Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 73 / Monday, April 17, 1995 / Proposed Rules 19197

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 935

Intergovernmental relations, Surface

mining, Underground mining.

Dated: April 10, 1995.

Richard J. Seibel,

Acting Assistant Director, Eastern Support

Center.

[FR Doc. 95–9389 Filed 4–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–05–M

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[NC–061–1–6815; FRL–5191–3]

Proposed Approval and Promulgation

of Implementation Plans and

Designation of Areas for Air Quality

Planning Purposes; State of North

Carolina

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: On November 12, 1993, the

State of North Carolina through the

North Carolina Department of

Environment, Health, and Natural

Resources submitted a maintenance

plan and a request to redesignate the

Charlotte-Gastonia area from

nonattainment to attainment for ozone

(O3). Subsequently on December 16,

1994, and January 6, 1995, the State

submitted supplementary information

which included refined modeling and

identification of the future reductions

needed to maintain the national ambient

air quality standard (NAAQS) for O3.

The Charlotte-Gastonia O3

nonattainment area includes

Mecklenburg and Gaston Counties.

Under the Clean Air Act, designations

can be changed if sufficient data are

available to warrant such changes. In

this action, EPA is proposing to approve

the State of North Carolina’s submittal

because it will meet the maintenance

plan and redesignation requirements.

The approved maintenance plan will

become a federally enforceable part of

North Carolina’s State Implementation

Plan (SIP) for the moderate

nonattainment area. In this action, EPA

is also proposing to approve the State of

North Carolina’s 1990 baseline

emissions inventory because it meets

EPA’s requirements regarding the

approval on baseline emission

inventories.

DATES: To be considered, comments

must be received by May 17, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

action should be addressed to Kay

Prince, at the EPA Regional Office listed

below.

Copies of the documents relative to

this action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations. The

interested persons wanting to examine

these documents should make an

appointment with the appropriate office

at least 24 hours before the visiting day.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 4 Air Programs Branch, 345

Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia

30365.

State of North Carolina, Air Quality

Section, Division of Environmental

Management, North Carolina

Department of Environment, Health,

and Natural Resources, Raleigh, North

Carolina 27626.

Environmental Management Division,

Mecklenburg County Department of

Environmental Protection, 700 N.

Tryon Street, Charlotte, North

Carolina 28202–2236.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kay

Prince, Regulatory Planning and

Development Section, Air Programs

Branch, Air, Pesticides & Toxics

Management Division, Region 4

Environmental Protection Agency, 345

Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia

30365. The telephone number is 404/

347–3555 extension 4221. Reference file

NC–061–1–6815.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act

Amendments of 1990 were enacted.

(Pub. L. 101–549, 104 Stat. 2399,

codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q).

Under section 107(d)(1)(C), EPA

designated Mecklenburg County of the

Charlotte-Gastonia area as

nonattainment by operation of law with

respect to O3 because the area was

designated nonattainment immediately

before November 15, 1990. The

nonattainment area was expanded to

include Gaston County per section

107(d)(1)(A)(i) (See 56 FR 56694 (Nov.

6, 1991) and 57 FR 56762 (Nov. 30,

1992), codified at 40 CFR 81.318.) The

area was classified as moderate.

The moderate nonattainment area

more recently has ambient monitoring

data that show no violations of the O3

NAAQS, during the period from 1990

through 1993. Therefore, in an effort to

comply with the Clean Air Act as

amended in 1990 (CAA) and to ensure

continued attainment of the NAAQS, on

November 12, 1993, the State of North

Carolina submitted an O3 maintenance

plan and requested redesignation of the

area to attainment with respect to the O3

NAAQS. On January 24, 1994, Region 4

determined that the information

received from the State constituted a

complete redesignation request under

the general completeness criteria of 40

CFR 51, appendix V, sections 2.1 and

2.2. Subsequently, on December 16,

1994, and January 6, 1995, the State

submitted additional information that

refined the modeling and clarified the

future measures needed to ensure

maintenance of the O3 NAAQS.

The North Carolina redesignation

request for the Charlotte-Gastonia

moderate O3 nonattainment area meets

the five requirements of section

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

attainment. The following is a brief

description of how the State of North

Carolina has fulfilled each of these

requirements. Because the maintenance

plan is a critical element of the

redesignation request, EPA will discuss

its evaluation of the maintenance plan

under its analysis of the redesignation

request.

