[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 37 (Thursday, February 25, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9398-9407]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03897]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0150; FRL-9942-70-Region 4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North
Carolina; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide
National Ambient Air Quality Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve portions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission,
submitted by the State of North Carolina, through the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources (NC DENR), Division of Air Quality
(NC DAQ), on March 18, 2014, for inclusion into the North Carolina SIP.
This proposal pertains to the infrastructure requirements of the Clean
Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide
(SO2) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The CAA
requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation,
maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by EPA, which is
commonly referred to as an ``infrastructure'' SIP submission. NC DAQ
certified that the North Carolina SIP contains provisions that ensure
the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and
maintained in North Carolina. EPA is proposing to determine that
portions of North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission, provided to
EPA on March 18, 2014, satisfy certain infrastructure elements for the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 28, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2015-0150 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and

should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Ms. Notarianni can be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background and Overview
II. What Elements are Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?
III. What is EPA's Approach to the Review of Infrastructure SIP
Submissions?
IV. What is EPA's Analysis of How North Carolina Addressed the
Elements of the Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``Infrastructure''
Provisions?
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Overview

    On June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520), EPA promulgated a revised primary
SO2 NAAQS to an hourly standard of 75 parts per billion
(ppb) based on a 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour
daily maximum concentrations. Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA,
states are required to submit SIPs meeting the applicable requirements
of section 110(a)(2) within three years after promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe.
Section 110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP elements such as
requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal
authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the
NAAQS. States were required to submit such SIPs for the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS to EPA no later than June 22, 2013.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In these infrastructure SIP submissions states generally
certify evidence of compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of
the CAA through a combination of state regulations and statutes,
some of which have been incorporated into the federally-approved
SIP. In addition, certain federally-approved, non-SIP regulations
may also be appropriate for demonstrating compliance with sections
110(a)(1) and (2). Throughout this rulemaking, unless otherwise
indicated, the terms ``regulation,'' ``rule,'' or ``15A NCAC''
indicate that the cited regulation has been approved into North
Carolina's federally-approved SIP. North Carolina's cited statutes,
North Carolina General Statutes (NCGS) are not approved into North
Carolina's federally-approved SIP unless explicitly specified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today's action is proposing to approve portions of North Carolina's
infrastructure SIP submission for the applicable requirements of the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. With respect to North Carolina's
infrastructure SIP submission related to provisions pertaining to the
PSD permitting requirements for major sources of sections 110(a)(2)(C)
and (J), the interstate transport requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1 through 4), and the state board
requirements of section 110(E)(ii), EPA is not proposing any action at
this time regarding these requirements. For the aspects of North
Carolina's submittal proposed for approval today, EPA notes that the
Agency is not approving any specific rule, but rather proposing that
North Carolina's already approved SIP meets certain CAA requirements.

II. What elements are required under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?

    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit SIPs to provide
for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a new or
revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such
NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section
110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP submission to
EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but the contents of that submission may
vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the
data and analytical tools available at the time the state develops and
submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the
submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary
depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP already
contains.
    More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and
timing requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements
that states must meet for ``infrastructure'' SIP requirements related
to a newly established or revised NAAQS. As mentioned above, these
requirements include basic SIP elements such as requirements for
monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are
designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The
requirements that are the subject of this proposed rulemaking are
summarized below and in EPA's September 13, 2013, memorandum entitled
``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements
under Clean Air Act sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2).'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not
governed by the three year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1)
because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area
controls are not due within three years after promulgation of a new
or revised NAAQS, but rather due at the time the nonattainment area
plan requirements are due pursuant to section 172. These
requirements are: (1) Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C)
to the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as required
in part D Title I of the CAA; and (2) submissions required by
section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D, Title I of the CAA. Today's proposed
rulemaking does not address infrastructure elements related to
section 110(a)(2)(I) or the nonattainment planning requirements of
110(a)(2)(C).

 110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures
 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System
 110(a)(2)(C): Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and
for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This rulemaking only addresses requirements for this element
as they relate to attainment areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II): Interstate Pollution Transport
 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution Abatement and
International Air Pollution
 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of
Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies
 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting
 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency Powers
 110(a)(2)(H): SIP revisions
 110(a)(2)(I): Plan Revisions for Nonattainment Areas \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ As mentioned above, this element is not relevant to today's
proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with Government Officials, Public
Notification, and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and
Visibility Protection
 110(a)(2)(K): Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling
Data
 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees
 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation and Participation by Affected Local
Entities

III. What is EPA's approach to the review of infrastructure SIP
submissions?

    EPA is acting upon the SIP submission from North Carolina that
addresses the infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. The requirement for
states to

