81 FR 9398 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 37 (February 25, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 37 (February 25, 2016)
| Page Range | 9398-9407 | |
| FR Document | 2016-03897 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 37 (Thursday, February 25, 2016)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 9398-9407] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-03897] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0150; FRL-9942-70-Region 4] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North Carolina; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve portions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission, submitted by the State of North Carolina, through the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (NC DENR), Division of Air Quality (NC DAQ), on March 18, 2014, for inclusion into the North Carolina SIP. This proposal pertains to the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2 ) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by EPA, which is commonly referred to as an ``infrastructure'' SIP submission. NC DAQ certified that the North Carolina SIP contains provisions that ensure the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and maintained in North Carolina. EPA is proposing to determine that portions of North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission, provided to EPA on March 18, 2014, satisfy certain infrastructure elements for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 28, 2016. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04- OAR-2015-0150 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and [[Page 9399]] should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Notarianni can be reached via electronic mail at [email protected] or via telephone at (404) 562-9031. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. Background and Overview II. What Elements are Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? III. What is EPA's Approach to the Review of Infrastructure SIP Submissions? IV. What is EPA's Analysis of How North Carolina Addressed the Elements of the Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``Infrastructure'' Provisions? V. Proposed Action VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background and Overview On June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520), EPA promulgated a revised primary SO2 NAAQS to an hourly standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) based on a 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required to submit SIPs meeting the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2) within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. States were required to submit such SIPs for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS to EPA no later than June 22, 2013.\1\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ In these infrastructure SIP submissions states generally certify evidence of compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA through a combination of state regulations and statutes, some of which have been incorporated into the federally-approved SIP. In addition, certain federally-approved, non-SIP regulations may also be appropriate for demonstrating compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2). Throughout this rulemaking, unless otherwise indicated, the terms ``regulation,'' ``rule,'' or ``15A NCAC'' indicate that the cited regulation has been approved into North Carolina's federally-approved SIP. North Carolina's cited statutes, North Carolina General Statutes (NCGS) are not approved into North Carolina's federally-approved SIP unless explicitly specified. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Today's action is proposing to approve portions of North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission for the applicable requirements of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. With respect to North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission related to provisions pertaining to the PSD permitting requirements for major sources of sections 110(a)(2)(C) and (J), the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1 through 4), and the state board requirements of section 110(E)(ii), EPA is not proposing any action at this time regarding these requirements. For the aspects of North Carolina's submittal proposed for approval today, EPA notes that the Agency is not approving any specific rule, but rather proposing that North Carolina's already approved SIP meets certain CAA requirements. II. What elements are required under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit SIPs to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a new or revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP submission to EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but the contents of that submission may vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the data and analytical tools available at the time the state develops and submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP already contains. More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements that states must meet for ``infrastructure'' SIP requirements related to a newly established or revised NAAQS. As mentioned above, these requirements include basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The requirements that are the subject of this proposed rulemaking are summarized below and in EPA's September 13, 2013, memorandum entitled ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2).'' \2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not governed by the three year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1) because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area controls are not due within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, but rather due at the time the nonattainment area plan requirements are due pursuant to section 172. These requirements are: (1) Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C) to the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as required in part D Title I of the CAA; and (2) submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the nonattainment planning requirements of part D, Title I of the CAA. Today's proposed rulemaking does not address infrastructure elements related to section 110(a)(2)(I) or the nonattainment planning requirements of 110(a)(2)(C).110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System 110(a)(2)(C): Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources \3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ This rulemaking only addresses requirements for this element as they relate to attainment areas. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II): Interstate Pollution Transport 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution Abatement and International Air Pollution 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency Powers 110(a)(2)(H): SIP revisions 110(a)(2)(I): Plan Revisions for Nonattainment Areas \4\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ As mentioned above, this element is not relevant to today's proposed rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with Government Officials, Public Notification, and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Visibility Protection 110(a)(2)(K): Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling Data 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation and Participation by Affected Local Entities III. What is EPA's approach to the review of infrastructure SIP submissions? EPA is acting upon the SIP submission from North Carolina that addresses the infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 2010 1-hour SO 2 NAAQS. The requirement for states to [[Page 9400]] make a SIP submission of this type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP submissions ``within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),'' and these SIP submissions are to provide for the ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that ``[e]ach such plan'' submission must address. EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term ``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA, such as ``nonattainment SIP'' or ``attainment plan SIP'' submissions to address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I of the CAA, ``regional haze SIP'' submissions required by EPA rule to address the visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A, and nonattainment new source review permit program submissions to address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D. Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing and general requirements for infrastructure SIP submissions, and section 110(a)(2) provides more details concerning the required contents of these submissions. The list of required elements provided in section 110(a)(2) contains a wide variety of disparate provisions, some of which pertain to required legal authority, some of which pertain to required substantive program provisions, and some of which pertain to requirements for both authority and substantive program provisions.\5\ EPA therefore believes that while the timing requirement in section 110(a)(1) is unambiguous, some of the other statutory provisions are ambiguous. In particular, EPA believes that the list of required elements for infrastructure SIP submissions provided in section 110(a)(2) contains ambiguities concerning what is required for inclusion in an infrastructure SIP submission. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides that states must provide assurances that they have adequate legal authority under state and local law to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C) provides that states must have a SIP-approved program to address certain sources as required by part C of title I of the CAA; and section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that states must have legal authority to address emergencies as well as contingency plans that are triggered in the event of such emergencies. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following examples of ambiguities illustrate the need for EPA to interpret some section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) requirements with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions for a given new or revised NAAQS. One example of ambiguity is that section 110(a)(2) requires that ``each'' SIP submission must meet the list of requirements therein, while EPA has long noted that this literal reading of the statute is internally inconsistent and would create a conflict with the nonattainment provisions in part D of title I of the Act, which specifically address nonattainment SIP requirements.\6\ Section 110(a)(2)(I) pertains to nonattainment SIP requirements and part D addresses when attainment plan SIP submissions to address nonattainment area requirements are due. For example, section 172(b) requires EPA to establish a schedule for submission of such plans for certain pollutants when the Administrator promulgates the designation of an area as nonattainment, and section 107(d)(1)(B) allows up to two years, or in some cases three years, for such designations to be promulgated.\7\ This ambiguity illustrates that rather than apply all the stated requirements of section 110(a)(2) in a strict literal sense, EPA must determine which provisions of section 110(a)(2) are applicable for a particular infrastructure SIP submission. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ See, e.g., ``Rule To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to the NOx SIP Call; Final Rule,'' 70 FR 25162, at 25163-65 (May 12, 2005) (explaining relationship between timing requirement of section 110(a)(2)(D) versus section 110(a)(2)(I)). \7\ EPA notes that this ambiguity within section 110(a)(2) is heightened by the fact that various subparts of part D set specific dates for submission of certain types of SIP submissions in designated nonattainment areas for various pollutants. Note, e.g., that section 182(a)(1) provides specific dates for submission of emissions inventories for the ozone NAAQS. Some of these specific dates are necessarily later than three years after promulgation of the new or revised NAAQS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Another example of ambiguity within sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) with respect to infrastructure SIPs pertains to whether states must meet all of the infrastructure SIP requirements in a single SIP submission, and whether EPA must act upon such SIP submission in a single action. Although section 110(a)(1) directs states to submit ``a plan'' to meet these requirements, EPA interprets the CAA to allow states to make multiple SIP submissions separately addressing infrastructure SIP elements for the same NAAQS. If states elect to make such multiple SIP submissions to meet the infrastructure SIP requirements, EPA can elect to act on such submissions either individually or in a larger combined action.\8\ Similarly, EPA interprets the CAA to allow it to take action on the individual parts of one larger, comprehensive infrastructure SIP submission for a given NAAQS without concurrent action on the entire submission. For example, EPA has sometimes elected to act at different times on various elements and sub-elements of the same infrastructure SIP submission.