1. The Area Must Have Attained the O3

NAAQS

The State of North Carolina’s request

is based on an analysis of quality

assured ambient air quality monitoring

data, which is relevant to the

maintenance plan and to the

redesignation request. Most recent

ambient air quality monitoring data for

calendar year 1990 through calendar

year 1993 show an expected exceedance

rate of less than 1.0 per year of the O3

NAAQS in the nonattainment area (See

40 CFR 50.9 and appendix H). The area

has continued to demonstrate

attainment to date. Because the

nonattainment area has complete

quality-assured data showing no

violations of the O3 NAAQS over the

most recent consecutive three calendar

year period, the area has met the first

component of attainment of the O3

NAAQS. The State of North Carolina

has also met the second component of

attainment of the O3 NAAQS by

committing to continue monitoring the

moderate nonattainment area in

accordance with 40 CFR part 58.

2. The Area Has Met All Applicable

Requirements Under Section 110 and

Part D of the CAA

On April 17, 1980, August 27, 1981,

October 11, 1985, November 19, 1986,

and December 19, 1986, EPA fully

approved North Carolina’s SIP as

meeting the requirements of section

110(a)(2) and part D of the 1977 CAA

(45 FR 26038, 46 FR 43137, 50 FR

41501, 51 FR 41786, and 51 FR 45468).

The approved control strategy did not

result in attainment of NAAQS for O3

prior to the 1990 CAA. Additionally, the

amended CAA revised section

182(a)(2)(A), 110(a)(2) and, under part
19198 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 73 / Monday, April 17, 1995 / Proposed Rules

D, revised section 172 and added new

requirements for all nonattainment

areas. Therefore, for purposes of

redesignation, to meet the requirement

that the SIP contain all applicable

requirements under the CAA, EPA

reviewed the North Carolina SIP and

ensures that it contains all measures due

under the amended CAA prior to or at

the time the State of North Carolina

submitted its redesignation request.

Section 107(d)(3)(E) requires that, for

an area to be redesignated, an area must

have met all applicable requirements

under section 110 and Part D. The

USEPA interprets section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)

to mean that for a redesignation to be

approved, the State must have met all

requirements that applied to the subject

area prior to or at the time of the

submission of a complete redesignation

request. Requirements of the Act that

come due subsequently continue to be

applicable to the area at those later dates

(see section 175A(c)) and, if the

redesignation of the area is disapproved,

the State remains obligated to fulfill

those requirements.

A. Section 110 Requirements

Although section 110 was amended

by the CAA, the North Carolina SIP for

the moderate nonattainment area meets

the requirements of amended section

110(a)(2). A number of the requirements

did not change in substance and,

therefore, EPA believes that the preamendment SIP met these requirements.

EPA has analyzed the SIP and

determined that it is consistent with the

requirements of amended section

110(a)(2).

B. Part D Requirements

Before the moderate nonattainment

area may be redesignated to attainment,

the State must have fulfilled the

applicable requirements of part D.

Under part D, an area’s classification

indicates the requirements to which it

will be subject. Subpart 1 of part D sets

forth the basic nonattainment

requirements applicable to all

nonattainment areas, classified as well

as nonclassifiable. Subpart 2 of part D

establishes additional requirements for

O3 nonattainment areas classified under

table 1 of section 181(a). As described

in the General Preamble for the

Implementation of title I, specific

requirements of subpart 2 may override

subpart’s general provisions (57 FR

13501 (April 16, 1992)). The CharlotteGastonia nonattainment area is

classified as moderate (See 56 FR 56694,

codified at 40 CFR 81.318). The State of

North Carolina submitted the request for

redesignation of the moderate

nonattainment area on November 12,

1993. Therefore, in order to be

redesignated to attainment, the State of

North Carolina must meet the applicable

requirements of subpart 1 of part D,

specifically sections 172(c) and 176, and

is also required to meet the applicable

requirements of subpart 2 of part D,

specifically sections 182(a) and (b).

a. Subpart 1 of Part D. Section 172(c)

sets forth general requirements

applicable to all nonattainment areas.

Under section 172(b), the section 172(c)

requirements are applicable as

determined by the Administrator, but no

later than 3 years after an area has been

designated as nonattainment under the

amended CAA. Furthermore, as noted

above, some of these section 172(c)

requirements are superseded by more

specific requirements in subpart 2 of

part D. In the case of the CharlotteGastonia nonattainment area, the State

has satisfied all of the section 172(c)

requirements necessary for the area to

be redesignated upon the basis of the

November 12, 1993, redesignation

request.

EPA has determined that the section

172(c)(2) reasonable further progress

(RFP) requirement (with parallel

requirements for a moderate ozone

nonattainment area under subpart 2 of

part D, due November 15, 1993) was not

applicable as the State of North Carolina

submitted this redesignation request on

November 12, 1993. Also the section

172(c)(9) contingency measures and

additional section 172(c)(1) non-RACT

reasonable available control measures

(RACM) beyond what may already be

required in the SIP are no longer

necessary, since no earlier date was set

for these measures and as RFP was not

due until November 15, 1993.

