Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; South Carolina: New Source Review-Prevention of Significant Deterioration, 4796-4800 [2013-01205]

Download as PDF 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 http:// 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 http:// 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 http://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 http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning 
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you 
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official 
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding 
federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 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 http://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 http://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