[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 198 (Wednesday, October 14, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 61775-61789]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26022]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0298; FRL-9935-59-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; SC; Redesignation
of the Charlotte-Rock Hill 2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to
Attainment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On April 17, 2015, the State of South Carolina, through the
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC
DHEC), submitted a request for the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) to redesignate the South Carolina portion of the bi-state
Charlotte-Rock Hill, North Carolina-South Carolina 2008 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area (the entire area is hereinafter referred to as the
``bi-State Charlotte Area'' or ``Area'' and the South Carolina portion
is hereinafter referred to as the ``York County Area'') to attainment
for the 2008 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
containing a maintenance plan for the York County Area. EPA is
proposing to determine that the bi-State Charlotte Area is continuing
to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS; to approve the State's plan for
maintaining attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone standard in the Area,
including the motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen
oxides (NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) for the
years 2014 and 2026 for the York County Area, into the SIP; and to
redesignate the York County Area to attainment for the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. EPA is also notifying the public of the status of EPA's
adequacy determination for the MVEBs for the York County Area.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 13, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2015-0298, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0298,'' 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.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, 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. 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 No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2015-0298. 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 may not be 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 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. 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 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Sheckler of the 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. Mrs. Sheckler may be reached by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to take?
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation?
IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions?
V. What is EPA's analysis of the request?
VI. What is EPA's analysis of South Carolina's proposed
NOX and VOC MVEBs for the York County Area?
VII. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the
proposed NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 for the York
County Area?
VIII. What is the effect of EPA's proposed actions?
IX. Proposed Actions
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to take?

    EPA is proposing to take the following three separate but related
actions, one of which involves multiple elements: (1) To determine that
the bi-state Charlotte Area is continuing to attain the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS; \1\ (2) to approve South Carolina's plan for maintaining
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (maintenance plan), including the
associated MVEBs for the York County Area, into the South Carolina SIP;
and (3) to redesignate the York County Area to attainment for the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also notifying the public of the status of
EPA's adequacy determination for the MVEBs for the York County Area.
The bi-state Charlotte Area consists of Mecklenburg County in its
entirety and portions of Cabarrus, Gaston, Iredell, Lincoln, Rowan and
Union Counties, North Carolina; and a portion of York County, South
Carolina. On April 16, 2015, the State of North Carolina provided a
redesignation request and maintenance plan for its portion of the bi-
state Charlotte Area. EPA approved North Carolina's redesignation
request and maintenance plan in a separate action. See 80 FR 44873
(July 28, 2015). Today's proposed actions are summarized below and
described in greater detail throughout this notice of proposed
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In an action published on July 28, 2015, EPA determined that
the bi-state Charlotte Area was attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone
standard when the Agency redesignated the North Carolina portion of
this Area. See 80 FR 44873.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA is making the preliminarily determination that the bi-state
Charlotte Area is continuing to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
based on recent air quality data and proposing to approve South
Carolina's maintenance plan for its portion of the bi-state Charlotte
Area as meeting the requirements of section 175A (such approval being
one of the CAA criteria for redesignation to attainment status). The
maintenance plan is designed to keep the bi-state Charlotte Area in
attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 2026. The maintenance
plan includes 2014 and 2026 MVEBs for NOX and VOC for the
York County Area for transportation conformity purposes. EPA is
proposing to approve these MVEBs and incorporate them into the South
Carolina SIP.
    EPA also proposes to determine that the South Carolina portion of
the bi-state Charlotte Area has met the requirements for redesignation
under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Accordingly, in this action, EPA
is proposing to approve a request to change the legal designation of
the portion of York County that is included in the bi-state Charlotte
Area to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    EPA is also notifying the public of the status of EPA's adequacy
process for the 2014 and 2026 NOX and VOC MVEBs for the York
County Area. The Adequacy comment period began on May 14, 2015, with
EPA's posting of the availability of South Carolina's submission on
EPA's Adequacy Web site (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm#york-cnty). The Adequacy comment period for
these MVEBs closed on June 15, 2015. No comments, adverse or otherwise,
were received through the Adequacy process. Please see section VII of
this proposed rulemaking for further explanation of this process and
for more details on the MVEBs.
    In summary, today's notice of proposed rulemaking is in response to
South Carolina's April 17, 2015, redesignation request and associated
SIP submission that address the specific issues summarized above and
the necessary elements described in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA for
redesignation of the South Carolina portion of the Area to attainment
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

II. What is the background for EPA's proposed actions?

    On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of
0.075 parts per million (ppm). See 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). Under
EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2008 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 0.075 ppm. See 40 CFR 50.15. Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet a data completeness
requirement. 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 as determined in Appendix I of part
50.
    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 complete, quality assured, and
certified ambient air quality data at the conclusion of the designation
process. The bi-state Charlotte Area was designated nonattainment for
the 2008 8-hour

ozone NAAQS on May 21, 2012 (effective July 20, 2012) using 2009-2011
ambient air quality data. See 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012). At the time
of designation, the bi-state Charlotte Area was classified as a
marginal nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In the
final implementation rule for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (SIP
Implementation Rule),\2\ EPA established ozone nonattainment area
attainment dates based on Table 1 of section 181(a) of the CAA. This
established an attainment date three years after the July 20, 2012,
effective date for areas classified as marginal areas for the 2008 8-
hour ozone nonattainment designations. Therefore, the bi-state
Charlotte Area's attainment date is July 20, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This rule, entitled Implementation of the 2008 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: State Implementation Plan
Requirements and published at 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015), addresses
a range of nonattainment area SIP requirements for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS, including requirements pertaining to attainment
demonstrations, reasonable further progress (RFP), reasonably
available control technology (RACT), reasonably available control
measures (RACM), major new source review (NSR), emission
inventories, and the timing of SIP submissions and of compliance
with emission control measures in the SIP. This rule also addresses
the revocation of the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the anti-backsliding
requirements that apply when the 1997 ozone NAAQS are revoked.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. What are the criteria for redesignation?

    The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA
allows for redesignation providing that: (1) The Administrator
determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the
Administrator has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for
the area under section 110(k); (3) the Administrator determines that
the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable
SIP and applicable Federal air pollutant control regulations and other
permanent and enforceable reductions; (4) the Administrator has fully
approved a maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of
section 175A; and, (5) the state containing such area has met all
requirements applicable to the area for purposes of redesignation under
section 110 and part D of the CAA.
    On April 16, 1992, EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the
General Preamble for the Implementation of title I of the CAA
Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on
April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on
processing redesignation requests in the following documents:
    1. ``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations,''
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, Director, Technical Support Division, June
18, 1990;
    2. ``Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief,
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;
    3. ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
    4. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the
``Calcagni Memorandum'');
    5. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response
to Clean Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
    6. ``Technical Support Documents (TSDs) for Redesignation of Ozone
and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G. T.
Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;
    7. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On
or After November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17,
1993;
    8. ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for
Ozone and CO Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from D. Kent Berry,
Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, November 30, 1993;
    9. ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14,
1994; and
    10. ``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and
Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Memorandum from John S. Seitz,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 1995.

IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions?

    On April 17, 2015, the State of South Carolina, through SC DHEC,
requested that EPA redesignate the South Carolina portion of the Area
to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA's evaluation
indicates that the entire bi-state Charlotte Area has attained the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS, and that the South Carolina portion of the Area
meets the requirements for redesignation as set forth in section
107(d)(3)(E), including the maintenance plan requirements under section
175A of the CAA. As a result, EPA is proposing to take the three
related actions summarized in section I of this notice.

