[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 36 (Friday, February 22, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 12238-12243]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04011]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0961; FRL-9782-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Carbon Monoxide Limited
Maintenance Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve a limited
maintenance plan update submitted by the State of North Carolina,
through the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural
Resources (NC DENR), on August 2, 2012. The limited maintenance plan
update is for the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem carbon
monoxide (CO) maintenance areas. Specifically, the State submitted a
limited maintenance plan update for CO, showing continued attainment of
the 8-hour CO National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for the
Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Areas. The 8-hour CO NAAQS
is 9 parts per million (ppm). EPA is taking direct final action to
approve the limited maintenance plan update because it is consistent
with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), and EPA's policy for limited
maintenance plans.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective April 23, 2013 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by March 25, 2013.
If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public
that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2012-0961, 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-2012-0961, Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2012-0961. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any
[[Page 12239]]
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding
federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Wong, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404)
562-8726. Mr. Wong can be reached via electronic mail at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. What criteria is EPA using to evaluate this submittal?
III. What is EPA's analysis of this submittal?
A. Requirements of Section 175A of the CAA
B. Consistency With the October 6, 1995, Memorandum
1. Attainment Inventory
2. Maintenance Demonstration
3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
4. Contingency Plan
5. Conformity Determination Under Limited Maintenance Plan
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
A maintenance plan, as defined in section 175A of the CAA, is a
revision to the SIP to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS for the
air pollutant in question in the area concerned for at least 10 years
after the redesignation. Eight years after the redesignation, states
are required to submit an update to the maintenance plan to provide for
the maintenance of the NAAQS for another 10 years after the initial 10
year period has expired. North Carolina's second maintenance plan for
the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem Areas was approved on
March 24, 2006 (71 FR 14817).
A limited maintenance plan for CO is a maintenance plan that is
available to states that have demonstrated that the design values for
CO in the nonclassifiable nonattainment or maintenance area are at, or
below, 7.65 ppm or 85 percent of the 8-hour CO NAAQS. To qualify for a
limited maintenance plan, the area's design value must not exceed the
7.65 ppm threshold throughout the entire rulemaking process. The design
value for CO is defined as the second highest reading in the area in a
two-year period. Should an area have more than one monitor, the monitor
with the second highest value in a two-year period serves as the design
monitor. EPA has also previously determined that the limited
maintenance plan for CO is available to all states as part of their
update to the maintenance plans as per section 175A(b), regardless of
the original nonattainment classification, or lack thereof.
NC DENR elected to convert its second 10-year maintenance plan for
CO to a limited maintenance plan, to provide additional flexibility for
implementing transportation conformity requirements in these CO
maintenance areas. Briefly, counties in the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham
and Winston-Salem Areas were previously designated nonattainment for
the 8-hour CO NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694, November 6, 1991. These areas
subsequently attained the 8-hour CO NAAQS and were redesignated from
nonattainment to attainment. On November 7, 1994, EPA redesignated the
Winston-Salem Area to attainment for the 8-hour CO NAAQS based on the
measured air quality data and a 10-year maintenance plan submitted for
the Winston-Salem Area. See 59 FR 48399. Additionally, on September 18,
1995, EPA redesignated both the Charlotte Area and the Raleigh-Durham
Area to attainment for the 8-hour CO NAAQS based on the measured air
quality data and the 10-year maintenance plan submitted for these
areas. See 60 FR 39258.
Section 175A(b) of the CAA mandates that the State shall submit an
additional revision to the maintenance plan eight years after
redesignation of any area as an attainment area. NC DENR fulfilled this
requirement by providing the second and final maintenance plan for all
three CO maintenance areas in the State. EPA subsequently approved NC
DENR's maintenance plan. In summary, on March 24, 2006, EPA approved
the second 10-year maintenance plan for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham,
and Winston-Salem CO Maintenance Areas, which are composed of the
following four counties: Mecklenburg (Charlotte Area); Durham and Wake
(Raleigh-Durham Area); and Forsyth (Winston-Salem Area). See 71 FR
14817.
As mentioned above, NC DENR elected to convert the second
maintenance plan for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem
Areas to a limited maintenance plan for the ease of implementing
transportation conformity requirements for the CO NAAQS. The limited
maintenance plans was submitted on August 2, 2012, for EPA approval.
