[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 210 (Wednesday, October 30, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 64896-64905]
[FR Doc No: 2013-25782]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0563; FRL-9902-18-Region 4]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina:
Non-Interference Demonstration for Removal of Federal Low-Reid
Vapor Pressure Requirement for the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve the State of North Carolina's
March 27, 2013, State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to the State's
approved Maintenance Plan for the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill (Triangle)
1997 8-hour Ozone Maintenance Area. Specifically, North Carolina's
revision, including updated modeling, shows that the Triangle Area
would continue to maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard if the
currently applicable Federal Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) standard for
gasoline from 7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) were modified to 9.0 psi
for three portions (Wake and Durham Counties, and a portion of
Granville County) of the ``Triangle Area'' of North Carolina during the
high-ozone season. The State has included a technical demonstration
with the revision to demonstrate that a less-stringent RVP standard of
9.0 psi in these areas would not interfere with continued maintenance
of the 1997 8-hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
or any other applicable standard. Approval of this SIP revision is a
prerequisite for EPA's consideration of an amendment to the regulations
to remove the aforementioned portions of the Triangle Area from the
list of areas that are currently subject to the Federal 7.8 psi RVP
requirements. In addition, EPA is also proposing to approve changes to
the motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) used in the 1997 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan for the Triangle Area. The use of new models and
the relaxation of the RVP requirement has resulted in a revised safety
margin which North Carolina is reallocating among the MVEBs associated
the Maintenance Plan. EPA has preliminarily determined that North
Carolina's March 27, 2013, SIP revision with respect to the changes to
the modeling and associated technical demonstration associated with the
State's request for the removal of the Federal RVP requirements, and
with respect to the updated MVEBs, is consistent with the applicable
provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). Should EPA decide to
remove the subject portions of the Triangle Area from those areas
subject to the 7.8 psi Federal RVP requirements, such action will occur
in a subsequent rulemaking.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before November 29,
2013.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R04-OAR-2013-0563 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-2013-0563, Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief,
Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2013-0563. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Lakeman of the Regulatory
Development Section, in the Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr.
Lakeman may be reached by phone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or via electronic
mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What is being proposed?
II. What is the background of the Triangle Area?
III. What is the history of the gasoline volatility requirement?
IV. What are the section 110(l) requirements?
V. What is EPA's analysis of North Carolina's submittal?
VI. Mobile Source Inventories and Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
Update
VII. Proposed Action
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is being proposed?

    The Triangle Area in North Carolina is currently designated
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Area was redesignated
from nonattainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on December 26, 2007.
See 72 FR 72948. This rulemaking proposes to approve a revision to the
1997 8-hour ozone Maintenance Plan for the Triangle Area submitted by
the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NC
DENR). Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve changes to the
maintenance plan, including updated modeling, that show that the
Triangle Area can continue to maintain the 1997 ozone standard without
reliance on emission reductions based upon the use of gasoline with an
RVP of 7.8 psi in any of the Triangle Area counties during the high
ozone season--June 1 through September 15.\1\ EPA is also proposing to
conclude that the new modeling demonstrates that the area would
continue to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard with the use of
gasoline with an RVP of 9.0 psi throughout the Triangle Area during the
high ozone season. Consistent with section 110(l) of the Act, EPA also
proposes to conclude that the use of gasoline with an RVP of 9.0 psi
throughout the Maintenance Plan Areas during the high ozone season
would not interfere with other applicable requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As discussed further below, a separate rulemaking is
required for relaxation of the current requirement to use gasoline
with an RVP of 7.8 psi in the Triangle Area. While EPA evaluates the
approvability of North Carolina's revision to the maintenance plan
pursuant to section 110(l), the decision regarding removal of
Federal RVP requirements pursuant to section 211(h) in the Triangle
Area is made at the discretion of the Administrator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The new modeling conducted by North Carolina to account for the
proposed relaxation of the applicable RVP standard in a portion of the
Triangle Area also results in changes to the safety margin associated
with the maintenance plan.\2\ As such, the North Carolina revision
includes a reallocation of the safety margin among the NOx MVEBs for
the Triangle Area. EPA is also proposing approval of this revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In addition to a less stringent RVP standard, the new
modeling also utilizes updated models for on-road and off-road
mobile emission sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This preamble is hereafter organized into five parts. Section II
provides the background of the Triangle Area designation status with
respect to the various Ozone NAAQS. Section III describes the
applicable history of federal gasoline regulation. Section IV provides
the Agency's policy regarding relaxation of the volatility standards.
Section V provides EPA's analysis of the information submitted by North
Carolina to support a relaxation of the more stringent volatility
standard in the Triangle Area. Finally, Section VI describes the
changes to the MVEBs associated with Maintenance Plan for the Triangle
Area and provides EPA's analysis regarding the proposed revision.

II. What is the background of the Triangle Area?

    In 1991, the Triangle Area was designated as a moderate
nonattainment area pursuant to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694
(November 6, 1991). Under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the Triangle
nonattainment area was composed of Durham and Wake Counties, and the
Dutchville Township portion of Granville County. Among the requirements
applicable to nonattainment areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was the
requirement to meet certain volatility standards (known as Reid Vapor
Pressure or RVP) for gasoline sold commercially. See 55 FR 23658 (June
11, 1990). As discussed in greater detail below, as part of the RVP
requirements associated with its nonattainment designation, gasoline
sold in the Triangle 1-hour nonattainment area could not exceed 7.8 psi
RVP during the high-ozone season months.
    Following implementation of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement in the
Triangle Area, on April 18, 1994, the Area was redesignated to
attainment for the 1-hour ozone standard, based on 1989-1992 ambient
air quality monitoring data. See 59 FR 18300. North Carolina's
redesignation request for the 1-hour ozone Triangle Area did not,
however, include a request for the Area to be removed from the list of
areas subject to the 7.8 psi RVP standard. As such, the 7.8 RVP
requirement remained in place for Durham and Wake Counties, and the
Dutchville Township portion of Granville County when the Triangle Area
was designated nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Under the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the Triangle Area was expanded from Durham and
Wake Counties, and the Dutchville Township portion of Granville County,
to also include Franklin, Johnston, Orange, and Person Counties, the
remainder of Granville County and Baldwin, Center, New Hope and
Williams Townships in Chatham County. See 69 FR 23857. In 2007, the
Triangle Area was redesignated to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. See 72 FR 72948, December 26, 2007. The Triangle Area was later
designated as attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 77 FR
30088, May 21, 2012.