The section 172(c)(3) emissions

inventory requirement has been met by

the submission of the 1990 base year

inventory required under subpart 2 of

part D, section 182(a)(1), which EPA is

proposing to approve in this action.

The State of North Carolina has a

fully-approved NSR program meeting

the requirements of section 182(b)(5).

Therefore, the section 172(c)(5)

requirement has been met.

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires

states to revise their SIPs to establish

criteria and procedures to ensure that

Federal actions, before they are taken,

conform to the air quality planning

goals in the applicable state SIP. The

requirement to determine conformity

applies to transportation plans,

programs and projects developed,

funded or approved under Title 23

U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act

(‘‘transportation conformity’’), as well as

to all other Federal actions (‘‘general

conformity’’). Section 176 further

provides that the conformity revisions

to be submitted by states must be

consistent with Federal conformity

regulations that the CAA required EPA

to promulgate. Congress provided for

the state revisions to be submitted one

year after the date for promulgation of

final EPA conformity regulations. When

that date passed without such

promulgation, EPA’s General Preamble

for the implementation of Title I

informed states that its conformity

regulations would establish a submittal

date [see 57 FR 13498t 13557 (April 16,

1992)].

The EPA promulgated final

transportation conformity regulations on

November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188), and

general conformity regulations on

November 30, 1993 (58 FR 63214).

These conformity rules require that

states adopt both transportation and

general conformity provisions in the SIP

for areas designated nonattainment or

subject to a maintenance plan approved

under CAA section 175A. Pursuant to

§ 51.396 of the transportation

conformity rule and § 51.851 of the

general conformity rule, the State of

North Carolina is required to submit SIP

revisions containing transportation and

general conformity criteria and

procedures consistent with those

established in the Federal rule by

November 25, 1994 and December 1,

1994, respectively. Because the

deadlines for these submittals had not

come due at the time of the submission

of the redesignation request, they are

not applicable requirements under

section 107(d)(3)(E)(V) and, thus, do not

affect approval of this redesignation

request. The State of North Carolina

submitted a SIP revision which contains

the required conformity provisions on

March 3, 1995.

b. Subpart 2 of Part D—Section 182.

The CAA was amended on November

15, 1990, Pub. L. 101–549, 104 Stat.

2399, codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

EPA was required to classify O3

nonattainment areas according to the

severity of their problem. On November

6, 1991 (56 FR 56694), the CharlotteGastonia area was designated as

moderate O3 nonattainment. Because

the Charlotte-Gastonia area is a

moderate O3 nonattainment area, it is

required to have met the requirements

of sections 182(a), (b) and (f) of the

CAA. EPA has analyzed the SIP and

determined which requirements have

been met and for which requirements

further action is required. In the

instances where further action is

required, SIP revisions meeting those

requirements must be fully approved in

order for EPA to find that all the

applicable requirements of the CAA
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 73 / Monday, April 17, 1995 / Proposed Rules 19199

1Among other things, the pre-amendment

guidance consists of the VOC RACT portions of the

Post-87 policy, 52 FR 45044 (Nov. 24, 1987); the

Bluebook, ‘‘Issues Relating to VOC Regulation

Cutpoints, Deficiencies and Deviations,

Clarification to Appendix D of November 24, 1987

Federal Register Notice’’ (of which notice of

availability was published in the Federal Register

on May 25, 1988); and the existing Control

Technology Guidelines (CTGs).

have been met. Thus, final approval of

this redesignation is contingent upon

the final approval of the additional SIP

submittals described below.

(1) Section 182(a)(1)—Emissions

Inventory

Section 182(a)(1) of the CAA required

an inventory of all actual emissions

from all sources, as described in section

172(c)(3) to be submitted by November

15, 1992. On November 13, 1992, the

State submitted an emission inventory

for the Charlotte-Gastonia area. EPA is

proposing to approve the inventory in

this notice. Final approval of this

redesignation is contingent on final

approval of the emissions inventory.

(2) Section 182(a)(2), 182(b)(2)—

Reasonably Available Control

Technology (RACT)

Subsequent to the 1977 Clean Air Act

Amendments, Mecklenburg County was

designated as not meeting the O3

NAAQS on March 3, 1978 (43 FR 8962).

The State was subsequently required to

revise its O3 SIP for this area to meet the

requirements of section 110(a)(2) and

part D of the 1977 Clean Air Act. On

April 17, 1980, August 27, 1981,

October 11, 1985, November 19, 1986,

and December 19, 1986, EPA fully

approved North Carolina’s SIP as

meeting the requirements of section

110(a)(2) and part D of the 1977 CAA

(45 FR 26038, 46 FR 43137, 50 FR

41501, 51 FR 41786, and 51 FR 45468).

