[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 142 (Tuesday, July 26, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44314-44318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15778]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2022-0397; FRL-10011-01-R4]


Air Plan Approval; South Carolina: New Source Review Updates

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) 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 (hereinafter referred to 
as SC DHEC or South Carolina) via a letter dated February 3, 2022. The 
SIP revisions include updates to South Carolina's Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review 
(NNSR) regulations. Specifically, the updates incorporate recent 
changes to the federal New Source Review (NSR) regulations, consisting 
of a clarification to the Project Emissions Accounting provisions, 
updates promulgated in the recent NSR Corrections Rule, and updates to 
reflect the regulation of greenhouse gases (GHGs) pursuant to the 
Tailoring Rule. 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 25, 2022.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2022-0397 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 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. Background

    The PSD program is a preconstruction permitting program that 
requires ``major'' stationary sources of air pollution to obtain a PSD 
permit prior to beginning construction in areas classified as either in 
attainment with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) or 
unclassifiable. See CAA section 165. EPA requires PSD SIPs to meet or 
exceed the minimum requirements codified at 40 CFR 51.166.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Related rules setting forth the federal PSD program for 
areas without an approved PSD permitting program are codified at 40 
CFR 52.21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NNSR permitting program is a preconstruction permitting program 
that requires ``major'' stationary sources of air pollution to obtain 
an NNSR permit prior to beginning construction in areas classified as 
being in nonattainment with the NAAQS. See CAA section 173. EPA 
requires NNSR SIPs to meet the minimum requirements codified at 40 CFR 
51.165.
    Over the years, EPA has updated its rules implementing NNSR and PSD 
permitting at 40 CFR 51.165 and 40 CFR 51.166, respectively, and as a 
result of these amendments, states and localities similarly are 
required to update their SIP-approved rules to ensure consistency with 
the minimum requirements in federal PSD and NNSR rules. Collectively, 
EPA commonly refers to its PSD and NNSR permitting programs as major 
``new source review'' permitting programs.
    On February 3, 2022, SC DHEC submitted SIP revisions to EPA for 
approval that include changes to South Carolina's major NSR permitting 
regulations to make them more closely align with federal requirements 
for PSD and NNSR permitting based on recent updates to the federal NSR 
regulations.\2\ Specifically, these changes update South Carolina's 
Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7--Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration and Standard No. 7.1--Nonattainment New Source Review.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EPA notes that the February 3, 2022, submittal was received 
by EPA on February 4, 2022. For clarity, EPA will refer to this 
submittal based on the date of the letter.
    \3\ EPA notes that under the February 3, 2022, cover letter, SC 
DHEC also submitted updates to the following State Regulations: 61-
62.60, South Carolina Designated Facility Plan and New Source 
Performance Standards; Regulation 61-62.63, National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Source 
Categories; and Regulation 61-62.70, Title V Operating Permit 
Program. However, South Carolina explains in the February 3, 2022, 
cover letter that these regulations are not part of the SIP, and 
they are not being requested for approval by EPA into the South 
Carolina SIP at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA last approved updates to South Carolina's SIP-approved major 
NSR regulations on October 28, 2021 by acting on an April 24, 2020 
submittal from South Carolina. See 86 FR 59646. Since the time of South 
Carolina's previous April 24, 2020 submittal to revise its major NSR 
rules, EPA has updated the federal major NSR regulations to clarify the 
Project Emissions Accounting provisions and to correct certain errors 
in the NSR

[[Page 44315]]