III. What is the history of the gasoline volatility requirement?

    On August 19, 1987 (52 FR 31274), EPA determined that gasoline
nationwide had become increasingly volatile, causing an increase in
evaporative emissions from gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment.
Evaporative emissions from gasoline, referred to as volatile organic
compounds (VOC), are precursors to the formation of tropospheric ozone
and contribute to the nation's ground-level ozone problem. Exposure to
ground-level ozone can reduce lung function (thereby aggravating asthma
or other respiratory conditions), increase susceptibility to
respiratory infection, and may contribute to premature death in people
with heart and lung disease.
    The most common measure of fuel volatility that is useful in
evaluating gasoline evaporative emissions is RVP. Under section 211(c)
of CAA, EPA promulgated regulations on March 22, 1989 (54 FR 11868),
that set maximum limits for the RVP of gasoline sold during the high
ozone season. These regulations constituted Phase I of a two-phase
nationwide program, which was designed to reduce the volatility of
commercial gasoline during the high ozone season. On June 11, 1990 (55
FR 23658), EPA promulgated more stringent volatility controls as Phase
II of the volatility control program. These requirements established
maximum RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8 psi (depending on the State,
the month, and the area's initial ozone attainment

designation with respect to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS during the high
ozone season).
    The 1990 CAA Amendments established a new section, 211(h), to
address fuel volatility. Section 211(h) requires EPA to promulgate
regulations making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, dispense,
supply, offer for supply, transport, or introduce into commerce
gasoline with an RVP level in excess of 9.0 psi during the high ozone
season. Section 211(h) prohibits EPA from establishing a volatility
standard more stringent than 9.0 psi in an attainment area, except that
we may impose a lower (more stringent) standard in any former ozone
nonattainment area redesignated to attainment.
    On December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), EPA modified the Phase II
volatility regulations to be consistent with section 211(h) of the CAA.
The modified regulations prohibited the sale of gasoline with an RVP
above 9.0 psi in all areas designated attainment for ozone, beginning
in 1992. For areas designated as nonattainment, the regulations
retained the original Phase II standards published on June 11, 1990 (55
FR 23658).
    As stated in the preamble to the Phase II volatility controls and
reiterated in the proposed change to the volatility standards published
in 1991, EPA will rely on states to initiate changes to EPA's
volatility program that they believe will enhance local air quality
and/or increase the economic efficiency of the program within the
limits of CAA section 211(h).\3\ In those rulemakings, EPA explained
that the Governor of a State may petition EPA to set a volatility
standard less stringent than 7.8 psi for some month or months in a
nonattainment area. The petition must demonstrate such a change is
appropriate because of a particular local economic impact and that
sufficient alternative programs are available to achieve attainment and
maintenance of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. A current listing of the RVP
requirements for states can be found on EPA's Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/gasolinefuels/volatility/standards.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990), 56 FR 24242 (May 29, 1991)
and 56 FR 64704 (Dec. 12, 1991).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As explained in the December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), Phase II
rulemaking, EPA believes that relaxation of an applicable RVP standard
in a nonattainment area is best accomplished in conjunction with the
redesignation process. In order for an ozone nonattainment area to be
redesignated as an attainment area, section 107(d)(3) of the Act
requires the state to make a showing, pursuant to section 175A of the
Act, that the area is capable of maintaining attainment for the ozone
NAAQS for ten years after redesignation. Depending on the area's
circumstances, this maintenance plan will either demonstrate that the
area is capable of maintaining attainment for ten years without the
more stringent volatility standard or that the more stringent
volatility standard may be necessary for the area to maintain its
attainment with the ozone NAAQS. Therefore, in the context of a request
for redesignation, EPA will not relax the volatility standard unless
the state requests a relaxation and the maintenance plan demonstrates,
to the satisfaction of EPA, that the area will maintain attainment for
ten years without the need for the more stringent volatility standard.
As noted above, however, North Carolina did not request relaxation of
the applicable 7.8 psi RVP standard when the Triangle Area was
redesignated to attainment for the either the 1-hour or the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. Rather, North Carolina is now seeking to relax the 7.8 psi
RVP standard after the Triangle Area has been redesignated to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Accordingly, the original
modeling and maintenance demonstration supporting the 1997 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan must be revised to reflect continued attainment under
the relaxed 9.0 psi RVP standard that the State has requested.

IV. What are the section 110(l) requirements?

    Section 110(l) requires that a revision to the SIP not interfere
with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress (RFP) (as defined in section 171), or any other
applicable requirement of the Act. EPA's criterion for determining the
approvability of North Carolina's March 27, 2013, SIP revision is
whether this requested action complies with section 110(l) of the CAA.
Because the modeling associated with the current maintenance plan for
North Carolina is premised in part upon the 7.8 psi RVP requirements, a
request to revise the maintenance plan modeling to no longer rely on
the 7.8 psi RVP requirement is subject to the requirements of CAA
section 110(l). Therefore, the State must demonstrate that this
revision will not interfere with the attainment or maintenance of any
of the NAAQS or any other applicable requirement of the CAA.
    This section 110(l) non-interference demonstration is a case-by-
case determination based upon the circumstances of each SIP revision.
EPA interprets 110(l) as applying to all NAAQS that are in effect,
including those that have been promulgated but for which the EPA has
not yet made designations. The specific elements of the 110(l) analysis
contained in the SIP revision depend on the circumstances and emissions
analyses associated with that revision. EPA's analysis of North
Carolina's March 27, 2013, SIP revision, including review of section
110(l) requirements is provided below.
    Finally, EPA notes that this rulemaking is only proposing to
approve the State's revision to its existing maintenance plan for the
Triangle Area showing that the area can continue to maintain the
standard without relying upon gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi being
sold in the Triangle area during the high ozone season. Consistent with
CAA section 211(h) and the Phase II volatility regulations a separate
rulemaking is required for relaxation of the current requirement to use
gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi in the Triangle area.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ While EPA evaluates the approvability of North Carolina's
revision to the maintenance plan pursuant to section 110(l), the
decision regarding removal of Federal RVP requirements pursuant to
section 211(h) in the Triangle Area is made at the discretion of the
Administrator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. What is EPA's analysis of North Carolina's submittal?

