Proposed Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of North Carolina

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[NC-061-1-6815; FRL-5191-3]

Proposed Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and

Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of North

Carolina

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On November 12, 1993, the State of North Carolina through the

North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources

submitted a maintenance plan and a request to redesignate the

Charlotte-Gastonia area from nonattainment to attainment for ozone

(O3). Subsequently on December 16, 1994, and January 6, 1995, the

State submitted supplementary information which included refined

modeling and identification of the future reductions needed to maintain

the national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for O3. The

Charlotte-Gastonia O3 nonattainment area includes Mecklenburg and

Gaston Counties. Under the Clean Air Act, designations can be changed

if sufficient data are available to warrant such changes. In this

action, EPA is proposing to approve the State of North Carolina's

submittal because it will meet the maintenance plan and redesignation

requirements. The approved maintenance plan will become a federally

enforceable part of North Carolina's State Implementation Plan (SIP)

for the moderate nonattainment area. In this action, EPA is also

proposing to approve the State of North Carolina's 1990 baseline

emissions inventory because it meets EPA's requirements regarding the

approval on baseline emission inventories.

DATES: To be considered, comments must be received by May 17, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this action should be addressed to Kay

Prince, at the EPA Regional Office listed below.

Copies of the documents relative to this action are available for

public inspection during normal business hours at the following

locations. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents

should make an appointment with the appropriate office at least 24

hours before the visiting day.

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 Air Programs Branch, 345

Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30365.

State of North Carolina, Air Quality Section, Division of Environmental

Management, North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and

Natural Resources, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626.

Environmental Management Division, Mecklenburg County Department of

Environmental Protection, 700 N. Tryon Street, Charlotte, North

Carolina 28202-2236.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kay Prince, Regulatory Planning and

Development Section, Air Programs Branch, Air, Pesticides & Toxics

Management Division, Region 4 Environmental Protection Agency, 345

Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia 30365. The telephone number is

404/347-3555 extension 4221. Reference file NC-061-1-6815.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 15, 1990, the Clean Air Act

Amendments of 1990 were enacted. (Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399,

codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q). Under section 107(d)(1)(C), EPA

designated Mecklenburg County of the Charlotte-Gastonia area as

nonattainment by operation of law with respect to O3 because the

area was designated nonattainment immediately before November 15, 1990.

The nonattainment area was expanded to include Gaston County per

section 107(d)(1)(A)(i) (See 56 FR 56694 (Nov. 6, 1991) and 57 FR 56762

(Nov. 30, 1992), codified at 40 CFR 81.318.) The area was classified as

moderate.

The moderate nonattainment area more recently has ambient

monitoring data that show no violations of the O3 NAAQS, during

the period from 1990 through 1993. Therefore, in an effort to comply

with the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA) and to ensure continued

attainment of the NAAQS, on November 12, 1993, the State of North

Carolina submitted an O3 maintenance plan and requested

redesignation of the area to attainment with respect to the O3

NAAQS. On January 24, 1994, Region 4 determined that the information

received from the State constituted a complete redesignation request

under the general completeness criteria of 40 CFR 51, appendix V,

sections 2.1 and 2.2. Subsequently, on December 16, 1994, and January

6, 1995, the State submitted additional information that refined the

modeling and clarified the future measures needed to ensure maintenance

of the O3 NAAQS.

The North Carolina redesignation request for the Charlotte-Gastonia

moderate O3 nonattainment area meets the five requirements of

section 107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation to attainment. The following is

a brief description of how the State of North Carolina has fulfilled

each of these requirements. Because the maintenance plan is a critical

element of the redesignation request, EPA will discuss its evaluation

of the maintenance plan under its analysis of the redesignation

request.

1. The Area Must Have Attained the O3 NAAQS

The State of North Carolina's request is based on an analysis of

quality assured ambient air quality monitoring data, which is relevant

to the maintenance plan and to the redesignation request. Most recent

ambient air quality monitoring data for calendar year 1990 through

calendar year 1993 show an expected exceedance rate of less than 1.0

per year of the O3 NAAQS in the nonattainment area (See 40 CFR

50.9 and appendix H). The area has continued to demonstrate attainment

to date. Because the nonattainment area has complete quality-assured

data showing no violations of the O3 NAAQS over the most recent

consecutive three calendar year period, the area has met the first

component of attainment of the O3 NAAQS. The State of North

Carolina has also met the second component of attainment of the O3

NAAQS by committing to continue monitoring the moderate nonattainment

area in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.

2. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110

and Part D of the CAA

On April 17, 1980, August 27, 1981, October 11, 1985, November 19,

1986, and December 19, 1986, EPA fully approved North Carolina's SIP as

meeting the requirements of section 110(a)(2) and part D of the 1977

CAA (45 FR 26038, 46 FR 43137, 50 FR 41501, 51 FR 41786, and 51 FR

45468). The approved control strategy did not result in attainment of

NAAQS for O3 prior to the 1990 CAA. Additionally, the amended CAA

revised section 182(a)(2)(A), 110(a)(2) and, under part

[[Page 19198]] D, revised section 172 and added new requirements for

all nonattainment areas. Therefore, for purposes of redesignation, to

meet the requirement that the SIP contain all applicable requirements

under the CAA, EPA reviewed the North Carolina SIP and ensures that it

contains all measures due under the amended CAA prior to or at the time

the State of North Carolina submitted its redesignation request.

Section 107(d)(3)(E) requires that, for an area to be redesignated,

an area must have met all applicable requirements under section 110 and

Part D. The USEPA interprets section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) to mean that for a

redesignation to be approved, the State must have met all requirements

that applied to the subject area prior to or at the time of the

submission of a complete redesignation request. Requirements of the Act

that come due subsequently continue to be applicable to the area at

those later dates (see section 175A(c)) and, if the redesignation of

the area is disapproved, the State remains obligated to fulfill those

requirements.

A. Section 110 Requirements

Although section 110 was amended by the CAA, the North Carolina SIP

for the moderate nonattainment area meets the requirements of amended

section 110(a)(2). A number of the requirements did not change in

substance and, therefore, EPA believes that the pre-amendment SIP met

these requirements. EPA has analyzed the SIP and determined that it is

consistent with the requirements of amended section 110(a)(2).

B. Part D Requirements

Before the moderate nonattainment area may be redesignated to

attainment, the State must have fulfilled the applicable requirements

of part D. Under part D, an area's classification indicates the

requirements to which it will be subject. Subpart 1 of part D sets

forth the basic nonattainment requirements applicable to all

nonattainment areas, classified as well as nonclassifiable. Subpart 2

of part D establishes additional requirements for O3 nonattainment

areas classified under table 1 of section 181(a). As described in the

General Preamble for the Implementation of title I, specific

requirements of subpart 2 may override subpart's general provisions (57

FR 13501 (April 16, 1992)). The Charlotte-Gastonia nonattainment area

is classified as moderate (See 56 FR 56694, codified at 40 CFR 81.318).

The State of North Carolina submitted the request for redesignation of

the moderate nonattainment area on November 12, 1993. Therefore, in

order to be redesignated to attainment, the State of North Carolina

must meet the applicable requirements of subpart 1 of part D,

specifically sections 172(c) and 176, and is also required to meet the

applicable requirements of subpart 2 of part D, specifically sections

182(a) and (b).

a. Subpart 1 of Part D. Section 172(c) sets forth general

requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas. Under section

172(b), the section 172(c) requirements are applicable as determined by

the Administrator, but no later than 3 years after an area has been

designated as nonattainment under the amended CAA. Furthermore, as

noted above, some of these section 172(c) requirements are superseded

by more specific requirements in subpart 2 of part D. In the case of

the Charlotte-Gastonia nonattainment area, the State has satisfied all

of the section 172(c) requirements necessary for the area to be

redesignated upon the basis of the November 12, 1993, redesignation

request.

EPA has determined that the section 172(c)(2) reasonable further

progress (RFP) requirement (with parallel requirements for a moderate

ozone nonattainment area under subpart 2 of part D, due November 15,

1993) was not applicable as the State of North Carolina submitted this

redesignation request on November 12, 1993. Also the section 172(c)(9)

contingency measures and additional section 172(c)(1) non-RACT

reasonable available control measures (RACM) beyond what may already be

required in the SIP are no longer necessary, since no earlier date was

set for these measures and as RFP was not due until November 15, 1993.

The section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory requirement has been met

by the submission of the 1990 base year inventory required under

subpart 2 of part D, section 182(a)(1), which EPA is proposing to

approve in this action.

The State of North Carolina has a fully-approved NSR program

meeting the requirements of section 182(b)(5). Therefore, the section

172(c)(5) requirement has been met.