regulations that have accumulated over time.\4\ South Carolina's 
February 3, 2022, SIP submittal seeks to incorporate these updates to 
the federal rules into the EPA-approved major NSR regulations in the 
South Carolina SIP. Additionally, as discussed in detail below, South 
Carolina's SIP submittal seeks to incorporate into the South Carolina 
SIP updated PSD provisions related to the regulation of GHGs pursuant 
to the Tailoring Rule,\5\ which was previously implemented in South 
Carolina through legislative action pursuant to South Carolina Joint 
Resolution H4888 (2010). EPA is proposing to approve these changes as 
meeting the requirements of the federal PSD and NNSR programs and as 
being consistent with the CAA. Additional details on South Carolina's 
February 3, 2022, revisions and EPA's analysis of the changes can be 
found below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and 
Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR): Project Emissions 
Accounting'' Rule was finalized on November 24, 2020. See 85 FR 
74890 (hereinafter ``Project Emissions Accounting Rule''). The ``New 
Source Review Regulations; Correction'' Rule was finalized on July 
19, 2021. See 86 FR 37918 (hereinafter ``NSR Corrections Rule'').
    \5\ ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V 
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule'' (hereinafter referred to as the 
``GHG Tailoring Rule''). See 75 FR 31514 (June 3, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Analysis of the State's Submittal

    As previously mentioned, the February 3, 2022, SIP submittal 
includes changes to South Carolina's PSD and NNSR regulations. Many of 
these changes are minor and are being proposed to align South 
Carolina's SIP-approved NSR rules with changes made by EPA in the 
federal PSD and NNSR regulations. More details on key updates included 
in the State's proposed changes to the South Carolina SIP are found in 
sections II.A and II.B below.

A. Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7--Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration

    The February 3, 2022, SIP submittal includes the following key 
changes to South Carolina's PSD regulations contained within Regulation 
61-62.5, Standard No. 7 (hereinafter referred to as ``Standard No. 7'') 
in order to more closely align them with the federal PSD regulations: 
(1) Added a definition for the ``sum of the difference'' along with 
updated wording throughout Standard No. 7 to include this new 
definition, based on EPA's Project Emissions Accounting Rule; (2) added 
a definition for ``subject to regulation''; and (3) made several 
changes throughout the rule based on EPA's recent NSR Corrections Rule. 
More details on these changes to Standard No. 7 are included below. All 
other changes to Standard No. 7 are minor edits, such as adding 
brackets where needed, correcting grammatical errors, and renumbering 
sections based on added or deleted paragraphs throughout the rule.
i. Revisions To Reflect the Project Emissions Accounting Rule
    Under paragraph (A)(2)(d)(vii), South Carolina adds a new 
definition for the ``sum of the difference,'' which is used for other 
definitions under paragraphs (A)(2)(d)(iii), (iv), and (vi). 
Subsequently, the definition for ``hydrid test for projects that 
involve multiple types of emissions units,'' under paragraph 
(A)(2)(d)(vi), was updated to include a reference to the new definition 
of the sum of the difference. These changes match those made to the 
federal PSD regulations at 40 CFR 51.166(a)(7)(iv)(f) and (g), through 
EPA's November 24, 2020, Project Emissions Accounting Rule.
ii. Added Definition of ``Subject to Regulation''
    GHG emissions were covered for the first time by the PSD and title 
V operating permit programs effective on January 2, 2011 pursuant to 
the GHG Tailoring Rule. See 75 FR 31514 (June 3, 2010). In the June 3, 
2010, notice, EPA described the implementation of the GHG Tailoring 