a. Overall Preliminary Non-Interference Analyses Conclusions for North
Carolina's Request for the Revision of the Maintenance Plan

    As discussed above, on March 27, 2013, NC DENR submitted a revision
to the existing maintenance plan for the Triangle 1997 8-hour ozone
maintenance area. Specifically, NC DENR revised the modeling for on-
road mobile, off-road mobile, and area source emissions. The modeling
was revised to show the emission changes that would result from
relaxing the gasoline RVP requirement from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi for the
Triangle Area during the high ozone season. North Carolina's March 27,
2013, SIP revision also included an evaluation of the impact that the
removal of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement would have on maintenance of the
1997 and 2008 ozone standards and on other applicable NAAQS. For the
purposes of this proposed change to the applicable RVP requirement, EPA
is making the preliminary determination that the relevant NAAQS \5\ for
consideration in the non-interference demonstration required by section
110(l) of the CAA

are the ozone, particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The six NAAQS for which EPA establishes health and welfare
based standards are CO, lead, NO2, ozone, PM, and
SO2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    VOC and NOX emissions are precursors for ozone and
particulate matter (PM), and NO2 is a component of
NOX. In addition, EPA also believes that, in this instance,
it is appropriate to also evaluate non-interference with respect to the
carbon monoxide (CO) NAAQS. Typically, EPA would not expect the CO
NAAQS to be affected by a change to RVP requirements because VOC and
NOX are not precursors to CO. The revised modeling submitted
by North Carolina, however, demonstrates a slight increase in CO
emissions, and as such, EPA believes a non-interference review for CO
is also appropriate in this case.
    There are no emissions reductions attributable to the emissions of
lead and sulfur dioxide (SO2) from RVP requirements. As a
result, there is no information indicating the proposed change would
have any impact on those NAAQS. Additionally, the Triangle Area is
currently designated attainment for the lead NAAQS, and is continuing
to attain the standard. As for the SO2 NAAQS, the Triangle
Area is not designated nonattainment, and there is no available
monitoring data indicating an exceedance of the NAAQS. Therefore, the
analysis below focuses on the impact of North Carolina's changes to the
RVP requirements on the ozone, particulate matter, NO2 and
CO NAAQS.
    To determine the emissions reviewed in the technical demonstration
included with the March 27, 2013, SIP revision, NC DENR compared the
2005 baseline emissions inventory to the 2017 projected emissions
inventory. The baseline emissions inventory represents an emission
level for a period when the applicable ambient air quality standard was
not violated, 2004-2006. NC DENR concluded that if projected emissions
remain at or below the baseline emissions, continued maintenance is
demonstrated and the ambient air quality standard should not be
violated in the future. In addition to comparing the final year of the
maintenance plan, NC DENR's technical demonstration also compares all
of the interim years to the 2005 baseline to demonstrate that these
years are also expected to show continued maintenance of all NAAQS.
    Also, in North Carolina's March 27, 2013, SIP revision, NC DENR
provided an updated analysis utilizing the MOVES model to calculate on-
road emissions that are used as part of the evaluation of the potential
impacts for the ozone NAAQS that might result exclusively from changing
the high ozone season RVP requirements from 7.8 psi to the requirement
of 9.0 psi. Relaxation of the RVP standard from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi
revealed a slight increase in emissions of 0.30 tons per day (tpd) (a
0.20 percent increase) in NOX and 3.88 tpd (a 2.44 percent
increase) in VOC for Durham, Granville and Wake Counties. While the
modeling showed a slight increase in NOX and VOC emissions
resulting from the use of 9.0 psi RVP as opposed to 7.8 psi, the most
appropriate analysis for purposes of evaluating non-interference is
whether total area emissions from all emissions inventory sources
(i.e., point and area stationary, and on-road and non-road mobile) in
the future years would remain at or below the level determined to be
consistent with maintenance of the 1997 ozone NAAQS. To provide this
full evaluation, the State compared total man-made emissions of VOC and
NOX for the year 2005 (base year), 2008 and 2011 using a RVP
of 7.8 psi (for Durham, Granville and Wake Counties only as the
remaining Triangle Area Counties are currently using a RVP of 9.0 psi)
to emissions generated for the years 2014 and 2017, using a RVP of 9.0
psi.
    There are four different man-made emission inventory source
classifications; 1) point, 2) area, 3) on-road mobile and 4) off-road
mobile. Point sources are those stationary sources that emit more than
10 tons per year of VOC or 100 tons per year of NOX from a
single facility. The source emissions are tabulated from data collected
by direct on-site measurements of emissions or mass balance
calculations utilizing emission factors from EPA's AP-42, Compilation
of Air Pollutant Emission Factors. For the projected year's inventory,
point sources are adjusted by growth factors based on Standard
Industrial Classification codes. The growth factors are generated using
the EPA's Economic Growth Analysis System version 5.0 (E-GAS 5.0)
program. Area sources are those stationary sources whose emissions are
relatively small but due to the large number of these sources, the
collective emissions could be significant (i.e., dry cleaners, service
stations, etc.). 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. These
types of emissions are estimated on the county level. For the projected
year's inventory, area source emissions are changed by population
growth, projected production growth, or when applicable, by E-GAS 5.0
growth factors. On-road mobile sources are those vehicles that travel
on the roadways. For on-road mobile sources, the MOVES model results
represent the new motor vehicle emission budgets for the Triangle area.
Off-road mobile sources are equipment that can move but do not use the
roadways (e.g., lawn mowers, construction equipment, railroad
locomotives, and aircraft). With the exception of the railroad
locomotives and aircraft engines, the emissions from this category are
calculated using the EPA's NONROAD2008a non-road mobile model. The
railroad locomotive and aircraft engine emissions are estimated by
taking an activity and multiply by an emission factor. All emissions
are also estimated at the county level. Total off-road mobile source
emissions represent the sum of emissions generated by the NONROAD 2008a
model and emissions calculated for aircraft and railroad locomotives.
    Despite the small increases in emissions from the change to the RVP
control, the Triangle Area continues to demonstrate a downward trend in
NOX and VOC emissions through 2017. Tables 1 and 2 below
provide the results of this analysis for the entire Triangle Area
(including the three Counties (noted in italics) affected by the
proposed RVP relaxation).