V. What is EPA's analysis of the request?

    As stated above, in accordance with the CAA, EPA proposes in this
action to: (1) Determine that the bi-state Charlotte Area is continuing
to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS; (2) approve South Carolina's
plan for maintaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Area, including
the associated MVEBs, into the South Carolina SIP; and (3) redesignate
the South Carolina portion of the Area to attainment for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. The five redesignation criteria provided under CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E) are discussed in greater detail for the Area in
the following paragraphs of this section.

Criteria (1)--The Bi-State Charlotte Area Has Attained the 2008 8-Hour
Ozone NAAQS

    For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). For ozone, an area may be
considered to be attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS if it meets the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.15
and Appendix I of part 50, based on three complete, consecutive
calendar years of quality-assured air quality monitoring data. To
attain the NAAQS, the 3-year average of the fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations measured at each monitor
within an area over each year must not exceed 0.075 ppm. Based on the
data handling and reporting convention described in 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix I, the NAAQS are attained if the design value is 0.075

ppm or below. The data must be collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and recorded in the EPA Air Quality
System (AQS). The monitors generally should have remained at the same
location for the duration of the monitoring period required for
demonstrating attainment.
    In its final action redesignating the North Carolina portion of the
bi-state Charlotte Area to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
EPA finalized its determination that the bi-state Charlotte Area was
attaining that standard in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 at that time.
EPA concluded that the design values for each monitor in the Area for
the years 2012-2014 are less than or equal to 0.075 ppm, that the data
from these monitors during this time period meet the data quality and
completeness requirements and are recorded in AQS, and that preliminary
2015 monitoring data available at the time of the final action
indicates that the bi-state Charlotte Area continues to attain the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 44874-44875. EPA has reviewed preliminary
monitoring data available since the time of the Agency's redesignation
of the North Carolina portion of the Area and proposes to find that the
bi-state Charlotte Area is continuing to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.\3\ For informational purposes, the fourth-highest 8-hour ozone
values at each monitor for 2012, 2013, 2014, and the 3-year averages of
these values (i.e., design values), are summarized in Table 1, below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This preliminary data is available at EPA's air data Web
site: http://aqsdr1.epa.gov/aqsweb/aqstmp/airdata/download_files.html#Daily. The list of monitors in the bi-state
Charlotte Area is available under the Designated Area field in Table
5 of the Ozone detailed information file at http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html.

                                 Table 1--2012-2014 Design Value Concentrations for the Bi-State Charlotte Area [caret]
                                                                   [Parts per million]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                4th Highest 8-hour Ozone Value (ppm)        3-Year Design
                                                                                ------------------------------------------------  Values (ppm)
                 Location                              County               Monitor ID                                                   ---------------
                                                                                2012            2013            2014          2012-2014
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lincoln County Replacing Iron Station.....  Lincoln.....................     37-109-0004           0.076           0.064           0.064           0.068
Garinger High School......................  Mecklenburg.................     37-119-0041           0.080           0.067           0.065           0.070
Westinghouse Blvd.........................  Mecklenburg.................     37-119-1005           0.073           0.062           0.063           0.066
29 N at Mecklenburg Cab Co................  Mecklenburg.................     37-119-1009           0.085           0.066           0.068           0.073
Rockwell..................................  Rowan.......................     37-159-0021           0.080           0.062           0.064           0.068
Enochville School *.......................  Rowan.......................     37-159-0022           0.077           0.063  ..............  ..............
Monroe Middle School......................  Union.......................     37-179-0003           0.075           0.062           0.067           0.068
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Monitoring data for 2014 is not available because the monitor was shut down in 2014.
[caret] There is a monitor in York County that is located outside of the designated nonattainment area.

    The 3-year design value for 2012-2014 for the bi-state Charlotte
Area is 0.073 ppm,\4\ which meets the NAAQS. EPA will not take final
action to approve the redesignation if the 3-year design value exceeds
the NAAQS prior to EPA finalizing the redesignation. The monitors used
to determine the attainment status for the bi-state Charlotte Area are
all located in North Carolina; no monitors are located in the South
Carolina portion of the Area. As discussed in more detail below, the
State of North Carolina has committed to continue monitoring in the bi-
state Charlotte Area in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The monitor with the highest 3-year design value is
considered the design value for the Area.
    \5\ See also EPA's proposed rulemaking notice associated with
the redesignation of the North Carolina portion of the Area. 80 FR
29250, 29259 (May 21, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Criteria (2)--South Carolina Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section
110(k) for the South Carolina Portion of the Area; and Criteria (5)--
South Carolina Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110
and Part D of Title I of the CAA

    For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the state has met all applicable
requirements under section 110 and part D of title I of the CAA (CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)) and that the state has a fully approved SIP
under section 110(k) for the area (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). EPA
proposes to find that South Carolina has met all applicable SIP
requirements for the South Carolina portion of the Area under section
110 of the CAA (general SIP requirements) for purposes of
redesignation. Additionally, EPA proposes to find that the South
Carolina SIP satisfies the criterion that it meets applicable SIP
requirements for purposes of redesignation under part D of title I of
the CAA in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). Further, EPA
proposes to determine that the SIP is fully approved with respect to
all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation in accordance
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these determinations, EPA
ascertained which requirements are applicable to the South Carolina
portion of the Area and, if applicable, that they are fully approved
under section 110(k). SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to
requirements that were applicable prior to submittal of the complete
redesignation request.
a. The South Carolina Portion of the Area Has Met All Applicable
Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA
    General SIP requirements. General SIP elements and requirements are
delineated in section 110(a)(2) of title I, part A of the CAA. These
requirements include, but are not limited to, the following: Submittal
of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after reasonable public
notice and hearing; provisions for establishment and operation of
appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality;
implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the
implementation of part C requirements (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD)) and provisions for the implementation of part D
requirements (NSR permit programs); provisions for air pollution
modeling; and provisions

