sufficient to achieve 
the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Design values are how EPA measures compliance with the 
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned above, North Carolina's December 14, 2020, SIP 
revision included a non-interference demonstration to support the 
State's request to remove Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham counties from 
North Carolina's SIP-approved expanded I/M program. This demonstration 
includes an evaluation of the impact that the removal of the I/M 
program for these counties would have on North Carolina's ability to 
attain or maintain any NAAQS in the State.
    For North Carolina's non-interference demonstration, EPA used 2017 
as an attainment base year \18\ and compared the total emissions of 
NO<INF>X</INF>, VOC, and CO in 2017 to the total emissions of these 
pollutants in 2022, the year when the I/M program in Lee, Onslow and 
Rockingham Counties is expected to end. EPA chose 2017 because that 
point, nonroad, and non-point data was provided in North Carolina's 
December 14, 2020, submission as it was the most complete data 
available to the State at the time of the development of the SIP 
revision. For consistent comparisons, EPA obtained the 2017 mobile 
emissions from the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). Tables 3, 4, and 
5 provide a summary for Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham Counties of the 
total emissions for NO<INF>X</INF>, VOC, and CO in 2017; total 
emissions for NO<INF>X</INF>, VOC, and CO in 2022 with the I/M program; 
and total emissions for NO<INF>X</INF>, VOC, and CO in 2022 without the 
I/M program. Table 6 shows the three county total for emissions in 
2017, in 2022 with I/M and in 2022 without I/M.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ As shown in Table 1 above, 2017 is one of the years 
associated with attaining design values for the ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As shown in Table 6 below, the total difference in emissions in 
2022 with and without the I/M program in the three counties combined is 
a decrease of 0.47 tpd for NO<INF>X</INF> and an increase of 0.20 tpd 
for VOC. However, the total NO<INF>X</INF> emissions in 2022 without 
the I/M program are 11.38 tpd under the total NO<INF>X</INF> emissions 
in 2017, and the total VOC emissions in 2022 without the I/M program is 
2.07 tpd below the total VOC emissions in 2017. The difference in 
emissions in 2022 with and without the I/M program is an increase of 
5.78 tpd for CO. However, the total CO emissions without the I/M 
program are 18.66 tpd under the total CO emissions in 2017. Because 
2022 total emissions without the I/M program are under total 2017 base 
year emissions, it is reasonable to conclude that removal of the I/M 
program in Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham Counties will not interfere with 
attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS. Additionally, as shown in Table 
7 below, the highest ozone design value associated with 2017 is 5 ppb 
above the most recently available ozone design value for 2019-2021, 
thereby providing an additional buffer.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ With respect to ozone transport obligations, EPA determined 
through the CSAPR Update that North Carolina does not contribute 
significantly to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance in 
downwind states for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 81 FR 74504 
(October 26, 2016); See also the Revised CSAPR Update, 82 FR 230676 
(April 30, 2021) (reiterating EPA's finding that North Carolina does 
not contribute significantly to nonattainment, or interfere with 
maintenance, in any other state with respect to the 2008 ozone 
NAAQS). Additionally, EPA determined that emissions from sources in 
North Carolina will not significantly contribute to nonattainment or 
interfere with maintenance of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS in any 
other state. See 86 FR 68413 (December 2, 2021).

[[Page 37285]]



                                                       Table 3--Lee County Anthropogenic Emissions
                                                                          [tpd]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       2017  Emissions          2022 Projected emissions      2022 Projected emissions
                                                               ------------------------------           with I/M                     without I/M
                            Sector                                                           -----------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   NOX       VOC       CO        NOX       VOC       CO        NOX       VOC       CO
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onroad........................................................       8.6      0.97      14.2      1.40      1.01     12.91      1.44      1.06     14.31
Point.........................................................       3.0      0.63      0.84      0.12      0.74      0.06      0.12      0.74      0.06
Nonroad.......................................................       1.4      0.40       6.8      0.54      0.35      6.65      0.54      0.35      6.65
Nonpoint......................................................      0.15       2.5       1.3      0.46      2.82      0.08      0.46      2.82      0.08
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................................................     13.15       4.5     23.14      2.52  [supcare     19.70      2.56      4.97      21.1
                                                                                                          t]4.93
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note 1: For tables 3, 4, and 5, tpd emissions for the 2017 baseline NOX and VOC were derived from the 2017NEI_Apr2020 with an apportioned emissions
  factor. Table 6 shows the three county totals. The apportioned emissions factor for each pollutant and data category were developed from EPA's 2016v1
  modeling platform, and what North Carolina relied on for the basis in developing the future year emissions projection as part of the SIP submission.
[supcaret] difference in total emission is due to rounding convention.


