Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; South Carolina: New Source Review-Prevention of Significant Deterioration, 4796-4800 [2013-01205]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
4796
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 78, No. 15
Wednesday, January 23, 2013
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0837; FRL–9771–4]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; South Carolina:
New Source Review—Prevention of
Significant Deterioration
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
changes to the South Carolina State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by
the South Carolina Department of
Health and Environmental Control (SC
DHEC) to EPA in five separate SIP
submittals dated May 1, 2012, July 18,
2011, February 16, 2011, December 23,
2009, and December 4, 2008. The SIP
revisions make changes to South
Carolina’s New Source Review (NSR)
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) program to adopt federal PSD
requirements regarding fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) and changes to the State’s
provisions related to the national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)
and volatile organic compounds (VOC).
EPA is proposing to approve portions of
the submittals as revisions to South
Carolina’s SIP because the Agency has
preliminarily determined that they are
consistent with section 110 of the Clean
Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA
regulations regarding NSR permitting.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before February 22, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2012–0837 by one of the following
methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562–9019.
4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0837,
Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:21 Jan 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms.
Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2012–
0837.’’ EPA’s policy is that all
comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and
may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through
www.regulations.gov or email,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30,
excluding federal holidays.
For
information regarding the South
Carolina SIP, contact Ms. Twunjala
Bradley, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street
SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms.
Bradley’s telephone number is (404)
562–9352; email address:
bradley.twunjala@epa.gov. For
information regarding NSR or PSD,
contact Ms. Yolanda Adams, Air
Permits Section, at the same address
above. Ms. Adams’ telephone number is
(404) 562–9241; email address:
adams.yolanda@epa.gov. For
information regarding the PM2.5
NAAQS, contact Mr. Joel Huey,
Regulatory Development Section, at the
same address above. Mr. Huey’s
telephone number is (404) 562–9104;
email address: huey.joel@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What action is EPA proposing?
II. What is the background for EPA’s
proposed action?
III. What is EPA’s analysis of South
Carolina’s SIP submittals?
IV. Proposed Actions
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
E:\FR\FM\23JAP1.SGM
23JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 15 / Wednesday, January 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules
I. What action is EPA proposing?
EPA is proposing to approve portions
of SIP submittals provided by SC DHEC
to EPA on May 1, 2012,1 July 18, 2011,
February 16, 2011, December 23, 2009,
and December 4, 2008, to adopt NSR
permitting requirements for
implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS,
federal changes to the NAAQS, an
update to the federal definition for VOC,
and an administrative correction to the
State’s VOC rule. South Carolina’s May
1, 2012, SIP submittal amends the
State’s PSD regulations at Regulation
61–62.5, Standard No. 7—Prevention of
Significant Deterioration to adopt the
PM2.5 PSD increments promulgated in
the rule entitled ‘‘Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) for
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5
Micrometers (PM2.5)—Increments,
Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and
Significant Monitoring Concentration
(SMC),’’ Final Rule, 75 FR 64864,
(October 20, 2010) (hereafter referred to
as ‘‘PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC
Rule’’).2 The December 4, 2008,
December 23, 2009, and July 18, 2011,
SIP submissions, as well as the May 1,
2012, submission, all update South
Carolina’s ambient air quality standards
table at 61–62.5, Standard No. 2—
Ambient Air Quality Standards to be
consistent with EPA’s NAAQS at 40
CFR part 50 and table at https://
www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html. Also,
South Carolina’s December 4, 2008, and
February 16, 2011, SIP submittals
amend the State’s definition for VOC to
be consistent with the federal definition
at 40 CFR 51.100(s). Lastly, the
December 4, 2008, submittal makes an
administrative correction to Regulation
61–62.5, Standard 5—Volatile Organic
Compounds. Details concerning each
SIP submittal are summarized below.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
II. What is the background for EPA’s
proposed action?
Today’s proposed action regarding the
PSD provisions relate to EPA’s PM2.5
PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule.
Today’s proposed actions on
administrative changes to South
Carolina’s ambient air quality standards
and to South Carolina’s definition for
VOC relate to other federal rule changes
including the federal VOC definition at
1 South Carolina’s May 1, 2012 submission to
EPA also included changes to Regulation 61–
62.63—National Emissions Standards for Hazardous
Air Pollutants which is not part of the South
Carolina federally approved SIP.
2 South Carolina’s May 1, 2012, SIP submittal did
not include the SILs-SMC screening tools also
promulgated in the PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILsSMC Rule. Furthermore, EPA’s authority to
implement the SILs and SMC for PSD purposes has
been challenged by the Sierra Club. Sierra Club v.
EPA, Case No 10–1413 (D.C. Circuit Court).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:21 Jan 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
40 CFR 51.100(s). More detail on the
PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule
can be found in EPA’s October 20, 2010,
final rule and is summarized below. See
75 FR 64864.
4797
Club v. EPA, Case No 10–1413 (D.C.
Circuit Court).5
1. What are PSD increments?
As established in part C of title I of
the CAA, EPA’s PSD program protects
A. PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC-Rule public health from adverse effects of air
pollution by ensuring that construction
On October 20, 2010, EPA finalized
of new or modified sources in
the PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC
attainment or unclassifiable areas does
Rule to provide additional regulatory
not lead to significant deterioration of
requirements under the PSD program
air quality while simultaneously
regarding the implementation of the
ensuring that economic growth will
PM2.5 NAAQS for NSR.3 Specifically,
occur in a manner consistent with
the rule establishes: (1) PM2.5
preservation of clean air resources.
increments pursuant to section 166(a) of Under section 165(a)(3) of the CAA, a
the CAA to prevent significant
PSD permit applicant must demonstrate
deterioration of air quality in areas
that emissions from the proposed
meeting the NAAQS; (2) SILs used as a
construction and operation of a facility
screening tool (by a major source subject ‘‘will not cause, or contribute to, air
to PSD) to evaluate the impact a
pollution in excess of any maximum
allowable increase or allowable
proposed major source or modification
concentration for any pollutant.’’ In
may have on the NAAQS or PSD
other words, when a source applies for
increment; and (3) a SMC (also a
a permit to emit a regulated pollutant in
screening tool) used by a major source
an area that meets the NAAQS, the state
subject to PSD to determine if a source
must submit to the permitting authority and EPA must determine if emissions of
the regulated pollutant from the source
one year of pre-construction air quality
monitoring data prior to constructing or will cause significant deterioration in
air quality. Significant deterioration
modifying a facility. South Carolina’s
occurs when the amount of the new
May 1, 2012, SIP submittal adopts the
pollution exceeds the applicable PSD
PM2.5 increments portion of the PM2.5
increment, which is the ‘‘maximum
PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule to be
allowable increase’’ of an air pollutant
consistent with the federal NSR
allowed to occur above the applicable
regulations and to appropriately
baseline concentration 6 for that
implement the State’s NSR program for
the PM2.5 NAAQS. South Carolina’s May pollutant. PSD increments prevent air
quality in clean areas from deteriorating
1, 2012, SIP submittal did not adopt the
to the level set by the NAAQS.