for public and local agency participation in planning and emission
control rule development.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA has
required certain states to establish programs to address the interstate
transport of air pollutants. The section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for
a state are not linked with a particular nonattainment area's
designation and classification in that state. EPA believes that the
requirements linked with a particular nonattainment area's designation
and classifications are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing
a redesignation request. The transport SIP submittal requirements,
where applicable, continue to apply to a state regardless of the
designation of any one particular area in the state. Thus, EPA does not
believe that the CAA's interstate transport requirements should be
construed to be applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.
    In addition, EPA believes other section 110 elements that are
neither connected with nonattainment plan submissions nor linked with
an area's attainment status are applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation. The area will still be subject to these requirements
after the area is redesignated. The section 110 and part D requirements
which are linked with a particular area's designation and
classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a
redesignation request. This approach is consistent with EPA's existing
policy on applicability (i.e., for redesignations) of conformity and
oxygenated fuels requirements, as well as with section 184 ozone
transport requirements. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final
rulemakings (61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7,
2008); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458,
May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking at (60 FR 62748,
December 7, 1995). See also the discussion on this issue in the
Cincinnati, Ohio, redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and in
the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19,
2001).
    Title I, Part D, applicable SIP requirements. Section 172(c) of the
CAA sets forth the basic requirements of attainment plans for
nonattainment areas that are required to submit them pursuant to
section 172(b). Subpart 2 of part D, which includes section 182 of the
CAA, establishes specific requirements for ozone nonattainment areas
depending on the area's nonattainment classification. As provided in
Subpart 2, a marginal ozone nonattainment area, such as the South
Carolina portion of the Area, must submit an emissions inventory that
complies with section 172(c)(3), but the specific requirements of
section 182(a) apply in lieu of the demonstration of attainment (and
contingency measures) required by section 172(c). See 42 U.S.C.
7511a(a). A thorough discussion of the requirements contained in
sections 172(c) and 182 can be found in the General Preamble for
Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498).
    Section 182(a) Requirements. Section 182(a)(1) requires states to
submit a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual
emissions from sources of VOC and NOx emitted within the
boundaries of the ozone nonattainment area. South Carolina provided an
emissions inventory for the South Carolina portion of the Area to EPA
in an August 8, 2014, SIP submission. On June 12, 2015, EPA published a
direct final rule to approve this emissions inventory into the SIP.\6\
See 80 FR 33413 (direct final rule) and 80 FR 33460 (associated
proposed rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ This direct final rule was effective on July 13, 2015,
because EPA did not receive any adverse comment during the public
comment period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under section 182(a)(2)(A), states with ozone nonattainment areas
that were designated prior to the enactment of the 1990 CAA amendments
were required to submit, within six months of classification, all rules
and corrections to existing VOC RACT rules that were required under
section 172(b)(3) of the CAA (and related guidance) prior to the 1990
CAA amendments. The South Carolina portion of the Area is not subject
to the section 182(a)(2) RACT ``fix up'' because it was designated as
nonattainment after the enactment of the 1990 CAA amendments.
    Section 182(a)(2)(B) requires each state with a marginal ozone
nonattainment area that implemented, or was required to implement, an
inspection and maintenance (I/M) program prior to the 1990 CAA
amendments to submit a SIP revision providing for an I/M program no
less stringent than that required prior to the 1990 amendments or
already in the SIP at the time of the amendments, whichever is more
stringent. The South Carolina portion of the Area is not subject to the
section 182(a)(2)(B) because it was designated as nonattainment after
the enactment of the 1990 CAA amendments and did not have an I/M
program in place prior to those amendments.
    Regarding the permitting and offset requirements of section
182(a)(2)(C) and section 182(a)(4), South Carolina currently has a
fully-approved part D NSR program in place. However, EPA has determined
that areas being redesignated need not comply with the requirement that
a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation, provided that the
area demonstrates maintenance of the NAAQS without part D NSR, because
PSD requirements will apply after redesignation. A more detailed
rationale for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols,
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994,
entitled, ``Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.'' South Carolina's PSD program will become
applicable in the South Carolina portion of the Area upon redesignation
to attainment.
    Section 182(a)(3) requires states to submit periodic inventories
and emissions statements. Section 182(a)(3)(A) requires states to
submit a periodic inventory every three years. As discussed below in
the section of this notice titled Criteria (4)(e), Verification of
Continued Attainment, the State will continue to update its emissions
inventory at least once every three years. Under section 182(a)(3)(B),
each state with an ozone nonattainment area must submit a SIP revision
requiring emissions statements to be submitted to the state by sources
within that nonattainment area. South Carolina provided a SIP revision
to EPA on August 22, 2014, addressing the section 182(a)(3)(B)
emissions statements requirement, and on June 12, 2015, EPA published a
direct final rule to approve this SIP revision.\7\ See 80 FR 33413
(direct final rule) and 80 FR 33460 (associated proposed rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ This direct final rule was effective on July 13, 2015,
because EPA did not receive any adverse comment during the public
comment period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 176 Conformity Requirements. Section 176(c) of the CAA
requires states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that
federally supported or funded projects conform to the air quality
planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation plans, programs, and projects that
are developed, funded, or approved under title 23 of the United States
Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity)
as well as to all other federally

supported or funded projects (general conformity). State transportation
conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement, and enforceability
that EPA promulgated pursuant to its authority under the CAA.
    EPA interprets the conformity SIP requirements \8\ as not applying
for purposes of evaluating a redesignation request under section 107(d)
because state conformity rules are still required after redesignation
and Federal conformity rules apply where state rules have not been
approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding this
interpretation); see also 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (redesignation
of Tampa, Florida). Nonetheless, South Carolina has an approved
conformity SIP for the South Carolina portion of the Area. See 74 FR
37168 (July 28, 2009). Thus, the South Carolina portion of the bi-state
Charlotte Area has satisfied all applicable requirements for purposes
of redesignation under section 110 and part D of title I of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to submit revisions
to their SIPs to reflect certain Federal criteria and procedures for
determining transportation conformity. Transportation conformity
SIPs are different from the MVEBs that are established in control
strategy SIPs and maintenance plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. The South Carolina Portion of the Bi-State Charlotte Area Has a
Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
    EPA has fully approved the applicable South Carolina SIP for the
South Carolina portion of the Area under section 110(k) of the CAA for
all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA may rely
on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request (see
Calcagni Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance
v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426)
plus any additional measures it may approve in conjunction with a
redesignation action (see 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and citations
therein). South Carolina has adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully
approved at various times, provisions addressing the various SIP
elements applicable for the ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 11136 (March 2,
2015); 76 FR 41111 (July 13, 2011).
    As indicated above, EPA believes that the section 110 elements that
are neither connected with nonattainment plan submissions nor linked to
an area's nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation. EPA has approved all part D requirements
applicable for purposes of this redesignation. As noted above, EPA has
approved South Carolina's August 8, 2014, emissions inventory SIP
revision, and its August 22, 2014, emissions statements SIP revision.
See 80 FR 33413.

Criteria (3)--The Air Quality Improvement in the Bi-State Charlotte
Area Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions
Resulting From Implementation of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air
Pollution Control Regulations and Other Permanent and Enforceable
Reductions

    For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the air quality improvement in the area
is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting
from implementation of the SIP, applicable Federal air pollution
control regulations, and other permanent and enforceable reductions
(CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). EPA has preliminarily determined that
South Carolina has demonstrated that the observed air quality
improvement in the bi-state Charlotte Area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from Federal measures and
from state measures adopted into the SIP. EPA does not believe that the
decrease in ozone concentrations in the bi-state Charlotte Area is due
to unusually favorable meteorological conditions.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 80 FR 44875-44877.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    State and Federal measures enacted in recent years have resulted in
permanent emission reductions. Most of these emission reductions are
enforceable through regulations. The state measures that have been
implemented to date and identified by South Carolina as permanent and
enforceable measures include Regulation 61-62.2--Prohibition of Open
Burning and Regulation 61-62.5--Control of Oxides of Nitrogen. These
measures are approved in the federally-approved SIP and thus are
permanent and enforceable. The Federal measures that have been
implemented include the following:
    Tier 2 vehicle and fuel standards. Implementation began in 2004 and
as newer, cleaner cars enter the national fleet, these standards
continue to significantly reduce NOx emissions. The
standards require all passenger vehicles in any manufacturer's fleet to
meet an average standard of 0.07 grams of NOx per mile.
Additionally, in January 2006 the sulfur content of gasoline was
required to be on average 30 ppm which assists in lowering the
NOx emissions. Most gasoline sold in South Carolina prior to
January 2006 had a sulfur content of about 300 ppm.\10\ EPA expects
that these standards will reduce NOx emissions from vehicles
by approximately 74 percent by 2030, translating to nearly 3 million
tons annually by 2030.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ South Carolina also identified Tier 3 Motor Vehicle
Emissions and Fuel Standards as a federal measure. EPA issued this
rule in April 28, 2014, which applies to light duty passenger cars
and trucks. EPA promulgated this rule to reduce air pollution from
new passenger cars and trucks beginning in 2017. Tier 3 emission
standards will lower sulfur content of gasoline and lower the
emissions standards.
    \11\ EPA, Regulatory Announcement, EPA420-F-99-051 (December
1999), available at: http://www.epa.gov/tier2/documents/f99051.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Large non-road diesel engines rule. This rule was promulgated in
2004, and is being phased in between 2008 through 2014. This rule will
also reduce the sulfur content in the nonroad diesel fuel. When fully
implemented, this rule will reduce NOX, VOC, particulate
matter, and carbon monoxide. These emission reductions are federally
enforceable. EPA issued this rule in June 2004, which applies to diesel
engines used in industries, such as construction, agriculture, and
mining. It is estimated that compliance with this rule will cut
NOX emissions from non-road diesel engines by up to 90
percent nationwide. The non-road diesel rule was fully implemented by
2010.
    Heavy-duty gasoline and diesel highway vehicle standards. EPA
issued this rule in January 2001 (66 FR 5002). This rule includes
standards limiting the sulfur content of diesel fuel, which went into
effect in 2004. A second phase took effect in 2007, which further
reduced the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 ppm, leading to
additional reductions in combustion NOX and VOC emissions.
EPA expects that this rule will achieve a 95 percent reduction in
NOX emissions from diesel trucks and buses and will reduce
NOX emissions by 2.6 million tons by 2030 when the heavy-
duty vehicle fleet is completely replaced with newer heavy-duty
vehicles that comply with these emission standards.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 66 FR 5002, 5012 (January 18, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Medium and heavy duty vehicle fuel consumption and GHG standards.
These standards require on-road vehicles to achieve a 7 percent to 20
percent reduction in CO2 emissions and fuel consumption by
2018. The decrease in fuel consumption will result in a 7 percent to 20
percent decrease in NOX emissions.