make a SIP submission of this type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1).
Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP submissions
``within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may
prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air
quality standard (or any revision thereof),'' and these SIP submissions
are to provide for the ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement''
of such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make
these SIP submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is
not conditioned upon EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a
new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific
elements that ``[e]ach such plan'' submission must address.
    EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the
purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term
``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to
distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions
that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA, such
as ``nonattainment SIP'' or ``attainment plan SIP'' submissions to
address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I of
the CAA, ``regional haze SIP'' submissions required by EPA rule to
address the visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A, and
nonattainment new source review permit program submissions to address
the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D.
    Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing and general requirements for
infrastructure SIP submissions, and section 110(a)(2) provides more
details concerning the required contents of these submissions. The list
of required elements provided in section 110(a)(2) contains a wide
variety of disparate provisions, some of which pertain to required
legal authority, some of which pertain to required substantive program
provisions, and some of which pertain to requirements for both
authority and substantive program provisions.\5\ EPA therefore believes
that while the timing requirement in section 110(a)(1) is unambiguous,
some of the other statutory provisions are ambiguous. In particular,
EPA believes that the list of required elements for infrastructure SIP
submissions provided in section 110(a)(2) contains ambiguities
concerning what is required for inclusion in an infrastructure SIP
submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides that states
must provide assurances that they have adequate legal authority
under state and local law to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C)
provides that states must have a SIP-approved program to address
certain sources as required by part C of title I of the CAA; and
section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that states must have legal authority
to address emergencies as well as contingency plans that are
triggered in the event of such emergencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following examples of ambiguities illustrate the need for EPA
to interpret some section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) requirements
with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions for a given new or
revised NAAQS. One example of ambiguity is that section 110(a)(2)
requires that ``each'' SIP submission must meet the list of
requirements therein, while EPA has long noted that this literal
reading of the statute is internally inconsistent and would create a
conflict with the nonattainment provisions in part D of title I of the
Act, which specifically address nonattainment SIP requirements.\6\
Section 110(a)(2)(I) pertains to nonattainment SIP requirements and
part D addresses when attainment plan SIP submissions to address
nonattainment area requirements are due. For example, section 172(b)
requires EPA to establish a schedule for submission of such plans for
certain pollutants when the Administrator promulgates the designation
of an area as nonattainment, and section 107(d)(1)(B) allows up to two
years, or in some cases three years, for such designations to be
promulgated.\7\ This ambiguity illustrates that rather than apply all
the stated requirements of section 110(a)(2) in a strict literal sense,
EPA must determine which provisions of section 110(a)(2) are applicable
for a particular infrastructure SIP submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See, e.g., ``Rule To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine
Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions
to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to the NOx SIP Call; Final Rule,''
70 FR 25162, at 25163-65 (May 12, 2005) (explaining relationship
between timing requirement of section 110(a)(2)(D) versus section
110(a)(2)(I)).
    \7\ EPA notes that this ambiguity within section 110(a)(2) is
heightened by the fact that various subparts of part D set specific
dates for submission of certain types of SIP submissions in
designated nonattainment areas for various pollutants. Note, e.g.,
that section 182(a)(1) provides specific dates for submission of
emissions inventories for the ozone NAAQS. Some of these specific
dates are necessarily later than three years after promulgation of
the new or revised NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Another example of ambiguity within sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) with respect to infrastructure SIPs pertains to whether
states must meet all of the infrastructure SIP requirements in a single
SIP submission, and whether EPA must act upon such SIP submission in a
single action. Although section 110(a)(1) directs states to submit ``a
plan'' to meet these requirements, EPA interprets the CAA to allow
states to make multiple SIP submissions separately addressing
infrastructure SIP elements for the same NAAQS. If states elect to make
such multiple SIP submissions to meet the infrastructure SIP
requirements, EPA can elect to act on such submissions either
individually or in a larger combined action.\8\ Similarly, EPA
interprets the CAA to allow it to take action on the individual parts
of one larger, comprehensive infrastructure SIP submission for a given
NAAQS without concurrent action on the entire submission. For example,
EPA has sometimes elected to act at different times on various elements
and sub-elements of the same infrastructure SIP submission.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See, e.g., ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation
Plans; New Mexico; Revisions to the New Source Review (NSR) State
Implementation Plan (SIP); Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) Permitting,'' 78 FR
4339 (January 22, 2013) (EPA's final action approving the structural
PSD elements of the New Mexico SIP submitted by the State separately
to meet the requirements of EPA's 2008 PM2.5 NSR rule),
and ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
New Mexico; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport Requirements for
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,'' (78 FR 4337) (January 22, 2013)
(EPA's final action on the infrastructure SIP for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS).
    \9\ On December 14, 2007, the State of Tennessee, through the
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, made a SIP
revision to EPA demonstrating that the State meets the requirements
of sections 110(a)(1) and (2). EPA proposed action for
infrastructure SIP elements (C) and (J) on January 23, 2012 (77 FR
3213) and took final action on March 14, 2012 (77 FR 14976). On
April 16, 2012 (77 FR 22533) and July 23, 2012 (77 FR 42997), EPA
took separate proposed and final actions on all other section
110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP elements of Tennessee's December 14,
2007, submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ambiguities within sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) may also arise
with respect to infrastructure SIP submission requirements for
different NAAQS. Thus, EPA notes that not every element of section
110(a)(2) would be relevant, or as relevant, or relevant in the same
way, for each new or revised NAAQS. The states' attendant
infrastructure SIP submissions for each NAAQS therefore could be
different. For example, the monitoring requirements that a state might
need to meet in its infrastructure SIP submission for purposes of
section 110(a)(2)(B) could be very different for different pollutants
because the content and scope of a state's infrastructure SIP
submission to meet this element might be very different for an entirely
new NAAQS than for a minor revision to an existing NAAQS.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ For example, implementation of the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS required the deployment of a system of new monitors to measure
ambient levels of that new indicator species for the new NAAQS.