On December 31, 1987, EPA deemed

that this control strategy had not

resulted in the attainment of the

NAAQS for O3 in the Charlotte-Gastonia

area. Consequently, Greer C. Tidwell,

Region 4 Regional Administrator, sent a

letter to James G. Martin, Governor of

North Carolina, on May 26, 1988. This

letter, pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(H)

of the 1977 CAA, notified North

Carolina that the SIP was substantially

inadequate to achieve the NAAQS for

O3 in Charlotte and called upon the

State to revise the SIP.

The 1990 CAA amended section

182(a)(2)(A), and Congress statutorily

adopted the requirement that O3

nonattainment areas correct their

deficient RACT rules for O3 (RACT Fixups). Areas designated nonattainment

before amendment of the CAA and

which retained that designation and

were classified as marginal or above as

of enactment are required to meet the

RACT Fix-ups requirement. Under

section 182(a)(2)(A), those areas were

required by May 15, 1991, to correct

RACT regulations as required under preamendment guidance.1 The SIP call

letters interpreted that guidance and

indicated corrections necessary for

specific nonattainment areas. Charlotte

was previously subject to RACT

requirements for ozone. Therefore, this

area is subject to the RACT fix-up

requirement and the May 15, 1991,

deadline.

The 1990 CAA also amended section

182(b)(2) which required RACT on all

major sources of VOCs for O3

nonattainment areas designated

moderate and above (RACT Catch-ups)

by November 15, 1992. The RACT

Catch-ups provision required the State

to submit a revision to the SIP to

implement RACT on: (1) Each category

of VOC sources in the area covered by

a control technique guideline (CTG)

document issued between the

enactment of the 1990 CAA and the date

of attainment (which is not an

applicable requirement for purposes of

this redesignation since the due date for

these rules is November 15, 1994, a date

after the submission of the redesignation

request); (2) all VOC sources in the area

covered by any CTG issued before the

date of the 1990 CAA; and (3) all other

major stationary sources of VOCs that

are located in the area.

North Carolina submitted SIP

revisions to correct deficiencies in the

VOC regulations to EPA on September

21, 1989, January 14, 1991, and April

29, 1991, all prior to the May 15, 1991,

deadline. Additionally, revisions to the

Mecklenburg County local program

regulations were submitted on August

13, 1991, and July 19, 1993. A Federal

Register notice approving these SIP

revisions was published on June 23,

1994 (59 FR 32365). The approval

became effective on August 22, 1994.

North Carolina failed to meet the

November 15, 1992, deadline date for

RACT catch-ups and EPA notified the

State on January 15, 1993, that a finding

of failure to submit had been made. This

finding of failure to submit triggered

the: (1) 18-month time clock for

mandatory application of sanctions

under section 179(a); (2) the

Administrator’s discretionary authority

to impose sanctions under section

110(m); and (3) the 2-year time clock for

promulgation of the Federal

Implementation Plan (FIP) VOC

regulations for this area as required by

section 110(c)(1).

The 18-month period prior to

application of mandatory sanctions

ended on July 15, 1994. North Carolina

submitted SIP revisions to EPA on

January 7, 1994, prior to the July 15,

1994, deadline. Because the revisions

addressed all RACT Catch-up

requirements and were found to contain

all required administrative and

technical components, the 18-month

time clock for mandatory application of

sanctions under section 179(a) was

stopped. Action to give final approval of

the North Carolina RACT Catch-up

provisions will be taken at the time or

prior to final approval of this

redesignation.

(3) Section 182(a)(3)—Emissions

Statements

Section 182(a)(3) of the CAA required

that the SIP be revised by November 15,

1992, to require stationary sources of

oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and VOCs to

provide the State with a statement

showing actual emission each year.

North Carolina failed to meet the

November 15, 1992, deadline date for

Emissions Statements and EPA notified

the State on January 15, 1993, that a

finding of failure to submit had been

made. This finding of failure to submit

triggered the: (1) 18-month time clock

for mandatory application of sanctions

under section 179(a); (2) the

Administrator’s discretionary authority

to impose sanctions under section

110(m); and (3) the 2-year time clock for

promulgation of the Federal

Implementation Plan (FIP) VOC

regulations for this area as required by

section 110(c)(1).

The 18-month period prior to

application of mandatory sanctions

ended on July 15, 1994. North Carolina

submitted SIP revisions to EPA on

December 17, 1993, prior to the July 15,

1994, deadline. Because the revision

addressed all the Emission Statement

requirements and was found to contain

all required administrative and

technical components, the 18-month

time clock for mandatory application of

sanctions under section 179(a) was

stopped. Final action regarding the

North Carolina Emission Statement

regulation will be taken at the time or

prior to final approval of this

redesignation. Approval of this

redesignation is contingent upon

approval of the emission statement

regulation.

