Document ID: EPA-R04-OAR-2010-0019-0003
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Approvals and Promulgations of Implementation Plans: North Carolina Portion of the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill 1997 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area; Reasonable Further Progress Plan
Posted Date: 2012-10-12T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 198 (Friday, October 12, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62159-62166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25181]

[[Page 62159]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2010-0019(a); FRL-9741-2]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina 
Portion of the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, North Carolina-North 
Carolina 1997 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area; Reasonable Further 
Progress Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve state 
implementation plan (SIP) revision, submitted by the North Carolina 
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NC DENR), on June 15, 
2007, as updated on November 30, 2009, to address the reasonable 
further progress (RFP) plan requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for the North Carolina 
portion of the bi-state Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill 1997 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment area. The Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill, North Carolina-
South Carolina 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area (hereafter referred 
to as the ``bi-state Charlotte Area'') is comprised of Cabarrus, 
Gaston, Lincoln, Mecklenburg, Rowan, Union and a portion of Iredell 
(Davidson and Coddle Creek Townships) Counties in North Carolina 
(hereafter referred to as the ``North Carolina portion of the bi-state 
Charlotte Area''); and a portion of York County in South Carolina. EPA 
is also providing the status of its adequacy determination for the 
motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEB) for volatile organic compounds 
(VOC) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) that were included in North Carolina's 
RFP plan. Further, EPA is approving these MVEB. These actions are being 
taken pursuant to section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). EPA 
will take action on South Carolina's RFP plan for its portion of the 
bi-state Charlotte Area, in a separate action.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective December 11, 2012 without 
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by November 13, 
2012. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely 
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform 
the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number, ``EPA-
R04-OAR-2010-0019,'' 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-2010-0019,'' Regulatory Development Section, 
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, 
Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides 
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such 
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours 
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are 
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal 
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID Number, ``EPA-R04-
OAR-2010-0019.'' EPA's policy is that all comments received will be 
included in the public docket without change and may be made available 
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through 
www.regulations.gov or email, information that you consider to be CBI 
or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an 
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your 
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of 
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without 
going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any 
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to 
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA 
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid 
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of 
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public 
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy at the 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: Ms. Sara Waterson of the Regulatory 
Development Section, in the 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) 562-9061. Ms. Sara Waterson can be reached 
via electronic mail at waterson.sara@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What action is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for EPA's action?
III. What is EPA's analysis of the RFP plan for the North Carolina 
portion of the bi-state Charlotte area?
IV. What is the 2008 NOx emissions inventory for the 
North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte area?
V. What is EPA's analysis of the 2008 VOC MVEB for the North 
Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte area?
VI. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the 2008 
VOC MVEB for the North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte 
area?
VII. Final Action
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving revisions to the North Carolina SIP, submitted by 
the State of North Carolina through NC DENR, on June 15, 2007, as 
updated on November 30, 2009, to meet RFP requirements of the CAA for 
the North

[[Page 62160]]

Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area for the 1997 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS. The RFP plan demonstrates that VOC emissions will be 
reduced by at least 15 percent for the period of 2002 through 2008. 
Additionally, EPA is approving the required 2008 VOC MVEB and optional 
2008 NOx MVEB which were included in the RFP plan for the North 
Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area. EPA is taking these 
actions because they are consistent with CAA requirements for the 
requirements for RFP. The MVEB for the North Carolina portion of the 
bi-state Charlotte Area, expressed in kilograms per day (kgd), are 
provided in Table 1 below.

Table 1--MVEB for the North Carolina Portion of the 1997 8-Hour Bi-State
                             Charlotte Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          VOC      NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  2008 County-level Subarea MVEB (kg/d)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbarrus.............................................    6,941    7,324
Gaston................................................    5,132    7,647
Iredell*..............................................    3,601    5,637
Lincoln...............................................    2,726    2,948
Mecklenburg...........................................   26,368   34,526
Rowan.................................................    6,149    7,193
Union.................................................    6,299    5,660
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents only the portion of Iredell County that is in the
  nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte Area.

    EPA is also describing the status of its transportation conformity 
adequacy determination for the 2008 MVEB.