                  Table 1--Total Man-Made VOC Emissions (tpd) for the Triangle Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             County                    2005            2008            2011            2014            2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chatham *.......................            5.52            5.57            5.23            5.00            4.85
Durham..........................           25.94           23.27           20.93           19.47           18.31
Franklin........................           11.81           11.55           11.20           11.14           11.23
Granville.......................           12.78           12.38           11.98           11.85           11.90
Johnston........................           30.58           29.43           28.31           27.73           27.57
Orange..........................           15.42           14.35           13.10           12.13           11.35
Person..........................            9.00            8.65            8.32            8.12            8.07

Wake............................           87.45           81.34           75.61           72.33           69.85
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................          198.50          186.54          174.68          167.77          163.13
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Emissions for Center, New Hope and Williams Townships in Chatham County only.

                  Table 2--Total Man-Made NOX Emissions (tpd) for the Triangle Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             County                    2005            2008            2011            2014            2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chatham *.......................            5.01            4.44            3.79            3.17            2.73
Durham..........................           39.48           35.16           28.45           23.52           19.73
Franklin........................            7.68            6.55            5.37            4.49            3.82
Granville.......................           10.94            8.98            7.01            5.56            4.57
Johnston........................           34.22           28.94           23.19           19.32           16.47
Orange..........................           23.37           20.64           16.53           13.52           11.31
Person..........................           37.48           31.38           31.20           31.02           29.72
Wake............................          106.52           98.12           83.82           69.97           59.06
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................          264.70          234.21          199.36          170.57          147.41
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Emissions for Center, New Hope and Williams Townships in Chatham County only.

    As Table 1 and 2 indicate, NOX and VOC emissions in the
Triangle Area will continue to decrease, even with the increase in high
ozone season fuel RVP to 9.0 psi. The slight increase in emissions is
being mitigated area-wide by a steady decrease in tailpipe emissions,
which is the result of cleaner new vehicle fleet replacing the older
fleet and other Federal and State emissions reduction programs. As
discussed below, based on this data, together with air quality data,
and maintenance demonstrations and attainment designations for the
NAAQS, EPA is making the preliminary determination that the slight
increase in NOX and VOC emissions resulting from this change
will not interfere with the Area's ability to maintain the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, or any other applicable requirement. More details on the
individual non-interference analyses for the ozone, PM, NO2
and CO NAAQS are provided below.

b. Non-Interference Analysis for the Ozone NAAQS

    Effective June 15, 2004, the Triangle Area was designated as
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The primary precursors
for ozone are VOC and NOX emissions. As a previous 1-hour
ozone nonattainment area, Durham and Wake Counties and a portion of
Granville County in the Triangle Area were already subject to the
Federal RVP requirements for high ozone season gasoline to aid the Area
with compliance with the ozone NAAQS. Although originally implemented
for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the Federal RVP requirements continued to
apply to Durham and Wake Counties and a portion of Granville County for
the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and are still in effect.
    On June 7, 2007, NC DENR submitted a redesignation request and
maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. NC DENR used the
MOBILE6.2 mobile source emissions model to estimate the emissions for
on-road sources and NONROAD2005c non-road mobile model for off-road
sources. In the years 2014 and 2017, NC DENR projected a reduction from
the 2005 base year inventory of approximately 38 percent and 45 percent
(respectively) in NOX emissions (in tpd). The projected
reduction of VOC emissions (in tpd) for the years 2014 and 2017 is
approximately 36 percent and 44 percent, respectively, from the 2005
base year emissions inventory.
    There is an overall downward trend in ozone concentration in the
Triangle Area that can be attributed to Federal and State programs that
have led to significant emissions reductions. On December 26, 2007, (72
FR 72948), EPA approved North Carolina's 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance
plan for the Triangle Area, and redesignated the Area to attainment for
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Triangle Area is continuing to meet
the 1-hour and 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,\6\ and is meeting the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS, based on recent air quality monitoring data. The 2008
ozone NAAQS is met when the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average concentration, averaged over 3 years is 75 parts per million
(ppm) or less.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The air quality design value for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS is
the 3-year average of the annual 4th highest daily maximum 8-hour
ozone concentration. The level of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is
0.075 ppm. The 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is not met when the design
value is greater than 0.075 ppm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned above, on December 26, 2007 (72 FR 72948), EPA
approved North Carolina's June 7, 2007, maintenance plan for the
Triangle Area. This maintenance plan contained MVEBs for NOX
and an insignificance determination for VOC contribution from motor
vehicles to the 8-hour ozone pollution in the Triangle Area. For the
purposes of regional emissions analysis, the information provided by
North Carolina supported EPA's determination that VOC contribution to
8-hour ozone pollution from motor vehicles in the Triangle Area as
insignificant for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Specifically, the future
on-road VOC emissions were projected to be less than 10 percent in the
Triangle Area, in the context of the total SIP inventory. According to
information provided by North Carolina, biogenic emissions account for
approximately 90 percent of the VOC emissions in future years in the
Triangle Area.
    In addition, North Carolina conducted a emissions sensitivity
analysis that indicated that 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone levels in the
Triangle Area were not impacted by reductions in man-made VOC emissions
(e.g., reductions from motor vehicles). Specifically, the photochemical
model was run for a 39-day scenario in 2009 with a 30 percent reduction
in all man-made VOC emissions. In addition, two mobile

source specific sensitivity simulations \7\ were conducted by NCDAQ
over a 7-day period to specifically focus on the impact of mobile
source emissions on ozone formation. None of these emissions
sensitivity simulations resulted in a significant response in ozone
formation. This supports the State's proposal that the highway mobile
VOC emissions are insignificant contributors to ozone formation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ One simulation ran a 50 percent increase in mobile source
emissions in the Triangle ozone nonattainment counties and the
second ran a 50 percent decrease in mobile source emissions in the
counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The current design value for ozone for the Triangle Area for 2010-
2012 is 0.075 ppm and the preliminary 2011-2013 design value is 0.071
ppm for this Area. EPA also evaluated the potential increase in the VOC
and NOX precursor emissions, and whether it is reasonable to
conclude that the requested change to RVP requirements in Durham,
Granville and Wake Counties during the high ozone season would cause
the Area to be out of compliance with the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    In light of the current designations, monitoring and emissions
data, and the submitted modeling, including the fact that the
NOX emissions inventories are projected to continue to
significantly decrease,\8\ EPA has preliminarily determined that North
Carolina's revision of the maintenance plan to no longer rely on
gasoline with 7.8 psi RVP requirement in Durham, Granville and Wake
Counties will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the ozone
NAAQS. As Table 3 indicates the design value (DV) for the Triangle Area
shows that the Area is meeting the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Future decreases in the inventory are an order of magnitude
greater than the increases associated with the change in RVP.