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to revise their SIPs to

establish criteria and procedures to ensure that Federal actions,

before they are taken, conform to the air quality planning goals in the

applicable state SIP. The requirement to determine conformity applies

to transportation plans, programs and projects developed, funded or

approved under Title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act

(``transportation conformity''), as well as to all other Federal

actions (``general conformity''). Section 176 further provides that the

conformity revisions to be submitted by states must be consistent with

Federal conformity regulations that the CAA required EPA to promulgate.

Congress provided for the state revisions to be submitted one year

after the date for promulgation of final EPA conformity regulations.

When that date passed without such promulgation, EPA's General Preamble

for the implementation of Title I informed states that its conformity

regulations would establish a submittal date [see 57 FR 13498t 13557

(April 16, 1992)].

The EPA promulgated final transportation conformity regulations on

November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188), and general conformity regulations on

November 30, 1993 (58 FR 63214). These conformity rules require that

states adopt both transportation and general conformity provisions in

the SIP for areas designated nonattainment or subject to a maintenance

plan approved under CAA section 175A. Pursuant to Sec. 51.396 of the

transportation conformity rule and Sec. 51.851 of the general

conformity rule, the State of North Carolina is required to submit SIP

revisions containing transportation and general conformity criteria and

procedures consistent with those established in the Federal rule by

November 25, 1994 and December 1, 1994, respectively. Because the

deadlines for these submittals had not come due at the time of the

submission of the redesignation request, they are not applicable

requirements under section 107(d)(3)(E)(V) and, thus, do not affect

approval of this redesignation request. The State of North Carolina

submitted a SIP revision which contains the required conformity

provisions on March 3, 1995.

b. Subpart 2 of Part D--Section 182. The CAA was amended on

November 15, 1990, Pub. L. 101-549, 104 Stat. 2399, codified at 42

U.S.C. 7401-7671q. EPA was required to classify O3 nonattainment

areas according to the severity of their problem. On November 6, 1991

(56 FR 56694), the Charlotte-Gastonia area was designated as moderate

O3 nonattainment. Because the Charlotte-Gastonia area is a

moderate O3 nonattainment area, it is required to have met the

requirements of sections 182(a), (b) and (f) of the CAA. EPA has

analyzed the SIP and determined which requirements have been met and

for which requirements further action is required. In the instances

where further action is required, SIP revisions meeting those

requirements must be fully approved in order for EPA to find that all

the applicable requirements of the CAA [[Page 19199]] have been met.

Thus, final approval of this redesignation is contingent upon the final

approval of the additional SIP submittals described below.

(1) Section 182(a)(1)--Emissions Inventory

Section 182(a)(1) of the CAA required an inventory of all actual

emissions from all sources, as described in section 172(c)(3) to be

submitted by November 15, 1992. On November 13, 1992, the State

submitted an emission inventory for the Charlotte-Gastonia area. EPA is

proposing to approve the inventory in this notice. Final approval of

this redesignation is contingent on final approval of the emissions

inventory.

(2) Section 182(a)(2), 182(b)(2)--Reasonably Available Control

Technology (RACT)

Subsequent to the 1977 Clean Air Act Amendments, Mecklenburg County

was designated as not meeting the O3 NAAQS on March 3, 1978 (43 FR

8962). The State was subsequently required to revise its O3 SIP

for this area to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2) and part D

of the 1977 Clean Air Act. On April 17, 1980, August 27, 1981, October

11, 1985, November 19, 1986, and December 19, 1986, EPA fully approved

North Carolina's SIP as meeting the requirements of section 110(a)(2)

and part D of the 1977 CAA (45 FR 26038, 46 FR 43137, 50 FR 41501, 51

FR 41786, and 51 FR 45468). On December 31, 1987, EPA deemed that this

control strategy had not resulted in the attainment of the NAAQS for

O3 in the Charlotte-Gastonia area. Consequently, Greer C. Tidwell,

Region 4 Regional Administrator, sent a letter to James G. Martin,

Governor of North Carolina, on May 26, 1988. This letter, pursuant to

section 110(a)(2)(H) of the 1977 CAA, notified North Carolina that the

SIP was substantially inadequate to achieve the NAAQS for O3 in

Charlotte and called upon the State to revise the SIP.

