[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 98 (Thursday, May 21, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29230-29237]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12348]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0260; FRL-9928-12-Region 4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; North
Carolina: Non-Interference Demonstration for Federal Low-Reid Vapor
Pressure Requirement for the Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties in North
Carolina
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve the State of North Carolina's April 16, 2015, revision to its
State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted through the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Air
Quality (DAQ), in support of the State's request that EPA change the
Federal Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) requirements for Gaston and
Mecklenburg Counties. This RVP-related SIP revision evaluates whether
changing the Federal RVP requirements in these counties would interfere
with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). North
Carolina's April 16, 2015, RVP-related SIP revision also updates the
State's maintenance plan and the associated motor vehicle emissions
budgets (MVEBs) related to its redesignation request for the North
Carolina portion of the Charlotte-Gastonia-Salisbury 2008 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area (Charlotte 2008 Ozone Area) to reflect the requested
change in the Federal RVP requirements. EPA is also proposing to
approve these updates to the maintenance plan and associated MVEBs. EPA
has preliminarily determined that North Carolina's April 16, 2015, RVP-
related SIP revision is consistent with the applicable provisions of
the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 11, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R04-OAR-2015-0260 by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: [email protected].
3. Fax: (404) 562-9019.
4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0260, Air Regulatory Managment Section
(formerly the Regulatory Development Section), Air Planning and
Implementation Branch (formerly the Air Planning Branch), Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Air
Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch,
Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional
Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2015-0260. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment
[[Page 29231]]
that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet.
If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include
your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and
with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due
to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Wong of the Air Regulatory
Management Section, in the 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. Mr. Wong may be reached by phone at (404) 562-8726 or via
electronic mail at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What is being proposed?
II. What is the background of the Charlotte area?
III. What is the history of the gasoline volatility requirement?
IV. What are the section 110(l) requirements?
V. What is EPA's analysis of North Carolina's submittal?
VI. Proposed Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is being proposed?
This rulemaking proposes to approve North Carolina's April 16,
2015, SIP revision in support of the State's request that EPA relax the
Federal RVP requirement from 7.8 pounds per square inch (psi) to 9.0
psi for gasoline sold between June 1 and September 15 of each year
(i.e., during high ozone season) in Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties.
Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve the State's technical
demonstration that changing the federal RVP requirements in Gaston and
Mecklenburg Counties from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of any national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) or with any other applicable requirement of the CAA.\1\ In a
separate SIP revision which is currently under EPA review, DAQ is
requesting that EPA redesignate the North Carolina portion of the
Charlotte 2008 8-hour Ozone Area to attainment.\2\ Final action to
approve North Carolina's requested change to the Federal RVP
requirement for Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties is contingent, in part,
on EPA's final action to approve North Carolina's redesignation request
for the North Carolina portion of the Charlotte 2008 8-hour Ozone Area.
With its redesignation request, the State included a maintenance
demonstration plan that estimates emissions through 2026 using a 7.8
psi RVP requirement rather than the 9.0 psi RVP requirement. However,
through the April 16, 2015 RVP-related SIP revision (the subject of
this proposed rulemaking), DAQ updated the mobile emissions for that
maintenance plan (including the MVEBs) to reflect the State's request
for EPA to change the Federal RVP requirement for Gaston and
Mecklenburg Counties to 9.0 psi. The updates are summarized on page 24
of the State's submittal titled ``Charlotte 2008 Ozone Redesignation
and Maintenance SIP_with_RVP_Demo_Final_04-16-15'', and may be accessed
at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0260. This
proposed action would also update that maintenance plan to reflect the
change for mobile emissions and the associated MVEBs due to the
proposed change in the Federal RVP requirements for Gaston and
Mecklenburg Counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A separate rulemaking is required for relaxation of the
current requirement to use gasoline with an RVP of 7.8 psi in these
counties. This action proposes EPA's evaluation of the approvability
of North Carolina's noninterference demonstration pursuant to
section 110(l). The decision regarding removal of Federal RVP
requirements pursuant to section 211(h) in the Area includes other
considerations evaluated at the discretion of the Administrator. As
such, the determination regarding whether to remove the Area from
those areas subject to the section 211(h) requirements is made
through a separate rulemaking action.