\9\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ See, e.g., ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Revisions to the New Source Review (NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP); Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) Permitting,'' 78 FR 4339 (January 22, 2013) (EPA's final action approving the structural PSD elements of the New Mexico SIP submitted by the State separately to meet the requirements of EPA's 2008 PM2.5 NSR rule), and ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport Requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,'' (78 FR 4337) (January 22, 2013) (EPA's final action on the infrastructure SIP for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS). \9\ On December 14, 2007, the State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, made a SIP revision to EPA demonstrating that the State meets the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2). EPA proposed action for infrastructure SIP elements (C) and (J) on January 23, 2012 (77 FR 3213) and took final action on March 14, 2012 (77 FR 14976). On April 16, 2012 (77 FR 22533) and July 23, 2012 (77 FR 42997), EPA took separate proposed and final actions on all other section 110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP elements of Tennessee's December 14, 2007, submittal. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ambiguities within sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) may also arise with respect to infrastructure SIP submission requirements for different NAAQS. Thus, EPA notes that not every element of section 110(a)(2) would be relevant, or as relevant, or relevant in the same way, for each new or revised NAAQS. The states' attendant infrastructure SIP submissions for each NAAQS therefore could be different. For example, the monitoring requirements that a state might need to meet in its infrastructure SIP submission for purposes of section 110(a)(2)(B) could be very different for different pollutants because the content and scope of a state's infrastructure SIP submission to meet this element might be very different for an entirely new NAAQS than for a minor revision to an existing NAAQS.\10\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\ For example, implementation of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS required the deployment of a system of new monitors to measure ambient levels of that new indicator species for the new NAAQS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [[Page 9401]] EPA notes that interpretation of section 110(a)(2) is also necessary when EPA reviews other types of SIP submissions required under the CAA. Therefore, as with infrastructure SIP submissions, EPA also has to identify and interpret the relevant elements of section 110(a)(2) that logically apply to these other types of SIP submissions. For example, section 172(c)(7) requires that attainment plan SIP submissions required by part D have to meet the ``applicable requirements'' of section 110(a)(2). Thus, for example, attainment plan SIP submissions must meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) regarding enforceable emission limits and control measures and section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) regarding air agency resources and authority. By contrast, it is clear that attainment plan SIP submissions required by part D would not need to meet the portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) that pertains to the PSD program required in part C of title I of the CAA, because PSD does not apply to a pollutant for which an area is designated nonattainment and thus subject to part D planning requirements. As this example illustrates, each type of SIP submission may implicate some elements of section 110(a)(2) but not others. Given the potential for ambiguity in some of the statutory language of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2), EPA believes that it is appropriate to interpret the ambiguous portions of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) in the context of acting on a particular SIP submission. In other words, EPA assumes that Congress could not have intended that each and every SIP submission, regardless of the NAAQS in question or the history of SIP development for the relevant pollutant, would meet each of the requirements, or meet each of them in the same way. Therefore, EPA has adopted an approach under which it reviews infrastructure SIP submissions against the list of elements in section 110(a)(2), but only to the extent each element applies for that particular NAAQS. Historically, EPA has elected to use guidance documents to make recommendations to states for infrastructure SIPs, in some cases conveying needed interpretations on newly arising issues and in some cases conveying interpretations that have already been developed and applied to individual SIP submissions for particular elements.\11\ EPA most recently issued guidance for infrastructure SIPs on September 13, 2013 (2013 Guidance).\12\ EPA developed this document to provide states with up-to-date guidance for infrastructure SIPs for any new or revised NAAQS. Within this guidance, EPA describes the duty of states to make infrastructure SIP submissions to meet basic structural SIP requirements within three years of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. EPA also made recommendations about many specific subsections of section 110(a)(2) that are relevant in the context of infrastructure SIP submissions.\13\ The guidance also discusses the substantively important issues that are germane to certain subsections of section 110(a)(2). Significantly, EPA interprets sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) such that infrastructure SIP submissions need to address certain issues and need not address others. Accordingly, EPA reviews each infrastructure SIP submission for compliance with the applicable statutory provisions of section 110(a)(2), as appropriate. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ EPA notes, however, that nothing in the CAA requires EPA to provide guidance or to promulgate regulations for infrastructure SIP submissions. The CAA directly applies to states and requires the submission of infrastructure SIP submissions, regardless of whether or not EPA provides guidance or regulations pertaining to such submissions. EPA elects to issue such guidance in order to assist states, as appropriate. \12\ ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),'' Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013. \13\ EPA's September 13, 2013, guidance did not make recommendations with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions to address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA issued the guidance shortly after the United States (U.S.) Supreme Court agreed to review the D.C. Circuit decision in EME Homer City, 696 F.3d7 (D.C. Cir. 2012) which had interpreted the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). In light of the uncertainty created by ongoing litigation, EPA elected not to provide additional guidance on the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) at that time. As the guidance is neither binding nor required by statute, whether EPA elects to provide guidance on a particular section has no impact on a state's CAA obligations. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As an example, section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) is a required element of section 110(a)(2) for infrastructure SIP submissions. Under this element, a state must meet the substantive requirements of section 128, which pertain to state boards that approve permits or enforcement orders and heads of executive agencies with similar powers. Thus, EPA reviews infrastructure SIP submissions to ensure that the state's implementation plan appropriately addresses the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and section 128. The 2013 Guidance explains EPA's interpretation that there may be a variety of ways by which states can appropriately address these substantive statutory requirements, depending on the structure of an individual state's permitting or enforcement program (e.g., whether permits and enforcement orders are approved by a multi-member board or by a head of an executive agency). However they are addressed by the state, the substantive requirements of section 128 are necessarily included in EPA's evaluation of infrastructure SIP submissions because section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) explicitly requires that the state satisfy the provisions of section 128. As another example, EPA's review of infrastructure SIP submissions with respect to the PSD program requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) focuses upon the structural PSD program requirements contained in part C and EPA's PSD regulations. Structural PSD program requirements include provisions necessary for the PSD program to address all regulated sources and new source review (NSR) pollutants, including greenhouse gases. By contrast, structural PSD program requirements do not include provisions that are not required under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 but are merely available as an option for the state, such as the option to provide grandfathering of complete permit applications with respect to the 2012 fine particulate matter (PM2.5 ) NAAQS. Accordingly, the latter optional provisions are types of provisions EPA considers irrelevant in the context of an infrastructure SIP action. For other section 110(a)(2) elements, however, EPA's review of a state's infrastructure SIP submission focuses on assuring that the state's implementation plan meets basic structural requirements. For example, section 110(a)(2)(C) includes, inter alia, the requirement that states have a program to regulate minor new sources. Thus, EPA evaluates whether the state has an EPA-approved minor new source review program and whether the program addresses the pollutants relevant to that NAAQS. In the context of acting on an infrastructure SIP submission, however, EPA does not think it is necessary to conduct a review of each and every provision of a state's existing minor source program (i.e., already in the existing SIP) for compliance with the requirements of the CAA and EPA's regulations that pertain to such programs. With respect to certain other issues, EPA does not believe that an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission is necessarily the appropriate type of action in which to address possible deficiencies in a state's existing SIP. These issues include: (i) Existing [[Page 9402]] provisions related to excess emissions from sources during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA's policies addressing such excess emissions (``SSM''); (ii) existing provisions related to ``director's variance'' or ``director's discretion'' that may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to allow revisions to SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public process or not requiring further approval by EPA; and (iii) existing provisions for PSD programs that may be inconsistent with current requirements of EPA's ``Final NSR Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (``NSR Reform''). Thus, EPA believes it may approve an infrastructure SIP submission without scrutinizing the totality of the existing SIP for such potentially deficient provisions and may approve the submission even if it is aware of such existing provisions.\14\ It is important to note that EPA's approval of a state's infrastructure SIP submission should not be construed as explicit or implicit re-approval of any existing potentially deficient provisions that relate to the three specific issues just described. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \14\ By contrast, EPA notes that if a state were to include a new provision in an infrastructure SIP submission that contained a legal deficiency, such as a new exemption for excess emissions during SSM events, then EPA would need to evaluate that provision for compliance against the rubric of applicable CAA requirements in the context of the action on the infrastructure SIP. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA's approach to review of infrastructure SIP submissions is to identify the CAA requirements that are logically applicable to that submission. EPA believes that this approach to the review of a particular infrastructure SIP submission is appropriate, because it would not be reasonable to read the general requirements of section 110(a)(1) and the list of elements in 110(a)(2) as requiring review of each and every provision of a state's existing SIP against all requirements in the CAA and EPA regulations merely for purposes of assuring that the state in question has the basic structural elements for a functioning SIP for a new or revised NAAQS. Because SIPs have grown by accretion over the decades as statutory and regulatory requirements under the CAA have evolved, they may include some outmoded provisions and historical artifacts. These provisions, while not fully up to date, nevertheless may not pose a significant problem for the purposes of ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of a new or revised NAAQS when EPA evaluates adequacy of the infrastructure SIP submission. EPA believes that a better approach is for states and EPA to focus attention on those elements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA most likely to warrant a specific SIP revision due to the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or other factors. For example, EPA's 2013 Guidance gives simpler recommendations with respect to carbon monoxide than other NAAQS pollutants to meet the visibility requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), because carbon monoxide does not affect visibility. As a result, an infrastructure SIP submission for any future new or revised NAAQS for carbon monoxide need only state this fact in order to address the visibility prong of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Finally, EPA believes that its approach with respect to infrastructure SIP requirements is based on a reasonable reading of sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) because the CAA provides other avenues and mechanisms to address specific substantive deficiencies in existing SIPs. These other statutory tools allow EPA to take appropriately tailored action, depending upon the nature and severity of the alleged SIP deficiency. Section 110(k)(5) authorizes EPA to issue a ``SIP call'' whenever the Agency determines that a state's SIP is substantially inadequate to attain or maintain the NAAQS, to mitigate interstate transport, or to otherwise comply with the CAA.\15\ Section 110(k)(6) authorizes EPA to correct errors in past actions, such as past approvals of SIP submissions.\16\ Significantly, EPA's determination that an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission is not the appropriate time and place to address all potential existing SIP deficiencies does not preclude EPA's subsequent reliance on provisions in section 110(a)(2) as part of the basis for action to correct those deficiencies at a later time. For example, although it may not be appropriate to require a state to eliminate all existing inappropriate director's discretion provisions in the course of acting on an infrastructure SIP submission, EPA believes that section 110(a)(2)(A) may be among the statutory bases that EPA relies upon in the course of addressing such deficiency in a subsequent action.\17\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \15\ For example, EPA issued a SIP call to Utah to address specific existing SIP deficiencies related to the treatment of excess emissions during SSM events. See ``Finding of Substantial Inadequacy of Implementation Plan; Call for Utah State Implementation Plan Revisions,'' 74 FR 21639 (April 18, 2011). \16\ EPA has used this authority to correct errors in past actions on SIP submissions related to PSD programs. See ``Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State Implementation Plans; Final Rule,'' 75 FR 82536 (December 30, 2010). EPA has previously used its authority under CAA section 110(k)(6) to remove numerous other SIP provisions that the Agency determined it had approved in error. See, e.g., 61 FR 38664 (July 25, 1996) and 62 FR 34641 (June 27, 1997) (corrections to American Samoa, Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 FR 67062 (November 16, 2004) (corrections to California SIP); and 74 FR 57051 (November 3, 2009) (corrections to Arizona and Nevada SIPs). \17\ See, e.g., EPA's disapproval of a SIP submission from Colorado on the grounds that it would have included a director's discretion provision inconsistent with CAA requirements, including section 110(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., 75 FR 42342 at 42344 (July 21, 2010) (proposed disapproval of director's discretion provisions); 76 FR 4540 (Jan. 26, 2011) (final disapproval of such provisions). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IV. What is EPA's analysis of how North Carolina addressed the elements of the sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``infrastructure'' provisions? The North Carolina infrastructure submission addresses the provisions of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as described below. 1. 110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that each implementation plan include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques (including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and auctions of emissions rights), as well as schedules and timetables for compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to meet the applicable requirements. These requirements are met through several North Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) regulations. Specifically, 15A NCAC 2D .0500 Emission Control Standards establishes emission limits for SO2. The following State rules address additional control measures, means and techniques: 15A NCAC 2D .0600 Monitoring: Recordkeeping: Reporting, and 15A NCAC 2D .2600 Source Testing. In addition, NCGS 143-215.107(a)(5), Air quality standards and classifications, provides the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission (EMC) with the statutory authority, ``To develop and adopt emission control standards as in the judgment of the Commission may be necessary to prohibit, abate, or control air pollution commensurate with established air quality standards.'' EPA has made the preliminary determination that the provisions contained in these regulations, and North Carolina's statutory authority are adequate for Section 110(a)(2)(A) for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. [[Page 9403]] In this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any existing State provisions with regard to excess emissions during start up, shut down, and malfunction (SSM) operations at a facility. EPA believes that a number of states have SSM provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance, ``State Implementation Plans: Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown'' (September 20, 1999), and the Agency is addressing such state regulations in a separate action.\18\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \18\ On June 12, 2015, EPA published a final action entitled, ``State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of EPA's SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction.'' See 80 FR 33840. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Additionally, in this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any existing state rules with regard to director's discretion or variance provisions. EPA believes that a number of states have such provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance (52 FR 45109 (November 24, 1987)), and the Agency plans to take action in the future to address such state regulations. In the meantime, EPA encourages any state having a director's discretion or variance provision which is contrary to the CAA and EPA guidance to take steps to correct the deficiency as soon as possible. 2. 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System: Section 110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to provide for establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to: (i) Monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and (ii) upon request, make such data available to the Administrator. NCGS 143- 215.107(a)(2), Air quality standards and classifications, provides the EMC with the statutory authority ``To determine by means of field sampling and other studies, including the examination of available data collected by any local, State or federal agency or any person, the degree of air contamination and air pollution in the State and the several areas of the State.'' Annually, states develop and submit to EPA for approval statewide ambient monitoring network plans consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR parts 50, 53, and 58. The annual network plan involves an evaluation of any proposed changes to the monitoring network, and includes the annual ambient monitoring network design plan and a certified evaluation of the agency's ambient monitors and auxiliary support equipment.\19\ The latest monitoring network plan for North Carolina was submitted to EPA on July 23, 2015, and on November 19, 2015, EPA approved this plan. North Carolina's approved monitoring network plan can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0150. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \19\ On occasion, proposed changes to the monitoring network are evaluated outside of the network plan approval process in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- NCGS 143-215.107(a)(2), EPA regulations, along with North Carolina's Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, provide for the establishment and operation of ambient air quality monitors, the compilation and analysis of ambient air quality data, and the submission of these data to EPA upon request. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices are adequate for the ambient air quality monitoring and data system related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 3. 110(a)(2)(C) Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources: This element consists of three sub-elements: enforcement, state-wide regulation of new and modified minor sources and minor modifications of major sources, and preconstruction permitting of major sources and major modifications in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable for the subject NAAQS as required by CAA title I part C (i.e., the major source PSD program). To meet these obligations, North Carolina cited the following State regulations: 15A NCAC 2D. 0500 Emissions Control Standards; 15A NCAC 2D. 0530 Prevention of Significant Deterioration; 15A NCAC 2D. 0531 Sources in Nonattainment Areas; 15A NCAC 2Q .0300 Construction Operation Permits; and 15A NCAC 2Q .0500 Title V Procedures. Collectively, these regulations enable North Carolina to regulate sources contributing to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS through enforceable permits. North Carolina also cited to the following statutory provisions as supporting this element: NCGS 143-215.108, Control of sources of air pollution; permits required; NCGS 143- 215.107(a)(7), Air quality standards and classifications; and NCGS 143- 215.6A, 6B, and 6C, Enforcement procedures: civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive relief. In this action, EPA is proposing to approve North Carolina's infrastructure SIP for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS with respect to the general requirement in section 110(a)(2)(C) to include a program in the SIP for enforcement of SO2 emissions controls and measures and the regulation of minor sources and modifications to assist in the protection of air quality in nonattainment, attainment or unclassifiable areas. Enforcement: NC DAQ's above-described, SIP-approved regulations provide for enforcement of SO2 emission limits and control measures through enforceable permits. In addition, North Carolina cited NCGS 143-215.6A, 6B, and 6C, Enforcement procedures: civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive relief, which provides NC DENR with the statutory authority to enforce air quality rules that contain requirements for emissions limits and controls. Preconstruction PSD Permitting for Major Sources: With respect to North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission related to the preconstruction PSD permitting requirements for major sources of section 110(a)(2)(C), EPA is not proposing any action today regarding these requirements and instead will act on this portion of the submission in a separate action. Regulation of minor sources and modifications: Section 110(a)(2)(C) also requires the SIP to include provisions that govern the minor source program that regulates emissions of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Regulation 15A NCAC 2Q .0300 Construction Operation Permits governs the preconstruction permitting of modifications and construction of minor stationary sources. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP is adequate for enforcement of control measures and regulation of minor sources and modifications related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 4. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) Interstate Pollution Transport: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Each of these components has two subparts resulting in four distinct components, commonly referred to as ``prongs,'' that must be addressed in infrastructure SIP submissions. The first two prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that prohibit any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 1''), and interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 2''). The third and fourth prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that prohibit emissions activity in one state from interfering with measures required [[Page 9404]] to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in another state (``prong 3''), or to protect visibility in another state (``prong 4''). EPA is not proposing any action in this rulemaking related to the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prongs 1 through 4). 5. 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) Interstate Pollution Abatement and International Air Pollution: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to include provisions insuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act relating to interstate and international pollution abatement. 