Rule, which consisted of the implementation of two steps (known as Step 
1 and Step 2 of the GHG Tailoring Rule) and a commitment to establish a 
third step no later than July 1, 2012. Among the changes established in 
rulemaking for Step 1 and Step 2 of the GHG Tailoring tule, EPA added 
the definition for ``Subject to regulation'' to the federal PSD 
regulations at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48).
    In the implementation of Step 3, EPA decided against further phase-
in of the GHG Tailoring Rule. Thus, the thresholds for determining PSD 
applicability based on emissions of GHGs remained the same as 
established in Steps 1 and 2 of the Tailoring Rule. See 77 FR 41051 
(July 12, 2012). However, as part of Step 3 of the GHG Tailoring Rule, 
EPA revised the regulations under 40 CFR 52.21 to establish Plantwide 
Applicability Limits (PALs) for GHG emissions. Id. Prior to that, PALs 
were only available for GHGs on a mass basis. EPA's July 12, 2012, rule 
revised the PAL regulations in 40 CFR 52.21 to allow for GHG PALs to be 
established on a carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) \6\ basis, 
as well as a mass basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ CO2e emissions refers to emissions of six 
recognized GHGs which are scaled to equivalent CO2 
emissions by relative global warming potential values and are then 
summed together to determine a total equivalent emissions value. See 
40 CFR 51.166 (b)(48)(ii) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 23, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed GHG Tailoring 
Rule permitting requirements in Utility Air Regulatory Group (UARG) v. 
EPA, 573 U.S. 302 (2014). The Supreme Court upheld EPA's regulation of 
GHGs under the PSD program as applied to Step 1 sources (i.e., sources 
that are ``major'' for purposes of PSD permitting based on non-GHG 
pollutants) but further held that EPA may not treat GHGs as air 
pollutants for the purpose of determining whether a source is a major 
source (or is undergoing a major modification). Thus, the Court 
invalidated the PSD and title V permitting requirements for GHG Step 2 
sources. As a result of the Supreme Court decision, on April 10, 2015, 
the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit 
(D.C. Circuit) vacated the regulations that implemented Step 2 of the 
GHG Tailoring Rule, including 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and 40 CFR 
52.21(b)(49)(v). Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA, 606 
Fed. Appx. 6, 7 (D.C. Cir. 2015).
    Subsequently, EPA promulgated a good cause final rule on August 19, 
2015, entitled ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V 
Permitting for Greenhouse Gases: Removal of Certain Vacated Elements'' 
that removed from the federal regulations the portions of the PSD 
permitting provisions related to the GHG Step 2 sources that were 
vacated by the D.C. Circuit earlier that year. See 80 FR 50199.
    In SC DHEC's February 3, 2022, SIP submittal, South Carolina adds a 
new definition for ``Subject to regulation'' under paragraph (B)(52) of 
Standard No. 7, which mostly matches the current federal PSD definition 
for ``[s]ubject to regulation'' found at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48). The new 
definition in paragraph (B)(52) correctly excludes the vacated language 
mentioned above but adds language related to the implementation of GHG 
PALs in South Carolina's PSD program under subparagraph (B)(52)(a), 
which is not found under 51.166(b)(48). Although the language regarding 
GHG PALs is not found in the federal definition for ``subject to 
regulation'' under 40 CFR 51.166, the rulemaking for Step 3 of the GHG 
Tailoring Rule does add the GHG PAL language as part of the definition 
of ``subject to regulations'' under 40 CFR 52.21. See 77 FR 41051 at 
41072. In that rulemaking, EPA notes that although the Agency is not 
adopting the GHG PAL

