81 FR 11717 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; South Carolina; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 44 (March 7, 2016)
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 44 (March 7, 2016)
| Page Range | 11717-11726 | |
| FR Document | 2016-04728 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 44 (Monday, March 7, 2016)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 11717-11726] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-04728] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0151; FRL-9943-34-Region 4] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; South Carolina; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve portions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission, submitted by the State of South Carolina, through the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC), on May 8, 2014, to demonstrate that the State meets the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2010 1-hour sulfur dioxide (SO2 ) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by EPA, which is commonly referred to as an ``infrastructure'' SIP. SC DHEC certified that the South Carolina SIP contains provisions that ensure the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and maintained in South Carolina. EPA is proposing to determine that portions of South Carolina's infrastructure submission, submitted to EPA on May 8, 2014, satisfy certain required infrastructure elements for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 6, 2016. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04- OAR-2015-0151 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Notarianni can be reached via electronic mail at [email protected] or the telephone number (404) 562-9031. Table of Contents I. Background and Overview II. What elements are required under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? III. What is EPA's approach to the review of infrastructure SIP submissions? IV. What is EPA's analysis of how South Carolina addressed the elements of the Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``Infrastructure'' provisions? V. Proposed Action VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background and Overview On June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520), EPA promulgated a revised primary SO2 NAAQS to an hourly standard of 75 parts per billion based on a 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required to submit SIPs meeting the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2) within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. States were required to submit such SIPs for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS to EPA no later than June 22, 2013.\1\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ In these infrastructure SIP submissions States generally certify evidence of compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA through a combination of state regulations and statutes, some of which have been incorporated into the federally-approved SIP. In addition, certain federally-approved, non-SIP regulations may also be appropriate for demonstrating compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2). Throughout this rulemaking, unless otherwise indicated, the term ``Regulation'' indicates that the cited regulation has been approved into South Carolina's federally- approved SIP. The term ``S.C. Code Ann.'' indicates cited South Carolina state statutes, which are not a part of the SIP unless otherwise indicated. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Today's action is proposing to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission for the applicable requirements of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, with the exception of the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4). With respect to the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4), EPA is not proposing any action today regarding these requirements. For the aspects of South Carolina's submittal proposed for approval today, EPA notes that the Agency is not approving any specific rule, but rather proposing that South Carolina's already approved SIP meets certain CAA requirements. [[Page 11718]] II. What elements are required under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit SIPs to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a new or revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP submission to EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but the contents of that submission may vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the data and analytical tools available at the time the state develops and submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP already contains. More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements that states must meet for the ``infrastructure'' SIP requirements related to a newly established or revised NAAQS. As mentioned above, these requirements include basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The requirements that are the subject of this proposed rulemaking are summarized below and in EPA's September 13, 2013, memorandum entitled ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2).'' \2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not governed by the three year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1) because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area controls are not due within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, but rather due at the time the nonattainment area plan requirements are due pursuant to section 172. These requirements are: (1) Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C) to the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as required in part D title I of the CAA; and (2) submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the nonattainment planning requirements of part D, title I of the CAA. Today's proposed rulemaking does not address infrastructure elements related to section 110(a)(2)(I) or the nonattainment planning requirements of 110(a)(2)(C). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System 110(a)(2)(C): Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources \3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ This rulemaking only addresses requirements for this element as they relate to attainment areas. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II): Interstate Pollution Transport 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution Abatement and International Air Pollution 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency Powers 110(a)(2)(H): SIP Revisions 110(a)(2)(I): Plan Revisions for Nonattainment Areas \4\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ As mentioned above, this element is not relevant to today's proposed rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with Government Officials, Public Notification, and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Visibility Protection 110(a)(2)(K): Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling Data 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation and Participation by Affected Local Entities III. What is EPA's approach to the review of infrastructure SIP submissions? EPA is acting upon the SIP submission from South Carolina that addresses the infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 2010 1-hour SO 2 NAAQS. The requirement for states to make a SIP submission of this type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP submissions ``within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),'' and these SIP submissions are to provide for the ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that ``[e]ach such plan'' submission must address. EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term ``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA, such as ``nonattainment SIP'' or ``attainment plan SIP'' submissions to address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I of the CAA, ``regional haze SIP'' submissions required by EPA rule to address the visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A, and nonattainment new source review (NNSR) permit program submissions to address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D. Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing and general requirements for infrastructure SIP submissions, and section 110(a)(2) provides more details concerning the required contents of these submissions. The list of required elements provided in section 110(a)(2) contains a wide variety of disparate provisions, some of which pertain to required legal authority, some of which pertain to required substantive program provisions, and some of which pertain to requirements for both authority and substantive program provisions.\5\ EPA therefore believes that while the timing requirement in section 110(a)(1) is unambiguous, some of the other statutory provisions are ambiguous. In particular, EPA believes that the list of required elements for infrastructure SIP submissions provided in section 110(a)(2) contains ambiguities concerning what is required for inclusion in an infrastructure SIP submission. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \5\ For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides that states must provide assurances that they have adequate legal authority under state and local law to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C) provides that states must have a SIP-approved program to address certain sources as required by part C of title I of the CAA; and section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that states must have legal authority to address emergencies as well as contingency plans that are triggered in the event of such emergencies. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The following examples of ambiguities illustrate the need for EPA to interpret some section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) requirements with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions for a given new or revised NAAQS. One example of ambiguity is that section 110(a)(2) requires that ``each'' SIP submission must meet the list of requirements therein, while EPA has long noted that this literal reading of the statute is internally inconsistent and would create a conflict with the nonattainment provisions in part D of title I of the Act, which specifically address nonattainment SIP [[Page 11719]] requirements.\6\ Section 110(a)(2)(I) pertains to nonattainment SIP requirements and part D addresses when attainment plan SIP submissions to address nonattainment area requirements are due. For example, section 172(b) requires EPA to establish a schedule for submission of such plans for certain pollutants when the Administrator promulgates the designation of an area as nonattainment, and section 107(d)(1)(B) allows up to two years, or in some cases three years, for such designations to be promulgated.\7\ This ambiguity illustrates that rather than apply all the stated requirements of section 110(a)(2) in a strict literal sense, EPA must determine which provisions of section 110(a)(2) are applicable for a particular infrastructure SIP submission. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ See, e.g., ``Rule To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to the NOX SIP Call; Final Rule,'' 70 FR 25162, at 25163-65 (May 12, 2005) (explaining relationship between timing requirement of section 110(a)(2)(D) versus section 110(a)(2)(I)). \7\ EPA notes that this ambiguity within section 110(a)(2) is heightened by the fact that various subparts of part D set specific dates for submission of certain types of SIP submissions in designated nonattainment areas for various pollutants. Note, e.g., that section 182(a)(1) provides specific dates for submission of emissions inventories for the ozone NAAQS. Some of these specific dates are necessarily later than three years after promulgation of the new or revised NAAQS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Another example of ambiguity within sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) with respect to infrastructure SIPs pertains to whether states must meet all of the infrastructure SIP requirements in a single SIP submission, and whether EPA must act upon such SIP submission in a single action. Although section 110(a)(1) directs states to submit ``a plan'' to meet these requirements, EPA interprets the CAA to allow states to make multiple SIP submissions separately addressing infrastructure SIP elements for the same NAAQS. If states elect to make such multiple SIP submissions to meet the infrastructure SIP requirements, EPA can elect to act on such submissions either individually or in a larger combined action.\8\ Similarly, EPA interprets the CAA to allow it to take action on the individual parts of one larger, comprehensive infrastructure SIP submission for a given NAAQS without concurrent action on the entire submission. For example, EPA has sometimes elected to act at different times on various elements and sub-elements of the same infrastructure SIP submission.\9\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ See, e.g., ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Revisions to the New Source Review (NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP); Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) Permitting,'' 78 FR 4339 (January 22, 2013) (EPA's final action approving the structural PSD elements of the New Mexico SIP submitted by the State separately to meet the requirements of EPA's 2008 PM2.5 NSR rule), and ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport Requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,'' (78 FR 4337) (January 22, 2013) (EPA's final action on the infrastructure SIP for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS). \9\ On December 14, 2007, the State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, made a SIP revision to EPA demonstrating that the State meets the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2). EPA proposed action for infrastructure SIP elements (C) and (J) on January 23, 2012 (77 FR 3213) and took final action on March 14, 2012 (77 FR 14976). On April 16, 2012 (77 FR 22533) and July 23, 2012 (77 FR 42997), EPA took separate proposed and final actions on all other section 110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP elements of Tennessee's December 14, 2007 submittal. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ambiguities within sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) may also arise with respect to infrastructure SIP submission requirements for different NAAQS. Thus, EPA notes that not every element of section 110(a)(2) would be relevant, or as relevant, or relevant in the same way, for each new or revised NAAQS. The states' attendant infrastructure SIP submissions for each NAAQS therefore could be different. For example, the monitoring requirements that a state might need to meet in its infrastructure SIP submission for purposes of section 110(a)(2)(B) could be very different for different pollutants because the content and scope of a state's infrastructure SIP submission to meet this element might be very different for an entirely new NAAQS than for a minor revision to an existing NAAQS.\10\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\ For example, implementation of the 1997 fine particulate matter (PM2.5 ) NAAQS required the deployment of a system of new monitors to measure ambient levels of that new indicator species for the new NAAQS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA notes that interpretation of section 110(a)(2) is also necessary when EPA reviews other types of SIP submissions required under the CAA. Therefore, as with infrastructure SIP submissions, EPA also has to identify and interpret the relevant elements of section 110(a)(2) that logically apply to these other types of SIP submissions. For example, section 172(c)(7) requires that attainment plan SIP submissions required by part D have to meet the ``applicable requirements'' of section 110(a)(2). Thus, for example, attainment plan SIP submissions must meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) regarding enforceable emission limits and control measures and section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) regarding air agency resources and authority. By contrast, it is clear that attainment plan SIP submissions required by part D would not need to meet the portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) that pertains to the PSD program required in part C of title I of the CAA, because PSD does not apply to a pollutant for which an area is designated nonattainment and thus subject to part D planning requirements. As this example illustrates, each type of SIP submission may implicate some elements of section 110(a)(2) but not others. Given the potential for ambiguity in some of the statutory language of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2), EPA believes that it is appropriate to interpret the ambiguous portions of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) in the context of acting on a particular SIP submission. In other words, EPA assumes that Congress could not have intended that each and every SIP submission, regardless of the NAAQS in question or the history of SIP development for the relevant pollutant, would meet each of the requirements, or meet each of them in the same way. Therefore, EPA has adopted an approach under which it reviews infrastructure SIP submissions against the list of elements in section 110(a)(2), but only to the extent each element applies for that particular NAAQS. Historically, EPA has elected to use guidance documents to make recommendations to states for infrastructure SIPs, in some cases conveying needed interpretations on newly arising issues and in some cases conveying interpretations that have already been developed and applied to individual SIP submissions for particular elements.\11\ EPA most recently issued guidance for infrastructure SIPs on September 13, 2013 (2013 Guidance).\12\ EPA developed this document to provide states with up-to-date guidance for infrastructure SIPs for any new or revised NAAQS. Within this guidance, EPA describes the duty of states to make infrastructure SIP submissions to meet basic structural SIP requirements within three years of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. EPA also made recommendations about many specific subsections of section 110(a)(2) that are relevant in the context of infrastructure [[Page 11720]] SIP submissions.\13\ The guidance also discusses the substantively important issues that are germane to certain subsections of section 110(a)(2). Significantly, EPA interprets sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) such that infrastructure SIP submissions need to address certain issues and need not address others. Accordingly, EPA reviews each infrastructure SIP submission for compliance with the applicable statutory provisions of section 110(a)(2), as appropriate. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \11\ EPA notes, however, that nothing in the CAA requires EPA to provide guidance or to promulgate regulations for infrastructure SIP submissions. The CAA directly applies to states and requires the submission of infrastructure SIP submissions, regardless of whether or not EPA provides guidance or regulations pertaining to such submissions. EPA elects to issue such guidance in order to assist states, as appropriate. \12\ ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),'' Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013. \13\ EPA's September 13, 2013, guidance did not make recommendations with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions to address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA issued the guidance shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the DC Circuit decision in EME Homer City, 696 F.3d7 (D.C. Cir. 2012) which had interpreted the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). In light of the uncertainty created by ongoing litigation, EPA elected not to provide additional guidance on the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) at that time. As the guidance is neither binding nor required by statute, whether EPA elects to provide guidance on a particular section has no impact on a state's CAA obligations. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- As an example, section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) is a required element of section 110(a)(2) for infrastructure SIP submissions. Under this element, a state must meet the substantive requirements of section 128, which pertain to state boards that approve permits or enforcement orders and heads of executive agencies with similar powers. Thus, EPA reviews infrastructure SIP submissions to ensure that the state's implementation plan appropriately addresses the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and section 128. The 2013 Guidance explains EPA's interpretation that there may be a variety of ways by which states can appropriately address these substantive statutory requirements, depending on the structure of an individual state's permitting or enforcement program (e.g., whether permits and enforcement orders are approved by a multi-member board or by a head of an executive agency). However they are addressed by the state, the substantive requirements of section 128 are necessarily included in EPA's evaluation of infrastructure SIP submissions because section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) explicitly requires that the state satisfy the provisions of section 128. As another example, EPA's review of infrastructure SIP submissions with respect to the PSD program requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) focuses upon the structural PSD program requirements contained in part C and EPA's PSD regulations. Structural PSD program requirements include provisions necessary for the PSD program to address all regulated sources and new source review (NSR) pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHGs). By contrast, structural PSD program requirements do not include provisions that are not required under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 but are merely available as an option for the state, such as the option to provide grandfathering of complete permit applications with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Accordingly, the latter optional provisions are types of provisions EPA considers irrelevant in the context of an infrastructure SIP action. For other section 110(a)(2) elements, however, EPA's review of a state's infrastructure SIP submission focuses on assuring that the state's implementation plan meets basic structural requirements. For example, section 110(a)(2)(C) includes, among other things, the requirement that states have a program to regulate minor new sources. Thus, EPA evaluates whether the state has an EPA-approved minor NSR program and whether the program addresses the pollutants relevant to that NAAQS. In the context of acting on an infrastructure SIP submission, however, EPA does not think it is necessary to conduct a review of each and every provision of a state's existing minor source program (i.e., already in the existing SIP) for compliance with the requirements of the CAA and EPA's regulations that pertain to such programs. With respect to certain other issues, EPA does not believe that an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission is necessarily the appropriate type of action in which to address possible deficiencies in a state's existing SIP. These issues include: (i) Existing provisions related to excess emissions from sources during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA's policies addressing such excess emissions (``SSM''); (ii) existing provisions related to ``director's variance'' or ``director's discretion'' that may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to allow revisions to SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public process or not requiring further approval by EPA; and (iii) existing provisions for PSD programs that may be inconsistent with current requirements of EPA's ``Final NSR Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (``NSR Reform''). Thus, EPA believes it may approve an infrastructure SIP submission without scrutinizing the totality of the existing SIP for such potentially deficient provisions and may approve the submission even if it is aware of such existing provisions.\14\ It is important to note that EPA's approval of a state's infrastructure SIP submission should not be construed as explicit or implicit re-approval of any existing potentially deficient provisions that relate to the three specific issues just described. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \14\ By contrast, EPA notes that if a state were to include a new provision in an infrastructure SIP submission that contained a legal deficiency, such as a new exemption for excess emissions during SSM events, then EPA would need to evaluate that provision for compliance against the rubric of applicable CAA requirements in the context of the action on the infrastructure SIP. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA's approach to review of infrastructure SIP submissions is to identify the CAA requirements that are logically applicable to that submission. EPA believes that this approach to the review of a particular infrastructure SIP submission is appropriate, because it would not be reasonable to read the general requirements of section 110(a)(1) and the list of elements in 110(a)(2) as requiring review of each and every provision of a state's existing SIP against all requirements in the CAA and EPA regulations merely for purposes of assuring that the state in question has the basic structural elements for a functioning SIP for a new or revised NAAQS. Because SIPs have grown by accretion over the decades as statutory and regulatory requirements under the CAA have evolved, they may include some outmoded provisions and historical artifacts. These provisions, while not fully up to date, nevertheless may not pose a significant problem for the purposes of ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of a new or revised NAAQS when EPA evaluates adequacy of the infrastructure SIP submission. EPA believes that a better approach is for states and EPA to focus attention on those elements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA most likely to warrant a specific SIP revision due to the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or other factors. For example, EPA's 2013 Guidance gives simpler recommendations with respect to carbon monoxide than other NAAQS pollutants to meet the visibility requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), because carbon monoxide does not affect visibility. As a result, an infrastructure SIP submission for any future new or revised NAAQS for carbon monoxide need only state this fact in order to address the visibility prong of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Finally, EPA believes that its approach with respect to infrastructure SIP requirements is based on a reasonable reading of sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) because the CAA [[Page 11721]] provides other avenues and mechanisms to address specific substantive deficiencies in existing SIPs. These other statutory tools allow EPA to take appropriately tailored action, depending upon the nature and severity of the alleged SIP deficiency. Section 110(k)(5) authorizes EPA to issue a ``SIP call'' whenever the Agency determines that a state's implementation plan is substantially inadequate to attain or maintain the NAAQS, to mitigate interstate transport, or to otherwise comply with the CAA.\15\ Section 110(k)(6) authorizes EPA to correct errors in past actions, such as past approvals of SIP submissions.\16\ Significantly, EPA's determination that an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission is not the appropriate time and place to address all potential existing SIP deficiencies does not preclude EPA's subsequent reliance on provisions in section 110(a)(2) as part of the basis for action to correct those deficiencies at a later time. For example, although it may not be appropriate to require a state to eliminate all existing inappropriate director's discretion provisions in the course of acting on an infrastructure SIP submission, EPA believes that section 110(a)(2)(A) may be among the statutory bases that EPA relies upon in the course of addressing such deficiency in a subsequent action.\17\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \15\ For example, EPA issued a SIP call to Utah to address specific existing SIP deficiencies related to the treatment of excess emissions during SSM events. See ``Finding of Substantial Inadequacy of Implementation Plan; Call for Utah State Implementation Plan Revisions,'' 74 FR 21639 (April 18, 2011). \16\ EPA has used this authority to correct errors in past actions on SIP submissions related to PSD programs. See ``Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State Implementation Plans; Final Rule,'' 75 FR 82536 (December 30, 2010). EPA has previously used its authority under CAA section 110(k)(6) to remove numerous other SIP provisions that the Agency determined it had approved in error. See, e.g., 61 FR 38664 (July 25, 1996) and 62 FR 34641 (June 27, 1997) (corrections to American Samoa, Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 FR 67062 (November 16, 2004) (corrections to California SIP); and 74 FR 57051 (November 3, 2009) (corrections to Arizona and Nevada SIPs). \17\ See, e.g., EPA's disapproval of a SIP submission from Colorado on the grounds that it would have included a director's discretion provision inconsistent with CAA requirements, including section 110(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., 75 FR 42342 at 42344 (July 21, 2010) (proposed disapproval of director's discretion provisions); 76 FR 4540 (Jan. 26, 2011) (final disapproval of such provisions). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IV. What is EPA's analysis of how South Carolina addressed the elements of the sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``Infrastructure'' provisions? South Carolina's May 8, 2014, infrastructure SIP submission addresses the provisions of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as described below. 1. 110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that each implementation plan include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques (including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and auctions of emissions rights), as well as schedules and timetables for compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to meet the applicable requirements. Several regulations within South Carolina's SIP are relevant to air quality control regulations. The regulations described below have been federally-approved in the South Carolina SIP and include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures. Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 2, Ambient Air Quality Standards and Regulation 61-62.1, Definitions and General Requirements, provide enforceable emission limits and other control measures, means, and techniques. Section 48-1-50(23) of the 1976 South Carolina Code of Laws, as amended, (S.C. Code Ann.) provides SC DHEC with the authority to ``Adopt emission and effluent control regulations standards and limitations that are applicable to the entire state, that are applicable only within specified areas or zones of the state, or that are applicable only when a specified class of pollutant is present.'' Collectively these regulations establish enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means or techniques, for activities that contribute to SO2 concentrations in the ambient air and provide authority for SC DHEC to establish such limits and measures as well as schedules for compliance to meet the applicable requirements of the CAA. EPA has made the preliminary determination that the provisions contained in these State regulations and State statute are adequate for enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques, as well as schedules and timetables for compliance to satisfy the requirements of Section 110(a)(2(A) for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in the State. In this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any existing state provisions with regard to excess emissions during start up, shut down and malfunction (SSM) operations at a facility. EPA believes that a number of states have SSM provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance, ``State Implementation Plans: Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown'' (September 20, 1999), and the Agency is addressing such state regulations in a separate action.\18\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \18\ On June 12, 2015, EPA published a final action entitled, ``State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of EPA's SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction.'' See 80 FR 33840. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Additionally, in this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any existing state rules with regard to director's discretion or variance provisions. EPA believes that a number of states have such provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance (52 FR 45109 (November 24, 1987)), and the Agency plans to take action in the future to address such state regulations. In the meantime, EPA encourages any state having a director's discretion or variance provision which is contrary to the CAA and EPA guidance to take steps to correct the deficiency as soon as possible. 2. 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System: Section 110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to provide for establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to: (i) Monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and (ii) upon request, make such data available to the Administrator. South Carolina's Air Pollution Control Regulations, Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, along with the South Carolina Network Description and Ambient Air Network Monitoring Plan, provide for an ambient air quality monitoring system in the State. S.C. Code Ann. Sec. 48-1-50(14) provides the Department with the necessary authority to ``[c]ollect and disseminate information on air and water control.'' Annually, states develop and submit to EPA for approval statewide ambient monitoring network plans consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR parts 50, 53, and 58. The annual network plan involves an evaluation of any proposed changes to the monitoring network, includes the annual ambient monitoring network design plan and a certified evaluation of the agency's ambient monitors and auxiliary support equipment.\19\ On July 20, 2015, South Carolina submitted its plan to EPA. On November 19, 2015, EPA approved South Carolina's monitoring network plan. South Carolina's approved monitoring network [[Page 11722]] plan can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA- R04-OAR-2015-0151. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP and practices are adequate for the ambient air quality monitoring and data system requirements related to the 2010 1- hour SO2 NAAQS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \19\ On occasion, proposed changes to the monitoring network are evaluated outside of the network plan approval process in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. 110(a)(2)(C) Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources: This element consists of three sub-elements: Enforcement, state-wide regulation of new and modified minor sources and minor modifications of major sources, and preconstruction permitting of major sources and major modifications in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable for the subject NAAQS as required by CAA title I part C (i.e., the major source PSD program). These requirements are met through Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, and Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7.1, Nonattainment New Source Review, of South Carolina's SIP, which pertain to the construction of any new major stationary source or any modification at an existing major stationary source in an area designated as attainment or unclassifiable. These regulations enable SC DHEC to regulate sources contributing to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Enforcement: SC DHEC's above-described, SIP-approved regulations provide for enforcement of SO2 emission limits and control measures through construction permitting for new or modified stationary sources. Also note that SC DHEC has powers to pursue injunctive relief and civil penalties under Section 48 of the S.C. Code Ann. PSD Permitting for Major Sources: EPA interprets the PSD sub- element to require that a state's infrastructure SIP submission for a particular NAAQS demonstrate that the state has a complete PSD permitting program in place covering the structural PSD requirements for all regulated NSR pollutants. A state's PSD permitting program is complete for this sub-element (and prong 3 of D(i) and J related to PSD) if EPA has already approved or is simultaneously approving the state's implementation plan with respect to all structural PSD requirements that are due under the EPA regulations or the CAA on or before the date of the EPA's proposed action on the infrastructure SIP submission. For the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, South Carolina's authority to regulate new and modified sources to assist in the protection of air quality in South Carolina is established in Regulations 61-62.1, Section II, Permit Requirements; 61-62.5, Standard No. 7, Prevention of Significant Deterioration of South Carolina's SIP. These regulations pertain to the construction of any new major stationary source or any modification at an existing major stationary source in an area designated as attainment or unclassifiable. South Carolina also cites to 61-62.5, Standard No. 7.1, Nonattainment New Source Review. South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission demonstrates that new major sources and major modifications in areas of the State designated attainment or unclassifiable for the specified NAAQS are subject to a federally-approved PSD permitting program meeting all the current structural requirements of part C of title I of the CAA to satisfy the infrastructure SIP PSD elements.\20\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \20\ More information concerning how the South Carolina infrastructure SIP submission currently meets applicable requirements for the PSD elements (110(a)(2)(C); (D)(i)(I), prong 3; and (J)) can be found in the technical support document in the docket for today's rulemaking. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Regulation of minor sources and modifications: Section 110(a)(2)(C) also requires the SIP to include provisions that govern the minor source preconstruction program that regulates emissions of the 2010 1- hour SO2 NAAQS. Regulation 61-62.1, Section II, Permit Requirements governs the preconstruction permitting of modifications and construction of minor stationary sources in South Carolina. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP and practices are adequate for enforcement of control measures, PSD permitting for major sources, and regulation of minor sources and modifications related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 4. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II): Interstate Pollution Transport: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Each of these components has two subparts resulting in four distinct components, commonly referred to as ``prongs,'' that must be addressed in infrastructure SIP submissions. The first two prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that prohibit any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 1''), and interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 2''). The third and fourth prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that prohibit emissions activity in one state from interfering with measures required to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in another state (``prong 3''), or to protect visibility in another state (``prong 4''). 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--prongs 1 and 2: EPA is not proposing any action in this rulemaking related to the interstate transport provisions pertaining to the contribution to nonattainment or interference with maintenance in other states of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (prongs 1 and 2) because South Carolina's 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS infrastructure submissions did not address prongs 1 and 2. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--prong 3: With regard to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), the PSD element, referred to as prong 3, this requirement may be met by a state's confirmation in an infrastructure SIP submission that new major sources and major modifications in the state are subject to: A PSD program meeting all the current structural requirements of part C of title I of the CAA, or (if the state contains a nonattainment area that has the potential to impact PSD in another state) a NNSR program. As discussed in more detail above under section 110(a)(2)(C), South Carolina's SIP contains provisions for the State's PSD program that reflect the required structural PSD requirements to satisfy the requirement of prong 3 and a NNSR program at 61-62.5, Standard No. 7.1, Nonattainment New Source Review. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP is adequate for interstate transport for PSD permitting of major sources and major modifications related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3). 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--prong 4: EPA is not proposing any action in this rulemaking related to the interstate transport provisions pertaining to the contribution to nonattainment or interference with maintenance in other states of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 4) and will consider these requirements in relation to South Carolina's 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS infrastructure submission in a separate rulemaking. 5. 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution Abatement and International Air Pollution: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to include provisions ensuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating to interstate and international pollution abatement. Regulation 61-62.5, Standards 7 and 7.1 (q)(2)(iv), Public Participation, requires SC DHEC to notify air agencies ``whose lands may be affected by emissions'' from each new or modified major source if such emissions may significantly [[Page 11723]] contribute to levels of pollution in excess of a NAAQS in any air quality control region outside of South Carolina. Additionally, South Carolina does not have any pending obligation under section 115 and 126 of the CAA. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP and practices are adequate for ensuring compliance with the applicable requirements relating to interstate and international pollution abatement for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 6. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies: Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires that each implementation plan provide (i) necessary assurances that the State will have adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out its implementation plan, (ii) that the state comply with the requirements respecting state boards pursuant to section 128 of the Act, and (iii) necessary assurances that, where the state has relied on a local or regional government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any plan provision, the state has responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of such plan provisions. EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's SIP as meeting the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E). EPA's rationale for today's proposal respecting each requirement of section 110(a)(2)(E) is described in turn below. With respect to section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii), SC DHEC develops, implements and enforces EPA-approved SIP provisions in the State. S.C. Code Ann. Section 48, Title 1, as referenced in South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission, provides the SC DHEC's general legal authority to establish a SIP and implement related plans. In particular, S.C. Code Ann. Section 48-1-50(12) grants SC DHEC the statutory authority to ``[a]ccept, receive and administer grants or other funds or gifts for the purpose of carrying out any of the purposes of this chapter; [and to] accept, receive and receipt for Federal money given by the Federal government under any Federal law to the State of South Carolina for air or water control activities, surveys or programs.'' S.C. Code Ann. Section 48, Title 2 grants SC DHEC statutory authority to establish environmental protection funds, which provide resources for SC DHEC to carry out its obligations under the CAA. Specifically, in Regulation 61-30, Environmental Protection Fees, SC DHEC established fees for sources subject to air permitting programs. SC DHEC implements the SIP in accordance with the provisions of S.C. Code Ann Sec. 1-23-40 (the Administrative Procedures Act) and S.C. Code Ann. Section 48, Title 1. For Section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii), the submission states that South Carolina does not rely on localities for specific SIP implementation. The requirements of 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii) are further confirmed when EPA performs a completeness determination for each SIP submittal. This provides additional assurances that each submittal provides evidence that adequate personnel, funding, and legal authority under State law has been used to carry out the State's implementation plan and related issues. This information is included in all prehearings and final SIP submittal packages for approval by EPA. As evidence of the adequacy of SC DHEC's resources with respect to sub-elements (i) and (iii), EPA submitted a letter to South Carolina on March 9, 2015, outlining 105 grant commitments and the current status of these commitments for fiscal year 2014. The letter EPA submitted to South Carolina can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0151. Annually, states update these grant commitments based on current SIP requirements, air quality planning, and applicable requirements related to the NAAQS. There were no outstanding issues in relation to the SIP for fiscal year 2014, therefore, SC DHEC's grants were finalized and closed out. Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires that states comply with section 128 of the CAA. Section 128 of the CAA requires that states include provisions in their SIP to address conflicts of interest for state boards or bodies that oversee CAA permits and enforcement orders and disclosure of conflict of interest requirements. Specifically, CAA section 128(a)(1) necessitates that each SIP shall require that at least a majority of any board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders shall be subject to the described public interest service and income restrictions therein. Subsection 128(a)(2) requires that the members of any board or body, or the head of an executive agency with similar power to approve permits or enforcement orders under the CAA, shall also be subject to conflict of interest disclosure requirements. With respect to 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), South Carolina satisfies the requirements of CAA section 128(a)(1) for the South Carolina Board of Health and Environmental Control, which is the ``board or body which approves permits and enforcement orders'' under the CAA in South Carolina, through S.C. Code Ann. Section 8-13-730. S.C. Code Ann. Section 8-13-730 provides that ``[u]nless otherwise provided by law, no person may serve as a member of a governmental regulatory agency that regulates business with which that person is associated,'' and S.C. Code Ann. Section 8-13-700(A) which provides in part that ``[n]o public official, public member, or public employee may knowingly use his official office, membership, or employment to obtain an economic interest for himself, a member of his immediate family, an individual with whom he is associated, or a business with which he is associated.'' S.C. Code Ann. Section 8-13-700(B)(1)-(5) provides for disclosure of any conflicts of interest by public official, public member or public employee, which meets the requirement of CAA Section 128(a)(2) that ``any potential conflicts of interest . . . be adequately disclosed.'' These State statutes--S.C. Code Ann. Sections 8-13-730, 8-13-700(A), and 8-13-700(B)(1)-(5)--have been approved into the South Carolina SIP as required by CAA section 128. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina has adequate resources for implementation of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 7. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting: Section 110(a)(2)(F) requires SIPs to meet applicable requirements addressing (i) the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources, (ii) periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions and emissions related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of such reports by the state agency with any emission limitations or standards established pursuant to this section, which reports shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection. SC DHEC's infrastructure SIP submission describes the establishment of requirements for compliance testing by emissions sampling and analysis, and for emissions and operation monitoring to ensure the quality of data in the State. SC DHEC uses these data to track progress towards maintaining the NAAQS, develop control and maintenance strategies, identify sources and general emission levels, and determine compliance with emission regulations and additional EPA requirements. These SIP requirements are codified at Regulation 61-62.1, Definitions and General Requirements, which provides for an emission [[Page 11724]] inventory plan that establishes reporting requirements of the South Carolina SIP. SC DHEC's SIP requires owners or operators of stationary sources to monitor emissions, submit periodic reports of such emissions and maintain records as specified by various regulations and permits, and to evaluate reports and records for consistency with the applicable emission limitation or standard on a continuing basis over time. The monitoring data collected and records of operations serve as the basis for a source to certify compliance, and can be used by SC DHEC as direct evidence of an enforceable violation of the underlying emission limitation or standard. Accordingly, EPA is unaware of any provision preventing the use of credible evidence in the South Carolina SIP. Additionally, South Carolina is required to submit emissions data to EPA for purposes of the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). The NEI is EPA's central repository for air emissions data. EPA published the Air Emissions Reporting Rule (AERR) on December 5, 2008, which modified the requirements for collecting and reporting air emissions data (73 FR 76539). The AERR shortened the time states had to report emissions data from 17 to 12 months, giving states one calendar year to submit emissions data. All states are required to submit a comprehensive emissions inventory every three years and report emissions for certain larger sources annually through EPA's online Emissions Inventory System. States report emissions data for the six criteria pollutants and their associated precursors--NOX , SO2 , ammonia, lead, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds. Many states also voluntarily report emissions of hazardous air pollutants. South Carolina made its latest update to the 2011 NEI on April 8, 2014. EPA compiles the emissions data, supplementing it where necessary, and releases it to the general public through the Web site http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP and practices are adequate for the stationary source monitoring systems related to the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(F). 8. 110(a)(2)(G) Emergency Powers: This section of the Act requires that states demonstrate authority comparable with section 303 of the CAA and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority. Regulation 61-62.3, Air Pollution Episodes, provides for contingency measures when an air pollution episode or exceedance may lead to a substantial threat to the health of persons in the state or region. S.C. Code Ann. Section 48-1-290 provides SC DHEC, with concurrent notice to the Governor, the authority to issue an order recognizing the existence of an emergency requiring immediate action as deemed necessary by SC DHEC to protect the public health or property. Any person subject to this order is required to comply immediately. Additionally, S.C. Code Ann. Section 1-23-130 provides SC DHEC with the authority to establish emergency regulations to address an imminent peril to public health, or welfare, and authorizes emergency regulations to protect natural resources if any natural resource related agency in the State finds that abnormal or unusual conditions, immediate need, or the State's best interest require such emergency action. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP, State laws, and practices are adequate for emergency powers related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(G). 9. 110(a)(2)(H) SIP Revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H), in summary, requires each SIP to provide for revisions of such plan: (i) As may be necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii) whenever the Administrator finds that the plan is substantially inadequate to attain the NAAQS or to otherwise comply with any additional applicable requirements. SC DHEC is responsible for adopting air quality rules and revising SIPs as needed to attain or maintain the NAAQS in South Carolina. The State has the ability and authority to respond to calls for SIP revisions, and has provided a number of SIP revisions over the years for implementation of the NAAQS. Additionally, S.C. Code Ann. Section 48, Title 1, provides SC DHEC with the necessary authority to revise the SIP to accommodate changes in the NAAQS and thus revise the SIP as appropriate. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina adequately demonstrates a commitment to provide future SIP revisions related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(H). 10. 110(a)(2)(J) Consultation with Government Officials, Public Notification, and PSD and Visibility Protection: EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission for the 2010 1- hour SO2 NAAQS with respect to the general requirement in section 110(a)(2)(J) to include a program in the SIP that complies with the applicable consultation requirements of section 121, the public notification requirements of section 127, PSD and visibility protection. EPA's rationale for each sub-element is described below. Consultation with government officials (121 consultation): Section 110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA requires states to provide a process for consultation with local governments, designated organizations and Federal Land Managers carrying out NAAQS implementation requirements pursuant to section 121 relative to consultation. Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, as well as the State's Regional Haze Implementation Plan (which allows for consultation between appropriate state, local, and tribal air pollution control agencies as well as the corresponding Federal Land Managers), provide for consultation with government officials whose jurisdictions might be affected by SIP development activities. South Carolina has SIP-approved state-wide consultation procedures for the implementation of transportation conformity (see 69 FR 4245). These consultation procedures were developed in coordination with the transportation partners in the State and are consistent with the approaches used for development of mobile inventories for SIPs. Implementation of transportation conformity as outlined in the consultation procedures requires SC DHEC to consult with Federal, state and local transportation and air quality agency officials on the development of motor vehicle emissions budgets. Additionally, S.C. Code Section 48-1- 50(8) provides SC DHEC with the necessary authority to ``Cooperate with the governments of the United States or other states or state agencies or organizations, officials, or unofficial, in respect to pollution control matters or for the formulation of interstate pollution control compacts or agreements.'' EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate consultation with government officials related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to [[Page 11725]] approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(J) consultation with government officials. Public notification (127 public notification): Regulation 61-62.3, Air Pollution Episodes, requires that SC DHEC notify the public of any air pollution episode or NAAQS violation. S.C. Code Ann. Sec. 48-1-60 establishes that ``Classification and standards of quality and purity of the environment [are] authorized after notice and hearing.'' Additionally, Regulation 61-62.5, Standard 7.1 (q), Public Participation, notifies the public by advertisement in a newspaper of general circulation in each region in which a proposed plant or modifications will be constructed of the degree of increment consumption that is expected from the plant or modification, and the opportunity for comment at a public hearing as well as written public comment. An opportunity for a public hearing for interested persons to appear and submit written or oral comments on the air quality impact of the plant or modification, alternatives to the plant or modification, the control technology required, and other appropriate considerations is also offered. EPA also notes that SC DHEC maintains a Web site that provides the public with notice of the health hazards associated with SO2 NAAQS exceedances, measures the public can take to help prevent such exceedances, and the ways in which the public can participate in the regulatory process. See http://www.scdhec.gov/HomeAndEnvironment/Air/MostCommonPollutants/SulfurDioxide/. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate the State's ability to provide public notification related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(J) public notification. PSD: With regard to the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J), this requirement may be met by a state's confirmation in an infrastructure SIP submission that new major sources and major modifications in the state are subject to a PSD program meeting all the current structural requirements of part C of title I of the CAA. As discussed in more detail above under the section discussing 110(a)(2)(C), South Carolina's SIP contains provisions for the State's PSD program that reflect the relevant SIP revisions pertaining to the required structural PSD requirements to satisfy the requirement of the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP is adequate for PSD permitting of major sources and major modifications for the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J). Visibility protection: EPA's 2013 Guidance notes that it does not treat the visibility protection aspects of section 110(a)(2)(J) as applicable for purposes of the infrastructure SIP approval process. SC DHEC referenced its regional haze program as germane to the visibility component of section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA recognizes that states are subject to visibility protection and regional haze program requirements under part C of the Act (which includes sections 169A and 169B). However, there are no newly applicable visibility protection obligations after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Thus, EPA has determined that states do not need to address the visibility component of 110(a)(2)(J) in infrastructure SIP submittals so SC DHEC does not need to rely on its regional haze program to fulfill its obligations under section 110(a)(2)(J). As such, EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS is approvable for the visibility protection element of section 110(a)(2)(J) and that South Carolina does not need to rely on its regional haze program. 11. 110(a)(2)(K) Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling Data: Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA requires that SIPs provide for performing air quality modeling so that effects on air quality of emissions from NAAQS pollutants can be predicted and submission of such data to the EPA can be made. Regulations 61-62.5, Standard No. 2, Ambient Air Quality Standards, and Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, of the South Carolina SIP specify that required air modeling be conducted in accordance with 40 CFR part 51, Appendix W, Guideline on Air Quality Models, as incorporated into the South Carolina SIP. Also, S.C. Code Ann. section 48-1-50(14) provides SC DHEC with the necessary authority to ``Collect and disseminate information on air and water control.'' Additionally, South Carolina participates in a regional effort to coordinate the development of emissions inventories and conduct regional modeling for several NAAQS, including the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, for the southeastern states. Taken as a whole, South Carolina's air quality regulations and practices demonstrate that SC DHEC has the authority to provide relevant data for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of any pollutant for which a NAAQS had been promulgated, and to provide such information to the EPA Administrator upon request. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate the State's ability to provide for air quality and modeling, along with analysis of the associated data, related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(K). 12. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting fees: Section 110(a)(2)(L) requires the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under the CAA, a fee sufficient to cover (i) the reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon any application for such a permit, and (ii) if the owner or operator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any such permit (not including any court costs or other costs associated with any enforcement action), until such fee requirement is superseded with respect to such sources by the Administrator's approval of a fee program under title V. S.C. Code Ann. Section 48-2-50 prescribes that SC DHEC charge fees for environmental programs it administers pursuant to Federal and State law and regulations including those that govern the costs to review, implement and enforce PSD and NNSR permits. Regulation 61-30, Environmental Protection Fees\21\ prescribes fees applicable to applicants and holders of permits, licenses, certificates, certifications, and registrations, establishes procedures for the payment of fees, provides for the assessment of penalties for nonpayment, and establishes an appeals process for refuting fees. This regulation may be amended as needed to meet the funding requirements of the State's permitting program. Additionally, South Carolina has a federally-approved title V program, Regulation 61-62.70, Title V Operating Permit Program,\22\ which implements and enforces the requirements of PSD and NNSR for facilities once they begin operating. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP and practices [[Page 11726]] adequately provide for permitting fees related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(L). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \21\ This regulation has not been incorporated into the federally-approved SIP. \22\ Title V program regulations are federally-approved but not incorporated into the federally-approved SIP. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation/participation by affected local entities: Section 110(a)(2)(M) of the Act requires states to provide for consultation and participation in SIP development by local political subdivisions affected by the SIP. Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, of the South Carolina SIP requires that SC DHEC notify the public, which includes local entities, of an application, preliminary determination, the activity or activities involved in the permit action, any emissions change associated with any permit modification, and the opportunity for comment prior to making a final permitting decision. Also, as noted above, S.C. Code Ann. Section 48-1-50(8) allows SC DHEC to ``Cooperate with the governments of the United States or other states or state agencies or organizations, officials, or unofficial, in respect to pollution control matters or for the formulation of interstate pollution control compacts or agreements.'' By way of example, SC DHEC has recently worked closely with local political subdivisions during the development of its Transportation Conformity SIP, Regional Haze Implementation Plan, and Ozone Early Action Compacts. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate consultation with affected local entities related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(M). V. Proposed Action With the exception of interstate transport provisions pertaining to the contribution to nonattainment or interference with maintenance in other states and visibility protection requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4), EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's May 8, 2014, SIP submission for the 2010 1- hour SO2 NAAQS for the above described infrastructure SIP requirements. EPA is proposing to approve these portions of South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS because these aspects of the submission are consistent with section 110 of the CAA. VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4); does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this proposed action for the state of South Carolina does not have Tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The Catawba Indian Nation Reservation is located within the State of South Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba Indian Claims Settlement Act, South Carolina statute 27-16-120, ``all state and local environmental laws and regulations apply to the [Catawba Indian Nation] and Reservation and are fully enforceable by all relevant state and local agencies and authorities.'' However, EPA has determined that because this proposed rule does not have substantial direct effects on an Indian Tribe because, as noted above, this action is not approving any specific rule, but rather proposing that South Carolina's already approved SIP meets certain CAA requirements. EPA notes today's action will not impose substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: February 19, 2016. Heather McTeer Toney, Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. 2016-04728 Filed 3-4-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 11717
making effective comments, please visit State of South Carolina, through the Table of Contents
http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ South Carolina Department of Health I. Background and Overview
commenting-epa-dockets. and Environmental Control (SC DHEC), II. What elements are required under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: on May 8, 2014, to demonstrate that the Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?
Edward Doty, Air Programs Branch State meets the infrastructure III. What is EPA’s approach to the review of
(AR–18J), Environmental Protection requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA infrastructure SIP submissions?
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, or Act) for the 2010 1-hour sulfur IV. What is EPA’s analysis of how South
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6057, dioxide (SO2) national ambient air Carolina addressed the elements of the
quality standard (NAAQS). The CAA Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)
Doty.Edward@epa.gov. ‘‘Infrastructure’’ provisions?
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
requires that each state adopt and
V. Proposed Action
Final Rules section of this Federal submit a SIP for the implementation,
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Register, EPA is approving the State’s maintenance and enforcement of each
SIP submittal as a direct final rule NAAQS promulgated by EPA, which is I. Background and Overview
without prior proposal because EPA commonly referred to as an
‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP. SC DHEC certified On June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520), EPA
views this as a noncontroversial promulgated a revised primary SO2
that the South Carolina SIP contains
submittal and anticipates no adverse NAAQS to an hourly standard of 75
provisions that ensure the 2010 1-hour
comments. A detailed rationale for the parts per billion based on a 3-year
SO2 NAAQS is implemented, enforced,
approval is set forth in the direct final average of the annual 99th percentile of
and maintained in South Carolina. EPA
rule. If no adverse comments are 1-hour daily maximum concentrations.
is proposing to determine that portions
received in response to this rule, no Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the
of South Carolina’s infrastructure
further activity is contemplated. If EPA CAA, states are required to submit SIPs
submission, submitted to EPA on May 8,
receives adverse comments, the direct meeting the applicable requirements of
2014, satisfy certain required
final rule will be withdrawn and all section 110(a)(2) within three years after
infrastructure elements for the 2010 1-
public comments received will be promulgation of a new or revised
hour SO2 NAAQS.
addressed in a subsequent final rule NAAQS or within such shorter period
based on this proposed rule. EPA will DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before April 6, 2016. as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(2)
not institute a second comment period. requires states to address basic SIP
Any parties interested in commenting ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
elements such as requirements for
on this action should do so at this time. identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
monitoring, basic program requirements
Please note that if EPA receives adverse OAR–2015–0151 at http://
and legal authority that are designed to
comment on an amendment, paragraph, www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
assure attainment and maintenance of
or section of this rule and if that instructions for submitting comments.
the NAAQS. States were required to
provision may be severed from the Once submitted, comments cannot be
submit such SIPs for the 2010 1-hour
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
SO2 NAAQS to EPA no later than June
as final those provisions of the rule that EPA may publish any comment received
22, 2013.1
are not the subject of an adverse to its public docket. Do not submit
comment. For additional information electronically any information you Today’s action is proposing to
see the direct final rule, which is consider to be Confidential Business approve South Carolina’s infrastructure
located in the Rules section of this Information (CBI) or other information SIP submission for the applicable
Federal Register. whose disclosure is restricted by statute. requirements of the 2010 1-hour SO2
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, NAAQS, with the exception of the
Dated: February 22, 2016. interstate transport requirements of
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
Robert A. Kaplan, comment. The written comment is section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. considered the official comment and 1, 2, and 4). With respect to the
[FR Doc. 2016–04895 Filed 3–4–16; 8:45 am] should include discussion of all points interstate transport requirements of
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P you wish to make. EPA will generally section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs
not consider comments or comment 1, 2, and 4), EPA is not proposing any
contents located outside of the primary action today regarding these
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or requirements. For the aspects of South
AGENCY other file sharing system). For Carolina’s submittal proposed for
additional submission methods, the full approval today, EPA notes that the
40 CFR Part 52 EPA public comment policy, Agency is not approving any specific
[EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0151; FRL–9943–34– information about CBI or multimedia rule, but rather proposing that South
Region 4] submissions, and general guidance on Carolina’s already approved SIP meets
making effective comments, please visit certain CAA requirements.