SILs and SMC screening tools also
Therefore, an increment is the
promulgated in the October 20, 2010,
mechanism used to estimate ‘‘significant
rule as the screening tools are not
deterioration’’ of air quality for a
required by the Act as part of an
pollutant in an area.
approvable SIP program.4 EPA’s
For PSD baseline purposes, a baseline
authority to implement the SILs and
area for a particular pollutant emitted
SMC for PSD purposes has been
from a source includes the attainment or
challenged by the Sierra Club. Sierra
unclassifiable area in which the source
is located as well as any other
3 EPA’s May 16, 2008, Rule entitled
attainment or unclassifiable area in
‘‘Implementation of the New Source Review
which the source’s emissions of that
Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5
pollutant are projected (by air quality
Micrometers,’’ Final Rule (73 FR 28321) and the
PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule establish the
modeling) to result in an ambient
framework for implementing preconstruction
pollutant increase of at least 1
permit review for the PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA approved
microgram per meter cubed (mg/m3)
South Carolina’s SIP submittal to adopt the May 16,
(annual average). See 40 CFR
2008, PM2.5 NSR requirements on June 23, 2011.
See 76 FR 36875.
52.21(b)(15)(i). Under EPA’s existing
4 As part of the response to comments on the
regulations, the establishment of a
October 20, 2010, final rulemaking, EPA explained
baseline area for any PSD increment
that the Agency agrees that the SILs and SMCs used
results from the submission of the first
as de minimis thresholds for the various pollutants
complete PSD permit application and is
are useful tools that enable permitting authorities
and PSD applicants to screen out ‘‘insignificant’’
based on the location of the proposed
activities; however, these values are not required by
source and its emissions impact on the
the Act as part of an approvable SIP program. EPA
believes that most states are likely to adopt the SILs
and SMCs because of the useful purpose they serve
regardless of EPA’s position that the values are not
mandatory. Alternatively, states may develop more
stringent values if they desire to do so. In any case,
states are not under any SIP-related deadline for
revising their PSD programs to add these screening
tools. See 75 FR 64864, 64900.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
5 On April 6, 2012, EPA filed a brief with the D.C.
Circuit Court defending the Agency’s authority to
implement SILs and SMC for PSD purposes.
6 Section 169(4) of the CAA provides that the
baseline concentration of a pollutant for a particular
baseline area is generally the air quality at the time
of the first application for a PSD permit in the area.
E:\FR\FM\23JAP1.SGM
23JAP1
4798
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 15 / Wednesday, January 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
area. Once the baseline area is
established, subsequent PSD sources
locating in that area need to consider
that a portion of the available increment
may have already been consumed by
previous emissions increases. In
general, the submittal date of the first
complete PSD permit application in a
particular area is the operative ‘‘baseline
date’’ after which new sources must
evaluate increment consumption.7 On
or before the date of the first complete
PSD application, emissions generally
are considered to be part of the baseline
concentration, except for certain
emissions from major stationary
sources. Most emissions increases that
occur after the baseline date will be
counted toward the amount of
increment consumed. Similarly,
emissions decreases after the baseline
date restore or expand the amount of
increment that is available. See 75 FR
64864. As described in the PM2.5 PSD
Increments-SILs-SMC Rule, and
pursuant to the authority under section
166(a) of the CAA, EPA promulgated
numerical increments for PM2.5 as a new
pollutant 8 for which NAAQS were
established after August 7, 1977,9 and
derived 24-hour and annual PM2.5
increments for the three area
classifications (Class I, II and III) using
the ‘‘contingent safe harbor’’ approach.
See 75 FR 64864 at 64869 and ambient
air increment table at 40 CFR
51.166(c)(1) and 52.21(c).
In addition to PSD increments for the
PM2.5 NAAQS, the PM2.5 PSD
Increments-SILs-SMC Rule amended the
definition at 40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21
for ‘‘major source baseline date’’ and
‘‘minor source baseline date’’ (including
trigger dates) to establish the PM2.5
NAAQS specific dates associated with
the implementation of PM2.5 PSD
increments. See 75 FR 64864. In
accordance with section 166(b) of the
CAA, EPA required the states to submit
revised implementation plans to EPA
for approval (to adopt the PM2.5 PSD
7 Baseline dates are pollutant specific. That is, a
complete PSD application establishes the baseline
date only for those regulated NSR pollutants that
are projected to be emitted in significant amounts
(as defined in the regulations) by the applicant’s
new source or modification. Thus, an area may have
different baseline dates for different pollutants.
8 EPA generally characterized the PM
2.5 NAAQS
as a NAAQS for a new indicator of PM. EPA did
not replace the PM10 NAAQS with the NAAQS for
PM2.5 when the PM2.5 NAAQS were promulgated in
1997. EPA rather retained the annual and 24-hour
NAAQS for PM2.5 as if PM2.5 was a new pollutant
even though EPA had already developed air quality
criteria for PM generally. See 75 FR 64864 (October
20, 2010).
9 EPA interprets 166(a) to authorize EPA to
promulgate pollutant-specific PSD regulations
meeting the requirements of section 166(c) and
166(d) for any pollutant for which EPA promulgates
a NAAQS after 1977.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:21 Jan 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
increments) within 21 months from
promulgation of the final rule (by July
20, 2012). Regardless of when a state
submits its revised SIP, the emissions
from major sources subject to PSD for
PM2.5 for which construction
commenced after October 20, 2010
(major source baseline date), consume
PM2.5 increment and should be included
in the increment analyses occurring
after the minor source baseline date is
established for an area under the state’s
revised PSD program. See 75 FR 64864.
As discussed in detail in Section III,
South Carolina’s May 1, 2012, SIP
submission adopts the PM2.5 PSD
increment permitting requirements
promulgated in the PM2.5 PSD
Increments-SILs-SMC Rule.
III. What is EPA’s analysis of South
Carolina’s SIP submittals?