II. What is the background for EPA's action?

A. General Background

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 
0.08 parts per million (ppm). Under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 
50, the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS is attained when the 3-year average of 
the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ambient air 
quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 
0.084 ppm when rounding is considered) (69 FR 23857, April 30, 2004). 
Ambient air quality monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet the 
data completeness requirement as determined in 40 CFR part 50, appendix 
I. The ambient air quality monitoring data completeness requirement is 
met when the average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data 
is greater than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent 
data completeness.
    Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the CAA requires EPA 
to designate as nonattainment any area that is violating the NAAQS, 
based on the three most recent years of ambient air quality data at the 
conclusion of the designation process. The bi-state Charlotte Area was 
designated nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on April 30, 
2004 (effective June 15, 2004) using 2001-2003 ambient air quality data 
(69 FR 23857, April 30, 2004). At the time of designation the bi-state 
Charlotte Area was classified as a moderate nonattainment area for the 
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In the April 30, 2004, Phase I Ozone 
Implementation Rule, EPA established ozone nonattainment area 
attainment dates based on Table 1 of section 181(a) of the CAA. This 
established an attainment date six years after the June 15, 2004, 
effective date for areas classified as moderate areas for the 1997 8-
hour ozone nonattainment designations. Section 181 of the CAA explains 
that the attainment date for moderate nonattainment areas shall be as 
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than six years after 
designation, or June 15, 2010. Therefore, the bi-state Charlotte Area's 
original attainment date was June 15, 2010. See 69 FR 23951, April 30, 
2004.
    The bi-state Charlotte Area did not attain the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS by June 15, 2010 (the applicable attainment date for moderate 
nonattainment areas); however, the Area qualified for an extension of 
the attainment date. Under certain circumstances, the CAA allows for 
extensions of the attainment dates prescribed at the time of the 
original nonattainment designation. In accordance with CAA section 
181(a)(5), EPA may grant up to 2 one-year extensions of the attainment 
date under specified conditions. On May 31, 2011, EPA determined that 
North Carolina and South Carolina met the CAA requirements to obtain a 
one-year extension of the attainment date for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS for the bi-state Charlotte Area. See 76 FR 31245. As a result, 
EPA extended the bi-state Charlotte Area's attainment date from June 
15, 2010, to June 15, 2011, for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    On November 15, 2011 (76 FR 70656), EPA determined the bi-state 
Charlotte Area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS; and subsequently, 
on March 7, 2012 (77 FR 13493), EPA determined that the bi-state 
Charlotte Area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the applicable 
attainment date. The determination of attaining data was based upon 
complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air monitoring data for 
the 2008-2010 period, showing that the bi-state Charlotte Area had 
monitored attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The requirements 
for the bi-state Charlotte Area to submit an attainment demonstration 
and associated reasonably available control measures (RACM), RFP plan, 
contingency measures, and other planning SIP revisions related to 
attainment of the standard were suspended as a result of the 
determination of attainment, so long as the bi-state Charlotte Area 
continues to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\1\ See 40 CFR 
52.1779(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Originally, North Carolina submitted SIP revisions, 
including an attainment demonstration, on June 15, 2007, to address 
nonattainment requirements related to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 
Specifically, North Carolina submitted an attainment demonstration 
and associated RACM, a RFP plan, contingency measures, emissions 
statement, a 2002 base year emissions inventory and other planning 
SIP revisions related to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
for the North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area. North 
Carolina withdrew the June 15, 2007, attainment demonstration SIP 
for the North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area on 
December 19, 2008. On November 12, 2009, North Carolina resubmitted 
the attainment demonstration SIP, and on November 30, 2009, North 
Carolina provided an update for the June 15, 2007, RFP plan for the 
North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 21, 2011, North Carolina withdrew the attainment 
demonstration submissions (except RFP, emissions statements, and the 
emissions inventory) as allowed by 40 CFR 51.918 for the North Carolina 
portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area.\2\ Subsequently, EPA approved 
North Carolina's SIP revisions related to the emissions statements and 
emissions inventory requirements for the North Carolina portion of the 
bi-state Charlotte Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For the EPA 
action related to the emissions statements requirements for the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS, see 77 FR 24382 (April 24, 2012) and 64 FR 41277 
(August 1, 1997). For the EPA action related to the emissions inventory 
requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, see 77 FR 26441 (May 4, 
2012). Despite the determination of attainment, North Carolina opted to 
leave the SIP submissions related to the RFP requirements for the 1997 
8-hour ozone NAAQS before EPA for action. As such, EPA is taking action 
to approve revisions to North Carolina's SIP submitted on June 15, 
2007, as updated on November 30, 2009, as it relates to the RFP 
requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ North Carolina did not withdraw any elements related to 
reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements, to the 
extent that these requirements were addressed in the attainment 
demonstration submissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Background for RFP

    On November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71612), as revised on June 8, 2007 (72 
FR