\2\ See footnote 4 for a geographic description of the Charlotte
2008 8-hour Ozone Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As mentioned above, North Carolina is requesting the removal of the
Federal 7.8 psi RVP requirement for Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties
and, as part of that request, has evaluated whether removal of this
requirement would interfere with attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS. To make this demonstration, North Carolina completed a technical
analysis to estimate the change in emissions that would result from a
switch to 9.0 psi RVP fuel. EPA has reviewed this technical analysis
and is proposing to find that North Carolina's technical demonstration
supports the conclusion that the use of gasoline with an RVP of 9.0 psi
in Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties will not interfere with attainment
or maintenance of any NAAQS or with any other applicable requirement of
the CAA in the Charlotte Area.\3\ In addition to proposing to approve
DAQ's noninterference demonstration, EPA is also proposing to approve
the update to the maintenance plan and MVEBs associated with the
State's request to redesignate the North Carolina portion of the
Charlotte 2008 8-hour Ozone Area to reflect the requested change in the
Federal RVP requirements for Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The use of the term ``Charlotte Area'' in the remainder of
this document refers to the EPA-designated area for the relevant
NAAQS that includes Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This preamble is hereinafter organized into five parts. Section II
provides the background of the Charlotte Area designation status with
respect to the various ozone NAAQS. Section III describes the
applicable history of federal gasoline regulation. Section IV provides
the Agency's policy regarding relaxation of the volatility standards.
Section V provides EPA's analysis of the information submitted by North
Carolina to support a change to the Federal RVP standard in Gaston and
Mecklenburg Counties.
II. What is the background of the Charlotte area?
The Charlotte Area was originally designated as a 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area by EPA on March 3, 1978 (43 FR 8962) and was
geographically defined as Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. On
November 6, 1991, by operation of law under section 181(a) of the CAA,
EPA classified the Charlotte Area as a moderate nonattainment area for
ozone and added Gaston County to the
[[Page 29232]]
nonattainment area. See 56 FR 56693. Among the requirements applicable
to nonattainment areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was the requirement
to meet certain volatility standards (known as Reid Vapor Pressure or
RVP) for gasoline sold commercially. See 55 FR 23658 (June 11, 1990).
As discussed in section III, below, a 7.8 psi Federal RVP requirement
first applied to Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties during the high ozone
season given its status as a nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone
standard.
DAQ requested a redesignation of the Charlotte Area to attainment
for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in 1993. The Area attained the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS and was redesignated to attainment for the 1-hour ozone on July
5, 1995, based on 1990-1993 ambient air quality monitoring data. See 60
FR 34859. North Carolina's 1-hour ozone redesignation request did not
include a request to relax the 7.8 psi Federal RVP standard.
On April 30, 2004, EPA designated and classified areas for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS that was promulgated on July 18, 1997, as
unclassifiable/attainment or nonattainment for the new 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. See 69 FR 23857. The Charlotte Area was designated as
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS with a design value of
0.100 parts per million (ppm).\4\ Subsequently, the Charlotte Area
attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS with a design value of 0.082 ppm
using three years of quality assured data for the years of 2008-2010.
The Charlotte Area was redesignated to attainment for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS in a final rulemaking on December 2, 2013. See 78 FR 72036.
North Carolina's 1997 8-hour ozone redesignation request did not
include a request for the removal of the 7.8 psi Federal RVP standard
for the Charlotte Area, and thus modeled 7.8 psi for Gaston and
Mecklenburg Counties to support the maintenance demonstration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The nonattainment area for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard
consists of Cabarrus, Gaston, Lincoln, Mecklenburg, Rowan, Union and
a portion of Iredell County (Davidson and Coddle Creek Townships),
North Carolina and a portion of York County, South Carolina. The 7.8
psi RVP standard continued to apply to Gaston and Mecklenburg
counties whereas the remaining counties in the nonattainment area
are subject to the 9.0 psi RVP standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 21, 2012, EPA designated and classified areas for the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS that was promulgated on March 27, 2008, as
unclassifiable/attainment or nonattainment for the new 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. See 77 FR 30088. The Charlotte Area was designated as
nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS with a design value of
0.079 ppm.\5\ On April 16, 2015, DAQ submitted a redesignation request
and maintenance plan for the North Carolina portion of the Charlotte
2008 8-hour Ozone Area for EPA's approval. In that submittal, the State
included a maintenance demonstration that estimates emissions using a
7.8 psi RVP requirement for Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties for the
2008 8-hour ozone redesignation request and maintenance plan. EPA is
taking action on the aforementioned redesignation request and
maintenance plan in a separate rulemaking. However, also on April 16,
2015, to support its request for EPA to change the Federal RVP
requirement for Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties, DAQ submitted a SIP
revision that contains a noninterference demonstration that included
updated modeling assuming 9.0 psi for RVP for Gaston and Mecklenburg
Counties and updates the maintenance plan submission and associated
MVEBs for the North Carolina portion of the Charlotte 2008 8-hour Ozone
Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard
includes the same counties in the nonattainment area for the 1997 8-
hour ozone standard, but it has a smaller geographical boundary than
the 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. The 2008 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area includes the entire county of Mecklenburg and
portions of the following counties: Cabarrus (Central Cabarrus,
Concord, Georgeville, Harrisburg, Kannapolis, Midland, Mount
Pleasant, Odell, Poplar Tent, New Gilead and Rimertown Townships),
Gaston (Dallas, Crowders Mountain, Gastonia, Riverbend and South
Point Townships), Iredell (Coddle and Davidson Townships), Lincoln
(Catawba Springs, Lincolnton and Ironton Townships), Rowan (Atwell,
China Grove, Franklin, Gold Hill, Litaker, Locke, Providence,
Salisbury, Steele and Unity Townships) and Union (Goose Creek,
Marshville, Monroe, Sandy Ridge and Vance Townships) for North
Carolina, and a portion of York County (excluding the Indian Country
associated with the Catawba Indian Nation) for South Carolina.