South Carolina currently has a SIPapproved NSR program for new and
modified stationary sources. SC DHEC’s
PSD preconstruction rules are found at
Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7–
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
and apply to major stationary sources or
modifications constructed in areas
designated attainment or unclassifiable/
attainment as required under part C of
title I of the CAA with respect to the
NAAQS. EPA is proposing to approve
changes to South Carolina’s SIP to adopt
the PM2.5 PSD increments,
administrative updates to the State’s
NAAQS table at Regulation 61–62.5,
Standard No. 2, and a revision to the
VOC definition at Regulation 61–62.1—
Definitions and General Requirements—
VOC. See below for more details on
South Carolina’s changes to its SIP.
A. Regulation 62–62.5, Standard No. 7—
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
South Carolina’s May 1, 2012, SIP
submittal adopts PM2.5 PSD increments
for the PM2.5 annual and 24-hour
NAAQS (pursuant to section 166(a) of
the CAA) into the South Carolina SIP (at
Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7) as
promulgated in the October 20, 2010,
and includes: (1) Addition of PM2.5 PSD
increments at SC DEHC’s increments at
Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7 (c)
and (p)(5) (for Class I variances)
(consistent with the tables at 40 CFR
51.166(c)), including replacing the term
‘‘particulate matter’’ with ‘‘PM10’’ in the
tables at Regulation 61–62.5, Standard
No. 7 paragraphs (c) and (p)(5) (for Class
I Variances) and replacing the term
‘‘particulate matter’’ with ‘‘PM2.5, PM10’’
in the text at Regulation 61–62.5,
Standard No. 7 paragraph (p)(5) (for
Class I Variances); (2) revision to the
definition at Regulation 61–62.5,
Standard No. 7, paragraph (b)(31)(i)(a)–
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(c) for ‘‘major source baseline date’’
(consistent with 40 CFR
51.166(b)(14)(i)(a) and (c)), to establish
major source baseline date for PM2.5 and
removing the term ‘‘particulate matter’’
to distinguish between PM10 and PM2.5;
Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7,
paragraph (b)(31)(ii)(a)–(c) for ‘‘minor
source baseline date,’’ to establish the
PM2.5 ‘‘trigger date’’ (consistent with 40
CFR 51.166(b)(14)(ii)(c)) and remove the
term ‘‘particulate matter’’ to distinguish
between PM10 and PM2.5; (3) revisions to
Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7,
paragraph (5)(i) for ‘‘baseline area’’
(consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i)
and (ii)) to specify pollutant air quality
impact annual averages and amend the
regulatory reference for section 107(d) of
the CAA at paragraph (5)(ii); and (4)
amendment to Regulation 61–62.5,
Standard No. 7 paragraph (b)(31)(iii)(a)
to also amend the regulatory reference
for section 107(d) of the CAA and to add
a reference to 40 CFR 51.166. These
changes provide for the implementation
of the PM2.5 PSD increments for the
PM2.5 NAAQS in South Carolina’s PSD
program. In today’s action, EPA is
proposing to approve South Carolina’s
May 1, 2012, SIP submittal to address
PM2.5 PSD increments. As mentioned
above, South Carolina’s May 1, 2012,
SIP submittal did not propose to adopt
the SILs and SMC screening tools also
promulgated in the PM2.5 PSD
Increments-SILs-SMC Rule.
B. Regulation 61.62.5, Standard No. 2—
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Sections 108 and 109 of the CAA
govern the establishment, review, and
revision, as appropriate, of the NAAQS
to protect public health and welfare.
The CAA requires periodic review of the
air quality criteria—the science upon
which the standards are based—and the
standards themselves. EPA’s regulatory
provisions that govern the NAAQS are
found at 40 CFR part 50—National
Primary and Secondary Ambient Air
Quality Standards. In this rulemaking,
EPA is proposing to approve portions of
multiple South Carolina SIP
submissions amending the State’s
NAAQS table for PM2.5, PM10, ozone and
lead that are found at Regulation 61.62–
5, Standard No. 2. The four SIP
submittals amending SC DEHC’s
NAAQS table can be found in the
Docket for this proposed rulemaking at
www.regulations.gov and are
summarized below.
E:\FR\FM\23JAP1.SGM
23JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 15 / Wednesday, January 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules
1. South Carolina’s December 4, 2008,
SIP Submittal 10
On October 17, 2006, EPA revised the
24-hour primary NAAQS for PM2.5 from
a level of 65 micrograms per cubic meter
(mg/m3) to 35 mg/m3. See 71 FR 61144.
Accordingly, South Carolina’s December
4, 2008, SIP submittal amends the
State’s NAAQS table to address the
amendment to the 24-hour primary
NAAQS for PM2.5 from 65 mg/m3 to 35
mg/m3. EPA is proposing to approve this
change to South Carolina’s NAAQS
table at Regulation 61.62–5, Standard
No. 2, based on a preliminary
determination that this change is
consistent with EPA’s regulations for
the 24-hour primary NAAQS for PM2.5.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
2. South Carolina’s December 23, 2009,
SIP Submittal 11
On March 27, 2008, EPA revised the
primary and secondary NAAQS for the
8-hour ozone to 75 parts per billion
(ppb) to provide increased protection of
public health and welfare, respectively.
See 73 FR 16436. Accordingly, South
Carolina’s December 23, 2009, SIP
submittal amends the State’s NAAQS
table to: (1) add the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS of 75 ppb, and (2) remove the
1-hour ozone NAAQS, which EPA
revoked on June 15, 2005, one year after
the effective date of the 1997 8-hour
ozone designations. See 70 FR 44470
(August 3, 2005), 69 FR 23858 and 69
FR 23951 (April 30, 2004).12
Additionally, on November 12, 2008,
EPA revised the lead NAAQS from 1.5
mg/m3 to 0.15 mg/m3 based on a rolling
3-month average for both the primary
and secondary standards. See 73 FR
66964. South Carolina’s December 23,
2009, SIP submittal amends the State’s
NAAQS table to adopt the 2008 lead
10 This SIP submittal also included changes to SC
DHEC’s Regulation 61.62–96—Nitrogen Oxides
(NOX) and Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Budget Trading
Program General Provisions. EPA took final action
to approve this portion of the December 4, 2008,
submittal on October 16, 2009 (74 FR 53167).
11 This submittal also make changes to South
Carolina’s State Regulations 61–62.60, 62.61, 62.63
and 62.72 regarding New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS), National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and Acid Rain,
respectively. However, these regulations are not
part of South Carolina’s federally approved SIP;
therefore, EPA is not proposing action on these
changes.