[[Page 62161]]

31727), EPA published a rule entitled ``Final Rule To Implement the 8-
Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard--Phase 2; Final Rule 
To Implement Certain Aspects of the 1990 Amendments Relating to New 
Source Review and Prevention of Significant Deterioration as They Apply 
in Carbon Monoxide, Particulate Matter and Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for 
Reformulated Gasoline'' (hereafter referred to as the Phase 2 Rule). 
Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA and EPA's Phase 2 Rule \3\ require a 
state, for each 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area that is classified 
as moderate, to submit an emissions inventory and a RFP plan to show 
how the state will reduce emissions of VOC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ RFP regulations are at 40 CFR 51.910.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The bi-state Charlotte Area had an attainment date of June 15, 2010 
(i.e., that is beyond five years after designation), that was later 
extended to June 15, 2011. See 76 FR 31245 (May 31, 2011). For a 
moderate area with an attainment date of more than five years after 
designation, the RFP plan must obtain a 15 percent reduction in ozone 
precursor emissions for the first six years after the baseline year 
(2002 through 2008). Since the North Carolina portion of the bi-state 
Charlotte Area did not have a previous plan to address RFP 
requirements,\4\ the initial RFP requirement for the Area must be met 
through VOC reductions as required by the 1990 CAA Amendments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Some areas that were designated as moderate or above for the 
1-hour ozone NAAQS may have implemented Rate of Progress plans 
(i.e., plans similar to the RFP requirements) by which the area 
would have achieved at least a 15 percent reduction in VOC from an 
initial baseline. Such areas have the flexibility to meet RFP 
requirements through a reduction in VOC or nitrogen oxides, after 
the initial achievement in a reduction of at least 15 percent for 
VOC emissions for the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Pursuant to CAA section 172(c)(9), RFP plans must include 
contingency measures that will take effect without further action by 
the state or EPA, which includes additional controls that would be 
implemented if the area fails to reach the RFP milestones. While the 
CAA does not specify the type of measures or quantity of emissions 
reductions required, EPA provided guidance interpreting the CAA that 
implementation of these contingency measures would provide additional 
emissions reductions of up to 3 percent of the adjusted base year 
inventory in the year following the RFP milestone year (i.e., in this 
case 2008). For more information on contingency measures please see the 
April 16, 1992 General Preamble (57 FR 13498, 13510) and the November 
29, 2005 Phase 2 8-hour ozone standard implementation rule (70 FR 
71612, 71650). Finally, RFP plans must also include a MVEB for the 
precursors for which the plan is developed. The State also had the 
option of developing MVEB for other precursors. See Section V of this 
rulemaking for more information on MVEB requirements.
    On June 15, 2007, and later updated on November 30, 2009, North 
Carolina submitted the RFP plan for the North Carolina portion of the 
bi-state Charlotte Area to address the CAA's requirements for the 1997 
8-hour ozone NAAQS. The June 15, 2007, SIP revision (as updated on 
November 30, 2009) included an attainment demonstration plan, RFP plan 
for 2008, contingency measures, RACT, RACM requirements, on-road VOC 
and NOx MVEB, and the 2002 base year emissions inventory. These 
revisions to the SIP were subject to notice and comment by the public 
and the State addressed the comments received on the proposed SIP 
revisions. Today's rulemaking is approving only the RFP plan, including 
the associated MVEB. The remainder of North Carolina's June 15, 2007, 
submittal was addressed by previous EPA actions, or by the State's 
withdrawal of submissions that were no longer necessary.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ North Carolina's November 30, 2009, SIP revision only 
addressed RFP and is being acted on in its entirety in this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What is EPA's analysis of the RFP plan for the North Carolina 
portion of the bi-state Charlotte area?

    On June 15, 2007, and later updated on November 30, 2009, North 
Carolina submitted the RFP plan for the North Carolina portion of the 
bi-state Charlotte Area to address the CAA's requirements for the 1997 
8-hour ozone NAAQS. Below provides EPA's analysis of North Carolina's 
RFP submission.