The 1990 CAA amended section 182(a)(2)(A), and Congress statutorily

adopted the requirement that O3 nonattainment areas correct their

deficient RACT rules for O3 (RACT Fix-ups). Areas designated

nonattainment before amendment of the CAA and which retained that

designation and were classified as marginal or above as of enactment

are required to meet the RACT Fix-ups requirement. Under section

182(a)(2)(A), those areas were required by May 15, 1991, to correct

RACT regulations as required under pre-amendment guidance.1 The

SIP call letters interpreted that guidance and indicated corrections

necessary for specific nonattainment areas. Charlotte was previously

subject to RACT requirements for ozone. Therefore, this area is subject

to the RACT fix-up requirement and the May 15, 1991, deadline.

\1\Among other things, the pre-amendment guidance consists of

the VOC RACT portions of the Post-87 policy, 52 FR 45044 (Nov. 24,

1987); the Bluebook, ``Issues Relating to VOC Regulation Cutpoints,

Deficiencies and Deviations, Clarification to Appendix D of November

24, 1987 Federal Register Notice'' (of which notice of availability

was published in the Federal Register on May 25, 1988); and the

existing Control Technology Guidelines (CTGs).

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

The 1990 CAA also amended section 182(b)(2) which required RACT on

all major sources of VOCs for O3 nonattainment areas designated

moderate and above (RACT Catch-ups) by November 15, 1992. The RACT

Catch-ups provision required the State to submit a revision to the SIP

to implement RACT on: (1) Each category of VOC sources in the area

covered by a control technique guideline (CTG) document issued between

the enactment of the 1990 CAA and the date of attainment (which is not

an applicable requirement for purposes of this redesignation since the

due date for these rules is November 15, 1994, a date after the

submission of the redesignation request); (2) all VOC sources in the

area covered by any CTG issued before the date of the 1990 CAA; and (3)

all other major stationary sources of VOCs that are located in the

area.

North Carolina submitted SIP revisions to correct deficiencies in

the VOC regulations to EPA on September 21, 1989, January 14, 1991, and

April 29, 1991, all prior to the May 15, 1991, deadline. Additionally,

revisions to the Mecklenburg County local program regulations were

submitted on August 13, 1991, and July 19, 1993. A Federal Register

notice approving these SIP revisions was published on June 23, 1994 (59

FR 32365). The approval became effective on August 22, 1994.

North Carolina failed to meet the November 15, 1992, deadline date

for RACT catch-ups and EPA notified the State on January 15, 1993, that

a finding of failure to submit had been made. This finding of failure

to submit triggered the: (1) 18-month time clock for mandatory

application of sanctions under section 179(a); (2) the Administrator's

discretionary authority to impose sanctions under section 110(m); and

(3) the 2-year time clock for promulgation of the Federal

Implementation Plan (FIP) VOC regulations for this area as required by

section 110(c)(1).

The 18-month period prior to application of mandatory sanctions

ended on July 15, 1994. North Carolina submitted SIP revisions to EPA

on January 7, 1994, prior to the July 15, 1994, deadline. Because the

revisions addressed all RACT Catch-up requirements and were found to

contain all required administrative and technical components, the 18-

month time clock for mandatory application of sanctions under section

179(a) was stopped. Action to give final approval of the North Carolina

RACT Catch-up provisions will be taken at the time or prior to final

approval of this redesignation.

(3) Section 182(a)(3)--Emissions Statements

Section 182(a)(3) of the CAA required that the SIP be revised by

November 15, 1992, to require stationary sources of oxides of nitrogen

(NOX) and VOCs to provide the State with a statement showing

actual emission each year. North Carolina failed to meet the November

15, 1992, deadline date for Emissions Statements and EPA notified the

State on January 15, 1993, that a finding of failure to submit had been

made. This finding of failure to submit triggered the: (1) 18-month

time clock for mandatory application of sanctions under section 179(a);

(2) the Administrator's discretionary authority to impose sanctions

under section 110(m); and (3) the 2-year time clock for promulgation of

the Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) VOC regulations for this area as

required by section 110(c)(1).

The 18-month period prior to application of mandatory sanctions

ended on July 15, 1994. North Carolina submitted SIP revisions to EPA

on December 17, 1993, prior to the July 15, 1994, deadline. Because the

revision addressed all the Emission Statement requirements and was

found to contain all required administrative and technical components,

the 18-month time clock for mandatory application of sanctions under

section 179(a) was stopped. Final action regarding the North Carolina

Emission Statement regulation will be taken at the time or prior to

final approval of this redesignation. Approval of this redesignation is

contingent upon approval of the emission statement regulation.

