Air Plan Approval; FL; GA; KY; MS; NC; SC: Definition of Chemical Process Plants Under State Prevention of Significant Deterioration Regulations, 57707-57712 [2020-19341]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 16, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
57707
TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED CALIFORNIA TEST PROCEDURES, TEST METHODS, AND SPECIFICATIONS
State effective
date
Title/subject
*
*
*
Method 310—Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOC) in Consumer Products and Reactive Organic Compounds (ROC) in Aerosol Coating Products.
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DATES:
[EPA–R04–OAR–2020–0177; FRL–10014–
29–Region 4]
Air Plan Approval; FL; GA; KY; MS;
NC; SC: Definition of Chemical
Process Plants Under State Prevention
of Significant Deterioration
Regulations
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving revisions to
the State Implementation Plans (SIP) for
Florida, Georgia, the Jefferson County
portion of Kentucky, Mississippi, North
Carolina, and South Carolina. The SIP
revisions incorporate changes to the
definition of chemical process plants
under the States’ Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD)
regulations. Consistent with an EPA
regulation completed in 2007, EPA is
approving the rules for Florida, Georgia,
the Jefferson County portion of
Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina,
and South Carolina that modify the
definition of chemical process plant to
exclude ethanol manufacturing facilities
that produce ethanol by natural
fermentation processes. Approving
these modified definitions clarifies that
the PSD major source applicability
threshold in the SIPs for these ethanol
plants is 250 tons per year (tpy) (rather
than 100 tpy) and removes the
requirement to include fugitive
emissions when determining if the
source is major for PSD. EPA concludes
that the changes to the state and local
rules are approvable because the Agency
believes that they are consistent with
EPA regulations governing state PSD
programs and will not interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further
progress (as defined in section 171 of
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Jkt 250001
EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR–
2020–0177. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information may not be publicly
available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information 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 can
either be retrieved electronically
through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management
Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation 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 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D.
Brad Akers, Air Regulatory Management
Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
Mr. Akers can be reached via electronic
mail at akers.brad@epa.gov or via
telephone at (404) 562–9089.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
40 CFR Part 52
16:31 Sep 15, 2020
This rule is effective October 16,
2020.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
VerDate Sep<11>2014
*
[Insert Federal Register citation], 9/16/2020.
the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act)), or any
other applicable requirement of the
CAA.
*
[FR Doc. 2020–18113 Filed 9–15–20; 8:45 am]
SUMMARY:
*
5/25/2018
EPA approval date
I. What is being addressed in this
notice?
EPA is approving the following
revisions to SIPs received by EPA from
Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi,
North Carolina, and South Carolina: (1)
A portion of a SIP revision provided to
EPA through the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FL DEP) via
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Additional
explanation
*
*
Submitted by CARB on June
4, 2019.
a letter dated December 12, 2011; 1 2 (2)
a SIP revision provided to EPA through
the Georgia Environmental Protection
Division (GA EPD) via a letter dated
September 15, 2008; 3 (3) a SIP revision
to the Jefferson County portion of the
Kentucky SIP that was provided to EPA
through the Kentucky Division for Air
Quality (KDAQ) via a letter dated July
1, 2009; 4 (4) a SIP revision provided to
1 Florida’s definition of ‘‘major stationary source’’
at 62–210.200 is also cross-referenced in the portion
of its SIP-approved nonattainment new source
review (NA NSR) regulation, 62–212.500,
Preconstruction Review in Nonattainment Areas,
that sets the fugitive emissions exclusion for
determining rule applicability. See Rule 62–
212.500(2)(b). If the definition of ‘‘chemical process
plants’’ within the term of ‘‘major stationary
source’’ were updated to exclude these ethanol
producing facilities for the purposes of NA NSR,
then fugitive emissions would not need to be
considered in determining whether the source is
major. All sources in nonattainment areas are major
at 100 tpy, and certain classifications of
nonattainment areas for ozone and PM2.5 establish
lower thresholds for major source applicability. See
40 CFR 51.165(b)(iv)(A). However, Florida’s
December 12, 2011, submittal did not seek to revise,
nor ask EPA to revise, the State’s SIP-approved NA
NSR program. Therefore, EPA is not approving the
revision to the definition of ‘‘chemical process
plant’’ within the term ‘‘major stationary source’’ to
apply to the NA NSR program. Accordingly, the
ethanol production facility exclusion within the
definition of ‘‘major stationary source’’ at 62–
210.200 will not apply in the SIP for the purposes
of determining applicability in Rule 62–212.500,
and EPA is noting this in the list of SIP-approved
Florida regulations at 40 CFR 52.520(c). There are
currently no nonattainment areas in Florida.
2 In EPA’s July 20, 2020, notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM), EPA stated that the entire State
of Florida had been designated as attainment/
unclassifiable for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
See 85 FR 43788. While the entire State has this
designation, in 2018, Duvall County, Florida was
designated unclassifiable for the 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQS and was subsequently redesignated to
attainment/unclassifiable on November 21, 2019.
See 84 FR 64206. EPA has also amended the
accompanying technical support document for the
State of Florida to correct this historical note. The
amended version of the TSD is included in the
docket of this action as ‘‘Florida TSD_Amended.’’
3 EPA received the submittal on September 29,
2008.
4 In 2003, the City of Louisville and Jefferson
County governments merged and the ‘‘Jefferson
County Air Pollution Control District’’ was renamed
the ‘‘Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control
District.’’ See The History of Air Pollution Control
in Louisville, available at https://louisvilleky.gov/
government/air-pollution-control-district/historyair-pollution-control-louisville. However, each of
the regulations in the Jefferson County portion of
E:\FR\FM\16SER1.SGM
Continued
16SER1
57708
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 16, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
EPA through the Mississippi
Department of Environmental Quality
(MDEQ) via a letter dated November 28,
2007; (5) a SIP revision provided to EPA
through the North Carolina Department
of Environmental Quality (NC DEQ) 5 6 7
via a letter dated June 20, 2008; 8 and (6)
a portion of a SIP revision provided to
EPA through the South Carolina
Department of Health and
Environmental Control (SC DHEC) via a
letter dated April 14, 2009,9 as updated
in a portion of SIP revision provided to
EPA via letter dated April 10, 2014.