(4) Section 182(b)(1)—15% Progress

Plans

Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA required

states to submit a revision to the SIP by
19200 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 73 / Monday, April 17, 1995 / Proposed Rules

November 15, 1993, to provide for VOC

emission reductions by November 15,

1996, of at least 15% from baseline

emissions accounting for any growth in

emissions after the date of enactment of

the CAA. The State failed to submit the

required revisions and as a result, on

January 28, 1994, EPA issued a finding

letter notifying North Carolina of a

finding of failure to submit. This finding

of failure to submit triggered the: (1) 18-

month time clock for mandatory

application of sanctions under section

179(a); (2) the Administrator’s

discretionary authority to impose

sanctions under section 110(m); and (3)

the 2-year time clock for promulgation

of the FIP 15% regulations for this area

as required by section 110(c)(1).

However, the letter acknowledges the

submittal of this redesignation request

to attainment and stated that if the

redesignation request to attainment is

approved then requirements for a 15%

plan SIP will be unnecessary for the

Charlotte-Gastonia area. Therefore, upon

approval of this redesignation request,

the sanctions clock will stop. As the

requirement to submit a 15% plan did

not come due until November 15, 1993,

the 15% plan requirement is not an

applicable requirement for purposes of

the evaluation of this redesignation

request.

(5) Section 182(b)(3)—Stage II

Section 182(b)(3) of the CAA required

moderate areas to implement Stage II

gasoline vapor recovery systems unless

and until EPA promulgated onboard

vapor recovery (OBVR) regulations. On

January 24, 1994, EPA promulgated the

OBVR rule, and, as section 202(a)(b) of

the CAA provides that once the rule is

promulgated, moderate areas are no

longer required to implement Stage II.

Thus, the Stage II vapor recovery

requirement of section 182(b)(3) is no

longer an applicable requirement.

(6) Section 182(b)(4)—Motor Vehicle

Inspection and Maintenance (I/M)

The CAA required all moderate and

above areas to revise the SIP to include

provisions necessary to provide for a

vehicle inspection and maintenance

program. The State failed to submit the

required revisions and as a result, on

January 15, 1993, EPA issued a finding

letter notifying North Carolina of a

finding of failure to submit. This finding

of failure to submit triggered the: (1) 18-

month time clock for mandatory

application of sanctions under section

179(a); (2) the Administrator’s

discretionary authority to impose

sanctions under section 110(m); and (3)

the 2-year time clock for promulgation

of the FIP I/M regulations for this area

as required by section 110(c)(1).

However, on July 19, 1993, the State

submitted revisions to their I/M

regulations, prior to the July 15, 1994,

deadline. Because the revision

addressed all the I/M requirements and

was found to contain all required

administrative and technical

components, the 18-month time clock

for mandatory application of sanctions

under section 179(a) was stopped. Final

action regarding the North Carolina I/M

regulation will be taken at the time or

prior to final approval of this

redesignation. The approval of this

redesignation is contingent upon final

approval of the I/M regulation.

(7) Section 182(b)(5)—New Source

Review (NSR)

The CAA required all classified

nonattainment areas to meet several

requirements regarding NSR, including

provisions to ensure that increased

emissions of VOCs compounds will not

result from any new or major source

modifications and a general offset rule.

The State submitted a NSR rule on

January 7, 1994, to incorporate VOC and

oxides of nitrogen (NOX) permit review

requirements for new and modified

sources in North Carolina’s O3

nonattainment areas. The revised permit

requirements meet new offset ratios and

additional provisions for moderate O3

nonattainment areas. EPA approved this

rule on October 31, 1994 (59 FR 54388),

giving North Carolina a fully approved

NSR program. (EPA notes that under the

policy announced in the memorandum,

‘‘Part D New Source Review (part D

NSR) Requirements for Areas

Requesting Redesignation to

Attainment,’’ dated October 14, 1994,

from Mary D. Nichols to Air Division

Directors I–X, approval of the NSR

submittal is not necessarily required for

approval of a redesignation.)

(8) Section 182(f)—Oxides of Nitrogen

(NOX) Requirements

Section 182(f) of the CAA requires

states with areas designated

nonattainment for O3 and classified as

moderate and above to impose the same

control requirements for major

stationary sources of NOX as apply to

major stationary sources of volatile

organic compounds (VOCs). These

control requirements, NOX RACT and

NOX NSR, were to be submitted to EPA

in a SIP revision by November 15, 1992.

EPA adopted a policy pursuant to

section 110(k)(4) of the CAA to

conditionally approve NOX RACT SIPs

which committed to provide EPA with

specific enforceable measures within

one year of the date of approval of the

commitment. EPA’s committal SIP

policy was challenged in Natural

Resources Defense Council v. Browner—

in the United States Court of Appeals

for the District of Columbia Circuit. In

a full Opinion, dated May 6, 1994, the

Court found that EPA’s conditional

approval interpretation exceeded the

EPA’s statutory authority, but

concluded that ‘‘EPA properly

extended’’ to November 15, 1993, the

deadline for submittal of fully

enforceable NOX RACT SIPs. As a result

of this court case, the deadline to submit

NOX RACT rules was November 15,

1993. Therefore, because that date is

after the State submitted the

redesignation request, NOX RACT is not

an applicable requirement for this

redesignation request.

3. The Area Has a Fully Approved SIP

Under Section 110(k) of the CAA

Based on the approval of provisions

under the pre-amended CAA and EPA’s

prior approval of SIP revisions under

the amended CAA, EPA has determined

that North Carolina will have a fully

approved O3 SIP under section 110(k)

for the moderate nonattainment area if

EPA approves SIP submissions

regarding the emissions inventory,

emission statements, VOC RACT catchups, and I/M. Final action will be taken

prior to or at the same time as final

approval of this redesignation.

4. The Air Quality Improvement Must

Be Permanent and Enforceable

Several control measures have come

into place since the Charlotte-Gastonia

nonattainment area violated the O3

NAAQS. Of these control measures, the

reduction of fuel volatility from 10.6 psi

in 1987 to less than 9.0 psi in 1990, and

finally to less than 7.8 psi beginning

with the summer of 1992, as measured

by the Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP), and

fleet turnover due to the Federal Motor

Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP)

produced the most significant decreases

in VOC emissions. The reduction in

VOC emissions due to the mobile source

regulations from 1987 to 1990 is 26.01

tons per day (29.63%). The VOC

emissions in the base year are not

artificially low due to a depressed

economy.

5. The Area Must Have a Fully

Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant

to Section 175A of the CAA

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth

the elements of a maintenance plan for

areas seeking redesignation from

nonattainment to attainment. The plan

must demonstrate continued attainment

of the applicable NAAQS for at least ten

years after the Administrator approves a

redesignation to attainment. Eight years
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 73 / Monday, April 17, 1995 / Proposed Rules 19201

after the redesignation, the state must

submit a revised maintenance plan

which demonstrates attainment for the

ten years following the initial ten-year

period. To provide for the possibility of

future NAAQS violations, the

maintenance plan must contain

contingency measures, with a schedule

for implementation, adequate to assure

prompt correction of any air quality

problems.

In this notice, EPA is proposing

approval of the State of North Carolina’s

maintenance plan for the CharlotteGastonia nonattainment area because

EPA finds that North Carolina’s

submittal meets the requirements of

section 175A.

A. Emissions Inventory—Base Year

Inventory

On November 13, 1992, the State of

North Carolina submitted

comprehensive inventories of VOC,

NOX , and CO emissions from the

Charlotte-Gastonia nonattainment area.

The inventory included biogenic, area,

stationary, and mobile sources for 1990.

The State of North Carolina submittal

contains the detailed inventory data and

summaries by county and source

category. Finally, this inventory was

prepared in accordance with EPA

guidance. A summary of the base year

inventory is included in this notice.

This notice proposes approval of the

base year inventory for the CharlotteGastonia area.

1990 CHARLOTTE/GASTONIA TYPICAL

SUMMER DAY EMISSIONS TONS PER

DAY (TPD)

Category NOX VOC CO

Point ............ 31.25 33.99 35.27

Area ............. 4.92 67.59 25.00

Nonroad ...... 15.52 19.38 138.45

Biogenic ...... 2.78 54.41 0.0

Mobile .......... 61.64 50.81 371.26

Total ......... 116.11 226.18 569.98

B. Demonstration of Maintenance—

Urban Airshed Modeling

a. Proposed Control Strategy

The plan must demonstrate

maintenance for at least 10 years. The

North Carolina plan demonstrates

maintenance out to the year 2005

through the use of the Urban Airshed

Model (UAM). The revised modeling

runs, submitted in the December 16,

1994 supplement, were completed for

three meteorological episodes during

which the area experienced exceedances

of the ozone standard. These runs

corrected and completed the modeling

submitted in the original November

1993 submittal pursuant to EPA

comments. Base and future case

modeling was done according to

guidelines presented in the EPA

document ‘‘Guideline for Regulatory

Application of the Urban Airshed

Model’’ in performing the modeling

analysis. The future case modeling

includes the interim year 1999 and the

10 year maintenance year of 2005. This

modeling analysis did not assume any

benefit from the NSR program.