A. Base Year Emissions Inventory

    An emissions inventory is a comprehensive, accurate, current 
inventory of actual emissions from all sources and is required by 
section 182(a)(1) of the CAA. Because the North Carolina portion of the 
bi-state Charlotte Area as part of the bi-state Charlotte Area did not 
implement the 15 percent VOC reductions for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the 
requirement for North Carolina to meet RFP is a 15 percent VOC 
reduction between 2002 and 2008 with continued progress toward 
attainment through attainment.\6\ EPA recommended 2002 as the base year 
emissions inventory, and is therefore the starting point for 
calculating RFP. North Carolina submitted its 2002 base year emissions 
inventory on June 15, 2007. In an action on May 4, 2012, EPA approved 
North Carolina's 2002 base year emissions inventory for the North 
Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area for the 1997 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR 26441. A summary of the North Carolina portion 
of the bi-state Charlotte Area 2002 base year emissions inventories is 
included in Table 2 below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The bi-state Charlotte Area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS by June 15, 2011, based on 2008- 2010 data.

                   Table 2--2002 Point and Area Sources Annual Emissions for the North Carolina Portion of the Bi-State Charlotte Area
                                                                  [Tons per summer day]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Point                     Area                    Non-Road                   Mobile
                     County                      -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      NOX          VOC          NOX          VOC          NOX          VOC          NOX          VOC
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cabarrus........................................          2.6          2.2          0.8          6.0          5.4          2.7         17.2         21.5
Gaston..........................................         34.8          2.5          1.3          8.9          4.9          2.9         20.0         13.5
Iredell*........................................         10.8          2.1          0.9          5.8          4.4          2.7         29.9         17.6
Lincoln.........................................          0.3          2.1          0.5          3.1          1.9          1.3          6.1          7.1
Mecklenburg.....................................          2.1          5.7          7.0         29.4         32.1         24.1         78.7         68.0
Rowan...........................................         11.0          6.3          0.8          5.6          4.1          2.3         19.7         14.8
Union...........................................          0.2          1.0          1.0          6.4          7.7          4.7         11.3         13.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents only the portion of Iredell County that is in the nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte Area.

[[Page 62162]]

    As mentioned above, EPA has already approved this emissions 
inventory in a prior action.

B. Adjusted Base Year Inventory and 2008 RFP Target Levels

    The process for determining the emissions baseline from which the 
RFP reductions are calculated is described in section 182(b)(1) of the 
CAA and 40 CFR 51.910. This baseline value is the 2002 adjusted base 
year inventory. Sections 182(b)(1)(B) and (D) require the exclusion 
from the base year inventory of emissions benefits resulting from the 
Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP) regulations promulgated 
by January 1, 1990, and the Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) regulations 
promulgated June 11, 1990 (55 FR 23666). The FMVCP and RVP emissions 
reductions are determined by the State using EPA's on-road mobile 
source emissions modeling software, MOBILE6. The FMVCP and RVP emission 
reductions are then removed from the base year inventory by the State, 
resulting in an adjusted base year inventory. The emission reductions 
needed to satisfy the RFP requirement are then calculated from the 
adjusted base year inventory. These reductions are then subtracted from 
the adjusted base year inventory to establish the emissions target for 
the RFP milestone year (2008).
    For moderate areas like the North Carolina portion of the bi-state 
Charlotte Area (as part of the bi-state Charlotte Area), the CAA 
specifies a 15 percent reduction in ozone precursor emissions over an 
initial six year period following the baseline inventory year. In the 
Phase 2 Rule, EPA interpreted this requirement for areas that were also 
designated nonattainment and classified as moderate or higher for the 
1-hour ozone NAAQS. In the Phase 2 Rule, EPA provided that an area 
classified as moderate or higher that has the same boundaries as an 
area, or is entirely composed of several areas or portions of areas, 
for which EPA fully approved a 15 percent plan for the 1-hour NAAQS, is 
considered to have met the requirements of section 182(b)(1) of the CAA 
for the 8-hour NAAQS. In this situation, a moderate nonattainment area 
is subject to RFP under section 172(c)(2) of the CAA and shall submit, 
no later than 3 years after designation for the 8-hour NAAQS, a SIP 
revision that meets the requirements of 40 CFR 51.910(b)(2). The RFP 
SIP revision must provide for a 15 percent emission reduction (either 
nitrogen oxides (NOX) and/or VOC) accounting for any growth 
that occurs during the six year period following the baseline emissions 
inventory year, that is, 2002-2008.
    The portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area that was classified as 
moderate under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS contained the counties of Gaston 
and Mecklenburg in North Carolina. Gaston and Mecklenburg counties were 
also designated nonattainment as a part of the 1997 8-hour ozone 
moderate bi-state Charlotte Area. Although a portion of this bi-state 
Charlotte Area was classified as moderate for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, a 
15 percent rate of progress (ROP) \7\ plan was not submitted due to its 
change in attainment status. Specifically, North Carolina submitted a 
redesignation and maintenance plan request instead before the due date 
of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS ROP plan. Therefore, because the bi-state 
Charlotte Area did not implement a 15 percent ROP plan under the 1-hour 
ozone NAAQS, the Area must have VOC reductions totaling at least 15 
percent for the first six years following the baseline inventory year 
of 2002 in order for the RFP plan to be approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the plan to demonstrate progress 
towards attainment was known as the ROP plan. For the 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS, this same plan is known as the RFP plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned earlier and according to section 182(b)(1)(D) of the 
CAA, emission reductions that resulted from the FMVCP and RVP rules 
promulgated prior to 1990 are not creditable for achieving RFP emission 
reductions. Therefore, the 2002 base year inventory is adjusted by 
subtracting the VOC and NOx emission reductions that are expected to 
occur between 2002 and the future milestone years due to the FMVCP and 
RVP rules.
    In the Phase 2 Rule, promulgated on November 29, 2005 (70 FR 
71612), EPA outlines Method 1 as the process that states should use to 
show compliance with RFP for areas like the North Carolina portion of 
the bi-state Charlotte Area. A summary of the steps for Method 1 is 
provided below.
     Step A is the actual anthropogenic base year VOC emissions 
inventory in 2002.
     Step B is to account for creditable emissions for RFP.
     Step C is to calculate non-creditable emissions for RFP. 
Non-creditable emissions include emissions from: (1) Motor vehicle 
exhaust or evaporative emissions regulations promulgated by January 1, 
1990; (2) regulations concern RVP promulgated by November 15, 1990; (3) 
RACT corrections required prior to November 1990; and (4) corrective 
inspection and maintenance (I/M) plan required prior to November 1990.
     Step D is the 2002 base year emissions (Step A) minus the 
non-creditable emissions (Step C).
     Step E is to calculate the 2008 target level VOC 
emissions. This is calculated by reducing the emissions from Step D by 
15 percent.
     The estimated 2008 VOC emissions are then compared to the 
2008 target level VOC emissions (Step E).
    As provided in North Carolina's RFP SIP revision, the State 
utilized the steps from Method 1 of the Phase 2 Rule. Specifically, 
North Carolina's November 30, 2009, SIP revision sets out the State's 
calculations.
1. Step A: Estimate the actual anthropogenic base year VOC inventory in 
2002 with all 2002 control programs in place for all sources.
    North Carolina provided this emission inventory in Table 3-1 of the 
November 30, 2009, RFP plan for the North Carolina portion of the bi-
state Charlotte Area, and as shown in Table 3, below. As mentioned 
above, EPA has already approved this inventory. See 77 FR 26441 (May 4, 
2012).