                                                     Table 4--Onslow County Anthropogenic Emissions
                                                                          [tpd]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       2017  Emissions          2022 Projected emissions      2022 Projected emissions
                                                               ------------------------------           with I/M                     without I/M
                            Sector                                                           -----------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   NOX       VOC       CO        NOX       VOC       CO        NOX       VOC       CO
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onroad........................................................      3.69      2.18      28.9      2.27      1.92     23.65      2.35      2.02     26.39
Point.........................................................      0.73      0.50       1.3      0.75      0.49      0.09      0.75      0.49      0.09
Nonroad.......................................................      1.29       2.0      15.3      1.64      1.32     12.49      1.64      1.32     12.49
Nonpoint......................................................       0.8       5.4       2.9      0.17      4.36      0.17      0.17      4.36      0.17
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................................................      6.51     10.08      48.4      4.83      8.09      36.4      4.91      8.19     39.14
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                   Table 5--Rockingham County Anthropogenic Emissions
                                                                          [tpd]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       2017  Emissions          2022 Projected emissions      2022 Projected emissions
                                                               ------------------------------           with I/M                     without I/M
                            Sector                                                           -----------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   NOX       VOC       CO        NOX       VOC       CO        NOX       VOC       CO
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onroad........................................................       3.1       1.9      23.0      2.43      1.86     18.56      2.49      1.92     20.20
Point.........................................................       2.1      3.13       2.4      3.23      1.47      0.88      3.23      1.47      0.88
Nonroad.......................................................      0.58      0.69       8.9      0.90      0.54      8.17      0.90      0.54      8.17
Nonpoint......................................................      0.39      3.13       2.4      0.36      4.27      0.09      0.36      4.27      0.09
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................................................      6.17      8.85      36.7      6.92      8.14      27.7      6.98      8.20     29.34
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                                   Table 6--Three County Total Anthropogenic Emissions
                                                                          [tpd]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       2017  Emissions          2022 Projected emissions      2022 Projected emissions
                                                               ------------------------------           with I/M                     without I/M
                            Sector                                                           -----------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   NOX       VOC       CO        NOX       VOC       CO        NOX       VOC       CO
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lee...........................................................     13.15       4.5     23.14      2.52      4.93     19.70      2.56      4.97      21.1
Onslow........................................................      6.51     10.08      48.4      4.83      8.09      36.4      4.91      8.19     39.14
Rockingham....................................................      6.17      8.85      36.7      6.92      8.14      27.7      6.98      8.20     29.34
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................................................     25.83     23.43    108.24     14.92     21.16     83.80     14.45     21.36     89.58
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i. Non-Interference Analysis for the Ozone NAAQS
    EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard of 0.08 ppm on July 
18, 1997. On March 12, 2008, EPA revised both the primary and secondary 
NAAQS for ozone to a level of 0.075 ppm to provide increased protection 
of public health and the environment. See 73 FR 16435 (March 27, 2008). 
On October 26, 2015, EPA published a final rule lowering the level of 
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS to 0.070 ppm. See 80 FR 65292. The 2015 ozone 
NAAQS retains the same general form and averaging time as the 1997 
ozone NAAQS and 2008 ozone NAAQS but is set at a more protective level. 
Under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
is attained when the 3-year