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

    EPA notes that interpretation of section 110(a)(2) is also
necessary when EPA reviews other types of SIP submissions required
under the CAA. Therefore, as with infrastructure SIP submissions, EPA
also has to identify and interpret the relevant elements of section
110(a)(2) that logically apply to these other types of SIP submissions.
For example, section 172(c)(7) requires that attainment plan SIP
submissions required by part D have to meet the ``applicable
requirements'' of section 110(a)(2). Thus, for example, attainment plan
SIP submissions must meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
regarding enforceable emission limits and control measures and section
110(a)(2)(E)(i) regarding air agency resources and authority. By
contrast, it is clear that attainment plan SIP submissions required by
part D would not need to meet the portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) that
pertains to the PSD program required in part C of title I of the CAA,
because PSD does not apply to a pollutant for which an area is
designated nonattainment and thus subject to part D planning
requirements. As this example illustrates, each type of SIP submission
may implicate some elements of section 110(a)(2) but not others.
    Given the potential for ambiguity in some of the statutory language
of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2), EPA believes that it is
appropriate to interpret the ambiguous portions of section 110(a)(1)
and section 110(a)(2) in the context of acting on a particular SIP
submission. In other words, EPA assumes that Congress could not have
intended that each and every SIP submission, regardless of the NAAQS in
question or the history of SIP development for the relevant pollutant,
would meet each of the requirements, or meet each of them in the same
way. Therefore, EPA has adopted an approach under which it reviews
infrastructure SIP submissions against the list of elements in section
110(a)(2), but only to the extent each element applies for that
particular NAAQS.
    Historically, EPA has elected to use guidance documents to make
recommendations to states for infrastructure SIPs, in some cases
conveying needed interpretations on newly arising issues and in some
cases conveying interpretations that have already been developed and
applied to individual SIP submissions for particular elements.\11\ EPA
most recently issued guidance for infrastructure SIPs on September 13,
2013 (2013 Guidance).\12\ EPA developed this document to provide states
with up-to-date guidance for infrastructure SIPs for any new or revised
NAAQS. Within this guidance, EPA describes the duty of states to make
infrastructure SIP submissions to meet basic structural SIP
requirements within three years of promulgation of a new or revised
NAAQS. EPA also made recommendations about many specific subsections of
section 110(a)(2) that are relevant in the context of infrastructure
SIP submissions.\13\ The guidance also discusses the substantively
important issues that are germane to certain subsections of section
110(a)(2). Significantly, EPA interprets sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) such that infrastructure SIP submissions need to address
certain issues and need not address others. Accordingly, EPA reviews
each infrastructure SIP submission for compliance with the applicable
statutory provisions of section 110(a)(2), as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ EPA notes, however, that nothing in the CAA requires EPA to
provide guidance or to promulgate regulations for infrastructure SIP
submissions. The CAA directly applies to states and requires the
submission of infrastructure SIP submissions, regardless of whether
or not EPA provides guidance or regulations pertaining to such
submissions. EPA elects to issue such guidance in order to assist
states, as appropriate.
    \12\ ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan
(SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2),'' Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013.
    \13\ EPA's September 13, 2013, guidance did not make
recommendations with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions to
address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA issued the guidance shortly
after the United States (U.S.) Supreme Court agreed to review the
D.C. Circuit decision in EME Homer City, 696 F.3d7 (D.C. Cir. 2012)
which had interpreted the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). In light of the uncertainty created by ongoing
litigation, EPA elected not to provide additional guidance on the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) at that time. As the
guidance is neither binding nor required by statute, whether EPA
elects to provide guidance on a particular section has no impact on
a state's CAA obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an example, section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) is a required element of
section 110(a)(2) for infrastructure SIP submissions. Under this
element, a state must meet the substantive requirements of section 128,
which pertain to state boards that approve permits or enforcement
orders and heads of executive agencies with similar powers. Thus, EPA
reviews infrastructure SIP submissions to ensure that the state's
implementation plan appropriately addresses the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and section 128. The 2013 Guidance explains EPA's
interpretation that there may be a variety of ways by which states can
appropriately address these substantive statutory requirements,
depending on the structure of an individual state's permitting or
enforcement program (e.g., whether permits and enforcement orders are
approved by a multi-member board or by a head of an executive agency).
However they are addressed by the state, the substantive requirements
of section 128 are necessarily included in EPA's evaluation of
infrastructure SIP submissions because section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
explicitly requires that the state satisfy the provisions of section
128.
    As another example, EPA's review of infrastructure SIP submissions
with respect to the PSD program requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C),
(D)(i)(II), and (J) focuses upon the structural PSD program
requirements contained in part C and EPA's PSD regulations. Structural
PSD program requirements include provisions necessary for the PSD
program to address all regulated sources and new source review (NSR)
pollutants, including greenhouse gases. By contrast, structural PSD
program requirements do not include provisions that are not required
under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 but are merely available as an
option for the state, such as the option to provide grandfathering of
complete permit applications with respect to the 2012 fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) NAAQS. Accordingly, the latter optional
provisions are types of provisions EPA considers irrelevant in the
context of an infrastructure SIP action.
    For other section 110(a)(2) elements, however, EPA's review of a
state's infrastructure SIP submission focuses on assuring that the
state's implementation plan meets basic structural requirements. For
example, section 110(a)(2)(C) includes, inter alia, the requirement
that states have a program to regulate minor new sources. Thus, EPA
evaluates whether the state has an EPA-approved minor new source review
program and whether the program addresses the pollutants relevant to
that NAAQS. In the context of acting on an infrastructure SIP
submission, however, EPA does not think it is necessary to conduct a
review of each and every provision of a state's existing minor source
program (i.e., already in the existing SIP) for compliance with the
requirements of the CAA and EPA's regulations that pertain to such
programs.
    With respect to certain other issues, EPA does not believe that an
action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission is necessarily the
appropriate type of action in which to address possible deficiencies in
a state's existing SIP. These issues include: (i) Existing