    Nonroad spark-ignition engines and recreational engines standards.
The nonroad spark-ignition and recreational engine standards, effective
in July 2003, regulate NOX, hydrocarbons, and carbon
monoxide from groups of previously unregulated nonroad engines. These
engine standards apply to large spark-ignition engines (e.g., forklifts
and airport ground service equipment), recreational vehicles (e.g.,
off-highway motorcycles and all-terrain-vehicles), and recreational
marine diesel engines sold in the United States and imported after the
effective date of these standards. When all of the nonroad spark-
ignition and recreational engine standards are fully implemented, an
overall 72 percent reduction in hydrocarbons, 80 percent reduction in
NOX, and 56 percent reduction in carbon monoxide emissions
are expected by 2020. These controls reduce ambient concentrations of
ozone, carbon monoxide, and fine particulate matter.
    National Program for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and Fuel
Economy Standards. The federal GHG and fuel economy standards apply to
light-duty cars and trucks in model years 2012-2016 (phase 1) and 2017-
2025 (phase 2). The final standards are projected to result in an
average industry fleet-wide level of 163 grams/mile of carbon dioxide
(CO2) which is equivalent to 54.5 miles per gallon (mpg) if
achieved exclusively through fuel economy improvements. The fuel
economy standards result in less fuel being consumed, and therefore
less NOX emissions released.
    Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine (RICE) National Emissions
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP).\13\ The RICE NESHAP is
expected to result in a small decrease in VOC emissions. RICE owners
and operators had to comply with the NESHAP by May 3, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ This NESHAP is expected to result in a small decrease in
VOC emissions. Boilers must comply with the NESHAP by January 31,
2016, for all states except North Carolina which has a compliance
date in May 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued the
NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22
states to reduce emissions of NOX, a precursor to ozone
pollution, and providing a mechanism (the NOX Budget Trading
Program) that states could use to achieve those reductions. Affected
states were required to comply with Phase I of the SIP Call beginning
in 2004 and Phase II beginning in 2007. By the end of 2008, ozone
season emissions from sources subject to the NOX SIP Call
dropped by 62 percent from 2000 emissions levels. All NOX
SIP Call states have SIPs that currently satisfy their obligations
under the NOX SIP Call; the NOX SIP Call
reduction requirements are being met; and EPA will continue to enforce
the requirements of the NOX SIP Call. Emission reductions
resulting from regulations developed in response to the NOX
SIP Call are therefore permanent and enforceable for the purposes of
today's action.
    CAIR/CSAPR. In its redesignation request and maintenance plan, the
State identified the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and the Cross-
State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) as two measures that contributed to
permanent and enforceable emissions reductions. CAIR created regional
cap-and-trade programs to reduce SO2 and NOX
emissions in 27 eastern states, including South Carolina, that
contributed to downwind nonattainment and maintenance of the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS and the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 70 FR 25162
(May 12, 2005). EPA approved South Carolina's CAIR regulations into the
South Carolina SIP on October 16, 2009. See 74 FR 53167. In 2008, the
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
(D.C. Circuit) initially vacated CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d
896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately remanded the rule to EPA without
vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits provided by CAIR, North
Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). On August 8,
2011 (76 FR 48208), acting on the DC Circuit's remand, EPA promulgated
CSAPR to replace CAIR and thus to address the interstate transport of
emissions contributing to nonattainment and interfering with
maintenance of the two air quality standards covered by CAIR as well as
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. CSAPR requires substantial reductions
of SO2 and NOX emissions from electric generating
units (EGUs) in 28 states in the Eastern United States.
    The DC Circuit's initial vacatur of CSAPR \14\ was reversed by the
United States Supreme Court on April 29, 2014, and the case was
remanded to the DC Circuit to resolve remaining issues in accordance
with the high court's ruling. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P.,
134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). On remand, the D.C. Circuit affirmed CSAPR in
most respects, but invalidated without vacating some of the CSAPR
budgets as to a number of states. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v.
EPA, 795 F.3d 118 (D.C. Cir. 2015). The remanded budgets include the
Phase 2 sulfur dioxide (SO2) and NOX ozone season
emissions budgets for South Carolina. This litigation ultimately
delayed implementation of CSAPR for three years, from January 1, 2012,
when CSAPR's cap-and-trade programs were originally scheduled to
replace the CAIR cap-and-trade programs, to January 1, 2015. Thus, the
rule's Phase 2 budgets were originally promulgated to begin on January
1, 2014, and are now scheduled to begin on January 1, 2017. CSAPR will
continue to operate under the existing emissions budgets until EPA
addresses the D.C. Circuit's remand.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38
(D.C. Cir. 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although the State identified CAIR and CSAPR as measures that
contributed to permanent and enforceable emissions reductions, EPA is
proposing to approve the redesignation of the South Carolina portion of
the bi-State Charlotte Area without relying on those measures as having
led to attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS or contributing to
maintenance of that standard. In so doing, we are proposing to
determine that the DC Circuit's invalidation of the South Carolina
CSAPR Phase 2 ozone season NOX and SO2 emissions
budgets does not bar today's proposed redesignation.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ The Court's holding regarding South Carolina's
SO2 CSAPR emissions budget is irrelevant to today's
action because SO2 is not an ozone precursor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The improvement in ozone air quality in the Area from 2011 (a year
when the design value for the Area was above the NAAQS) to 2014 (a year
when the design value was below the NAAQS) is not due to CSAPR
emissions reductions because, as noted above, CSAPR did not go into
effect until January 1, 2015, after the Area was already attaining the
standard. As a general matter, because CSAPR is CAIR's replacement,
emissions reductions associated with CAIR will for most areas be made
permanent and enforceable through implementation of CSAPR. However, EPA
has preliminarily determined that the vast majority of reductions in
emissions in the South Carolina portion of the Area from 2011-2014 were
due to permanent and enforceable reductions in mobile source VOC and
NOX emissions. In addition, EPA's analysis of EGU emissions
data from CAIR-subject sources in South Carolina, none of which are
located in the South Carolina portion of the Charlotte Area, further
support our proposed determination that attainment of the 2008 ozone
NAAQS in the Area was not due to CAIR reductions from South Carolina
EGUs.
    As summarized at the end of this section, EPA found that from 2011
to