Though the number of counties remained the same for the 2008 ozone
nonattainment area, Gaston and Mecklenburg adhered the 7.8 psi RVP
requirement while remaining counties were subjected to the RVP of
9.0 psi.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. What is the history of the gasoline volatility requirement?
On August 19, 1987 (52 FR 31274), EPA determined that gasoline
nationwide had become increasingly volatile, causing an increase in
evaporative emissions from gasoline-powered vehicles and equipment.
Evaporative emissions from gasoline, referred to as volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), are precursors to the formation of tropospheric ozone
and contribute to the nation's ground-level ozone problem. Exposure to
ground-level ozone can reduce lung function (thereby aggravating asthma
or other respiratory conditions), increase susceptibility to
respiratory infection, and may contribute to premature death in people
with heart and lung disease.
The most common measure of fuel volatility that is useful in
evaluating gasoline evaporative emissions is RVP. Under section 211(c)
of CAA, EPA promulgated regulations on March 22, 1989 (54 FR 11868),
that set maximum limits for the RVP of gasoline sold during the high
ozone season. These regulations constituted Phase I of a two-phase
nationwide program, which was designed to reduce the volatility of
commercial gasoline during the summer ozone control season. On June 11,
1990 (55 FR 23658), EPA promulgated more stringent volatility controls
as Phase II of the volatility control program. These requirements
established maximum RVP standards of 9.0 psi or 7.8 psi (depending on
the State, the month, and the area's initial ozone attainment
designation with respect to the 1-hour ozone NAAQS during the high
ozone season).
The 1990 CAA Amendments established a new section, 211(h), to
address fuel volatility. Section 211(h) requires EPA to promulgate
regulations making it unlawful to sell, offer for sale, dispense,
supply, offer for supply, transport, or introduce into commerce
gasoline with an RVP level in excess of 9.0 psi during the high ozone
season. Section 211(h) prohibits EPA from establishing a volatility
standard more stringent than 9.0 psi in an attainment area, except that
EPA may impose a lower (more stringent) standard in any former ozone
nonattainment area redesignated to attainment.
On December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), EPA modified the Phase II
volatility regulations to be consistent with section 211(h) of the CAA.
The modified regulations prohibited the sale of gasoline with an RVP
above 9.0 psi in all areas designated attainment for ozone, beginning
in 1992. For areas designated as nonattainment, the regulations
retained the original Phase II standards published on June 11, 1990 (55
FR 23658). A current listing of the RVP requirements for states can be
found at 40 CFR 80.27(a)(2) as well as on EPA's Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/gasolinefuels/volatility/standards.htm.
As explained in the December 12, 1991 (56 FR 64704), Phase II
rulemaking, EPA believes that relaxation of an applicable RVP standard
is best accomplished in conjunction with the redesignation process. In
order for an ozone nonattainment area to be redesignated
[[Page 29233]]
as an attainment area, section 107(d)(3) of the Act requires the state
to make a showing, pursuant to section 175A of the Act, that the area
is capable of maintaining attainment for the ozone NAAQS for ten years
after redesignation. Depending on the area's circumstances, this
maintenance plan will either demonstrate that the area is capable of
maintaining attainment for ten years without the more stringent
volatility standard or that the more stringent volatility standard may
be necessary for the area to maintain its attainment with the ozone
NAAQS. Therefore, in the context of a request for redesignation, EPA
will not change the volatility standard unless the state requests a
change and the maintenance plan demonstrates, to the satisfaction of
EPA, that the area will maintain attainment for ten years without the
need for the more stringent volatility standard.