                                                           Table 3--Triangle Area Design Value
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           2005-2007 DV       2006-2008 DV       2007-2009 DV       2008-2010 DV       2009-2011 DV       2010-2012 DV
          2004-2006 DV  (ppm)                 (ppm)              (ppm)              (ppm)              (ppm)              (ppm)              (ppm)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.080.................................             0.081              0.080              0.077              0.074              0.073              0.075
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Non-Interference Analysis for the PM NAAQS

    The precursors for PM2.5 are NOX,
SO2, VOC and ammonia. For the Triangle Area, on-road mobile,
off-road mobile and area sources are not believed to be large
contributors to directly emitted fine particulate matter less than 2.5
micrometers (PM2.5) or indirectly formed PM2.5
concentrations. As mentioned earlier in this rulemaking, the RVP
requirements result in emissions benefits for VOC and NOX so
EPA focused on these precursors for the analysis of the potential
impact of North Carolina's SIP change. However, as described in North
Carolina's March 27, 2013, submission, directly emitted
PM2.5 is a very small component of the overall
PM2.5 ambient concentrations. Instead, the primary species
impacting PM2.5 concentrations are the secondarily formed
sulfates and organic carbons.
    Sulfates are formed through the chemical reaction of SO2
and ammonia, and the majority of the organic carbons come from natural
sources like trees. See ``Redesignation Demonstration and Maintenance
Plan for the Hickory (Catawba County) and Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High
Point (Davidson and Guilford Counties) Fine Particulate Matter
Nonattainment Areas'', submitted to EPA on 18 December 2009, Figure 4-
2, p. 4-4, which can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using docket ID
No. EPA-R04-OAR-2009-1010. A 2009 analysis of SO2 emissions,
which is a primary contributor to the formation of PM2.5
within North Carolina, found about 3.3 percent of total SO2
emissions came from on-road, off-road and area sources combined, while
the remaining 96.7 percent came from point sources.
    On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652), EPA established an annual
PM2.5 NAAQS at 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\)
based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations. At that time, EPA also established a 24-hour NAAQS of
65 [mu]g/m\3\. See 40 CFR 50.7. On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), EPA
retained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS at 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\
based on a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations, and promulgated a new 24-hour NAAQS of 35 [mu]g/m\3\
based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations. On January 15, 2013 (78 FR 3086), EPA established an
annual primary PM2.5 NAAQS at 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\ based on a 3-
year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. At that
time, EPA retained the 2006 24-hour NAAQS at 35 [mu]g/m\3\ based on a
3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations.
    On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944), all counties in the Triangle Area
were designated unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard, and on November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), all
counties in the Triangle Area were designated unclassifiable/attainment
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard. As Table 4 indicates
the PM2.5 annual and 24-hour design values demonstrate
attainment of the respective NAAQS and those for the annual standard
have been decreasing.

                                          Table 4--PM2.5 Design Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Year                                   2008-2010       2009-2011       2010-2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 Annual Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design Value....................................................            10.4             9.8            10.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                24-hour Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design Value....................................................              22              22              22
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the fact that a change to the NC Maintenance Plan to no
longer rely on gasoline with a 7.8 psi RVP requirement will only result
in a slight increase in VOC and NOX emissions, EPA has
preliminarily determined that a change to the Federal RVP requirement
for Durham, Granville and Wake Counties would not interfere with

the Triangle Area maintaining the 1997 PM2.5 annual or the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards.

d. Non-Interference Analysis for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS

    On February 17, 2012 (77 FR 9532), EPA finalized designations for
2010 NO2 NAAQS. Counties in North Carolina, including those
in the Triangle Area, were designated unclassifiable/attainment for the
2010 NO2 NAAQS. Based on North Carolina's March 27, 2013,
SIP revision, EPA has evaluated the potential increase in the
NOX emissions (approximately a quarter of a ton per day
between June 1st and September 15th) and whether it is reasonable to
believe that North Carolina's requested change for its high ozone
season RVP requirement would cause the Area to be out of compliance
with the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. The slight increase in
NOX emissions is being mitigated by a steady decrease in
tailpipe emissions,\9\ which is the result of cleaner new vehicle fleet
replacing the older fleet. See table 2 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See table 2 above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the current designation, monitoring and emissions trend
data and the submitted modeling, including the fact that NOX
emissions inventories are projected to continue to significantly
decrease, EPA has preliminarily determined that a change to the Federal
RVP requirements for the Triangle Area would not interfere with the
continued decline in NOX emissions, nor with attainment or
maintenance of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.

e. Non-Interference Analysis for the CO NAAQS

    Durham and Wake Counties in the Triangle Area were previously
designated nonattainment for the 8-hour CO NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694,
November 6, 1991. Subsequently, Durham and Wake Counties attained the
8-hour CO NAAQS and was redesignated from nonattainment to attainment.
On August 2, 1995, EPA redesignated Durham and Wake Counties to
attainment for the 8-hour CO NAAQS based on the measured air quality
data and the 10-year maintenance plan submitted. See 60 FR 39258. The
8-hour CO NAAQS is 9 ppm and the 1-hour CO NAAQS is 35 ppm. Monitoring
data from 2009-2012 shows Wake County is well below the 8-hour CO NAAQS
values as listed in Table 5.

                                Table 5--CO 8-Hour Monitored Concentration NAAQS
                                                      [ppm]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             County                 Monitor ID         2009            2010            2011            2012
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   8-hr NAAQS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wake............................       371830014             1.3             1.3             1.4             1.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   1-hr NAAQS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wake............................       371830014             2.1             2.1             1.8             1.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based upon the revised modeling associated with the proposed
relaxation of the RVP standard in the three portions of the Triangle
Area currently subject to the more stringent standard, it is estimated
that Triangle Area on-road CO emissions will increase approximately 6.3
tons per day in 2014 and 2017. This projected increase represents an
increase in the total inventory of less than 1 percent.

                           Table 6--2010 CO Emissions (Tons/Day) for Maintenance Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             County                Point source     Area source       On-road        Non-road          Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Durham..........................            0.97            1.54          186.00           19.04          207.55
Wake............................            1.17            4.26          642.97           70.62          719.02
                                 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.......................            2.14            5.80          828.97           89.66          926.57
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of the slight increase in CO emissions, and the existing
air quality data showing a wide margin of compliance with the CO NAAQS,
EPA has preliminarily determined that a change to the Federal RVP
requirement for Durham, Granville and Wake Counties would not interfere
with the Raleigh-Durham Area maintaining the CO standards. As Table 5
above indicates the CO design value is well below the standard.

VI. Mobile Source Inventories and Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets Update

a. Background

    On June 7, 2007, the State of North Carolina, through NC DENR,
submitted a final request for EPA to: (1) Redesignate the Triangle Area
to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard; and (2) approve a
North Carolina SIP revision containing a maintenance plan for the
Triangle Area. On December 26, 2007 (72 FR 72948), EPA approved the
redesignation request for the Triangle Area. Additionally, EPA approved
the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan including NOX MVEBs
for the Triangle Area.\10\ These approvals were based on EPA's
determination that the State of North Carolina had demonstrated that
the Triangle Area met the criteria for redesignation to attainment
specified in the CAA, including the determination

that the entire Triangle Area had attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In the December 26, 2007 final rule EPA also approved NC
DENR's determination that on-road emissions of VOCs are
insignificant for transportation conformity purposes. We are not
addressing that insignificance finding in today's proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the time of original redesignation request, the on-road motor
vehicle inventory was generating by the MOBILE6.2 model, which at the
time was the current MVEB model. The proposed change to the maintenance
plan discussed above includes a MVEB generated by the MOVES model which
has since replaced MOBILE6.2 model. In addition, the model used to
calculate the original non-road inventory (NONROAD2005c) has also since
been updated by a new non-road inventory model (NONROAD2008a).
    As a result of these new models and the revised emission associated
with a relaxed RVP standard, the safety margin \11\ calculations
provided in the revised maintenance plan have changes from the previous
margins included with the original maintenance plan. Therefore, North
Carolina's revision includes a reallocation of the safety margin to the
NOX MVEB based upon the revised calculations. EPA's
preliminary analysis of these changes is described below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ A safety margin is the difference between the attainment
level of emissions from all source categories (i.e., point, area,
and mobile) and the projected level of emissions from all source
categories. The State may choose to allocate some of the safety
margin to the MVEBs, for transportation conformity purposes, so long
as the total level of emissions from all source categories remains
equal to or less than the attainment level of emissions. (40 CFR
93.124(a))
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. On-Road Inventory

    As discussed above, the on-road motor vehicle emissions in the
revised maintenance plan are calculated using the MOVES model. The
MOVES model uses the road class vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and other
operating conditions as input parameters to generate an output file
that contains estimated emissions. For the projected years inventories,
the on-road 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 fuel standards.
    Table 7 shows the on-road Chatham, Franklin, Johnston, Orange and
Person Counties emissions based on the current RVP of 9.0 psi and the
on-road Wake, Durham, and Granville Counties emissions based on the
current RVP of 7.8 psi. Table 8 shows the on-road emissions data for
Durham, Granville and Wake Counties for 2005, 2008 and 2011 based on
7.8 psi and the comparison of the projected 2014 and 2017 emissions
based on a RVP relaxation to 9.0 psi for the three counties.

                            Table 7--MOVES On-Road Emissions for the Triangle Area *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       2005            2008            2011            2014            2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            VOC Emissions (tons/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MOVES...........................           87.66           74.10           59.13           48.22           38.97
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             NOX Emissions (tons/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MOVES...........................          175.18          152.05          117.46           91.84           72.88
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Wake, Durham, and Granville Counties emissions based on the current RVP of 7.8 psi.

                                  Table 8--MOVES On-Road Emissions Comparison *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       2005            2008            2011          2014 \**\       2017 \**\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            VOC Emissions (tons/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MOVES...........................           57.69           49.01           39.21     31.90/32.94     25.64/26.44
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            NOX Emissions (tons/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MOVES...........................          116.11          102.92           80.09     62.56/62.99     49.48/49.78
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Emissions data for Durham, Granville and Wake Counties only.
** Wake, Durham, and Granville Counties emissions based on relaxation of RVP of 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi.

c. Non-Road Inventory

    In the original 2007 redesignation demonstration and maintenance
plan, the model used to generate off-road emissions was the
NONROAD2005c model. Since 2007, EPA has updated the non-road model to
NONROAD2008a. NONROAD2008a is the latest USEPA approved non-road model.
In this revision, the NONROAD2008a model is used to generate non-road
emissions for all inventory years--2005, 2008, 2011, 2014, and 2017.
Also, the non-road emissions documentation includes the general
conformity analysis for two new nuclear generating units at Duke-
Progress Energy Company in Wake County.

d. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

    In the March 27, 2013, SIP revision, North Carolina provided an
increase for the amount of safety margins allocated to the
NOX MVEBs to account for changes in the projection models.
The MVEBs in this SIP revision which EPA is proposing to approve update
the MVEBs which were originally approved by EPA on December 26, 2007.
The updated MVEBs are outlined in table 9 below.
    NC DENR is currently allocating portions of the available safety
margin to the MVEBs to allow for unanticipated VMT growth as well as
changes to future vehicle mix assumptions that influence the emission
estimations. In the March 2013 SIP revision, North Carolina is seeking
to adjust the safety margins. The following tables provide the adjusted
NOX MVEBs, in kilograms per day (kg/d) for the 2008 base
attainment year inventories, as well as the projected NOX
emissions inventory 2017 for each County.