(4) Section 182(b)(1)--15% Progress Plans

Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA required states to submit a revision

to the SIP by [[Page 19200]] November 15, 1993, to provide for VOC

emission reductions by November 15, 1996, of at least 15% from baseline

emissions accounting for any growth in emissions after the date of

enactment of the CAA. The State failed to submit the required revisions

and as a result, on January 28, 1994, EPA issued a finding letter

notifying North Carolina of a finding of failure to submit. This

finding of failure to submit triggered the: (1) 18-month time clock for

mandatory application of sanctions under section 179(a); (2) the

Administrator's discretionary authority to impose sanctions under

section 110(m); and (3) the 2-year time clock for promulgation of the

FIP 15% regulations for this area as required by section 110(c)(1).

However, the letter acknowledges the submittal of this redesignation

request to attainment and stated that if the redesignation request to

attainment is approved then requirements for a 15% plan SIP will be

unnecessary for the Charlotte-Gastonia area. Therefore, upon approval

of this redesignation request, the sanctions clock will stop. As the

requirement to submit a 15% plan did not come due until November 15,

1993, the 15% plan requirement is not an applicable requirement for

purposes of the evaluation of this redesignation request.

(5) Section 182(b)(3)--Stage II

Section 182(b)(3) of the CAA required moderate areas to implement

Stage II gasoline vapor recovery systems unless and until EPA

promulgated onboard vapor recovery (OBVR) regulations. On January 24,

1994, EPA promulgated the OBVR rule, and, as section 202(a)(b) of the

CAA provides that once the rule is promulgated, moderate areas are no

longer required to implement Stage II. Thus, the Stage II vapor

recovery requirement of section 182(b)(3) is no longer an applicable

requirement.

(6) Section 182(b)(4)--Motor Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M)

The CAA required all moderate and above areas to revise the SIP to

include provisions necessary to provide for a vehicle inspection and

maintenance program. The State failed to submit the required revisions

and as a result, on January 15, 1993, EPA issued a finding letter

notifying North Carolina of a finding of failure to submit. This

finding of failure to submit triggered the: (1) 18-month time clock for

mandatory application of sanctions under section 179(a); (2) the

Administrator's discretionary authority to impose sanctions under

section 110(m); and (3) the 2-year time clock for promulgation of the

FIP I/M regulations for this area as required by section 110(c)(1).

However, on July 19, 1993, the State submitted revisions to their I/M

regulations, prior to the July 15, 1994, deadline. Because the revision

addressed all the I/M requirements and was found to contain all

required administrative and technical components, the 18-month time

clock for mandatory application of sanctions under section 179(a) was

stopped. Final action regarding the North Carolina I/M regulation will

be taken at the time or prior to final approval of this redesignation.

The approval of this redesignation is contingent upon final approval of

the I/M regulation.

(7) Section 182(b)(5)--New Source Review (NSR)

The CAA required all classified nonattainment areas to meet several

requirements regarding NSR, including provisions to ensure that

increased emissions of VOCs compounds will not result from any new or

major source modifications and a general offset rule. The State

submitted a NSR rule on January 7, 1994, to incorporate VOC and oxides

of nitrogen (NOX) permit review requirements for new and modified

sources in North Carolina's O3 nonattainment areas. The revised

permit requirements meet new offset ratios and additional provisions

for moderate O3 nonattainment areas. EPA approved this rule on

October 31, 1994 (59 FR 54388), giving North Carolina a fully approved

NSR program. (EPA notes that under the policy announced in the

memorandum, ``Part D New Source Review (part D NSR) Requirements for

Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' dated October 14, 1994,

from Mary D. Nichols to Air Division Directors I-X, approval of the NSR

submittal is not necessarily required for approval of a redesignation.)

(8) Section 182(f)--Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) Requirements

Section 182(f) of the CAA requires states with areas designated

nonattainment for O3 and classified as moderate and above to

impose the same control requirements for major stationary sources of

NOX as apply to major stationary sources of volatile organic

compounds (VOCs). These control requirements, NOX RACT and

NOX NSR, were to be submitted to EPA in a SIP revision by November

15, 1992. EPA adopted a policy pursuant to section 110(k)(4) of the CAA

to conditionally approve NOX RACT SIPs which committed to provide

EPA with specific enforceable measures within one year of the date of

approval of the commitment. EPA's committal SIP policy was challenged

in Natural Resources Defense Council v. Browner--in the United States

Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In a full

Opinion, dated May 6, 1994, the Court found that EPA's conditional

approval interpretation exceeded the EPA's statutory authority, but

concluded that ``EPA properly extended'' to November 15, 1993, the

deadline for submittal of fully enforceable NOX RACT SIPs. As a

result of this court case, the deadline to submit NOX RACT rules

was November 15, 1993. Therefore, because that date is after the State

submitted the redesignation request, NOX RACT is not an applicable

requirement for this redesignation request.