As noted above, North Carolina did not request a change of the
applicable 7.8 psi Federal RVP standard when the Charlotte Area was
redesignated to attainment for the either the 1-hour or the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. The State, in conjunction with its request to redesignate
the North Carolina portion of the Charlotte 2008 8-hour Ozone Area to
attainment,\6\ is now requesting a change of the Federal RVP
requirement from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. EPA's consideration of this
requested change for the Federal RVP requirements for Gaston and
Mecklenburg Counties is contingent, in part, upon EPA approving North
Carolina's redesignation request and maintenance plan for the North
Carolina portion of the Charlotte 2008 8-hour Ozone Area. To make the
requested change in the Federal RVP requirements for Gaston and
Mecklenburg Counties, EPA would also have to approve the updates to
North Carolina's maintenance plan and MVEBs included with the State's
April 16, 2015, RVP-related SIP revision.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See footnote 4 for a geographic description of the Charlotte
NC 2008 8-hour Ozone Area.
\7\ The maintenance plan has to ensure maintenance of the 0.075
ppm 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS which is more stringent than the 0.080
ppm 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. What are the section 110(l) requirements?
To support North Carolina's request to relax the Federal RVP
requirement for Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties, the State must
demonstrate that the requested change will satisfy section 110(l) of
the CAA. Section 110(l) requires that a revision to the SIP not
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress (as defined in section 171), or any other
applicable requirement of the Act. EPA's criterion for determining the
approvability of North Carolina's April 16, 2015, RVP-related SIP
revision is whether the noninterference demonstration associated with
the relaxation request satisfies section 110(l).
EPA evaluates each section 110(l) noninterference demonstration on
a case-by-case basis considering the circumstances of each SIP
revision. EPA interprets 110(l) as applying to all NAAQS that are in
effect, including those that have been promulgated but for which the
EPA has not yet made designations. The degree of analysis focused on
any particular NAAQS in a noninterference demonstration varies
depending on the nature of the emissions associated with the proposed
SIP revision. EPA's analysis of North Carolina's April 16, 2015, SIP
revision pursuant to section 110(l) is provided below.
As previously mentioned, EPA is proposing three actions in relation
to the State's April 16, 2015, noninterference demonstration. First,
EPA is proposing to approve North Carolina's update to the maintenance
plan associated with the State's redesignation request for the North
Carolina portion of the Charlotte 2008 8-hour Ozone Area to reflect
modeling of 9.0 psi for RVP for Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve the revised MVEBs that result from
the updated mobile modeling to reflect the change in RVP for Gaston and
Mecklenburg Counties. Third, EPA is proposing to approve the State's
technical demonstration that the switch to the sale of gasoline with an
RVP of 9.0 psi in Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties during the high ozone
season will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS
and to amend the SIP to include this demonstration. Consistent with CAA
section 211(h) and the Phase II volatility regulations, a separate
rulemaking is required to change the current Federal requirement to use
gasoline with a 7.8 psi RVP in Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties.
V. What is EPA's analysis of North Carolina's submittal?
a. Overall Preliminary Conclusions Regarding North Carolina's
Noninterference Analyses
On April 16, 2015, DAQ submitted a noninterference demonstration to
support the State's request to modify the RVP summertime gasoline
requirement from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi for Gaston and Mecklenburg
Counties. This demonstration includes an evaluation of the impact that
the removal of the 7.8 psi RVP requirement for these counties would
have on the Area's ability to attain or maintain the 1997 and 2008
ozone standards or other NAAQS in the Charlotte Area.\8\ North
Carolina's noninterference analysis evaluated the impact of the change
in RVP on the Area's ability to attain or maintain the ozone,
particulate matter (PM),\9\ Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), sulfur
dioxide (SO2), and carbon monoxide (CO) NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The six NAAQS for which EPA establishes health and welfare
based standards are CO, lead, NO2, ozone, PM, and
SO2. RVP requirements do not have an impact on actual or
modeled lead emissions.