These revisions conform the State
rules to changes to EPA regulations
reflected in EPA’s final rule entitled
‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration,
Nonattainment New Source Review, and
the Kentucky SIP still has the subheading ‘‘Air
Pollution Control District of Jefferson County.’’
Thus, to be consistent with the terminology used in
the SIP, EPA refers throughout this notice to
regulations contained in the Jefferson County
portion of the Kentucky SIP as the ‘‘Jefferson
County’’ regulations.
5 At the time of the 2008 submittal, NC DEQ was
the North Carolina Department of Environment and
Natural Resources. Throughout this rulemaking,
EPA will refer to the State Agency as NC DEQ.
6 In EPA’s July 20, 2020, NPRM, EPA erroneously
cited North Carolina’s PSD regulation as ‘‘15 North
Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 02D .0530,
Prevention of Significant Deterioration. See 85 FR
43788 at 43790 (July 20, 2020). The citation should
read ‘‘15A North Carolina Administrative Code
(NCAC) 02D .0530, Prevention of Significant
Deterioration.’’
7 In EPA’s July 20, 2020, NPRM, EPA erroneously
stated that North Carolina incorporates portions of
‘‘40 CFR 52.21’’ by reference, which includes the
2007 Ethanol Rule provisions. See 85 FR 43788 at
43790 and 43791. These citations should read as
‘‘40 CFR 51.166’’ throughout Section III.E. of the
NPRM, including the citations ‘‘40 CFR
51.166(b)(1)(i)(a)’’ and ‘‘40 CFR 51.166(b)(1)(iii)’’ in
lieu of ‘‘40 CFR 52.21(b)(1)(i)(a)’’ and ‘‘40 CFR
52.21(b)(1)(iii),’’ respectively. EPA has also
amended the accompanying technical support
document for the State of North Carolina to correct
these references. The amended version of the TSD
is included in the docket of this action as ‘‘North
Carolina TSD_Amended.’’
8 EPA received the submission on June 25, 2008.
9 In EPA’s July 20, 2020, NPRM, EPA erroneously
omitted the reference to South Carolina’s revision
to Rule 61–62.5, Standard No. 7 at (i)(1)(vii)(t) in
the State’s SIP revision that includes the same
ethanol exclusion in the definition of ‘‘chemical
process plant’’. See 85 FR 43788 at 43791. Section
III.E of the NPRM should have contained the
following statement: ‘Finally, paragraph (i) for
exemptions was revised at (i)(1)(vii) to read: ‘‘The
source or modification would be a major stationary
source or major modification only if fugitive
emissions, to the extent quantifiable, are considered
in calculating the potential to emit of the stationary
source or modification and the source does not
belong to any of the following categories (i)(1)(vii):
. . . (t) Chemical process plants—The term
chemical processing plant shall not include ethanol
production facilities that produce ethanol by
natural fermentation included in NAICS codes
325193 or 312140 . . .’ ’’ EPA has amended the
accompanying technical support document for the
State of South Carolina to correct this omission. The
amended version of the TSD is included in the
docket of this action as ‘‘South Carolina TSD_
Amended.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Sep 15, 2020
Jkt 250001
Title V: Treatment of Certain Ethanol
Production Facilities Under the ‘‘Major
Emitting Facility’’ Definition’’
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘2007
Ethanol Rule’’) as published in the
Federal Register on May 1, 2007 (72 FR
24060). The 2007 Ethanol Rule amended
the PSD definition of ‘‘major stationary
source’’ to exclude certain ethanol
facilities from the ‘‘chemical process
plant’’ source category and clarified that
the PSD major source applicability
threshold for certain ethanol plants is
250 tpy (rather than 100 tpy). The 2007
Ethanol Rule also removed the
requirement to include fugitive
emissions when determining if an
ethanol facility is a major source for
PSD.
II. Have the requirements for approval
of a SIP revision been met?
In its NPRM published on July 20,
2020 (85 FR 43788), EPA identified and
evaluated the state and local regulations
in the aforementioned SIP revisions that
were revised in response to the Ethanol
Rule. EPA also explained how these SIP
revisions satisfy the completeness
criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V
and meet the substantive SIP
requirements of the CAA, including
section 110 and implementing
regulations. EPA included technical
analyses in separate technical support
documents (TSDs) included in the
docket for this rulemaking. See these
TSDs and the NPRM for further detail
on the SIP revisions and EPA’s rationale
for approving them. EPA did not receive
any relevant public comments on the
NPRM.10
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is finalizing
regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation
by reference the following regulations:
Florida Rule 62–210.200, F.A.C.,
‘‘Definitions,’’ state effective October 23,
2013; 11 12 Florida Rule 62–212.400,
10 EPA received one comment that did not pertain
to the July 20, 2020, NPRM. This comment is posted
in the docket for this action.
11 Except for the purposes of determining
applicability in Rule 62–212.500, ‘‘Preconstruction
Review for Nonattainment Areas.’’ See footnote 1
for additional information.
12 The effective date of the change to Florida Rule
62–210.200 made in Florida’s December 12, 2011,
SIP revision is December 4, 2011. However, for
purposes of the state effective date included at 40
CFR 52.520(c), that change to Florida’s rule is
captured and superseded by Florida’s update in a
December 19, 2013, SIP revision, state effective on
October 23, 2013, which EPA previously approved
on May 19, 2014. See 79 FR 28607. Accordingly,
EPA is also revising the state effective version for
entry 62–210.200 at 40 CFR 52.520(c) to read
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
‘‘Prevention of Significant
Deterioration,’’ state effective October
23, 2013; 13 Georgia Rule 391–3–1–
.02(7), ‘‘Prevention of Significant
Deterioration of Air Quality (PSD),’’
state effective July 20, 2017; 14 Jefferson
County Regulation 2.05, ‘‘Prevention of
Significant Deterioration of Air
Quality,’’ version 13, state effective
January 17, 2018 15 16 for the Jefferson
County portion of the Kentucky SIP;
Mississippi Rule 11 MAC Part 2, Rule
5.2, ‘‘Adoption of Federal Rules by
Reference,’’ state effective May 28,
2016; 17 18 North Carolina Rule 02D
.0530, ‘‘Prevention of Significant
Deterioration,’’ state effective September
1, 2017; 19 and South Carolina Rule 61–
‘‘October 23, 2013,’’ as this state effective version
captures and supersedes the previously listed
March 28, 2012, state effective version.
13 The effective date of the change to Florida Rule
62–212.400 made in Florida’s December 12, 2011,
SIP revision is December 4, 2011. However, for
purposes of the state effective date included at 40
CFR 52.520(c), that change to Florida’s rule is
captured and superseded by Florida’s update in a
February 27, 2013, SIP revision, state effective on
March 28, 2012, which EPA previously approved
on September 19, 2012. See 77 FR 58027.
14 The effective date of the change to Georgia Rule
391–3–1–.02(7) made in Georgia’s September 15,
2008, SIP revision is September 11, 2008. However,
for purposes of the state effective date included at
40 CFR 52.570(c), that change to Georgia’s rule is
captured and superseded by Georgia’s update in a
November 29, 2017, SIP revision, state effective on
July 20, 2017, which EPA previously approved on
December 4, 2018. See 83 FR 62466.
15 The effective date of the change to Jefferson
County Regulation 2.05 made in Kentucky’s July 1,
2009, SIP revision is June 20, 2009. However, for
purposes of the state effective date included at 40
CFR 52.920(c), that change to Jefferson County’s
rule is captured and superseded by Kentucky’s
update in a March 15, 2018, SIP revision, state
effective on January 17, 2018, which EPA
previously approved on April 10, 2019. See 84 FR
14268.
16 EPA is also correcting an inadvertent error for
the entry at Jefferson County Regulation 2.05 at 40
CFR part 52.920(c), Table 2 in the ‘‘Title/subject’’
column to read ‘‘Prevention of Significant
Deterioration.’’ EPA erroneously revised the entry
to read ‘‘Permits’’ in an April 10, 2019, final rule.
See 84 FR 14268.
17 The effective date of the change to Mississippi
Rule APC–S–5, ‘‘Regulations for the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration of Air Quality’’ made in
Mississippi’s November 28, 2007, SIP revision is
August 23, 2007. However, for purposes of the state
effective date included at 40 CFR 52.1270(c), that
change to Mississippi’s rule is captured and
superseded by Mississippi’s update in a June 7,
2016, SIP revision, state effective on May 28, 2016,
which EPA previously approved on August 8, 2017.
See 82 FR 37015. Furthermore, Mississippi has
recodified previous Rule APC–S–5 as 11 MAC Part
2, Rule 5, with the relevant part from the November
28, 2007, SIP revision now included in Rule 5.2.
18 EPA is also revising the entry for 11 MAC Part
2—Chapter 5, Rule 5.1 at 40 CFR 52.1270(c) to
remove related explanatory notes that are not
applicable to this Rule. EPA is not revising Rule 5.1
in a substantive manner.
19 The effective date of the change to North
Carolina Rule 02D .0530 made in North Carolina’s
June 20, 2008, SIP revision is May 1, 2008.
However, for purposes of the state effective date
E:\FR\FM\16SER1.SGM
16SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 16, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
62.5, Standard No. 7, ‘‘Prevention of
Significant Deterioration,’’ state
effective August 25, 2017.20 EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these
materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region 4 Office (please contact the
person identified in the ‘‘For Further
Information Contact’’ section of this
preamble for more information).
Therefore, these materials have been
approved by EPA for inclusion in the
State implementation plan, have been
incorporated by reference by EPA into
that plan, are fully federally enforceable
under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA
as of the effective date of the final
rulemaking of EPA’s approval, and will
be incorporated by reference in the next
update to the SIP compilation.21
IV. Final Action
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
EPA is approving revisions to the
Florida SIP, Georgia SIP, the Jefferson
County portion of the Kentucky SIP,
Mississippi SIP, North Carolina SIP, and
South Carolina SIP. The revisions to the
state and local rules that EPA is
approving change the definition of
‘‘major stationary source’’ under the
States’ and local agency’s PSD
regulations. These changes make clear
that the PSD applicability threshold for
certain ethanol plants is 250 tpy and
remove the requirement to include
fugitive emissions when determining if
an ethanol plant is a major source for
PSD (see section III for the rules being
revised). EPA has determined that these
revisions are consistent with EPA’s PSD
regulations and that approval of these
revisions is consistent with the
requirements of CAA section 110(l) and
will not adversely impact air quality.
EPA’s analysis is available in the NPRM
and the TSDs that were prepared for
each SIP revision and are in the docket
for this action. Approval of the revisions
to these SIPs will ensure consistency
between the State and federally
approved rules and ensure federal
enforceability of the State’s revised air
program rules.
included at 40 CFR 52.1770(c), that change to North
Carolina’s rule is captured and superseded by North
Carolina’s update in a October 17, 2017, SIP
revision, state effective on September 1, 2017,
which EPA previously approved on September 11,
2018. See 82 FR 45827.
20 The effective date of the change to South
Carolina Rule 61–62.1, Standard No. 7 made in
South Carolina’s April 10, 2014, SIP revision is
December 27, 2013. However, for purposes of the
state effective date included at 40 CFR 52.2120(c),
that change to South Carolina’s rule is captured and
superseded by South Carolina’s update in a
September 5, 2017, SIP revision, state effective on
August 25, 2017, which EPA previously approved
on February 13, 2019. See 84 FR 3705.
21 See 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Sep 15, 2020
Jkt 250001
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.
See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. This action merely approves
state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
these actions:
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Are not Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
actions because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are 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.);
• Do 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);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are 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
• Do 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).
The SIPs subject to these actions, with
the exception of the South Carolina SIP,
are not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
57709
where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rules regarding SIPs do not
have tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), nor will they
impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
With respect to the South Carolina SIP,
because this final action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law, this final action
for the State of South Carolina does not
have Tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000). Therefore, this
action will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt
Tribal law. The Catawba Indian Nation
(CIN) Reservation is located within the
boundary of York County, South
Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba
Indian Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code
Ann. 27–16–120 (Settlement Act), ‘‘all
state and local environmental laws and
regulations apply to the [Catawba Indian
Nation] and Reservation and are fully
enforceable by all relevant state and
local agencies and authorities.’’ The CIN
also retains authority to impose
regulations applying higher
environmental standards to the
Reservation than those imposed by state
law or local governing bodies, in
accordance with the Settlement Act.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by November 16, 2020. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review, nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
E:\FR\FM\16SER1.SGM
16SER1
57710
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 16, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section
307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: August 27, 2020.
Mary Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
Subpart K—Florida
2. In § 52.520, amend the table in
paragraph (c) by:
■ a. Under ‘‘Chapter 62–210 Stationary
Sources—General Requirements’’,
revising the entry for ‘‘62–210.200’’ and;
■ b. Under ‘‘Chapter 62–212 Stationary
Sources—Preconstruction Review’’,
revising the entries for ‘‘62–212.400’’
and ‘‘62–212.500’’.
The revisions read as follows:
■
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
§ 52.520
*
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA APPROVED FLORIDA REGULATIONS
State citation
(section)
State effective
date
Title/subject
*
*
EPA approval
date
*
Explanation
*
*
*
*
Chapter 62–210 Stationary Sources—General Requirements
62–210.200 .....
Definitions ..........
*
10/23/2013
*
9/16/2020, [Insert
citation of publication].
*
The ethanol production facility exclusion within the definition of ‘‘major
stationary source’’ at 62–210.200 does not apply to 62–212.500.
Except the following definitions: ‘‘animal crematory’’; ‘‘biological
waste’’; ‘‘biological waste incinerator’’; ‘‘biomedical waste’’; ‘‘capture
efficiency’’; ‘‘cast polymer operation’’; ‘‘human crematory’’; ‘‘major
source of air pollution,’’ ‘‘major source,’’ or ‘‘title V source’’; ‘‘printed
interior panels’’; ‘‘unit-specific applicable requirement’’; and ‘‘wasteto-energy facility’’.
*
*
*
*
Chapter 62–212 Stationary Sources—Preconstruction Review
*
62–212.400 .....
62–212.500 .....
*
Prevention of
Significant Deterioration.
Preconstruction
Review for
Nonattainment
Areas.
*
*
*
*
3/28/2012
2/2/2006
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
9/16/2020, [Insert Except the provisions for the PM2.5 significant impact levels at (5)(b).
citation of publication].
6/27/2008, 73 FR The ethanol production facility exclusion within the definition of ‘‘major
36435.
stationary source’’ at 62–210.200 does not apply to 62–212.500.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 52.570
Subpart L—Georgia
3. In § 52.570 amend the table in
paragraph (c) by revising the entry for
‘‘391–3–1–.02(7)’’ to read as follows:
■
*
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA APPROVED GEORGIA REGULATIONS
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
State citation
*
391–3–1–
.02(7).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
State effective
date
Title/subject
*
Prevention of
Significant Deterioration of
Air Quality
(PSD).
16:31 Sep 15, 2020
Jkt 250001
*
7/20/2017
PO 00000
EPA approval
date
Explanation
*
*
*
*
9/16/2020, [Insert Except for the automatic rescission clause at 391–3–1
citation of pub–.02(7)(a)(2)(iv), which EPA disapproved on March 4, 2016. Except
lication].
for portions of Rule 391–3–1–.02(7) incorporating by reference 40
CFR 52.21(b)(2)(v), and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(3)(iii)(c), because those
CFR provisions were indefinitely stayed by the Fugitive Emissions
Rule in the March 30, 2011 rulemaking and have not been approved into the Georgia SIP.
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\16SER1.SGM
16SER1
57711
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 16, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
EPA APPROVED GEORGIA REGULATIONS—Continued
State citation
Title/subject
*
*
*
State effective
date
*
*
*
EPA approval
date
*
Explanation
*
*
*
entry for ‘‘2.05’’ under ‘‘Reg 2—Permit
Requirements’’ to read as follows:
*
Subpart S—Kentucky
§ 52.920
4. In § 52.920 amend Table 2 in
paragraph (c), Table 2 by revising the
■
*
*
(c) * * *
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
*
TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED JEFFERSON COUNTY REGULATIONS FOR KENTUCKY
Reg
Title/subject
*
EPA approval
date
Federal Register notice
*
District effective date
*
Explanation
*
*
*
*
Reg 2—Permit Requirements
*
*
2.05 ........ Prevention of
Significant
Deterioration
of Air Quality.
*
*
*
9/16/2020
*
[Insert citation
of publication].
*
*
*
*
1/17/2018
*
*
*
*
*
This approval does not include Jefferson County’s revisions to
incorporate by reference the Fugitive Emissions Rule (December 19, 2008).
*
‘‘11 MAC Part 2—Chapter 5’’ and the
entries for ‘‘Rule 5.1’’ and ‘‘Rule 5.2’’ to
read as follows:
*
Subpart Z—Mississippi
*
§ 52.1270
*
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
5. In § 52.1270 amend the table in
paragraph (c) by revising the heading for
■
EPA-APPROVED MISSISSIPPI REGULATIONS
State citation
State effective
date
Title/subject
*
*
EPA approval
date
*
Explanation
*
*
*
*
11 MAC Part 2—Chapter 5 Regulations for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality
Rule 5.1 ..
Rule 5.2 ..
Purpose of this
Regulation.
Adoption of Federal Rules by
Reference.
*
*
*
*
5/28/2016
5/28/2016
*
Subpart II—North Carolina
6. In § 52.1770 amend Table (1) in
paragraph (c) by revising the entries for
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Sep 15, 2020
Jkt 250001
8/8/2017, 82 FR
37015.
9/16/2020, [Insert
citation of publication].
The version of Rule 5.2 in the SIP does not incorporate by reference the
provisions at § 52.21(b)(2)(v) and (b)(3)(iii)(c) that were stayed indefinitely by the Fugitive Emissions Interim Rule (published in the Federal
Register March 30, 2011).
‘‘Section .0530’’ and ‘‘Section .0531’’
under Subchapter 2D, ‘‘Air Pollution
Control Requirements’’ under Section
.0500, ‘‘Emission Control Standards’’ to
read as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
§ 52.1770
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
E:\FR\FM\16SER1.SGM
16SER1
*
*
57712
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 180 / Wednesday, September 16, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
EPA-APPROVED NORTH CAROLINA REGULATIONS
State citation
State effective
date
Title/subject
EPA approval
date
Explanation
Subchapter 2D Air Pollution Control Requirements
*
*
*
*
Section .0500
*
*
Prevention of Significant Deterioration.
Sources in Nonattainment
Areas.
Section
.0530.
Section
.0531.
*
*
*
9/1/2013
*
*
*
*
*
*
Subpart PP—South Carolina
*
§ 52.2120
7. In § 52.2120 amend the table in
paragraph (c) by revising the entry for
■
*
*
*
*
*
The version of Section .0531 in the SIP does not incorporate by reference the provisions amended in the Ethanol Rule (published in the
Federal Register on May 1, 2007) that excludes facilities that produce
ethanol through a natural fermentation process from the definition of
‘‘chemical process plants’’ at § 52.21(b)(1)(i)(a) and (b)(1)(iii)(t).
*
‘‘Standard No. 7’’ under ‘‘Regulation No.
62.5’’ to read as follows:
*
*
Emission Control Standards
*
9/16/2020, [Insert
citation of publication].
9/14/2016, 81 FR
63107.
9/1/2017
*
*
*
(c) * * *
Identification of plan.
*
*
*
EPA-APPROVED SOUTH CAROLINA REGULATIONS
State citation
Title/subject
State effective
date
EPA approval
date
*
Regulation
No.
62.5.
*
Air Pollution Control Standards..
*
.............................
*
........................
*
*
Prevention of Significant Deterioration.
*
9/16/2020, [Insert
citation of publication].
*
*
*
*
Except Standard No. 7, paragraphs (b)(30)(v) and (b)(34)(iii)(d), which
the state withdrew from EPA’s consideration for approval on December
20, 2016.
Except Standard No. 7, paragraph (b)(34)(iii)(c), approved conditionally
on June 2, 2008, and approved fully on June 23, 2011, with a state effective date of June 25, 2005.
*
*
Standard
No. 7.
*
*
*
8/25/2017
*
*
*
*
ACTION:
Explanation
*
*
Final rule.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2020–0180; FRL–10012–
89–Region 9]
Air Plan Approval; California; Feather
River Air Quality Management District
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Sep 15, 2020
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
approve a revision to the Feather River
Air Quality Management District
(FRAQMD) portion of the California
State Implementation Plan (SIP). This
revision concerns emissions of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) from vehicle
and mobile equipment coating
operations. We are approving a local
rule that regulates these emission
sources under the Clean Air Act (CAA
or the Act).
SUMMARY:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Jkt 250001
This rule will be effective on
October 16, 2020.
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
*
*
The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R09–OAR–2020–0180. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (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 through https://
www.regulations.gov, or please contact
ADDRESSES:
[FR Doc. 2020–19341 Filed 9–15–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
*
E:\FR\FM\16SER1.SGM
16SER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 180 (Wednesday, September 16, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57707-57712]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-19341]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2020-0177; FRL-10014-29-Region 4]
Air Plan Approval; FL; GA; KY; MS; NC; SC: Definition of Chemical
Process Plants Under State Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Regulations
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
revisions to the State Implementation Plans (SIP) for Florida, Georgia,
the Jefferson County portion of Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina,
and South Carolina. The SIP revisions incorporate changes to the
definition of chemical process plants under the States' Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations. Consistent with an EPA
regulation completed in 2007, EPA is approving the rules for Florida,
Georgia, the Jefferson County portion of Kentucky, Mississippi, North
Carolina, and South Carolina that modify the definition of chemical
process plant to exclude ethanol manufacturing facilities that produce
ethanol by natural fermentation processes. Approving these modified
definitions clarifies that the PSD major source applicability threshold
in the SIPs for these ethanol plants is 250 tons per year (tpy) (rather
than 100 tpy) and removes the requirement to include fugitive emissions
when determining if the source is major for PSD. EPA concludes that the
changes to the state and local rules are approvable because the Agency
believes that they are consistent with EPA regulations governing state
PSD programs and will not interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in
section 171 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act)), or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA.
DATES: This rule is effective October 16, 2020.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2020-0177. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the
index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information 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 can either
be retrieved electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy
at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air and Radiation 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 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D. Brad Akers, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Akers can be
reached via electronic mail at [email protected] or via telephone at
(404) 562-9089.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What is being addressed in this notice?
EPA is approving the following revisions to SIPs received by EPA
from Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South
Carolina: (1) A portion of a SIP revision provided to EPA through the
Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FL DEP) via a letter
dated December 12, 2011; 1 2 (2) a SIP revision provided to
EPA through the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GA EPD) via
a letter dated September 15, 2008; \3\ (3) a SIP revision to the
Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP that was provided to EPA
through the Kentucky Division for Air Quality (KDAQ) via a letter dated
July 1, 2009; \4\ (4) a SIP revision provided to
[[Page 57708]]
EPA through the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ)
via a letter dated November 28, 2007; (5) a SIP revision provided to
EPA through the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NC
DEQ) 5 6 7 via a letter dated June 20, 2008; \8\ and (6) a
portion of a SIP revision provided to EPA through the South Carolina
Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC) via a letter
dated April 14, 2009,\9\ as updated in a portion of SIP revision
provided to EPA via letter dated April 10, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Florida's definition of ``major stationary source'' at 62-
210.200 is also cross-referenced in the portion of its SIP-approved
nonattainment new source review (NA NSR) regulation, 62-212.500,
Preconstruction Review in Nonattainment Areas, that sets the
fugitive emissions exclusion for determining rule applicability. See
Rule 62-212.500(2)(b). If the definition of ``chemical process
plants'' within the term of ``major stationary source'' were updated
to exclude these ethanol producing facilities for the purposes of NA
NSR, then fugitive emissions would not need to be considered in
determining whether the source is major. All sources in
nonattainment areas are major at 100 tpy, and certain
classifications of nonattainment areas for ozone and
PM2.5 establish lower thresholds for major source
applicability. See 40 CFR 51.165(b)(iv)(A). However, Florida's
December 12, 2011, submittal did not seek to revise, nor ask EPA to
revise, the State's SIP-approved NA NSR program. Therefore, EPA is
not approving the revision to the definition of ``chemical process
plant'' within the term ``major stationary source'' to apply to the
NA NSR program. Accordingly, the ethanol production facility
exclusion within the definition of ``major stationary source'' at
62-210.200 will not apply in the SIP for the purposes of determining
applicability in Rule 62-212.500, and EPA is noting this in the list
of SIP-approved Florida regulations at 40 CFR 52.520(c). There are
currently no nonattainment areas in Florida.
\2\ In EPA's July 20, 2020, notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM), EPA stated that the entire State of Florida had been
designated as attainment/unclassifiable for the 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. See 85 FR 43788. While the entire State has this designation,
in 2018, Duvall County, Florida was designated unclassifiable for
the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS and was subsequently redesignated to
attainment/unclassifiable on November 21, 2019. See 84 FR 64206. EPA
has also amended the accompanying technical support document for the
State of Florida to correct this historical note. The amended
version of the TSD is included in the docket of this action as
``Florida TSD_Amended.''
\3\ EPA received the submittal on September 29, 2008.
\4\ In 2003, the City of Louisville and Jefferson County
governments merged and the ``Jefferson County Air Pollution Control
District'' was renamed the ``Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control
District.'' See The History of Air Pollution Control in Louisville,
available at https://louisvilleky.gov/government/air-pollution-control-district/history-air-pollution-control-louisville. However,
each of the regulations in the Jefferson County portion of the
Kentucky SIP still has the subheading ``Air Pollution Control
District of Jefferson County.'' Thus, to be consistent with the
terminology used in the SIP, EPA refers throughout this notice to
regulations contained in the Jefferson County portion of the
Kentucky SIP as the ``Jefferson County'' regulations.
\5\ At the time of the 2008 submittal, NC DEQ was the North
Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. Throughout
this rulemaking, EPA will refer to the State Agency as NC DEQ.
\6\ In EPA's July 20, 2020, NPRM, EPA erroneously cited North
Carolina's PSD regulation as ``15 North Carolina Administrative Code
(NCAC) 02D .0530, Prevention of Significant Deterioration. See 85 FR
43788 at 43790 (July 20, 2020). The citation should read ``15A North
Carolina Administrative Code (NCAC) 02D .0530, Prevention of
Significant Deterioration.''
\7\ In EPA's July 20, 2020, NPRM, EPA erroneously stated that
North Carolina incorporates portions of ``40 CFR 52.21'' by
reference, which includes the 2007 Ethanol Rule provisions. See 85
FR 43788 at 43790 and 43791. These citations should read as ``40 CFR
51.166'' throughout Section III.E. of the NPRM, including the
citations ``40 CFR 51.166(b)(1)(i)(a)'' and ``40 CFR
51.166(b)(1)(iii)'' in lieu of ``40 CFR 52.21(b)(1)(i)(a)'' and ``40
CFR 52.21(b)(1)(iii),'' respectively. EPA has also amended the
accompanying technical support document for the State of North
Carolina to correct these references. The amended version of the TSD
is included in the docket of this action as ``North Carolina
TSD_Amended.''
\8\ EPA received the submission on June 25, 2008.
\9\ In EPA's July 20, 2020, NPRM, EPA erroneously omitted the
reference to South Carolina's revision to Rule 61-62.5, Standard No.
7 at (i)(1)(vii)(t) in the State's SIP revision that includes the
same ethanol exclusion in the definition of ``chemical process
plant''. See 85 FR 43788 at 43791. Section III.E of the NPRM should
have contained the following statement: `Finally, paragraph (i) for
exemptions was revised at (i)(1)(vii) to read: ``The source or
modification would be a major stationary source or major
modification only if fugitive emissions, to the extent quantifiable,
are considered in calculating the potential to emit of the
stationary source or modification and the source does not belong to
any of the following categories (i)(1)(vii): . . . (t) Chemical
process plants--The term chemical processing plant shall not include
ethanol production facilities that produce ethanol by natural
fermentation included in NAICS codes 325193 or 312140 . . .' '' EPA
has amended the accompanying technical support document for the
State of South Carolina to correct this omission. The amended
version of the TSD is included in the docket of this action as
``South Carolina TSD_Amended.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These revisions conform the State rules to changes to EPA
regulations reflected in EPA's final rule entitled ``Prevention of
Significant Deterioration, Nonattainment New Source Review, and Title
V: Treatment of Certain Ethanol Production Facilities Under the ``Major
Emitting Facility'' Definition'' (hereinafter referred to as the ``2007
Ethanol Rule'') as published in the Federal Register on May 1, 2007 (72
FR 24060). The 2007 Ethanol Rule amended the PSD definition of ``major
stationary source'' to exclude certain ethanol facilities from the
``chemical process plant'' source category and clarified that the PSD
major source applicability threshold for certain ethanol plants is 250
tpy (rather than 100 tpy). The 2007 Ethanol Rule also removed the
requirement to include fugitive emissions when determining if an
ethanol facility is a major source for PSD.
II. Have the requirements for approval of a SIP revision been met?
In its NPRM published on July 20, 2020 (85 FR 43788), EPA
identified and evaluated the state and local regulations in the
aforementioned SIP revisions that were revised in response to the
Ethanol Rule. EPA also explained how these SIP revisions satisfy the
completeness criteria of 40 CFR part 51, appendix V and meet the
substantive SIP requirements of the CAA, including section 110 and
implementing regulations. EPA included technical analyses in separate
technical support documents (TSDs) included in the docket for this
rulemaking. See these TSDs and the NPRM for further detail on the SIP
revisions and EPA's rationale for approving them. EPA did not receive
any relevant public comments on the NPRM.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ EPA received one comment that did not pertain to the July
20, 2020, NPRM. This comment is posted in the docket for this
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference the following
regulations: Florida Rule 62-210.200, F.A.C., ``Definitions,'' state
effective October 23, 2013; 11 12 Florida Rule 62-212.400,
``Prevention of Significant Deterioration,'' state effective October
23, 2013; \13\ Georgia Rule 391-3-1-.02(7), ``Prevention of Significant
Deterioration of Air Quality (PSD),'' state effective July 20, 2017;
\14\ Jefferson County Regulation 2.05, ``Prevention of Significant
Deterioration of Air Quality,'' version 13, state effective January 17,
2018 15 16 for the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky
SIP; Mississippi Rule 11 MAC Part 2, Rule 5.2, ``Adoption of Federal
Rules by Reference,'' state effective May 28, 2016; 17 18
North Carolina Rule 02D .0530, ``Prevention of Significant
Deterioration,'' state effective September 1, 2017; \19\ and South
Carolina Rule 61-
[[Page 57709]]
62.5, Standard No. 7, ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration,''
state effective August 25, 2017.\20\ EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov
and at the EPA Region 4 Office (please contact the person identified in
the ``For Further Information Contact'' section of this preamble for
more information). Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA
for inclusion in the State implementation plan, have been incorporated
by reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable
under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the
final rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by
reference in the next update to the SIP compilation.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Except for the purposes of determining applicability in
Rule 62-212.500, ``Preconstruction Review for Nonattainment Areas.''
See footnote 1 for additional information.
\12\ The effective date of the change to Florida Rule 62-210.200
made in Florida's December 12, 2011, SIP revision is December 4,
2011. However, for purposes of the state effective date included at
40 CFR 52.520(c), that change to Florida's rule is captured and
superseded by Florida's update in a December 19, 2013, SIP revision,
state effective on October 23, 2013, which EPA previously approved
on May 19, 2014. See 79 FR 28607. Accordingly, EPA is also revising
the state effective version for entry 62-210.200 at 40 CFR 52.520(c)
to read ``October 23, 2013,'' as this state effective version
captures and supersedes the previously listed March 28, 2012, state
effective version.
\13\ The effective date of the change to Florida Rule 62-212.400
made in Florida's December 12, 2011, SIP revision is December 4,
2011. However, for purposes of the state effective date included at
40 CFR 52.520(c), that change to Florida's rule is captured and
superseded by Florida's update in a February 27, 2013, SIP revision,
state effective on March 28, 2012, which EPA previously approved on
September 19, 2012. See 77 FR 58027.
\14\ The effective date of the change to Georgia Rule 391-3-
1-.02(7) made in Georgia's September 15, 2008, SIP revision is
September 11, 2008. However, for purposes of the state effective
date included at 40 CFR 52.570(c), that change to Georgia's rule is
captured and superseded by Georgia's update in a November 29, 2017,
SIP revision, state effective on July 20, 2017, which EPA previously
approved on December 4, 2018. See 83 FR 62466.
\15\ The effective date of the change to Jefferson County
Regulation 2.05 made in Kentucky's July 1, 2009, SIP revision is
June 20, 2009. However, for purposes of the state effective date
included at 40 CFR 52.920(c), that change to Jefferson County's rule
is captured and superseded by Kentucky's update in a March 15, 2018,
SIP revision, state effective on January 17, 2018, which EPA
previously approved on April 10, 2019. See 84 FR 14268.
\16\ EPA is also correcting an inadvertent error for the entry
at Jefferson County Regulation 2.05 at 40 CFR part 52.920(c), Table
2 in the ``Title/subject'' column to read ``Prevention of
Significant Deterioration.'' EPA erroneously revised the entry to
read ``Permits'' in an April 10, 2019, final rule. See 84 FR 14268.
\17\ The effective date of the change to Mississippi Rule APC-S-
5, ``Regulations for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration of
Air Quality'' made in Mississippi's November 28, 2007, SIP revision
is August 23, 2007. However, for purposes of the state effective
date included at 40 CFR 52.1270(c), that change to Mississippi's
rule is captured and superseded by Mississippi's update in a June 7,
2016, SIP revision, state effective on May 28, 2016, which EPA
previously approved on August 8, 2017. See 82 FR 37015. Furthermore,
Mississippi has recodified previous Rule APC-S-5 as 11 MAC Part 2,
Rule 5, with the relevant part from the November 28, 2007, SIP
revision now included in Rule 5.2.
\18\ EPA is also revising the entry for 11 MAC Part 2--Chapter
5, Rule 5.1 at 40 CFR 52.1270(c) to remove related explanatory notes
that are not applicable to this Rule. EPA is not revising Rule 5.1
in a substantive manner.
\19\ The effective date of the change to North Carolina Rule 02D
.0530 made in North Carolina's June 20, 2008, SIP revision is May 1,
2008. However, for purposes of the state effective date included at
40 CFR 52.1770(c), that change to North Carolina's rule is captured
and superseded by North Carolina's update in a October 17, 2017, SIP
revision, state effective on September 1, 2017, which EPA previously
approved on September 11, 2018. See 82 FR 45827.
\20\ The effective date of the change to South Carolina Rule 61-
62.1, Standard No. 7 made in South Carolina's April 10, 2014, SIP
revision is December 27, 2013. However, for purposes of the state
effective date included at 40 CFR 52.2120(c), that change to South
Carolina's rule is captured and superseded by South Carolina's
update in a September 5, 2017, SIP revision, state effective on
August 25, 2017, which EPA previously approved on February 13, 2019.
See 84 FR 3705.
\21\ See 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving revisions to the Florida SIP, Georgia SIP, the
Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP, Mississippi SIP, North
Carolina SIP, and South Carolina SIP. The revisions to the state and
local rules that EPA is approving change the definition of ``major
stationary source'' under the States' and local agency's PSD
regulations. These changes make clear that the PSD applicability
threshold for certain ethanol plants is 250 tpy and remove the
requirement to include fugitive emissions when determining if an
ethanol plant is a major source for PSD (see section III for the rules
being revised). EPA has determined that these revisions are consistent
with EPA's PSD regulations and that approval of these revisions is
consistent with the requirements of CAA section 110(l) and will not
adversely impact air quality. EPA's analysis is available in the NPRM
and the TSDs that were prepared for each SIP revision and are in the
docket for this action. Approval of the revisions to these SIPs will
ensure consistency between the State and federally approved rules and
ensure federal enforceability of the State's revised air program rules.
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. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. This action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, these actions:
Are not significant regulatory actions subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Are not Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory actions because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Are 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.);
Do 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);
Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Are not economically significant regulatory actions based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Are 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
Do 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).
The SIPs subject to these actions, with the exception of the South
Carolina SIP, are not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that
a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rules
regarding SIPs do not have tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will they
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law. With respect to the South Carolina SIP, because this final action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law, this
final action for the State of South Carolina does not have Tribal
implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000). Therefore, this action will not impose substantial
direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law. The Catawba
Indian Nation (CIN) Reservation is located within the boundary of York
County, South Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba Indian Claims
Settlement Act, S.C. Code Ann. 27-16-120 (Settlement Act), ``all state
and local environmental laws and regulations apply to the [Catawba
Indian Nation] and Reservation and are fully enforceable by all
relevant state and local agencies and authorities.'' The CIN also
retains authority to impose regulations applying higher environmental
standards to the Reservation than those imposed by state law or local
governing bodies, in accordance with the Settlement Act.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by November 16, 2020. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review, nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and
[[Page 57710]]
shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This
action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. See section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: August 27, 2020.
Mary Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart K--Florida
0
2. In Sec. 52.520, amend the table in paragraph (c) by:
0
a. Under ``Chapter 62-210 Stationary Sources--General Requirements'',
revising the entry for ``62-210.200'' and;
0
b. Under ``Chapter 62-212 Stationary Sources--Preconstruction Review'',
revising the entries for ``62-212.400'' and ``62-212.500''.
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 52.520 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA Approved Florida Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State citation State EPA approval
(section) Title/subject effective date date Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 62-210 Stationary Sources--General Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
62-210.200......... Definitions..... 10/23/2013 9/16/2020, The ethanol production facility
[Insert exclusion within the definition of
citation of ``major stationary source'' at 62-
publication]. 210.200 does not apply to 62-212.500.
Except the following definitions:
``animal crematory''; ``biological
waste''; ``biological waste
incinerator''; ``biomedical waste'';
``capture efficiency''; ``cast polymer
operation''; ``human crematory'';
``major source of air pollution,''
``major source,'' or ``title V
source''; ``printed interior panels'';
``unit-specific applicable
requirement''; and ``waste-to-energy
facility''.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 62-212 Stationary Sources--Preconstruction Review
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
62-212.400......... Prevention of 3/28/2012 9/16/2020, Except the provisions for the PM2.5
Significant [Insert significant impact levels at (5)(b).
Deterioration. citation of
publication].
62-212.500......... Preconstruction 2/2/2006 6/27/2008, 73 The ethanol production facility
Review for FR 36435. exclusion within the definition of
Nonattainment ``major stationary source'' at 62-
Areas. 210.200 does not apply to 62-212.500.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Subpart L--Georgia
0
3. In Sec. 52.570 amend the table in paragraph (c) by revising the
entry for ``391-3-1-.02(7)'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.570 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA Approved Georgia Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State EPA approval
State citation Title/subject effective date date Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
391-3-1-.02(7)..... Prevention of 7/20/2017 9/16/2020, Except for the automatic rescission
Significant [Insert clause at 391-3-1 -.02(7)(a)(2)(iv),
Deterioration citation of which EPA disapproved on March 4, 2016.
of Air Quality publication]. Except for portions of Rule 391-3-1-
(PSD). .02(7) incorporating by reference 40
CFR 52.21(b)(2)(v), and 40 CFR
52.21(b)(3)(iii)(c), because those CFR
provisions were indefinitely stayed by
the Fugitive Emissions Rule in the
March 30, 2011 rulemaking and have not
been approved into the Georgia SIP.
[[Page 57711]]
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Subpart S--Kentucky
0
4. In Sec. 52.920 amend Table 2 in paragraph (c), Table 2 by revising
the entry for ``2.05'' under ``Reg 2--Permit Requirements'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.920 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
Table 2--EPA-Approved Jefferson County Regulations for Kentucky
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA approval District
Reg Title/subject date Federal Register notice effective date Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reg 2--Permit Requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
2.05................ Prevention of 9/16/2020 [Insert citation of 1/17/2018 This approval does not include Jefferson
Significant publication]. County's revisions to incorporate by reference
Deterioration of Air the Fugitive Emissions Rule (December 19,
Quality. 2008).
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Subpart Z--Mississippi
0
5. In Sec. 52.1270 amend the table in paragraph (c) by revising the
heading for ``11 MAC Part 2--Chapter 5'' and the entries for ``Rule
5.1'' and ``Rule 5.2'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1270 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA-Approved Mississippi Regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
State citation Title/subject effective date EPA approval date Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11 MAC Part 2--Chapter 5 Regulations for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 5.1............................ Purpose of this 5/28/2016 8/8/2017, 82 FR 37015..
Regulation.
Rule 5.2............................ Adoption of Federal 5/28/2016 9/16/2020, [Insert The version of Rule 5.2 in the SIP does not
Rules by Reference. citation of incorporate by reference the provisions at Sec.
publication]. 52.21(b)(2)(v) and (b)(3)(iii)(c) that were
stayed indefinitely by the Fugitive Emissions
Interim Rule (published in the Federal Register
March 30, 2011).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Subpart II--North Carolina
0
6. In Sec. 52.1770 amend Table (1) in paragraph (c) by revising the
entries for ``Section .0530'' and ``Section .0531'' under Subchapter
2D, ``Air Pollution Control Requirements'' under Section .0500,
``Emission Control Standards'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
[[Page 57712]]
EPA-Approved North Carolina Regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
State citation Title/subject effective date EPA approval date Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subchapter 2D Air Pollution Control Requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section .0500 Emission Control Standards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Section .0530....................... Prevention of 9/1/2017 9/16/2020, [Insert
Significant citation of
Deterioration. publication].
Section .0531....................... Sources in 9/1/2013 9/14/2016, 81 FR 63107. The version of Section .0531 in the SIP does not
Nonattainment Areas. incorporate by reference the provisions amended
in the Ethanol Rule (published in the Federal
Register on May 1, 2007) that excludes
facilities that produce ethanol through a
natural fermentation process from the
definition of ``chemical process plants'' at
Sec. 52.21(b)(1)(i)(a) and (b)(1)(iii)(t).
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Subpart PP--South Carolina
0
7. In Sec. 52.2120 amend the table in paragraph (c) by revising the
entry for ``Standard No. 7'' under ``Regulation No. 62.5'' to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.2120 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA-Approved South Carolina Regulations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
State citation Title/subject effective date EPA approval date Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Regulation No. 62.5................. Air Pollution Control .............. ....................... ................................................
Standards..
* * * * * * *
Standard No. 7...................... Prevention of 8/25/2017 9/16/2020, [Insert Except Standard No. 7, paragraphs (b)(30)(v) and
Significant citation of (b)(34)(iii)(d), which the state withdrew from
Deterioration. publication]. EPA's consideration for approval on December
20, 2016.
Except Standard No. 7, paragraph
(b)(34)(iii)(c), approved conditionally on June
2, 2008, and approved fully on June 23, 2011,
with a state effective date of June 25, 2005.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-19341 Filed 9-15-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