Modeling for all three episodes

indicated that to predict all grid cells

below .124 parts per million (ppm) for

both 1999 and 2005, additional controls

would be needed. The analysis of

control options showed that a further

reduction of VOC emissions of 25

percent demonstrated a 1 part per

billion (ppb) reduction of ozone and a

further reduction of VOC emissions of

50 percent demonstrated a 2 ppb or less

reduction in ozone. By contrast, a 35

percent further reduction of NOX

resulted in a 10–12 ppb reduction in

ozone. Therefore, North Carolina

concluded that the NOX controls will be

more effective in the maintenance of the

standard in the Charlotte/Gastonia area,

and, hence, the selected strategy

primarily consists of controls of NOX

emissions. The revised modeling and

the identified control measures will be

the subject of a public hearing on April

19, 1995. The selected control strategy

includes the following measures:

• Reformulated Gasoline to meet the Federal

Phase I and Phase II standards to begin in

1999 in Mecklenburg, Gaston, Union,

Cabarrus, Lincoln, Rowan, and Iredell

Counties;

• Clean Fuel Fleet Program, including the

schedule for implementation as specified

in the CAA for areas classified serious and

above, in the same seven counties

previously listed;

• Burning bans in the seven counties for the

months of June, July, and August;

• Control of NOX for the Transcontinental

Natural Gas Pumping Station in Iredell

County for the months of June, July, and

August; and

•Additional 10 percent control beyond the

control being applied to meet title IV NOX

requirements on Duke Power’s Allen and

Riverbend facilities in Gaston County for

the months of June, July, and August.

The State will also take comment at

the public hearing on the feasibility of

substituting an enhanced I/M program

for the reformulated gasoline measure.

The modeling results indicate that such

substitution would show maintenance

of the standard. The strategy represents

a combination of mobile and stationary

source controls that provide a 25 ton per

day reduction in NOx emissions

resulting in a 2–6 ppb reduction in

ozone, depending upon the

meteorological episode. The modeling

for all three meteorological episodes for

both 1999 and 2005 with the above

described control strategy showed

attainment of the O3 standard. The State

has committed to develop regulations

necessary to implement a control

strategy that will demonstrate

maintenance of the ozone standard

through 2005, and submit those

regulations to EPA for approval into the

maintenance plan.

b. Request for Comments

Consistent with the notice of public

hearing for the redesignation of the

Charlotte-Gastonia ozone nonattainment

area, the State will take comment on the

aforementioned control strategy, that

strategy with enhanced I/M as a

substitute for the reformulate gasoline

measure, and any combination of those

control measures. EPA invites comment

on the following scenarios:

(a) Adoption and implementation in 1999

of the five measures as detailed above;

(b) Adoption and implementation in 1999

of the five measures as detailed above with

enhanced I/M substituted for the

reformulated gasoline program;

(c) Adoption and implementation in 1999

of the aforementioned controls on the

Transcontinental Natural Gas Pumping

Station in Iredell County and the additional

10 percent control beyond the title IV

requirements on Duke Power’s Allen and

Riverbend facilities in Gaston County; or

(d) Approval of the request as

demonstrating maintenance with no

additional VOC or NOx controls.

Scenarios a and b both involve a

combination of measures that results in

the modeling showing attainment of the

standard in all grid cells. Scenario a,

however, involves the inclusion by the

State in the maintenance plan of

regulations to require the sale of

reformulated gasoline beginning in

1999. EPA specifically requests

comment regarding the issue of whether

such regulations may be adopted or

enforced in maintenance or attainment

areas by a state in light of the

preemption provisions of section

211(c)(4) of the CAA.

Scenarios c and d, on the other hand,

do not provide for the adoption of

control measures that result in the

modeling showing attainment of the

standard in all grid cells. EPA requests

comment as to whether, in light of the

reasons described below, a maintenance

plan based on either scenario c or d

should be approved for the Charlotte

area. Under scenario d, no additional

controls approved for maintenance, the

modeling shows 3 to 4 grid cells out of

625 over the standard. The range of

predicted values above .124 ppm for

this scenario is .125 ppm to .129 ppm.
19202 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 73 / Monday, April 17, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Although the ozone modeling

guidance generally requires that

modeling results show attainment of the

standard in all grid cells, it does allow

alternative methods for demonstrating

attainment on a case by case basis. EPA

believes that the modeling

demonstration submitted by the State of

North Carolina is sufficiently

conservative so that it is likely that the

O3 NAAQS will continue to be

maintained in the Charlotte area

without the State having to invoke

costly additional measures adopted in

the maintenance standard. That belief is

based on the combination of the

following factors:

(1) North Carolina has five years of air

quality data showing attainment of the

standard.