3. The Area Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of the

CAA

Based on the approval of provisions under the pre-amended CAA and

EPA's prior approval of SIP revisions under the amended CAA, EPA has

determined that North Carolina will have a fully approved O3 SIP

under section 110(k) for the moderate nonattainment area if EPA

approves SIP submissions regarding the emissions inventory, emission

statements, VOC RACT catch-ups, and I/M. Final action will be taken

prior to or at the same time as final approval of this redesignation.

4. The Air Quality Improvement Must Be Permanent and Enforceable

Several control measures have come into place since the Charlotte-

Gastonia nonattainment area violated the O3 NAAQS. Of these

control measures, the reduction of fuel volatility from 10.6 psi in

1987 to less than 9.0 psi in 1990, and finally to less than 7.8 psi

beginning with the summer of 1992, as measured by the Reid Vapor

Pressure (RVP), and fleet turnover due to the Federal Motor Vehicle

Control Program (FMVCP) produced the most significant decreases in VOC

emissions. The reduction in VOC emissions due to the mobile source

regulations from 1987 to 1990 is 26.01 tons per day (29.63%). The VOC

emissions in the base year are not artificially low due to a depressed

economy.

5. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to

Section 175A of the CAA

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance

plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.

The plan must demonstrate continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS

for at least ten years after the Administrator approves a redesignation

to attainment. Eight years [[Page 19201]] after the redesignation, the

state must submit a revised maintenance plan which demonstrates

attainment for the ten years following the initial ten-year period. To

provide for the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance

plan must contain contingency measures, with a schedule for

implementation, adequate to assure prompt correction of any air quality

problems.

In this notice, EPA is proposing approval of the State of North

Carolina's maintenance plan for the Charlotte-Gastonia nonattainment

area because EPA finds that North Carolina's submittal meets the

requirements of section 175A.

A. Emissions Inventory--Base Year Inventory

On November 13, 1992, the State of North Carolina submitted

comprehensive inventories of VOC, NOX , and CO emissions from the

Charlotte-Gastonia nonattainment area. The inventory included biogenic,

area, stationary, and mobile sources for 1990.

The State of North Carolina submittal contains the detailed

inventory data and summaries by county and source category. Finally,

this inventory was prepared in accordance with EPA guidance. A summary

of the base year inventory is included in this notice. This notice

proposes approval of the base year inventory for the Charlotte-Gastonia

area.

1990 Charlotte/Gastonia Typical Summer Day Emissions Tons Per Day (TPD)

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

Category NOX VOC CO

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

Point..................................... 31.25 33.99 35.27

Area...................................... 4.92 67.59 25.00

Nonroad................................... 15.52 19.38 138.45

Biogenic.................................. 2.78 54.41 0.0

Mobile.................................... 61.64 50.81 371.26

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

Total................................... 116.11 226.18 569.98

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

B. Demonstration of Maintenance--Urban Airshed Modeling

a. Proposed Control Strategy

The plan must demonstrate maintenance for at least 10 years. The

North Carolina plan demonstrates maintenance out to the year 2005

through the use of the Urban Airshed Model (UAM). The revised modeling

runs, submitted in the December 16, 1994 supplement, were completed for

three meteorological episodes during which the area experienced

exceedances of the ozone standard. These runs corrected and completed

the modeling submitted in the original November 1993 submittal pursuant

to EPA comments. Base and future case modeling was done according to

guidelines presented in the EPA document ``Guideline for Regulatory

Application of the Urban Airshed Model'' in performing the modeling

analysis. The future case modeling includes the interim year 1999 and

the 10 year maintenance year of 2005. This modeling analysis did not

assume any benefit from the NSR program.