EPA has made the determination that North Carolina's limited
maintenance plan satisfies the requirements for section 175A
maintenance plan, and is consistent with EPA's policy for limited
maintenance plan elements as outlined in an October 6, 1995, memorandum
from the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards , entitled
``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment
Areas'' (October 6, 1995, Memorandum). More information regarding
limited maintenance plan requirements is provided below.
II. What criteria is EPA using to evaluate this submittal?
In addition to the general requirements in section 175A of the CAA,
guidance for CO limited maintenance plans is provided in the October 6,
1995, memorandum, which states that the following five components need
to be addressed: (1) Attainment inventory; (2) maintenance
demonstration; (3) monitoring network/verification of continued
attainment; (4) contingency plan; and (5) conformity determinations
under limited maintenance plans. These elements were outlined in the
October 6, 1995, EPA memorandum, and are comprehensively discussed
below.
[[Page 12240]]
III. What is EPA's analysis of this submittal?
A. Requirements of Section 175A of the CAA
Section 175A contains four subsections pertaining to maintenance
plans. Section 175A(a) establishes requirements for initial SIP
redesignation request maintenance plans, as previously addressed by
North Carolina and subsequently approved by EPA for all three of North
Carolina's CO areas. See 59 FR 48399 and 60 FR 39258.
Section 175A(b) requires States to submit an update to the
maintenance plan eight years following the original redesignation to
attainment. For the section 175A(b) update, the State must outline
methods for maintaining the pertinent NAAQS for ten years after the
expiration of the ten-year period referred to in subsection (a), i.e.,
North Carolina's maintenance plan update must outline methods for
maintaining the CO NAAQS through 2015, NC DENR satisfied the
requirements for the second maintenance plans for all of its CO
maintenance areas, and EPA subsequently approved NC DENR's second
maintenance plan for each of its CO maintenance areas. See 71 FR 14817,
March 24, 2006. As indicated above, although North Carolina has
previously satisfied the requirements for the 175A(b) maintenance plan
updates for all of its CO areas, the State has elected to convert these
maintenance plans to limited maintenance plans.
Section 175A(c) does not apply to this rulemaking, given that EPA
has previously redesignated the Charlotte, Raleigh/Durham, and Winston-
Salem areas to attainment for CO.
Section 175A(d) which included the contingency provisions
requirements are addressed in detail in section B4, below.
B. Consistency With the October 6, 1995, Memorandum
As discussed above, EPA's interpretation of section 175A of the
CAA, as it pertains to limited maintenance plans for CO, is contained
in the October 6, 1995, Memorandum. North Carolina addressed the five
major elements of that policy, as follows:
1. Attainment Inventory
The State is required to develop an attainment emissions inventory
to identify a level of emissions in the area which is sufficient to
attain the CO NAAQS. This inventory should be consistent with EPA's
most recent guidance on emission inventories for nonattainment areas
available at the time and should include the emissions during the time
period associated with the monitoring data showing attainment. It
should be based on actual ``typical CO season day'' emissions for all
source classifications (i.e., stationary point and area sources and
nonroad and onroad mobile sources) for the attainment year. In its
August 2, 2012, submittal, NC DENR provided a comprehensive CO
emissions inventory for nonroad mobile, onroad mobile, point, and area
sources for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem CO
Maintenance Areas.
NC DENR collected or developed point source emissions inventory
from stationary sources that have the potential to emit more than five
tons per year of CO emissions from a single facility and are required
to have an operating permit. The stationary area source inventory is
estimated on a county level and consisted of those sources whose
emissions are relatively small, but due to the large number of sources,
the collective emissions could be significant. North Carolina estimated
the stationary area source emissions by multiplying an emission factor
by some known indicator of collective activity (such as fuel usage,
number of households, or population). For on-road mobile source
emissions, NC DENR used USEPA's Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator
(MOVES) model version 2010a (i.e., MOVES2010a), released in August
2010, for estimating vehicle emissions. Nonroad mobile sources are
pieces of equipment that can move but do not use roadways (e.g. lawn
mowers, construction equipment, railroad locomotives, aircraft). The
emissions from this category are calculated at the county level using
USEPA's NONROAD2008s nonroad mobile model, with the exception of
railroad locomotives and aircraft engines. The railroad locomotives and
aircraft engines are estimated by taking an activity and multiplying by
an emission factor. Table 1 displays the 2010 attainment year emissions
inventory as required for the limited maintenance plans. Appendix B of
North Carolina's SIP submittal provides detailed discussions regarding
the development of emissions for the four emission source
classifications, and is provided in the docket for today's rulemaking.