[[Page 37286]]

average of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average 
ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.070 
ppm.
    Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham counties were originally designated 
unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and have 
continued to attain the standard. On May 21, 2012, EPA designated all 
three counties as ``unclassifiable/attainment'' for the 2008 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088. Finally, on November 6, 2017, EPA 
designated the entire state of North Carolina attainment/unclassifiable 
for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 82 FR 54232 (November 6, 2017). 
North Carolina continues to maintain attainment designation statewide 
for all ozone NAAQS.
    As discussed above, the emissions inventory comparison made in 
Tables 3, 4, and 5 above for the ozone precursors (NO<INF>X</INF> and 
VOC) demonstrates that the removal of the I/M program from all three 
counties will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the ozone 
NAAQS. Table 6 shows the three county totals. Additionally, Table 7 
presents recent design values (the measure of compliance with the ozone 
NAAQS) that have demonstrated attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS of 
0.070 ppm or 70 parts per billion (ppb). For these reasons, EPA 
proposes to find that removal of Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham counties 
from the SIP-approved expanded I/M program would not interfere with 
maintenance of the ozone NAAQS in the State.

                                                     Table 7--Monitor Ozone Design Values (DV) \20\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 2013-2015 DV      2014-2016 DV      2015-2017 DV      2016-2018 DV      2017-2019 DV     2018-2020 DV     2019-2021 DV
           Monitor                   (ppb)             (ppb)             (ppb)             (ppb)            (ppb)            (ppb)            (ppb)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lee County...................  NA..............  62..............  61..............  Shut down *.....  Shut down *....  Shut down *....  Shut down.*
Onslow County................  No monitor......  No monitor......  No monitor......  No monitor......  No monitor.....  No monitor.....  No monitor.
Rockingham County............  64..............  66..............  65..............  63..............  63.............  60.............  60.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The Blackstone monitor in Lee County operated from November 2013 to July 2018 and only collected enough data for the two complete DVs. It was a
  special purpose monitoring site and was not required to be part of the Part 58 monitoring network and it was subsequently shut down.

ii. Non-Interference Analysis for the Fine Particulate Matter 
(PM<INF>2.5</INF>) NAAQS
    Over the course of several years, EPA has reviewed and revised the 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS a number of times. On July 18, 1997, EPA 
established an annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS of 15.0 micrograms per 
cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\), based on a 3-year average of annual mean 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> concentrations, and a 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS 
of 65 [mu]g/m\3\, based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 
24-hour concentrations. See 62 FR 36852. On September 21, 2006, EPA 
retained the 1997 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS of 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ but 
revised the 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS to 35 [mu]g/m\3\, based 
again on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour 
concentrations. See 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006). On December 14, 
2012, EPA retained the 2006 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS of 35 [mu]g/
m\3\ but revised the annual primary PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS to 12.0 
[mu]g/m\3\, based again on a 3-year average of annual mean 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> concentrations. See 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ All design values in this notice of proposed rulemaking are 
available on EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values#report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA promulgated designations for the 1997 Annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS on January 5, 2005 (70 FR 943). Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham 
counties were designated unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 Annual 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. On November 13, 2009, and on January 15, 2015, 
EPA published notices determining that the entire state of North 
Carolina was unclassifiable/attainment for the 2006 daily 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS and the 2012 Annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, 
respectively. See 74 FR 58688 (November 13, 2009) and 80 FR 2206 
(January 15, 2013).
    In North Carolina's December 14, 2020, SIP revision, the State 
concluded that the removal of Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham counties from 
the expanded I/M program would not interfere with attainment or 
maintenance of the PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. The pollution control 
systems for light-duty gasoline vehicles subject to the I/M program are 
not designed to reduce emissions for PM<INF>2.5</INF>; therefore, 
removing counties from the program will not have any impact on ambient 
concentrations of PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. In addition, MOVES2014(b) 
modeling results in the State's SIP revision indicate that removing 
these three counties from the expanded I/M program would not increase 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> emissions. For these reasons, EPA proposes to find 
that removal of Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham counties from the SIP-
approved expanded I/M program would not interfere with maintenance of 
the PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in the State.
iii. Non-Interference Analysis for the 2010 NO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS
    The 2010 NO<INF>2</INF> 1-hour standard is set at 100 ppb, based on 
the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of the yearly distribution of 
1-hour daily maximum concentrations. The annual standard of 53 ppb is 
based on the annual mean concentration. On February 17, 2012, EPA 
designated all counties in North Carolina as unclassifiable/attainment 
for the 2010 NO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS. See 77 FR 9532.
    Based on the technical analysis in North Carolina's December 14, 
2020, SIP revision, the projected increase in total anthropogenic 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions (of which NO<INF>2</INF> is a component) 
associated with the removal of the three counties from the expanded I/M 
program ranges from 0.04 tpd (Lee County) to 0.08 tpd (Onslow County) 
in 2022. However, it is important to note that the total NO<INF>X</INF> 
emissions in 2022 without the I/M program in these three counties 
decreases by 11.38 tpd from 2017. All NO<INF>2</INF> monitors in the 
State are measuring below the annual NO<INF>2</INF> standard, and all 
near road monitors are measuring well below the 1-hour NO<INF>2</INF> 
standard. For these reasons, EPA proposes to find that removal of Lee, 
Onslow, and Rockingham counties from the SIP-approved expanded I/M 
program would not interfere with maintenance of the NO<INF>2</INF> 
NAAQS in the State.
iv. Non-Interference Analysis for the CO NAAQS
    EPA promulgated the CO NAAQS in 1971 and has retained the primary 
standards since its last review of the standard in 2011. The primary 
NAAQS for CO include: (1) an 8-hour standard of 9.0 ppm, measured using 
the annual second highest 8-hour concentration for two consecutive 
years as the design value; and (2) a 1-hour average of 35 ppm, using 
the second highest 1-hour average within a given year. The three 
counties subject to this proposed action have always been designated as 
unclassifiable/attainment for the CO NAAQS.
    As discussed in Section III.B above, the emissions inventory 
comparison