provisions related to excess emissions from sources during periods of
startup, shutdown, or malfunction that may be contrary to the CAA and
EPA's policies addressing such excess emissions (``SSM''); (ii)
existing provisions related to ``director's variance'' or ``director's
discretion'' that may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to
allow revisions to SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public
process or not requiring further approval by EPA; and (iii) existing
provisions for PSD programs that may be inconsistent with current
requirements of EPA's ``Final NSR Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR 80186
(December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (``NSR
Reform''). Thus, EPA believes it may approve an infrastructure SIP
submission without scrutinizing the totality of the existing SIP for
such potentially deficient provisions and may approve the submission
even if it is aware of such existing provisions.\14\ It is important to
note that EPA's approval of a state's infrastructure SIP submission
should not be construed as explicit or implicit re-approval of any
existing potentially deficient provisions that relate to the three
specific issues just described.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ By contrast, EPA notes that if a state were to include a
new provision in an infrastructure SIP submission that contained a
legal deficiency, such as a new exemption for excess emissions
during SSM events, then EPA would need to evaluate that provision
for compliance against the rubric of applicable CAA requirements in
the context of the action on the infrastructure SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's approach to review of infrastructure SIP submissions is to
identify the CAA requirements that are logically applicable to that
submission. EPA believes that this approach to the review of a
particular infrastructure SIP submission is appropriate, because it
would not be reasonable to read the general requirements of section
110(a)(1) and the list of elements in 110(a)(2) as requiring review of
each and every provision of a state's existing SIP against all
requirements in the CAA and EPA regulations merely for purposes of
assuring that the state in question has the basic structural elements
for a functioning SIP for a new or revised NAAQS. Because SIPs have
grown by accretion over the decades as statutory and regulatory
requirements under the CAA have evolved, they may include some outmoded
provisions and historical artifacts. These provisions, while not fully
up to date, nevertheless may not pose a significant problem for the
purposes of ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of a new
or revised NAAQS when EPA evaluates adequacy of the infrastructure SIP
submission. EPA believes that a better approach is for states and EPA
to focus attention on those elements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA
most likely to warrant a specific SIP revision due to the promulgation
of a new or revised NAAQS or other factors.
    For example, EPA's 2013 Guidance gives simpler recommendations with
respect to carbon monoxide than other NAAQS pollutants to meet the
visibility requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), because carbon
monoxide does not affect visibility. As a result, an infrastructure SIP
submission for any future new or revised NAAQS for carbon monoxide need
only state this fact in order to address the visibility prong of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).
    Finally, EPA believes that its approach with respect to
infrastructure SIP requirements is based on a reasonable reading of
sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) because the CAA provides other avenues
and mechanisms to address specific substantive deficiencies in existing
SIPs. These other statutory tools allow EPA to take appropriately
tailored action, depending upon the nature and severity of the alleged
SIP deficiency. Section 110(k)(5) authorizes EPA to issue a ``SIP
call'' whenever the Agency determines that a state's SIP is
substantially inadequate to attain or maintain the NAAQS, to mitigate
interstate transport, or to otherwise comply with the CAA.\15\ Section
110(k)(6) authorizes EPA to correct errors in past actions, such as
past approvals of SIP submissions.\16\ Significantly, EPA's
determination that an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission
is not the appropriate time and place to address all potential existing
SIP deficiencies does not preclude EPA's subsequent reliance on
provisions in section 110(a)(2) as part of the basis for action to
correct those deficiencies at a later time. For example, although it
may not be appropriate to require a state to eliminate all existing
inappropriate director's discretion provisions in the course of acting
on an infrastructure SIP submission, EPA believes that section
110(a)(2)(A) may be among the statutory bases that EPA relies upon in
the course of addressing such deficiency in a subsequent action.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ For example, EPA issued a SIP call to Utah to address
specific existing SIP deficiencies related to the treatment of
excess emissions during SSM events. See ``Finding of Substantial
Inadequacy of Implementation Plan; Call for Utah State
Implementation Plan Revisions,'' 74 FR 21639 (April 18, 2011).
    \16\ EPA has used this authority to correct errors in past
actions on SIP submissions related to PSD programs. See ``Limitation
of Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions
Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State Implementation
Plans; Final Rule,'' 75 FR 82536 (December 30, 2010). EPA has
previously used its authority under CAA section 110(k)(6) to remove
numerous other SIP provisions that the Agency determined it had
approved in error. See, e.g., 61 FR 38664 (July 25, 1996) and 62 FR
34641 (June 27, 1997) (corrections to American Samoa, Arizona,
California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 FR 67062 (November 16,
2004) (corrections to California SIP); and 74 FR 57051 (November 3,
2009) (corrections to Arizona and Nevada SIPs).
    \17\ See, e.g., EPA's disapproval of a SIP submission from
Colorado on the grounds that it would have included a director's
discretion provision inconsistent with CAA requirements, including
section 110(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., 75 FR 42342 at 42344 (July 21,
2010) (proposed disapproval of director's discretion provisions); 76
FR 4540 (Jan. 26, 2011) (final disapproval of such provisions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. What is EPA's analysis of how North Carolina addressed the elements
of the sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``infrastructure'' provisions?

    The North Carolina infrastructure submission addresses the
provisions of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as described below.
    1. 110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures:
Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that each implementation plan include
enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means, or
techniques (including economic incentives such as fees, marketable
permits, and auctions of emissions rights), as well as schedules and
timetables for compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to meet
the applicable requirements. These requirements are met through several
North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) regulations. Specifically,
15A NCAC 2D .0500 Emission Control Standards establishes emission
limits for SO2. The following State rules address additional
control measures, means and techniques: 15A NCAC 2D .0600 Monitoring:
Recordkeeping: Reporting, and 15A NCAC 2D .2600 Source Testing. In
addition, NCGS 143-215.107(a)(5), Air quality standards and
classifications, provides the North Carolina Environmental Management
Commission (EMC) with the statutory authority, ``To develop and adopt
emission control standards as in the judgment of the Commission may be
necessary to prohibit, abate, or control air pollution commensurate
with established air quality standards.'' EPA has made the preliminary
determination that the provisions contained in these regulations, and
North Carolina's statutory authority are adequate for Section
110(a)(2)(A) for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.

    In this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any
existing State provisions with regard to excess emissions during start
up, shut down, and malfunction (SSM) operations at a facility. EPA
believes that a number of states have SSM provisions which are contrary
to the CAA and existing EPA guidance, ``State Implementation Plans:
Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and
Shutdown'' (September 20, 1999), and the Agency is addressing such
state regulations in a separate action.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ On June 12, 2015, EPA published a final action entitled,
``State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for Rulemaking;
Restatement and Update of EPA's SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs;
Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend
Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup,
Shutdown, and Malfunction.'' See 80 FR 33840.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, in this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or
disapprove any existing state rules with regard to director's
discretion or variance provisions. EPA believes that a number of states
have such provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA
guidance (52 FR 45109 (November 24, 1987)), and the Agency plans to
take action in the future to address such state regulations. In the
meantime, EPA encourages any state having a director's discretion or
variance provision which is contrary to the CAA and EPA guidance to
take steps to correct the deficiency as soon as possible.
    2. 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System: Section
110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to provide for establishment and operation
of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to:
(i) Monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and (ii)
upon request, make such data available to the Administrator. NCGS 143-
215.107(a)(2), Air quality standards and classifications, provides the
EMC with the statutory authority ``To determine by means of field
sampling and other studies, including the examination of available data
collected by any local, State or federal agency or any person, the
degree of air contamination and air pollution in the State and the
several areas of the State.''
    Annually, states develop and submit to EPA for approval statewide
ambient monitoring network plans consistent with the requirements of 40
CFR parts 50, 53, and 58. The annual network plan involves an
evaluation of any proposed changes to the monitoring network, and
includes the annual ambient monitoring network design plan and a
certified evaluation of the agency's ambient monitors and auxiliary
support equipment.\19\ The latest monitoring network plan for North
Carolina was submitted to EPA on July 23, 2015, and on November 19,
2015, EPA approved this plan. North Carolina's approved monitoring
network plan can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No.
EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0150.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ On occasion, proposed changes to the monitoring network are
evaluated outside of the network plan approval process in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NCGS 143-215.107(a)(2), EPA regulations, along with North
Carolina's Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, provide for the
establishment and operation of ambient air quality monitors, the
compilation and analysis of ambient air quality data, and the
submission of these data to EPA upon request. EPA has made the
preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices are
adequate for the ambient air quality monitoring and data system related
to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
    3. 110(a)(2)(C) Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and
for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources: This element
consists of three sub-elements: enforcement, state-wide regulation of
new and modified minor sources and minor modifications of major
sources, and preconstruction permitting of major sources and major
modifications in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable for the
subject NAAQS as required by CAA title I part C (i.e., the major source
PSD program). To meet these obligations, North Carolina cited the
following State regulations: 15A NCAC 2D. 0500 Emissions Control
Standards; 15A NCAC 2D. 0530 Prevention of Significant Deterioration;
15A NCAC 2D. 0531 Sources in Nonattainment Areas; 15A NCAC 2Q .0300
Construction Operation Permits; and 15A NCAC 2Q .0500 Title V
Procedures. Collectively, these regulations enable North Carolina to
regulate sources contributing to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS
through enforceable permits. North Carolina also cited to the following
statutory provisions as supporting this element: NCGS 143-215.108,
Control of sources of air pollution; permits required; NCGS 143-
215.107(a)(7), Air quality standards and classifications; and NCGS 143-
215.6A, 6B, and 6C, Enforcement procedures: civil penalties, criminal
penalties, and injunctive relief.
    In this action, EPA is proposing to approve North Carolina's
infrastructure SIP for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS with
respect to the general requirement in section 110(a)(2)(C) to include a
program in the SIP for enforcement of SO2 emissions controls
and measures and the regulation of minor sources and modifications to
assist in the protection of air quality in nonattainment, attainment or
unclassifiable areas.
    Enforcement: NC DAQ's above-described, SIP-approved regulations
provide for enforcement of SO2 emission limits and control
measures through enforceable permits. In addition, North Carolina cited
NCGS 143-215.6A, 6B, and 6C, Enforcement procedures: civil penalties,
criminal penalties, and injunctive relief, which provides NC DENR with
the statutory authority to enforce air quality rules that contain
requirements for emissions limits and controls.
    Preconstruction PSD Permitting for Major Sources: With respect to
North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission related to the
preconstruction PSD permitting requirements for major sources of
section 110(a)(2)(C), EPA is not proposing any action today regarding
these requirements and instead will act on this portion of the
submission in a separate action.
    Regulation of minor sources and modifications: Section 110(a)(2)(C)
also requires the SIP to include provisions that govern the minor
source program that regulates emissions of the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS. Regulation 15A NCAC 2Q .0300 Construction
Operation Permits governs the preconstruction permitting of
modifications and construction of minor stationary sources.
    EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's
SIP is adequate for enforcement of control measures and regulation of
minor sources and modifications related to the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS.
    4. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) Interstate Pollution Transport:
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Each of these components has two subparts
resulting in four distinct components, commonly referred to as
``prongs,'' that must be addressed in infrastructure SIP submissions.
The first two prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I),
are provisions that prohibit any source or other type of emissions
activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment
of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 1''), and interfering with
maintenance of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 2''). The third and
fourth prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are
provisions that prohibit emissions activity in one state from
interfering with measures required