\9\ PM is composed of PM2.5 and PM10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAQ's noninterference analysis utilized EPA's 2014 Motor Vehicle
Emissions Simulator (MOVES) emission modeling system to estimate
emissions for mobile sources. These mobile source emissions are used as
part of the evaluation of the potential impacts to the NAAQS that might
result exclusively from changing the high ozone season RVP requirement
from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. As summarized in Tables 1 and 2, below, the
MOVES model predicted minor increases in on-road mobile source
NOX and VOC emissions in the North Carolina portion of the
Charlotte 2008 8-hour Ozone Area due to relaxation of the RVP
requirement. Daily on-road mobile NOX emissions are
projected to increase by 0.11 ton in 2015 down to an increase of 0.01
ton in 2026 during the ozone season. Daily on-road mobile VOC emissions
are projected to increase by 0.18 ton in 2015 down to an increase of
0.04 ton in 2026 during the ozone season.
[[Page 29234]]
Table 1--On-Road Mobile Source NOX Emissions (Average Tons/Day) for Ozone Season
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7.8 psi RVP
County -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 2015 2018 2022 2026
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cabarrus \1\.................... 6.60 5.93 3.94 2.79 1.86
Gaston \1\ \2\.................. 8.11 7.23 4.60 3.04 1.97
Iredell \1\..................... 3.36 3.05 2.05 1.41 0.93
Lincoln \1\..................... 3.00 2.75 1.84 1.23 0.76
Mecklenburg \2\................. 26.99 24.12 14.35 9.63 6.85
Rowan \1\....................... 6.42 5.75 3.73 2.56 1.59
Union \1\....................... 5.67 5.14 3.41 2.28 1.51
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... 60.15 53.97 33.92 22.94 15.47
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9.0 psi RVP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cabarrus \1\.................... .............. 5.93 3.94 2.79 1.86
Gaston \1\ \2\.................. .............. 7.26 4.62 3.04 1.98
Iredell \1\..................... .............. 3.05 2.05 1.41 0.93
Lincoln \1\..................... .............. 2.75 1.84 1.23 0.76
Mecklenburg \2\................. .............. 24.20 14.39 9.65 6.85
Rowan \1\....................... .............. 5.75 3.73 2.56 1.59
Union \1\....................... .............. 5.14 3.41 2.28 1.51
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... .............. 54.08 33.98 22.96 15.48
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions Increase.............. .............. 0.11 0.06 0.02 0.01
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Emissions are reported only for the nonattainment portion of the county included in the Charlotte, NC 2008 8-
hour Ozone Area.
\2\ Only Gaston and Mecklenburg counties use 7.8 psi RVP fuel. The remaining counties use 9.0 psi RVP fuel.
Table 2--On-Road Mobile Source VOC Emissions (Average Tons/Day) for Ozone Season
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7.8 psi RVP
County -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 2015 2018 2022 2026
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cabarrus \1\.................... 4.15 3.89 3.01 2.53 2.04
Gaston \1\ \2\.................. 4.61 4.24 3.05 2.31 1.72
Iredell \1\..................... 1.95 1.82 1.40 1.10 0.82
Lincoln \1\..................... 1.91 1.81 1.37 1.07 0.79
Mecklenburg \2\................. 14.40 13.28 10.00 8.18 6.64
Rowan \1\....................... 3.76 3.48 2.57 1.93 1.41
Union \1\....................... 3.54 3.30 2.54 2.04 1.56
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... 34.32 31.82 23.94 19.16 14.98
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9.0 psi RVP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cabarrus \1\.................... .............. 3.89 3.01 2.53 2.04
Gaston \1\ \2\.................. .............. 4.29 3.08 2.32 1.73
Iredell \1\..................... .............. 1.82 1.40 1.10 0.82
Lincoln \1\..................... .............. 1.81 1.37 1.07 0.79
Mecklenburg \2\................. .............. 13.41 10.09 8.22 6.67
Rowan \1\....................... .............. 3.48 2.57 1.93 1.41
Union \1\....................... .............. 3.30 2.54 2.04 1.56
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................... .............. 32.00 24.06 19.21 15.02
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions Increase.............. .............. 0.18 0.12 0.05 0.04
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Emissions are reported only for the nonattainment portion of the county included in the Charlotte, NC 2008 8-
hour Ozone Area.
\2\ Only Gaston and Mecklenburg counties use 7.8 psi RVP fuel. The remaining counties use 9.0 psi RVP fuel.