[[Page 37287]]

made in Tables 3, 4, 5, and 6 above for CO demonstrates that the 
removal of the I/M program from all three counties will not interfere 
with attainment or maintenance of the CO NAAQS. In North Carolina's 
December 14, 2020, SIP revision, the State concluded that the removal 
of Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham counties from the expanded I/M program 
would not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the CO NAAQS. 
MOVES2014(b) mobile emissions modeling results show a slight increase 
in CO emissions for each of the three counties of 1.4 tpd (Lee County), 
2.74 tpd (Onslow County), and 1.64 tpd (Rockingham County)--5.78 tpd 
total for all three counties when comparing emissions with and without 
the I/M program in 2022. This increase is not expected to interfere 
with continued attainment of the CO NAAQS in any of the three counties 
or adjacent counties, particularly because the three-county total CO 
emissions in 2022 without I/M is 18.66 tpd less than the total CO 
emissions in 2017. Furthermore, statewide, the current ambient air 
quality levels for CO are less than 20 percent of the CO NAAQS. For 
these reasons, EPA proposes to find that removal of Lee, Onslow, and 
Rockingham counties from the SIP-approved I/M program would not 
interfere with maintenance of the CO NAAQS in the State.

IV. Proposed Action

    For the reasons explained above, EPA is proposing to approve North 
Carolina's December 14, 2020, SIP revision. Specifically, EPA is 
proposing to approve the removal of Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham 
counties from the SIP-approved expanded I/M program. Additionally, EPA 
is proposing to find that North Carolina's removal of Lee, Onslow, and 
Rockingham counties from the SIP-approved expanded I/M program (and the 
removal of reliance on the additional I/M emissions reductions 
generated for the NO<INF>X</INF> Budget and Allowance Trading Program) 
will not interfere with the State's obligations under the 
NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call to meet its Statewide NO<INF>X</INF> emissions 
budget. In addition, EPA is also proposing to find that the removal of 
Lee, Onslow, and Rockingham counties from the SIP-approved--I/M program 
will not interfere with continued attainment or maintenance of any 
applicable NAAQS or with any other applicable requirement of the CAA, 
and that North Carolina has satisfied the requirements of section 
110(l) of the CAA.

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. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided they meet the criteria of the CAA. 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:
    <bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
    <bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
    <bullet> 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.);
    <bullet> 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);
    <bullet> Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
    <bullet> Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
    <bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
    <bullet> 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
    <bullet> 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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or 
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does 
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen 
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: June 13, 2022.
Daniel Blackman,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2022-13163 Filed 6-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>