       Table 3--2002 VOC Emissions Inventory for the North Carolina Portion of the Bi-State Charlotte Area
                                              [Tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Non-road         On-road
             County                    Point           Area           mobile          mobile           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cabarrus........................             2.2             6.0             2.7            20.5            31.4
Gaston..........................             2.5             8.9             2.9            13.3            27.6
Iredell*........................             0.9             1.9             0.9             6.6            10.3
Lincoln.........................             2.1             3.1             1.3             6.7            13.2
Mecklenburg.....................             5.7            29.4            24.1            66.1           125.3

[[Page 62163]]

 
Rowan...........................             6.3             5.6             2.3            14.2            28.4
Union...........................             1.0             6.4             4.7            12.3            24.4
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................            20.7            61.3            38.9           139.7           260.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents only the portion of Iredell County that is in the nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte
  Area

2. Step B: Using the same highway vehicle activity inputs used to 
calculate the actual 2002 inventory, run the appropriate motor vehicle 
emissions model for 2002 and for 2008 with all post-1990 CAA measures 
turned off. Any other local inputs for vehicle I/M programs should be 
set according to the program that was required to be in place in 1990. 
Fuel RVP should be set at 9.0 or 7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) 
depending on the RVP required in the local area as a result of fuel RVP 
regulations promulgated in June, 1990.
    For the North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area, the 
RACT and I/M program corrections and the 1992 RVP requirements were 
completely in place by 1996 and therefore are already accounted for in 
the 2002 baseline. As a result, these measures would produce no 
additional reductions between 2002 and 2008 or later milestone years.
3. Step C: Calculate the difference between the 2002 and 2008 VOC 
emission factors calculated in Step B and multiply by the 2002 vehicle 
miles traveled. The result is the VOC emission calculation that will 
occur between 2002 and 2008 without the benefits of any post-1990-CAA 
measures. These are the non-creditable reductions that occur over this 
period.
    North Carolina calculated the non-creditable emission reductions 
between 2002 and 2008 by modeling its 2002 and 2008 motor vehicle 
emissions with all post-1990 CAA measures turned off, and calculating 
the difference. The table below (as present in Table 4-8 of North 
Carolina's November 30, 2009, SIP revision) shows that there is 
approximately a 10.0 tons per day (tpd) difference.

   Table 4--Total Bi-State Charlotte Area Non-Creditable VOC Emission
                             Estimates (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         Non-creditable
                        County                            VOC emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cabarrus..............................................             1.688
Gaston................................................             0.912
Iredell*..............................................             0.822
Lincoln...............................................             0.633
Mecklenburg...........................................             3.384
Rowan.................................................             1.315
Union.................................................             1.230
                                                       -----------------
    Total.............................................     9.984 or 10.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents only the portion of Iredell County that is in the
  nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte Area

4. Step D: Subtract the non-creditable reductions calculated in Step C 
from the actual anthropogenic 2002 inventory estimated in Step A. This 
adjusted VOC inventory is the basis for calculating the target level of 
emissions in 2008.
    The adjusted VOC inventory for calculating the target level of VOC 
emissions reductions for 2008 is 250.6 tpd (i.e., 260.6 tpd (i.e., 
result of Step A) and 10.0 tpd (i.e., the result of Step C)).
5. Step E: Reduce the adjusted VOC inventory calculated in Step D by 15 
percent. The result is the target level of VOC emissions in 2008 in 
order to meet the 2008 RFP requirement. The actual projected 2008 
inventory for all sources with all control measures in place, including 
projected 2008 growth in activity, must be at or lower than this target 
level of emissions.
    The targeted level of emissions reductions for the North Carolina 
portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area to meet RFP requirements is 37.6 
tpd of VOC (i.e, 250.6 tpd multiplied by 15 percent). Thus the required 
targeted level of VOC emissions is 213.0 tpd for the North Carolina 
portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area.

C. Final Analysis of North Carolina's RFP Analysis for the North 
Carolina Portion of the Bi-State Charlotte Area

    As mentioned above, the required target level for the North 
Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area to meet the initial RFP 
plan requirement is a 15 percent reduction in VOC emissions for 2008 
from the VOC emissions in 2002 (as adjusted per CAA requirements). 
Specifically, to meet this requirement, North Carolina needed to 
demonstrate a reduction of at least 37.6 tpd. Table 5 below summarizes 
the results of North Carolina's calculations for this RFP analysis.

 Table 5--15 Percent RFP Analysis for North Carolina Portion of Bi-State
                             Charlotte Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   VOC
        Step from method 1                    Matrix              (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step A...........................  Total 2002 Base Year            260.6
                                    Anthropogenic VOC Emissions.
Step C...........................  Non-Creditable VOC               10.0
                                    reductions.
Step D...........................  2002 Base Year minus the Non-   250.6
                                    Creditable Emissions.
Step E...........................  2008 Target Level of VOC        213.0
                                    Emissions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its November 30, 2009, SIP revision, North Carolina calculated 
the 2008 VOC emissions inventory for the North Carolina portion of the 
bi-state Charlotte Area. This emissions inventory is provided in Table 
6 below.

[[Page 62164]]

        Table 6--2008 Baseline VOC Emissions (tpd) for North Carolina Portion of Bi-State Charlotte Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Non-road         On-road
             County                    Point           Area           mobile          mobile           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cabarrus........................             2.3             5.9             1.5            10.4            20.1
Gaston..........................             2.7             9.4             2.0             7.5            21.6
Iredell*........................             0.7             1.8             0.5             5.4             8.4
Lincoln.........................             2.1             2.9             0.8             4.2            10.0
Mecklenburg.....................             5.9            30.1            13.0            38.0            87.0
Rowan...........................             6.0             5.6             1.5            14.2            22.3
Union...........................             1.2             5.7             1.7             9.9            18.5
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................            20.9            61.4            21.0            84.6           187.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents only the portion of Iredell County that is in the nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte
  Area

    As discussed above, the required target for VOC emissions for the 
year 2008 for North Carolina to meet the RFP requirements for the North 
Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area is 213.0 tpd (i.e., 15 
percent reduction from the adjusted 2002 baseline). As revealed in 
Table 6, North Carolina calculated an emissions inventory of 187.9 tpd 
of VOC for the North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area in 
2008, which is well below the 213.0 tpd required target. Thus, EPA is 
making the determination that North Carolina's SIP revision 
demonstrates the required progress towards attainment for the North 
Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area. In today's action, EPA 
is approving North Carolina's RFP SIP revision submitted on June 15, 
2007 (as updated on November 30, 2009) as meeting the CAA and EPA's 
regulations regarding RFP.