[[Page 44316]]

language into the existing PSD PAL provisions under 40 CFR 51.166, 
``nothing in th[at] action is intended to restrict states from adopting 
th[ose], or similar, changes into their SIP-approved PAL program[s] if 
they choose to do so.'' See id. at 41070.
    EPA additionally notes that although South Carolina appears to be 
adding provisions of the GHG Tailoring Rule to its PSD program for the 
first time, the State has been implementing these provisions through a 
joint resolution that became effective on July 1, 2010.\7\ Adding the 
definition for ``subject to regulation'' into South Carolina's PSD 
rules merely streamlines the State's rules to current federal PSD 
standards in 40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21. However, this change has no 
practical effect because GHG provisions for PSD were already authorized 
on an interim basis by legislative action in South Carolina.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ On June 11, 2010, the South Carolina Governor signed Joint 
Resolution H4888, which stated in relevant part that ``[i]n the 
event that the United States Environmental Protection Agency adopts 
rules that raise the threshold levels of GHG emissions that will 
trigger a requirement for emitters of greenhouse gases in South 
Carolina, notwithstanding any other provision of law, the rules 
shall be immediately effective in this State on an interim basis and 
implemented by the South Carolina Department of Health and 
Environmental Control pursuant to this joint resolution.'' See 
https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess118_2009-2010/bills/4888.htm (last 
accessed on June 10, 2022). Subsequently, on March 4, 2011, SC DHEC 
submitted a letter to EPA confirming that the State has the 
authority to implement the Tailoring Rule thresholds in their PSD 
and title V programs. This letter to EPA can be found in the docket 
for this proposed action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, following the addition of this new definition, South 
Carolina renumbers the paragraphs that follow in order to accommodate 
the new entry. For the reasons described above, EPA believes that South 
Carolina's new definition is appropriate for incorporation into the SIP 
and is consistent with the federal PSD regulations.
iii. Revisions To Reflect Updates Contained in the NSR Corrections Rule
    Additionally, based on EPA's July 19, 2021, NSR Corrections Rule, 
South Carolina makes several edits and deletions to Standard No. 7 to 
match the federal PSD regulations, and these are detailed below.
    First, in paragraph (B)(8), which defines Best Available Control 
Technology (BACT), as well as in paragraph (J)(1), which includes 
provisions related to the Control Technology Review Provisions of 40 
CFR 51.166(j), SC DHEC adds a reference to 40 CFR part 63 in accordance 
with updates contained in the NSR Corrections Rule.
    Second, in paragraphs (B)(30)(c)(v)(1) and (B)(30)(c)(vi), SC DHEC 
removes references to 40 CFR 51.166 in accordance with the NSR 
Corrections Rule. These references are unnecessary because these 
paragraphs already referenced 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, which houses 
the federal PSD regulations contained within 40 CFR 51.166.
    Third, under paragraphs (B)(32)(a)(i), (B)(32)(c)(viii), and 
(I)(1)(g)(viii), SC DHEC lowers the applicability threshold regarding 
consideration of fugitive emissions for municipal incinerators from the 
capacity to charge more than two-hundred and fifty (250) tons of refuse 
per day to the capacity to charge more than fifty (50) tons of refuse 
per day. This change broadens the applicability of the State's PSD rule 
for these types of sources and matches changes made to the federal PSD 
rule at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(1)(i)(a), (b)(1)(iii)(h), and (i)(1)(ii)(h) 
through the NSR Corrections Rule.
    Fourth, SC DHEC deletes language within subparagraphs (I)(1)(a) 
through (e), (I)(1)(i), (I)(1)(j), (I)(6) through (11), (M)(1)(e), 
(M)(1)(g) and (M)(1)(h), from Standard No. 7 and inserts ``[Reserved]'' 
in their place. This deleted language matches the deletion of 
corresponding paragraphs in the federal PSD rules through the NSR 
Corrections Rule. Specifically, EPA removed paragraphs 40 CFR 
52.21(i)(1)(i) through (v), (i)(1)(ix), (i)(1)(x), (i)(6) through (11), 
(m)(1)(v), (m)(1)(vii) and (m)(1)(viii).\8\ In addition, South Carolina 
adds a new ``[Reserved]'' paragraph under (I)(12), which also matches 
the federal rules at 40 CFR 52.21(i)(12).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Although these provisions are contained in 40 CFR 52.21 
(which contains federal PSD plan rules rather than minimum 
requirements for state PSD plans), South Carolina previously adopted 
these provisions into its PSD plan.
    \9\ Although this provision is contained in 40 CFR 52.21 (which 
contains federal PSD plan rules rather than minimum requirements for 
state PSD plans), South Carolina previously adopted this provision 
into its PSD plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Fifth, throughout several paragraphs in Standard No. 7, South 
Carolina updates internal references. Specifically, SC DHEC updates 
references in paragraphs (N)(1), (P)(6), (P)(7) and (P)(8) to align its 
rules with changes to the federal rules at 40 CFR 52.21(n)(1), (p)(6), 
(p)(7) and (p)(8), respectively.
iv. Other Minor Revisions
    Additionally, SC DHEC makes a correction to one of the references 
in paragraph (AA)(12)(b), which incorrectly listed the requirements of 
the paragraph as being under ``(AA)(12)(c) through (AA)(12)(b)(i).'' 
The changes correct the reference to say ``(AA)(12)(c) through 
(AA)(12)(i)'' instead.
    As previously mentioned, all the changes detailed above are either 
minor edits and corrections or updates to align South Carolina's rules 
with the minimum requirements for PSD plans (including updates 
responsive to EPA's Project Emissions Rule, the NSR Corrections Rule, 
and the Tailoring Rule). For these reasons, EPA is proposing to approve 
and incorporate into the South Carolina SIP the changes to Standard No. 
7.

B. Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7.1--Nonattainment New Source 
Review

    The February 3, 2022, SIP submittal includes the following key 
changes to South Carolina's NNSR regulations contained within 
Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7.1 (hereinafter referred to as 
``Standard No. 7.1'') to more closely align with the federal NNSR 
regulations: (1) added a definition for the ``sum of the difference'' 
based on EPA's Project Emissions Accounting rule; (2) incorporated the 
federal interpollutant trading provisions for NNSR; and (3) made 
several changes throughout the rule based on EPA's NSR Corrections 
Rule. More details on these changes to Standard No. 7.1 are included 
below.
    All other changes to South Carolina's Regulation 61-62.5, Standard 
No. 7.1, are minor edits, such as grammatical corrections, and 
renumbering sections based on added or deleted paragraphs throughout 
the rule.
i. Revisions To Reflect the Project Emissions Accounting Rule
    Under paragraph (A)(9), SC DHEC adds a new definition for the ``sum 
of the difference,'' which is used within other definitions in 
paragraphs (A)(6), (7) and (8). Subsequently, the definition for 
``hydrid test for projects that involve multiple types of emissions 
units,'' under paragraph (A)(8) was updated to include a reference to 
the new definition of the sum of the difference. These changes match 
those made to the federal NNSR regulations at 40 CFR 
51.165(a)(2)(ii)(F) and (G), through EPA's Project Emissions Accounting 
Rule.
ii. Revisions To Reflect Updates Contained in the NSR Corrections Rule
    Similar to the changes to South Carolina's PSD regulations 
explained in Section II.A., SC DHEC makes several edits and deletions 
to Standard No. 7.1 to align this rule with updates to 40 CFR 51.165 
resulting from the NSR Corrections Rule. These changes are detailed 
further below.

[[Page 44317]]