12 On June 15, 2005 (one year after the effective
date of the 1997 8-hour ozone designations), EPA
revoked the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for all areas
except the 8-hour ozone nonattainment-deferred
Early Action Compact Areas (EAC) areas. The 1hour ozone NAAQS for the EAC nonattainmentdeferred areas including those in South Carolina
(Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC and Central
Midlands Columbia Area) was revoked on April 15,
2009 (one year after the effective date of the EAC
areas 8-hour ozone designations to attainment). See
64 FR 17897 (April 2, 2008), 69 FR 23858 and 69
23951 (April 30, 2004).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:21 Jan 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
NAAQS of 0.15 mg/m3 based on a rolling
3-month average for both the primary
and secondary standards.
EPA is proposing to approve these
change to South Carolina’s NAAQS
table at Regulation 61.62–5, Standard
No. 2, based on a preliminary
determination that these changes are
consistent with EPA’s regulations for
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the
2008 lead NAAQS. Further, EPA is
proposing to approve South Carolina’s
removal of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
from its SIP at Regulation 61.62–5,
Standard No. 2, because this NAAQS
has been revoked by the Agency for
South Carolina areas.
3. South Carolina’s July 18, 2011, SIP
Submittal 13
South Carolina’s July 18, 2011, SIP
submittal removes the annual total
suspended particulate (TSP) standard
from South Carolina’s NAAQS table.14
This SIP submittal also clarifies that the
carbon monoxide 1-hour and 8-hour
average concentrations are not to be
exceeded more than once a year (in
accordance with 40 CFR 50.8) and adds
a footnote referencing 40 CFR 50.16 for
detailed explanation concerning
calculation of the rolling 3-month
average for the lead NAAQS. However,
these two revisions are superseded by
SC’s DHEC’s May 1, 2012, SIP submittal
which streamlines and reformats the
State’s NAAQS table. See discussion
below.
4. South Carolina’s May 1, 2012, SIP
Submittal 15
South Carolina’s May 1, 2012,
submittal removes from the State’s
NAAQS table the PM10 annual standard
to be consistent with EPA’s October 17,
2006, revocation of the annual PM10
NAAQS. See 71 FR 61144. Additionally,
this SIP submittal reformats SC DEHC’s
NAAQS table in an effort to ensure
information found therein is consistent
with EPA’s NAAQS at 40 CFR 50 and
13 This SIP submittal also make changes to South
Carolina’s SIP at Regulations 61–62.1—Definitions
and General Requirements; 61–62.5, Standard 1—
Emissions from Fuel Burning Operations; 61–62.5,
Standard No. 4—Emissions from Process Industries;
and 61–62.5, Standard 6—Alternative Emission
Limitation Options (‘‘Bubble’’). EPA will consider
action on these changes to South Carolina SIP in a
separate rulemaking.
14 EPA initially established NAAQS for PM in
1971 measured by the TSP indicator. On July 1,
1987, EPA revised the PM NAAQS by changing the
indicator to PM10 (establishing an annual and 24hour standard) and revoking the TSP NAAQS. See
52 FR 24634.
15 This submittal also make changes to South
Carolina’s regulations 61–62.63—National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. However,
these regulations are not part of South Carolina’s
federally approved SIP; therefore, EPA is not
proposing action on these changes.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
4799
the table at https://www.epa.gov/air/
criteria.html including (1) removing the
table’s footnotes and instead adding a
column referencing the federal CFR for
each NAAQS; (2) streamlining the units
column; and (3) updating test method
references.
C. Regulation 61–62.1—Definitions and
General Requirements
South Carolina’s December 4, 2008,
and February 16, 2011,16 SIP submittals
revise the definition for VOC at
Regulation 61–62.1—Definitions and
General Requirements to include
additional compounds
1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-3methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane
(HFE–7300) (as amended on January 18,
2007 (72 FR 2193)) and propylene
carbonate and dimethyl carbonate
(amended on January 21, 2009 (74 FR
3437)) respectively to the list of
compounds excluded from the
definition of VOC on the basis that they
have a negligible contribution to
tropospheric formation of ozone.17 EPA
has preliminarily determined that these
changes are consistent with EPA’s
federal regulations at 40 CFR 51.100 and
as such is proposing to approve these
changes into the South Carolina SIP.
D. Regulation 61–62.5, Standard 5—
Volatile Organic Compounds
South Carolina’s December 4, 2008,
SIP submittal makes an administrative
correction to subparagraphs 2.a.(i)(a)
and (b) of Regulation 61–62.5, Standard
5, Section II, Part Q (Manufacture of
Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products)
16 This submittal also make changes to South
Carolina’s State Regulations 61–62.60, 62.61, 62.63
and 62.72 regarding NSPS, NESHAP, NESHAP for
Source Categories, and Acid Rain, respectively.
However, these regulations are not part of South
Carolina’s federally approved SIP; therefore, EPA is
not proposing action on these changes.
17 Tropospheric ozone, commonly known as
smog, occurs when VOC and nitrogen oxide (NOX)
react in the atmosphere. Because of the harmful
health effects of ozone, EPA limits the amount of
VOC and NOX that can be released into the
atmosphere. VOC are those compounds of carbon
(excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide,
carbonic acid, metallic carbides, or carbonates, and
ammonium carbonate) which form ozone through
atmospheric photochemical reactions. Compounds
of carbon (or organic compounds) have different
levels of reactivity; they do not react at the same
speed, or do not form ozone to the same extent. It
has been EPA’s policy that compounds of carbon
with a negligible level of reactivity need not be
regulated to reduce ozone (42 FR 35314, July 8,
1977). EPA determines whether a given carbon
compound has ‘‘negligible’’ reactivity by comparing
the compound’s reactivity to the reactivity of
ethane. EPA lists these compounds in its
regulations at 40 CFR 51.100(s), and excludes them
from the definition of VOC. The chemicals on this
list are often called ‘‘negligibly reactive.’’ EPA may
periodically revise the list of negligibly reactive
compounds to add compounds to or delete them
from the list.
E:\FR\FM\23JAP1.SGM
23JAP1
4800
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 15 / Wednesday, January 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules
by adding the term and symbol ‘‘minus
(¥)’’ to express the outlet gas
temperature threshold for surface
condensers.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve multiple
submissions revising South Carolina’s
SIP to adopt the PM2.5 increments as
amended in the October 20, 2010, PM2.5
PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule, to
adopt federal NAAQS updates and VOC
definition updates, and to make an
administrative correction. EPA has
made the preliminary determination
that these SIP submittals, with regard to
the aforementioned proposed actions,
are approvable because they are
consistent with section 110 of the CAA
and EPA regulations regarding NSR
permitting.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this 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 Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L.104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 F43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:21 Jan 22, 2013
Jkt 229001
• 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 rule does
have tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
being proposed for approval to apply
PSD permitting program statewide
including the Catawba Indian Nation.
Accordingly, EPA and the Catawba
Indian Nation discussed South
Carolina’s SIP submittals prior to
today’s proposed action. EPA notes that
this rulemaking 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, Greenhouse gases,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
oxides, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: January 7, 2013.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2013–01205 Filed 1–22–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R01–OAR–2009–0449; A–1–FRL–
9773–2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Connecticut; Reasonably Available
Control Technology for the 1997 8Hour Ozone Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing approval of
State Implementation Plan revisions
submitted by the State of Connecticut.
These SIP revisions consist of a
demonstration that Connecticut meets
the requirements of reasonably available
control technology for oxides of
nitrogen and volatile organic
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
compounds set forth by the Clean Air
Act with respect to the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard. Additionally, we are
proposing approval of three single
source orders. This action is being taken
in accordance with the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before February 22, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R01–OAR–2009–0449 by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: arnold.anne@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (617) 918–0047.
4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification
Number EPA–R01–OAR–2009–0449,’’
Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5
Post Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail
code OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109–
3912.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver
your comments to: Anne Arnold,
Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
EPA New England Regional Office,
Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air
Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office
Square—Suite 100, (mail code OEP05–
2), Boston, MA 02109–3912. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R01–OAR–2009–
0449. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through
www.regulations.gov, or email,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov your email address
will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made
E:\FR\FM\23JAP1.SGM
23JAP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 15 (Wednesday, January 23, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 4796-4800]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-01205]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 15 / Wednesday, January 23, 2013 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 4796]]
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0837; FRL-9771-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; South
Carolina: New Source Review--Prevention of Significant Deterioration
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve changes to the South Carolina
State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the South Carolina
Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC) to EPA in five
separate SIP submittals dated May 1, 2012, July 18, 2011, February 16,
2011, December 23, 2009, and December 4, 2008. The SIP revisions make
changes to South Carolina's New Source Review (NSR) Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) program to adopt federal PSD
requirements regarding fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and
changes to the State's provisions related to the national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS) and volatile organic compounds (VOC). EPA is
proposing to approve portions of the submittals as revisions to South
Carolina's SIP because the Agency has preliminarily determined that
they are consistent with section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act)
and EPA regulations regarding NSR permitting.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 22, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2012-0837 by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562-9019.
4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0837, Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. Lynorae Benjamin, Chief,
Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. ``EPA-R04-OAR-
2012-0837.'' EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through
www.regulations.gov or email, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding
federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding the South
Carolina SIP, contact Ms. Twunjala Bradley, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Bradley's telephone number
is (404) 562-9352; email address: bradley.twunjala@epa.gov. For
information regarding NSR or PSD, contact Ms. Yolanda Adams, Air
Permits Section, at the same address above. Ms. Adams' telephone number
is (404) 562-9241; email address: adams.yolanda@epa.gov. For
information regarding the PM2.5 NAAQS, contact Mr. Joel
Huey, Regulatory Development Section, at the same address above. Mr.
Huey's telephone number is (404) 562-9104; email address:
huey.joel@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What action is EPA proposing?
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed action?
III. What is EPA's analysis of South Carolina's SIP submittals?
IV. Proposed Actions
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
[[Page 4797]]
I. What action is EPA proposing?
EPA is proposing to approve portions of SIP submittals provided by
SC DHEC to EPA on May 1, 2012,\1\ July 18, 2011, February 16, 2011,
December 23, 2009, and December 4, 2008, to adopt NSR permitting
requirements for implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS, federal
changes to the NAAQS, an update to the federal definition for VOC, and
an administrative correction to the State's VOC rule. South Carolina's
May 1, 2012, SIP submittal amends the State's PSD regulations at
Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7--Prevention of Significant
Deterioration to adopt the PM2.5 PSD increments promulgated
in the rule entitled ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)--
Increments, Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring
Concentration (SMC),'' Final Rule, 75 FR 64864, (October 20, 2010)
(hereafter referred to as ``PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC
Rule'').\2\ The December 4, 2008, December 23, 2009, and July 18, 2011,
SIP submissions, as well as the May 1, 2012, submission, all update
South Carolina's ambient air quality standards table at 61-62.5,
Standard No. 2--Ambient Air Quality Standards to be consistent with
EPA's NAAQS at 40 CFR part 50 and table at https://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html. Also, South Carolina's December 4, 2008, and February
16, 2011, SIP submittals amend the State's definition for VOC to be
consistent with the federal definition at 40 CFR 51.100(s). Lastly, the
December 4, 2008, submittal makes an administrative correction to
Regulation 61-62.5, Standard 5--Volatile Organic Compounds. Details
concerning each SIP submittal are summarized below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ South Carolina's May 1, 2012 submission to EPA also included
changes to Regulation 61-62.63--National Emissions Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants which is not part of the South Carolina
federally approved SIP.
\2\ South Carolina's May 1, 2012, SIP submittal did not include
the SILs-SMC screening tools also promulgated in the
PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule. Furthermore, EPA's
authority to implement the SILs and SMC for PSD purposes has been
challenged by the Sierra Club. Sierra Club v. EPA, Case No 10-1413
(D.C. Circuit Court).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed action?
Today's proposed action regarding the PSD provisions relate to
EPA's PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule. Today's proposed
actions on administrative changes to South Carolina's ambient air
quality standards and to South Carolina's definition for VOC relate to
other federal rule changes including the federal VOC definition at 40
CFR 51.100(s). More detail on the PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-
SMC Rule can be found in EPA's October 20, 2010, final rule and is
summarized below. See 75 FR 64864.
A. PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC-Rule
On October 20, 2010, EPA finalized the PM2.5 PSD
Increments-SILs-SMC Rule to provide additional regulatory requirements
under the PSD program regarding the implementation of the
PM2.5 NAAQS for NSR.\3\ Specifically, the rule establishes:
(1) PM2.5 increments pursuant to section 166(a) of the CAA
to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in areas meeting
the NAAQS; (2) SILs used as a screening tool (by a major source subject
to PSD) to evaluate the impact a proposed major source or modification
may have on the NAAQS or PSD increment; and (3) a SMC (also a screening
tool) used by a major source subject to PSD to determine if a source
must submit to the permitting authority one year of pre-construction
air quality monitoring data prior to constructing or modifying a
facility. South Carolina's May 1, 2012, SIP submittal adopts the
PM2.5 increments portion of the PM2.5 PSD
Increments-SILs-SMC Rule to be consistent with the federal NSR
regulations and to appropriately implement the State's NSR program for
the PM2.5 NAAQS. South Carolina's May 1, 2012, SIP submittal
did not adopt the SILs and SMC screening tools also promulgated in the
October 20, 2010, rule as the screening tools are not required by the
Act as part of an approvable SIP program.\4\ EPA's authority to
implement the SILs and SMC for PSD purposes has been challenged by the
Sierra Club. Sierra Club v. EPA, Case No 10-1413 (D.C. Circuit
Court).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ EPA's May 16, 2008, Rule entitled ``Implementation of the
New Source Review Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5
Micrometers,'' Final Rule (73 FR 28321) and the PM2.5 PSD
Increments-SILs-SMC Rule establish the framework for implementing
preconstruction permit review for the PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA
approved South Carolina's SIP submittal to adopt the May 16, 2008,
PM2.5 NSR requirements on June 23, 2011. See 76 FR 36875.
\4\ As part of the response to comments on the October 20, 2010,
final rulemaking, EPA explained that the Agency agrees that the SILs
and SMCs used as de minimis thresholds for the various pollutants
are useful tools that enable permitting authorities and PSD
applicants to screen out ``insignificant'' activities; however,
these values are not required by the Act as part of an approvable
SIP program. EPA believes that most states are likely to adopt the
SILs and SMCs because of the useful purpose they serve regardless of
EPA's position that the values are not mandatory. Alternatively,
states may develop more stringent values if they desire to do so. In
any case, states are not under any SIP-related deadline for revising
their PSD programs to add these screening tools. See 75 FR 64864,
64900.
\5\ On April 6, 2012, EPA filed a brief with the D.C. Circuit
Court defending the Agency's authority to implement SILs and SMC for
PSD purposes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. What are PSD increments?
As established in part C of title I of the CAA, EPA's PSD program
protects public health from adverse effects of air pollution by
ensuring that construction of new or modified sources in attainment or
unclassifiable areas does not lead to significant deterioration of air
quality while simultaneously ensuring that economic growth will occur
in a manner consistent with preservation of clean air resources. Under
section 165(a)(3) of the CAA, a PSD permit applicant must demonstrate
that emissions from the proposed construction and operation of a
facility ``will not cause, or contribute to, air pollution in excess of
any maximum allowable increase or allowable concentration for any
pollutant.'' In other words, when a source applies for a permit to emit
a regulated pollutant in an area that meets the NAAQS, the state and
EPA must determine if emissions of the regulated pollutant from the
source will cause significant deterioration in air quality. Significant
deterioration occurs when the amount of the new pollution exceeds the
applicable PSD increment, which is the ``maximum allowable increase''
of an air pollutant allowed to occur above the applicable baseline
concentration \6\ for that pollutant. PSD increments prevent air
quality in clean areas from deteriorating to the level set by the
NAAQS. Therefore, an increment is the mechanism used to estimate
``significant deterioration'' of air quality for a pollutant in an
area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Section 169(4) of the CAA provides that the baseline
concentration of a pollutant for a particular baseline area is
generally the air quality at the time of the first application for a
PSD permit in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For PSD baseline purposes, a baseline area for a particular
pollutant emitted from a source includes the attainment or
unclassifiable area in which the source is located as well as any other
attainment or unclassifiable area in which the source's emissions of
that pollutant are projected (by air quality modeling) to result in an
ambient pollutant increase of at least 1 microgram per meter cubed
([mu]g/m\3\) (annual average). See 40 CFR 52.21(b)(15)(i). Under EPA's
existing regulations, the establishment of a baseline area for any PSD
increment results from the submission of the first complete PSD permit
application and is based on the location of the proposed source and its
emissions impact on the
[[Page 4798]]
area. Once the baseline area is established, subsequent PSD sources
locating in that area need to consider that a portion of the available
increment may have already been consumed by previous emissions
increases. In general, the submittal date of the first complete PSD
permit application in a particular area is the operative ``baseline
date'' after which new sources must evaluate increment consumption.\7\
On or before the date of the first complete PSD application, emissions
generally are considered to be part of the baseline concentration,
except for certain emissions from major stationary sources. Most
emissions increases that occur after the baseline date will be counted
toward the amount of increment consumed. Similarly, emissions decreases
after the baseline date restore or expand the amount of increment that
is available. See 75 FR 64864. As described in the PM2.5 PSD
Increments-SILs-SMC Rule, and pursuant to the authority under section
166(a) of the CAA, EPA promulgated numerical increments for
PM2.5 as a new pollutant \8\ for which NAAQS were
established after August 7, 1977,\9\ and derived 24-hour and annual
PM2.5 increments for the three area classifications (Class
I, II and III) using the ``contingent safe harbor'' approach. See 75 FR
64864 at 64869 and ambient air increment table at 40 CFR 51.166(c)(1)
and 52.21(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Baseline dates are pollutant specific. That is, a complete
PSD application establishes the baseline date only for those
regulated NSR pollutants that are projected to be emitted in
significant amounts (as defined in the regulations) by the
applicant's new source or modification. Thus, an area may have
different baseline dates for different pollutants.
\8\ EPA generally characterized the PM2.5 NAAQS as a
NAAQS for a new indicator of PM. EPA did not replace the
PM10 NAAQS with the NAAQS for PM2.5 when the
PM2.5 NAAQS were promulgated in 1997. EPA rather retained
the annual and 24-hour NAAQS for PM2.5 as if
PM2.5 was a new pollutant even though EPA had already
developed air quality criteria for PM generally. See 75 FR 64864
(October 20, 2010).
\9\ EPA interprets 166(a) to authorize EPA to promulgate
pollutant-specific PSD regulations meeting the requirements of
section 166(c) and 166(d) for any pollutant for which EPA
promulgates a NAAQS after 1977.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to PSD increments for the PM2.5 NAAQS, the
PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule amended the definition at
40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21 for ``major source baseline date'' and ``minor
source baseline date'' (including trigger dates) to establish the
PM2.5 NAAQS specific dates associated with the
implementation of PM2.5 PSD increments. See 75 FR 64864. In
accordance with section 166(b) of the CAA, EPA required the states to
submit revised implementation plans to EPA for approval (to adopt the
PM2.5 PSD increments) within 21 months from promulgation of
the final rule (by July 20, 2012). Regardless of when a state submits
its revised SIP, the emissions from major sources subject to PSD for
PM2.5 for which construction commenced after October 20,
2010 (major source baseline date), consume PM2.5 increment
and should be included in the increment analyses occurring after the
minor source baseline date is established for an area under the state's
revised PSD program. See 75 FR 64864. As discussed in detail in Section
III, South Carolina's May 1, 2012, SIP submission adopts the
PM2.5 PSD increment permitting requirements promulgated in
the PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule.
III. What is EPA's analysis of South Carolina's SIP submittals?
South Carolina currently has a SIP-approved NSR program for new and
modified stationary sources. SC DHEC's PSD preconstruction rules are
found at Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7- Prevention of Significant
Deterioration and apply to major stationary sources or modifications
constructed in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable/attainment
as required under part C of title I of the CAA with respect to the
NAAQS. EPA is proposing to approve changes to South Carolina's SIP to
adopt the PM2.5 PSD increments, administrative updates to
the State's NAAQS table at Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 2, and a
revision to the VOC definition at Regulation 61-62.1--Definitions and
General Requirements--VOC. See below for more details on South
Carolina's changes to its SIP.
A. Regulation 62-62.5, Standard No. 7--Prevention of Significant
Deterioration
South Carolina's May 1, 2012, SIP submittal adopts PM2.5
PSD increments for the PM2.5 annual and 24-hour NAAQS
(pursuant to section 166(a) of the CAA) into the South Carolina SIP (at
Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7) as promulgated in the October 20,
2010, and includes: (1) Addition of PM2.5 PSD increments at
SC DEHC's increments at Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7 (c) and
(p)(5) (for Class I variances) (consistent with the tables at 40 CFR
51.166(c)), including replacing the term ``particulate matter'' with
``PM10'' in the tables at Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7
paragraphs (c) and (p)(5) (for Class I Variances) and replacing the
term ``particulate matter'' with ``PM2.5, PM10''
in the text at Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7 paragraph (p)(5) (for
Class I Variances); (2) revision to the definition at Regulation 61-
62.5, Standard No. 7, paragraph (b)(31)(i)(a)-(c) for ``major source
baseline date'' (consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(i)(a) and (c)),
to establish major source baseline date for PM2.5 and
removing the term ``particulate matter'' to distinguish between
PM10 and PM2.5; Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No.
7, paragraph (b)(31)(ii)(a)-(c) for ``minor source baseline date,'' to
establish the PM2.5 ``trigger date'' (consistent with 40 CFR
51.166(b)(14)(ii)(c)) and remove the term ``particulate matter'' to
distinguish between PM10 and PM2.5; (3) revisions
to Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7, paragraph (5)(i) for ``baseline
area'' (consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i) and (ii)) to specify
pollutant air quality impact annual averages and amend the regulatory
reference for section 107(d) of the CAA at paragraph (5)(ii); and (4)
amendment to Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7 paragraph
(b)(31)(iii)(a) to also amend the regulatory reference for section
107(d) of the CAA and to add a reference to 40 CFR 51.166. These
changes provide for the implementation of the PM2.5 PSD
increments for the PM2.5 NAAQS in South Carolina's PSD
program. In today's action, EPA is proposing to approve South
Carolina's May 1, 2012, SIP submittal to address PM2.5 PSD
increments. As mentioned above, South Carolina's May 1, 2012, SIP
submittal did not propose to adopt the SILs and SMC screening tools
also promulgated in the PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule.
B. Regulation 61.62.5, Standard No. 2--Ambient Air Quality Standards
Sections 108 and 109 of the CAA govern the establishment, review,
and revision, as appropriate, of the NAAQS to protect public health and
welfare. The CAA requires periodic review of the air quality criteria--
the science upon which the standards are based--and the standards
themselves. EPA's regulatory provisions that govern the NAAQS are found
at 40 CFR part 50--National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality
Standards. In this rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve portions of
multiple South Carolina SIP submissions amending the State's NAAQS
table for PM2.5, PM10, ozone and lead that are
found at Regulation 61.62-5, Standard No. 2. The four SIP submittals
amending SC DEHC's NAAQS table can be found in the Docket for this
proposed rulemaking at www.regulations.gov and are summarized below.
[[Page 4799]]
1. South Carolina's December 4, 2008, SIP Submittal \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ This SIP submittal also included changes to SC DHEC's
Regulation 61.62-96--Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) and Sulfur
Dioxide (SO2) Budget Trading Program General Provisions.
EPA took final action to approve this portion of the December 4,
2008, submittal on October 16, 2009 (74 FR 53167).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 17, 2006, EPA revised the 24-hour primary NAAQS for
PM2.5 from a level of 65 micrograms per cubic meter
([micro]g/m\3\) to 35 [micro]g/m\3\. See 71 FR 61144. Accordingly,
South Carolina's December 4, 2008, SIP submittal amends the State's
NAAQS table to address the amendment to the 24-hour primary NAAQS for
PM2.5 from 65 [micro]g/m\3\ to 35 [micro]g/m\3\. EPA is
proposing to approve this change to South Carolina's NAAQS table at
Regulation 61.62-5, Standard No. 2, based on a preliminary
determination that this change is consistent with EPA's regulations for
the 24-hour primary NAAQS for PM2.5.
2. South Carolina's December 23, 2009, SIP Submittal \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ This submittal also make changes to South Carolina's State
Regulations 61-62.60, 62.61, 62.63 and 62.72 regarding New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS), National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and Acid Rain, respectively.
However, these regulations are not part of South Carolina's
federally approved SIP; therefore, EPA is not proposing action on
these changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 27, 2008, EPA revised the primary and secondary NAAQS for
the 8-hour ozone to 75 parts per billion (ppb) to provide increased
protection of public health and welfare, respectively. See 73 FR 16436.
Accordingly, South Carolina's December 23, 2009, SIP submittal amends
the State's NAAQS table to: (1) add the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 75
ppb, and (2) remove the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, which EPA revoked on June
15, 2005, one year after the effective date of the 1997 8-hour ozone
designations. See 70 FR 44470 (August 3, 2005), 69 FR 23858 and 69 FR
23951 (April 30, 2004).\12\ Additionally, on November 12, 2008, EPA
revised the lead NAAQS from 1.5 [micro]g/m\3\ to 0.15 [micro]g/m\3\
based on a rolling 3-month average for both the primary and secondary
standards. See 73 FR 66964. South Carolina's December 23, 2009, SIP
submittal amends the State's NAAQS table to adopt the 2008 lead NAAQS
of 0.15 [micro]g/m\3\ based on a rolling 3-month average for both the
primary and secondary standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ On June 15, 2005 (one year after the effective date of the
1997 8-hour ozone designations), EPA revoked the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
for all areas except the 8-hour ozone nonattainment-deferred Early
Action Compact Areas (EAC) areas. The 1-hour ozone NAAQS for the EAC
nonattainment-deferred areas including those in South Carolina
(Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC and Central Midlands Columbia
Area) was revoked on April 15, 2009 (one year after the effective
date of the EAC areas 8-hour ozone designations to attainment). See
64 FR 17897 (April 2, 2008), 69 FR 23858 and 69 23951 (April 30,
2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is proposing to approve these change to South Carolina's NAAQS
table at Regulation 61.62-5, Standard No. 2, based on a preliminary
determination that these changes are consistent with EPA's regulations
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 2008 lead NAAQS. Further, EPA
is proposing to approve South Carolina's removal of the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS from its SIP at Regulation 61.62-5, Standard No. 2, because this
NAAQS has been revoked by the Agency for South Carolina areas.
3. South Carolina's July 18, 2011, SIP Submittal \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ This SIP submittal also make changes to South Carolina's
SIP at Regulations 61-62.1--Definitions and General Requirements;
61-62.5, Standard 1--Emissions from Fuel Burning Operations; 61-
62.5, Standard No. 4--Emissions from Process Industries; and 61-
62.5, Standard 6--Alternative Emission Limitation Options
(``Bubble''). EPA will consider action on these changes to South
Carolina SIP in a separate rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
South Carolina's July 18, 2011, SIP submittal removes the annual
total suspended particulate (TSP) standard from South Carolina's NAAQS
table.\14\ This SIP submittal also clarifies that the carbon monoxide
1-hour and 8-hour average concentrations are not to be exceeded more
than once a year (in accordance with 40 CFR 50.8) and adds a footnote
referencing 40 CFR 50.16 for detailed explanation concerning
calculation of the rolling 3-month average for the lead NAAQS. However,
these two revisions are superseded by SC's DHEC's May 1, 2012, SIP
submittal which streamlines and reformats the State's NAAQS table. See
discussion below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ EPA initially established NAAQS for PM in 1971 measured by
the TSP indicator. On July 1, 1987, EPA revised the PM NAAQS by
changing the indicator to PM10 (establishing an annual
and 24-hour standard) and revoking the TSP NAAQS. See 52 FR 24634.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. South Carolina's May 1, 2012, SIP Submittal \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ This submittal also make changes to South Carolina's
regulations 61-62.63--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants. However, these regulations are not part of South
Carolina's federally approved SIP; therefore, EPA is not proposing
action on these changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
South Carolina's May 1, 2012, submittal removes from the State's
NAAQS table the PM10 annual standard to be consistent with
EPA's October 17, 2006, revocation of the annual PM10 NAAQS.
See 71 FR 61144. Additionally, this SIP submittal reformats SC DEHC's
NAAQS table in an effort to ensure information found therein is
consistent with EPA's NAAQS at 40 CFR 50 and the table at https://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html including (1) removing the table's
footnotes and instead adding a column referencing the federal CFR for
each NAAQS; (2) streamlining the units column; and (3) updating test
method references.
C. Regulation 61-62.1--Definitions and General Requirements
South Carolina's December 4, 2008, and February 16, 2011,\16\ SIP
submittals revise the definition for VOC at Regulation 61-62.1--
Definitions and General Requirements to include additional compounds
1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-3-methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane
(HFE-7300) (as amended on January 18, 2007 (72 FR 2193)) and propylene
carbonate and dimethyl carbonate (amended on January 21, 2009 (74 FR
3437)) respectively to the list of compounds excluded from the
definition of VOC on the basis that they have a negligible contribution
to tropospheric formation of ozone.\17\ EPA has preliminarily
determined that these changes are consistent with EPA's federal
regulations at 40 CFR 51.100 and as such is proposing to approve these
changes into the South Carolina SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ This submittal also make changes to South Carolina's State
Regulations 61-62.60, 62.61, 62.63 and 62.72 regarding NSPS, NESHAP,
NESHAP for Source Categories, and Acid Rain, respectively. However,
these regulations are not part of South Carolina's federally
approved SIP; therefore, EPA is not proposing action on these
changes.
\17\ Tropospheric ozone, commonly known as smog, occurs when VOC
and nitrogen oxide (NOX) react in the atmosphere. Because
of the harmful health effects of ozone, EPA limits the amount of VOC
and NOX that can be released into the atmosphere. VOC are
those compounds of carbon (excluding carbon monoxide, carbon
dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides, or carbonates, and
ammonium carbonate) which form ozone through atmospheric
photochemical reactions. Compounds of carbon (or organic compounds)
have different levels of reactivity; they do not react at the same
speed, or do not form ozone to the same extent. It has been EPA's
policy that compounds of carbon with a negligible level of
reactivity need not be regulated to reduce ozone (42 FR 35314, July
8, 1977). EPA determines whether a given carbon compound has
``negligible'' reactivity by comparing the compound's reactivity to
the reactivity of ethane. EPA lists these compounds in its
regulations at 40 CFR 51.100(s), and excludes them from the
definition of VOC. The chemicals on this list are often called
``negligibly reactive.'' EPA may periodically revise the list of
negligibly reactive compounds to add compounds to or delete them
from the list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Regulation 61-62.5, Standard 5--Volatile Organic Compounds
South Carolina's December 4, 2008, SIP submittal makes an
administrative correction to subparagraphs 2.a.(i)(a) and (b) of
Regulation 61-62.5, Standard 5, Section II, Part Q (Manufacture of
Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products)
[[Page 4800]]
by adding the term and symbol ``minus (-)'' to express the outlet gas
temperature threshold for surface condensers.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve multiple submissions revising South
Carolina's SIP to adopt the PM2.5 increments as amended in
the October 20, 2010, PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule, to
adopt federal NAAQS updates and VOC definition updates, and to make an
administrative correction. EPA has made the preliminary determination
that these SIP submittals, with regard to the aforementioned proposed
actions, are approvable because they are consistent with section 110 of
the CAA and EPA regulations regarding NSR permitting.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
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 Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L.104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 F43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule does have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is being proposed for approval to apply PSD permitting
program statewide including the Catawba Indian Nation. Accordingly, EPA
and the Catawba Indian Nation discussed South Carolina's SIP submittals
prior to today's proposed action. EPA notes that this rulemaking 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, Greenhouse gases,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
oxides, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: January 7, 2013.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2013-01205 Filed 1-22-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
