Document ID: EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0614-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: North Carolina; Repeal of Transportation Facilities Rules
Posted Date: 2017-05-12T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 91 (Friday, May 12, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 22086-22088]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09539]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0614; FRL-9961-74-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; North Carolina Repeal of Transportation 
Facilities Rules

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking 
action to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision, submitted 
by the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality through the 
Division of Air Quality (DAQ) on September 16, 2016, for the purpose of 
removing the statewide transportation facilities rules. The State 
provided a Clean Air Act section 110(l) noninterference demonstration 
establishing that removal of the North Carolina transportation 
facilities rules will not interfere with the maintenance of the 8-hour 
carbon monoxide standard or any other national ambient air quality 
standards (NAAQS). EPA is approving this SIP revision because the DAQ 
has demonstrated that it is consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or 
Act).

DATES: This direct final rule is effective July 11, 2017 without 
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by June 12, 2017. 
If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of 
the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public 
that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2016-0614 at https://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 https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Sheckler, Air Regulatory 
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, 
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 
30303-8960. The telephone number is (404) 562-9222. Ms. Sheckler can 
also be reached via electronic mail at sheckler.kelly@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In 1978, EPA designated Mecklenburg County, North Carolina 
(hereinafter the ``Charlotte Area'') as nonattainment for the NAAQS for 
carbon monoxide (CO). Then, under the CAA amendments of 1990, the 
Charlotte Area was designated as ``not-classifiable'' and had five 
years to attain the CO NAAQS (i.e., November 15, 1995). On November 15, 
1990, Durham and Wake Counties (hereinafter the ``Raleigh-Durham/Chapel 
Hill Area'') and Forsyth County (hereinafter the ``Winston-Salem 
Area'') in North Carolina were designated as ``moderate'' nonattainment 
and had until December 31, 1995, to attain the standard.
    In April 1994, DAQ submitted a request to EPA to redesignate the 
Winston-Salem Area to attainment status, and in November 1994, EPA 
approved the maintenance plan for CO (59 FR 48402), and redesignated 
the area to attainment/maintenance for CO. Next, in 1995, EPA approved 
the Charlotte and Raleigh-Durham/Chapel Hill Areas' maintenance plans 
for CO and redesignated the area to attainment/maintenance for CO (60 
FR 39262). In

[[Page 22087]]

2015, these areas completed the 20-year maintenance periods, and EPA 
redesignated them to attainment.
    North Carolina adopted the transportation facility rules on 
November 15, 1973, pursuant to the federal requirement (40 CFR part 
51.18) to control emissions from indirect (complex) sources. North 
Carolina identifies transportation facilities as complex sources in its 
rules (N.C.G.S. 143-213(22)) and includes any facilities that cause 
increased emissions from motor vehicles. In 1974, EPA suspended the 
indirect source review programs, including 40 CFR part 51.18. The 1977 
CAA amendments codified this suspension in section 110(a)(5)(A)(i); 
this suspension allowed states to include indirect source review 
regulations in their State Implementation Plans (61 FR 3584; 62 FR 
41277; 63 FR 72193; 64 FR 61213), but EPA could not require them as a 
condition of its approval of the SIP.
    In 2013, the North Carolina General Assembly enacted Session Law 
2013-2014 that sought to streamline the regulatory process and 
eliminate unnecessary regulation. The State Environmental Management 
Commission recommended repealing the transportation facility rules in 
15A NCAC 02D .0800--Complex Sources and 02Q .0600--Transportation 
Facilities Procedures. The transportation facility rules are aimed at 
addressing CO emissions, and North Carolina does not have any CO 
nonattainment areas. As a result, DAQ proposes to repeal the 
transportation facilities rule.

II. Analysis of State's Submittal

    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 (RFP) (as defined in section 171), or any 
other applicable requirement of the Act. EPA evaluates each section 
110(l) noninterference demonstration on a case-by-case basis 
considering the circumstances of each SIP revision. DAQ provided a 
demonstration that shows that the repeal of the statewide North 
Carolina transportation facilities rules will not interfere with the 
maintenance of the CO standards or any other NAAQS or other CAA 
requirement. The rules, which are focused on addressing CO emissions, 
offer no environmental benefit to the State now that it no longer has 
any CO nonattainment areas. The Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham/Chapel Hill 
and Winston-Salem Areas have been redesignated to maintenance (60 FR 
39262 and 59 FR 48402), and the monitoring data for CO in 2016 shows 
that all three areas are well below the 8-hour CO standard. The complex 
sources (transportation facilities) rules do not set requirements for 
any other NAAQS, including ozone, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, 
nitrogen dioxide and lead, and therefore, removing the transportation 
facilities rules in 15A NCAC 02D .0800--Complex Sources and 02Q .0600--
Transportation Facilities Procedures would not result in violations of 
the NAAQS.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving the aforementioned changes to remove 15A NCAC 02D 
.0800--Complex Sources and 02Q .0600--Transportation Facilities 
Procedures, from the SIP for North Carolina. EPA is publishing this 
rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a 
noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. 
However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register 
publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will serve as 
the proposal to approve the SIP revision should adverse comments be 
filed. This rule will be effective July 11, 2017 without further notice 
unless the Agency receives adverse comments by June 12, 2017.
    If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document 
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will 
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in 
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not 
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting 
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public 
is advised that this rule will be effective on July 11, 2017 and no 
further action will be taken on the proposed rule.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
federal regulations. 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 that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, 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.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it

[[Page 22088]]

is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major 
rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by July 11, 2017. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor 
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may 
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or 
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are 
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of 
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules 
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate 
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can 
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed 
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to 
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: March 31, 2017.
V. Anne Heard,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart II--North Carolina

Sec.  52.1770  [Amended]

0
2. Section 52.1770(c), Table 1 is amended:
0
a. Under ``Subchapter 2D Air Pollution Control Requirements'' by 
removing the heading ``Section .0800 Complex Sources'' and the entries 
``Sect .0801'' through ``Sect .0806''; and
0
b. Under ``Subchapter 2Q Air Quality Permits'' by removing the heading 
``Section .0600 Transportation Facility Procedures'' and the entries 
``Sect .0601'' through ``Sect .0607''.

[FR Doc. 2017-09539 Filed 5-11-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P