Document ID: EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0961-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Air Quality Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston Salem Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan
Posted Date: 2013-02-22T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 36 (Friday, February 22, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12238-12243]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04011]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0961; FRL-9782-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Carbon Monoxide Limited 
Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a limited 
maintenance plan update submitted by the State of North Carolina, 
through the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural 
Resources (NC DENR), on August 2, 2012. The limited maintenance plan 
update is for the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem carbon 
monoxide (CO) maintenance areas. Specifically, the State submitted a 
limited maintenance plan update for CO, showing continued attainment of 
the 8-hour CO National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for the 
Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Areas. The 8-hour CO NAAQS 
is 9 parts per million (ppm). EPA is taking direct final action to 
approve the limited maintenance plan update because it is consistent 
with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), and EPA's policy for limited 
maintenance plans.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective April 23, 2013 without 
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by March 25, 2013. 
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-2012-0961, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: (404) 562-9019.
    4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0961, Regulatory Development Section, Air 
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 
Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 
Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are 
only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. 
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through 
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2012-0961. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or 
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. 
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, 
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email 
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your 
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of 
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on 
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that 
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your 
comment and with any

[[Page 12239]]

disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public 
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning 
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you 
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official 
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding 
federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Wong, Regulatory Development 
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management 
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 
Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404) 
562-8726. Mr. Wong can be reached via electronic mail at 
wong.richard@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. What criteria is EPA using to evaluate this submittal?
III. What is EPA's analysis of this submittal?
    A. Requirements of Section 175A of the CAA
    B. Consistency With the October 6, 1995, Memorandum
    1. Attainment Inventory
    2. Maintenance Demonstration
    3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
    4. Contingency Plan
    5. Conformity Determination Under Limited Maintenance Plan
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    A maintenance plan, as defined in section 175A of the CAA, is a 
revision to the SIP to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS for the 
air pollutant in question in the area concerned for at least 10 years 
after the redesignation. Eight years after the redesignation, states 
are required to submit an update to the maintenance plan to provide for 
the maintenance of the NAAQS for another 10 years after the initial 10 
year period has expired. North Carolina's second maintenance plan for 
the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem Areas was approved on 
March 24, 2006 (71 FR 14817).
    A limited maintenance plan for CO is a maintenance plan that is 
available to states that have demonstrated that the design values for 
CO in the nonclassifiable nonattainment or maintenance area are at, or 
below, 7.65 ppm or 85 percent of the 8-hour CO NAAQS. To qualify for a 
limited maintenance plan, the area's design value must not exceed the 
7.65 ppm threshold throughout the entire rulemaking process. The design 
value for CO is defined as the second highest reading in the area in a 
two-year period. Should an area have more than one monitor, the monitor 
with the second highest value in a two-year period serves as the design 
monitor. EPA has also previously determined that the limited 
maintenance plan for CO is available to all states as part of their 
update to the maintenance plans as per section 175A(b), regardless of 
the original nonattainment classification, or lack thereof.
    NC DENR elected to convert its second 10-year maintenance plan for 
CO to a limited maintenance plan, to provide additional flexibility for 
implementing transportation conformity requirements in these CO 
maintenance areas. Briefly, counties in the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham 
and Winston-Salem Areas were previously designated nonattainment for 
the 8-hour CO NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991. These areas 
subsequently attained the 8-hour CO NAAQS and were redesignated from 
nonattainment to attainment. On November 7, 1994, EPA redesignated the 
Winston-Salem Area to attainment for the 8-hour CO NAAQS based on the 
measured air quality data and a 10-year maintenance plan submitted for 
the Winston-Salem Area. See 59 FR 48399. Additionally, on September 18, 
1995, EPA redesignated both the Charlotte Area and the Raleigh-Durham 
Area to attainment for the 8-hour CO NAAQS based on the measured air 
quality data and the 10-year maintenance plan submitted for these 
areas. See 60 FR 39258.
    Section 175A(b) of the CAA mandates that the State shall submit an 
additional revision to the maintenance plan eight years after 
redesignation of any area as an attainment area. NC DENR fulfilled this 
requirement by providing the second and final maintenance plan for all 
three CO maintenance areas in the State. EPA subsequently approved NC 
DENR's maintenance plan. In summary, on March 24, 2006, EPA approved 
the second 10-year maintenance plan for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, 
and Winston-Salem CO Maintenance Areas, which are composed of the 
following four counties: Mecklenburg (Charlotte Area); Durham and Wake 
(Raleigh-Durham Area); and Forsyth (Winston-Salem Area). See 71 FR 
14817.
    As mentioned above, NC DENR elected to convert the second 
maintenance plan for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem 
Areas to a limited maintenance plan for the ease of implementing 
transportation conformity requirements for the CO NAAQS. The limited 
maintenance plans was submitted on August 2, 2012, for EPA approval. 
EPA has made the determination that North Carolina's limited 
maintenance plan satisfies the requirements for section 175A 
maintenance plan, and is consistent with EPA's policy for limited 
maintenance plan elements as outlined in an October 6, 1995, memorandum 
from the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards , entitled 
``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment 
Areas'' (October 6, 1995, Memorandum). More information regarding 
limited maintenance plan requirements is provided below.

