Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 3, 2007 / Proposed Rules

56312 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No.
191 / Wednesday, October 3, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. vessel is subject to seizure and ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR forfeiture. AGENCY
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of (2) All persons and vessels permitted
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. in the security zone must comply with
the instructions of the Coast Guard [EPA–R04–OAR–2007–0601–200730; FRL–
2. Add a new temporary § 165.T14– 8477–2]
161 to read as follows: Captain of the Port or the designated on-
scene-patrol personnel. These personnel
Approval and Promulgation of
§ 165.T14–161 Security Zone; Nawiliwili comprise commissioned, warrant, and
Harbor, Kauai, HI. Implementation Plans and Designation
petty officers of the Coast Guard and of Areas for Air Quality Planning
(a) Location. The following land areas, other persons permitted by law to Purposes; North Carolina;
and water areas from the surface of the enforce this regulation. Upon being Redesignation of the Raleigh-Durham-
water to the ocean floor, are a security hailed by an authorized vessel or law Chapel Hill 8-Hour Ozone
zone that is activated as described in enforcement officer using siren, radio, Nonattainment Area to Attainment for
paragraph (c) of this section, and flashing light, loudhailer, voice Ozone
enforced subject to the provisions of command, or other means, the operator
paragraph (d) of this section: All waters of a vessel must proceed as directed. AGENCY: Environmental Protection
of Nawiliwili Harbor, Kauai, shoreward Agency (EPA).
of the Nawiliwili Harbor COLREGS (3) If authorized passage through the ACTION: Proposed rule.
DEMARCATION LINE (See 33 CFR security zone, a vessel must operate at
80.1450), excluding the waters west of the minimum speed necessary to SUMMARY: On June 7, 2007, the State of
a line running from the southeastern maintain a safe course and must North Carolina, through the North
most point of the breakwater of proceed as directed by the Captain of Carolina Department of Environment
Nawiliwili Small Boat Harbor due south the Port or his or her designated and Natural Resources (NCDENR),
to the south shore of the harbor, and representatives. While underway with submitted a request to redesignate the
excluding the waters from Kalapaki permission of the Captain of the Port or Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill 8-hour
Beach south to a line extending from the his or her designated representatives, no ozone nonattainment area to attainment
western most point of Kukii Point due person or vessel is allowed within 100 for the 8-hour ozone National Ambient
west to the Harbor Jetty. The land of the yards of a the Hawaii Super Ferry when Air Quality Standard (NAAQS); and to
jetty south of Nawiliwili Park including it is underway, moored, position- approve a State Implementation Plan
the jetty access road, commonly known (SIP) revision containing a maintenance
keeping, or at anchor, unless authorized
as Jetty Road, is included within the plan for the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel
by the Captain of the Port or his or her
security zone. Hill Area. The Raleigh-Durham-Chapel
designated representatives. Hill 8-hour ozone nonattainment area
(b) Effective period. This section is
effective from November 1, 2007, (4) When conditions permit, the (the ‘‘Triangle Area’’) is comprised of
through December 31, 2007. It will be Captain of the Port, or his or her Durham, Franklin, Granville, Johnston,
activated for enforcement pursuant to designated representatives, may permit Orange, Person and Wake Counties in
paragraph (c) of this section. vessels that are at anchor, restricted in their entireties, and Baldwin, Center,
(c) Enforcement periods. The zone their ability to maneuver, or constrained New Hope and Williams Townships in
described in paragraph (a) of this by draft to remain within the security Chatham County. In this action, EPA is
section will be activated for zone in order to ensure navigational proposing to approve the 8-hour ozone
enforcement 60 minutes before the safety. redesignation request for the Triangle
Hawaii Superferry’s arrival into the Area. Additionally, EPA is proposing to
(e) Enforcement officials. Any Coast
zone and remain activated for 10 approve the 8-hour ozone maintenance
Guard commissioned, warrant, or petty
minutes after the Hawaii Superferry’s plan for the Triangle Area, including the
officer, and any other person permitted motor vehicle emissions budgets
departure from the zone. The activation
by law, may enforce the regulations in (MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and
of the zone for enforcement will be
announced by marine information this section. an insignificance determination for
broadcast, and by a red flag, illuminated Dated: September 26, 2007. volatile organic compounds (VOC)
between sunset and sunrise, displayed Sally Brice-O’Hara, emissions from motor vehicles. This
from Pier One and the Harbor Facility Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, proposed approval of North Carolina’s
Entrance on Jetty Road. Fourteenth Coast Guard District. redesignation request is based on EPA’s
(d) Regulations. (1) Under 33 CFR [FR Doc. 07–4893 Filed 9–28–07; 3:29 pm]
determination that North Carolina has
165.33, entry by persons or vessels into demonstrated that the Triangle Area has
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
the security zone created by this section met the criteria for redesignation to
and activated as described in paragraph attainment specified in the Clean Air
(c) of this section is prohibited unless Act (CAA), including the determination
authorized by the Coast Guard Captain that the entire Triangle 8-hour ozone
of the Port, Honolulu or his or her nonattainment area has attained the 8-
designated representatives. Operation of hour ozone standard. Further, in this
any type of vessel, including every action, EPA is also describing the status
description of watercraft or other of its transportation conformity
artificial contrivance used, or capable of adequacy determination for the new
ebenthall on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
being used, as a means of transportation 2008 and 2017 MVEBs for NOX, and for
on water, within the security zone is the insignificance determination for
prohibited. If a vessel is found to be VOC contribution from motor vehicle
operating within the security zone emissions to the 8-hour ozone pollution,
without permission of the Captain of the that are contained in the 8-hour ozone
Port, Honolulu, and refuses to leave, the maintenance plan for the Triangle Area.
VerDate Aug<31>2005 15:16 Oct 02, 2007 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\03OCP1.SGM 03OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 3, 2007 / Proposed Rules 56313
DATES: Comments must be received on Electronic files should avoid the use of of the 2008 and 2017 Subarea NOX
or before November 2, 2007. special characters, any form of MVEBs, and the Proposed VOC
encryption, and be free of any defects or Insignificance Determination for the
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, Triangle Area
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– viruses. For additional information XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
OAR–2007–0601, by one of the about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
following methods: Docket Center homepage at http:// I. What Proposed Actions Are EPA
(a) http://www.regulations.gov: www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. Taking?
Follow the on-line instructions for Docket: All documents in the EPA is proposing to take two related
submitting comments. electronic docket are listed in the actions, which are summarized below
(b) E-mail: ward.nacosta@epa.gov. www.regulations.gov index. Although and described in greater detail
(c) Fax: (404) 562–9019. listed in the index, some information is throughout this notice of proposed
(d) Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2007–0601, not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other rulemaking: (1) To redesignate the
Regulatory Development Section, Air information whose disclosure is Triangle Area to attainment for the 8-
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and restricted by statute. Certain other hour ozone NAAQS; and (2) to approve
Toxics Management Division, U.S. material, such as copyrighted material, North Carolina’s 8-hour ozone
Environmental Protection Agency, is not placed on the Internet and will be maintenance plan into the North
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., publicly available only in hard copy Carolina SIP, including the associated
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. form. Publicly available docket MVEBs for NOX and the VOC
(e) Hand Delivery or Courier: Nacosta materials are available either insignificance determination. In
C. Ward, Regulatory Development electronically in www.regulations.gov or addition, and related to today’s
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, in hard copy at the Regulatory proposed actions, EPA is also notifying
Pesticides and Toxics Management Development Section, Air Planning the public of the status of EPA’s
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics adequacy determination for the Triangle
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, Management Division, U.S. Area subarea 1 NOX MVEBs and the
SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such Environmental Protection Agency, insignificance determination for VOC
deliveries are only accepted during the Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., emission contribution from motor
Regional Office’s normal hours of Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA vehicles to 8-hour ozone pollution in
operation. The Regional Office’s official requests that if at all possible, you the Triangle Area.
hours of business are Monday through contact the person listed in the FOR First, EPA is proposing to determine
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to that the Triangle Area has attained the
holidays. schedule your inspection. The Regional 8-hour ozone standard, and that the
Instructions: Direct your comments to Office’s official hours of business are Triangle Area has met the other
Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2007– Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, requirements for redesignation under
0601. EPA’s policy is that all comments excluding Federal holidays. section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is
received will be included in the public FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. now proposing to approve a request to
docket without change and may be Nacosta C. Ward of the Regulatory change the legal designation of the
made available online at Development Section, in the Air Triangle Area from nonattainment to
www.regulations.gov, including any Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and attainment for the 8-hour ozone
personal information provided, unless Toxics Management Division, U.S. NAAQS.
the comment includes information Environmental Protection Agency, Second, EPA is proposing to approve
North Carolina’s 8-hour ozone
claimed to be Confidential Business Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
maintenance plan for the Triangle Area
Information (CBI) or other information Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The
(such approval being one of the CAA
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. telephone number is (404) 562–9140.
criteria for redesignation to attainment
Do not submit through Ms. Nacosta Ward can be reached via
status). The maintenance plan is
www.regulations.gov or e-mail, electronic mail at
designed to help keep the Triangle Area
information that you consider to be CBI ward.nacosta@epa.gov.
in attainment of the 8-hour ozone
or otherwise protected. The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NAAQS through 2017. Consistent with
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
Table of Contents the CAA, the maintenance plan that
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
EPA is proposing to approve today also
means EPA will not know your identity I. What Proposed Actions Are EPA Taking?
includes 2008 and 2017 subarea MVEBs
or contact information unless you II. What Is the Background for EPA’s
Proposed Actions? for NOX, and an insignificance
provide it in the body of your comment. determination regarding the
If you send an e-mail comment directly III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation?
IV. Why Is EPA Proposing These Actions? contribution of VOC emissions from
to EPA without going through
V. What Is the Effect of EPA’s Proposed
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail Actions? 1 The term ‘‘subarea’’ refers to the portion of the
address will be automatically captured VI. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the Request? area, in a nonattainment or maintenance area, for
and included as part of the comment VII. What Is EPA’s Analysis of North which the MVEB applies. In this case, the
that is placed in the public docket and ‘‘subareas’’ are established at the county level so
Carolina’s Proposed VOC Insignificance
this indicates that the MVEBs cover individual
made available on the Internet. If you Finding and the Proposed Subarea NOX counties and also indicates to transportation
submit an electronic comment, EPA MVEBs for the Triangle Area? conformity implementers in this area that there are
recommends that you include your VIII. What Is an Adequacy Determination? separate county-level MVEBs for each county in
name and other contact information in IX. What Is the Status of EPA’s Adequacy this area. EPA’s Companion Guidance for the July
Determination for the Proposed Subarea 1, 2004, Final Transportation Conformity Rule:
the body of your comment and with any Conformity Implementation in Multi-Jurisdictional
NOX MVEBs for the Years 2008 and
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 2017, and the VOC Insignificance Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas for Existing
cannot read your comment due to and New Air Quality Standards explains more
Determination? about the possible geographical extent of a MVEB,
technical difficulties and cannot contact X. Proposed Action on the Redesignation how these geographical areas are defined, and how
you for clarification, EPA may not be Request and Maintenance Plan SIP transportation conformity is implemented in these
able to consider your comment. Revision Including Proposed Approval different geographical areas.
56314 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 3, 2007 / Proposed Rules
motor vehicles to the ozone pollution in previous 1-hour ozone standard. Under are subject only to the provisions of
the Triangle Area. Today, EPA is EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the subpart 1. Other 8-hour ozone
proposing to approve (into the North 8-hour ozone standard is attained when nonattainment areas are also subject to
Carolina SIP) the 2008 and 2017 subarea the 3-year average of the annual fourth the provisions of subpart 2. Under
NOX MVEBs and the VOC insignificance highest daily maximum 8-hour average EPA’s Phase 1 8-hour ozone
determination, that are included as part ambient air quality ozone implementation rule (69 FR 23857)
of North Carolina’s maintenance plan concentrations is less than or equal to (Phase 1 Rule), signed on April 15,
for the Triangle Area for the 8-hour 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when 2004, and published April 30, 2004, an
ozone NAAQS. The VOC insignificance rounding is considered). (See, 69 FR area was classified under subpart 2
determination applies to the entire 23857 (April 30, 2004) for further based on its 8-hour ozone design value
Triangle Area, whereas the NOX MVEBs information.) Ambient air quality (i.e., the 3-year average of the annual
are subarea MVEBs that apply to monitoring data for the 3-year period fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
individual counties within the Triangle must meet a data completeness average ozone concentrations), if it had
Area. Please see Section V of this requirement. The ambient air quality a 1-hour design value at or above 0.121
rulemaking for a listing of the MVEBs monitoring data completeness ppm (the lowest 1-hour design value in
for these individual counties. requirement is met when the average Table 1 of subpart 2). All other areas are
Third, EPA is also notifying the percent of days with valid ambient covered under subpart 1, based upon
public of the status of EPA’s adequacy monitoring data is greater than 90 their 8-hour ambient air quality design
process for the newly-established 2008 percent, and no single year has less than values.
and 2017 subarea NOX MVEBs, and its 75 percent data completeness as Durham and Wake Counties, and the
insignificance determination for VOC determined in Appendix I of part 50. Dutchville Township portion of
for the Triangle Area. The adequacy Specifically, section 2.3 of 40 CFR part Granville County were originally
comment period for the Triangle Area’s 50, Appendix I, ‘‘Comparisons with the designated as a moderate nonattainment
2008 and 2017 subarea NOX MVEBs, Primary and Secondary Ozone area for the 1-hour ozone standard on
and the VOC insignificance Standards’’ states: November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694).
determination began on March 21, 2007, The primary and secondary ozone ambient Durham and Wake Counties, and the
with EPA’s posting of the availability of air quality standards are met at an ambient Dutchville Township portion of
North Carolina’s maintenance plan air quality monitoring site when the 3-year Granville County were redesignated as
submittal on EPA’s Adequacy Web site average of the annual fourth-highest daily attainment for the 1-hour ozone
(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ maximum 8-hour average ozone standard on April 18, 1994 (59 FR
stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm). concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 18300). On April 30, 2004, EPA
The adequacy comment period for these ppm. The number of significant figures in the designated the Triangle Area (of which
level of the standard dictates the rounding
subarea MVEBs, and the VOC Durham and Wake Counties, and the
convention for comparing the computed 3-