15A NCAC 2D .0530 Prevention of Significant Deterioration and 15A NCAC 2D .0531 Sources of Nonattainment Areas provide how NC DAQ will notify neighboring states of potential impacts from new or modified sources consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166. These regulations require NC DAQ to provide an opportunity for a public hearing to the public, which includes state or local air pollution control agencies, ``whose lands may be affected by emissions from the source or modification'' in North Carolina. In addition, North Carolina does not have any pending obligation under sections 115 and 126 of the CAA. Accordingly, EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP is adequate for ensuring compliance with the applicable requirements relating to interstate and international pollution abatement for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 6. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies: Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires that each implementation plan provide: (i) Necessary assurances that the state will have adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out its implementation plan, (ii) that the state comply with the requirements respecting state boards pursuant to section 128 of the Act, and (iii) necessary assurances that, where the state has relied on a local or regional government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any plan provision, the state has responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of such plan provisions. EPA is proposing to approve North Carolina's SIP as meeting the requirements of sub-elements 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii). EPA approved North Carolina's infrastructure submission for sub-element (E)(ii) on November 3, 2015. See 80 FR 67645. EPA's rationale for today's proposal respecting sub-elements (i) and (iii) is described in turn below. To satisfy the requirements of sections 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii), North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission cites several regulations. Rule 15A NCAC 2Q. 0200 ``Permit Fees,'' provides the mechanism by which stationary sources that emit air pollutants pay a fee based on the quantity of emissions. State statutes NCGS 143-215.3, General powers of Commission and Department: auxiliary powers, and NCGS 143-215.107(a)(1), Air quality standards and classifications, provide the EMC with the statutory authority ``[t]o prepare and develop, after proper study, a comprehensive plan or plans for the prevention, abatement and control of air pollution in the State or in any designated area of the State.'' NCGS 143-215.112, Local air pollution control programs, provides the EMC with the statutory authority ``to review and have general oversight and supervision over all local air pollution control programs.'' North Carolina has three local air agencies located in Buncombe, Forsyth, and Mecklenburg Counties that implement the air program in these areas. In addition, the requirements of 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii) are met when EPA performs a completeness determination for each SIP submittal. This determination ensures that each submittal provides evidence that adequate personnel, funding, and legal authority under state law has been used to carry out the state's implementation plan and related issues. NC DAQ's authority is included in all prehearings and final SIP submittal packages for approval by EPA. NC DAQ is responsible for submitting all revisions to the North Carolina SIP to EPA for approval. As further evidence of the adequacy of NC DAQ's resources, EPA submitted a letter to North Carolina on March 9, 2015, outlining 105 grant commitments and the current status of these commitments for fiscal year 2014. The letter EPA submitted to North Carolina can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015- 0150. Annually, states update these grant commitments based on current SIP requirements, air quality planning, and applicable requirements related to the NAAQS. North Carolina satisfactorily met all commitments agreed to in the Air Planning Agreement for fiscal year 2014, therefore North Carolina's grants were finalized and closed out. Collectively, these rules and commitments provide evidence that NC DAQ has adequate personnel, funding, and legal authority to carry out the State's implementation plan and related issues. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina has adequate resources and authority to satisfy sections 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii) of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. With respect to North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission related to the state board requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), EPA is not proposing any action today as the Agency has already approved this portion of the submission in a separate action. See 80 FR 67645. 7. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting: Section 110(a)(2)(F) requires SIPs to meet applicable requirements addressing: (i) The installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources, (ii) periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions and emissions related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of such reports by the state agency with any emission limitations or standards established pursuant to this section, which reports shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection. North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission describes how the State establishes requirements for emissions compliance testing and utilizes emissions sampling and analysis. NC DAQ uses these data to track progress towards maintaining the NAAQS, develop control and maintenance strategies, identify sources and general emission levels, and determine compliance with emission regulations and additional EPA requirements. North Carolina meets these requirements through 15A NCAC 2D .0604 Exceptions to Monitoring and Reporting Requirements; 15A NCAC 2D .0605 General Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements; 15A NCAC 2D .0611 Monitoring Emissions from Other Sources; 15A NCAC 2D .0612 Alternative Monitoring and Reporting Procedures; 15A NCAC 2D .0613 Quality Assurance Program; and 15A NCAC 2D .0614 Compliance Assurance Monitoring. In addition, 15A NCAC 2D .0605(c) General Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements allows for the use of credible evidence in the event that the NC DAQ Director has evidence that a source is violating an emission standard or permit condition, the Director may require that the owner or operator of any source submit to the Director any information necessary to determine the compliance status of the source. In addition, EPA is unaware of any provision preventing the use of credible evidence in the North Carolina SIP. Also, NCGS 143-215.107(a)(4), Air [[Page 9405]] quality standards and classifications, provides the EMC with the statutory authority ``To collect information or to require reporting from classes of sources which, in the judgment of the [EMC], may cause or contribute to air pollution.'' Stationary sources are required to submit periodic emissions reports to the State by Rule 15A NCAC 2Q .0207 ``Annual Emissions Reporting.'' North Carolina is also required to submit emissions data to EPA for purposes of the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). The NEI is EPA's central repository for air emissions data. EPA published the Air Emissions Reporting Rule (AERR) on December 5, 2008, which modified the requirements for collecting and reporting air emissions data. See 73 FR 76539. The AERR shortened the time states had to report emissions data from 17 to 12 months, giving states one calendar year to submit emissions data. All states are required to submit a comprehensive emissions inventory every three years and report emissions for certain larger sources annually through EPA's online Emissions Inventory System. States report emissions data for the six criteria pollutants and the precursors that form them--nitrogen oxides, SO2, ammonia, lead, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds. Many states also voluntarily report emissions of hazardous air pollutants. North Carolina made its latest update to the 2011 NEI on June 3, 2014. EPA compiles the emissions data, supplementing it where necessary, and releases it to the general public through the Web site http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices are adequate for the stationary source monitoring systems obligations for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(F). 8. 110(a)(2)(G) Emergency powers: This section requires that states demonstrate authority comparable with section 303 of the CAA and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority. North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission cites 15A NCAC 2D .0300 Air Pollution Emergencies as identifying air pollution emergency episodes and preplanned abatement strategies, and provides the means to implement emergency air pollution episode measures. Under NCGS 143- 215.3(a)(12), General powers of Commission and Department; auxiliary powers, if NC DENR finds that such a ``condition of . . . air pollution exists and that it creates an emergency requiring immediate action to protect the public health and safety or to protect fish and wildlife, the Secretary of the Department [NC DENR] with the concurrence of the Governor, shall order persons causing or contributing to the . . . air pollution in question to reduce or discontinue immediately the emission of air contaminants or the discharge of wastes.'' In addition, NCGS 143-215.3(a)(12) provides NC DENR with the authority to declare an emergency when it finds that a generalized condition of water or air pollution which is causing imminent danger to the health or safety of the public. This statute also allows, in the absence of a generalized condition of air pollution, should the Secretary find ``that the emissions from one or more air contaminant sources . . . is causing imminent danger to human health and safety or to fish and wildlife, he may with the concurrence of the Governor order the person or persons responsible for the operation or operations in question to immediately reduce or discontinue the emissions of air contaminants . . . or to take such other measures as are, in his judgment, necessary.'' EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices are adequate to satisfy the emergency powers obligations of the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 9. 110(a)(2)(H) SIP revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H), in summary, requires each SIP to provide for revisions of such plan (i) as may be necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii) whenever the Administrator finds that the plan is substantially inadequate to attain the NAAQS or to otherwise comply with any additional applicable requirements. NC DAQ is responsible for adopting air quality rules and revising SIPs as needed to attain or maintain the NAAQS in North Carolina. NCGS 143-215.107(a)(1) and (a)(10) grant NC DAQ the authority to prepare and develop, after proper study, a comprehensive plan for the prevention of air pollution and implement the CAA, respectively. These provisions also provide NC DAQ the ability and authority to respond to calls for SIP revisions, and North Carolina has provided a number of SIP revisions over the years for implementation of the NAAQS. In addition, State regulation 15A NCAC 2D .2401(d) states that ``The EMC may specify through rulemaking a specific emission limit lower than that established under this rule for a specific source if compliance with the lower emission limit is required to attain or maintain the ambient air quality standard for ozone or PM2.5 or any other ambient air quality standard in Section 15A NCAC 2D .0400.'' EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate a commitment to provide future SIP revisions related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, when necessary. 10. 110(a)(2)(J) Consultation with Government Officials, Public Notification, and PSD and Visibility Protection: EPA is proposing to approve North Carolina's infrastructure SIP for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS with respect to the general requirement in section 110(a)(2)(J) to include a program in the SIP that complies with the applicable consultation requirements of section 121, and the public notification requirements of section 127. With respect to North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission related to the preconstruction PSD permitting, EPA is not proposing any action today regarding these requirements and instead will act on these portions of the submission in a separate action. EPA's rationale for its proposed action regarding applicable consultation requirements of section 121, the public notification requirements of section 127, and visibility is described below. Consultation with government officials (121 consultation): Section 110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA requires states to provide a process for consultation with local governments, designated organizations and Federal Land Managers (FLMs) carrying out NAAQS implementation requirements pursuant to section 121 relative to consultation. 