(2) The maintenance plan contains preadopted measures and a violation would

trigger reduction in emissions by the

following ozone season.

(3) The ozone standard is a statistically

based NAAQS that allows one exceedance

per year.

(4) North Carolina has done extensive

modeling to gain an understanding of the

creation of ozone in the Charlotte area and

has generally made conservative assumptions

in selecting modeling inputs.

(5) The uncertainties in the biogenic

emission inventory and other modeling

inputs are well within the range of the 2–3

ppb needed to reach the .124 ppm in all grid

cells.

(6) The modeling did not account for lower

VOC, NOX and O3 boundary conditions

expected when SIP attainment control

programs have been implemented in many

areas throughout the United States.

Therefore, EPA believes the area is eligible

for redesignation with the existing control

strategy and the contingency plan discussed

below.

The emissions budget for conformity is

contingent upon the control strategy selected

pursuant to the April 19, 1995, public

hearing. That budget will be published in any

notice that takes final action approving this

redesignation request.

C. Verification of Continued Attainment

Continued attainment of the O3

NAAQS in the nonattainment area

depends, in part, on the State of North

Carolina’s efforts toward tracking

indicators of continued attainment

during the maintenance period. The

primary trigger of the contingency plan

will be a violation of the ambient air

quality standard for ozone. The trigger

date will be the date that the State

certifies to EPA that the data is quality

assured, which will occur no later than

30 days after the recorded violation. The

secondary trigger of the contingency

plan will be an exceedance of the ozone

standard that would indicate a violation

could be imminent. This trigger will be

activated within 30 days of the State

finding the exceedance.

Once either the primary or the

secondary trigger is activated, the State

Air Quality Section will commence

analysis, including updated modeling as

necessary, to determine what control

measures will be required to bring the

area back into attainment. By May 1 of

the year following the ozone season in

which the primary trigger has been

activated, the State will complete the

analysis and adopt stationary control

measures indicated by the analysis,

using the emergency rule process as

necessary. The time frame for adopting

measures other than for stationary

sources will be based on the time frames

in section 181(b) of the CAA. Where

only the secondary trigger has been

activated, the State will complete the

analysis and begin the regulatory

adoption process for any measures that

are needed by May 1 of the following

year.

D. Contingency Plan

The level of VOC and NOX emissions

in the nonattainment areas will largely

determine its ability to stay in

compliance with the O3 NAAQS in the

future. Despite the State’s best efforts to

demonstrate continued compliance with

the NAAQS, the ambient air pollutant

concentrations may exceed or violate

the NAAQS. Therefore, the State of

North Carolina has provided

contingency measures with a schedule

for implementation in the event of a

future O3 air quality problem. The

actual measures will be determined

from the analysis process described in

the Verification of Continued

Attainment portion of this notice. The

measures analyzed will include RACT

or greater level control for NOX and

VOC sources, Stage II vapor control for

gasoline dispensing facilities,

enhancements to the I/M program,

transportation control measures, and

any other appropriate measures. EPA

finds that the contingency plan

provided in the State of North Carolina’s

submittal meets the requirements of

section 175A(d) of the CAA.

E. Subsequent Maintenance Plan

Revisions

In accordance with section 175A(b) of

the CAA, the State of North Carolina has

agreed to submit a revised maintenance

SIP eight years after the nonattainment

area is redesignated to attainment. Such

revised SIP will provide for

maintenance for an additional ten years.

6. Proposed Action

EPA proposes approval of the State of

North Carolina’s request to redesignate

to attainment the Charlotte-Gastonia O3

nonattainment area and maintenance

plan contingent upon a full and final

approval of the outstanding

requirements discussed above (emission

statement, RACT catch-ups, emission

inventory and I/M). EPA also proposes

to approve the 1990 baseyear inventory

for the Charlotte-Gastonia

nonattainment area.

The OMB has exempted these actions

from review under Executive Order

12866.

Nothing in this action shall be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for a revision to any state

implementation plan. Each request for

revision to the state implementation

plan shall be considered separately in

light of specific technical, economic,

and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and government entities

with jurisdiction over populations of

less than 50,000.

Redesignation of an area to attainment

under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA

does not impose any new requirements

on small entities. Redesignation is an

action that affects the status of a

geographical area and does not impose

any regulatory requirements on sources.

The Administrator certifies that the

approval of the redesignation request

will not affect a substantial number of

small entities.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Air pollution control, Carbon

monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation

by reference, Intergovernmental

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, National parks,

Wilderness areas.

Dated: April 5, 1995.

Joe R. Franzmathes,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95–9248 Filed 4–14–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P