insignificance determination closed on year average annual fourth-highest daily Dutchville Township portion of
April 20, 2007. No adverse comments maximum 8-hour average ozone Granville County are a part) as a ‘‘basic’’
were received during the adequacy concentration with the level of the standard. 8-hour ozone nonattainment area (see,
public comment period. Please see The third decimal place of the computed 69 FR 23857, April 30, 2004). Thus, on
section VIII of this proposed rulemaking value is rounded, with values equal to or June 7, 2007, when North Carolina
for further explanation of this process, greater than 5 rounding up. Thus, a submitted its final redesignation
and for more details on the MVEBs and computed 3-year average ozone request, the Triangle Area was classified
concentration of 0.085 ppm is the smallest
the VOC insignificance determination. under subpart 1 of the CAA, and was
value that is greater than 0.08 ppm.
Today’s notice of proposed obligated to meet only the subpart 1
rulemaking is in response to North The CAA required EPA to designate requirements.
Carolina’s June 7, 2007, SIP submittal, as nonattainment any area that was Various aspects of EPA’s Phase 1 Rule
which supersedes North Carolina’s violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS were challenged in court. On December
March 12, 2007, submittal that included based on the three most recent years of 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for
a request for parallel processing. The ambient air quality data. The Triangle 8- the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C.
June 7, 2007, submittal requests the hour ozone nonattainment area was Circuit Court) vacated EPA’s Phase 1
redesignation of the Triangle Area, and designated using 2001–2003 ambient air Rule (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004).
includes a SIP revision addressing the quality data. The Federal Register South Coast Air Quality Management
specific issues summarized above and document making these designations Dist. (SCAQMD) v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882
the necessary elements for redesignation was signed on April 15, 2004, and (D.C. Cir. 2006). On June 8, 2007, in
described in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR response to several petitions for
CAA. 23857). rehearing, the D.C. Circuit Court
The CAA contains two sets of clarified that the Phase 1 Rule was
II. What Is the Background for EPA’s provisions—subpart 1 and subpart 2— vacated only with regard to those parts
Proposed Actions? that address planning and control of the Rule that had been successfully
Ground-level ozone is not emitted requirements for ozone nonattainment challenged. Therefore, the Phase 1 Rule
directly by sources. Rather, emissions of areas. (Both are found in title I, part D.) provisions related to classifications for
NOX and VOC react in the presence of Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as areas currently classified under subpart
sunlight to form ground-level ozone. ‘‘basic’’ nonattainment) contains 2 of title I, part D of the CAA as 8-hour
NOX and VOC are referred to as general, less prescriptive, requirements nonattainment areas, the 8-hour
precursors of ozone. The CAA for nonattainment areas for any attainment dates and the timing for
establishes a process for air quality pollutant—including ozone—governed emissions reductions needed for
management through the NAAQS. by a NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a refers to as ‘‘classified’’ nonattainment) remain effective. The June 8th decision
revised 8-hour ozone standard of 0.08 provides more specific requirements for left intact the Court’s rejection of EPA’s
parts per million (ppm). This new certain ozone nonattainment areas. reasons for implementing the 8-hour
standard is more stringent than the Some 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas standard in certain nonattainment areas
under subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2. By requirements in accordance with the Triangle Area were originally
limiting the vacatur, the Court let stand requirements due at the time the request designated as a moderate nonattainment
EPA’s revocation of the 1-hour standard is submitted and (2) consideration of the area for the 1-hour ozone standard on
and those anti-backsliding provisions of inequity of applying retroactively any November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694); the
the Phase 1 Rule that had not been requirements that might in the future be remainder of the Triangle Area was
successfully challenged. The June 8th applied. designated as attainment. Durham and
decision reaffirmed the December 22, First, at the time the redesignation Wake Counties, and the Dutchville
2006, decision that EPA had improperly request was submitted, the Triangle Township portion of Granville County
failed to retain measures required for 1- Area was classified under subpart 1 and were redesignated as attainment for the
hour nonattainment areas under the was obligated to meet only subpart 1 1-hour ozone standard on April 18, 2004
anti-backsliding provisions of the requirements. Under EPA’s (59 FR 18300). Therefore, the entire
regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New longstanding interpretation of section Triangle Area was redesignated to
Source Review (NSR) requirements 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, to qualify for attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard
based on an area’s 1-hour nonattainment redesignation, states requesting prior to its nonattainment designation
classification; (2) Section 185 penalty redesignation to attainment must meet for the 8-hour ozone standard. As a
fees for 1-hour severe or extreme only the relevant SIP requirements that result, the Triangle Area is considered
nonattainment areas; and (3) measures came due prior to the submittal of a to be a 1-hour attainment area subject to
to be implemented pursuant to section complete redesignation request. a CAA section 175A maintenance plan
172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, on the September 4, 1992, Calcagni for the 1-hour standard. The D.C. Circuit
contingency of an area not making Memorandum (‘‘Procedures for Court’s decisions do not impact
reasonable further progress toward Processing Requests to Redesignate redesignation requests for these types of
attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum areas, except to the extent that the
failure to attain that NAAQS. The June from John Calcagni, Director, Air Court, in its June 8th decision, clarified
8th decision clarified that the Court’s Quality Management Division). See also, that for those areas with 1-hour MVEBs
reference to conformity requirements for Michael Shapiro Memorandum, in their maintenance plans, anti-
anti-backsliding purposes was limited to September 17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, backsliding requires that those 1-hour
requiring the continued use of 1-hour 12465–66 (March 7, 1995) budgets must be used for 8-hour
motor vehicle emissions budgets until 8- (Redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, conformity determinations until they
hour budgets were available for 8-hour Michigan). See, Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 are replaced by 8-hour budgets. To meet
conformity determinations, which is F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004) (upholding this this requirement, conformity
already required under EPA’s interpretation). See, e.g. also, 68 FR determinations in such areas must
conformity regulations. The Court thus 25418, 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) comply with the applicable
clarified that 1-hour conformity (redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri). requirements of EPA’s conformity
determinations are not required for anti- Moreover, it would be inequitable to regulations at 40 CFR part 93.
backsliding purposes. retroactively apply any new SIP First, there are no conformity
This section sets forth EPA’s views on requirements that were not applicable at requirements relevant for the Triangle
the potential effect of the Court’s rulings the time the request was submitted. The Area redesignation request, such as a
on this proposed redesignation action. D.C. Circuit Court has recognized the transportation conformity SIP. It is
For the reasons set forth below, EPA inequity in such retroactive rulemaking, EPA’s longstanding policy that it is
does not believe that the Court’s rulings (Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F. 3d 63 reasonable to interpret the conformity
alter any requirements relevant to this (D.C. Cir. 2002)), in which the Court SIP requirements as not applying for
redesignation action so as to preclude upheld a district court’s ruling refusing purposes of evaluating a redesignation
redesignation, and do not prevent EPA to make retroactive an EPA request under section 107(d) because
from proposing or ultimately finalizing determination of nonattainment that state conformity rules are still required
this redesignation. EPA believes that the was past the statutory due date. Such a after redesignation, and Federal
Court’s December 22, 2006, and June 8, determination would have resulted in conformity rules apply where state rules
2007, decisions impose no impediment the imposition of additional have not been approved. See, 40 CFR
to moving forward with redesignation of requirements on the area. The Court 51.390; see also, Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d
the Triangle Area to attainment, because stated: ‘‘Although EPA failed to make 426 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding EPA’s
even in light of the Court’s decisions, the nonattainment determination within interpretation). See also, 60 FR 62748
redesignation is appropriate under the the statutory time frame, Sierra Club’s (Dec. 7, 1995) (redesignation of Tampa,
relevant redesignation provisions of the proposed solution only makes the Florida). Durham and Wake Counties,
CAA and longstanding policies situation worse. Retroactive relief would and the Dutchville Township portion of
regarding redesignation requests. likely impose large costs on the states, Granville County, currently have a fully
With respect to the 8-hour standard, which would face fines and suits for not approved 1-hour ozone transportation
the Court’s ruling rejected EPA’s reasons implementing air pollution prevention conformity SIP, which was approved on
for classifying areas under subpart 1 for plans in 1997, even though they were December 27, 2002 (67 FR 78983).
the 8-hour standard, and remanded that not on notice at the time.’’ Id. at 68. Second, with regard to the three other
matter to the Agency. Consequently, it Similarly here, it would be unfair to anti-backsliding provisions for the 1-
is possible that this Area could, during penalize the area by applying to it for hour standard that the D.C. Circuit
a remand to EPA, be reclassified under purposes of redesignation, additional Court found were not properly retained,
subpart 2. Although any future decision SIP requirements under subpart 2 that Durham and Wake Counties, and the
by EPA to classify this area under were not in effect at the time it Dutchville Township portion of
subpart 2 might trigger additional future submitted its redesignation request. Granville County comprise an
requirements for the area, EPA believes With respect to the requirements attainment area subject to a
that this does not mean that under the 1-hour standard ozone maintenance plan for the 1-hour
redesignation cannot now go forward. standard, only the Durham and Wake standard, and the NSR, contingency
This belief is based upon (1) EPA’s Counties, and the Dutchville Township measure (pursuant to section 172(c)(9)
longstanding policy of evaluating portion of Granville County of the or 182(c)(9)), and fee provision
requirements no longer apply to this guidance on processing redesignation Director, Office of Air Quality Planning
area because it was redesignated to requests in the following documents: and Standards, May 10, 1995.
attainment of the 1-hour standard. As a 1. ‘‘Ozone and Carbon Monoxide IV. Why Is EPA Proposing These
result, the decisions in SCAQMD should Design Value Calculations,’’ Actions?
not alter any requirements that would Memorandum from Bill Laxton,
preclude EPA from finalizing the Director, Technical Support Division, On June 7, 2007, North Carolina
redesignation of the Triangle Area to June 18, 1990; requested redesignation of the Triangle
attainment for the 8-hour ozone 2. ‘‘Maintenance Plans for 8-hour ozone nonattainment area to
standard. Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon attainment for the 8-hour ozone
As noted earlier, in 2006, the ambient Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,’’ standard. EPA’s evaluation indicates
ozone data for the Triangle Area Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, that North Carolina has demonstrated
indicated no further violations of the 8- Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs that the Triangle Area has attained the
hour ozone NAAQS, using data from the Branch, April 30, 1992; standard and has met the requirements
3-year period of 2004–2006 to 3. ‘‘Contingency Measures for Ozone for redesignation set forth in section
demonstrate attainment. As a result, on and Carbon Monoxide (CO) 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is also
June 7, 2007, North Carolina requested Redesignations,’’ Memorandum from G. announcing the status of its adequacy
redesignation of the Triangle Area to T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon determination for the 2008 and 2017
attainment for the 8-hour ozone Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, subarea NOX MVEBs, and the VOC
NAAQS. The redesignation request 1992; insignificance determination, which are
4. ‘‘Procedures for Processing relevant to the requested redesignation.
included three years of complete,
quality-assured ambient air quality data Requests to Redesignate Areas to V. What Is the Effect of EPA’s Proposed
for the ozone seasons (April 1st until Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John Actions?
October 31st) of 2004–2006, indicating Calcagni, Director, Air Quality EPA’s proposed actions establish the
that the 8-hour ozone NAAQS has been Management Division, September 4, bases upon which EPA may take final
achieved for the entire Triangle Area. 1992 (hereafter referred to as the action on the issues being proposed for
Under the CAA, nonattainment areas ‘‘Calcagni Memorandum’’); approval today. Approval of North
may be redesignated to attainment if 5. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) Carolina’s redesignation request would
sufficient, complete, quality-assured Actions Submitted in Response to Clean change the legal designation of the
data is available for the Administrator to Air Act (ACT) Deadlines,’’ Durham, Franklin, Granville, Johnston,
determine that the area has attained the Memorandum from John Calcagni, Orange, Person and Wake Counties in
standard and the area meets the other Director, Air Quality Management their entireties, and Baldwin, Center,
CAA redesignation requirements in Division, October 28, 1992; New Hope and Williams Townships in
section 107(d)(3)(E). 6. ‘‘Technical Support Documents Chatham County for the 8-hour ozone
(TSD’s) for Redesignation of Ozone and NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81.
III. What Are the Criteria for
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Approval of North Carolina’s request
Redesignation?
Areas,’’ Memorandum from G. T. Helms, would also incorporate into the North
The CAA provides the requirements Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Carolina SIP, a plan for the Triangle
for redesignating a nonattainment area Programs Branch, August 17, 1993; Area for maintaining the 8-hour ozone
to attainment. Specifically, section 7. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) NAAQS in the Area through 2017. This
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for Requirements for Areas Submitting maintenance plan includes contingency
redesignation providing that: (1) The Requests for Redesignation to measures to remedy future violations of
Administrator determines that the area Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The
has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air maintenance plan also establishes
the Administrator has fully approved Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After subarea NOX MVEBs and provides a
the applicable implementation plan for November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum VOC insignificance determination for
the area under section 110(k); (3) the from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting the Triangle Area. The following Table
Administrator determines that the Assistant Administrator for Air and identifies the subarea NOX MVEBs for
improvement in air quality is due to Radiation, September 17, 1993; the year 2008 and 2017 for this Area.
permanent and enforceable reductions 8. ‘‘Use of Actual Emissions in
in emissions resulting from Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone TABLE 1.—TRIANGLE SUBAREA NOX
implementation of the applicable SIP and CO Nonattainment Areas,’’ MVEBS
and applicable Federal air pollutant Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, [Kilograms per day]
control regulations and other permanent Acting Director, Air Quality
and enforceable reductions; (4) the Management Division, November 30, County 2008 2017
Administrator has fully approved a 1993;
maintenance plan for the area as 9. ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part Chatham ....................... 1,565 948
meeting the requirements of section D NSR) Requirements for Areas Durham ......................... 13,106 4,960
175A; and, (5) the state containing such Requesting Redesignation to Franklin ......................... 2,048 1,139
area has met all requirements applicable Graham ......................... 4,649 1,714
Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary
Johnston ....................... 12,583 5,958
to the area under section 110 and part D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Orange .......................... 9,933 3,742
D of the CAA. Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994; Person .......................... 1,359 791
EPA provided guidance on and Wake ............................. 36,615 16,352
redesignation in the General Preamble 10. ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress,