to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in another state
(``prong 3''), or to protect visibility in another state (``prong 4'').
EPA is not proposing any action in this rulemaking related to the
interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prongs 1 through 4).
    5. 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) Interstate Pollution Abatement and
International Air Pollution: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to
include provisions insuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the
Act relating to interstate and international pollution abatement. 15A
NCAC 2D .0530 Prevention of Significant Deterioration and 15A NCAC 2D
.0531 Sources of Nonattainment Areas provide how NC DAQ will notify
neighboring states of potential impacts from new or modified sources
consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166. These regulations
require NC DAQ to provide an opportunity for a public hearing to the
public, which includes state or local air pollution control agencies,
``whose lands may be affected by emissions from the source or
modification'' in North Carolina. In addition, North Carolina does not
have any pending obligation under sections 115 and 126 of the CAA.
Accordingly, EPA has made the preliminary determination that North
Carolina's SIP is adequate for ensuring compliance with the applicable
requirements relating to interstate and international pollution
abatement for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
    6. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of
Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies:
Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires that each implementation plan provide:
(i) Necessary assurances that the state will have adequate personnel,
funding, and authority under state law to carry out its implementation
plan, (ii) that the state comply with the requirements respecting state
boards pursuant to section 128 of the Act, and (iii) necessary
assurances that, where the state has relied on a local or regional
government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any
plan provision, the state has responsibility for ensuring adequate
implementation of such plan provisions. EPA is proposing to approve
North Carolina's SIP as meeting the requirements of sub-elements
110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii). EPA approved North Carolina's infrastructure
submission for sub-element (E)(ii) on November 3, 2015. See 80 FR
67645. EPA's rationale for today's proposal respecting sub-elements (i)
and (iii) is described in turn below.
    To satisfy the requirements of sections 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii),
North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission cites several
regulations. Rule 15A NCAC 2Q. 0200 ``Permit Fees,'' provides the
mechanism by which stationary sources that emit air pollutants pay a
fee based on the quantity of emissions. State statutes NCGS 143-215.3,
General powers of Commission and Department: auxiliary powers, and NCGS
143-215.107(a)(1), Air quality standards and classifications, provide
the EMC with the statutory authority ``[t]o prepare and develop, after
proper study, a comprehensive plan or plans for the prevention,
abatement and control of air pollution in the State or in any
designated area of the State.'' NCGS 143-215.112, Local air pollution
control programs, provides the EMC with the statutory authority ``to
review and have general oversight and supervision over all local air
pollution control programs.'' North Carolina has three local air
agencies located in Buncombe, Forsyth, and Mecklenburg Counties that
implement the air program in these areas.
    In addition, the requirements of 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii) are met
when EPA performs a completeness determination for each SIP submittal.
This determination ensures that each submittal provides evidence that
adequate personnel, funding, and legal authority under state law has
been used to carry out the state's implementation plan and related
issues. NC DAQ's authority is included in all prehearings and final SIP
submittal packages for approval by EPA. NC DAQ is responsible for
submitting all revisions to the North Carolina SIP to EPA for approval.
    As further evidence of the adequacy of NC DAQ's resources, EPA
submitted a letter to North Carolina on March 9, 2015, outlining 105
grant commitments and the current status of these commitments for
fiscal year 2014. The letter EPA submitted to North Carolina can be
accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-
0150. Annually, states update these grant commitments based on current
SIP requirements, air quality planning, and applicable requirements
related to the NAAQS. North Carolina satisfactorily met all commitments
agreed to in the Air Planning Agreement for fiscal year 2014, therefore
North Carolina's grants were finalized and closed out. Collectively,
these rules and commitments provide evidence that NC DAQ has adequate
personnel, funding, and legal authority to carry out the State's
implementation plan and related issues. EPA has made the preliminary
determination that North Carolina has adequate resources and authority
to satisfy sections 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii) of the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS.
    With respect to North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission
related to the state board requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii),
EPA is not proposing any action today as the Agency has already
approved this portion of the submission in a separate action. See 80 FR
67645. 7. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting:
Section 110(a)(2)(F) requires SIPs to meet applicable requirements
addressing: (i) The installation, maintenance, and replacement of
equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners
or operators of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such
sources, (ii) periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions
and emissions related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of
such reports by the state agency with any emission limitations or
standards established pursuant to this section, which reports shall be
available at reasonable times for public inspection. North Carolina's
infrastructure SIP submission describes how the State establishes
requirements for emissions compliance testing and utilizes emissions
sampling and analysis. NC DAQ uses these data to track progress towards
maintaining the NAAQS, develop control and maintenance strategies,
identify sources and general emission levels, and determine compliance
with emission regulations and additional EPA requirements. North
Carolina meets these requirements through 15A NCAC 2D .0604 Exceptions
to Monitoring and Reporting Requirements; 15A NCAC 2D .0605 General
Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements; 15A NCAC 2D .0611 Monitoring
Emissions from Other Sources; 15A NCAC 2D .0612 Alternative Monitoring
and Reporting Procedures; 15A NCAC 2D .0613 Quality Assurance Program;
and 15A NCAC 2D .0614 Compliance Assurance Monitoring. In addition, 15A
NCAC 2D .0605(c) General Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements
allows for the use of credible evidence in the event that the NC DAQ
Director has evidence that a source is violating an emission standard
or permit condition, the Director may require that the owner or
operator of any source submit to the Director any information necessary
to determine the compliance status of the source. In addition, EPA is
unaware of any provision preventing the use of credible evidence in the
North Carolina SIP. Also, NCGS 143-215.107(a)(4), Air

quality standards and classifications, provides the EMC with the
statutory authority ``To collect information or to require reporting
from classes of sources which, in the judgment of the [EMC], may cause
or contribute to air pollution.''
    Stationary sources are required to submit periodic emissions
reports to the State by Rule 15A NCAC 2Q .0207 ``Annual Emissions
Reporting.'' North Carolina is also required to submit emissions data
to EPA for purposes of the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). The NEI
is EPA's central repository for air emissions data. EPA published the
Air Emissions Reporting Rule (AERR) on December 5, 2008, which modified
the requirements for collecting and reporting air emissions data. See
73 FR 76539. The AERR shortened the time states had to report emissions
data from 17 to 12 months, giving states one calendar year to submit
emissions data. All states are required to submit a comprehensive
emissions inventory every three years and report emissions for certain
larger sources annually through EPA's online Emissions Inventory
System. States report emissions data for the six criteria pollutants
and the precursors that form them--nitrogen oxides, SO2,
ammonia, lead, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and volatile
organic compounds. Many states also voluntarily report emissions of
hazardous air pollutants. North Carolina made its latest update to the
2011 NEI on June 3, 2014. EPA compiles the emissions data,
supplementing it where necessary, and releases it to the general public
through the Web site http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html.
EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP
and practices are adequate for the stationary source monitoring systems
obligations for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA
is proposing to approve North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission
with respect to section 110(a)(2)(F).
    8. 110(a)(2)(G) Emergency powers: This section requires that states
demonstrate authority comparable with section 303 of the CAA and
adequate contingency plans to implement such authority. North
Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission cites 15A NCAC 2D .0300 Air
Pollution Emergencies as identifying air pollution emergency episodes
and preplanned abatement strategies, and provides the means to
implement emergency air pollution episode measures. Under NCGS 143-
215.3(a)(12), General powers of Commission and Department; auxiliary
powers, if NC DENR finds that such a ``condition of . . . air pollution
exists and that it creates an emergency requiring immediate action to
protect the public health and safety or to protect fish and wildlife,
the Secretary of the Department [NC DENR] with the concurrence of the
Governor, shall order persons causing or contributing to the . . . air
pollution in question to reduce or discontinue immediately the emission
of air contaminants or the discharge of wastes.'' In addition, NCGS
143-215.3(a)(12) provides NC DENR with the authority to declare an
emergency when it finds that a generalized condition of water or air
pollution which is causing imminent danger to the health or safety of
the public. This statute also allows, in the absence of a generalized
condition of air pollution, should the Secretary find ``that the
emissions from one or more air contaminant sources . . . is causing
imminent danger to human health and safety or to fish and wildlife, he
may with the concurrence of the Governor order the person or persons
responsible for the operation or operations in question to immediately
reduce or discontinue the emissions of air contaminants . . . or to
take such other measures as are, in his judgment, necessary.'' EPA has
made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and
practices are adequate to satisfy the emergency powers obligations of
the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
    9. 110(a)(2)(H) SIP revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H), in summary,
requires each SIP to provide for revisions of such plan (i) as may be
necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or
secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved
or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii)
whenever the Administrator finds that the plan is substantially
inadequate to attain the NAAQS or to otherwise comply with any
additional applicable requirements. NC DAQ is responsible for adopting
air quality rules and revising SIPs as needed to attain or maintain the
NAAQS in North Carolina. NCGS 143-215.107(a)(1) and (a)(10) grant NC
DAQ the authority to prepare and develop, after proper study, a
comprehensive plan for the prevention of air pollution and implement
the CAA, respectively. These provisions also provide NC DAQ the ability
and authority to respond to calls for SIP revisions, and North Carolina
has provided a number of SIP revisions over the years for
implementation of the NAAQS. In addition, State regulation 15A NCAC 2D
.2401(d) states that ``The EMC may specify through rulemaking a
specific emission limit lower than that established under this rule for
a specific source if compliance with the lower emission limit is
required to attain or maintain the ambient air quality standard for
ozone or PM2.5 or any other ambient air quality standard in
Section 15A NCAC 2D .0400.'' EPA has made the preliminary determination
that North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate a
commitment to provide future SIP revisions related to the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS, when necessary.
    10. 110(a)(2)(J) Consultation with Government Officials, Public
Notification, and PSD and Visibility Protection: EPA is proposing to
approve North Carolina's infrastructure SIP for the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS with respect to the general requirement in section
110(a)(2)(J) to include a program in the SIP that complies with the
applicable consultation requirements of section 121, and the public
notification requirements of section 127. With respect to North
Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission related to the preconstruction
PSD permitting, EPA is not proposing any action today regarding these
requirements and instead will act on these portions of the submission
in a separate action. EPA's rationale for its proposed action regarding
applicable consultation requirements of section 121, the public
notification requirements of section 127, and visibility is described
below.
    Consultation with government officials (121 consultation): Section
110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA requires states to provide a process for
consultation with local governments, designated organizations and
Federal Land Managers (FLMs) carrying out NAAQS implementation
requirements pursuant to section 121 relative to consultation. 15A NCAC
2D.1600 General Conformity, 15A NCAC 2D .2000 Transportation
Conformity, and 15A NCAC 2D .0531 Sources in Nonattainment Areas, along
with the State's Regional Haze Implementation Plan, provide for
consultation with government officials whose jurisdictions might be
affected by SIP development activities. Specifically, North Carolina
adopted state-wide consultation procedures for the implementation of
transportation conformity which includes the development of mobile
inventories for SIP development. These consultation procedures were
developed in coordination with the transportation partners in the State
and are consistent with the approaches used for development of mobile
inventories for SIPs. Implementation of transportation conformity as
outlined in the