II. What criteria is EPA using to evaluate this submittal?

    In addition to the general requirements in section 175A of the CAA, 
guidance for CO limited maintenance plans is provided in the October 6, 
1995, memorandum, which states that the following five components need 
to be addressed: (1) Attainment inventory; (2) maintenance 
demonstration; (3) monitoring network/verification of continued 
attainment; (4) contingency plan; and (5) conformity determinations 
under limited maintenance plans. These elements were outlined in the 
October 6, 1995, EPA memorandum, and are comprehensively discussed 
below.

[[Page 12240]]

III. What is EPA's analysis of this submittal?

A. Requirements of Section 175A of the CAA

    Section 175A contains four subsections pertaining to maintenance 
plans. Section 175A(a) establishes requirements for initial SIP 
redesignation request maintenance plans, as previously addressed by 
North Carolina and subsequently approved by EPA for all three of North 
Carolina's CO areas. See 59 FR 48399 and 60 FR 39258.
    Section 175A(b) requires States to submit an update to the 
maintenance plan eight years following the original redesignation to 
attainment. For the section 175A(b) update, the State must outline 
methods for maintaining the pertinent NAAQS for ten years after the 
expiration of the ten-year period referred to in subsection (a), i.e., 
North Carolina's maintenance plan update must outline methods for 
maintaining the CO NAAQS through 2015, NC DENR satisfied the 
requirements for the second maintenance plans for all of its CO 
maintenance areas, and EPA subsequently approved NC DENR's second 
maintenance plan for each of its CO maintenance areas. See 71 FR 14817, 
March 24, 2006. As indicated above, although North Carolina has 
previously satisfied the requirements for the 175A(b) maintenance plan 
updates for all of its CO areas, the State has elected to convert these 
maintenance plans to limited maintenance plans.
    Section 175A(c) does not apply to this rulemaking, given that EPA 
has previously redesignated the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham, and Winston-
Salem areas to attainment for CO.
    Section 175A(d) which included the contingency provisions 
requirements are addressed in detail in section B4, below.

B. Consistency With the October 6, 1995, Memorandum

    As discussed above, EPA's interpretation of section 175A of the 
CAA, as it pertains to limited maintenance plans for CO, is contained 
in the October 6, 1995, Memorandum. North Carolina addressed the five 
major elements of that policy, as follows:
1. Attainment Inventory
    The State is required to develop an attainment emissions inventory 
to identify a level of emissions in the area which is sufficient to 
attain the CO NAAQS. This inventory should be consistent with EPA's 
most recent guidance on emission inventories for nonattainment areas 
available at the time and should include the emissions during the time 
period associated with the monitoring data showing attainment. It 
should be based on actual ``typical CO season day'' emissions for all 
source classifications (i.e., stationary point and area sources and 
nonroad and onroad mobile sources) for the attainment year. In its 
August 2, 2012, submittal, NC DENR provided a comprehensive CO 
emissions inventory for nonroad mobile, onroad mobile, point, and area 
sources for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem CO 
Maintenance Areas.
    NC DENR collected or developed point source emissions inventory 
from stationary sources that have the potential to emit more than five 
tons per year of CO emissions from a single facility and are required 
to have an operating permit. The stationary area source inventory is 
estimated on a county level and consisted of those sources whose 
emissions are relatively small, but due to the large number of sources, 
the collective emissions could be significant. North Carolina estimated 
the stationary area source emissions by multiplying an emission factor 
by some known indicator of collective activity (such as fuel usage, 
number of households, or population). For on-road mobile source 
emissions, NC DENR used USEPA's Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator 
(MOVES) model version 2010a (i.e., MOVES2010a), released in August 
2010, for estimating vehicle emissions. Nonroad mobile sources are 
pieces of equipment that can move but do not use roadways (e.g. lawn 
mowers, construction equipment, railroad locomotives, aircraft). The 
emissions from this category are calculated at the county level using 
USEPA's NONROAD2008s nonroad mobile model, with the exception of 
railroad locomotives and aircraft engines. The railroad locomotives and 
aircraft engines are estimated by taking an activity and multiplying by 
an emission factor. Table 1 displays the 2010 attainment year emissions 
inventory as required for the limited maintenance plans. Appendix B of 
North Carolina's SIP submittal provides detailed discussions regarding 
the development of emissions for the four emission source 
classifications, and is provided in the docket for today's rulemaking.