Table 1--2010 CO Emissions (tons/day) for Maintenance Areas
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point
County source Area source On-road Nonroad Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Durham......................................... 0.97 1.54 186.00 19.04 207.55
Wake........................................... 1.17 4.26 642.97 70.62 719.02
----------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................................... 2.14 5.80 828.97 89.66 926.57
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winston-Salem Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forsyth........................................ 2.22 1.41 244.16 23.97 271.76
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charlotte Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mecklenburg.................................... 2.39 4.21 724.39 114.71 845.70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Maintenance Demonstration
In the October 6, 1995, Memorandum, EPA stated that the maintenance
demonstration requirement is considered to be satisfied for
nonclassifiable areas if the monitoring data show that the area is
meeting the air quality criteria for limited maintenance areas (i.e.,
85 percent of the eight hour CO NAAQS, or 7.65 ppm). EPA determined in
this same memorandum that there is no requirement to protect emissions
over the maintenance period. Instead, EPA believes that if the area
begins the
[[Page 12241]]
maintenance period at, or below, 7.65 ppm (85 percent of the 8-hour CO
NAAQS), the applicability of prevention of significant deterioration
(PSD) requirements, control measures already in the SIP, and other
federal measures should provide adequate assurance of maintenance
throughout the maintenance period. Monitoring data from 2008-2011 shows
all three areas below the 8-hour CO NAAQS values as listed in Table 2.
All monitoring levels are well below the 85 percent threshold of 7.65
ppm and therefore the State has satisfied the maintenance demonstration
requirement for a limited maintenance plan for each of its CO
maintenance areas.
Table 2--CO 8-Hour Monitored Concentration NAAQS
[parts per million]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
County Monitor ID 2009 2010 2011 8-hr NAAQS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Raleigh-Durham Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wake................................................. 371830014 1.3 1.3 1.4 9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Winston-Salem Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Forsyth.............................................. 370670023 1.7 1.9 2.1 9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charlotte Maintenance Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mecklenburg.......................................... 371190041 1.7 1.7 1.5 9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
Once an area has been redesignated, the state should continue to
operate an appropriate air quality monitoring network, in accordance
with 40 CFR Part 58, to verify the attainment status of the area. This
is particularly important for areas using a limited maintenance plan
because there will be no cap on emissions. In accordance with 40 CFR
Part 58, NC DENR commits to continue monitoring CO at these three sites
to ensure that CO concentrations remain well below the 7.65 ppm
threshold for limited maintenance plans. The State's monitoring plan
for 2012 can be found at the following site: http://www.ncair.org/monitor/monitoring_plan/new_plan/2012_NCDAQ_Network_Plan.pdf. EPA
has determined that the State has satisfied the monitoring network and
verification of continued attainment requirements for the limited
maintenance plan.
4. Contingency Plan
Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include
contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct any violation
of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation of an area. The October 6,
1995, Memorandum further requires that the contingency provisions
identify the measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for
adoption and implementation, and a specific time limit for action by
the state.
In its August 2, 2012, submittal, NC DENR committed to the same
contingency measures that EPA previously approved on March 24, 2006 (71
FR 14817) and a subsequent clarification on June 19, 2007 (72 FR
33692). The State pre-adopted an oxygenated fuels program with minimum
oxygen content by weight of 2.7 for Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and
Winston-Salem maintenance areas. The oxygenated fuel program is
required under the CAA for the Raleigh-Durham and Winston-Salem areas
as a required control measure prior to the attainment redesignation.