Table 3, below, shows the total estimated anthropogenic emissions
of NOX and VOC from area, point, on-road, and nonroad source
categories for the North Carolina Portion of the Charlotte 2008 8-hour
Ozone Area. Emissions reported for 2014 assume the use of 7.8 psi RVP
fuel for Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties whereas emissions from 2015
through 2026 assume the use of 9.0 psi RVP fuel. NOX and VOC
emissions are projected to continue to decrease in the Charlotte 8-hour
Ozone Area using 9.0 psi RVP fuel in the entire Area for years 2015
through 2026. DAQ's analysis also estimates that RVP relaxation could
increase anthropogenic VOC emissions by 0.42 tpd in 2015 and 0.32 tpd
in 2026 and could increase anthropogenic NOX emissions by
0.11 tpd in 2015 and 0.01 tpd in 2026.
[[Page 29235]]
Table 3--Total Anthropogenic Emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX (tons/ VOC (tons/
Year day) day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014.......................................... 130.18 113.12
2015.......................................... 124.18 111.09
2018.......................................... 94.33 104.41
2022.......................................... 86.67 101.74
2026.......................................... 67.54 100.46
Difference from 2014 to 2026.................. -62.64 -12.66
------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Noninterference Analysis for the Ozone NAAQS
As discussed above, the Charlotte Area is currently designated as
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and in a separate action,
EPA is considering the State's redesignation request for the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. Although the Charlotte Area was previously designated
as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the Charlotte Area
was redesignated to attainment for that NAAQS on December 2, 2014. See
78 FR 72036.
Table 4, below, shows the safety margins \10\ from a 2014 base year
with 7.8 psi RVP fuel to the years 2015, 2018, 2022, and 2026 with 9.0
psi RVP fuel for the entire Charlotte 2008 8-hour Ozone Area. The
safety margins identified in Table 4 indicate that the switch to 9.0
psi RVP fuel in Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties will not interfere with
the Area's ability to attain or maintain the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The safety margin is the difference between the attainment
level of emissions in the base year from all source categories
(point, area, on-road and nonroad) and the projected level of
emissions in future years from all source categories.
\11\ The Charlotte Area is located within a NOX-
limited region. A NOX-limited region is one in which the
concentration of ozone is limited by the amount of NOX
emissions. NOX and VOC are precursors to the formation of
ozone in the atmosphere. In a NOX-limited area, high
prevailing concentrations of VOC from naturally-occurring sources
are present in the atmosphere to contribute to ozone formation.
Consequently, reduction of manmade, or anthropogenic, sources of VOC
emissions generally do not result in reduced ozone formation.
Instead, reductions of NOX emissions provide a more
effective ozone reduction strategy because reduced emissions of
manmade NOX emissions limit the amount of NOX
available in the atmosphere for ozone formation. See, e.g., The
State of the Southern Oxidants Study (SOS) Policy Relevant Findings
in Ozone and PM2.5 Pollution Research 1995-2003 (June 30, 2004),
http://www.ncsu.edu/sos/pubs/sos3/State_of_SOS_3.pdf.
Table 4--Safety Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX (tons/ VOC (tons/
Year day) day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014.......................................... N/A N/A
2015.......................................... -6.00 -2.03
2018.......................................... -35.85 -8.71
2022.......................................... -43.51 -11.38
2026.......................................... -62.64 -12.66
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is more stringent than the 1997
8-hour ozone standard, North Carolina's April 16, 2015, noninterference
demonstration for the ozone NAAQS is focused on the 2008 8-hour ozone
standard. The 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS is met when the annual fourth-
highest daily maximum 8-hour average concentration, averaged over 3
years is 0.075 ppm or less. As shown in Table 5, all of the ozone
monitors in the Charlotte 2008 8-hour Ozone Area are currently below
the 2008 8-hour ozone standard.