for the Implementation of Title I of the Attainment Demonstration, and Related Approval of North Carolina’s
CAA Amendments of 1990, on April 16, Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment maintenance plan would also result in
1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented Areas Meeting the Ozone National approval of the subarea NOX MVEBs,
this guidance on April 28, 1992 (57 FR Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’ and the VOC insignificance
18070). EPA has provided further Memorandum from John S. Seitz, determination. Additionally, EPA is
notifying the public of the status of its Criteria (1)—The Triangle Area Has Appendix I, the standard is attained if
adequacy determination for the 2008 Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS the design value is 0.084 ppm or below.
and 2017 subarea NOX MVEBs, and its EPA is proposing to determine that The data must be collected and quality-
VOC insignificance determination, the Triangle Area has attained the 8- assured in accordance with 40 CFR part
pursuant to 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1). hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area 58, and recorded in the EPA Air Quality
may be considered to be attaining the 8- System (AQS). The monitors generally
VI. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the should have remained at the same
hour ozone NAAQS if there are no
Request? location for the duration of the
violations, as determined in accordance
with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of monitoring period required for
EPA is proposing to make the
part 50, based on three complete, demonstrating attainment.
determination that the Triangle Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone standard, and consecutive calendar years of quality- EPA reviewed ozone monitoring data
that all other redesignation criteria have assured air quality monitoring data. To from ambient ozone monitoring stations
attain this standard, the 3-year average in the Triangle Area for the ozone
been met for the Triangle Area. The
of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8- season from 2004–2006. This data has
basis for EPA’s determination for the
hour average ozone concentrations been quality assured and is recorded in
area is discussed in greater detail below.
measured at each monitor within an AQS. The fourth high averages for 2004,
area over each year must not exceed 2005 and 2006, and the 3-year average
0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding of these values (i.e., design values), are
convention described in 40 CFR part 50, summarized in the following Table:
TABLE 2.—ANNUAL 4TH MAX HIGH AND DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATION FOR 8-HOUR OZONE FOR THE TRIANGLE AREA
[In parts per million]
COUNTY Chatham Durham Franklin Granville Johnston Person Wake
MONITOR Pittsboro Duke Street Franklinton Butner West Johnston Bushy Fork Millbrook Fuquay Varina
(AIRS ID) (#37–037–0004) (#37–063–0013) (#37–069–0001) (#37–077–0001) (#37–101–0002) (#37–145–0003) (#37–183–0014) (#37–183–0016)
2004 ...................... 0.068 0.074 0.077 0.081 0.074 0.076 0.075 0.077
2005 ...................... 0.079 0.076 0.080 0.085 0.083 0.079 0.082 0.085
2006 ...................... 0.066 0.075 0.074 0.075 0.072 0.071 0.078 0.072
Design Value ........ 0.071 0.075 0.077 0.080 0.076 0.075 0.078 0.078
As discussed above, the design value requirements in accordance with section that come due subsequent to the area’s
for an area is the highest design value 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these submittal of a complete redesignation
recorded at any monitor in the area. determinations, EPA ascertained which request remain applicable until a
Therefore, the design value for the requirements are applicable to the area redesignation is approved, but are not
Triangle Area is 0.080 ppm, which and that if applicable, they are fully required as a prerequisite to
meets the standard as described above. approved under section 110(k). SIPs redesignation. See, section 175A(c) of
As discussed in more detail below, must be fully approved only with the CAA; Sierra Club, 375 F.3d 537; see
North Carolina has committed to respect to applicable requirements. also, 68 FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003)
continue monitoring in this area in (redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri).
accordance with 40 CFR part 58. The a. The Triangle Area has met all
Applicable Requirements Under Section General SIP requirements. Section
data submitted by North Carolina 110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA delineates
provides an adequate demonstration 110 and Part D of the CAA
the general requirements for a SIP,
that the Triangle Area has attained the The September 4, 1992, Calcagni which include enforceable emissions
8-hour ozone NAAQS. Memorandum (see ‘‘Procedures for limitations and other control measures,
Criteria (2)—North Carolina has a Fully Processing Requests to Redesignate means, or techniques, provisions for the
Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) for Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum establishment and operation of
the Triangle Area and Criteria (5)—has from John Calcagni, Director, Air appropriate devices necessary to collect
met all Applicable Requirements Under Quality Management Division, data on ambient air quality, and
Section 110 and Part D of the CAA September 4, 1992) describes EPA’s programs to enforce the limitations.
interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E). General SIP elements and requirements
Below is a summary of how these two Under this interpretation, to qualify for are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of
criteria were met. redesignation, states requesting title I, part A of the CAA. These
EPA has determined that North redesignation to attainment must meet requirements include, but are not
Carolina has met all applicable SIP only the relevant CAA requirements that limited to, the following: submittal of a
requirements for the Triangle Area come due prior to the submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state
under section 110 of the CAA (general complete redesignation request. See after reasonable public notice and
SIP requirements). EPA has also also, Michael Shapiro Memorandum, hearing; provisions for establishment
determined that the North Carolina SIP (‘‘SIP Requirements for Areas and operation of appropriate procedures
satisfies the criterion that it meet Submitting Requests for Redesignation needed to monitor ambient air quality;
applicable SIP requirements under part to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon implementation of a source permit
D of title I of the CAA (requirements Monoxide NAAQS On or After program; provisions for the
specific to subpart 1 basic 8-hour ozone November 15, 1992,’’ September 17, implementation of part C requirements
nonattainment areas) in accordance 1993), and 60 FR 12459, 12465–66 (Prevention of Significant Deterioration
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of (PSD)) and provisions for the
EPA has determined that the SIP is fully Detroit-Ann Arbor, Michigan). implementation of part D requirements
approved with respect to all applicable Applicable requirements of the CAA (NSR permit programs); provisions for
air pollution modeling; and provisions EPA believes that section 110 In addition to the fact that no part D
for public and local agency participation elements not linked to the area’s requirements applicable for purposes of
in planning and emission control rule nonattainment status are not applicable redesignation became due prior to
development. for purposes of redesignation. Any submission of the redesignation request
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs section 110 requirements that are linked and therefore are not applicable, EPA
contain certain measures to prevent to the Part D requirements for 8-hour believes it is reasonable to interpret the
sources in a state from significantly ozone nonattainment areas are not yet conformity and NSR requirements as
contributing to air quality problems in due, since, as explained below, no part not requiring approval prior to
another state. To implement this D requirements for 8-hour standard redesignation.
provision, EPA has required certain became due prior to submission of the Section 176 Conformity
states to establish programs to address redesignation request. Therefore, as Requirements. Section 176(c) of the
the transport of air pollutants (NOX SIP discussed above, for purposes of CAA requires states to establish criteria
Call, Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)). redesignation, they are not considered and procedures to ensure that Federally
EPA has also found, generally, that applicable requirements. Nonetheless, supported or funded projects conform to
states have not submitted timely SIPs EPA notes it has previously approved the air quality planning goals in the
under section 110(a)(1) to meet the provisions in the North Carolina SIP applicable SIP. The requirement to
interstate transport requirements of addressing section 110 elements under determine conformity applies to
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). However, the the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (See, 51 FR transportation plans, programs and
section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a 19834, June 3, 1986). EPA believes that projects developed, funded or approved
state are not linked with a particular the section 110 SIP approved for the 1- under title 23 of the United States Code
nonattainment area’s designation and hour ozone NAAQS is also sufficient to (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act
classification in that state. EPA believes meet the requirements under the 8-hour (transportation conformity) as well as to
that the requirements linked with a ozone NAAQS (as well as satisfying the all other Federally supported or funded
particular nonattainment area’s issues raised by the D.C. Circuit Court projects (general conformity). State
designation and classifications are the in the SCAQMD case). conformity revisions must be consistent
relevant measures to evaluate in Part D requirements. EPA has also with Federal conformity regulations
reviewing a redesignation request. The determined that the North Carolina SIP relating to consultation, enforcement
transport SIP submittal requirements, meets applicable SIP requirements and enforceability that the CAA
where applicable, continue to apply to under part D of the CAA since no
required the EPA to promulgate.
a state regardless of the designation of EPA believes it is reasonable to
requirements became due prior to the
any one particular area in the state. interpret the conformity SIP
submission of the Area’s redesignation requirements as not applying for
Thus, we do not believe that the CAA’s
request. Sections 172–176 of the CAA, purposes of evaluating the redesignation
interstate transport requirements should
found in subpart 1 of part D, set forth request under section 107(d) because
be construed to be applicable
the basic nonattainment requirements state conformity rules are still required
requirements for purposes of
applicable to all nonattainment areas. after redesignation and Federal
redesignation.
In addition, EPA believes that the Section 182 of the CAA, found in conformity rules apply where state rules
other section 110 elements not subpart 2 of part D, establishes have not been approved. See, Wall, 265
connected with nonattainment plan additional specific requirements F.3d 426 (upholding this interpretation).
submissions and not linked with an depending on the area’s nonattainment See also, 60 FR 62748 (December 7,
area’s attainment status are not classification. Subpart 2 is not 1995, Tampa, Florida).
applicable requirements for purposes of applicable to the Triangle Area. NSR Requirements. EPA has also
redesignation. The area will still be Part D, subpart 1 applicable SIP determined that areas being
subject to these requirements after the requirements. For purposes of redesignated need not comply with the
area is redesignated. The section 110 evaluating this redesignation request, requirement that a NSR program be
and part D requirements, which are the applicable part D, subpart 1 SIP approved prior to redesignation,
linked with a particular area’s requirements for all nonattainment areas provided that the area demonstrates
designation and classification, are the are contained in sections 172(c)(1)–(9). maintenance of the standard without a
relevant measures to evaluate in A thorough discussion of the part D NSR program in effect since PSD
reviewing a redesignation request. This requirements contained in section 172 requirements will apply after
approach is consistent with EPA’s can be found in the General Preamble redesignation. The rationale for this
existing policy on applicability (i.e., for for Implementation of title I (57 FR view is described in a memorandum
redesignations) of conformity and 13498). No requirements applicable for from Mary Nichols, Assistant
oxygenated fuels requirements, as well purposes of redesignation under part D Administrator for Air and Radiation,
as with section 184 ozone transport became due prior to the submission of dated October 14, 1994, entitled ‘‘Part D
requirements. See, Reading, the redesignation request, and therefore New Source Review (Part D NSR)
Pennsylvania, proposed and final none are applicable to the Area for Requirements for Areas Requesting
rulemakings (61 FR 53174–53176, purposes of redesignation. For example, Redesignation to Attainment.’’ North
October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, the requirements for an attainment Carolina has demonstrated that the
1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, demonstration that meets the Triangle Area will be able to maintain
final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, requirements of section 172(c)(1) are not the standard without a part D NSR
1996); and Tampa, Florida, final yet applicable, nor are the requirements program in effect, and therefore, North
rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, December for Reasonably Achievable Control Carolina need not have a fully approved
7, 1995). See also, the discussion on this Technology (RACT) and Reasonably part D NSR program prior to approval of
issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio Available Control Measures (RACM) the redesignation request. North
redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, (section 172(c)(1)), reasonable further Carolina’s PSD program will become
2000), and in the Pittsburgh, progress (RFP) (section 172(c)(2)), and effective in the Triangle Area upon
Pennsylvania redesignation (66 FR contingency measures (section redesignation to attainment. See,
50399, October 19, 2001). 172(c)(9)). rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60
FR 12467–12468, March 7, 1995); continued decrease in emissions monitoring, verification of continued

Cleveland-Akron-Lorraine, Ohio (61 FR throughout the region. attainment, and a contingency plan. As
20458, 20469–70, May 7, 1996); is discussed more fully below, North
Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, TABLE 3.—TRIANGLE AREA EMISSION Carolina’s maintenance plan includes
October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids, REDUCTIONS PROGRAMS all the necessary components and is
Michigan (61 FR 31834–31837, June 21, approvable as part of the redesignation
1996). Thus, the Triangle Area has Mobile Sources request.
satisfied all applicable requirements for • Tier 2 Vehicle Standards
• Heavy Duty Gasoline and Diesel High- b. Attainment Emissions Inventory
purposes of redesignation under section
110 and part D of the CAA. way Vehicle Standards North Carolina selected 2005 as ‘‘the
Nonroad Mobile Sources attainment year’’ for the Triangle Area
b. The Triangle Area Has a Fully • Large Nonroad Diesel Engines Rule for the purposes of demonstrating
Approved Applicable SIP Under Section • Spark Ignition Engines and Recreational attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
110(k) of the CAA Standards
State and Local Measures
This attainment inventory identifies the
EPA has fully approved the applicable • Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Pro- level of emissions in the area, which is
North Carolina SIP for the Triangle gram in Clean Air Bill sufficient to attain the 8-hour ozone
Area, under section 110(k) of the CAA • NOX SIP Call standard. North Carolina began
for all requirements applicable for • Clean Smokestacks Act development of this attainment
purposes of redesignation. EPA may rely • Opening Burning Ban inventory by first developing a baseline
on prior SIP approvals in approving a • Air Toxics Control Program emissions inventory for the Triangle
redesignation request, see Calcagni • Prevention of Significant Deterioration Area. The year 2005 was chosen as the
• Heavy Duty Diesel Engine Gap Filling
Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern Rule
base year for developing a
Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. comprehensive ozone precursor
Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–90 (6th Cir. emissions inventory for which projected
Criteria (4)—The area has a fully
1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426, plus any emissions could be developed for 2008,
approved maintenance plan pursuant to
additional measures it may approve in 2011, 2014, and 2017. Nonroad mobile
section 175A of the CAA
conjunction with a redesignation action. emissions estimates were based on the
See, 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and In its request to redesignate the EPA’s NONROAD2005c model. On-road
citations therein. Following passage of Triangle Area to attainment, North mobile source emissions were
the CAA of 1970, North Carolina has Carolina submitted a SIP revision to calculated using EPA’s MOBILE6.2
adopted and submitted, and EPA has provide for the maintenance of the 8- emission factors model. The 2005 VOC
fully approved at various times, hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years and NOX emissions, as well as the
provisions addressing the various after the effective date of redesignation emissions for other years, for the
1-hour ozone standard SIP elements to attainment. Triangle Area were developed
applicable in the Triangle Area (59 FR a. What is required in a maintenance consistent with EPA guidance, and are
18300, April 18, 1994; and 69 FR 56163, plan? summarized in Tables 4 and 5 in the
September 20, 2004). following subsection.
As indicated above, EPA believes that Section 175A of the CAA sets forth
the section 110 elements not connected the elements of a maintenance plan for c. Maintenance Demonstration
with nonattainment plan submissions areas seeking redesignation from The June 7, 2007, final submittal
and not linked to the area’s nonattainment to attainment. Under includes a maintenance plan for the
nonattainment status are not applicable section 175A, the plan must Triangle Area. This demonstration:
requirements for purposes of demonstrate continued attainment of (i) Shows compliance and
redesignation. EPA also believes that the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
since the part D requirements applicable years after the Administrator approves a standard by providing information to
for purposes of redesignation did not redesignation to attainment. Eight years support the demonstration that current
become due prior to submission of the after the redesignation, the State of and future emissions of VOC and NOX
redesignation request, they also are North Carolina must submit a revised remain at or below attainment year 2005
therefore not applicable requirements maintenance plan, which demonstrates emissions levels. The year 2005 was
for purposes of redesignation. that attainment will continue to be chosen as the attainment year because it
maintained for the 10 years following is one of the most recent three years
Criteria (3)—The air quality the initial 10-year period. To address (i.e., 2004, 2005, and 2006) for which
improvement in the Triangle Area is due the possibility of future NAAQS the Triangle Area has clean air quality
to permanent and enforceable violations, the maintenance plan must data for the 8-hour ozone standard.
reductions in emissions resulting from contain such contingency measures, (ii) Uses 2005 as the attainment year
implementation of the SIP and with a schedule for implementation as and includes future emission inventory
applicable Federal air pollution control EPA deems necessary to assure prompt projections for 2008, 2011, 2014, and
regulations and other permanent and correction of any future 8-hour ozone 2017.
enforceable reductions violations. Section 175A of the CAA sets (iii) Identifies an ‘‘out year,’’ at least
EPA believes that North Carolina has forth the elements of a maintenance 10 years after the time necessary for
demonstrated that the observed air plan for areas seeking redesignation EPA to review and approve the
quality improvement in the Triangle from nonattainment to attainment. The maintenance plan. Per 40 CFR part 93,
Area is due to permanent and Calcagni Memorandum provides subarea NOX MVEBs were established
enforceable reductions in emissions additional guidance on the content of a for the last year (2017) of the
resulting from implementation of the maintenance plan. The Calcagni maintenance plan. Additionally, North
SIP, Federal measures, and other state Memorandum explains that an ozone Carolina chose, through interagency
adopted measures. Additionally, new maintenance plan should address five consultation, to establish subarea
emissions control programs for fuels requirements: the attainment emissions MVEBs for the year 2008 for NOX, and
and motor vehicles will help ensure a inventory, maintenance demonstration, to determine insignificance for VOC for
the Triangle Area. See, section VII (iv) Provides the following actual and per day (tpd) for the Triangle Area. See,
below. projected emissions inventories, in tons Tables 4 and 5.
TABLE 4.—TRIANGLE AREA EMISSIONS OF VOC

[Tons per day]
Source category 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017
Point ....................................................................................................................................... 12.28 13.24 14.45 15.61 16.94

Area ........................................................................................................................................ 67.26 72.94 78.01 82.80 87.80
Mobile * ................................................................................................................................... 47.47 39.71 35.13 30.24 27.18
Nonroad ** .............................................................................................................................. 30.78 26.24 23.99 23.28 23.01
Total ................................................................................................................................ 157.79 152.13 151.58 151.93 154.93
Safety Margin ......................................................................................................................... N/A 5.66 6.21 5.86 2.86

* Calculated using MOBILE 6.2.
** Calculated using NONROAD2005c.
TABLE 5.—TRIANGLE AREA NOX EMISSIONS

[tons per day]
Source category 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017
Point ....................................................................................................................................... 38.37 33.55 34.50 35.43 35.04

Area ........................................................................................................................................ 13.02 13.65 14.24 14.87 15.55
Mobile * ................................................................................................................................... 101.68 81.66 59.00 42.78 32.59
Nonroad ** .............................................................................................................................. 38.42 34.90 31.09 26.52 22.25
Total ................................................................................................................................ 191.49 163.76 138.83 119.60 105.43
Safety Margin ......................................................................................................................... N/A 27.73 52.66 71.89 86.06

* Calculated using MOBILE 6.2.
** Calculated using NONROAD2005c.
A safety margin is the difference implement and enforce any subsequent identify specific indicators to be used to
between the attainment level of emissions control contingency measures determine when the contingency
emissions (from all sources) and the determined to be necessary to correct measures need to be implemented. The
projected level of emissions (from all future ozone attainment problems. maintenance plan must include a
sources) in the maintenance plan. The North Carolina will track the progress requirement that a state will implement
attainment level of emissions is the of the maintenance plan by performing all measures with respect to control of
level of emissions during one of the future reviews of actual emissions for the pollutant that were contained in the
years in which the area met the NAAQS. the Area using the latest emissions SIP before redesignation of the area to
North Carolina has decided to allocate factors, models and methodologies. For attainment in accordance with section
a portion of the available safety margin these periodic inventories, North 175A(d).
to the subarea NOX MVEBs for the years Carolina will review the assumptions In the June 7, 2007, submittal, North
2008 and 2017 for the Triangle Area, made for the purpose of the Carolina affirms that all programs
and has calculated the safety margin in maintenance demonstration concerning instituted by the State and EPA will
its submittal. See, Tables 4 and 5, above. projected growth of activity levels. If remain enforceable, and that sources are
This allocation and the resulting any of these assumptions appear to have prohibited from reducing emissions
available safety margin for the Triangle changed substantially, North Carolina controls following the redesignation of
Area are discussed further in section VII will re-project emissions. the area. The contingency plan included
of this proposed rulemaking. in the submittal provides tracking and
f. Contingency Plan triggering mechanisms to determine
d. Monitoring Network
The contingency plan provisions are when contingency measures are needed
There are currently eight monitors designed to promptly correct a violation and a process of developing and
measuring ozone in the Triangle Area. of the NAAQS that occurs after adopting appropriate control measures.
North Carolina has committed in the redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA The primary trigger of the contingency
maintenance plan to continue operation requires that a maintenance plan plan will be a violation of the 8-hour
of these monitors in compliance with 40 include such contingency measures as ozone NAAQS, or when the three-year
CFR part 58, and has addressed the EPA deems necessary to assure that the average of the fourth-highest value is
requirement for monitoring. state will promptly correct a violation of equal to or greater than 0.085 ppm at
the NAAQS that occurs after any of the Triangle Area monitors. The
e. Verification of Continued Attainment

redesignation. The maintenance plan trigger date will be 60 days from the
North Carolina has the legal authority should identify the contingency date that the State observes a fourth-
to enforce and implement the measures to be adopted, a schedule and highest value that, when averaged with
requirements of the ozone maintenance procedure for adoption and the two previous ozone seasons’ fourth
plan for the Triangle Area. This implementation, and a time limit for highest values, would result in a three-
includes the authority to adopt, action by the state. A state should also year average equal to or greater than
0.085 ppm. The secondary trigger will • Diesel inspection and maintenance VOC for the Triangle Area. See below
apply where no actual violation of the program 2; for further information on the
8-hour ozone standard has occurred, but • Implementation of diesel retrofits insignificance determination. Second,
where the State finds monitored ozone programs, including incentives for EPA is proposing to approve the subarea
levels indicating that an ozone NAAQS performing retrofits; and NOX MVEBs for the Triangle Area.
violation may be imminent. An • Additional controls in upwind
A. Proposed VOC Insignificance
imminent violation exists where there is areas.
Determination
a pattern. A pattern will be deemed to Once the tertiary trigger is activated,
exist when there are two consecutive NCDENR will commence analyses In certain instances, the
ozone seasons in which the fourth- including meteorological evaluation, Transportation Conformity Rule allows
highest values are 0.085 ppm or greater trajectory analyses of high ozone days, areas not to establish an MVEB where it
at a single monitor within the Triangle and an emissions inventory assessment is demonstrated that the regional motor
Area. The trigger date will be 60 days to understand why a fourth highest vehicle emissions for a particular
from the date that the State observes a exceedance of the standard has pollutant/precursor is an insignificant
fourth-highest value of 0.085 ppm or occurred. NCDENR will then work with contributor to the air quality problem in
greater at a monitor for which the the local awareness program and an area. The general criteria for
previous season had a fourth-highest develop an outreach plan to identify any insignificance findings can be found in
value of 0.085 ppm or greater. Similarly, additional voluntary measures that can 40 CFR 93.109(k). Insignificance
the tertiary trigger is a first alert to a be implemented. If the fourth highest determinations are based on a number
potential air quality problem in the exceedance occurs early in the season, of factors, including (1) The percentage
future and will not be an actual NCDENR will work with entities of motor vehicle emissions in context of
violation of the 8-hour ozone standard. identified in the outreach plan to the total SIP inventory; (2) the current
The trigger will be activated when a determine if the measures can be state of air quality as determined by
monitor in the Triangle Area has a implemented during the ozone season. monitoring data for that NAAQS; (3) the
fourth-highest value of 0.085 ppm or Otherwise, NCDENR will work with the absence of SIP motor vehicle control
greater, starting the first year after the local air awareness coordinator to measures; and (4) historical trends and
maintenance plan has been approved. implement the plan for the following future projections of the growth of
The trigger date will be 60 days from the ozone season. motor vehicle emissions. EPA’s
date that the State observes a fourth- EPA has concluded that the rationale for the providing for
highest value of 0.085 ppm or greater at maintenance plan adequately addresses insignificance determinations is
any monitor. the five basic components of a described in the July 1, 2004, revision
In the submittal, if there is a measured maintenance plan: Attainment to the Transportation Conformity Rule
violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in inventory, maintenance demonstration, at 69 FR 40004. Specifically, the
the Triangle Area, contingency monitoring network, verification of rationale is explained on page 40061
measures would be adopted and continued attainment, and a under the subsection entitled ‘‘XXIII. B.
implemented as expeditiously as contingency plan. The maintenance Areas With Insignificant Motor Vehicle
possible, but no later than eighteen to plan SIP revision submitted by North Emissions.’’ Any insignificance
twenty four months after the triggering Carolina for the Triangle Area meets the determination under review of EPA is
event. Once the primary or secondary requirements of section 175A of the subject to the adequacy and approval
trigger is activated, the proposed CAA and is approvable. process for EPA’s action on the SIP.
schedule for these actions would be as VII. What Is EPA’s Analysis of North Through the adequacy and SIP
follows: Carolina’s Proposed VOC Insignificance approval process, EPA may find that a
Determination and the Proposed SIP demonstrates that regional motor
• NCDENR will begin analyses,
Subarea NOX MVEBs for the Triangle vehicle emissions are an insignificant
including trajectory analyses of high
Area? contributor to the air quality problem
ozone days, and emissions inventory
for the pollutant/precursor at issue. In
assessment to determine required Today’s actions address two related the case of the Triangle Area, EPA
emission control measures for attaining elements regarding on-road motor intends to make its finding as part of
or maintaining the 8-hour ozone vehicle emissions and the requirement EPA’s final action on the redesignation
standard; to establish MVEBs. First, EPA is request of North Carolina for the
• By May 1st of the year following the proposing to find that the VOC emission Triangle Area. Upon the effective date of
ozone season in which the primary (a contribution from motor vehicles to 8- EPA’s adequacy finding or the
violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS hour ozone pollution in the Triangle publication date of the final rule for this
occurs) or secondary trigger has been Area is insignificant. The result of this SIP revision (i.e., which includes the
activated, NCDENR will complete finding, if finalized, is that North VOC insignificance determination),
sufficient analyses to begin adoption of Carolina need not develop an MVEB for federal regulations waive the regional
necessary rules for ensuring attainment emissions analysis requirements (for the
2 At this time, there is not an approved method
and maintenance of the 8-hour ozone purpose of transportation conformity
for determining emission reductions from a Diesel
NAAQS; and Inspection and Maintenance program. Therefore, implementation) for the relevant
• Rules would become State-effective there is no technical basis to award emission credits pollutant or precursor. Areas with
for a heavy duty diesel inspection and maintenance insignificant regional motor vehicle
by the following January 1st, unless program in the SIP. However, we do not want to
legislative review is required. emissions for a pollutant or precursor
preclude future technical changes that may make