15A NCAC 2D.1600 General Conformity, 15A NCAC 2D .2000 Transportation Conformity, and 15A NCAC 2D .0531 Sources in Nonattainment Areas, along with the State's Regional Haze Implementation Plan, provide for consultation with government officials whose jurisdictions might be affected by SIP development activities. Specifically, North Carolina adopted state-wide consultation procedures for the implementation of transportation conformity which includes the development of mobile inventories for SIP development. These consultation procedures were developed in coordination with the transportation partners in the State and are consistent with the approaches used for development of mobile inventories for SIPs. Implementation of transportation conformity as outlined in the [[Page 9406]] consultation procedures requires NC DAQ to consult with Federal, state and local transportation and air quality agency officials on the development of motor vehicle emissions budgets. The Regional Haze SIP provides for consultation between appropriate state, local, and tribal air pollution control agencies as well as the corresponding FLMs. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate that the State meets applicable requirements related to consultation with government officials for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS when necessary for the consultation with government officials element of section 110(a)(2)(J). Public notification (127 public notification): Rule 15A NCAC 2D .0300 Air Pollution Emergencies provides North Carolina with the authority to declare an emergency and notify the public accordingly when it finds a generalized condition of water or air pollution which is causing imminent danger to the health or safety of the public. Additionally, the NC DAQ has the North Carolina Air Awareness Program which is a program to educate the public on air quality issues and promote voluntary emission reduction measures. The NC DAQ also features a Web page providing ambient monitoring information regarding current and historical air quality across the State at http://www.ncair.org/monitor/. North Carolina participates in the EPA AirNOW program, which enhances public awareness of air quality in North Carolina and throughout the country. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate the State's ability to provide public notification related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS when necessary for the public notification element of section 110(a)(2)(J). Visibility protection: EPA's 2013 Guidance notes that it does not treat the visibility protection aspects of section 110(a)(2)(J) as applicable for purposes of the infrastructure SIP approval process. NC DENR referenced its regional haze program as germane to the visibility component of section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA recognizes that states are subject to visibility protection and regional haze program requirements under part C of the Act (which includes sections 169A and 169B). However, there are no newly applicable visibility protection obligations after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Thus, EPA has determined that states do not need to address the visibility component of 110(a)(2)(J) in infrastructure SIP submittals so NC DENR does not need to rely on its regional haze program to fulfill its obligations under section 110(a)(2)(J). As such, EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission is approvable for the visibility protection element of section 110(a)(2)(J) related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS and that North Carolina does not need to rely on its regional haze program to satisfy this element. 11. 110(a)(2)(K) Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling Data: Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA requires that SIPs provide for performing air quality modeling so that effects on air quality of emissions from NAAQS pollutants can be predicted and submission of such data to the EPA can be made. This infrastructure requirement is met through emissions data collected through 15A NCAC 2D .0600 Monitoring: Recordkeeping: Reporting (authorized under NCGS 143-215.107(a)(4)), which provides information to model potential impact of major and some minor sources. 15A NCAC 2D .0530 Prevention of Significant Deterioration and 15A NCAC 2D .0531 Sources in Nonattainment Areas require that air modeling be conducted in accordance with 40 CFR part 51, Appendix W, Guideline on Air Quality Models. These regulations demonstrate that North Carolina has the authority to perform air quality modeling and to provide relevant data for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. The NC DAQ currently has personnel with training and experience to conduct source-oriented dispersion modeling that would likely be used in SO2 NAAQS applications with models approved by EPA. Additionally, North Carolina participates in a regional effort to coordinate the development of emissions inventories and conduct regional modeling for several NAAQS, including the 2010 1- hour SO2 NAAQS, for the Southeastern states. Taken as a whole, North Carolina's air quality regulations and practices demonstrate that NC DAQ has the authority to provide relevant data for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of any pollutant for which a NAAQS has been promulgated, and to provide such information to the EPA Administrator upon request. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate the State's ability to provide for air quality modeling, along with analysis of the associated data, related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 12. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting fees: This element necessitates that the SIP require the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under the CAA, a fee sufficient to cover: (i) The reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon any application for such a permit, and (ii) if the owner or operator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any such permit (not including any court costs or other costs associated with any enforcement action), until such fee requirement is superseded with respect to such sources by the Administrator's approval of a fee program under title V. To satisfy these requirements, North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission cites Regulation 15A NCAC 2Q .0200 Permit Fees, which requires the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under the CAA, a sufficient fee to cover the costs of the permitting program. The 15A NCAC 2D .0500 and 2Q .0500 rules contain the State's title V program which includes provisions to implement and enforce PSD and NNSR permits once these permits have been issued. The fees collected under 15A NCAC 2Q .0200 also support this activity. NCGS 143- 215.3, General powers of Commission and Department; auxiliary Powers, provides the State the statutory authority for NC DAQ to require a processing fee in an amount sufficient for the reasonable cost of reviewing and acting upon PSD and NNSR permits. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately provide for permitting fees related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, when necessary. 13. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation and Participation by Affected Local Entities: Section 110(a)(2)(M) of the Act requires states to provide for consultation and participation in SIP development by local political subdivisions affected by the SIP. 15A NCAC 2D .0530 Prevention of Significant Deterioration requires that NC DENR notify the public, including affected local entities, of PSD permit applications and associated information related to PSD permits, and the opportunity for comment prior to making final permitting decisions. NCGS 150B-21.1 and 150B-21.2 authorize and require NC DAQ to advise, consult, cooperate and enter into agreements with other agencies of the state, the Federal Government, other states, interstate agencies, groups, political subdivisions, and industries [[Page 9407]] affected by the provisions of this act, rules, or policies of the Department. Also, 15A NCAC 2D .2000 Transportation Conformity requires a consultation with all affected partners to be implemented for transportation conformity determinations. Furthermore, NC DAQ has demonstrated consultation with, and participation by, affected local entities through its work with local political subdivisions during the developing of its Transportation Conformity SIP, Regional Haze Implementation Plan, and the 8-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration for the North Carolina portion of the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock Hill NC-SC nonattainment area. Additionally, the NC DAQ organizes stakeholder meetings to support SIP development and rulemakings. EPA has made the preliminary determination that North Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate consultation with affected local entities related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, when necessary. V. Proposed Action EPA is proposing to approve that portions of NC DAQ's infrastructure SIP submission, submitted March 18, 2014, for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, has met the above described infrastructure SIP requirements. The PSD permitting requirements for major sources of section 110(a)(2)(C) and (J), the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1 through 4), will not be addressed by EPA at this time. EPA has already taken action to approve North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission related to section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to approve these portions of North Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS because these aspects of the submission are consistent with section 110 of the CAA. VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4); Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: February 11, 2016. Heather McTeer Toney, Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. 2016-03897 Filed 2-24-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![9398 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection persons wanting to examine these ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve documents should make an AGENCY
revisions to the State Implementation appointment with the office at least 24
Plan (SIP) for the state of Missouri. The hours in advance. 40 CFR Part 52
revisions address base year Emissions [EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0150; FRL–9942–70–
Inventory (EI) and emissions statement FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Region 4]
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) Lachala Kemp, Environmental
for the Missouri portion of the St. Louis Protection Agency, Air Planning and Approval and Promulgation of
marginal ozone nonattainment area (‘‘St. Development Branch, 11201 Renner Implementation Plans; North Carolina;
Louis area’’). The Missouri counties Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas 66219 at Infrastructure Requirements for the
comprising the St. Louis area are (913) 551–7214 or by email at 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient
Franklin, Jefferson, St. Charles, and St. kemp.lachala@epa.gov. Air Quality Standard
Louis along with the City of St. Louis. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
EPA is proposing to approve the SIP AGENCY: Environmental Protection
final rules section of this Federal Agency.
revisions because they satisfy the CAA
Register, EPA is approving the state’s ACTION: Proposed rule.
section 182 requirements for the 2008 8-
SIP revision as a direct final rule
hour ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA is without prior proposal because the SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
proposing the revisions pursuant to Agency views this as a noncontroversial Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
section 110 and part D of the CAA and revision amendment and anticipates no portions of the State Implementation
EPA’s regulations. EPA will consider relevant adverse comments to this Plan (SIP) submission, submitted by the
and take action on the Illinois action. A detailed rationale for the State of North Carolina, through the
submission for its portion of the St. approval is set forth in the direct final Department of Environment and Natural
Louis area in a separate action. rule. If no relevant adverse comments Resources (NC DENR), Division of Air
are received in response to this action, Quality (NC DAQ), on March 18, 2014,
DATES: Comments on this proposed
no further activity is contemplated in for inclusion into the North Carolina
action must be received in writing by
relation to this action. If EPA receives SIP. This proposal pertains to the
March 28, 2016.
relevant adverse comments, the direct infrastructure requirements of the Clean
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2010 1-
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07– final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be hour sulfur dioxide (SO2) national
OAR–2015–0438, to http:// ambient air quality standard (NAAQS).