                           Table 1--2010 CO Emissions (tons/day) for Maintenance Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Point
                     County                         source    Area source    On-road      Nonroad       Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Durham.........................................         0.97         1.54       186.00        19.04       207.55
Wake...........................................         1.17         4.26       642.97        70.62       719.02
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
    Total......................................         2.14         5.80       828.97        89.66       926.57
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Winston-Salem Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forsyth........................................         2.22         1.41       244.16        23.97       271.76
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Charlotte Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mecklenburg....................................         2.39         4.21       724.39       114.71       845.70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Maintenance Demonstration
    In the October 6, 1995, Memorandum, EPA stated that the maintenance 
demonstration requirement is considered to be satisfied for 
nonclassifiable areas if the monitoring data show that the area is 
meeting the air quality criteria for limited maintenance areas (i.e., 
85 percent of the eight hour CO NAAQS, or 7.65 ppm). EPA determined in 
this same memorandum that there is no requirement to protect emissions 
over the maintenance period. Instead, EPA believes that if the area 
begins the

[[Page 12241]]

maintenance period at, or below, 7.65 ppm (85 percent of the 8-hour CO 
NAAQS), the applicability of prevention of significant deterioration 
(PSD) requirements, control measures already in the SIP, and other 
federal measures should provide adequate assurance of maintenance 
throughout the maintenance period. Monitoring data from 2008-2011 shows 
all three areas below the 8-hour CO NAAQS values as listed in Table 2. 
All monitoring levels are well below the 85 percent threshold of 7.65 
ppm and therefore the State has satisfied the maintenance demonstration 
requirement for a limited maintenance plan for each of its CO 
maintenance areas.