                       Table 9--Triangle Area (County Level) NOX MVEB in Kilograms per Day
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  County                                                      2008 NOX  (kg/d)  2017 NOX  (kg/d)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chatham\*\...............................  Base Emissions...................             3,033             1,690
                                           Safety Margin....................               455               422
                                           NOX Conformity MVEB..............             3,488             2,112
Durham...................................  Base Emissions...................            22,438            10,509
                                           Safety Margin....................             2,244             2,101
                                           NOX Conformity MVEB..............            24,682            12,610
Franklin.................................  Base Emissions...................             4,537             2,204
                                           Safety Margin....................               454               441
                                           NOX Conformity MVEB..............             4,991             2,645
Granville................................  Base Emissions...................             6,105             2,622
                                           Safety Margin....................               916               656
                                           NOX Conformity MVEB..............             7,021             3,278
Johnston.................................  Base Emissions...................            20,320             9,865
                                           Safety Margin....................             2,032             1,972
                                           NOX Conformity MVEB..............            22,352            11,838
Orange...................................  Base Emissions...................            13,820             6,137
                                           Safety Margin....................             1,382             1,227
                                           NOX Conformity MVEB..............            15,202             7,364
Person...................................  Base Emissions...................             2,871             1,340
                                           Safety Margin....................               431               335
                                           NOX Conformity MVEB..............             3,302             1,674
Wake.....................................  Base Emissions...................            64,825            32,034
                                           Safety Margin....................             6,483             6,407
                                           NOX Conformity MVEB..............            71,308            38,441
                                          ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total................................  New Safety Margin................            14,396            13,563
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Chatham County emissions for maintenance area only.

    A total of 14,396 kg (15.87 tpd) and 13,563 kg (14.95 tpd) from the
available NOX safety margins in 2008 and 2017, respectively,
were added to the MVEBs for the Triangle Area.
    As demonstrated above, the Triangle Area is projected to steadily
decrease its total NOX emissions from the base year of 2005
to the maintenance year of 2017. This NOX emission decrease
demonstrates continued attainment/maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS for ten years from 2007 (the year the Area was effectively
designated attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS) as required by
the CAA.

VII. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the State of North Carolina's March 27,
2013, revision to its Maintenance Plan for the Triangle 1997 8-hour
Ozone Maintenance Area. Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve the
State's showing that the Triangle Area can continue to maintain the
1997 ozone standard without emissions reductions associated with the
use of 7.8 psi RVP gasoline in the three portions of the Triangle Area
currently subject to the 7.8 psi RVP standard during the high ozone
season--June 1 through September 15.
    EPA proposes to approve the revised and updated modeling submitted
by the State, which shows that the Triangle Area can continue to
maintain the 1997 ozone standard if the applicable RVP standard in the
three portions of the Triangle Area, the North Carolina revision is
changed. EPA is also proposing to approve the revised NOX
MVEBs for 2008 and 2017 including the revised and reallocated safety
margin among the NOX MVEBs for the Triangle Area.
    EPA has preliminarily determined that North Carolina's March 27,
2013, SIP revision, including the technical demonstration associated
with the State's request for the removal of the Federal RVP
requirements, and the updated MVEBs are consistent with the applicable
provisions of the CAA. Should EPA decide to remove the subject portions
of the Triangle Area from those areas subject to the 7.8 psi Federal
RVP requirements, such action will occur in a separate, subsequent
rulemaking.

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submittal that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, October 7, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because

application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA;
and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed rule does not have tribal implications
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: October 21, 2013.
Beverly H. Banister,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2013-25782 Filed 10-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: January 14, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 9)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 1872-1874]
[DOCID:fr14ja09-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2008-0997; Airspace Docket No. 08-AAL-28]

Amendment of Class D and E Airspace; Bethel, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class D and E airspace at Bethel, AK to
provide

to address magnetic variation changes with the Navigation Aids at the
Bethel Airport. This action amends Class D and E airspace upward from
the surface, and from 700 feet (ft.) and 1,200 ft. above the surface at
Bethel Airport, Bethel, AK.

DATES: Effective Date: 0901 UTC, March 12, 2009. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
title 1, Code of Federal Regulations, part 51, subject to the annual
revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Rolf, AAL-538G, Federal Aviation
Administration, 222 West 7th Avenue, Box 14, Anchorage, AK 99513-7587;
telephone number<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet address: http://www.faa.gov/about/
office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/service_units/systemops/fs/
alaskan/rulemaking/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    On Tuesday October 28, 2008, the FAA proposed to amend part 71 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 to amend Class D and
E airspace upward from the surface, and from 700 ft. and 1,200 ft.
above the surface at Bethel, AK (73 FR 63910). The Bethel Airport and
its Navigation Aids will be soon undergoing a magnetic variation
change. This change will result in the necessity to amend the airspace
descriptions. There will be no visible change to the airspace currently
depicted on aeronautical charts. Additionally, the present 1,200 foot
airspace description is no longer necessary, because Bethel, Alaska
lies within a larger section of Class E5 airspace, called Yukon-
Kuskokwim Delta, covering the area required for the airport. The Class
E4 description has been slightly modified to address small bearing and
radial errors listed in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Class D and
E controlled airspace extending upward from the surface, and from 700
ft. and 1,200 ft. above the surface in the Bethel Airport area is
amended by this action.
    Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking
proceeding by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA.
No comments were received. The rule is adopted as proposed.
    The area will be depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot
reference. The coordinates for this airspace docket are based on North
American Datum 83. The Class D airspace area designations are published
in paragraph 5000 of FAA Order 7400.9S, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, signed October 3, 2008, and effective October 31,
2008, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace areas designated as surface areas are published in paragraph
6002 and 6004 in FAA Order 7400.9S, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, signed October 3, 2008, and effective October 31, 2008, which
is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E airspace areas
designated as 700/1,200 ft. transition areas are published in paragraph
6005 of FAA Order 7400.9S, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points,
signed October 3, 2008, and effective October 31, 2008, which is
incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class D and E airspace
designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in
the Order.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 71 amends Class D and E airspace at
the Bethel Airport, Alaska. This Class D and E airspace is amended to
accommodate aircraft executing instrument procedures, and will be
depicted on aeronautical charts for pilot reference. The intended
effect of this rule is to provide adequate controlled airspace for
Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the Bethel Airport, Bethel,
Alaska.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that
will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority.
    This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart 1, Section 40103, Sovereignty and use of
airspace. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing
regulations to ensure the safe and efficient use of the navigable
airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because
it amends Class D and E airspace to contain aircraft executing
instrument procedures for the Bethel Airport and represents the FAA's
continuing effort to safely and efficiently use the navigable airspace.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71-- DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, CLASS B, CLASS C, CLASS D, AND
CLASS E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIRWAYS; ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24
FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9S, Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, signed October 3, 2008, and effective October 31, 2008, is
amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 General.

* * * * *

AAL AK D Bethel, AK [Amended]

Bethel, Bethel Airport, AK
    (Lat. 60[deg]46[min]47[sec] N., long. 161[deg]50[min]17[sec] W.)
Bethel VORTAC
    (Lat. 60[deg]47[min]05[sec] N., long. 161[deg]49[min]28[sec] W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
2,600 feet MSL within a 4.1-mile radius of the Bethel Airport, AK,
excluding that portion below 1,100 feet MSL between the 058[deg]
radial and the 078[deg] radial of the Bethel VORTAC, AK, from 2.9
miles northeast of the Bethel VORTAC, AK. This Class D airspace area
is effective during the specific dates and times established in
advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will
thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility
Directory.
* * * * *

Paragraph 6002 Class E Airspace Designated as Surface Areas.

* * * * *

AAL AK E2 Bethel, AK [Amended]

Bethel, Bethel Airport, AK
    (Lat. 60[deg]46[min]47[sec] N., long. 161[deg]50[min]17[sec] W.)

Bethel VORTAC
    (Lat. 60[deg]47[min]05[sec] N., long. 161[deg]49[min]28[sec] W.)

    Within a 4.1-mile radius of the Bethel Airport, AK, excluding
that portion below 1,100 feet MSL between the 058[deg] radial and
the 078[deg] radial of the Bethel VORTAC, AK, from 2.9 miles
northeast of the Bethel VORTAC, AK. This Class E airspace area is
effective during the specific dates and times established in advance
by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter
be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.
* * * * *

Paragraph 6004 Class E Airspace Areas Designated as an Extension to
a Class D Surface Area.

* * * * *

AAL AK E4 Bethel, AK [Amended]

Bethel, Bethel Airport, AK
    (Lat. 60[deg]46[min]47[sec] N., long. 161[deg]50[min]17[sec] W.)
Bethel VORTAC
    (Lat. 60[deg]47[min]05[sec] N., long. 161[deg]49[min]28[sec] W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface within 3 miles
each side of the 019[deg] radial of the Bethel VORTAC, AK, extending
from the 4.1-mile radius of the Bethel Airport, AK, to 8.2 miles
northeast of the Bethel Airport, AK, excluding that portion below
1,100 feet MSL between the 058[deg] radial and the 078[deg] radial
of the Bethel VORTAC, AK, from 2.9 miles northeast of the Bethel
VORTAC, AK, and within 3.4 miles each side of the 005[deg] radial of
the Bethel VORTAC, AK, extending from the 4.1-mile radius of the
Bethel Airport, AK, to 11 miles north of the Bethel VORTAC, AK, and
within 3.5 miles each side of the 210[deg] radial of the Bethel
VORTAC, AK, extending from the 4.1-mile radius of the Bethel
Airport, AK, to 5 miles southwest of the Bethel Airport, AK.
* * * * *

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Extending Upward from 700 Feet or
More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AAL AK E5 Bethel, AK [Amended]

Bethel, Bethel Airport, AK
    (Lat. 60[deg]46[min]47[sec] N., long. 161[deg]50[min]17[sec] W.)
Bethel Localizer
    (Lat. 60[deg]46[min]06[sec] N., long. 161[deg]50[min]47[sec] W.)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 16.8-mile radius of the Bethel Airport, AK, and within 8
miles west and 4 miles east of the Bethel Localizer front course
extending from the 16.8-mile radius of the Bethel Airport, AK, to
22.8 miles north of the Bethel Airport, AK, and within 8 miles east
and 4 miles west of the Bethel Localizer back course extending from
the 16.8-mile radius of the Bethel Airport, AK, to 21.4 miles south
of the Bethel Airport, AK.
* * * * *

    Issued in Anchorage, AK, on December 29, 2008.
Anthony M. Wylie,
Manager, Alaska Flight Services Information Area Group.
 [FR Doc. E9-518 Filed 1-13-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 59 (Wednesday, March 27, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 18480]
[FR Doc No: 2013-06984]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[Docket No. USCG-2013-0150]

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Chef Menteur Pass, at Lake
Catherine, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of deviation from drawbridge regulation.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard has issued a temporary deviation from the
regulation governing the operation of the U.S. Highway 90 swing highway
bridge across the Chef Menteur Pass, mile 2.8, at Lake Catherine,
Orleans Parish, Louisiana. The deviation is necessary to ensure the
safety of pedestrians/bikers as they cross the bridge for the Ochsner
Ironman 70.3 New Orleans event. This deviation allows the bridge to
remain in the closed-to-navigation position continuously during the
event.

DATES: This deviation is effective from 7:30 a.m. until 2 p.m. on
Sunday, April 21, 2013.

ADDRESSES: The docket for this deviation, [USCG-2013-0150] is available
at http://www.regulations.gov. Type the docket number in the ``SEARCH''
box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation. You may also visit the Docket
Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
Department of Transportation West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary deviation, call or email Donna Gagliano, Bridge
Administration Branch, Coast Guard, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If you have questions on viewing the docket,
call Barbara Hairston, Program Manager, Docket Operations, telephone
202-366-9826.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The bridge owner approved the request for
the closure of the U.S. Highway 90 swing bridge crossing the Chef
Menteur Pass, mile 2.8, at Lake Catherine, Orleans, Parish, Louisiana.
The bridge provides 10 feet vertical clearance in the closed-to-
navigation position at mean high water. Currently, according to 33 CFR
117.436, the draw of the U.S. Highway 90 bridge, mile 2.8, shall open
on signal; except that, from 5:30 a.m. to 7:30 a.m. Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays, the draw need open only for the
passage of vessels. The draw shall open at any time for a vessel in
distress. This deviation allows the draw span of the bridge to remain
closed to navigation from 7:30 a.m. until 2 p.m. on Sunday, April 21,
2013, while the Ironman contenders travel across the bridge as part of
the race course. Navigation on the waterway consists mainly of
commercial fishermen and sportsman fishermen. As a result of
coordination between the Coast Guard and the waterway users, it has
been determined that this closure will not have a significant effect on
these vessels. The Coast Guard will inform users through the Local and
Broadcast Notice to Mariners of the closure period. There is an
alternate route available via The Rigolets Pass to vessel traffic.
Vessels that can pass under the bridge in the closed-to-navigation
position can do so at any time. The bridge will not be able to open for
emergencies.
    In accordance with 33 CFR 117.436, the drawbridge must return to
its regular operating schedule immediately at the end of the designated
time period. This deviation from the operating regulations is
authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.

    Dated: March 15, 2013.
David M. Frank,
Bridge Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013-06984 Filed 3-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P