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online addressed in a subsequent final rule
The CAA requires that each state adopt
instructions for submitting comments. based on this proposed action. EPA will
and submit a SIP for the
Once submitted, comments cannot be not institute a second comment period implementation, maintenance and
edited or removed from Regulations.gov. on this action. Any parties interested in enforcement of each NAAQS
The EPA may publish any comment commenting on this action should do so promulgated by EPA, which is
received to its public docket. Do not at this time. Please note that if EPA commonly referred to as an
submit electronically any information receives adverse comment on part of ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP submission. NC
you consider to be Confidential this rule and if that part can be severed DAQ certified that the North Carolina
Business Information (CBI) or other from the remainder of the rule, EPA may SIP contains provisions that ensure the
information whose disclosure is adopt as final those parts of the rule that 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS is
restricted by statute. Multimedia are not the subject of an adverse implemented, enforced, and maintained
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be comment. For additional information, in North Carolina. EPA is proposing to
accompanied by a written comment. see the direct final rule which is located determine that portions of North
The written comment is considered the in the rules section of this Federal Carolina’s infrastructure SIP
official comment and should include Register. submission, provided to EPA on March
discussion of all points you wish to 18, 2014, satisfy certain infrastructure
make. The EPA will generally not List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 elements for the 2010 1-hour SO2
consider comments or comment NAAQS.
contents located outside of the primary Environmental protection, Air
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or pollution control, Carbon monoxide, DATES: Written comments must be
other file sharing system). For Incorporation by reference, received on or before March 28, 2016.
additional submission methods, the full Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
EPA public comment policy, oxides, Ozone, Reporting and identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
information about CBI or multimedia recordkeeping requirements, Volatile OAR–2015–0150 at http://
submissions, and general guidance on organic compounds. www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
making effective comments, please visit Dated: February 17, 2016. instructions for submitting comments.
http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ Once submitted, comments cannot be
Mark Hague,
commenting-epa-dockets. edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
Publicly available docket materials Regional Administrator, Region 7. EPA may publish any comment received
are available either electronically at [FR Doc. 2016–03903 Filed 2–24–16; 8:45 am] to its public docket. Do not submit
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
www.regulations.gov or at the BILLING CODE 6560–50–P electronically any information you
Environmental Protection Agency, Air consider to be Confidential Business
Planning and Development Branch, Information (CBI) or other information
11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Kansas 66219. The Regional Office’s Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
official hours of business are Monday etc.) must be accompanied by a written
through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., comment. The written comment is
excluding legal holidays. The interested considered the official comment and
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:27 Feb 24, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM 25FEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_9435/page/1.svg)
![9400 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules
make a SIP submission of this type statutory provisions are ambiguous. In plan’’ to meet these requirements, EPA
arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). particular, EPA believes that the list of interprets the CAA to allow states to
Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states required elements for infrastructure SIP make multiple SIP submissions
must make SIP submissions ‘‘within 3 submissions provided in section separately addressing infrastructure SIP
years (or such shorter period as the 110(a)(2) contains ambiguities elements for the same NAAQS. If states
Administrator may prescribe) after the concerning what is required for elect to make such multiple SIP
promulgation of a national primary inclusion in an infrastructure SIP submissions to meet the infrastructure
ambient air quality standard (or any submission. SIP requirements, EPA can elect to act
revision thereof),’’ and these SIP The following examples of on such submissions either individually
submissions are to provide for the ambiguities illustrate the need for EPA or in a larger combined action.8
‘‘implementation, maintenance, and to interpret some section 110(a)(1) and Similarly, EPA interprets the CAA to
enforcement’’ of such NAAQS. The section 110(a)(2) requirements with allow it to take action on the individual
statute directly imposes on states the respect to infrastructure SIP parts of one larger, comprehensive
duty to make these SIP submissions, submissions for a given new or revised infrastructure SIP submission for a
and the requirement to make the NAAQS. One example of ambiguity is given NAAQS without concurrent
submissions is not conditioned upon that section 110(a)(2) requires that action on the entire submission. For
EPA’s taking any action other than ‘‘each’’ SIP submission must meet the example, EPA has sometimes elected to
promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. list of requirements therein, while EPA act at different times on various
Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of has long noted that this literal reading elements and sub-elements of the same
specific elements that ‘‘[e]ach such of the statute is internally inconsistent infrastructure SIP submission.9
plan’’ submission must address. and would create a conflict with the Ambiguities within sections 110(a)(1)
EPA has historically referred to these nonattainment provisions in part D of and 110(a)(2) may also arise with
SIP submissions made for the purpose title I of the Act, which specifically respect to infrastructure SIP submission
of satisfying the requirements of CAA address nonattainment SIP requirements for different NAAQS.
sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as requirements.6 Section 110(a)(2)(I) Thus, EPA notes that not every element
‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ submissions. pertains to nonattainment SIP of section 110(a)(2) would be relevant,
Although the term ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ requirements and part D addresses or as relevant, or relevant in the same
does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses when attainment plan SIP submissions way, for each new or revised NAAQS.
the term to distinguish this particular to address nonattainment area The states’ attendant infrastructure SIP
type of SIP submission from requirements are due. For example, submissions for each NAAQS therefore
submissions that are intended to satisfy section 172(b) requires EPA to establish could be different. For example, the
other SIP requirements under the CAA, a schedule for submission of such plans monitoring requirements that a state
such as ‘‘nonattainment SIP’’ or for certain pollutants when the might need to meet in its infrastructure
‘‘attainment plan SIP’’ submissions to Administrator promulgates the SIP submission for purposes of section
address the nonattainment planning designation of an area as nonattainment, 110(a)(2)(B) could be very different for
requirements of part D of title I of the and section 107(d)(1)(B) allows up to different pollutants because the content
CAA, ‘‘regional haze SIP’’ submissions two years, or in some cases three years, and scope of a state’s infrastructure SIP
required by EPA rule to address the for such designations to be submission to meet this element might
visibility protection requirements of promulgated.7 This ambiguity illustrates be very different for an entirely new
CAA section 169A, and nonattainment that rather than apply all the stated NAAQS than for a minor revision to an
new source review permit program requirements of section 110(a)(2) in a existing NAAQS.10
submissions to address the permit strict literal sense, EPA must determine
requirements of CAA, title I, part D. which provisions of section 110(a)(2) 8 See, e.g., ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of
Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing are applicable for a particular Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Revisions to
the New Source Review (NSR) State
and general requirements for infrastructure SIP submission. Implementation Plan (SIP); Prevention of
infrastructure SIP submissions, and Another example of ambiguity within Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment
section 110(a)(2) provides more details sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) with New Source Review (NNSR) Permitting,’’ 78 FR
concerning the required contents of respect to infrastructure SIPs pertains to 4339 (January 22, 2013) (EPA’s final action
approving the structural PSD elements of the New
these submissions. The list of required whether states must meet all of the Mexico SIP submitted by the State separately to
elements provided in section 110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP requirements in a meet the requirements of EPA’s 2008 PM2.5 NSR
contains a wide variety of disparate single SIP submission, and whether EPA rule), and ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of Air
provisions, some of which pertain to must act upon such SIP submission in Quality Implementation Plans; New Mexico;
required legal authority, some of which Infrastructure and Interstate Transport
a single action. Although section Requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,’’ (78 FR
pertain to required substantive program 110(a)(1) directs states to submit ‘‘a 4337) (January 22, 2013) (EPA’s final action on the
provisions, and some of which pertain infrastructure SIP for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS).
to requirements for both authority and 6 See, e.g., ‘‘Rule To Reduce Interstate Transport 9 On December 14, 2007, the State of Tennessee,
substantive program provisions.5 EPA of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air through the Tennessee Department of Environment
Interstate Rule); Revisions to Acid Rain Program; and Conservation, made a SIP revision to EPA
therefore believes that while the timing Revisions to the NOx SIP Call; Final Rule,’’ 70 FR demonstrating that the State meets the requirements
requirement in section 110(a)(1) is 25162, at 25163–65 (May 12, 2005) (explaining of sections 110(a)(1) and (2). EPA proposed action
unambiguous, some of the other relationship between timing requirement of section for infrastructure SIP elements (C) and (J) on
110(a)(2)(D) versus section 110(a)(2)(I)). January 23, 2012 (77 FR 3213) and took final action
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
5 For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides 7 EPA notes that this ambiguity within section on March 14, 2012 (77 FR 14976). On April 16,
that states must provide assurances that they have 110(a)(2) is heightened by the fact that various 2012 (77 FR 22533) and July 23, 2012 (77 FR
adequate legal authority under state and local law subparts of part D set specific dates for submission 42997), EPA took separate proposed and final
to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C) provides of certain types of SIP submissions in designated actions on all other section 110(a)(2) infrastructure
that states must have a SIP-approved program to nonattainment areas for various pollutants. Note, SIP elements of Tennessee’s December 14, 2007,
address certain sources as required by part C of title e.g., that section 182(a)(1) provides specific dates submittal.