2014, mobile source emission reductions accounted for 82 percent of the
total NOX reductions and 85 percent of the total VOC
reductions in the South Carolina portion of the Area. As laid out in
the State's maintenance demonstration, NOX and VOC emissions
in the South Carolina portion of the Area are projected to continue
their downward trend through the end of the first maintenance plan
period, driven entirely by mobile source measures.\16\ From 2014 to
2026, the State projected that all of the emissions decreases in the
South Carolina portion of the Area would be due to mobile source
measures based on EPA-approved mobile source modeling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Although the State listed CAIR and CSAPR as permanent and
enforceable measures, the State's maintenance demonstration does not
include emissions reductions from these programs because there are
no EGUs in the South Carolina portion of the Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Furthermore, emissions data from EPA's Clean Air Markets Division
(CAMD) summarized in Table 3 shows that NOX emissions from
CAIR-subject EGUs in South Carolina were already below the
NOX ozone season CAIR budget by 2011, when the design value
for the Area was above the 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA believes that the
additional decreases in NOX emissions from South Carolina
EGUs in 2012-2014 were largely due to the retirement of several coal-
and oil-fired EGUs during that time period. See Table 4. These
retirements are permanent and enforceable, regardless of the rationale
behind the shutdowns. Because these retired units were subject to CAIR,
even if CAIR was partially responsible for attainment of the 2008 ozone
NAAQS in the South Carolina portion of the Area, CAIR's part in that
attainment has been made permanent and enforceable through retirements
that will endure.\17\ Given the particular facts and circumstances
associated with this Area, EPA does not believe that the DC Circuit's
recent invalidation of South Carolina's CSAPR Phase 2 NOX
ozone season and SO2 budgets, which replaced CAIR's
NOX ozone season and SO2 budgets, is a bar to
EPA's redesignation of the South Carolina portion of the Area for the
2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ EPA expects that NOX emissions from South
Carolina EGUs will continue to decrease with the scheduled
retirement of two coal- and/or oil-fired EGUs by the end of 2018 and
the switch from coal and/or oil to natural gas at two additional
EGUs. None of these units are located in the Charlotte Area.

  Table 3--Comparison of South Carolina EGU Annual NOX Ozone Season Budget and NOX Ozone Season Emissions From
                                               South Carolina EGUs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         South Carolina EGU NOX ozone season emissions
  South Carolina EGU CAIR NOX ozone season   -------------------------------------------------------------------
         annual budget  (2009-2014)                 2011             2012             2013             2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
15,249......................................          13,036            8,817            6,491            7,237
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           Table 4--South Carolina EGUs That Retired During 2011-2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                2011 Ozone
                                                                                season NOX      Retirement
                          Facility name                                Unit          emissions         date
                                                                                (tons)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
H B Robinson....................................................               1             378            2012
W S Lee.........................................................               1             166            2014
W S Lee.........................................................               2             181            2014
Canadys Steam...................................................            CAN1             492            2012
Canadys Steam...................................................            CAN2             515            2013
Canadys Steam...................................................            CAN3             769            2013
Dolphus M Grainger..............................................               1             186            2012
Dolphus M Grainger..............................................               2             192            2012
Jefferies.......................................................               3             423            2012
Jefferies.......................................................               4             418            2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned above, the State measures that have been implemented
include the following: \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ EPA incorporated these two measures into the SIP in 2005.
See 70 FR 50195 (August 26, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Prohibition of Open Burning: Effective in 2004, Regulation 61-62.2
prohibits the certain open burning activities during the ozone season
for additional control of NOX emissions.
    Control of Oxides of Nitrogen: Effective in 2004, Regulation 61-
62.5, Standard 5.2--Control of Oxides of Nitrogen, applies to new and
existing stationary sources that emit or have the potential to emit
NOX generated from fuel combustion. This regulation sets
standards for new construction based on Best Available Control
Technology (BACT) standards from the national RACT/BACT/LAER
clearinghouse. For new sources, the regulation is primarily directed at
smaller sources that fall below the prevention of significance
deterioration (PSD) thresholds and therefore otherwise be exempt for
NOX controls.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ South Carolina stated that neighboring states have adopted
measures to improve regional air quality, noting that North Carolina
has implemented the state-wide Clean Smokestacks Act which sets a
cap on NOX and sulfur dioxide emissions. North Carolina's
Clean Smokestacks Act requires coal-fired power plants to reduce
annual NOX emissions by 77 percent by 2009, and to reduce
annual SO2 emissions by 49 percent by 2009 and 73 percent
by 2013. This law set a NOX emissions cap of 56,000 tons/
year for 2009 and SO2 emissions caps of 250,000 tons/year
and 130,000 tons/year for 2009 and 2013, respectively. The public
utilities cannot meet these emission caps by purchasing emission
credits. EPA approved the statewide emissions caps as part of the
North Carolina SIP on September 26, 2011. In 2013, the power plants
subject to this law had combined NOX emissions of 38,857
tons per year, well below the 56,000 tons per year cap. The
emissions cap has been met in all subsequent years as well and is
enforceable at both the federal and state level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA evaluated the ozone precursor emissions data in the South
Carolina portion of the Area and found that there were significant
reductions in these emissions in multiple source categories from 2011
to 2014 during ozone season. The emissions data show that from 2011 to
2014, NOX and VOC emissions

decreased in the point source, area source, and mobile source
categories and that the decrease in mobile source NOX
emissions accounted for approximately 82 percent of the total
NOX emissions reductions and approximately 85 percent of the
total VOC emissions reductions. It is not necessary for every change in
emissions between the nonattainment year and the attainment year to be
permanent and enforceable. Rather, the CAA requires that improvement in
air quality necessary for the area to attain the relevant NAAQS must be
reasonably attributable to permanent and enforceable emission
reductions in emissions.