Table 5--Charlotte Area Ozone Design Values (ppm)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monitor 2007-2009 2008-2010 2009-2011 2010-2012 2011-2013 2012-2014
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crouse.................................................. 0.076 0.072 0.071 0.075 0.072 0.068
Garinger................................................ 0.082 0.078 0.079 0.083 0.078 0.070
Arrowood................................................ 0.076 0.073 0.076 0.077 0.072 0.066
County Line............................................. 0.086 0.082 0.078 0.083 0.078 0.073
Rockwell................................................ 0.083 0.077 0.075 0.078 0.073 0.068
Enochville.............................................. 0.083 0.077 0.076 0.077 0.072 (\12\)
Monroe.................................................. 0.076 0.072 0.070 0.073 0.070 0.068
York.................................................... 0.072 0.067 0.064 0.065 0.063 0.060
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 5 also shows that there is an overall downward trend in ozone
concentrations in the Charlotte 2008 8-hour Ozone Area. This decline
can be attributed to Federal and State programs that have led to
significant emissions reductions in ozone precursors. Given this
downward trend, the current ozone concentrations in the Charlotte 2008
8-hour Ozone Area, and the results of North Carolina's emissions
analysis, EPA has preliminarily determined that a change to 9.0 psi RVP
fuel for Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties would not interfere with the
Area's ability to attain or maintain the 1997 or 2008 ozone NAAQS in
the Charlotte Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The Enochville monitor shut down after the 2014 monitoring
season. There was not enough data at the location to calculate a 3-
year average design value for 2012-2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Noninterference Analysis for the PM NAAQS
Over the course of several years, EPA has reviewed and revised the
PM2.5 NAAQS a number of times. On July 16, 1997, EPA
established an annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15.0 micrograms per
cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\), based on a 3-year average of annual mean
PM2.5 concentrations, and a 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS
of 65 [mu]g/m\3\, based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of
24-hour concentrations. See 62 FR 36852 (July 18, 1997). On September
21, 2006, EPA retained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15.0
[mu]g/m\3\ but revised the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 [mu]g/
m\3\, based again on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations. See 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006). On December 14,
2012, EPA retained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 [mu]g/
m\3\ but revised the annual primary PM2.5 NAAQS to 12.0
[mu]g/m\3\, based again on a 3-year average of annual mean
PM2.5 concentrations. See 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013).
EPA promulgated designations for the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS on January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944), and April 14, 2005 (70 FR 19844).
The Charlotte Area was designated unclassifiable/attainment for the
1997 Annual PM2.5 standards. As mentioned above, EPA revised
the Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in December 2012. EPA completed
designations for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for most areas
on December 14, 2015, and designated counties in the Charlotte Area as
unclassifiable/attainment. See 80 FR 2206 (January 15, 2015).
[[Page 29236]]
In 2013, the Charlotte Area PM2.5 design values were 9.8
[mu]g/m\3\ for the Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and 22 [mu]g/m\3\ for
the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. North Carolina's MOVES2014 modeling
predicted slight reductions of direct PM2.5 emissions (0.23
percent reduction in 2015 and a 0.61 percent reduction in 2026) after
changing the model inputs to reflect the proposed use of 9.0 psi RVP
fuel in Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties. As discussed above, the
MOVES2014 modeling also predicted small increases in NOX and
VOC emissions due to the proposed RVP relaxation. However, EPA believes
that any resulting increase in ambient PM2.5 concentrations
resulting from these changes would not cause interference with the
PM2.5 NAAQS because the NOX and VOC mobile
emission increases would be small in relation to the current total
emissions and because ambient PM2.5 concentrations in the
southeastern U.S. tend to be impacted more significantly by direct
PM2.5 and SO2 emissions than by NOX
and anthropogenic VOC emissions.\13\ As discussed below, the MOVES2014
model did not predict any impact on SO2 emissions due to RVP
relaxation in Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties. Given the current
PM2.5 concentrations in the Charlotte Area and the results
of North Carolina's emissions analysis, EPA has preliminarily
determined that a change to 9.0 psi RVP fuel for Gaston and Mecklenburg
Counties would not interfere with maintenance of the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS or the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in
the Charlotte Area.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The main precursors for PM2.5 are
NOX, SO2, VOC and ammonia. There have been a
number of studies in the Southeast which have indicated that
SO2 is the primary driver of PM2.5 formation
in the Southeast. See, e.g., Journal of Environmental Engineering-
Quantifying the sources of ozone, fine particulate matter, and
regional haze in the Southeastern United States (June 24, 2009),
http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-environmental-management.
\14\ EPA has also preliminarily determined that a change to 9.0
psi RVP fuel in the Charlotte Area would not interfere with
maintenance of the Annual PM10 NAAQS of 150 [micro]g/m\3\
given the results of North Carolina's emissions analysis and the
fact that the Area is currently attaining the PM10
standard. Because PM2.5 is a component of
PM10, this preliminary determination is further supported
by the downward trend in PM2.5 identified above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Noninterference Analysis for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS
On February 17, 2012, EPA designated all counties in North Carolina
as unclassifiable/attainment for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. See 77
FR 9532. Based on the technical analysis in North Carolina's April 16,
2015, RVP-related SIP revision, the projected increase in total
anthropogenic NOX emissions associated with the change to
9.0 psi RVP fuel for Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties is approximately
0.11 tpd in 2015 and 0.01 tpd in 2026. Given the current
unclassifiable/attainment designation and the results of North
Carolina's emissions analysis, EPA has preliminarily determined that a
change to 9.0 psi RVP fuel for Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties would
not interfere with maintenance of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS in the
Charlotte Area.
e. Noninterference Analysis for the CO NAAQS
In November 6, 1991, Mecklenburg County was classified as ``not
classified'' for the 1971 8-hour CO NAAQS of 9 ppm. See 56 FR 56694.