consultation procedures requires NC DAQ to consult with Federal, state
and local transportation and air quality agency officials on the
development of motor vehicle emissions budgets. The Regional Haze SIP
provides for consultation between appropriate state, local, and tribal
air pollution control agencies as well as the corresponding FLMs. EPA
has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and
practices adequately demonstrate that the State meets applicable
requirements related to consultation with government officials for the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS when necessary for the consultation
with government officials element of section 110(a)(2)(J).
    Public notification (127 public notification): Rule 15A NCAC 2D
.0300 Air Pollution Emergencies provides North Carolina with the
authority to declare an emergency and notify the public accordingly
when it finds a generalized condition of water or air pollution which
is causing imminent danger to the health or safety of the public.
Additionally, the NC DAQ has the North Carolina Air Awareness Program
which is a program to educate the public on air quality issues and
promote voluntary emission reduction measures. The NC DAQ also features
a Web page providing ambient monitoring information regarding current
and historical air quality across the State at http://www.ncair.org/monitor/. North Carolina participates in the EPA AirNOW program, which
enhances public awareness of air quality in North Carolina and
throughout the country. EPA has made the preliminary determination that
North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate the State's
ability to provide public notification related to the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS when necessary for the public notification element
of section 110(a)(2)(J).
    Visibility protection: EPA's 2013 Guidance notes that it does not
treat the visibility protection aspects of section 110(a)(2)(J) as
applicable for purposes of the infrastructure SIP approval process. NC
DENR referenced its regional haze program as germane to the visibility
component of section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA recognizes that states are
subject to visibility protection and regional haze program requirements
under part C of the Act (which includes sections 169A and 169B).
However, there are no newly applicable visibility protection
obligations after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Thus, EPA
has determined that states do not need to address the visibility
component of 110(a)(2)(J) in infrastructure SIP submittals so NC DENR
does not need to rely on its regional haze program to fulfill its
obligations under section 110(a)(2)(J). As such, EPA has made the
preliminary determination that North Carolina's infrastructure SIP
submission is approvable for the visibility protection element of
section 110(a)(2)(J) related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS
and that North Carolina does not need to rely on its regional haze
program to satisfy this element.
    11. 110(a)(2)(K) Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling
Data: Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA requires that SIPs provide for
performing air quality modeling so that effects on air quality of
emissions from NAAQS pollutants can be predicted and submission of such
data to the EPA can be made. This infrastructure requirement is met
through emissions data collected through 15A NCAC 2D .0600 Monitoring:
Recordkeeping: Reporting (authorized under NCGS 143-215.107(a)(4)),
which provides information to model potential impact of major and some
minor sources. 15A NCAC 2D .0530 Prevention of Significant
Deterioration and 15A NCAC 2D .0531 Sources in Nonattainment Areas
require that air modeling be conducted in accordance with 40 CFR part
51, Appendix W, Guideline on Air Quality Models. These regulations
demonstrate that North Carolina has the authority to perform air
quality modeling and to provide relevant data for the purpose of
predicting the effect on ambient air quality of the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS. The NC DAQ currently has personnel with training
and experience to conduct source-oriented dispersion modeling that
would likely be used in SO2 NAAQS applications with models
approved by EPA. Additionally, North Carolina participates in a
regional effort to coordinate the development of emissions inventories
and conduct regional modeling for several NAAQS, including the 2010 1-
hour SO2 NAAQS, for the Southeastern states. Taken as a
whole, North Carolina's air quality regulations and practices
demonstrate that NC DAQ has the authority to provide relevant data for
the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of any
emissions of any pollutant for which a NAAQS has been promulgated, and
to provide such information to the EPA Administrator upon request. EPA
has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and
practices adequately demonstrate the State's ability to provide for air
quality modeling, along with analysis of the associated data, related
to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
    12. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting fees: This element necessitates that
the SIP require the owner or operator of each major stationary source
to pay to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit
required under the CAA, a fee sufficient to cover: (i) The reasonable
costs of reviewing and acting upon any application for such a permit,
and (ii) if the owner or operator receives a permit for such source,
the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and
conditions of any such permit (not including any court costs or other
costs associated with any enforcement action), until such fee
requirement is superseded with respect to such sources by the
Administrator's approval of a fee program under title V.
    To satisfy these requirements, North Carolina's infrastructure SIP
submission cites Regulation 15A NCAC 2Q .0200 Permit Fees, which
requires the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay
to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required
under the CAA, a sufficient fee to cover the costs of the permitting
program. The 15A NCAC 2D .0500 and 2Q .0500 rules contain the State's
title V program which includes provisions to implement and enforce PSD
and NNSR permits once these permits have been issued. The fees
collected under 15A NCAC 2Q .0200 also support this activity. NCGS 143-
215.3, General powers of Commission and Department; auxiliary Powers,
provides the State the statutory authority for NC DAQ to require a
processing fee in an amount sufficient for the reasonable cost of
reviewing and acting upon PSD and NNSR permits. EPA has made the
preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices
adequately provide for permitting fees related to the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS, when necessary.
    13. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation and Participation by Affected Local
Entities: Section 110(a)(2)(M) of the Act requires states to provide
for consultation and participation in SIP development by local
political subdivisions affected by the SIP. 15A NCAC 2D .0530
Prevention of Significant Deterioration requires that NC DENR notify
the public, including affected local entities, of PSD permit
applications and associated information related to PSD permits, and the
opportunity for comment prior to making final permitting decisions.
NCGS 150B-21.1 and 150B-21.2 authorize and require NC DAQ to advise,
consult, cooperate and enter into agreements with other agencies of the
state, the Federal Government, other states, interstate agencies,
groups, political subdivisions, and industries

affected by the provisions of this act, rules, or policies of the
Department. Also, 15A NCAC 2D .2000 Transportation Conformity requires
a consultation with all affected partners to be implemented for
transportation conformity determinations. Furthermore, NC DAQ has
demonstrated consultation with, and participation by, affected local
entities through its work with local political subdivisions during the
developing of its Transportation Conformity SIP, Regional Haze
Implementation Plan, and the 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration for
the North Carolina portion of the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill NC-SC
nonattainment area. Additionally, the NC DAQ organizes stakeholder
meetings to support SIP development and rulemakings. EPA has made the
preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices
adequately demonstrate consultation with affected local entities
related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, when necessary.

V. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve that portions of NC DAQ's
infrastructure SIP submission, submitted March 18, 2014, for the 2010
1-hour SO2 NAAQS, has met the above described infrastructure
SIP requirements. The PSD permitting requirements for major sources of
section 110(a)(2)(C) and (J), the interstate transport requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1 through 4), will not be
addressed by EPA at this time. EPA has already taken action to approve
North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission related to section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to
approve these portions of North Carolina's infrastructure SIP
submission for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS because these
aspects of the submission are consistent with section 110 of the CAA.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed 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 proposed action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     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).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: February 11, 2016.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2016-03897 Filed 2-24-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P