   Table 5--NOX Emissions for the South Carolina Portion of the Charlotte 2008 Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Area
                                              [Tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Year                 Point source     Area source       On-road        Non-road          Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011............................            4.71            0.93           11.43            2.63           19.70
2014............................            4.54            0.91           10.04            2.50           17.85
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Table 6--VOC Emissions for the South Carolina Portion of the Charlotte 2008 Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Area
                                              [Tons per summer day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Year                 Point source     Area source       On-road        Non-road          Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011............................            4.02            6.93            5.30            1.78           18.03
2014............................            3.80            6.89            3.93            1.70           16.32
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The emissions reductions identified in Tables 5 and 6 are
attributable to numerous measures implemented during this period,
including the permanent and enforceable mobile source measures
discussed above such as the Tier 2 vehicle and fuel standards, the
large non-road diesel engines rule,\20\ heavy-duty gasoline and diesel
highway vehicle standards,\21\ medium and heavy duty vehicle fuel
consumption and GHG standards,\22\ non-road spark-ignitions and
recreational standards,\23\ and the national program for GHG emissions
and fuel economy standards. These mobile source measures have resulted
in, and continue to result in, large reductions in NOX
emissions over time due to fleet turnover (i.e., the replacement of
older vehicles that predate the standards with newer vehicles that meet
the standards). For example, implementation of the Tier 2 standards
began in 2004, and as newer, cleaner cars enter the national fleet,
these standards continue to significantly reduce NOX
emissions. EPA expects that these standards will reduce NOX
emissions from vehicles by approximately 74 percent by 2030,
translating to nearly 3 million tons annually by 2030.\24\
Implementation of the heavy-duty gasoline and diesel highway vehicle
standards rule also began in 2004. EPA projects a 2.6 million ton
reduction in NOX emissions by 2030 when the heavy-duty
vehicle fleet is completely replaced with newer heavy-duty vehicles
that comply with these emission standards.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ EPA estimated that compliance with this rule will cut
NOX emissions from non-road diesel engines by up to 90
percent nationwide.
    \21\ Implementation of this rule is expected to achieve a 95
percent reduction in NOX emissions from diesel trucks and
buses.
    \22\ When fully implemented in 2018, this rule is expected to
reduce NOX emissions from the covered vehicles by 20
percent.
    \23\ When fully implemented, the standards will result in an 80
percent reduction in NOX by 2020.
    \24\ EPA, Regulatory Announcement, EPA420-F-99-051 (December
1999), available at: http://www.epa.gov/tier2/documents/f99051.pdf.
    \25\ 66 FR 5002, 5012 (January 18, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State calculated the on-road and non-road mobile source
emissions contained in Tables 5 and 6 using EPA-approved models and
procedures that account for the Federal mobile source measures
identified above, fleet turnover, and increased
population.26 27 Because the model does not include any
additional mobile source measures, the reductions in mobile source
emissions quantified in the Area between 2011 and 2014 are the result
of the permanent and enforceable mobile source measures listed above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ South Carolina used EPA's MOVES2014 model to calculate on-
road emissions factors and EPA's NONROAD 2008a model to quantify
off-road emissions.
    \27\ South Carolina used the interagency consultation process
required by 40 CFR part 93 (known as the Transportation Conformity
Rule) which requires EPA, the United States Department of
Transportation, metropolitan planning organizations, state
departments of transportation, and State and local air quality
agencies to work together to develop applicable implementation
plans. The on-road emissions were generated by an aggregate of the
vehicle activity (generated from the travel demand model) on
individual roadways multiplied by the appropriate emissions factor
from MOVES2014. The assumptions which are included in the travel
demand model, such as population, were reviewed through the
interagency consultation process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Improvements in air quality in the bi-state Charlotte area are due
to real, permanent and enforceable reductions in NOX
emissions resulting from state and federal measures. EPA is proposing
to approve the redesignation request and related SIP revisions for the
York County portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area.

Criteria (4)--The South Carolina Portion of the Area Has a Fully
Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA

    For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has a fully approved
maintenance plan pursuant to section 175A of the CAA (CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In conjunction with its request to redesignate the
South Carolina portion of the Area to attainment for the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, SC DHEC submitted a SIP revision to provide for the
maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after
the effective date of redesignation to attainment. EPA believes that
this maintenance plan meets the requirements for approval under section
175A of the CAA.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
Under section 175A, the plan must

demonstrate continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least
10 years after the Administrator approves a redesignation to
attainment. Eight years after the redesignation, the state must submit
a revised maintenance plan demonstrating that attainment will continue
to be maintained for the 10 years following the initial 10-year period.
To address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance
plan must contain contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to assure
prompt correction of any future 2008 8-hour ozone violations. The
Calcagni Memorandum provides further guidance on the content of a
maintenance plan, explaining that a maintenance plan should address
five requirements: The attainment emissions inventory, maintenance
demonstration, monitoring, verification of continued attainment, and a
contingency plan. As is discussed more fully below, EPA has
preliminarily determined that South Carolina's maintenance plan
includes all the necessary components and is thus proposing to approve
it as a revision to the South Carolina SIP.
b. Attainment Emissions Inventory
    As discussed above, EPA determined that the bi-state Charlotte Area
had attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS at the time that it
redesignated the North Carolina portion of the Area to attainment. See
80 FR 44874-44875. EPA has reviewed preliminary monitoring data
available since the time of the Agency's redesignation of the North
Carolina portion of the Area and proposes to find that the bi-state
Charlotte Area continues to attain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. South
Carolina selected 2014 as the base year (i.e., attainment emissions
inventory year) for developing a comprehensive emissions inventory for
NOX and VOC, for which projected emissions could be
developed for 2018, 2022, and 2026. The attainment inventory identifies
a level of emissions in the Area that is sufficient to attain the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS. South Carolina began development of the attainment
inventory by first generating a baseline emissions inventory for the
State's portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area. The projected summer
day emission inventories have been estimated using projected rates of
growth in population, traffic, economic activity, and other parameters.
In addition to comparing the final year of the plan (2026) to the base
year (2014), South Carolina compared interim years to the baseline to
demonstrate that these years are also expected to show continued
maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone standard.
    The emissions inventory is composed of four major types of sources:
Point, area, on-road mobile, and non-road mobile. South Carolina also
included event sources (i.e., fires) in the inventory. The complete
descriptions of how the inventories were developed are discussed in
Appendices A-E of the April 17, 2015, submittal, which can be found in
the docket for this action. Point source emissions are tabulated from
data collected by direct on-site measurements of emissions or from mass
balance calculations utilizing emission factors from EPA's AP-42 or
stack test results. For each projected year's inventory, point sources
are adjusted by growth factors based on economic forecasting for the
energy sector. Airport and helipad emissions reported were obtained
from the EPA's 2011 National Emission Inventory and grown based on York
County population growth.
    For area sources, emissions are estimated by multiplying an
emission factor by some known indicator of collective activity such as
production, number of employees, or population. South Carolina started
with the 2011 NEI for area sources reported at the York County level,
then allocated the emissions to the portion of the county within the
bi-state Charlotte Area by the proportion of the York County population
within the Area. For each projected year's inventory, area source
emissions are grown by information such as population growth, energy
consumption by sector, or county business patterns from the Census.
    The non-road mobile sources emissions are calculated using EPA's
nonroad portion of the Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES2014)
model, with the exception of the emissions associated with railroad
locomotives, which were obtained from EPA's 2011 NEI v1. For each
projected year's inventory, the emissions are estimated using growth
factors based on York County population growth.
    For highway mobile sources, South Carolina ran EPA's MOVES2014
mobile model to calculate emissions. The MOVES2014 model includes the
road class vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as an input file and can
directly output the estimated emissions. For each projected year's
inventory, the highway mobile sources emissions are calculated by
running the MOVES mobile model for the future year with the projected
VMT to generate emissions that take into consideration expected Federal
tailpipe standards, fleet turnover, and new fuels.
    The events inventory, consisting of wildfires and prescribed fires,
was first based on EPA's 2011 NEI v1, which utilized a model for
predicting emission from fires based on factors such as the area
burned, fuel load available, burn efficiency, and emission factors.
Emissions from fires were not grown for the maintenance and interim
years due to the unpredictability of projecting wildfires.
    The 2014 NOX and VOC emissions for the South Carolina
portion of the Area, as well as the emissions for other years, were
developed consistent with EPA guidance and are summarized in Tables 7
through 9 of the following subsection discussing the maintenance
demonstration. See Appendices A-E of the April 17, 2015, submission for
more detailed information on the emissions inventory.
c. Maintenance Demonstration
    The maintenance plan associated with the redesignation request
includes a maintenance demonstration that:
    (i) Shows compliance with and maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS by providing information to support the demonstration that
current and future emissions of NOX and VOC remain at or
below 2014 emissions levels.
    (ii) Uses 2014 as the attainment year and includes future emissions
inventory projections for 2018, 2022, and 2026.
    (iii) Identifies an ``out year'' at least 10 years after the time
necessary for EPA to review and approve the maintenance plan. Per 40
CFR part 93, NOX and VOC MVEBs were established for the last
year (2026) of the maintenance plan (see section VII below).
Additionally, SC DHEC opted to establish MVEBs for an interim year
(2014).
    (iv) Provides actual (2014) and projected emissions inventories, in
tons per summer day (tpsd), for the South Carolina portion of the Area,
as shown in Tables 7 through 9, below.