Mecklenburg County was redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour CO
NAAQS on August 2, 1995. See 60 FR 39258. On August 31, 2011, EPA
retained the 8-hour standard and 1-hour standard. See 76 FR 54294.
Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties remain in attainment for the 1971 and
2011 1-hour and 8-hour CO NAAQS.
North Carolina's MOVES2014 modeling projected an increase in total
on-road mobile source CO emissions of approximately 2.78 tpd in 2015
and 1.44 tpd in 2026 (0.71 percent and 0.60 percent of estimated total
on-road mobile source emissions in those years, respectively) after
changing the model inputs to reflect the proposed use of 9.0 psi RVP
fuel in Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties. The 2012 and 2013 ambient
monitoring data showed maximum 8-hour concentration of 1.2 ppm for the
8-hour CO. Additionally, 2012 and 2013 ambient monitoring data showed
maximum 1-hour CO concentrations of 2.3 and 1.7 ppm, respectively, well
below the 35 ppm 1-hour CO NAAQS. Given the current unclassifiable/
attainment designation, ambient monitoring data, and the results of
North Carolina's emissions analysis, EPA has preliminarily determined
that a change to 9.0 psi RVP fuel for Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties
would not interfere with maintenance of the 1971 1-hour and 8-hour CO
NAAQS in the Charlotte Area.
f. Noninterference Analysis for the SO2 NAAQS
On June 22, 2010, EPA revised the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS to 75
parts per billion (ppb) which became effective on August 23, 2010. See
75 FR 35520. On August 5, 2013, EPA designated nonattainment only in
areas with violating 2009-2011 monitoring data. EPA did not designate
any county in North Carolina for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS
as part of the initial designation. See 78 FR 47191. On March 2, 2015,
a Consent Decree was issued by the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California stipulating the time and method for
designating the remaining areas in the Country.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Copy of the Consent Decree- http://www.epa.gov/so2designations/pdfs/201503FinalCourtOrder.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
North Carolina's MOVES2014 modeling did not predict any change in
SO2 emissions due to RVP relaxation. The Charlotte Area had
a design value of 10 ppb, about 13 percent of the SO2 NAAQS.
Additionally, 3 percent of total SO2 is derived from on-
road, nonroad and area sources combined and the remaining 97 percent
from point sources.\16\ For these reasons, EPA has preliminarily
determined that a change to 9.0 psi RVP fuel for Gaston and Mecklenburg
Counties would not interfere with maintenance of the 2012
SO2 NAAQS in the Charlotte Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ ``Redesignation Demonstration and Maintenance Plan for the
Hickory (Catawba County) and Greensboro/Winston-Salem/High Point
(Davidson and Guilford Counties) Fine Particulate Matter
Nonattainment Areas'', submitted to the EPA on December 18, 2009,
Figure 4-2, p. 4-4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the State of North Carolina's
noninterference demonstration, submitted on April 16, 2015, in support
of the State's request that EPA change the Federal RVP requirements for
Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties from 7.8 psi to 9.0 psi. Specifically,
EPA is proposing to find that this change in the RVP requirements for
Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties will not interfere with attainment or
maintenance of any NAAQS or with any other applicable requirement of
the CAA. North Carolina's April 16, 2015, SIP revision also updates its
maintenance plan and the associated MVEBs related to the State's
redesignation request for the North Carolina portion of the 2008
Charlotte 8-hour Ozone Area to reflect emissions changes for the
requested change to the Federal RVP requirements. EPA is proposing to
approve those changes to update the maintenance plan and the MVEBs. As
previously mentioned, final action on North Carolina's noninterference
demonstration is contingent upon EPA approving the State's
redesignation request and maintenance plan for the North Carolina
portion of Charlotte 2008 8-hour Ozone Area.
EPA has preliminarily determined that North Carolina's April 16,
2015, RVP-related SIP revision is consistent with the applicable
provisions of the
[[Page 29237]]
CAA. EPA is not proposing action today to remove the Federal 7.8 psi
RVP requirement for Gaston and Mecklenburg Counties. Any such proposal
would occur in a separate and subsequent rulemaking.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submittal that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not propose to 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, October 7, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, 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 proposed 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,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 12, 2015.
Heather McTeer Toney
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2015-12348 Filed 5-20-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P