Approval and Promulgation of http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
Implementation Plans; South Carolina; commenting-epa-dockets. 1 In these infrastructure SIP submissions States
Infrastructure Requirements for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
generally certify evidence of compliance with
2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA through a
Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory combination of state regulations and statutes, some
Air Quality Standard Management Section, Air Planning and
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
of which have been incorporated into the federally-
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides approved SIP. In addition, certain federally-
AGENCY: Environmental Protection approved, non-SIP regulations may also be
Agency (EPA). and Toxics Management Division, U.S. appropriate for demonstrating compliance with
ACTION: Proposed rule. Environmental Protection Agency, sections 110(a)(1) and (2). Throughout this
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., rulemaking, unless otherwise indicated, the term
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. ‘‘Regulation’’ indicates that the cited regulation has
been approved into South Carolina’s federally-
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve Notarianni can be reached via electronic approved SIP. The term ‘‘S.C. Code Ann.’’ indicates
portions of the State Implementation mail at notarianni.michele@epa.gov or cited South Carolina state statutes, which are not
Plan (SIP) submission, submitted by the the telephone number (404) 562–9031. a part of the SIP unless otherwise indicated.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_11761/page/1.svg)
![11718 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules
II. What elements are required under for Construction or Modification of does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? Stationary Sources 3 the term to distinguish this particular
• 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II): Interstate type of SIP submission from
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires Pollution Transport submissions that are intended to satisfy
states to submit SIPs to provide for the • 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution other SIP requirements under the CAA,
implementation, maintenance, and Abatement and International Air such as ‘‘nonattainment SIP’’ or
enforcement of a new or revised Pollution ‘‘attainment plan SIP’’ submissions to
NAAQS within three years following • 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate Resources address the nonattainment planning
the promulgation of such NAAQS, or and Authority, Conflict of Interest, and requirements of part D of title I of the
within such shorter period as EPA may Oversight of Local Governments and CAA, ‘‘regional haze SIP’’ submissions
prescribe. Section 110(a) imposes the Regional Agencies required by EPA rule to address the
obligation upon states to make a SIP • 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary Source visibility protection requirements of
submission to EPA for a new or revised Monitoring and Reporting CAA section 169A, and nonattainment
NAAQS, but the contents of that • 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency Powers new source review (NNSR) permit
submission may vary depending upon • 110(a)(2)(H): SIP Revisions program submissions to address the
the facts and circumstances. In • 110(a)(2)(I): Plan Revisions for permit requirements of CAA, title I, part
particular, the data and analytical tools Nonattainment Areas 4 D.
available at the time the state develops • 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with
Government Officials, Public Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing
and submits the SIP for a new or revised
Notification, and Prevention of and general requirements for
NAAQS affects the content of the
Significant Deterioration (PSD) and infrastructure SIP submissions, and
submission. The contents of such SIP
Visibility Protection section 110(a)(2) provides more details
submissions may also vary depending
• 110(a)(2)(K): Air Quality Modeling concerning the required contents of
upon what provisions the state’s
and Submission of Modeling Data these submissions. The list of required
existing SIP already contains.
• 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees elements provided in section 110(a)(2)
More specifically, section 110(a)(1) contains a wide variety of disparate
provides the procedural and timing • 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation and
Participation by Affected Local Entities provisions, some of which pertain to
requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) required legal authority, some of which
lists specific elements that states must III. What is EPA’s approach to the pertain to required substantive program
meet for the ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP review of infrastructure SIP provisions, and some of which pertain
requirements related to a newly submissions? to requirements for both authority and
established or revised NAAQS. As EPA is acting upon the SIP substantive program provisions.5 EPA
mentioned above, these requirements submission from South Carolina that therefore believes that while the timing
include basic SIP elements such as addresses the infrastructure requirement in section 110(a)(1) is
requirements for monitoring, basic requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) unambiguous, some of the other
program requirements and legal and 110(a)(2) for the 2010 1-hour SO2 statutory provisions are ambiguous. In
authority that are designed to assure NAAQS. The requirement for states to particular, EPA believes that the list of
attainment and maintenance of the make a SIP submission of this type required elements for infrastructure SIP
NAAQS. The requirements that are the arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). submissions provided in section
subject of this proposed rulemaking are Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states 110(a)(2) contains ambiguities
summarized below and in EPA’s must make SIP submissions ‘‘within 3 concerning what is required for
September 13, 2013, memorandum years (or such shorter period as the inclusion in an infrastructure SIP
entitled ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure Administrator may prescribe) after the submission.
State Implementation Plan (SIP) promulgation of a national primary The following examples of
Elements under Clean Air Act Sections ambient air quality standard (or any ambiguities illustrate the need for EPA
110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2).’’ 2 revision thereof),’’ and these SIP to interpret some section 110(a)(1) and
• 110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and submissions are to provide for the section 110(a)(2) requirements with
Other Control Measures ‘‘implementation, maintenance, and respect to infrastructure SIP
• 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient Air Quality enforcement’’ of such NAAQS. The submissions for a given new or revised
Monitoring/Data System statute directly imposes on states the NAAQS. One example of ambiguity is
duty to make these SIP submissions, that section 110(a)(2) requires that
• 110(a)(2)(C): Programs for and the requirement to make the ‘‘each’’ SIP submission must meet the
Enforcement of Control Measures and submissions is not conditioned upon list of requirements therein, while EPA
EPA’s taking any action other than has long noted that this literal reading
2 Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are
promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. of the statute is internally inconsistent
not governed by the three year submission deadline
of section 110(a)(1) because SIPs incorporating
Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of and would create a conflict with the
necessary local nonattainment area controls are not specific elements that ‘‘[e]ach such nonattainment provisions in part D of
due within three years after promulgation of a new plan’’ submission must address. title I of the Act, which specifically
or revised NAAQS, but rather due at the time the EPA has historically referred to these address nonattainment SIP
nonattainment area plan requirements are due
SIP submissions made for the purpose
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
pursuant to section 172. These requirements are: (1)
Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C) to the of satisfying the requirements of CAA 5 For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides
extent that subsection refers to a permit program as sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as that states must provide assurances that they have
required in part D title I of the CAA; and (2) ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ submissions. adequate legal authority under state and local law
submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(I) which to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C) provides
pertain to the nonattainment planning requirements
Although the term ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ that states must have a SIP-approved program to
of part D, title I of the CAA. Today’s proposed address certain sources as required by part C of title
3 This rulemaking only addresses requirements
rulemaking does not address infrastructure I of the CAA; and section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that
elements related to section 110(a)(2)(I) or the for this element as they relate to attainment areas. states must have legal authority to address
nonattainment planning requirements of 4 As mentioned above, this element is not emergencies as well as contingency plans that are
110(a)(2)(C). relevant to today’s proposed rulemaking. triggered in the event of such emergencies.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_11761/page/2.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 11721
provides other avenues and mechanisms the provisions of sections 110(a)(1) and During Malfunctions, Startup, and
to address specific substantive (2) as described below. Shutdown’’ (September 20, 1999), and
deficiencies in existing SIPs. These 1. 110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and the Agency is addressing such state
other statutory tools allow EPA to take Other Control Measures: Section regulations in a separate action.18
appropriately tailored action, depending 110(a)(2)(A) requires that each Additionally, in this action, EPA is
upon the nature and severity of the implementation plan include not proposing to approve or disapprove
alleged SIP deficiency. Section 110(k)(5) enforceable emission limitations and any existing state rules with regard to
authorizes EPA to issue a ‘‘SIP call’’ other control measures, means, or director’s discretion or variance
whenever the Agency determines that a techniques (including economic provisions. EPA believes that a number
state’s implementation plan is incentives such as fees, marketable of states have such provisions which are
substantially inadequate to attain or permits, and auctions of emissions contrary to the CAA and existing EPA
maintain the NAAQS, to mitigate rights), as well as schedules and guidance (52 FR 45109 (November 24,
interstate transport, or to otherwise timetables for compliance, as may be 1987)), and the Agency plans to take
comply with the CAA.15 Section necessary or appropriate to meet the action in the future to address such state
110(k)(6) authorizes EPA to correct applicable requirements. Several regulations. In the meantime, EPA
errors in past actions, such as past regulations within South Carolina’s SIP encourages any state having a director’s
approvals of SIP submissions.16 are relevant to air quality control discretion or variance provision which
Significantly, EPA’s determination that regulations. The regulations described is contrary to the CAA and EPA
an action on a state’s infrastructure SIP below have been federally-approved in guidance to take steps to correct the
submission is not the appropriate time the South Carolina SIP and include deficiency as soon as possible.
and place to address all potential enforceable emission limitations and 2. 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient Air Quality
existing SIP deficiencies does not other control measures. Regulation 61– Monitoring/Data System: Section
preclude EPA’s subsequent reliance on 62.5, Standard No. 2, Ambient Air 110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to provide for
provisions in section 110(a)(2) as part of Quality Standards and Regulation 61– establishment and operation of
the basis for action to correct those 62.1, Definitions and General appropriate devices, methods, systems,
deficiencies at a later time. For example, Requirements, provide enforceable and procedures necessary to: (i)
although it may not be appropriate to emission limits and other control Monitor, compile, and analyze data on
require a state to eliminate all existing measures, means, and techniques. ambient air quality, and (ii) upon
inappropriate director’s discretion Section 48–1–50(23) of the 1976 South request, make such data available to the
provisions in the course of acting on an Carolina Code of Laws, as amended, Administrator. South Carolina’s Air
infrastructure SIP submission, EPA (S.C. Code Ann.) provides SC DHEC Pollution Control Regulations,
believes that section 110(a)(2)(A) may be with the authority to ‘‘Adopt emission Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7,
among the statutory bases that EPA and effluent control regulations Prevention of Significant Deterioration,
relies upon in the course of addressing standards and limitations that are along with the South Carolina Network
such deficiency in a subsequent applicable to the entire state, that are Description and Ambient Air Network
action.17 applicable only within specified areas Monitoring Plan, provide for an ambient
or zones of the state, or that are air quality monitoring system in the
IV. What is EPA’s analysis of how applicable only when a specified class State. S.C. Code Ann. § 48–1–50(14)
South Carolina addressed the elements of pollutant is present.’’ Collectively provides the Department with the
of the sections 110(a)(1) and (2) these regulations establish enforceable necessary authority to ‘‘[c]ollect and
‘‘Infrastructure’’ provisions? emissions limitations and other control disseminate information on air and
South Carolina’s May 8, 2014, measures, means or techniques, for water control.’’ Annually, states develop
infrastructure SIP submission addresses activities that contribute to SO2 and submit to EPA for approval
concentrations in the ambient air and statewide ambient monitoring network
15 For example, EPA issued a SIP call to Utah to
provide authority for SC DHEC to plans consistent with the requirements
address specific existing SIP deficiencies related to of 40 CFR parts 50, 53, and 58. The
the treatment of excess emissions during SSM
establish such limits and measures as
events. See ‘‘Finding of Substantial Inadequacy of well as schedules for compliance to annual network plan involves an
Implementation Plan; Call for Utah State meet the applicable requirements of the evaluation of any proposed changes to
Implementation Plan Revisions,’’ 74 FR 21639 CAA. EPA has made the preliminary the monitoring network, includes the
(April 18, 2011). annual ambient monitoring network
16 EPA has used this authority to correct errors in
determination that the provisions
past actions on SIP submissions related to PSD contained in these State regulations and design plan and a certified evaluation of
programs. See ‘‘Limitation of Approval of State statute are adequate for the agency’s ambient monitors and
Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions enforceable emission limitations and auxiliary support equipment.19 On July
Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in other control measures, means, or 20, 2015, South Carolina submitted its
State Implementation Plans; Final Rule,’’ 75 FR
82536 (December 30, 2010). EPA has previously techniques, as well as schedules and plan to EPA. On November 19, 2015,
used its authority under CAA section 110(k)(6) to timetables for compliance to satisfy the EPA approved South Carolina’s
remove numerous other SIP provisions that the requirements of Section 110(a)(2(A) for monitoring network plan. South
Agency determined it had approved in error. See, the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in the Carolina’s approved monitoring network
e.g., 61 FR 38664 (July 25, 1996) and 62 FR 34641
(June 27, 1997) (corrections to American Samoa, State.
Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 In this action, EPA is not proposing to 18 On June 12, 2015, EPA published a final action
approve or disapprove any existing state entitled, ‘‘State Implementation Plans: Response to
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
FR 67062 (November 16, 2004) (corrections to
California SIP); and 74 FR 57051 (November 3, Petition for Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of
provisions with regard to excess EPA’s SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings of
2009) (corrections to Arizona and Nevada SIPs).
17 See, e.g., EPA’s disapproval of a SIP submission
emissions during start up, shut down Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend
from Colorado on the grounds that it would have and malfunction (SSM) operations at a Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During
included a director’s discretion provision facility. EPA believes that a number of Periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction.’’
inconsistent with CAA requirements, including states have SSM provisions which are See 80 FR 33840.
section 110(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., 75 FR 42342 at 42344 19 On occasion, proposed changes to the
(July 21, 2010) (proposed disapproval of director’s
contrary to the CAA and existing EPA monitoring network are evaluated outside of the
discretion provisions); 76 FR 4540 (Jan. 26, 2011) guidance, ‘‘State Implementation Plans: network plan approval process in accordance with
(final disapproval of such provisions). Policy Regarding Excess Emissions 40 CFR part 58.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_11761/page/5.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 11723
contribute to levels of pollution in Code Ann § 1–23–40 (the Ann. Section 8–13–730. S.C. Code Ann.
excess of a NAAQS in any air quality Administrative Procedures Act) and S.C. Section 8–13–730 provides that
control region outside of South Code Ann. Section 48, Title 1. For ‘‘[u]nless otherwise provided by law, no
Carolina. Additionally, South Carolina Section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii), the submission person may serve as a member of a
does not have any pending obligation states that South Carolina does not rely governmental regulatory agency that
under section 115 and 126 of the CAA. on localities for specific SIP regulates business with which that
EPA has made the preliminary implementation. person is associated,’’ and S.C. Code
determination that South Carolina’s SIP The requirements of 110(a)(2)(E)(i) Ann. Section 8–13–700(A) which
and practices are adequate for ensuring and (iii) are further confirmed when provides in part that ‘‘[n]o public
compliance with the applicable EPA performs a completeness official, public member, or public
requirements relating to interstate and determination for each SIP submittal. employee may knowingly use his
international pollution abatement for This provides additional assurances that official office, membership, or
the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. each submittal provides evidence that employment to obtain an economic
6. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate Resources adequate personnel, funding, and legal interest for himself, a member of his
and Authority, Conflict of Interest, and authority under State law has been used immediate family, an individual with
Oversight of Local Governments and to carry out the State’s implementation whom he is associated, or a business
Regional Agencies: Section 110(a)(2)(E) plan and related issues. This with which he is associated.’’ S.C. Code
requires that each implementation plan information is included in all Ann. Section 8–13–700(B)(1)–(5)
provide (i) necessary assurances that the prehearings and final SIP submittal provides for disclosure of any conflicts
State will have adequate personnel, packages for approval by EPA. of interest by public official, public
funding, and authority under state law As evidence of the adequacy of SC member or public employee, which
to carry out its implementation plan, (ii) DHEC’s resources with respect to sub- meets the requirement of CAA Section
that the state comply with the elements (i) and (iii), EPA submitted a 128(a)(2) that ‘‘any potential conflicts of
requirements respecting state boards letter to South Carolina on March 9, interest . . . be adequately disclosed.’’
pursuant to section 128 of the Act, and 2015, outlining 105 grant commitments These State statutes—S.C. Code Ann.
(iii) necessary assurances that, where and the current status of these Sections 8–13–730, 8–13–700(A), and
the state has relied on a local or regional commitments for fiscal year 2014. The 8–13–700(B)(1)–(5)—have been
government, agency, or instrumentality letter EPA submitted to South Carolina approved into the South Carolina SIP as
for the implementation of any plan can be accessed at www.regulations.gov required by CAA section 128. EPA has
provision, the state has responsibility using Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR– made the preliminary determination
for ensuring adequate implementation 2015–0151. Annually, states update that South Carolina has adequate
of such plan provisions. EPA is these grant commitments based on resources for implementation of the
proposing to approve South Carolina’s current SIP requirements, air quality
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
SIP as meeting the requirements of planning, and applicable requirements
section 110(a)(2)(E). EPA’s rationale for related to the NAAQS. There were no 7. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary Source
today’s proposal respecting each outstanding issues in relation to the SIP Monitoring and Reporting: Section
requirement of section 110(a)(2)(E) is for fiscal year 2014, therefore, SC 110(a)(2)(F) requires SIPs to meet
described in turn below. DHEC’s grants were finalized and closed applicable requirements addressing (i)
With respect to section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) out. the installation, maintenance, and
and (iii), SC DHEC develops, Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires that replacement of equipment, and the
implements and enforces EPA-approved states comply with section 128 of the implementation of other necessary
SIP provisions in the State. S.C. Code CAA. Section 128 of the CAA requires steps, by owners or operators of
Ann. Section 48, Title 1, as referenced that states include provisions in their stationary sources to monitor emissions
in South Carolina’s infrastructure SIP SIP to address conflicts of interest for from such sources, (ii) periodic reports
submission, provides the SC DHEC’s state boards or bodies that oversee CAA on the nature and amounts of emissions
general legal authority to establish a SIP permits and enforcement orders and and emissions related data from such
and implement related plans. In disclosure of conflict of interest sources, and (iii) correlation of such
particular, S.C. Code Ann. Section 48– requirements. Specifically, CAA section reports by the state agency with any
1–50(12) grants SC DHEC the statutory 128(a)(1) necessitates that each SIP shall emission limitations or standards
authority to ‘‘[a]ccept, receive and require that at least a majority of any established pursuant to this section,
administer grants or other funds or gifts board or body which approves permits which reports shall be available at
for the purpose of carrying out any of or enforcement orders shall be subject to reasonable times for public inspection.
the purposes of this chapter; [and to] the described public interest service and SC DHEC’s infrastructure SIP
accept, receive and receipt for Federal income restrictions therein. Subsection submission describes the establishment
money given by the Federal government 128(a)(2) requires that the members of of requirements for compliance testing
under any Federal law to the State of any board or body, or the head of an by emissions sampling and analysis,
South Carolina for air or water control executive agency with similar power to and for emissions and operation
activities, surveys or programs.’’ S.C. approve permits or enforcement orders monitoring to ensure the quality of data
Code Ann. Section 48, Title 2 grants SC under the CAA, shall also be subject to in the State. SC DHEC uses these data
DHEC statutory authority to establish conflict of interest disclosure to track progress towards maintaining
environmental protection funds, which requirements. the NAAQS, develop control and
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
provide resources for SC DHEC to carry With respect to 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), South maintenance strategies, identify sources
out its obligations under the CAA. Carolina satisfies the requirements of and general emission levels, and
Specifically, in Regulation 61–30, CAA section 128(a)(1) for the South determine compliance with emission
Environmental Protection Fees, SC Carolina Board of Health and regulations and additional EPA
DHEC established fees for sources Environmental Control, which is the requirements. These SIP requirements
subject to air permitting programs. SC ‘‘board or body which approves permits are codified at Regulation 61–62.1,
DHEC implements the SIP in and enforcement orders’’ under the CAA Definitions and General Requirements,
accordance with the provisions of S.C. in South Carolina, through S.C. Code which provides for an emission
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_11761/page/7.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 11725
approve South Carolina’s infrastructure section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA has made the predicting the effect on ambient air
SIP submission with respect to section preliminary determination that South quality of any emissions of any
110(a)(2)(J) consultation with Carolina’s SIP is adequate for PSD pollutant for which a NAAQS had been
government officials. permitting of major sources and major promulgated, and to provide such
Public notification (127 public modifications for the PSD element of information to the EPA Administrator
notification): Regulation 61–62.3, Air section 110(a)(2)(J). upon request. EPA has made the
Pollution Episodes, requires that SC Visibility protection: EPA’s 2013 preliminary determination that South
DHEC notify the public of any air Guidance notes that it does not treat the Carolina’s SIP and practices adequately
pollution episode or NAAQS violation. visibility protection aspects of section demonstrate the State’s ability to
S.C. Code Ann. § 48–1–60 establishes 110(a)(2)(J) as applicable for purposes of provide for air quality and modeling,
that ‘‘Classification and standards of the infrastructure SIP approval process. along with analysis of the associated
quality and purity of the environment SC DHEC referenced its regional haze data, related to the 2010 1-hour SO2
[are] authorized after notice and program as germane to the visibility NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing
hearing.’’ Additionally, Regulation 61– component of section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA to approve South Carolina’s
62.5, Standard 7.1 (q), Public recognizes that states are subject to infrastructure SIP submission with
Participation, notifies the public by visibility protection and regional haze respect to section 110(a)(2)(K).