Table 7--Actual and Projected Typical Summer Day NOX Emissions (tpsd) for the South Carolina Portion of the Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Sector                            2014            2018            2022            2026
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................            4.54            4.57            4.59            4.62
Area............................................            0.91            0.92            0.92            0.92
Non-road........................................            2.50            1.91            1.58            1.43
On-road.........................................           10.04            6.65            4.61            3.39
Event sources...................................            0.04            0.04            0.04            0.04
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total *.....................................           18.03           14.09           11.74           10.40
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 8--Actual and Projected Typical Summer Day VOC Emissions (tpsd) for the South Carolina Portion of the Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Sector                            2014            2018            2022            2026
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point...........................................            3.80            3.83            3.84            3.86
Area............................................            6.89            7.30            7.54            7.80
Non-road........................................            1.70            1.46            1.39            1.40
On-road.........................................            3.93            2.79            2.15            1.74
Event sources...................................            0.42            0.42            0.42            0.42
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Total *.....................................           16.74           15.80           15.34           15.22
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Table 9--Emission Estimates for the South Carolina Portion of the Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Year                      VOC (tpsd)      NOX (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014....................................           16.74           18.03
2018....................................           15.80           14.09
2022....................................           15.34           11.74
2026....................................           15.22           10.40
Difference from 2014 to 2026............           -1.52           -7.63
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Tables 7 through 9 summarize the 2014 and future projected
emissions of NOX and VOC from the South Carolina portion of
the Area. In situations where local emissions are the primary
contributor to nonattainment, the NAAQS should not be violated in the
future as long as emissions from within the nonattainment area remain
at or below the baseline with which attainment was achieved. South
Carolina has projected emissions as described previously and determined
that emissions in the South Carolina portion of the Area will remain
below those in the attainment year inventory for the duration of the
maintenance plan.
    As discussed in section VII of this proposed rulemaking, a safety
margin is the difference between the attainment level of emissions
(from all sources) and the projected level of emissions (from all
sources) in the maintenance plan. The attainment level of emissions is
the level of emissions during one of the years in which the area met
the NAAQS. South Carolina selected 2014 as the attainment emissions
inventory year for the South Carolina portion of the Area. South
Carolina calculated safety margins in its submittal for year 2018,
2022, and 2026. Because the initial MVEB year of 2014 is also the base
year for the maintenance plan inventory, there is no safety margin,
therefore, no adjustments were made to the MVEB for 2014. The State has
allocated a portion of the 2026 safety margin to the 2026 MVEBs for the
York County Area.

 Table 10--New Safety Margins for the South Carolina Portion of the Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Year                      VOC (tpsd)      NOX (tpsd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014....................................             N/A             N/A
2018....................................           -0.94           -3.94
2022....................................           -1.40           -6.29
2026....................................           -1.52           -7.63
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State decided to allocate 100 percent of the 2026 safety margin
to the 2026 MVEBs to allow for unanticipated growth in VMT, changes and
uncertainty in vehicle mix assumptions, etc., that will influence the
emission estimations. SC DHEC has allocated 7.63 tpd (6,922 kg/day) to
the 2026 NOX MVEB and 1.52 tpd (1,379 kg/day) to the 2026
VOC MVEB. After allocation of 100 percent of the available safety
margin, there is no remaining safety margin for NOX and VOC.
This allocation and the resulting safety margin for the South Carolina
portion of the Area are discussed further in section VI of this
proposed rulemaking along

with the MVEBs to be used for transportation conformity proposes.
d. Monitoring Network
    There are currently seven monitors measuring ozone in the bi-state
Charlotte Area. All of these monitors are operated by the State of
North Carolina or Mecklenburg County. There are no South Carolina
monitors in the bi-state Charlotte Area. Specifically, North Carolina
operates four of the monitors in the bi-state Charlotte Area, whereas
the Mecklenburg County Air Quality Office operates three of the
monitors in Mecklenburg County. The State of North Carolina, through
the North Carolina Department of Air Quality has committed to continue
operation of all monitors in the North Carolina portion of the bi-state
Charlotte Area (which happens to be all of the monitors in the bi-state
Charlotte Area) in compliance with 40 CFR part 58 and have thus
addressed the requirement for monitoring. EPA approved North Carolina's
commitment to continuing monitoring as part of the Agency's action to
redesignate the North Carolina portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area
to attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 44873 (July 28,
2015). EPA approved North Carolina's monitoring plan on November 25,
2013.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
    The State of South Carolina, through SC DHEC, has the legal
authority to enforce and implement the requirements of the South
Carolina portion of the Area 2008 8-hour ozone maintenance plan. This
includes the authority to adopt, implement, and enforce any subsequent
emissions control contingency measures determined to be necessary to
correct future ozone attainment problems.
    Additionally, under the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule
(CERR) and Air Emissions Reporting Requirements (AERR), SC DHEC is
required to develop a comprehensive, annual, statewide emissions
inventory every three years that is due twelve to eighteen months after
the completion of the inventory year. The AERR inventory years match
the base year and final year of the inventory for the maintenance plan,
and are within one or two years of the interim inventory years of the
maintenance plan. Therefore, SC DHEC commits to compare the CERR and
AERR inventories as they are developed with the maintenance plan to
determine if additional steps are necessary for continued maintenance
of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in this Area.
f. Contingency Measures in the Maintenance Plan
    Section 175A of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include
such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to assure that the
state will promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. The maintenance plan should identify the contingency
measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and
implementation, and a time limit for action by the state. A state
should also identify specific indicators to be used to determine when
the contingency measures need to be implemented. The maintenance plan
must include a requirement that a state will implement all measures
with respect to control of the pollutant that were contained in the SIP
before redesignation of the area to attainment in accordance with
section 175A(d).
    In the April 17, 2015 submittal, South Carolina affirms that all
programs instituted by the State will remain enforceable and that
sources are prohibited from reducing emissions controls following the
redesignation of the Area. The contingency plan included in the
submittal includes a triggering mechanism to determine when contingency
measures are needed and a process of developing and implementing
appropriate control measures. The primary trigger of the contingency
plan will be a quality assured/quality controlled (QA/QC) design value
that exceeds the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (i.e., when the three-year
average of the 4th highest values is equal to or greater than 0.076 ppm
at any monitor in the Area). If the QA/QC data indicates a violating
design value, the triggering event will be the date of the design value
violation, not the final QA/QC date.
    Additionally, SC DHEC will be evaluating periodic emissions
inventories and comparing them to the projected inventories. If the
emissions reported in these inventories exceed the projected emissions
in the maintenance plan by more than 10 percent, SC DHEC will
investigate the cause for these differences and develop a strategy for
addressing them.
    Finally, SC DHEC commits to implement, within 24 months of a
trigger, at least one of the control measures listed below or other
contingency measures that may be determined to be more appropriate
based on the analyses performed.\28\ At least one of the following
contingency measures will be adopted and implemented upon a primary
triggering event:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ If SC DHEC determines that a longer schedule is required to
implement specific contingency measures, then, upon selection of the
appropriate measures, SC DHEC will notify EPA of the proposed
schedule and provide sufficient information to demonstrate that the
proposed measures are a prompt correction of the triggering event.
Any extension would be subject to EPA's approval of the SIP revision
containing the required contingency measure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     NOX Reasonably Available Control Technology on
stationary sources not subject to existing requirements;
     Implementation of diesel retrofit programs, including
incentives for performing retrofits for fleet vehicle operations;
     Alternative fuel programs for fleet vehicle operations;
     Gas can and lawnmower replacement programs;
     Voluntary engine idle reductions programs;
     SC DHEC's Take a Break from Exhaust program; and,
     Other measures deemed appropriate at the time as a result
of advances in control technologies.
    EPA has concluded that the maintenance plan adequately addresses
the five basic components of a maintenance plan: The attainment
emissions inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring,
verification of continued attainment, and a contingency plan.
Therefore, the maintenance plan SIP revision submitted by South
Carolina for the State's portion of the Area meets the requirements of
section 175A of the CAA and is approvable.