awarding such emission credits possible. If it is are still required to make a conformity
North Carolina will consider one or
necessary to implement contingency measures for determination that satisfies other
more of the following contingency this area, North Carolina, in coordination with EPA, relevant requirements. Additionally,
measures to re-attain the standard: will evaluate the feasibility of this program as a
contingency measure at that time. If a technical
such areas are required to satisfy the
• NOX RACT on stationary sources in basis for emission credits is not available, other regional emissions analysis
the Triangle Area; contingency measures will need to be implemented. requirements for pollutants or
precursors for which EPA has not made Carolina indicates that VOC MVEB is established for the last year of
a finding of insignificance. contribution to 8-hour ozone pollution the maintenance plan. A state may
The maintenance plan for the Triangle from motor vehicle emissions is adopt MVEBs for other years as well.
Area, included as part of the SIP insignificant. The MVEB is the portion of the total
revision, contains MVEBs for NOX and With regard to the factor relating to allowable emissions in the maintenance
an insignificance determination for VOC the absence of motor vehicle control demonstration that is allocated to
contribution from motor vehicles to the measures in the SIP, EPA considered the highway and transit vehicle use and
8-hour ozone pollution in the Triangle existence of an inspection and emissions. See, 40 CFR 93.101. The
Area. As part of the preparation for its maintenance (I/M) program in the North MVEB serves as a ceiling on emissions
redesignation request, North Carolina Carolina SIP, and its implementation in from an area’s planned transportation
consulted with the interagency the individual counties comprising the system. The MVEB concept is further
consultation group for the Triangle Area Triangle Area. The I/M program was not explained in the preamble to the
regarding the insignificance added to the North Carolina SIP as a November 24, 1993, transportation
determination for VOC. For the VOC control measure, but rather, a NOX conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The
purposes of regional emissions analysis, control measure. The I/M program is preamble also describes how to
the information provided by North currently being implemented in all but establish the MVEB in the SIP and how
Carolina supports EPA’s proposal to one of the counties (Person County) in to revise the MVEB.
determine VOC contribution to 8-hour the Triangle Area. Implementation of North Carolina, after interagency
ozone pollution from motor vehicles in the I/M program in the Triangle Area consultation with the transportation
the Triangle Area as insignificant. The began from July 2002 through July 2004, partners for the Triangle Area, has
information provided by North Carolina and continues to be ongoing in the Area. elected to develop county-level subarea
to EPA as part of the SIP revision In North Carolina’s SIP submittal, the MVEBs for NOX. North Carolina is
addresses each of the factors listed in 40 State explains that the I/M program was developing these MVEBs, as required,
CFR 93.109(k), and is summarized established to achieve additional for the last year of its maintenance plan,
below. reductions in NOX emissions, and that 2017, and for an additional year, 2008.
The future on-road VOC emissions are while there are incidental VOC emission The MVEBs reflect the total on-road
projected to be less than 10 percent in reductions (approximately 2 tons per emissions for 2008 and 2017, plus an
the Triangle Area, in the context of the day in 2005) as a result of implementing allocation from the available NOX safety
total SIP inventory. According to this program in the Triangle Area, the margin for each year. Under 40 CFR
information provided by North Carolina, program was not implemented to reduce 93.101, the term safety margin is the
biogenic emissions account for VOC emissions from motor vehicles. As difference between the attainment level
approximately 90 percent of the VOC a result, the existence of this program in (from all sources) and the projected
emissions in future years in the Triangle the SIP for the purpose of NOX level of emissions (from all sources) in
Area. Support for these percentages is reductions does not prohibit EPA from the maintenance plan. The safety
found in Figure 4.1.6–3, located in finding the VOC contribution to 8-hour margin can be allocated to the
Appendix C.3—Mobile Source ozone pollution from motor vehicles transportation sector; however, the total
Inventory Documentation on pages 4–36 insignificant. emissions must remain below the
of North Carolina’s submittal (available After evaluating the information attainment level. These MVEBs and
in the Docket for this proposed provided by North Carolina and allocation from the safety margin were
rulemaking) which also indicates on- weighing the factors for the developed in consultation with the
road VOC emissions declining by about insignificance determination outlined in transportation partners and were added
50 percent by 2017 and vehicle miles 40 CFR 93.109(k), particularly the to account for uncertainties in
traveled (VMT) going up by about 25 to biogenic contribution to the overall VOC population growth, changes in model
30 percent by 2017. In addition, North inventory, EPA is now proposing to VMT and new emission factor models.
Carolina conducted a sensitivity approve North Carolina’s determination The subarea NOX MVEBs for the
analysis (a photochemical model) that that the VOC contribution from motor Triangle Area are defined in Table 6
indicated that 8-hour ozone levels in the vehicle emissions to the 8-hour ozone below.
Triangle Area were not impacted by pollution for the Triangle Area is
reductions in man-made VOC emissions insignificant. If this finding is TABLE 6.—TRIANGLE SUBAREA NOX
(i.e., reductions from motor vehicles). completed through the adequacy MVEBS *
Specifically, the photochemical model process (see Section VIII below) or [Kilograms per day]
was run for a 39-day scenario with a approved through the final rulemaking
modeled 30 percent reduction in man- on this SIP submission, the County 2008 2017
made VOC emissions. According to the insignificance determination should be
photochemical model, in the year 2009, considered and specifically noted in the Chatham ....................... 1,565 948
even with anticipated increases in VMT, transportation conformity document Durham ......................... 13,106 4,960
the mobile source inventory is still that is prepared for this Area. Franklin ......................... 2,048 1,139
projected to be less than 6 percent of the Graham ......................... 4,649 1,714
total inventory for VOC emissions. In B. Proposed Subarea NOX MVEBs Johnston ....................... 12,583 5,958
Under the CAA, states are required to Orange .......................... 9,933 3,742
comparison, biogenic emissions are Person .......................... 1,359 791
expected to account for at least 84 submit, at various times, control strategy Wake ............................. 36,615 16,352
percent of the total inventory for VOC SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone
emissions. As discussed in North areas. These control strategy SIPs * Includes an allocation from the available
Carolina’s submittal, the biogenic sector (reasonable further progress and NOX safety margins (see Table 7).
is the most abundant source of VOC in attainment demonstration, etc.) and As mentioned above, North Carolina
North Carolina and accounts for maintenance plans create MVEBs for has chosen to allocate a portion of the
approximately 90 percent of the total criteria pollutants and/or their available safety margin to the 2008 and
VOC emissions statewide. As a result, precursors to address pollution from 2017 subarea NOX MVEBs. The
the information provided by North cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, an following table identifies the amount of
the NOX safety margin that was allotted construction of new highways, must follows this guidance and rulemaking in
to the 2008 and 2017 subarea NOX ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., be consistent with) making its adequacy determinations.
MVEBs. the part of the state’s air quality plan EPA must also use a similar process to
that addresses pollution from cars and determine the adequacy of an
TABLE 7.—NOX SAFETY MARGIN trucks. ‘‘Conformity’’ to the SIP means insignificance determination that is
ALLOCATION that transportation activities will not submitted by a state as a part of a
[Kilograms per day] cause new air quality violations, worsen control strategy SIP or maintenance
existing violations, or delay timely plan. Additional information on the
County 2008 2017 attainment of the NAAQS. If a adequacy process for both MVEBs and
transportation plan does not ‘‘conform,’’ insignificance determinations is
Chatham ....................... 204 190 most new projects that would expand available in the proposed rule entitled,
Durham ......................... 1,191 827 the capacity of roadways cannot go ‘‘Transportation Conformity Rule
Franklin ......................... 186 190 forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 Amendments: Response to Court
Graham ......................... 606 343 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and Decision and Additional Rule Changes,’’
Johnston ....................... 1,144 993
Orange .......................... 903 624 procedures for demonstrating and 68 FR 38974, 38984 (June 30, 2003).
Person .......................... 177 158 assuring conformity of such
IX. What Is the Status of EPA’s
Wake ............................. 3,329 2,725 transportation activities to a SIP. The
Adequacy Determination for the
regional emissions analysis is one, but
Total ....................... 7,741 6,049 Subarea NOX MVEBs for the Years 2008
not the only, requirement for
and 2017, and the VOC Insignificance
implementing transportation
The total allocation is 7,741 kg/day Determination?
conformity. Transportation conformity
(8.53 tpd) in 2008 and 6,049 kg/day is a requirement for nonattainment and As discussed earlier, North Carolina’s
(6.67 tpd) in 2017 for NOX. The maintenance areas. Maintenance areas maintenance plan submission includes
remaining NOX safety margin after are areas that were previously new county-level subarea NOX MVEBs
allocation of some of the safety margin nonattainment for a particular NAAQS for the Triangle Area for the years 2008
to the MVEBs for the Triangle Area is but have since been redesignated to and 2017. Additionally, the
19.20 tpd in 2008 and 79.39 tpd in 2017. attainment with a maintenance plan for maintenance plan included a VOC
Through this rulemaking, EPA is that NAAQS. insignificance determination for the
proposing to approve the 2008 and 2017 When reviewing submitted ‘‘control entire Triangle Area, and therefore, no
subarea MVEBs for NOX for the Triangle strategy’’ SIPs or maintenance plans MVEB for VOC is included as part of the
Area because EPA has determined that containing MVEBs, EPA must SIP revision. EPA reviewed both the
the Area maintains the 8-hour ozone affirmatively find the MVEB contained NOX MVEBs and the VOC insignificance
standard with the emissions at the therein ‘‘adequate’’ for use in determination through the adequacy
levels of the budgets. As mentioned determining transportation conformity. process. The North Carolina SIP
above, these MVEBs are subarea MVEBs Once EPA affirmatively finds the submission, including the Triangle
for each individual county in the submitted MVEB is adequate for subarea NOX MVEBs and the VOC
Triangle Area. Once the new subarea transportation conformity purposes, that insignificance determination, was open
MVEBs for the Triangle Area (the MVEB can be used by state and Federal for public comment on EPA’s adequacy
subject of this rulemaking) are approved agencies in determining whether Web site on March 21, 2007, found at:
or found adequate (whichever is done proposed transportation projects http://www.epa.gov/otaq/
first), they must be used for future ‘‘conform’’ to the SIP as required by stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm.
conformity determinations. section 176(c) of the CAA. The EPA public comment period on
EPA’s substantive criteria for adequacy of the 2008 and 2017 subarea
VIII. What Is an Adequacy
determining ‘‘adequacy’’ of an MVEB, NOX MVEBs, and VOC insignificance
Determination?
including EPA’s determination that an determination closed on April 20, 2007.
As discussed above, the MVEB is the MVEB need not be established because EPA did not receive any comments on
portion of the total allowable emissions of an insignificance determination, are the adequacy of the MVEBs or the VOC
in the maintenance demonstration that set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The insignificance determination, nor did
is allocated to highway and transit process for determining ‘‘adequacy’’ EPA receive any requests for the SIP
vehicle use and emissions. The MVEB consists of three basic steps: public submittal.
concept is further explained in the notification of a SIP submission, a EPA intends to make its
preamble to the November 24, 1993, public comment period, and EPA’s determination on the adequacy of the
transportation conformity rule (58 FR adequacy finding. This process for 2008 and 2017 subarea NOX MVEBs,
62188). The preamble also describes determining the adequacy of submitted and the VOC insignificance
how to establish the MVEB in the SIP SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in determination for the Triangle Area for
and how to revise the MVEB. EPA’s May 14, 1999, guidance, transportation conformity purposes in
Additionally, the transportation ‘‘Conformity Guidance on the final rulemaking on the
conformity rule (see 93.109(k)) allows Implementation of March 2, 1999, redesignation of the Triangle Area. If
for areas not to establish a MVEB for a Conformity Court Decision.’’ This EPA finds the 2008 and 2017 subarea
particular pollutant or precursor if it can guidance was finalized in the NOX MVEBs, and the VOC
be demonstrated that motor vehicle Transportation Conformity Rule insignificance determination adequate
emissions contributions do not Amendments for the ‘‘New 8-Hour or approves these MVEBs and the VOC
significantly contribute to an area’s Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air insignificance determination in the final
pollution. North Carolina’s submittal for Quality Standards and Miscellaneous rulemaking action, the new MVEBs for
this area establishes MVEBs for NOX Revisions for Existing Areas; NOX must be used, and the VOC
and provides an insignificance transportation conformity rule insignificance determination should be
determination for VOC contribution. amendments—Response to Court noted, for future transportation
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new Decision and Additional Rule Change,’’ conformity determinations. If the new
transportation projects, such as the on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). EPA 2008 and 2017 subarea NOX MVEBs are
found adequate, and both the NOX determination for the 2008 and 2017 Federal Government and Indian tribes,
MVEBs and the related VOC subarea NOX MVEBs, and VOC as specified by Executive Order 13175
insignificance determination are insignificance determination, in (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
approved in the final rulemaking, the accordance with 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1). action also does not have Federalism
NOX MVEBs and the VOC insignificance Within 24 months from the effective implications because it does not have
determination will be effective on the date of EPA’s adequacy finding for the substantial direct effects on the states,
