[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