VI. What is EPA's analysis of South Carolina's proposed NOX
and VOC MVEBs for the York County 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 demonstration
requirements) and maintenance plans create MVEBs for criteria
pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from cars and
trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB must be established for the last
year of the maintenance plan. A state may adopt MVEBs for other years
as well. 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 establish the MVEB in the SIP and how to revise the
MVEB.
    As part of the interagency consultation process on setting MVEBs,
SC DHEC held conference calls with the Rock Hill Fort Mill Area
Transportation Study (RFATS) Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
to determine what years to set MVEBs for the Area. According to the
transportation conformity rule, a maintenance plan must establish MVEBs
for the last year of the maintenance plan (in this case, 2026). See 40
CFR 93.118. The consensus formed during the interagency consultation
process was that another MVEB should be set for the York County, SC
maintenance plan base year of 2014.
    Accordingly, SC DHEC established MVEBs based on the latest MPO
jurisdictional boundaries such that MVEBs are established for that
portion of York County which is within the RFATS MPO as part of the bi-
state Charlotte Area. Table 11, below, provides the NOX and
VOC MVEBs in kilograms per day (kg/day),\29\ for 2014 and 2026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ The conversion to kilograms used the actual emissions
reported in the MOVES model. The conversion was done utilizing the
``CONVERT'' function in an EXCEL spreadsheet. The conversion factor
is 907.1847.

                                        Table 11--York County Area MVEBs
                                                    [kg/day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               2014                            2026
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        NOX             VOC             NOX             VOC
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Emissions..................................           9,112           3,566           3,076           1,576
Safety Margin Allocated to MVEB.................  ..............  ..............           6,922           1,379
Conformity MVEB.................................           9,112           3,566           9,998           2,955
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned above, South Carolina has chosen to allocate a portion
of the available safety margin to the NOX and VOC MVEBs for
2026 for the York County Area.
    Through this rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve the MVEBs for
NOX and VOC for 2014 and 2026 for the York County Area
because EPA believes that the Area maintains the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS with the emissions at the levels of the budgets. Once the MVEBs
for the York County Area are approved or found adequate (whichever is
completed first), they must be used for future conformity
determinations. After thorough review, EPA has preliminary determined
that the budgets meet the adequacy criteria, as outlined in 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4), and is proposing to approve the budgets because they are
consistent with maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS through
2026.

VII. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the
proposed NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 for the York
County Area?

    When reviewing submitted ``control strategy'' SIPs or maintenance
plans containing MVEBs, 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 MVEBs 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, South Carolina's April 17, 2015, maintenance
plan includes NOX and VOC MVEBs for the York County Area for
2014, an interim year of the maintenance plan, and 2026, the last year
of the maintenance plan. EPA is reviewing the NOX and VOC s
MVEBs through the adequacy process. The York County Area NOX
and VOC MVEBs, opened for public comment on EPA's adequacy Web site on
May 14, 2015, found at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm. The EPA public comment period on adequacy for
the MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 for the York County Area closed on June 15,
2015. No comments, adverse or otherwise, were received during EPA's
adequacy process for the MVEBs associated with South Carolina's
maintenance plan.

    EPA intends to make its determination on the adequacy of the 2014
and 2026 MVEBs for the York County Area for transportation conformity
purposes in the near future by completing the adequacy process that was
started on May 14, 2015. After EPA finds the 2014 and 2026 MVEBs
adequate or approves them, the new MVEBs for NOX and VOC
must be used for future transportation conformity determinations. For
required regional emissions analysis years that involve 2014 through
2026, the applicable 2014 MVEBs will be used and for 2026 and beyond,
the applicable budgets will be the new 2026 MVEBs established in the
maintenance plan, as defined in section VI of this proposed rulemaking.

VIII. What is the effect of EPA's proposed actions?

    EPA's proposed actions establish the basis upon which EPA may take
final action on the issues being proposed for approval today. Approval
of South Carolina's redesignation request would change the legal
designation of the portion of York County within the South Carolina
portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area, as found at 40 CFR part 81,
from nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Approval of South Carolina's associated SIP revision would also
incorporate a plan for maintaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the
Area through 2026 into the SIP. This maintenance plan includes
contingency measures to remedy any future violations of the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS and procedures for evaluation of potential violations. The
maintenance plan also establishes NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014
and 2026 for the York County Area. The MVEBs are listed in Table 11 in
Section VI. Additionally, EPA is notifying the public of the status of
EPA's adequacy determination for the newly-established NOX
and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 for the York County Area.

IX. Proposed Actions

    EPA is taking three separate but related actions regarding the
redesignation and maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the
South Carolina portion of the Area. EPA is proposing to determine that
the entire bi-state Charlotte Area is continuing to attain the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to approve the maintenance plan
for the South Carolina portion of the Area, including the
NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026, into the South Carolina
SIP (under CAA section 175A). The maintenance plan demonstrates that
the Area will continue to maintain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and that
the budgets meet all of the adequacy criteria contained in 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4) and (5). Further, as part of this action, EPA is
describing the status of its adequacy determination for the
NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2026 in accordance with 40
CFR 93.118(f)(1). Within 24 months from the publication date of EPA's
final rule for this action, the transportation partners will need to
demonstrate conformity to the new NOX and VOC MVEBs pursuant
to 40 CFR 93.104(e)(3).
    Additionally, EPA is proposing to determine that the South Carolina
portion of the bi-state Charlotte Area has met the criteria under CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation from nonattainment to attainment
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On this basis, EPA is proposing to
approve South Carolina's redesignation request for the South Carolina
portion of the Area. If finalized, approval of the redesignation
request would change the official designation of that portion of York
County that is included in the bi-state Charlotte Area, as found at 40
CFR part 81, from nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E)
are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, 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, these proposed actions merely propose to approve state law
as meeting Federal requirements and do not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For this reason, these
proposed actions:
     Are 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);
     do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     are 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.);
     do 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);
     do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     are not economically significant regulatory actions based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     are 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
     will not have disproportionate human health or
environmental effects under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February
16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed action for the state of South Carolina
does not have Tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The Catawba Indian Nation Reservation
is located within the State of South Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba
Indian Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code Ann. 27-16-120, ``all state and
local environmental laws and regulations apply to the [Catawba Indian
Nation] and Reservation and are fully enforceable by all relevant state
and local agencies and authorities.'' However, because no tribal lands
are located within the South Carolina portion of the Area, this action
is not approving any specific state requirement into the SIP that would
apply to Tribal lands. Therefore, EPA has determined that this proposed
rule does not have substantial direct effects on an Indian Tribe. EPA
notes today's action will not impose substantial direct costs on Tribal
governments or preempt Tribal law.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

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

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

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

    Dated: October 1, 2015.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2015-26022 Filed 10-13-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P