Modeling for all three episodes indicated that to predict all grid

cells below .124 parts per million (ppm) for both 1999 and 2005,

additional controls would be needed. The analysis of control options

showed that a further reduction of VOC emissions of 25 percent

demonstrated a 1 part per billion (ppb) reduction of ozone and a

further reduction of VOC emissions of 50 percent demonstrated a 2 ppb

or less reduction in ozone. By contrast, a 35 percent further reduction

of NOX resulted in a 10-12 ppb reduction in ozone. Therefore,

North Carolina concluded that the NOX controls will be more

effective in the maintenance of the standard in the Charlotte/Gastonia

area, and, hence, the selected strategy primarily consists of controls

of NOX emissions. The revised modeling and the identified control

measures will be the subject of a public hearing on April 19, 1995. The

selected control strategy includes the following measures:

Reformulated Gasoline to meet the Federal Phase I and Phase

II standards to begin in 1999 in Mecklenburg, Gaston, Union,

Cabarrus, Lincoln, Rowan, and Iredell Counties;

Clean Fuel Fleet Program, including the schedule for

implementation as specified in the CAA for areas classified serious

and above, in the same seven counties previously listed;

Burning bans in the seven counties for the months of June,

July, and August;

Control of NOX for the Transcontinental Natural Gas

Pumping Station in Iredell County for the months of June, July, and

August; and

Additional 10 percent control beyond the control being

applied to meet title IV NOX requirements on Duke Power's Allen

and Riverbend facilities in Gaston County for the months of June,

July, and August.

The State will also take comment at the public hearing on the

feasibility of substituting an enhanced I/M program for the

reformulated gasoline measure. The modeling results indicate that such

substitution would show maintenance of the standard. The strategy

represents a combination of mobile and stationary source controls that

provide a 25 ton per day reduction in NOx emissions resulting in a

2-6 ppb reduction in ozone, depending upon the meteorological episode.

The modeling for all three meteorological episodes for both 1999 and

2005 with the above described control strategy showed attainment of the

O3 standard. The State has committed to develop regulations

necessary to implement a control strategy that will demonstrate

maintenance of the ozone standard through 2005, and submit those

regulations to EPA for approval into the maintenance plan.

b. Request for Comments

Consistent with the notice of public hearing for the redesignation

of the Charlotte-Gastonia ozone nonattainment area, the State will take

comment on the aforementioned control strategy, that strategy with

enhanced I/M as a substitute for the reformulate gasoline measure, and

any combination of those control measures. EPA invites comment on the

following scenarios:

(a) Adoption and implementation in 1999 of the five measures as

detailed above;

(b) Adoption and implementation in 1999 of the five measures as

detailed above with enhanced I/M substituted for the reformulated

gasoline program;

(c) Adoption and implementation in 1999 of the aforementioned

controls on the Transcontinental Natural Gas Pumping Station in

Iredell County and the additional 10 percent control beyond the

title IV requirements on Duke Power's Allen and Riverbend facilities

in Gaston County; or

(d) Approval of the request as demonstrating maintenance with no

additional VOC or NOx controls.

Scenarios a and b both involve a combination of measures that

results in the modeling showing attainment of the standard in all grid

cells. Scenario a, however, involves the inclusion by the State in the

maintenance plan of regulations to require the sale of reformulated

gasoline beginning in 1999. EPA specifically requests comment regarding

the issue of whether such regulations may be adopted or enforced in

maintenance or attainment areas by a state in light of the preemption

provisions of section 211(c)(4) of the CAA.

Scenarios c and d, on the other hand, do not provide for the

adoption of control measures that result in the modeling showing

attainment of the standard in all grid cells. EPA requests comment as

to whether, in light of the reasons described below, a maintenance plan

based on either scenario c or d should be approved for the Charlotte

area. Under scenario d, no additional controls approved for

maintenance, the modeling shows 3 to 4 grid cells out of 625 over the

standard. The range of predicted values above .124 ppm for this

scenario is .125 ppm to .129 ppm. [[Page 19202]]

Although the ozone modeling guidance generally requires that

modeling results show attainment of the standard in all grid cells, it

does allow alternative methods for demonstrating attainment on a case

by case basis. EPA believes that the modeling demonstration submitted

by the State of North Carolina is sufficiently conservative so that it

is likely that the O3 NAAQS will continue to be maintained in the

Charlotte area without the State having to invoke costly additional

measures adopted in the maintenance standard. That belief is based on

the combination of the following factors:

(1) North Carolina has five years of air quality data showing

attainment of the standard.

(2) The maintenance plan contains pre-adopted measures and a

violation would trigger reduction in emissions by the following

ozone season.