date of publication of EPA’s final MVEBs, or the publication date for the on the relationship between the national
rulemaking in the Federal Register. For final rule for this action, the government and the states, or on the
required regional emissions analysis transportation partners will need to distribution of power and
years that involve the year 2016 or demonstrate conformity to the new
responsibilities among the various
before, the applicable budget for the subarea NOX MVEBs pursuant to 40
levels of government, as specified in
purposes of conducting transportation CFR 93.104(e) as effectively amended by
conformity will be the new 2008 section 172(c)(2)(E) of the CAA as added Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
subarea NOX MVEBs for the Triangle by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, August 10, 1999). This action merely
Area. For required regional emissions Efficient Transportation Equity Act—A affects the status of a geographical area,
analysis years that involve 2017 or Legacy for Users (SAFETEA–LU), which does not impose any new requirements
beyond, the applicable budgets will be was signed into law on August 10, 2005. on sources, or allow a state to avoid
the new 2017 subarea NOX MVEBs. Additionally, the transportation adopting or implementing other
Both the 2008 and 2017 subarea NOX partners should note EPA’s finding of requirements and does not alter the
MVEBs are defined in section VII of this adequacy and approval for the VOC relationship or the distribution of power
proposed rulemaking. More detail on insignificance determination for future and responsibilities established in the
the VOC insignificance determination conformity determinations. CAA. This proposed rule also is not
can be found in section VII of this subject to Executive Order 13045
XI. Statutory and Executive Order
proposed rulemaking as well. ‘‘Protection of Children from
Reviews
X. Proposed Action on the Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
Redesignation Request and 51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed
Maintenance Plan SIP Revision because it is not economically
action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
Including Proposed Approval of the significant and because the Agency does
action’’ and therefore is not subject to
2008 and 2017 Subarea NOX MVEBs, not have reason to believe that the rule
review by the Office of Management and
and the Proposed VOC Insignificance concerns an environmental health risk
Budget. For this reason, this action is
Determination for the Triangle Area also not subject to Executive Order or safety risk that may
EPA is proposing to make the 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations disproportionately affect children.
determination that the Triangle Area has That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
met the criteria for redesignation from Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May role is to approve state choices,
nonattainment to attainment for the 8- 22, 2001). This proposed action merely provided that they meet the criteria of
hour ozone NAAQS. Further, EPA is proposes to approve state law as the CAA. In this context, in the absence
proposing to approve North Carolina’s meeting Federal requirements and of a prior existing requirement for the
June 7, 2006, SIP submittal including imposes no additional requirements State to use voluntary consensus
the redesignation request for the beyond those imposed by state law. standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
Triangle Area. EPA believes that the Redesignation of an area to attainment to disapprove a SIP submission for
redesignation request and monitoring under section 107(d)(3)(e) of the CAA failure to use VCS. It would thus be
data demonstrate that the Triangle Area does not impose any new requirements inconsistent with applicable law for
has attained, and will continue to on small entities. Redesignation is an EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission;
maintain the 8-hour ozone standard. action that affects the status of a to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
EPA is also proposing to approve the geographical area and does not impose that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
maintenance plan for the Triangle Area any new regulatory requirements on
the CAA. Redesignation is an action that
included as part of the June 7, 2006, SIP sources. Accordingly, the Administrator
revision. The maintenance plan affects the status of a geographical area
certifies that this proposed rule will not
includes subarea NOX MVEBs for 2008 have a significant economic impact on but does not impose any new
and 2017, and a VOC insignificance a substantial number of small entities requirements on sources. Thus, the
determination for motor vehicles’ under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 requirements of section 12(d) of the
contribution to the ozone pollution in U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule National Technology Transfer and
this Area, among other requirements. proposes to approve pre-existing Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
EPA is proposing to approve the 2008 requirements under state law and does 272 note) do not apply. This proposed
and 2017 subarea NOX MVEBs for the not impose any additional enforceable rule does not impose an information
Triangle Area because the maintenance duty beyond that required by state law, collection burden under the provisions
plan demonstrates that in light of it does not contain any unfunded of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
expected emissions for all other source mandate or significantly or uniquely (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
categories, the Triangle Area will affect small governments, as described
List of Subjects
continue to maintain the 8-hour ozone in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
standard. EPA is also proposing to of 1995 (Public Law 104–4). 40 CFR Part 52
approve the insignificance This proposed rule also does not have
determination for the VOC contribution tribal implications because it will not Environmental protection, Air
from motor vehicle emissions to the 8- have a substantial direct effect on one or pollution control, Intergovernmental
hour ozone pollution for the Triangle more Indian tribes, on the relationship relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Area. between the Federal Government and Reporting and recordkeeping
Further as part of today’s action, EPA Indian tribes, or on the distribution of requirements, Volatile organic
is describing the status of its adequacy power and responsibilities between the compounds.
40 CFR Part 81 without change and may be made (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental protection, Air available on-line at http:// Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
pollution control, National parks, www.regulations.gov, including any Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,
Wilderness areas. personal information provided, unless DC 20460–0001; telephone number:
the comment includes information (703) 305–5218; fax number: (703) 305–
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. claimed to be Confidential Business 0599; e-mail address:
Dated: September 25, 2007. Information (CBI) or other information stanton.susan@epa.gov.
J.I. Palmer, Jr., whose disclosure is restricted by statute. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regional Administrator, Region 4. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise I. General Information
[FR Doc. E7–19513 Filed 10–2–07; 8:45 am]
protected through regulations.gov or e- A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
mail. The regulations.gov website is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which You may be potentially affected by
means EPA will not know your identity this action if you are an agricultural
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION producer, food manufacturer, or
AGENCY or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. pesticide manufacturer. Potentially
If you send an e-mail comment directly affected entities may include, but are
40 CFR Part 180
to EPA without going through not limited to:
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0546; FRL–8151–6] regulations.gov, your e-mail address • Crop production (NAICS code 111),
will be automatically captured and e.g., agricultural workers; greenhouse,
Thiabendazole; Threshold of nursery, and floriculture workers;
included as part of the comment that is
Regulation Determination farmers.
placed in the docket and made available
• Animal production (NAICS code
AGENCY: Environmental Protection on the Internet. If you submit an
112), e.g., cattle ranchers and farmers,
Agency (EPA). electronic comment, EPA recommends
dairy cattle farmers, livestock farmers.
ACTION: Proposed rule. that you include your name and other
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
contact information in the body of your
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to establish
311), e.g., agricultural workers; farmers;
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM
by rule that there is no need for a greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
tolerance or tolerance exemption under workers; ranchers; pesticide applicators.
comment due to technical difficulties • Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act and cannot contact you for clarification, code 32532), e.g., agricultural workers;
(FFDCA) for the use of the fungicide EPA may not be able to consider your commercial applicators; farmers;
thiabendazole as a seed treatment on comment. Electronic files should avoid greenhouse, nursery, and floriculture
dry peas. This determination is based on the use of special characters, any form workers; residential users.
EPA’s finding that any residues that of encryption, and be free of any defects This listing is not intended to be
remain in food from this use will be or viruses. exhaustive, but rather provides a guide
both non-detectable and below the level Docket: All documents in the docket for readers regarding entities likely to be
of regulatory concern. are listed in the docket index available affected by this action. Other types of
DATES: Comments must be received on in regulations.gov. To access the entities not listed in this unit could also
or before December 3, 2007. electronic docket, go to http:// be affected. The North American
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, www.regulations.gov, select ‘‘Advanced Industrial Classification System
identified by docket identification (ID) Search,’’ then ‘‘Docket Search.’’ Insert (NAICS) codes have been provided to
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2007–0546, by the docket ID number where indicated assist you and others in determining
one of the following methods: and select the ‘‘Submit’’ button. Follow whether this action might apply to
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// the instructions on the regulations.gov certain entities. If you have any
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line website to view the docket index or questions regarding the applicability of
instructions for submitting comments. access available documents. Although this action to a particular entity, consult
• Mail: Office of Pesticide Programs listed in the index, some information is the person listed under FOR FURTHER
(OPP) Regulatory Public Docket (7502P), not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other INFORMATION CONTACT.
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 information whose disclosure is
Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, restricted by statute. Certain other B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare
DC 20460–0001. material, such as copyrighted material, My Comments for EPA?
• Delivery: OPP Regulatory Public is not placed on the Internet and will be 1. Docket. EPA has established a
Docket (7502P), Environmental publicly available only in hard copy docket for this action under docket
Protection Agency, Rm. S–4400, One form. Publicly available docket identification (ID) number EPA–HQ–
Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S. materials are available either in the OPP–2007–0546. Publicly available
Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. Deliveries electronic docket at http:// docket materials are available either in
are only accepted during the Docket’s www.regulations.gov, or, if only the electronic docket at http://
normal hours of operation (8:30 a.m. to available in hard copy, at the OPP www.regulations.gov, or, if only
4 p.m., Monday through Friday, Regulatory Public Docket in Rm. S– available in hard copy, at the Office of
excluding legal holidays). Special 4400, One Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), Pesticide Programs (OPP) Regulatory
arrangements should be made for 2777 S. Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The Public Docket in Rm. S–4400, One
deliveries of boxed information. The hours of operation of this Docket Potomac Yard (South Bldg.), 2777 S.
Docket Facility telephone number is Facility are from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Crystal Dr., Arlington, VA. The hours of
(703) 305–5805. Monday through Friday, excluding legal operation of this Docket Facility are
Instructions: Direct your comments to holidays. The Docket Facility telephone from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday
docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–2007– number is (703) 305–5805. through Friday, excluding legal
0546. EPA’s policy is that all comments FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: holidays. The Docket Facility telephone
received will be included in the docket Susan Stanton, Registration Division number is (703) 305–5805.

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 3, 2007 / Proposed Rules

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 191 / Wednesday, October 3, 2007 / Proposed Rules

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

56312 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No.

191 / Wednesday, October 3, 2007 / Proposed Rules

redesignation in the General Preamble 10. ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress,

COUNTY Chatham Durham Franklin Granville Johnston Person Wake

FR 12467–12468, March 7, 1995); continued decrease in emissions monitoring, verification of continued

TABLE 4.—TRIANGLE AREA EMISSIONS OF VOC

Source category 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017

Point ....................................................................................................................................... 12.28 13.24 14.45 15.61 16.94

Total ................................................................................................................................ 157.79 152.13 151.58 151.93 154.93

Safety Margin ......................................................................................................................... N/A 5.66 6.21 5.86 2.86

TABLE 5.—TRIANGLE AREA NOX EMISSIONS

Source category 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017

Point ....................................................................................................................................... 38.37 33.55 34.50 35.43 35.04

Total ................................................................................................................................ 191.49 163.76 138.83 119.60 105.43

Safety Margin ......................................................................................................................... N/A 27.73 52.66 71.89 86.06

e. Verification of Continued Attainment

preclude future technical changes that may make

You might also like