IV. What is the 2008 NOX emissions inventory for the North 
Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte area?

    In support of its development of a NOx MVEB for the 2008, North 
Carolina, in its November 30, 2009, SIP revision, developed the NOx 
emissions inventory for the North Carolina portion of the bi-state 
Charlotte Area. This inventory is not required for the RFP plan but is 
necessary for the development of the MVEB. This emissions inventory is 
provided in Table 7 below.

      Table 7--2008 Baseline NOx Emissions (tpd) for the North Carolina Portion of Bi-State Charlotte Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Non-road         On-road
             County                    Point           Area           mobile          mobile           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cabarrus........................             2.6             1.5             4.1             9.6            17.8
Gaston..........................            32.8             2.2             4.8            10.0            49.8
Iredell*........................             0.5             0.4             0.9             6.9             8.7
Lincoln.........................             9.3             0.7             1.4             3.7            15.1
Mecklenburg.....................             2.0            11.3            20.9            45.6            79.8
Rowan...........................            22.4             1.3             4.6             9.5            37.8
Union...........................             0.2             1.5             3.3             7.4            12.4
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................            69.8            18.9            40.0            92.7           221.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents only the portion of Iredell County that is in the nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte
  Area

V. What is EPA's analysis of the 2008 MVEB for the North Carolina 
portion of the bi-state Charlotte area?

    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation plans, 
programs, and projects, such as the construction of new highways, must 
``conform'' to (i.e., be consistent with) the part of the state's air 
quality plan that addresses pollution from cars and trucks. Conformity 
to the SIP means that transportation activities will not cause new air 
quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely 
attainment of the NAAQS or any interim milestones. If a transportation 
plan does not conform, most new projects that would expand the capacity 
of roadways cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth 
EPA policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and assuring 
conformity of such transportation activities to a SIP. The regional 
emissions analysis is one, but not the only, requirement for 
implementing transportation conformity. Transportation conformity is a 
requirement for nonattainment and maintenance areas. Maintenance areas 
are areas that were previously nonattainment for a particular NAAQS but 
have since been redesignated to attainment with an approved maintenance 
plan for that NAAQS.
    Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times, 
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans for nonattainment areas. 
These control strategy SIPs (including RFP and attainment 
demonstrations) and maintenance plans create MVEB for criteria 
pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from cars and 
trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, an MVEB must be established for the target 
year and precursor pollutant of the RFP (i.e., in this case, for the 
target year of 2008 and for VOC). A state may adopt MVEB for other 
precursors as well. North Carolina also opted to establish a MVEB for 
NOX for the year 2008. The MVEB is the portion of the total 
allowable emissions in the maintenance demonstration that is allocated 
to highway and transit vehicle use and emissions. See 40 CFR 93.101. 
The MVEB serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area's planned 
transportation system. The MVEB concept is further explained in the 
preamble to the November 24, 1993, Transportation Conformity Rule (58 
FR 62188). The preamble also describes how to

[[Page 62165]]

establish the MVEB in the SIP and how to revise the MVEB.
    After interagency consultation with the transportation partners for 
the North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area, North 
Carolina developed VOC and NOX MVEB for the year 2008. 
Specifically, North Carolina developed these MVEB, as required, for the 
target year and precursor--2008 and VOC--for the RFP plan, and chose to 
establish an additional MVEB for NOX for the year 2008. The 
MVEB for the North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area for 
North Carolina's 2008 RFP plan are based on the projected 2008 mobile 
source emissions accounting for all mobile control measures. The 2008 
MVEB are defined in Table 8 below.

  Table 8--MVEB for North Carolina Portion of the 1997 8-Hour Bi-State
                             Charlotte Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          VOC      NOx
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  2008 County-level Subarea MVEB (kg/d)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbarrus.............................................    6,941    7,324
Gaston................................................    5,132    7,647
Iredell*..............................................    3,601    5,637
Lincoln...............................................    2,726    2,948
Mecklenburg...........................................   26,368   34,526
Rowan.................................................    6,149    7,193
Union.................................................    6,299    5,660
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Represents only the portion of Iredell County that is in the
  nonattainment area for the bi-state Charlotte Area.