I of the CAA; and section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that for submission of emissions inventories for the 10 For example, implementation of the 1997 PM
2.5
states must have legal authority to address ozone NAAQS. Some of these specific dates are NAAQS required the deployment of a system of
emergencies as well as contingency plans that are necessarily later than three years after promulgation new monitors to measure ambient levels of that new
triggered in the event of such emergencies. of the new or revised NAAQS. indicator species for the new NAAQS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:27 Feb 24, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM 25FEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_9435/page/3.svg)
![9404 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules
to prevent significant deterioration of air To satisfy the requirements of sections determination that North Carolina has
quality in another state (‘‘prong 3’’), or 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii), North Carolina’s adequate resources and authority to
to protect visibility in another state infrastructure SIP submission cites satisfy sections 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii) of
(‘‘prong 4’’). EPA is not proposing any several regulations. Rule 15A NCAC 2Q. the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
action in this rulemaking related to the 0200 ‘‘Permit Fees,’’ provides the With respect to North Carolina’s
interstate transport requirements of mechanism by which stationary sources infrastructure SIP submission related to
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and that emit air pollutants pay a fee based the state board requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prongs 1 through 4). on the quantity of emissions. State 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), EPA is not proposing
5. 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) Interstate Pollution statutes NCGS 143–215.3, General any action today as the Agency has
Abatement and International Air powers of Commission and Department: already approved this portion of the
Pollution: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) auxiliary powers, and NCGS 143– submission in a separate action. See 80
requires SIPs to include provisions 215.107(a)(1), Air quality standards and FR 67645. 7. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary
insuring compliance with sections 115 classifications, provide the EMC with Source Monitoring and Reporting:
and 126 of the Act relating to interstate the statutory authority ‘‘[t]o prepare and Section 110(a)(2)(F) requires SIPs to
and international pollution abatement. develop, after proper study, a meet applicable requirements
15A NCAC 2D .0530 Prevention of comprehensive plan or plans for the addressing: (i) The installation,
Significant Deterioration and 15A NCAC prevention, abatement and control of air maintenance, and replacement of
2D .0531 Sources of Nonattainment pollution in the State or in any equipment, and the implementation of
Areas provide how NC DAQ will notify designated area of the State.’’ NCGS other necessary steps, by owners or
neighboring states of potential impacts 143–215.112, Local air pollution control operators of stationary sources to
from new or modified sources programs, provides the EMC with the monitor emissions from such sources,
consistent with the requirements of 40 statutory authority ‘‘to review and have (ii) periodic reports on the nature and
CFR 51.166. These regulations require general oversight and supervision over amounts of emissions and emissions
NC DAQ to provide an opportunity for all local air pollution control programs.’’ related data from such sources, and (iii)
a public hearing to the public, which North Carolina has three local air correlation of such reports by the state
includes state or local air pollution agencies located in Buncombe, Forsyth,
agency with any emission limitations or
control agencies, ‘‘whose lands may be and Mecklenburg Counties that
standards established pursuant to this
affected by emissions from the source or implement the air program in these
section, which reports shall be available
modification’’ in North Carolina. In areas.
In addition, the requirements of at reasonable times for public
addition, North Carolina does not have inspection. North Carolina’s
110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii) are met when
any pending obligation under sections infrastructure SIP submission describes
EPA performs a completeness
115 and 126 of the CAA. Accordingly, how the State establishes requirements
determination for each SIP submittal.
EPA has made the preliminary for emissions compliance testing and
This determination ensures that each
determination that North Carolina’s SIP utilizes emissions sampling and
submittal provides evidence that
is adequate for ensuring compliance analysis. NC DAQ uses these data to
adequate personnel, funding, and legal
with the applicable requirements track progress towards maintaining the
authority under state law has been used
relating to interstate and international NAAQS, develop control and
to carry out the state’s implementation
pollution abatement for the 2010 1-hour maintenance strategies, identify sources
plan and related issues. NC DAQ’s
SO2 NAAQS. authority is included in all prehearings and general emission levels, and
6. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate Resources and final SIP submittal packages for determine compliance with emission
and Authority, Conflict of Interest, and approval by EPA. NC DAQ is regulations and additional EPA
Oversight of Local Governments and responsible for submitting all revisions requirements. North Carolina meets
Regional Agencies: Section 110(a)(2)(E) to the North Carolina SIP to EPA for these requirements through 15A NCAC
requires that each implementation plan approval. 2D .0604 Exceptions to Monitoring and
provide: (i) Necessary assurances that As further evidence of the adequacy Reporting Requirements; 15A NCAC 2D
the state will have adequate personnel, of NC DAQ’s resources, EPA submitted .0605 General Recordkeeping and
funding, and authority under state law a letter to North Carolina on March 9, Reporting Requirements; 15A NCAC 2D
to carry out its implementation plan, (ii) 2015, outlining 105 grant commitments .0611 Monitoring Emissions from Other
that the state comply with the and the current status of these Sources; 15A NCAC 2D .0612
requirements respecting state boards commitments for fiscal year 2014. The Alternative Monitoring and Reporting
pursuant to section 128 of the Act, and letter EPA submitted to North Carolina Procedures; 15A NCAC 2D .0613
(iii) necessary assurances that, where can be accessed at www.regulations.gov Quality Assurance Program; and 15A
the state has relied on a local or regional using Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR– NCAC 2D .0614 Compliance Assurance
government, agency, or instrumentality 2015–0150. Annually, states update Monitoring. In addition, 15A NCAC 2D
for the implementation of any plan these grant commitments based on .0605(c) General Recordkeeping and
provision, the state has responsibility current SIP requirements, air quality Reporting Requirements allows for the
for ensuring adequate implementation planning, and applicable requirements use of credible evidence in the event
of such plan provisions. EPA is related to the NAAQS. North Carolina that the NC DAQ Director has evidence
proposing to approve North Carolina’s satisfactorily met all commitments that a source is violating an emission
SIP as meeting the requirements of sub- agreed to in the Air Planning Agreement standard or permit condition, the
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
elements 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii). EPA for fiscal year 2014, therefore North Director may require that the owner or
approved North Carolina’s Carolina’s grants were finalized and operator of any source submit to the
infrastructure submission for sub- closed out. Collectively, these rules and Director any information necessary to
element (E)(ii) on November 3, 2015. commitments provide evidence that NC determine the compliance status of the
See 80 FR 67645. EPA’s rationale for DAQ has adequate personnel, funding, source. In addition, EPA is unaware of
today’s proposal respecting sub- and legal authority to carry out the any provision preventing the use of
elements (i) and (iii) is described in turn State’s implementation plan and related credible evidence in the North Carolina
below. issues. EPA has made the preliminary SIP. Also, NCGS 143–215.107(a)(4), Air
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:27 Feb 24, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM 25FEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_9435/page/7.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules 9405
quality standards and classifications, exists and that it creates an emergency emission limit lower than that
provides the EMC with the statutory requiring immediate action to protect established under this rule for a specific
authority ‘‘To collect information or to the public health and safety or to protect source if compliance with the lower
require reporting from classes of sources fish and wildlife, the Secretary of the emission limit is required to attain or
which, in the judgment of the [EMC], Department [NC DENR] with the maintain the ambient air quality
may cause or contribute to air concurrence of the Governor, shall order standard for ozone or PM2.5 or any other
pollution.’’ persons causing or contributing to the ambient air quality standard in Section
Stationary sources are required to . . . air pollution in question to reduce 15A NCAC 2D .0400.’’ EPA has made
submit periodic emissions reports to the or discontinue immediately the the preliminary determination that
State by Rule 15A NCAC 2Q .0207 emission of air contaminants or the North Carolina’s SIP and practices
‘‘Annual Emissions Reporting.’’ North discharge of wastes.’’ In addition, NCGS adequately demonstrate a commitment
Carolina is also required to submit 143–215.3(a)(12) provides NC DENR to provide future SIP revisions related to
emissions data to EPA for purposes of with the authority to declare an the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, when
the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). emergency when it finds that a necessary.