(3) The ozone standard is a statistically based NAAQS that

allows one exceedance per year.

(4) North Carolina has done extensive modeling to gain an

understanding of the creation of ozone in the Charlotte area and has

generally made conservative assumptions in selecting modeling

inputs.

(5) The uncertainties in the biogenic emission inventory and

other modeling inputs are well within the range of the 2-3 ppb

needed to reach the .124 ppm in all grid cells.

(6) The modeling did not account for lower VOC, NOX and

O3 boundary conditions expected when SIP attainment control

programs have been implemented in many areas throughout the United

States.

Therefore, EPA believes the area is eligible for redesignation with

the existing control strategy and the contingency plan discussed

below.

The emissions budget for conformity is contingent upon the

control strategy selected pursuant to the April 19, 1995, public

hearing. That budget will be published in any notice that takes

final action approving this redesignation request.

C. Verification of Continued Attainment

Continued attainment of the O3 NAAQS in the nonattainment area

depends, in part, on the State of North Carolina's efforts toward

tracking indicators of continued attainment during the maintenance

period. The primary trigger of the contingency plan will be a violation

of the ambient air quality standard for ozone. The trigger date will be

the date that the State certifies to EPA that the data is quality

assured, which will occur no later than 30 days after the recorded

violation. The secondary trigger of the contingency plan will be an

exceedance of the ozone standard that would indicate a violation could

be imminent. This trigger will be activated within 30 days of the State

finding the exceedance.

Once either the primary or the secondary trigger is activated, the

State Air Quality Section will commence analysis, including updated

modeling as necessary, to determine what control measures will be

required to bring the area back into attainment. By May 1 of the year

following the ozone season in which the primary trigger has been

activated, the State will complete the analysis and adopt stationary

control measures indicated by the analysis, using the emergency rule

process as necessary. The time frame for adopting measures other than

for stationary sources will be based on the time frames in section

181(b) of the CAA. Where only the secondary trigger has been activated,

the State will complete the analysis and begin the regulatory adoption

process for any measures that are needed by May 1 of the following

year.

D. Contingency Plan

The level of VOC and NOX emissions in the nonattainment areas

will largely determine its ability to stay in compliance with the

O3 NAAQS in the future. Despite the State's best efforts to

demonstrate continued compliance with the NAAQS, the ambient air

pollutant concentrations may exceed or violate the NAAQS. Therefore,

the State of North Carolina has provided contingency measures with a

schedule for implementation in the event of a future O3 air

quality problem. The actual measures will be determined from the

analysis process described in the Verification of Continued Attainment

portion of this notice. The measures analyzed will include RACT or

greater level control for NOX and VOC sources, Stage II vapor

control for gasoline dispensing facilities, enhancements to the I/M

program, transportation control measures, and any other appropriate

measures. EPA finds that the contingency plan provided in the State of

North Carolina's submittal meets the requirements of section 175A(d) of

the CAA.

E. Subsequent Maintenance Plan Revisions

In accordance with section 175A(b) of the CAA, the State of North

Carolina has agreed to submit a revised maintenance SIP eight years

after the nonattainment area is redesignated to attainment. Such

revised SIP will provide for maintenance for an additional ten years.

6. Proposed Action

EPA proposes approval of the State of North Carolina's request to

redesignate to attainment the Charlotte-Gastonia O3 nonattainment

area and maintenance plan contingent upon a full and final approval of

the outstanding requirements discussed above (emission statement, RACT

catch-ups, emission inventory and I/M). EPA also proposes to approve

the 1990 baseyear inventory for the Charlotte-Gastonia nonattainment

area.

The OMB has exempted these actions from review under Executive

Order 12866.

Nothing in this action shall be construed as permitting or allowing

or establishing a precedent for any future request for a revision to

any state implementation plan. Each request for revision to the state

implementation plan shall be considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental factors and in relation to

relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA

must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of

any proposed or final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.

Alternatively, EPA may certify that the rule will not have a

significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small

entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises,

and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than

50,000.

Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E)

of the CAA does not impose any new requirements on small entities.

Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical

area and does not impose any regulatory requirements on sources. The

Administrator certifies that the approval of the redesignation request

will not affect a substantial number of small entities.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation

by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.

Dated: April 5, 1995.

Joe R. Franzmathes,

Acting Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 95-9248 Filed 4-14-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P