    First, under paragraphs (A)(11) \10\ and (B)(22), SC DHEC lowers 
the applicability threshold regarding consideration of fugitive 
emissions from for municipal incinerators from the capacity to charge 
more than two-hundred and fifty (250) tons of refuse per day to the 
capacity to charge more than fifty (50) tons of refuse per day. This 
change broadens the applicability of South Carolina's Standard No. 7.1 
for these types of sources and matches changes made to the federal NNSR 
rules at 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(C)(8) and (a)(4)(viii) through the NSR 
Corrections Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Paragraph (A)(10) is being renumbered to (A)(11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Although most of paragraphs (A)(11) and (B)(22) are appropriate for 
incorporation into the South Carolina SIP and match the current federal 
rules, the State-effective version includes a portion of the definition 
for ``Chemical process plants'' under (A)(11)(t) and (B)(22)(c)(xx) 
that has never been approved into the SIP. In particular, the language 
contained after ``Chemical process plant,'' which states that ``[t]he 
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.\11\ Due to 
the ongoing review of the 2007 Ethanol Rule in regards to the federal 
NNSR regulations, SC DHEC notes in its February 3, 2022, cover letter 
that it is not requesting EPA to approve these portions of paragraphs 
(A)(11) and (B)(22) into the SIP at this time.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 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.
    \12\ South Carolina's February 3, 2022, cover letter, 
additionally references a June 21, 2021, withdrawal letter, which 
was sent to EPA while the Agency was in the process of approving the 
State's last update to the NSR regulations into the SIP. In the 
February 3, 2020, letter, SC DHEC confirms that the intention of the 
June 21, 2021, withdrawal letter remains the same and that it is not 
requesting EPA to approve the Ethanol Rule provisions, found in 
Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7.1, at this time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, in paragraph (B)(5), South Carolina adds a reference to 40 
CFR part 63 in accordance with updates contained in the NSR Corrections 
Rule. This paragraph already contains references to Parts 60 and 61 but 
based on changes to the federal NNSR rules at 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(xl), 
South Carolina adds the reference to Part 63 as well.
    Third, in paragraphs (B)(21)(c)(v)(1) and (B)(21)(c)(vi), South 
Carolina removes the references to 40 CFR 51.166 in accordance with 
revisions arising from the NSR Corrections Rule. These references were 
incorrect to use in Standard No. 7.1 because 40 CFR 51.166 contains the 
Federal PSD regulations, rather than the federal NNSR regulations. 
Additionally, these references were unnecessary because these 
paragraphs already referenced 40 CFR part 51, subpart I, which house 
the federal NNSR regulations, found in 40 CFR 51.165.
    Fourth, under paragraph (D)(6), which contains NNSR offset 
provisions, SC DHEC deletes an outdated reference to EPA's 
``Recommended Policy on the Control of Volatile Organic Compounds (42 
FR 35314, July 8, 1977).'' Instead, South Carolina points to 40 CFR 
51.100(s), where a list of compounds with negligible photochemical 
reactivity can be found. According to the State's rule, emissions 
credit may be allowed only for hydrocarbons substituted with one of 
these compounds. This updated reference matches changes made to the 
federal NNSR rules at 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(D) through the NSR Corrections 
Rule.
    Finally, under Section (H), specifically in paragraph (H)(1), South 
Carolina adopts corrections to the federal interprecursor offsetting 
rules, found at 40 CFR 51.165(a)(11), in order to delete vacated 
language regarding ozone interprecursor offsetting. Originally, the 
State-effective version of Section (H) contained 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). See 83 
FR 62998. These federal provisions were later vacated by the 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, EPA 
removed this vacated language from 40 CFR 51.165(a)(11) through the NSR 
Corrections Rule.
    South Carolina's previous proposed SIP revision addressing Standard 
No. 7.1, which was submitted to EPA on April 24, 2020, sought to 
incorporate Section (H), including the vacated language mentioned 
above, under paragraph (H)(1), into the SIP. Because of the court 
decision and vacatur, South Carolina later withdrew its request for EPA 
to incorporate Section (H) in its entirety into the SIP, through an 
April 20, 2021, withdrawal letter, and so this section is not currently 
found in the SIP-approved version of Standard No. 7.1. The February 3, 
2022, SIP revision now submits a corrected version of Section (H), with 
the removal of the vacated language from paragraph (H)(1), for 
incorporation into the SIP. EPA has evaluated the revised provision and 
found that the language matches that of the federal NNSR regulation, 
found at 40 CFR 51.165(a)(11), and is proposing to incorporate it into 
the South Carolina SIP.
    As previously mentioned, all the changes detailed above are either 
minor edits and corrections or are updates to align South Carolina's 
rules with minimum requirements in the federal NNSR rule found at 40 
CFR 51.165, based on changes made through EPA's Project Emissions Rule 
and the NSR Corrections Rule. For these reasons, EPA is proposing to 
approve and incorporate into the South Carolina SIP the changes to 
Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7.1, except for the parts of 
subparagraphs (A)(11)(t) and (B)(22)(c)(xx) noted above, as they relate 
to the Ethanol Rule Provisions of the federal NNSR regulations,

III. 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 requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, and as discussed in Sections I and II 
of this preamble, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference South 
Carolina's Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7--Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration, and Standard No. 7.1--Nonattainment New 
Source Review, both state effective on November 26, 2021, except for a 
portion of paragraphs (A)(11)(t) and (B)(22)(c)(xx) related to the 
Ethanol Rule Provisions, found in Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7.1. 
EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally 
available through www.regulations.gov

[[Page 44318]]

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).

IV. Proposed Action

    As described above, EPA is proposing to approve, with the 
exceptions noted above, 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, both state effective 
on November 26, 2021. These changes were submitted by South Carolina on 
February 3, 2022.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. This action merely 
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 proposed action merely proposes to approve state law 
as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional 
requirements beyond those imposed by state law, this proposed action 
for the State of South Carolina does not have Tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 
Therefore, this proposed 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 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 19, 2022.
Daniel Blackman,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2022-15778 Filed 7-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P