The NEI is EPA’s central repository for generalized condition of water or air 10. 110(a)(2)(J) Consultation with
air emissions data. EPA published the pollution which is causing imminent Government Officials, Public
Air Emissions Reporting Rule (AERR) danger to the health or safety of the Notification, and PSD and Visibility
on December 5, 2008, which modified public. This statute also allows, in the Protection: EPA is proposing to approve
the requirements for collecting and absence of a generalized condition of air North Carolina’s infrastructure SIP for
reporting air emissions data. See 73 FR pollution, should the Secretary find the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS with
76539. The AERR shortened the time ‘‘that the emissions from one or more air respect to the general requirement in
states had to report emissions data from contaminant sources . . . is causing section 110(a)(2)(J) to include a program
17 to 12 months, giving states one imminent danger to human health and in the SIP that complies with the
calendar year to submit emissions data. safety or to fish and wildlife, he may applicable consultation requirements of
All states are required to submit a with the concurrence of the Governor section 121, and the public notification
comprehensive emissions inventory order the person or persons responsible requirements of section 127. With
every three years and report emissions for the operation or operations in respect to North Carolina’s
for certain larger sources annually question to immediately reduce or infrastructure SIP submission related to
through EPA’s online Emissions discontinue the emissions of air the preconstruction PSD permitting,
Inventory System. States report contaminants . . . or to take such other EPA is not proposing any action today
emissions data for the six criteria measures as are, in his judgment, regarding these requirements and
pollutants and the precursors that form necessary.’’ EPA has made the instead will act on these portions of the
them—nitrogen oxides, SO2, ammonia, preliminary determination that North submission in a separate action. EPA’s
lead, carbon monoxide, particulate Carolina’s SIP and practices are rationale for its proposed action
matter, and volatile organic compounds. adequate to satisfy the emergency regarding applicable consultation
Many states also voluntarily report powers obligations of the 1-hour SO2 requirements of section 121, the public
emissions of hazardous air pollutants. NAAQS. notification requirements of section 127,
North Carolina made its latest update to and visibility is described below.
the 2011 NEI on June 3, 2014. EPA 9. 110(a)(2)(H) SIP revisions: Section Consultation with government
compiles the emissions data, 110(a)(2)(H), in summary, requires each officials (121 consultation): Section
supplementing it where necessary, and SIP to provide for revisions of such plan 110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA requires states to
releases it to the general public through (i) as may be necessary to take account provide a process for consultation with
the Web site http://www.epa.gov/ttn/ of revisions of such national primary or local governments, designated
chief/eiinformation.html. EPA has made secondary ambient air quality standard organizations and Federal Land
the preliminary determination that or the availability of improved or more Managers (FLMs) carrying out NAAQS
North Carolina’s SIP and practices are expeditious methods of attaining such implementation requirements pursuant
adequate for the stationary source standard, and (ii) whenever the to section 121 relative to consultation.
monitoring systems obligations for the Administrator finds that the plan is 15A NCAC 2D.1600 General
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, substantially inadequate to attain the Conformity, 15A NCAC 2D .2000
EPA is proposing to approve North NAAQS or to otherwise comply with Transportation Conformity, and 15A
Carolina’s infrastructure SIP submission any additional applicable requirements. NCAC 2D .0531 Sources in
with respect to section 110(a)(2)(F). NC DAQ is responsible for adopting air Nonattainment Areas, along with the
8. 110(a)(2)(G) Emergency powers: quality rules and revising SIPs as State’s Regional Haze Implementation
This section requires that states needed to attain or maintain the Plan, provide for consultation with
demonstrate authority comparable with NAAQS in North Carolina. NCGS 143– government officials whose jurisdictions
section 303 of the CAA and adequate 215.107(a)(1) and (a)(10) grant NC DAQ might be affected by SIP development
contingency plans to implement such the authority to prepare and develop, activities. Specifically, North Carolina
authority. North Carolina’s after proper study, a comprehensive adopted state-wide consultation
infrastructure SIP submission cites 15A plan for the prevention of air pollution procedures for the implementation of
NCAC 2D .0300 Air Pollution and implement the CAA, respectively. transportation conformity which
Emergencies as identifying air pollution These provisions also provide NC DAQ includes the development of mobile
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
emergency episodes and preplanned the ability and authority to respond to inventories for SIP development. These
abatement strategies, and provides the calls for SIP revisions, and North consultation procedures were developed
means to implement emergency air Carolina has provided a number of SIP in coordination with the transportation
pollution episode measures. Under revisions over the years for partners in the State and are consistent
NCGS 143–215.3(a)(12), General powers implementation of the NAAQS. In with the approaches used for
of Commission and Department; addition, State regulation 15A NCAC 2D development of mobile inventories for
auxiliary powers, if NC DENR finds that .2401(d) states that ‘‘The EMC may SIPs. Implementation of transportation
such a ‘‘condition of . . . air pollution specify through rulemaking a specific conformity as outlined in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:27 Feb 24, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM 25FEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_9435/page/8.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules 9407
affected by the provisions of this act, Management and Budget under ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
rules, or policies of the Department. Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, AGENCY
Also, 15A NCAC 2D .2000 October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
Transportation Conformity requires a January 21, 2011); 40 CFR Part 63
consultation with all affected partners to • Does not impose an information [EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0492; FRL–9940–75–
be implemented for transportation collection burden under the provisions OAR]
conformity determinations. of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
Furthermore, NC DAQ has U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); RIN 2060–AR97
demonstrated consultation with, and • Is certified as not having a Clarification of Requirements for
participation by, affected local entities significant economic impact on a
through its work with local political Method 303 Certification Training
substantial number of small entities
subdivisions during the developing of under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 AGENCY: Environmental Protection
its Transportation Conformity SIP, U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Agency (EPA).
Regional Haze Implementation Plan, • Does not contain any unfunded ACTION: Proposed rule.
and the 8-Hour Ozone Attainment mandate or significantly or uniquely
Demonstration for the North Carolina affect small governments, as described SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
portion of the Charlotte-Gastonia-Rock in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Agency (EPA) is proposing revisions to
Hill NC–SC nonattainment area. of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); better define the requirements
Additionally, the NC DAQ organizes • Does not have Federalism associated with conducting Method 303
stakeholder meetings to support SIP implications as specified in Executive training courses. In the ‘‘Rules and
development and rulemakings. EPA has Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, Regulations’’ section of this issue of the
made the preliminary determination 1999); Federal Register, we are approving the
that North Carolina’s SIP and practices • Is not an economically significant revisions to Method 303 as a direct final
adequately demonstrate consultation regulatory action based on health or rule without a prior proposed rule. If we
with affected local entities related to the safety risks subject to Executive Order receive no adverse comment, we will
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, when 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); not take further action on this proposed
necessary. • Is not a significant regulatory action rule. Method 303 is an air pollution test
V. Proposed Action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR method used to determine the presence
28355, May 22, 2001); of visible emissions (VE) from coke
EPA is proposing to approve that ovens. This action adds language that
portions of NC DAQ’s infrastructure SIP • Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National further clarifies the criteria used by the
submission, submitted March 18, 2014, EPA to determine the competency of
for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, has Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because Method 303 training providers, but does
met the above described infrastructure not change the requirements for
SIP requirements. The PSD permitting application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and conducting the test method. These
requirements for major sources of changes will help entities interested in
section 110(a)(2)(C) and (J), the • Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as conducting the required training courses
interstate transport requirements of by clearly defining the requirements
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using necessary to do so.
1 through 4), will not be addressed by
practicable and legally permissible DATES: Written comments must be
EPA at this time. EPA has already taken
action to approve North Carolina’s methods, under Executive Order 12898 received by March 28, 2016.
infrastructure SIP submission related to (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 2010 SO2 The SIP is not approved to apply on identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
NAAQS. EPA is proposing to approve any Indian reservation land or in any OAR–2014–0492, to the Federal
these portions of North Carolina’s other area where EPA or an Indian tribe eRulemaking Portal: http://
infrastructure SIP submission for the has demonstrated that a tribe has www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS because these jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian instructions for submitting comments.
aspects of the submission are consistent country, the rule does not have tribal Once submitted, comments cannot be
with section 110 of the CAA. implications as specified by Executive edited or withdrawn. The EPA may
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, publish any comment received to its
VI. Statutory and Executive Order 2000), nor will it impose substantial public docket. Do not submit
Reviews direct costs on tribal governments or electronically any information you
Under the CAA, the Administrator is preempt tribal law. consider to be Confidential Business
required to approve a SIP submission Information (CBI) or other information
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
that complies with the provisions of the whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Act and applicable Federal regulations. Environmental protection, Air Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). pollution control, Incorporation by etc.) must be accompanied by a written
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, reference, Intergovernmental relations, comment. The written comment is
EPA’s role is to approve state choices, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and considered the official comment and
provided that they meet the criteria of recordkeeping requirements, Volatile should include discussion of all points
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed organic compounds. you wish to make. The EPA will
action merely approves state law as Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. generally not consider comments or
meeting Federal requirements and does comment contents located outside of the
Dated: February 11, 2016.
not impose additional requirements primary submission (i.e., on the Web,
beyond those imposed by state law. For Heather McTeer Toney, Cloud, or other file sharing system).
that reason, this proposed action: Regional Administrator, Region 4. For additional submission methods,
• Is not a significant regulatory action [FR Doc. 2016–03897 Filed 2–24–16; 8:45 am] the full EPA public comment policy,
subject to review by the Office of BILLING CODE 6560–50–P information about CBI or multimedia
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:27 Feb 24, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM 25FEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_9435/page/10.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-02 14:35:28
Document Modified: 2018-02-02 14:35:28
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule. | |
| Dates | Written comments must be received on or before March 28, 2016. | |
| Contact | Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Notarianni can be reached via electronic mail at [email protected] or via telephone at (404) 562-9031. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 9398 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Dioxide; Ozone; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR