Air Plan Approval; South Carolina; 2018 General Assembly New Source Review Update, 40796-40801 [2021-15536]
Download as PDF
40796
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 143 / Thursday, July 29, 2021 / Proposed Rules
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 Clean Air Act;
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, the SIP is 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 rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Nitrogen
oxides, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: July 22, 2021.
Deborah Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region
1.
[FR Doc. 2021–16116 Filed 7–28–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2020–0524; FRL–8762–01–
R4]
Air Plan Approval; South Carolina;
2018 General Assembly New Source
Review Update
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of
South Carolina, through the South
Carolina Department of Health and
Environmental Control (SCDHEC or
Department), on April 24, 2020. The SIP
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jul 28, 2021
Jkt 253001
revisions update the State’s Prevention
of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and
Nonattainment New Source Review
(NNSR) regulations. Specifically, the
SIP revisions add and update several
definitions for consistency with the
Federal regulations, update public
participation requirements for PSD,
clarify the applicability of ‘‘source
impact analysis’’ for PSD, add an
emissions offset banking provision for
NNSR, and make administrative
updates, such as typographical
corrections and renumbering. Finally,
the changes incorporate language that
addresses the public notice rule
provisions for NNSR, which removes
the mandatory requirements to provide
public notice in a newspaper and
instead allows for electronic notice (‘‘enotice’’) as an alternate noticing option
for the State. EPA is proposing to
approve these revisions pursuant to the
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and
implementing Federal regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 30, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2020–0524 at
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
EPA may publish any comment received
to its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include a discussion of all points
you wish to make. EPA will generally
not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Andres Febres, 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.
The telephone number is (404) 562–
8966. Mr. Febres can also be reached via
electronic mail at febresmartinez.andres@epa.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What is EPA proposing?
On April 24, 2020, SDHEC submitted
SIP revisions to EPA for approval that
include changes to South Carolina’s
major source New Source Review (NSR)
permitting regulations to make them
more closely align with Federal
requirements for PSD and NNSR
permitting; correct typographical errors;
and update internal references,
including renumbering throughout both
regulations. Specifically, these changes
update South Carolina Regulation 61–
62.5, Standard No. 7—Prevention of
Significant Deterioration and Standard
No. 7.1—Nonattainment New Source
Review.1 In addition to the changes
above, the SIP revisions include an
update to the public noticing
procedures for South Carolina’s NNSR
regulations. The public notice
requirement updates address the
Federal rule entitled ‘‘Revisions to
Public Notice Provisions in Clean Air
Act Permitting Programs,’’ (also referred
to as the e-Notice Rule) that was
finalized in 2016. See 81 FR 71613
(October 18, 2016).2
With certain exceptions described in
Section III below, EPA is proposing to
approve the changes submitted by South
Carolina on April 24, 2020, which
modify the State’s PSD and NNSR
programs, as meeting the requirements
of the Federal NSR program and being
consistent with the CAA.
II. Background
This proposed action seeks to revise
South Carolina’s PSD and NNSR
regulations in the federally-approved
SIP. Many of these changes are
administrative in nature, including
updating internal references and
correcting typographical errors, but they
do include the adoption of several
definitions currently in the Federal NSR
regulations, update public participation
requirements for PSD, clarify the
applicability of ‘‘source impact
1 On April 24, 2020, SDHEC also submitted to
EPA SIP revisions to Regulations 61–62.1, Section
I—Definitions; 61–62.1, Section II—Permit
Requirements; 61–62.1, Section III—Emission
Inventory and Emissions Statement; 61–62.1,
Section IV—Source Tests; 61–62.1, Section V—
Credible Emissions; 61–62.5, Standard No. 2—
Ambient Air Quality Standards; and 61–62.5,
Standard 5.2—Control of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX).
EPA will address these SIP revisions in separate
actions.
2 EPA previously approved e-notice provisions for
South Carolina’s PSD program. See 83 FR 64285
(December 14, 2018). Although the e-notice
provisions in the State’s NNSR program are being
proposed for incorporation into the SIP for the first
time, the April 24, 2020, SIP revisions also include
updates to the already SIP-approved e-notice
provisions in South Carolina’s SIP-approved PSD
program.
E:\FR\FM\29JYP1.SGM
29JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 143 / Thursday, July 29, 2021 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
analysis’’ for PSD, and add an emissions
offset banking provision for NNSR,
which will be discussed in further detail
in Section III below. Additionally, the
April 24, 2020, SIP revisions also adopt
e-notice provisions into the State’s
NNSR regulations.
On October 5, 2016, EPA finalized the
revised public notice rule provisions for
the Federal NSR, Title V, and the Outer
Continental Shelf permitting programs
of the CAA. See 81 FR 71613 (October
18, 2016). The new provisions removed
the mandatory requirement to provide
public notice of a draft air permit
through publication in a local
newspaper. Instead, these provisions
allow for an internet-based ‘‘e-notice’’
option for permitting authorities
implementing their own SIP-approved
permitting programs and EPA-approved
Title V programs. However, permitting
authorities are not required to adopt enotice. Nothing in the final rule
prevents a permitting authority from
continuing to use newspaper
notification and/or from supplementing
an e-notice with newspaper
notifications and/or additional means of
notification. When e-notice is provided,
EPA’s rule requires electronic access (eaccess) to the draft permit. Generally,
state and local agencies intend to post
the draft permits and public notices in
a designated location on their agency
websites, which is accessible to anyone
in the general public. For the noticing
of draft permits issued by permitting
authorities with EPA-approved
programs, the rule simply requires the
permitting authority to use ‘‘a consistent
noticing method’’ for all permit notices
under the specific permitting program.
E-notice is already being practiced by
many permitting authorities, including
South Carolina in their PSD program,
because it enables them to communicate
permitting and other affected actions to
the public more quickly and efficiently
while lowering costs by eliminating or
minimizing newspaper publications. A
full description of the Federal e-notice
provisions is available in EPA’s October
18, 2016 final rulemaking notice. See 81
FR 71613.
III. Analysis of State’s Submittal
As mentioned above, the April 24,
2020, SIP revisions include changes to
South Carolina’s PSD and NNSR
regulations. Many of these changes are
administrative in nature, including
updating internal references, correcting
typographical errors, and renumbering
paragraphs. However, the SIP revisions
do include several changes intended to
make South Carolina’s major source
NSR regulations more closely align with
the Federal major source NSR
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jul 28, 2021
Jkt 253001
regulations, including the adoption of
several definitions, and updating of
other definitions, that are currently in
the Federal NSR regulations. Included
below in Sections III.A. and III.B. are
more details on the key updates
proposed for adoption into the South
Carolina SIP.
A. Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7—
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
The April 24, 2020, SIP revisions
include the following key changes
within the State’s current SIP-approved
PSD regulations in order to more closely
align with the Federal PSD regulations:
(1) Updating the definition of ‘‘Building,
structure, facility or installation;’’ (2)
Deleting the mention of fugitive
emissions from the definition of ‘‘Major
modification’’ and ‘‘Net emissions
increase;’’ (3) Adding a definition for
‘‘Pollution prevention;’’ (4) Updating
the ‘‘Exceptions’’ section to clarify the
applicability of the ‘‘Source Impact
Analysis’’ section of the PSD regulations
in regards to the 2015 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS); (5) Updating the definition of
‘‘Monitoring, recordkeeping and
reporting;’’ and (6) Updating the public
participation requirements for PSD,
including those for plantwide
applicability limits (PALs) permits
under PSD. More details are included
below.
Under Section (B), Definitions, the
definition of ‘‘Building, structure,
facility or installation’’ was updated by
renumbering the paragraph from (b)(9)
to (B)(9)(a) and adding paragraph
(B)(9)(b) to expand the definition and
give more details on the applicability for
onshore activities related to Oil and Gas
Extraction. These changes more closely
align the rule with the Federal PSD
regulation at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(6)(ii),
and EPA is proposing to approve them
into the South Carolina SIP.
Originally found in paragraphs
(b)(30)(v) and (b)(34)(iii)(d), South
Carolina’s PSD regulations contained a
description of fugitive emissions under
the definitions of ‘‘Major modification’’
and ‘‘Net emissions increase.’’ In the
April 24, 2020, SIP revisions, these two
paragraphs are renumbered to (B)(30)(e)
and (B)(34)(c)(ii), respectively, and the
text is removed and replaced with
‘‘[Reserved]’’. The Federal PSD
regulation, specifically at 40 CFR
51.166(b)(2)(v) and (b)(3)(iii)(d),
contains the language regarding fugitive
emissions that South Carolina seeks to
remove from its SIP; however, this
language in the Federal rules has been
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
40797
stayed indefinitely.3 EPA never acted on
the language found in South Carolina’s
former paragraphs (b)(30)(v) and
(b)(34)(iii)(d), because the State
withdrew its request to adopt it into the
SIP through a December 20, 2016,
withdrawal letter.4 Because the
language was never approved into the
SIP and the language in the Federal PSD
regulations is currently stayed, EPA is
proposing to add paragraphs (B)(30)(e)
and (B)(34)(c)(ii) to the South Carolina
SIP as submitted in the April 24, 2020,
submittal with the ‘‘[Reserved]’’ note in
them.
Also, under the Definitions section,
under paragraph (B)(36), the State
originally had a ‘‘[Reserved]’’ note. In
the April 24, 2020, SIP revisions, the
State deletes the note and adding a
definition of ‘‘Pollution prevention’’ in
its place. This definition mirrors that of
the Federal PSD regulation, found at 40
CFR 51.166(b)(38), and EPA is
proposing to approve it into the South
Carolina SIP.
Under Section (I), Exemptions, the
State added new paragraphs at (I)(11)(a)
and (b), which are meant to clarify the
applicability of Section (K), Source
impact analysis. The new paragraphs
were added to clarify which permit
applications must comply with Section
(K) with respect to the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. Specifically, these new
paragraphs explain that if a permit
application was determined by the State
to be complete on or before October 1,
2015, the ozone NAAQS with respect to
which the requirements of Section (K)
apply is the ozone NAAQS in effect on
the date the permit application was
determined to be complete and not the
2015 ozone NAAQS. These new
paragraphs also explain that if the State
had published a public notice with a
preliminary determination regarding the
application before December 28, 2015,
the ozone NAAQS with respect to
which the requirements of (K) apply is
the ozone NAAQS in effect at the time
of first publication of the public notice
of a preliminary determination on the
permit application or public notice of
the draft permit and not the 2015 ozone
3 Effective September 30, 2009 (74 FR 50115),
EPA established a three-month stay of what is
commonly known as the Fugitive Emissions Rule.
The stay was later extended for an additional three
months, effective December 31, 2009 (74 FR 65692).
In order to allow for more time for the
reconsideration and for public comment on any
potential revisions to the Fugitive Emissions Rule,
EPA established a longer 18-month stay that became
effective on March 31, 2010 (75 FR 16012). Finally,
on March 30, 2011, EPA stayed indefinitely
portions of the Fugitive Emissions Rule.
4 The December 20, 2016, withdrawal letter can
be found in the docket for this proposed
rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\29JYP1.SGM
29JYP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
40798
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 143 / Thursday, July 29, 2021 / Proposed Rules
NAAQS. The final rule promulgating
the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS was
signed by the EPA Administrator on
October 1, 2015, and became effective
on December 28, 2015. See 80 FR 65292
(October 26, 2015). Given these dates,
South Carolina’s October 1, 2015, and
December 28, 2015, deadlines in
paragraphs (I)(a) and (I)(b), respectively,
would be appropriate cutoff dates for
the applicability of Section (K) in regard
to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Additionally, these changes more
closely align the rule with the Federal
PSD regulation at 40 CFR
51.166(i)(11)(i) and (ii). EPA is therefore
proposing to approve these changes into
the South Carolina SIP.
Under Section (R), Source obligations,
South Carolina updated the definition of
‘‘Monitoring, recordkeeping and
reporting’’ found in paragraph (R)(6) by
adding paragraphs (R)(6)(c), and
(R)(6)(g)(i) and (ii). Paragraph (R)(6)(c)
adds an additional requirements for
emissions units that are existing electric
utility steam generating units, and
Paragraph (R)(6)(g) adds the definition
of ‘‘reasonable possibility’’ as that term
is used in Paragraph (R)(6). These
changes match the Federal PSD
regulations at 40 CFR 51.166(r)(6)(ii)
and (r)(6)(vi), respectively, and EPA is
proposing to approve these changes into
the South Carolina SIP.
Finally, under Section (Q), Public
Participation, South Carolina updates
the e-notice provisions for PSD.
Originally found in paragraph (q)(2)(ii),
the public notice requirements are
renumbered to (Q)(2)(c) and reworded
for clarity and consistency with the
Federal e-notice rule. The updates
identify website publication on a public
website selected by the Department as
the consistent noticing method for draft
permits subject to public notice under
its PSD program. The updates note that
other methods, such as newspapers,
may be used in addition to website
publication. South Carolina also
includes a cross reference to the new enotice provisions of Section (Q) under
the State’s PALs provisions for PSD to
maintain the consistent e-noticing
method of public participation
throughout its PSD regulations. The
updated language can be found under
Section (AA) of Standard No. 7, in
paragraph (AA)(5). EPA is proposing to
approve these changes into the South
Carolina SIP because they are consistent
with EPA’s e-notice rule.
All other changes to Standard No. 7
included in the April 24, 2020, SIP
revisions are administrative in nature
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jul 28, 2021
Jkt 253001
and are being proposed for approval
into the South Carolina SIP.5
B. Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No.
7.1—Nonattainment New Source Review
The April 24, 2020, SIP revisions
include the following key changes
within the State’s current SIP-approved
NNSR regulations to more closely align
with the Federal NNSR regulations: (1)
Adding multiple definitions included in
the Federal NNSR regulations; (2)
Updating and renumbering existing
definitions in South Carolina’s SIP; (3)
Adopting language regarding
interpollutant trading and banking; and
(4) Updating the ‘‘Public participation’’
requirements for NNSR, including those
for PALs permits under NNSR.
Under Section (A), Applicability,
South Carolina renumbered former
paragraph (e) to paragraph (A)(10).
Although most of paragraph (A)(10) is
appropriate for incorporation into the
South Carolina SIP and matches the
current Federal rule, former paragraph
(e) had a portion of the definition for
‘‘Chemical process plants,’’ previously
found at paragraph (e)(T), that was
never approved in the SIP. In particular,
the language contained after ‘‘Chemical
process plant,’’ now renumbered to
paragraph (A)(10)(t), which states that
‘‘The term chemical processing plants
shall not include ethanol production
facilities that produce ethanol by
natural fermentation included in NAICS
codes 325193 or 312140,’’ is not
currently in the SIP and cannot be
incorporated due to issues with the
2007 Federal Ethanol Rule.6 Due to the
5 A description of each of these changes to
Standard No. 7 begins on page 354/500 of the April
24, 2020, submittal PDF. The submittal can be
found in the docket for this proposed rulemaking.
6 On May 1, 2007, EPA published in the Federal
Register the 2007 Ethanol Rule (72 FR 24060),
which amended EPA’s PSD and NNSR regulations
to exclude ethanol manufacturing facilities that
produce ethanol by natural fermentation processes
from the ‘‘chemical process plants’’ category under
the regulatory definition of ‘‘major stationary
source.’’ Shortly thereafter, EPA received a petition
for reconsideration of the 2007 Ethanol Rule
provisions from Natural Resources Defense Council
(NRDC), which petition EPA initially denied on
March 27, 2008. See 73 FR 24174 (March 27, 2008).
In 2009, EPA received a second petition for
reconsideration from NRDC, and NRDC also filed a
petition for judicial review in the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
challenging EPA’s 2008 denial of its first petition
for reconsideration. The court granted a joint
motion to hold the case in abeyance, and the case
has remained in abeyance. On October 21, 2019,
EPA partially granted and partially denied the
second petition for reconsideration. See 84 FR
59743 (November 6, 2019). Specifically, EPA
granted the request for reconsideration with regard
to the claim that the 2007 Ethanol Rule did not
appropriately address the CAA section 193 antibacksliding requirements for nonattainment areas.
Concurrently, EPA denied the remainder of the
requests for reconsideration. This means that states
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ongoing review of the 2007 Ethanol Rule
in regards to the Federal NNSR
regulations, South Carolina withdrew its
request for EPA to approve the phrase
‘‘The term chemical processing plants
shall not include ethanol production
facilities that produce ethanol by
natural fermentation included in NAICS
codes 325193 or 312140’’ in the
renumbered paragraph (A)(10) through a
letter dated June 21, 2021.7 8
Under Section (B), Definitions, the
State adds several definitions that are
part of the Federal NNSR regulations.
The new definitions include: Allowable
emissions; Begin actual construction;
Building, structure, facility, or
installation; Temporary clean coal
technology demonstration project; Clean
coal technology; Clean coal technology
demonstration project; Commence;
Construction; Continuous emissions
monitoring system; Continuous
emissions rate monitoring system;
Continuous parameter monitoring
system; Electric utility steam generating
unit; Emissions unit; Federal Land
Manager; Federally enforceable;
Fugitive emissions; Necessary
preconstruction approvals or permits;
Pollution prevention; Potential to emit;
Predictive emissions monitoring system;
Project; Replacement unit; Resource
recovery facility; Reviewing authority;
Secondary emissions; and Stationary
source. Except for the definition for
‘‘Resource recovery facility,’’ the new
definitions all match those in the
Federal NNSR regulation found at 40
CFR 51.165, and EPA is proposing to
approve them into the South Carolina
SIP.9
are now able to adopt the Ethanol Rule provisions
for their PSD programs, but are generally not
choosing to do the same for their NNSR programs
at this time.
7 The June 21, 2021, withdrawal letter can be
found in the docket for this proposed rulemaking.
8 Former paragraph (c)(7)(C)(xx) contains the
same ethanol exclusion language as (A)(10)(t).
South Carolina renumbered this paragraph to
(B)(22)(c)(xx). The June 21, 2021, withdrawal letter
also withdraws South Carolina’s request for EPA to
incorporate the ethanol exclusion language at
(B)(22)(c)(xx) into the South Carolina SIP.
9 At the time of submission, the definitions for
‘‘Replacement unit’’ and ‘‘Secondary emissions’’ in
South Carolina’s April 24, 2020, SIP revisions
matched the then-current Federal NNSR
regulations. On June 22, 2021, the EPA
Administrator signed a final rule amending several
NSR regulations, including the definitions for
‘‘Replacement unit’’ and ‘‘Secondary emissions.’’
This final rule is available at https://www.epa.gov/
nsr/final-error-corrections-rule. Although the
definitions of these two terms in South Carolina’s
submittal do not exactly match the revised Federal
definitions, EPA is proposing to approve them into
the South Carolina SIP given the nature of the
revisions to these Federal definitions. However, if
South Carolina wishes to have matching
definitions, it may submit a SIP revision in the
future to adopt the revised definitions into its SIP.
E:\FR\FM\29JYP1.SGM
29JYP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 143 / Thursday, July 29, 2021 / Proposed Rules
The new definition for ‘‘Resource
recovery facility,’’ found in paragraph
(B)(34) of South Carolina’s Standard No.
7.1 in the SIP revision, does not match
the Federal NNSR regulations because
the Federal rules do not contain a
definition for this kind of facility.
However, the new definition merely
clarifies what constitutes a resource
recovery facility and does not create a
new exemption or limitation on the
applicability of the State’s NNSR
regulations. Therefore, EPA is proposing
to approve the definition into the South
Carolina SIP.
Also, under Section (B), South
Carolina’s April 24, 2020, SIP revisions
update and replace two lists, converting
them into a table format. Specifically,
the changes involve paragraph
(B)(22)(a), formerly found in paragraph
(c)(7)(A), and paragraph (B)(37),
formerly found in paragraph (c)(14).
Former paragraph (c)(7)(A), which
contained the definition of ‘‘Major
stationary source,’’ used to include a list
of emissions thresholds for sources in
certain nonattainment areas under
paragraphs (c)(7)(A)(i)(a) through (d).
These thresholds are now recodified in
the table found in paragraph (B)(22)(a)(i)
and are expanded for clarity. The
threshold values and list of pollutants
are unchanged from the SIP-approved
version of the rule. Although the
revision does not add ammonia as a
precursor to fine particulate matter
(PM2.5),10 EPA does not believe that this
will have any negative impact on the
attainment or maintenance of the PM2.5
NAAQS in the State. This is due to the
fact that South Carolina does not
currently have any PM2.5 nonattainment
areas, and thus, the PM2.5 thresholds in
this NNSR rule are not currently
applicable. In the event of an area being
designated nonattainment for PM2.5 in
the future, the State would be required
to submit, among other things, a revised
NNSR SIP revision that identifies
ammonia as a PM2.5 precursor. For these
reasons, EPA believes that the
recodified table in paragraph
(B)(22)(a)(i) is appropriate for approval
into the South Carolina SIP.
Former paragraph (c)(14) contained a
definition of ‘‘Significant’’ and included
a list of emission rates at or above which
a net emissions increase or the potential
to emit from a source would be
considered significant. South Carolina
renumbered the definition as paragraph
10 The Federal NNSR definition of ‘‘Major
stationary source’’ sets a 70 tpy major source
threshold for the PM2.5 precursors (Sulfur dioxide,
Nitrogen oxides, Volatile Organic Compounds, and
Ammonia) in any serious PM2.5 nonattainment area.
See 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(1)(viii) and
(a)(1)(xxxvii)(C)(2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jul 28, 2021
Jkt 253001
(B)(37) and created a table containing
the significant emissions rates. The rates
in the new table generally match the
rates in former paragraph (c)(14), except
for the rates for carbon monoxide (CO)
and ozone, which are expanded to
include more stringent rates. For CO,
South Carolina’s April 24, 2020, SIP
revisions maintain the old emissions
rate, now only applicable in marginal
and moderate nonattainment areas, but
add a more stringent emissions rate for
serious nonattainment areas. Similarly,
for ozone, South Carolina maintains the
old emissions rate, now applicable only
for marginal and moderate
nonattainment areas, but adds more
stringent rates for serious and severe
nonattainment areas, as well as for
extreme nonattainment areas. Given that
these changes are more stringent than
the current SIP-approved rule, EPA
believes that they are appropriate for
incorporation into the South Carolina
SIP.
Under Section (C), which incorporates
parts of former paragraph (d)—Permit
requirements, South Carolina’s April 24,
2020, SIP revisions add additional
conditions regarding emissions offsets
and alternative site analysis that need to
be met in order to grant a permit; adds
exemptions for ‘‘Temporary emission
source’’ and ‘‘Secondary emissions;’’
and clarifies the requirements of the
State’s NNSR regulations, in regards to
major sources and major modifications
of PM10.
As part of the changes to Section (C),
South Carolina includes two new
paragraphs, (C)(1)(d) and (e). Paragraph
(C)(1)(d) adds as a condition for a permit
approval, for the source to obtain a
positive net air quality benefit in the
affected area, as determined by 40 CFR
part 51, Appendix S. Paragraph (C)(1)(e)
adds a condition for the source to carry
out an alternative sites analysis in order
to demonstrate that benefits of the
proposed source significantly outweigh
the environmental and social costs
imposed as a result of its location,
construction, or modification.
Under new paragraphs (C)(2) and
(C)(3), South Carolina adds new
exemptions for ‘‘Temporary emissions
source[s]’’ and ‘‘Secondary emissions.’’
The exemption for ‘‘Temporary
emissions source’’ does not exempt
temporary sources, defined by the State
as plants or facilities that will be
relocated outside the nonattainment
area after a short period of time, from
obtaining a permit. This change exempts
these types of sources from meeting the
requirements of paragraphs (C)(1)(c) and
(C)(1)(d), which require that the source
obtain emissions reductions from other
sources to offset the increase in
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
40799
emissions. The exemption for
‘‘Secondary emissions’’ states that if a
source is subject to the NNSR regulation
due to direct emissions from the source,
the applicable conditions in paragraph
(C)(1) must also be met for secondary
emissions; however, secondary
emissions may be exempt from
paragraphs (C)(1)(a) (lowest achievable
emissions rate) and (C)(1)(b)
(compliance certification). EPA is
proposing to approve the addition of
paragraphs (C)(2) and (C)(3) because
they are consistent with the exemptions
in Appendix S of 40 CFR part 51 and
still require preconstruction review for
temporary sources and sources subject
to NNSR regulation due to direct
emissions.11
Finally, the changes to Section (C)
include a clarification paragraph in
regards to particulate matter (PM10). In
particular, paragraph (C)(4) explains
that the requirements of the State’s
NNSR regulations, in regards to major
sources and major modifications of
PM10, would also apply to major sources
and major modifications of PM10
precursors.
Under new Section (D), Offset
standards, South Carolina incorporates
several paragraphs that were previously
parts of former paragraph (d) of the
State’s NNSR regulations. The SIP
revisions also adds new paragraphs
throughout this section for consistency
with the Federal offset provisions found
at 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3). New paragraphs
(D)(4), (5), (7), and (8) are consistent
with federal requirements found in 40
CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C), (G), and (J), all
relating to the baseline for determining
credit for emissions reductions.
In the April 24, 2020, SIP revisions,
South Carolina adds new Sections (H)
through (K) to the State’s NNSR
regulations. Sections (J) and (K) only
contain a ‘‘[Reserved]’’ note, to leave
space for future updates. Sections (H)
and (I) include South Carolina’s
adoption of language related to
interpollutant offsetting and banking of
emission offsets, respectively. The
language generally aligns with that of
the Federal regulations at 40 CFR
51.165(a)(3) and (11), as well as
Appendix S to Part 51, but does not
constitute a valid banking and trading
program because it is missing some of
the key elements that are required to
ensure that these offsets are traded and
banked correctly and utilizing
permanent, quantifiable, and
enforceable reductions.
11 South Carolina’s SIP prohibits the issuance of
any permit to construct or modify a source if
emissions interfere with attainment or maintenance
of any state or federal standard. See Regulation 61–
62.1, Section II, Paragraph A.4.
E:\FR\FM\29JYP1.SGM
29JYP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
40800
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 143 / Thursday, July 29, 2021 / Proposed Rules
Additionally, Section (H),
Interpollutant offsetting, contains
vacated language from the December 6,
2018, rule ‘‘Implementation of the 2015
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for Ozone: Nonattainment Area State
Implementation Plan Requirements’’
(2018 Implementation Rule).12 The
Federal interpollutant offsetting
provisions found at 40 CFR
51.165(a)(11), as well as Appendix S to
Part 51 (at paragraph IV.G.5), were
vacated by the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit (D.C. Circuit) through a January
29, 2021, court decision. See Sierra Club
v. EPA, 985 F.3d 1055 (D.C. Cir. 2021).
Accordingly, on June 22, 2021, the EPA
Administrator signed a final rule that,
among other changes, removes the
language allowing interprecursor
trading for ozone and restoring the
language in the NNSR regulations to the
form it was in after the EPA’s 2008
PM2.5 implementation rule.13 As a
result, South Carolina withdrew its
request that EPA incorporate Section (H)
into the SIP through a withdrawal letter
dated April 20, 2021.14
For the reasons discussed above, EPA
is not proposing to incorporate Section
(H) into the South Carolina SIP, and is
proposing to incorporate only the
addition of Section (I), Banking of
emissions offsets, with the caveat that
this does not create an offset banking
and trading program in the State’s SIP.
In order for South Carolina to have an
offsets banking and trading program in
the SIP, the State must adopt a full
banking and trading rule that covers
everything necessary for the program to
operate correctly and EPA must
incorporate that rule into the SIP.
Finally, under Section (M), Public
participation, South Carolina adds enotice provisions for its NNSR program.
Originally found in paragraph (d)(7)(iv),
the public notice requirements are
renumbered to (M)(2)(d) and revised to
incorporate EPA’s amendments to the
Federal public notice requirements
discussed in Section II of this
rulemaking. Specifically, South
Carolina’s April 24, 2020, SIP revisions
for Standard No. 7.1 identify website
publication on a public website
identified by the Department as the
consistent noticing method for draft
permits subject to public notice under
its NNSR program. South Carolina’s enotice provisions for NNSR note that
other noticing methods, such as
12 See
83 FR 62998.
final rule is available at https://
www.epa.gov/nsr/final-error-corrections-rule.
14 The April 20, 2021, withdrawal letter can be
found in the docket for this proposed rulemaking.
13 The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jul 28, 2021
Jkt 253001
newspapers, may be used in addition
(but not as a substitute) to website
publication. South Carolina also
includes a cross-reference to the new enotice provisions of Section (M) under
the State’s PALs provisions for NNSR to
maintain the consistent e-noticing
method of public participation
throughout its NNSR regulations. The
updated language can be found under
Section (N) of Standard No. 7.1, in
paragraph (N)(5). EPA believes that the
April 24, 2020, SIP revisions meet all
the requirements of the revised Federal
e-notice provisions in regards to the
State’s NNSR regulations, and EPA is
proposing to incorporate these changes
into South Carolina’s SIP.
All other changes for Standard No. 7.1
included in the April 24, 2020, SIP
revisions are administrative in nature.15
Except for the parts of subparagraphs
(A)(10)(t) and (B)(22)(c)(xx) noted above,
as they relate to the Ethanol Rule
Provisions of the Federal NNSR
regulations, and Section (H), as it relates
to the Interpollutant Offsetting, all other
changes to Standard No. 7.1 submitted
through South Carolina’s April 24, 2020
SIP revisions are being proposed for
incorporation into the State’s
implementation plan.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with the
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
South Carolina’s Regulation 61–62.5,
Standards No. 7—Prevention of
Significant Deterioration, and Standard
No. 7.1—Nonattainment New Source
Review, both state effective on April 24,
2020, with the exception of paragraph
(H), and a portion of paragraphs
(A)(10)(t), and (B)(22)(c)(xx), from
Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7.1, as
discussed above. 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).
V. Proposed Action
As described above, EPA is proposing
to approve, with some exceptions, the
changes to the South Carolina
Regulation 61–62.5, Standards No. 7—
Prevention of Significant Deterioration,
15 A description of each of these changes to
Standard No. 7.1 begins on page 357/500 of the
April 24, 2020, submittal PDF. The submittal can
be found in the docket for this proposed
rulemaking.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and Standard No. 7.1—Nonattainment
New Source Review. These changes
were submitted by South Carolina on
April 24, 2020.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. This action merely proposes to
approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Because this action merely approves
state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
E:\FR\FM\29JYP1.SGM
29JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 143 / Thursday, July 29, 2021 / Proposed Rules
imposed by state law, this SIP approval
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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:36 Jul 28, 2021
Jkt 253001
Dated: July 15, 2021.
John Blevins,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2021–15536 Filed 7–28–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
40801
Cybersecurity & Communications
Reliability Division, Public Safety and
Homeland Security Bureau, (202) 418–
0944 or via email at Saswat.Misra@
fcc.gov.
This is a
summary of the Commission’s
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
document, Report No. 3179, released
COMMISSION
July 19, 2021. The full text of the
Petition can be accessed online via the
47 CFR Part 4
Commission’s Electronic Comment
Filing System at: https://apps.fcc.gov/
[PS Docket No. 15–80; Report No. 3179;
ecfs/. The Commission will not send a
FRS 39529]
Congressional Review Act (CRA)
Petition for Reconsideration of Action
submission to Congress or the
in Rulemaking Proceeding
Government Accountability Office
pursuant to the CRA, 5 U.S.C.
AGENCY: Federal Communications
801(a)(1)(A), because no rules are being
Commission.
adopted by the Commission.
ACTION: Petition for Reconsideration.
Subject: In the Matter of Amendments
SUMMARY: A Petition for Reconsideration to Part 4 of the Commission’s Rules
Concerning Disruptions to
(Petition) has been filed in the
Communications, published at 86 FR
Commission’s rulemaking proceeding
22796, April 29, 2021, in PS Docket No.
by Ian P. Culver, on behalf of California
15–80. This document is being
Public Utilities Commission.
published pursuant to 47 CFR 1.429(e).
DATES: Oppositions to the Petition must
See also 47 CFR 1.4(b)(1) and 1.429(f),
be filed on or before August 13, 2021.
(g).
Replies to an opposition must be filed
Number of Petitions Filed: 1.
on or before August 23, 2021.
Federal
Communications Commission.
ADDRESSES: Federal Communications
Marlene Dortch,
Commission, 45 L Street NE,
Washington, DC 20554.
Secretary, Office of the Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021–16126 Filed 7–28–21; 8:45 am]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Saswat Misra, Attorney-Advisor,
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
PO 00000
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\29JYP1.SGM
29JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 143 (Thursday, July 29, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 40796-40801]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15536]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2020-0524; FRL-8762-01-R4]
Air Plan Approval; South Carolina; 2018 General Assembly New
Source Review Update
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the
State of South Carolina, through the South Carolina Department of
Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC or Department), on April 24,
2020. The SIP revisions update the State's Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR)
regulations. Specifically, the SIP revisions add and update several
definitions for consistency with the Federal regulations, update public
participation requirements for PSD, clarify the applicability of
``source impact analysis'' for PSD, add an emissions offset banking
provision for NNSR, and make administrative updates, such as
typographical corrections and renumbering. Finally, the changes
incorporate language that addresses the public notice rule provisions
for NNSR, which removes the mandatory requirements to provide public
notice in a newspaper and instead allows for electronic notice (``e-
notice'') as an alternate noticing option for the State. EPA is
proposing to approve these revisions pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA
or Act) and implementing Federal regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 30, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2020-0524 at www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or
removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment received to
its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include a discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andres Febres, 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. The telephone number is
(404) 562-8966. Mr. Febres can also be reached via electronic mail at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What is EPA proposing?
On April 24, 2020, SDHEC submitted SIP revisions to EPA for
approval that include changes to South Carolina's major source New
Source Review (NSR) permitting regulations to make them more closely
align with Federal requirements for PSD and NNSR permitting; correct
typographical errors; and update internal references, including
renumbering throughout both regulations. Specifically, these changes
update South Carolina Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7--Prevention of
Significant Deterioration and Standard No. 7.1--Nonattainment New
Source Review.\1\ In addition to the changes above, the SIP revisions
include an update to the public noticing procedures for South
Carolina's NNSR regulations. The public notice requirement updates
address the Federal rule entitled ``Revisions to Public Notice
Provisions in Clean Air Act Permitting Programs,'' (also referred to as
the e-Notice Rule) that was finalized in 2016. See 81 FR 71613 (October
18, 2016).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On April 24, 2020, SDHEC also submitted to EPA SIP revisions
to Regulations 61-62.1, Section I--Definitions; 61-62.1, Section
II--Permit Requirements; 61-62.1, Section III--Emission Inventory
and Emissions Statement; 61-62.1, Section IV--Source Tests; 61-62.1,
Section V--Credible Emissions; 61-62.5, Standard No. 2--Ambient Air
Quality Standards; and 61-62.5, Standard 5.2--Control of Oxides of
Nitrogen (NOX). EPA will address these SIP revisions in separate
actions.
\2\ EPA previously approved e-notice provisions for South
Carolina's PSD program. See 83 FR 64285 (December 14, 2018).
Although the e-notice provisions in the State's NNSR program are
being proposed for incorporation into the SIP for the first time,
the April 24, 2020, SIP revisions also include updates to the
already SIP-approved e-notice provisions in South Carolina's SIP-
approved PSD program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With certain exceptions described in Section III below, EPA is
proposing to approve the changes submitted by South Carolina on April
24, 2020, which modify the State's PSD and NNSR programs, as meeting
the requirements of the Federal NSR program and being consistent with
the CAA.
II. Background
This proposed action seeks to revise South Carolina's PSD and NNSR
regulations in the federally-approved SIP. Many of these changes are
administrative in nature, including updating internal references and
correcting typographical errors, but they do include the adoption of
several definitions currently in the Federal NSR regulations, update
public participation requirements for PSD, clarify the applicability of
``source impact
[[Page 40797]]
analysis'' for PSD, and add an emissions offset banking provision for
NNSR, which will be discussed in further detail in Section III below.
Additionally, the April 24, 2020, SIP revisions also adopt e-notice
provisions into the State's NNSR regulations.
On October 5, 2016, EPA finalized the revised public notice rule
provisions for the Federal NSR, Title V, and the Outer Continental
Shelf permitting programs of the CAA. See 81 FR 71613 (October 18,
2016). The new provisions removed the mandatory requirement to provide
public notice of a draft air permit through publication in a local
newspaper. Instead, these provisions allow for an internet-based ``e-
notice'' option for permitting authorities implementing their own SIP-
approved permitting programs and EPA-approved Title V programs.
However, permitting authorities are not required to adopt e-notice.
Nothing in the final rule prevents a permitting authority from
continuing to use newspaper notification and/or from supplementing an
e-notice with newspaper notifications and/or additional means of
notification. When e-notice is provided, EPA's rule requires electronic
access (e-access) to the draft permit. Generally, state and local
agencies intend to post the draft permits and public notices in a
designated location on their agency websites, which is accessible to
anyone in the general public. For the noticing of draft permits issued
by permitting authorities with EPA-approved programs, the rule simply
requires the permitting authority to use ``a consistent noticing
method'' for all permit notices under the specific permitting program.
E-notice is already being practiced by many permitting authorities,
including South Carolina in their PSD program, because it enables them
to communicate permitting and other affected actions to the public more
quickly and efficiently while lowering costs by eliminating or
minimizing newspaper publications. A full description of the Federal e-
notice provisions is available in EPA's October 18, 2016 final
rulemaking notice. See 81 FR 71613.
III. Analysis of State's Submittal
As mentioned above, the April 24, 2020, SIP revisions include
changes to South Carolina's PSD and NNSR regulations. Many of these
changes are administrative in nature, including updating internal
references, correcting typographical errors, and renumbering
paragraphs. However, the SIP revisions do include several changes
intended to make South Carolina's major source NSR regulations more
closely align with the Federal major source NSR regulations, including
the adoption of several definitions, and updating of other definitions,
that are currently in the Federal NSR regulations. Included below in
Sections III.A. and III.B. are more details on the key updates proposed
for adoption into the South Carolina SIP.
A. Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7--Prevention of Significant
Deterioration
The April 24, 2020, SIP revisions include the following key changes
within the State's current SIP-approved PSD regulations in order to
more closely align with the Federal PSD regulations: (1) Updating the
definition of ``Building, structure, facility or installation;'' (2)
Deleting the mention of fugitive emissions from the definition of
``Major modification'' and ``Net emissions increase;'' (3) Adding a
definition for ``Pollution prevention;'' (4) Updating the
``Exceptions'' section to clarify the applicability of the ``Source
Impact Analysis'' section of the PSD regulations in regards to the 2015
8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS); (5)
Updating the definition of ``Monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting;''
and (6) Updating the public participation requirements for PSD,
including those for plantwide applicability limits (PALs) permits under
PSD. More details are included below.
Under Section (B), Definitions, the definition of ``Building,
structure, facility or installation'' was updated by renumbering the
paragraph from (b)(9) to (B)(9)(a) and adding paragraph (B)(9)(b) to
expand the definition and give more details on the applicability for
onshore activities related to Oil and Gas Extraction. These changes
more closely align the rule with the Federal PSD regulation at 40 CFR
51.166(b)(6)(ii), and EPA is proposing to approve them into the South
Carolina SIP.
Originally found in paragraphs (b)(30)(v) and (b)(34)(iii)(d),
South Carolina's PSD regulations contained a description of fugitive
emissions under the definitions of ``Major modification'' and ``Net
emissions increase.'' In the April 24, 2020, SIP revisions, these two
paragraphs are renumbered to (B)(30)(e) and (B)(34)(c)(ii),
respectively, and the text is removed and replaced with ``[Reserved]''.
The Federal PSD regulation, specifically at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(2)(v) and
(b)(3)(iii)(d), contains the language regarding fugitive emissions that
South Carolina seeks to remove from its SIP; however, this language in
the Federal rules has been stayed indefinitely.\3\ EPA never acted on
the language found in South Carolina's former paragraphs (b)(30)(v) and
(b)(34)(iii)(d), because the State withdrew its request to adopt it
into the SIP through a December 20, 2016, withdrawal letter.\4\ Because
the language was never approved into the SIP and the language in the
Federal PSD regulations is currently stayed, EPA is proposing to add
paragraphs (B)(30)(e) and (B)(34)(c)(ii) to the South Carolina SIP as
submitted in the April 24, 2020, submittal with the ``[Reserved]'' note
in them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Effective September 30, 2009 (74 FR 50115), EPA established
a three-month stay of what is commonly known as the Fugitive
Emissions Rule. The stay was later extended for an additional three
months, effective December 31, 2009 (74 FR 65692). In order to allow
for more time for the reconsideration and for public comment on any
potential revisions to the Fugitive Emissions Rule, EPA established
a longer 18-month stay that became effective on March 31, 2010 (75
FR 16012). Finally, on March 30, 2011, EPA stayed indefinitely
portions of the Fugitive Emissions Rule.
\4\ The December 20, 2016, withdrawal letter can be found in the
docket for this proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also, under the Definitions section, under paragraph (B)(36), the
State originally had a ``[Reserved]'' note. In the April 24, 2020, SIP
revisions, the State deletes the note and adding a definition of
``Pollution prevention'' in its place. This definition mirrors that of
the Federal PSD regulation, found at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(38), and EPA is
proposing to approve it into the South Carolina SIP.
Under Section (I), Exemptions, the State added new paragraphs at
(I)(11)(a) and (b), which are meant to clarify the applicability of
Section (K), Source impact analysis. The new paragraphs were added to
clarify which permit applications must comply with Section (K) with
respect to the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Specifically, these new
paragraphs explain that if a permit application was determined by the
State to be complete on or before October 1, 2015, the ozone NAAQS with
respect to which the requirements of Section (K) apply is the ozone
NAAQS in effect on the date the permit application was determined to be
complete and not the 2015 ozone NAAQS. These new paragraphs also
explain that if the State had published a public notice with a
preliminary determination regarding the application before December 28,
2015, the ozone NAAQS with respect to which the requirements of (K)
apply is the ozone NAAQS in effect at the time of first publication of
the public notice of a preliminary determination on the permit
application or public notice of the draft permit and not the 2015 ozone
[[Page 40798]]
NAAQS. The final rule promulgating the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS was
signed by the EPA Administrator on October 1, 2015, and became
effective on December 28, 2015. See 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
Given these dates, South Carolina's October 1, 2015, and December 28,
2015, deadlines in paragraphs (I)(a) and (I)(b), respectively, would be
appropriate cutoff dates for the applicability of Section (K) in regard
to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Additionally, these changes more closely align
the rule with the Federal PSD regulation at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(11)(i) and
(ii). EPA is therefore proposing to approve these changes into the
South Carolina SIP.
Under Section (R), Source obligations, South Carolina updated the
definition of ``Monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting'' found in
paragraph (R)(6) by adding paragraphs (R)(6)(c), and (R)(6)(g)(i) and
(ii). Paragraph (R)(6)(c) adds an additional requirements for emissions
units that are existing electric utility steam generating units, and
Paragraph (R)(6)(g) adds the definition of ``reasonable possibility''
as that term is used in Paragraph (R)(6). These changes match the
Federal PSD regulations at 40 CFR 51.166(r)(6)(ii) and (r)(6)(vi),
respectively, and EPA is proposing to approve these changes into the
South Carolina SIP.
Finally, under Section (Q), Public Participation, South Carolina
updates the e-notice provisions for PSD. Originally found in paragraph
(q)(2)(ii), the public notice requirements are renumbered to (Q)(2)(c)
and reworded for clarity and consistency with the Federal e-notice
rule. The updates identify website publication on a public website
selected by the Department as the consistent noticing method for draft
permits subject to public notice under its PSD program. The updates
note that other methods, such as newspapers, may be used in addition to
website publication. South Carolina also includes a cross reference to
the new e-notice provisions of Section (Q) under the State's PALs
provisions for PSD to maintain the consistent e-noticing method of
public participation throughout its PSD regulations. The updated
language can be found under Section (AA) of Standard No. 7, in
paragraph (AA)(5). EPA is proposing to approve these changes into the
South Carolina SIP because they are consistent with EPA's e-notice
rule.
All other changes to Standard No. 7 included in the April 24, 2020,
SIP revisions are administrative in nature and are being proposed for
approval into the South Carolina SIP.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ A description of each of these changes to Standard No. 7
begins on page 354/500 of the April 24, 2020, submittal PDF. The
submittal can be found in the docket for this proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7.1--Nonattainment New Source
Review
The April 24, 2020, SIP revisions include the following key changes
within the State's current SIP-approved NNSR regulations to more
closely align with the Federal NNSR regulations: (1) Adding multiple
definitions included in the Federal NNSR regulations; (2) Updating and
renumbering existing definitions in South Carolina's SIP; (3) Adopting
language regarding interpollutant trading and banking; and (4) Updating
the ``Public participation'' requirements for NNSR, including those for
PALs permits under NNSR.
Under Section (A), Applicability, South Carolina renumbered former
paragraph (e) to paragraph (A)(10). Although most of paragraph (A)(10)
is appropriate for incorporation into the South Carolina SIP and
matches the current Federal rule, former paragraph (e) had a portion of
the definition for ``Chemical process plants,'' previously found at
paragraph (e)(T), that was never approved in the SIP. In particular,
the language contained after ``Chemical process plant,'' now renumbered
to paragraph (A)(10)(t), which states that ``The term chemical
processing plants shall not include ethanol production facilities that
produce ethanol by natural fermentation included in NAICS codes 325193
or 312140,'' is not currently in the SIP and cannot be incorporated due
to issues with the 2007 Federal Ethanol Rule.\6\ Due to the ongoing
review of the 2007 Ethanol Rule in regards to the Federal NNSR
regulations, South Carolina withdrew its request for EPA to approve the
phrase ``The term chemical processing plants shall not include ethanol
production facilities that produce ethanol by natural fermentation
included in NAICS codes 325193 or 312140'' in the renumbered paragraph
(A)(10) through a letter dated June 21, 2021.7 8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ On May 1, 2007, EPA published in the Federal Register the
2007 Ethanol Rule (72 FR 24060), which amended EPA's PSD and NNSR
regulations to exclude ethanol manufacturing facilities that produce
ethanol by natural fermentation processes from the ``chemical
process plants'' category under the regulatory definition of ``major
stationary source.'' Shortly thereafter, EPA received a petition for
reconsideration of the 2007 Ethanol Rule provisions from Natural
Resources Defense Council (NRDC), which petition EPA initially
denied on March 27, 2008. See 73 FR 24174 (March 27, 2008). In 2009,
EPA received a second petition for reconsideration from NRDC, and
NRDC also filed a petition for judicial review in the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit challenging EPA's 2008
denial of its first petition for reconsideration. The court granted
a joint motion to hold the case in abeyance, and the case has
remained in abeyance. On October 21, 2019, EPA partially granted and
partially denied the second petition for reconsideration. See 84 FR
59743 (November 6, 2019). Specifically, EPA granted the request for
reconsideration with regard to the claim that the 2007 Ethanol Rule
did not appropriately address the CAA section 193 anti-backsliding
requirements for nonattainment areas. Concurrently, EPA denied the
remainder of the requests for reconsideration. This means that
states are now able to adopt the Ethanol Rule provisions for their
PSD programs, but are generally not choosing to do the same for
their NNSR programs at this time.
\7\ The June 21, 2021, withdrawal letter can be found in the
docket for this proposed rulemaking.
\8\ Former paragraph (c)(7)(C)(xx) contains the same ethanol
exclusion language as (A)(10)(t). South Carolina renumbered this
paragraph to (B)(22)(c)(xx). The June 21, 2021, withdrawal letter
also withdraws South Carolina's request for EPA to incorporate the
ethanol exclusion language at (B)(22)(c)(xx) into the South Carolina
SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under Section (B), Definitions, the State adds several definitions
that are part of the Federal NNSR regulations. The new definitions
include: Allowable emissions; Begin actual construction; Building,
structure, facility, or installation; Temporary clean coal technology
demonstration project; Clean coal technology; Clean coal technology
demonstration project; Commence; Construction; Continuous emissions
monitoring system; Continuous emissions rate monitoring system;
Continuous parameter monitoring system; Electric utility steam
generating unit; Emissions unit; Federal Land Manager; Federally
enforceable; Fugitive emissions; Necessary preconstruction approvals or
permits; Pollution prevention; Potential to emit; Predictive emissions
monitoring system; Project; Replacement unit; Resource recovery
facility; Reviewing authority; Secondary emissions; and Stationary
source. Except for the definition for ``Resource recovery facility,''
the new definitions all match those in the Federal NNSR regulation
found at 40 CFR 51.165, and EPA is proposing to approve them into the
South Carolina SIP.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ At the time of submission, the definitions for ``Replacement
unit'' and ``Secondary emissions'' in South Carolina's April 24,
2020, SIP revisions matched the then-current Federal NNSR
regulations. On June 22, 2021, the EPA Administrator signed a final
rule amending several NSR regulations, including the definitions for
``Replacement unit'' and ``Secondary emissions.'' This final rule is
available at https://www.epa.gov/nsr/final-error-corrections-rule.
Although the definitions of these two terms in South Carolina's
submittal do not exactly match the revised Federal definitions, EPA
is proposing to approve them into the South Carolina SIP given the
nature of the revisions to these Federal definitions. However, if
South Carolina wishes to have matching definitions, it may submit a
SIP revision in the future to adopt the revised definitions into its
SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 40799]]
The new definition for ``Resource recovery facility,'' found in
paragraph (B)(34) of South Carolina's Standard No. 7.1 in the SIP
revision, does not match the Federal NNSR regulations because the
Federal rules do not contain a definition for this kind of facility.
However, the new definition merely clarifies what constitutes a
resource recovery facility and does not create a new exemption or
limitation on the applicability of the State's NNSR regulations.
Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve the definition into the South
Carolina SIP.
Also, under Section (B), South Carolina's April 24, 2020, SIP
revisions update and replace two lists, converting them into a table
format. Specifically, the changes involve paragraph (B)(22)(a),
formerly found in paragraph (c)(7)(A), and paragraph (B)(37), formerly
found in paragraph (c)(14).
Former paragraph (c)(7)(A), which contained the definition of
``Major stationary source,'' used to include a list of emissions
thresholds for sources in certain nonattainment areas under paragraphs
(c)(7)(A)(i)(a) through (d). These thresholds are now recodified in the
table found in paragraph (B)(22)(a)(i) and are expanded for clarity.
The threshold values and list of pollutants are unchanged from the SIP-
approved version of the rule. Although the revision does not add
ammonia as a precursor to fine particulate matter
(PM2.5),\10\ EPA does not believe that this will have any
negative impact on the attainment or maintenance of the
PM2.5 NAAQS in the State. This is due to the fact that South
Carolina does not currently have any PM2.5 nonattainment
areas, and thus, the PM2.5 thresholds in this NNSR rule are
not currently applicable. In the event of an area being designated
nonattainment for PM2.5 in the future, the State would be
required to submit, among other things, a revised NNSR SIP revision
that identifies ammonia as a PM2.5 precursor. For these
reasons, EPA believes that the recodified table in paragraph
(B)(22)(a)(i) is appropriate for approval into the South Carolina SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The Federal NNSR definition of ``Major stationary source''
sets a 70 tpy major source threshold for the PM2.5
precursors (Sulfur dioxide, Nitrogen oxides, Volatile Organic
Compounds, and Ammonia) in any serious PM2.5
nonattainment area. See 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(1)(viii) and
(a)(1)(xxxvii)(C)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Former paragraph (c)(14) contained a definition of ``Significant''
and included a list of emission rates at or above which a net emissions
increase or the potential to emit from a source would be considered
significant. South Carolina renumbered the definition as paragraph
(B)(37) and created a table containing the significant emissions rates.
The rates in the new table generally match the rates in former
paragraph (c)(14), except for the rates for carbon monoxide (CO) and
ozone, which are expanded to include more stringent rates. For CO,
South Carolina's April 24, 2020, SIP revisions maintain the old
emissions rate, now only applicable in marginal and moderate
nonattainment areas, but add a more stringent emissions rate for
serious nonattainment areas. Similarly, for ozone, South Carolina
maintains the old emissions rate, now applicable only for marginal and
moderate nonattainment areas, but adds more stringent rates for serious
and severe nonattainment areas, as well as for extreme nonattainment
areas. Given that these changes are more stringent than the current
SIP-approved rule, EPA believes that they are appropriate for
incorporation into the South Carolina SIP.
Under Section (C), which incorporates parts of former paragraph
(d)--Permit requirements, South Carolina's April 24, 2020, SIP
revisions add additional conditions regarding emissions offsets and
alternative site analysis that need to be met in order to grant a
permit; adds exemptions for ``Temporary emission source'' and
``Secondary emissions;'' and clarifies the requirements of the State's
NNSR regulations, in regards to major sources and major modifications
of PM10.
As part of the changes to Section (C), South Carolina includes two
new paragraphs, (C)(1)(d) and (e). Paragraph (C)(1)(d) adds as a
condition for a permit approval, for the source to obtain a positive
net air quality benefit in the affected area, as determined by 40 CFR
part 51, Appendix S. Paragraph (C)(1)(e) adds a condition for the
source to carry out an alternative sites analysis in order to
demonstrate that benefits of the proposed source significantly outweigh
the environmental and social costs imposed as a result of its location,
construction, or modification.
Under new paragraphs (C)(2) and (C)(3), South Carolina adds new
exemptions for ``Temporary emissions source[s]'' and ``Secondary
emissions.'' The exemption for ``Temporary emissions source'' does not
exempt temporary sources, defined by the State as plants or facilities
that will be relocated outside the nonattainment area after a short
period of time, from obtaining a permit. This change exempts these
types of sources from meeting the requirements of paragraphs (C)(1)(c)
and (C)(1)(d), which require that the source obtain emissions
reductions from other sources to offset the increase in emissions. The
exemption for ``Secondary emissions'' states that if a source is
subject to the NNSR regulation due to direct emissions from the source,
the applicable conditions in paragraph (C)(1) must also be met for
secondary emissions; however, secondary emissions may be exempt from
paragraphs (C)(1)(a) (lowest achievable emissions rate) and (C)(1)(b)
(compliance certification). EPA is proposing to approve the addition of
paragraphs (C)(2) and (C)(3) because they are consistent with the
exemptions in Appendix S of 40 CFR part 51 and still require
preconstruction review for temporary sources and sources subject to
NNSR regulation due to direct emissions.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ South Carolina's SIP prohibits the issuance of any permit
to construct or modify a source if emissions interfere with
attainment or maintenance of any state or federal standard. See
Regulation 61-62.1, Section II, Paragraph A.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the changes to Section (C) include a clarification
paragraph in regards to particulate matter (PM10). In
particular, paragraph (C)(4) explains that the requirements of the
State's NNSR regulations, in regards to major sources and major
modifications of PM10, would also apply to major sources and
major modifications of PM10 precursors.
Under new Section (D), Offset standards, South Carolina
incorporates several paragraphs that were previously parts of former
paragraph (d) of the State's NNSR regulations. The SIP revisions also
adds new paragraphs throughout this section for consistency with the
Federal offset provisions found at 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3). New paragraphs
(D)(4), (5), (7), and (8) are consistent with federal requirements
found in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C), (G), and (J), all relating to the
baseline for determining credit for emissions reductions.
In the April 24, 2020, SIP revisions, South Carolina adds new
Sections (H) through (K) to the State's NNSR regulations. Sections (J)
and (K) only contain a ``[Reserved]'' note, to leave space for future
updates. Sections (H) and (I) include South Carolina's adoption of
language related to interpollutant offsetting and banking of emission
offsets, respectively. The language generally aligns with that of the
Federal regulations at 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3) and (11), as well as
Appendix S to Part 51, but does not constitute a valid banking and
trading program because it is missing some of the key elements that are
required to ensure that these offsets are traded and banked correctly
and utilizing permanent, quantifiable, and enforceable reductions.
[[Page 40800]]
Additionally, Section (H), Interpollutant offsetting, contains
vacated language from the December 6, 2018, rule ``Implementation of
the 2015 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone:
Nonattainment Area State Implementation Plan Requirements'' (2018
Implementation Rule).\12\ The Federal interpollutant offsetting
provisions found at 40 CFR 51.165(a)(11), as well as Appendix S to Part
51 (at paragraph IV.G.5), were vacated by the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) through a
January 29, 2021, court decision. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 985 F.3d 1055
(D.C. Cir. 2021). Accordingly, on June 22, 2021, the EPA Administrator
signed a final rule that, among other changes, removes the language
allowing interprecursor trading for ozone and restoring the language in
the NNSR regulations to the form it was in after the EPA's 2008
PM2.5 implementation rule.\13\ As a result, South Carolina
withdrew its request that EPA incorporate Section (H) into the SIP
through a withdrawal letter dated April 20, 2021.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See 83 FR 62998.
\13\ The final rule is available at https://www.epa.gov/nsr/final-error-corrections-rule.
\14\ The April 20, 2021, withdrawal letter can be found in the
docket for this proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the reasons discussed above, EPA is not proposing to
incorporate Section (H) into the South Carolina SIP, and is proposing
to incorporate only the addition of Section (I), Banking of emissions
offsets, with the caveat that this does not create an offset banking
and trading program in the State's SIP. In order for South Carolina to
have an offsets banking and trading program in the SIP, the State must
adopt a full banking and trading rule that covers everything necessary
for the program to operate correctly and EPA must incorporate that rule
into the SIP.
Finally, under Section (M), Public participation, South Carolina
adds e-notice provisions for its NNSR program. Originally found in
paragraph (d)(7)(iv), the public notice requirements are renumbered to
(M)(2)(d) and revised to incorporate EPA's amendments to the Federal
public notice requirements discussed in Section II of this rulemaking.
Specifically, South Carolina's April 24, 2020, SIP revisions for
Standard No. 7.1 identify website publication on a public website
identified by the Department as the consistent noticing method for
draft permits subject to public notice under its NNSR program. South
Carolina's e-notice provisions for NNSR note that other noticing
methods, such as newspapers, may be used in addition (but not as a
substitute) to website publication. South Carolina also includes a
cross-reference to the new e-notice provisions of Section (M) under the
State's PALs provisions for NNSR to maintain the consistent e-noticing
method of public participation throughout its NNSR regulations. The
updated language can be found under Section (N) of Standard No. 7.1, in
paragraph (N)(5). EPA believes that the April 24, 2020, SIP revisions
meet all the requirements of the revised Federal e-notice provisions in
regards to the State's NNSR regulations, and EPA is proposing to
incorporate these changes into South Carolina's SIP.
All other changes for Standard No. 7.1 included in the April 24,
2020, SIP revisions are administrative in nature.\15\ Except for the
parts of subparagraphs (A)(10)(t) and (B)(22)(c)(xx) noted above, as
they relate to the Ethanol Rule Provisions of the Federal NNSR
regulations, and Section (H), as it relates to the Interpollutant
Offsetting, all other changes to Standard No. 7.1 submitted through
South Carolina's April 24, 2020 SIP revisions are being proposed for
incorporation into the State's implementation plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ A description of each of these changes to Standard No. 7.1
begins on page 357/500 of the April 24, 2020, submittal PDF. The
submittal can be found in the docket for this proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference South Carolina's Regulation 61-62.5, Standards No. 7--
Prevention of Significant Deterioration, and Standard No. 7.1--
Nonattainment New Source Review, both state effective on April 24,
2020, with the exception of paragraph (H), and a portion of paragraphs
(A)(10)(t), and (B)(22)(c)(xx), from Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No.
7.1, as discussed above. 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).
V. Proposed Action
As described above, EPA is proposing to approve, with some
exceptions, the changes to the South Carolina Regulation 61-62.5,
Standards No. 7--Prevention of Significant Deterioration, and Standard
No. 7.1--Nonattainment New Source Review. These changes were submitted
by South Carolina on April 24, 2020.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. This action merely
proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
Because this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
[[Page 40801]]
imposed by state law, this SIP approval 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 15, 2021.
John Blevins,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2021-15536 Filed 7-28-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P