                                Table 2--CO 8-Hour Monitored Concentration NAAQS
                                               [parts per million]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        County                          Monitor ID     2009       2010       2011     8-hr NAAQS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wake.................................................    371830014        1.3        1.3        1.4            9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Winston-Salem Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forsyth..............................................    370670023        1.7        1.9        2.1            9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Charlotte Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mecklenburg..........................................    371190041        1.7        1.7        1.5            9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
    Once an area has been redesignated, the state should continue to 
operate an appropriate air quality monitoring network, in accordance 
with 40 CFR Part 58, to verify the attainment status of the area. This 
is particularly important for areas using a limited maintenance plan 
because there will be no cap on emissions. In accordance with 40 CFR 
Part 58, NC DENR commits to continue monitoring CO at these three sites 
to ensure that CO concentrations remain well below the 7.65 ppm 
threshold for limited maintenance plans. The State's monitoring plan 
for 2012 can be found at the following site: http://www.ncair.org/monitor/monitoring_plan/new_plan/2012_NCDAQ_Network_Plan.pdf. EPA 
has determined that the State has satisfied the monitoring network and 
verification of continued attainment requirements for the limited 
maintenance plan.
4. Contingency Plan
    Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include 
contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct any violation 
of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation of an area. The October 6, 
1995, Memorandum further requires that the contingency provisions 
identify the measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for 
adoption and implementation, and a specific time limit for action by 
the state.
    In its August 2, 2012, submittal, NC DENR committed to the same 
contingency measures that EPA previously approved on March 24, 2006 (71 
FR 14817) and a subsequent clarification on June 19, 2007 (72 FR 
33692). The State pre-adopted an oxygenated fuels program with minimum 
oxygen content by weight of 2.7 for Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and 
Winston-Salem maintenance areas. The oxygenated fuel program is 
required under the CAA for the Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem areas 
as a required control measure prior to the attainment redesignation. 
Charlotte was placed under oxygenated fuel program for effective area-
wide CO emission reduction and ease for State implementation. The 
triggering date will be no more than 60 days after an ambient air 
quality violation is monitored. NC DENR will commence an analysis and 
regulation development process during this time. The State will 
consider the following control measures:
    a. Amending the oxygenated fuels program by adopting oxygenate 
content of 2.0 percent to 2.7 percent by weight, or activate of the 2.7 
percent by eight pre-adopted contingency measure, or 2.7 percent to 3.1 
percent by weight.
    b. Expanding coverage of oxygenated fuels to include counties where 
a strong commuting pattern into the core maintenance area exists.
    c. Alternative fuel vehicle programs to include compressed natural 
gas and electric vehicles.
    d. Employee commute options programs.
    NC DENR committed to implement at least one of the control measures 
within 24 months of the trigger, or as expeditiously as practicable. 
EPA has determined that the State has satisfied the contingency plan 
requirements pursuant to section 175A(d) of the CAA as well as those of 
the October 6, 1995, Memorandum.
5. Conformity Determination Under Limited Maintenance Plan
    The transportation conformity rule of November 24, 1993 (58 FR 
62188), and the general conformity rule of November 30, 1993 (58 FR 
63214), apply to nonattainment areas and maintenance areas operating 
under the maintenance plans. Under either rule, one means of 
demonstrating conformity of federal actions is to indicate that 
expected emissions from planned actions are consistent with the 
emissions budget for the area.
    EPA's October 6, 1995, Memorandum states that emissions budgets in 
limited maintenance plan areas may be treated as essentially not 
constraining for the length of the maintenance period because it is 
unreasonable to expect that such an area will experience so much growth 
in that period that a violation of the CO NAAQS would result. In other 
words, EPA concluded that, for these areas, emissions need not be 
capped for the maintenance period.
    In accordance with the Transportation conformity rule, approval of 
a limited maintenance plan only removes the requirement to conduct a 
regional emissions analysis as part of the conformity determination. 
The requirement to demonstrate conformity per the requirements in 
section 93.109, in Table 1 still applies. Additionally, federally 
funded projects are still subject to ``Hot Spot'' analysis 
requirements. However, no regional modeling analysis would be required.
    Transportation partners should note that this approval of these 
limited maintenance plans in future

[[Page 12242]]

transportation conformity determinations. Additionally, while this 
finding waives the requirements for a regional emissions analysis for 
the CO, as mentioned above, it does not waive other conformity 
requirements for the CO standard for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and 
Winston-Salem areas, and it does not waive transportation conformity 
requirement for other pollutants/precursors for which these areas may 
be designated nonattainment or redesigned to attainment with a full 
maintenance plan.
    The State has satisfied the conformity determination under limited 
maintenance plan requirements for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and 
Winston-Salem areas in this limited maintenance plan.

IV. Final Action

    EPA is approving the CO limited maintenance plan for the Charlotte, 
Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem Areas. The State of North Carolina 
has complied with the requirements of section 175A of the CAA, as 
interpreted by the guidance provided in the October 6, 1995, 
Memorandum. North Carolina has shown monitored levels of CO in the 
three areas have been consistently well below the requisite level of 
7.65 ppm for the 8-hour CO NAAQS in order to qualify for the limited 
maintenance plan. North Carolina has also shown monitored values for 
the 8-hour CO NAAQS have been consistently well below the NAAQS levels 
from 2009-2011. EPA has made the determination that the North Carolina, 
August 2, 2012, submission providing the CO limited maintenance plan 
for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem Areas is 
consistent with the CAA and EPA's guidance on limited maintenance 
plans. This action is being taken pursuant to section 110 of the CAA.
    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 April 23, 2013 
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by 
March 25, 2013.
    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 April 23, 2013 and no 
further action will be taken on the proposed rule. Please note that if 
we receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of 
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of 
the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are 
not the subject of an adverse comment.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
final 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 final action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 F43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this final rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by April 23, 2013. 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. 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: February 11, 2013.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

[[Page 12243]]

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

0
2. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by adding a new entry for entry for 
``8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan for Charlotte, 
Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Maintenance Areas.'' at the end of the 
table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1770  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                              EPA Approved North Carolina Non-regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    State effective     EPA approval     Federal Register
            Provision                     date              date             citation            Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Limited    August 2, 2012.....         2/22/13   [Insert citation    ....................
 Maintenance Plan for Charlotte,                                        of publication].
 Raleigh/Durham and Winston-
 Salem Maintenance Area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2013-04011 Filed 2-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P