    Through this rulemaking, EPA is approving the 2008 VOC and 
NOX MVEB for the North Carolina portion of the bi-state 
Charlotte Area because EPA has made the determination that the Area 
maintains the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS with the emissions at the levels 
of the budgets. Once the MVEB for the North Carolina portion of the bi-
state Charlotte Area are approved or found adequate (whichever is 
completed first), they must be used for future conformity 
determinations for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for Metropolitan 
Planning Organizations' long-range transportation plans and 
transportation improvement programs. After thorough review, EPA has 
previously determined that the budgets meet the adequacy criteria, as 
outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) (see 75 FR 7474, February 19, 2010), 
and is now approving the budgets because they are consistent with RFP 
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the year 2008.

VI. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the 2008 
MVEB for the North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte area?

    When reviewing a submitted ``control strategy'' SIP, RFP or 
maintenance plan containing a MVEB, EPA may affirmatively find the MVEB 
contained therein adequate for use in determining transportation 
conformity. Once EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate 
for transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB must be used by state 
and federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation 
projects conform to the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the CAA.
    EPA's substantive criteria for determining adequacy of a MVEB are 
set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The process for determining adequacy 
consists of three basic steps: public notification of a SIP submission, 
a public comment period, and EPA's adequacy determination. This process 
for determining the adequacy of submitted MVEB for transportation 
conformity purposes was initially outlined in EPA's May 14, 1999, 
guidance, ``Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999, 
Conformity Court Decision.'' EPA adopted regulations to codify the 
adequacy process in the Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for 
the ``New 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards and Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing Areas; 
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments--Response to Court Decision 
and Additional Rule Change,'' on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). Additional 
information on the adequacy process for transportation conformity 
purposes is available in the proposed rule entitled, ``Transportation 
Conformity Rule Amendments: Response to Court Decision and Additional 
Rule Changes,'' 68 FR 38974, 38984 (June 30, 2003).
    As discussed earlier, North Carolina's RFP plan submission includes 
VOC and NOx MVEB for the North Carolina portion of the bi-state 
Charlotte Area for the year 2008. EPA reviewed the MVEB through the 
adequacy process. The North Carolina SIP submission, including the 2008 
MVEB for the North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area, was 
open for public comment on EPA's adequacy Web site on December 3, 2009, 
found at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm. The EPA public comment period on adequacy of the 2008 
MVEB for the North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area, 
closed on January 3, 2010. EPA did not receive any comments, adverse or 
otherwise, during the adequacy process. In a letter sent on January 12, 
2010, EPA notified NC DENR that the MOBILE6.2-based 2008 VOC MVEB for 
the North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area were 
determined to be adequate for transportation conformity purposes. On 
February 19, 2010, EPA published its adequacy notice in the Federal 
Register (75 FR 7474). When EPA found the 2008 MVEB adequate, this 
triggered a requirement that the new MVEB are used for future 
transportation conformity determinations. For required regional 
emissions analysis years beyond 2008, the applicable budgets are the 
2008 MVEB. The 2008 MVEB are defined in sections I and V of this 
rulemaking.

VII. Final Action

    EPA is taking direct final action to approve portions of a SIP 
revision, submitted on June 15, 2007 (as later updated on November 30, 
2009), by the State of North Carolina, through the NC DENR to meet the 
RFP requirements for the North Carolina portion of the bi-state 
Charlotte Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Additionally, EPA is 
approving the VOC MVEB for the North Carolina portion of the bi-state 
Charlotte Area that were included in North Carolina's RFP plan. These 
actions are being taken pursuant to section 110 of the CAA.
    EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the 
Agency views this as a non-controversial amendment 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 comment be filed. This rule will be effective on December 11, 
2012 without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comment 
by November 13, 2012. 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 on this action. 
Any parties interested in commenting must do so at this time. If no 
such comments are received, the public is advised this rule will be 
effective on December 11, 2012 and no further action will be taken on 
the proposed rule.

[[Page 62166]]

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State 
law. For that reason, this 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 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified 
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the 
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State, 
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on 
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by December 11, 2012. 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, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, and Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: October 2, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

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 ``1997 8-
hour ozone reasonable further progress plan for North Carolina portion 
of the bi-state Charlotte Area'' to the end of the table to read as 
follows:

Sec.  52. 1770   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                              EPA Approved North Carolina Non-regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  State       EPA Approval
                 Provision                   effective date       date            Federal Register citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
1997 8-hour ozone reasonable further               11/30/09        10/12/12  [Insert citation of publication].
 progress plan for North Carolina portion
 of the bi-state Charlotte Area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2012-25181 Filed 10-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P