Charlotte was placed under oxygenated fuel program for effective area-
wide CO emission reduction and ease for State implementation. The
triggering date will be no more than 60 days after an ambient air
quality violation is monitored. NC DENR will commence an analysis and
regulation development process during this time. The State will
consider the following control measures:
a. Amending the oxygenated fuels program by adopting oxygenate
content of 2.0 percent to 2.7 percent by weight, or activate of the 2.7
percent by eight pre-adopted contingency measure, or 2.7 percent to 3.1
percent by weight.
b. Expanding coverage of oxygenated fuels to include counties where
a strong commuting pattern into the core maintenance area exists.
c. Alternative fuel vehicle programs to include compressed natural
gas and electric vehicles.
d. Employee commute options programs.
NC DENR committed to implement at least one of the control measures
within 24 months of the trigger, or as expeditiously as practicable.
EPA has determined that the State has satisfied the contingency plan
requirements pursuant to section 175A(d) of the CAA as well as those of
the October 6, 1995, Memorandum.
5. Conformity Determination Under Limited Maintenance Plan
The transportation conformity rule of November 24, 1993 (58 FR
62188), and the general conformity rule of November 30, 1993 (58 FR
63214), apply to nonattainment areas and maintenance areas operating
under the maintenance plans. Under either rule, one means of
demonstrating conformity of federal actions is to indicate that
expected emissions from planned actions are consistent with the
emissions budget for the area.
EPA's October 6, 1995, Memorandum states that emissions budgets in
limited maintenance plan areas may be treated as essentially not
constraining for the length of the maintenance period because it is
unreasonable to expect that such an area will experience so much growth
in that period that a violation of the CO NAAQS would result. In other
words, EPA concluded that, for these areas, emissions need not be
capped for the maintenance period.
In accordance with the Transportation conformity rule, approval of
a limited maintenance plan only removes the requirement to conduct a
regional emissions analysis as part of the conformity determination.
The requirement to demonstrate conformity per the requirements in
section 93.109, in Table 1 still applies. Additionally, federally
funded projects are still subject to ``Hot Spot'' analysis
requirements. However, no regional modeling analysis would be required.
Transportation partners should note that this approval of these
limited maintenance plans in future
[[Page 12242]]
transportation conformity determinations. Additionally, while this
finding waives the requirements for a regional emissions analysis for
the CO, as mentioned above, it does not waive other conformity
requirements for the CO standard for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham and
Winston-Salem areas, and it does not waive transportation conformity
requirement for other pollutants/precursors for which these areas may
be designated nonattainment or redesigned to attainment with a full
maintenance plan.
The State has satisfied the conformity determination under limited
maintenance plan requirements for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and
Winston-Salem areas in this limited maintenance plan.
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the CO limited maintenance plan for the Charlotte,
Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem Areas. The State of North Carolina
has complied with the requirements of section 175A of the CAA, as
interpreted by the guidance provided in the October 6, 1995,
Memorandum. North Carolina has shown monitored levels of CO in the
three areas have been consistently well below the requisite level of
7.65 ppm for the 8-hour CO NAAQS in order to qualify for the limited
maintenance plan. North Carolina has also shown monitored values for
the 8-hour CO NAAQS have been consistently well below the NAAQS levels
from 2009-2011. EPA has made the determination that the North Carolina,
August 2, 2012, submission providing the CO limited maintenance plan
for the Charlotte, Raleigh-Durham, and Winston-Salem Areas is
consistent with the CAA and EPA's guidance on limited maintenance
plans. This action is being taken pursuant to section 110 of the CAA.
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no
adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should
adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective April 23, 2013
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by
March 25, 2013.
If EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this rule will be effective on April 23, 2013 and no
further action will be taken on the proposed rule. Please note that if
we receive adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of
the rule, we may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are
not the subject of an adverse comment.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 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
final action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements
and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. For that reason, this final action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 F43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this final rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 23, 2013. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: February 11, 2013.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
[[Page 12243]]
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart II--North Carolina
0
2. Section 52.1770(e) is amended by adding a new entry for entry for
``8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan for Charlotte,
Raleigh/Durham and Winston-Salem Maintenance Areas.'' at the end of the
table to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA Approved North Carolina Non-regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State effective EPA approval Federal Register
Provision date date citation Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Limited August 2, 2012..... 2/22/13 [Insert citation ....................
Maintenance Plan for Charlotte, of publication].
Raleigh/Durham and Winston-
Salem Maintenance Area.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2013-04011 Filed 2-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P