advertisement in a newspaper of general program requirements under part C of 12. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting fees:
circulation in each region in which a the Act (which includes sections 169A Section 110(a)(2)(L) requires the owner
proposed plant or modifications will be and 169B). However, there are no newly or operator of each major stationary
constructed of the degree of increment applicable visibility protection source to pay to the permitting
consumption that is expected from the obligations after the promulgation of a authority, as a condition of any permit
plant or modification, and the new or revised NAAQS. Thus, EPA has required under the CAA, a fee sufficient
opportunity for comment at a public determined that states do not need to to cover (i) the reasonable costs of
hearing as well as written public address the visibility component of reviewing and acting upon any
comment. An opportunity for a public 110(a)(2)(J) in infrastructure SIP application for such a permit, and (ii) if
hearing for interested persons to appear submittals so SC DHEC does not need to the owner or operator receives a permit
and submit written or oral comments on rely on its regional haze program to for such source, the reasonable costs of
the air quality impact of the plant or fulfill its obligations under section implementing and enforcing the terms
modification, alternatives to the plant or 110(a)(2)(J). As such, EPA has made the and conditions of any such permit (not
modification, the control technology preliminary determination that South including any court costs or other costs
required, and other appropriate Carolina’s infrastructure SIP submission associated with any enforcement
considerations is also offered. related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS action), until such fee requirement is
EPA also notes that SC DHEC is approvable for the visibility superseded with respect to such sources
maintains a Web site that provides the protection element of section by the Administrator’s approval of a fee
public with notice of the health hazards 110(a)(2)(J) and that South Carolina does program under title V.
associated with SO2 NAAQS not need to rely on its regional haze S.C. Code Ann. Section 48–2–50
exceedances, measures the public can program. prescribes that SC DHEC charge fees for
take to help prevent such exceedances, 11. 110(a)(2)(K) Air Quality Modeling
environmental programs it administers
and the ways in which the public can and Submission of Modeling Data:
pursuant to Federal and State law and
participate in the regulatory process. Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA requires
regulations including those that govern
See http://www.scdhec.gov/ that SIPs provide for performing air
the costs to review, implement and
HomeAndEnvironment/Air/ quality modeling so that effects on air
MostCommonPollutants/SulfurDioxide/. quality of emissions from NAAQS enforce PSD and NNSR permits.
EPA has made the preliminary pollutants can be predicted and Regulation 61–30, Environmental
determination that South Carolina’s SIP submission of such data to the EPA can Protection Fees21 prescribes fees
and practices adequately demonstrate be made. Regulations 61–62.5, Standard applicable to applicants and holders of
the State’s ability to provide public No. 2, Ambient Air Quality Standards, permits, licenses, certificates,
notification related to the 2010 1-hour and Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7, certifications, and registrations,
SO2 NAAQS when necessary. Prevention of Significant Deterioration, establishes procedures for the payment
Accordingly, EPA is proposing to of the South Carolina SIP specify that of fees, provides for the assessment of
approve South Carolina’s infrastructure required air modeling be conducted in penalties for nonpayment, and
SIP submission with respect to section accordance with 40 CFR part 51, establishes an appeals process for
110(a)(2)(J) public notification. Appendix W, Guideline on Air Quality refuting fees. This regulation may be
PSD: With regard to the PSD element Models, as incorporated into the South amended as needed to meet the funding
of section 110(a)(2)(J), this requirement Carolina SIP. Also, S.C. Code Ann. requirements of the State’s permitting
may be met by a state’s confirmation in section 48–1–50(14) provides SC DHEC program. Additionally, South Carolina
an infrastructure SIP submission that with the necessary authority to ‘‘Collect has a federally-approved title V
new major sources and major and disseminate information on air and program, Regulation 61–62.70, Title V
modifications in the state are subject to water control.’’ Additionally, South Operating Permit Program,22 which
a PSD program meeting all the current Carolina participates in a regional effort implements and enforces the
structural requirements of part C of title to coordinate the development of requirements of PSD and NNSR for
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
I of the CAA. As discussed in more emissions inventories and conduct facilities once they begin operating. EPA
detail above under the section regional modeling for several NAAQS, has made the preliminary determination
discussing 110(a)(2)(C), South Carolina’s including the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, that South Carolina’s SIP and practices
SIP contains provisions for the State’s for the southeastern states. Taken as a
21 This regulation has not been incorporated into
PSD program that reflect the relevant whole, South Carolina’s air quality
the federally-approved SIP.
SIP revisions pertaining to the required regulations and practices demonstrate 22 Title V program regulations are federally-
structural PSD requirements to satisfy that SC DHEC has the authority to approved but not incorporated into the federally-
the requirement of the PSD element of provide relevant data for the purpose of approved SIP.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_11761/page/9.svg)
![11726 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules
adequately provide for permitting fees VI. Statutory and Executive Order because this proposed rule does not
related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS Reviews have substantial direct effects on an
when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is Under the CAA, the Administrator is Indian Tribe because, as noted above,
proposing to approve South Carolina’s required to approve a SIP submission this action is not approving any specific
infrastructure SIP submission with that complies with the provisions of the rule, but rather proposing that South
respect to section 110(a)(2)(L). Act and applicable Federal regulations. Carolina’s already approved SIP meets
13. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation/ See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). certain CAA requirements. EPA notes
participation by affected local entities: Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, today’s action will not impose
Section 110(a)(2)(M) of the Act requires EPA’s role is to approve state choices, substantial direct costs on Tribal
states to provide for consultation and provided that they meet the criteria of governments or preempt Tribal law.
participation in SIP development by the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
local political subdivisions affected by action merely approves state law as
Environmental protection, Air
the SIP. Regulation 61–62.5, Standard meeting Federal requirements and does
pollution control, Incorporation by
No. 7, Prevention of Significant not impose additional requirements
reference Intergovernmental relations,
Deterioration, of the South Carolina SIP beyond those imposed by state law. For
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
requires that SC DHEC notify the public, that reason, this proposed action:
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
which includes local entities, of an • Is not a significant regulatory action subject organic compounds.
application, preliminary determination, to review by the Office of Management and
the activity or activities involved in the Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
permit action, any emissions change FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 Dated: February 19, 2016.
associated with any permit FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Heather McTeer Toney,
• does not impose an information collection
modification, and the opportunity for burden under the provisions of the Regional Administrator, Region 4.
comment prior to making a final Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 [FR Doc. 2016–04728 Filed 3–4–16; 8:45 am]
permitting decision. Also, as noted et seq.); BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
above, S.C. Code Ann. Section 48–1– • is certified as not having a significant
50(8) allows SC DHEC to ‘‘Cooperate economic impact on a substantial number
with the governments of the United of small entities under the Regulatory ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
States or other states or state agencies or AGENCY
• does not contain any unfunded mandate or
organizations, officials, or unofficial, in significantly or uniquely affect small
respect to pollution control matters or governments, as described in the Unfunded 40 CFR Part 52
for the formulation of interstate Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104– [EPA–R05–OAR–2014–0664; FRL–9943–32–
pollution control compacts or 4); Region 5]
agreements.’’ By way of example, SC • does not have Federalism implications as
DHEC has recently worked closely with specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR Air Plan Approval; Illinois; Base Year
43255, August 10, 1999); Emission Inventories for the 2008
local political subdivisions during the • is not an economically significant
development of its Transportation regulatory action based on health or safety 8-Hour Ozone Standard
Conformity SIP, Regional Haze risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Implementation Plan, and Ozone Early FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
Agency (EPA).
Action Compacts. EPA has made the • is not a significant regulatory action subject
to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, ACTION: Proposed rule.
preliminary determination that South
Carolina’s SIP and practices adequately May 22, 2001);
• is not subject to requirements of Section SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
demonstrate consultation with affected 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
local entities related to the 2010 1-hour and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. State Implementation Plan (SIP)
SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is 272 note) because application of those revision submitted by the Illinois
proposing to approve South Carolina’s requirements would be inconsistent with Environmental Protection Agency
infrastructure SIP submission with the CAA; and (IEPA) on September 3, 2014, to address
respect to section 110(a)(2)(M). • does not provide EPA with the emission inventory requirements for the
discretionary authority to address, as
V. Proposed Action appropriate, disproportionate human Illinois portions of the Chicago-
health or environmental effects, using Naperville, Illinois-Indiana-Wisconsin
With the exception of interstate practicable and legally permissible and St. Louis, Missouri-Illinois ozone
transport provisions pertaining to the methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 nonattainment areas under the 2008
contribution to nonattainment or FR 7629, February 16, 1994). ozone National Ambient Air Quality
interference with maintenance in other In addition, this proposed action for Standard. The Clean Air Act (CAA)
states and visibility protection the state of South Carolina does not requires emission inventories for all
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) have Tribal implications as specified by ozone nonattainment areas. The
and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4), EPA is Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, emission inventories contained in
proposing to approve South Carolina’s November 9, 2000). The Catawba Indian Illinois’ September 3, 2014, submission
May 8, 2014, SIP submission for the Nation Reservation is located within the meet this CAA requirement.
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for the above State of South Carolina. Pursuant to the DATES: Comments must be received on
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
described infrastructure SIP Catawba Indian Claims Settlement Act, or before April 6, 2016.
requirements. EPA is proposing to South Carolina statute 27–16–120, ‘‘all ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
approve these portions of South state and local environmental laws and identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
Carolina’s infrastructure SIP submission regulations apply to the [Catawba Indian OAR–2014–0664 at http://
for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS Nation] and Reservation and are fully www.regulations.gov or via email to
because these aspects of the submission enforceable by all relevant state and Aburano.Douglas@epa.gov. For
are consistent with section 110 of the local agencies and authorities.’’ comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
CAA. However, EPA has determined that follow the online instructions for
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:20 Mar 04, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07MRP1.SGM 07MRP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_11761/page/10.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-02 15:07:35
Document Modified: 2018-02-02 15:07:35
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule. | |
| Dates | Written comments must be received on or before April 6, 2016. | |
| Contact | Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Notarianni can be reached via electronic mail at [email protected] or the telephone number (404) 562-9031. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 11717 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Dioxide; Ozone; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR