[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 197 (Friday, October 13, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47936-47940]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22128]

Vol. 82

Friday,

No. 197

October 13, 2017

Part VI

Environmental Protection Agency

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

40 CFR Part 52

Air Plan Approval; South Carolina; Cross-State Air Pollution Rule;
Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 82 , No. 197 / Friday, October 13, 2017 /
Rules and Regulations

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2017-0364; FRL-9969-27-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; South Carolina; Cross-State Air Pollution Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action to approve portions of a revision to the South Carolina State
Implementation Plan (SIP) concerning the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule
(CSAPR). South Carolina submitted a draft version of this SIP revision
for parallel processing on May 26, 2017, and a final version on
September 5, 2017. Under CSAPR, large electricity generating units
(EGUs) in South Carolina are subject to Federal Implementation Plans
(FIPs) requiring the units to participate in CSAPR's federal trading
program for annual emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and
one of CSAPR's two federal trading programs for annual emissions of
sulfur dioxide (SO2). This action approves the State's
regulations requiring large South Carolina EGUs to participate in new
CSAPR state trading programs for annual NOX and
SO2 emissions integrated with the CSAPR federal trading
programs and incorporates them into South Carolina's SIP, replacing the
corresponding FIP requirements. These CSAPR state trading programs are
substantively identical to the CSAPR federal trading programs, with the
State retaining EPA's default allowance allocation methodology and EPA
remaining the implementing authority for administration of the trading
program. Under the CSAPR regulations, approval of these portions of the
SIP revision automatically eliminates South Carolina units' obligations
to participate in CSAPR's federal trading programs for annual
NOX and SO2 emissions under the corresponding
CSAPR FIPs addressing interstate transport requirements for the 1997
Annual Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS). Approval of these portions of the SIP
revision satisfies South Carolina's good neighbor obligation for the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is not acting on any other
portion of the September 5, 2017 submittal.

DATES: This rule is effective November 13, 2017.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2017-0364. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ashten Bailey, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Ms. Bailey can be reached by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
via electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background on CSAPR and CSAPR-Related SIP Revisions

    EPA issued CSAPR in July 2011 to address the requirements of Clean
Air Act (CAA or Act) section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) concerning interstate
transport of air pollution.\1\ As amended (including the 2016 CSAPR
Update),\2\ CSAPR requires 27 Eastern states to limit their statewide
emissions of SO2 and/or NOX in order to mitigate
transported air pollution unlawfully impacting other states' ability to
attain or maintain four NAAQS: The 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS,
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
and the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The CSAPR emissions limitations are
defined in terms of maximum statewide ``budgets'' for emissions of
annual SO2, annual NOX, and/or ozone season
NOX by each covered state's large EGUs. The CSAPR state
budgets are implemented in two phases of generally increasing
stringency, with the Phase 1 budgets applying to emissions in 2015 and
2016 and the Phase 2 (and CSAPR Update) budgets applying to emissions
in 2017 and later years. As a mechanism for achieving compliance with
the emissions limitations, CSAPR establishes five federal emissions
trading programs: A program for annual NOX emissions, two
geographically separate programs for annual SO2 emissions,
and two geographically separate programs for ozone-season
NOX emissions. CSAPR also establishes FIP requirements
applicable to the large EGUs in each covered state. Currently, the
CSAPR FIP provisions require each state's units to participate in up to
three of the five CSAPR trading programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Federal Implementation Plans; Interstate Transport of Fine
Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals, 76 FR
48208 (August 8, 2011) (codified as amended at 40 CFR 52.38 and
52.39 and subparts AAAAA through EEEEE of 40 CFR part 97).
    \2\ 81 FR 74504 (October 26, 2016). The CSAPR Update was
promulgated to address interstate pollution with respect to the 2008
ozone NAAQS and to address a judicial remand of certain original
CSAPR ozone season NOX budgets promulgated with respect
to the 1997 ozone NAAQS. 81 FR at 74505. The CSAPR Update
established new emission reduction requirements addressing the more
recent NAAQS and coordinated them with the remaining emission
reduction requirements addressing the older NAAQS, so that starting
in 2017, CSAPR includes two geographically separate trading programs
for ozone season NOX emissions covering EGUs in a total
of 23 states. See 40 CFR 52.38(b)(1)-(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CSAPR includes provisions under which states may submit and EPA
will approve SIP revisions to modify or replace the CSAPR FIP
requirements while allowing states to continue to meet their transport-
related obligations using either CSAPR's federal emissions trading
programs or state emissions trading programs integrated with the
federal programs.\3\ Through such a SIP revision, a state may replace
EPA's default provisions for allocating emission allowances among the
state's units, employing any state-selected methodology to allocate or
auction the allowances, subject to timing conditions and limits on
overall allowance quantities. In the case of CSAPR's federal trading
programs for ozone season NOX emissions (or an integrated
state trading program), a state may also expand trading program
applicability to include certain smaller EGUs.\4\ If a state

wants to replace CSAPR FIP requirements with SIP requirements under
which the state's units participate in a state trading program that is
integrated with and identical to the federal trading program even as to
the allocation and applicability provisions, the state may submit a SIP
revision for that purpose as well. However, no emissions budget
increases or other substantive changes to the trading program
provisions are allowed. A state whose units are subject to multiple
CSAPR FIPs and federal trading programs may submit SIP revisions to
modify or replace either some or all of those FIP requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 40 CFR 52.38, 52.39. States also retain the ability to
submit SIP revisions to meet their transport-related obligations
using mechanisms other than the CSAPR federal trading programs or
integrated state trading programs.
    \4\ States covered by both the CSAPR Update and the
NOX SIP Call have the additional option to expand
applicability under the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2
Trading Program to include non-electric generating units that would
have participated in the former NOX Budget Trading
Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    States can submit two basic forms of CSAPR-related SIP revisions
effective for emissions control periods in 2017 or later years.\5\
Specific conditions for approval of each form of SIP revision are set
forth in the CSAPR regulations. Under the first alternative--an
``abbreviated'' SIP revision--a state may submit a SIP revision that
upon approval replaces the default allowance allocation and/or
applicability provisions of a CSAPR federal trading program for the
state.\6\ Approval of an abbreviated SIP revision leaves the
corresponding CSAPR FIP and all other provisions of the relevant
federal trading program in place for the state's units.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ CSAPR also provides for a third, more streamlined form of
SIP revision that is effective only for control periods in 2016 and
is not relevant here. See 40 CFR 52.38(a)(3), (b)(3), (b)(7);
52.39(d), (g).
    \6\ 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4), (b)(4), (b)(8); 52.39(e), (h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the second alternative--a ``full'' SIP revision--a state may
submit a SIP revision that upon approval replaces a CSAPR federal
trading program for the state with a state trading program integrated
with the federal trading program, so long as the state trading program
is substantively identical to the federal trading program or does not
substantively differ from the federal trading program except as
discussed previously with regard to the allowance allocation and/or
applicability provisions.\7\ For purposes of a full SIP revision, a
state may either adopt state rules with complete trading program
language, incorporate the federal trading program language into its
state rules by reference (with appropriate conforming changes), or
employ a combination of these approaches.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 40 CFR 52.38(a)(5), (b)(5), (b)(9); 52.39(f), (i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The CSAPR regulations identify several important consequences and
limitations associated with approval of a full SIP revision. First,
upon EPA's approval of a full SIP revision as correcting the deficiency
in the state's implementation plan that was the basis for a particular
set of CSAPR FIP requirements, the obligation to participate in the
corresponding CSAPR federal trading program is automatically eliminated
for units subject to the state's jurisdiction without the need for a
separate EPA withdrawal action, so long as EPA's approval of the SIP is
full and unconditional.\8\ Second, approval of a full SIP revision does
not terminate the obligation to participate in the corresponding CSAPR
federal trading program for any units located in any Indian country
within the borders of the state, and if and when a unit is located in
Indian country within a state's borders, EPA may modify the SIP
approval to exclude from the SIP, and include in the surviving CSAPR
FIP instead, certain trading program provisions that apply jointly to
units in the state and to units in Indian country within the state's
borders.\9\ Finally, if at the time a full SIP revision is approved EPA
has already started recording allocations of allowances for a given
control period to a state's units, the federal trading program
provisions authorizing EPA to complete the process of allocating and
recording allowances for that control period to those units will
continue to apply, unless EPA's approval of the SIP revision provides
otherwise.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 40 CFR 52.38(a)(6), (b)(10)(i); 52.39(j).
    \9\ 40 CFR 52.38(a)(5)(iv)-(v), (a)(6), (b)(5)(v)-(vi),
(b)(9)(vi)-(vii), (b)(10)(i); 52.39(f)(4)-(5), (i)(4)-(5), (j).
    \10\ 40 CFR 52.38(a)(7), (b)(11)(i); 52.39(k).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 28, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) issued a decision on a
number of petitions related to CSAPR, which found that EPA required
more emissions reductions than may have been necessary to address the
downwind air quality problems to which some states contribute. The
court remanded several CSAPR emission budgets to EPA for
reconsideration, including the Phase 2 SO2 trading budget
for South Carolina.\11\ However, South Carolina has proposed to
voluntarily adopt into their SIP a CSAPR state trading program that is
integrated with the federal trading program and includes a state-
established SO2 budget equal to the state's remanded Phase 2
SO2 emission budget.\12\ EPA notes that nothing in the
court's decision affects South Carolina's authority to seek
incorporation into its SIP of a state-established budget as stringent
as the remanded federally-established budget or limits EPA's authority
to approve such a SIP revision. The CSAPR regulations provide each
covered state with the option to meet its transport obligations through
SIP revisions replacing the federal trading programs and requiring the
state's EGUs to participate in integrated CSAPR state trading programs
that apply emissions budgets of the same or greater stringency. Under
the CSAPR regulations, when such a SIP revision is approved, the
corresponding FIP provisions are automatically withdrawn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA (EME Homer City II),
795 F.3d 118 (D.C. Cir. 2015). The D.C. Circuit also remanded
SO2 budgets for Alabama, Georgia, and Texas. The court
also remanded Phase 2 ozone-season NOX budgets for eleven
states, including South Carolina.
    \12\ See memo entitled ``The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's Plan for Responding to the Remand of the Cross-State Air
Pollution Rule Phase 2 SO2 Budgets for Alabama, Georgia,
South Carolina and Texas'' from Janet G. McCabe, EPA Acting
Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, to EPA Regional Air
Division Directors (June 27, 2016), available at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0598-0003. The memo
directs the Regional Air Division Directors to share the memo with
state officials. EPA also communicated orally with officials in
Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas in advance of the memo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the CSAPR rulemaking, EPA determined that air pollution
transported from South Carolina would unlawfully affect other states'
ability to attain or maintain the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS.\13\ South Carolina units meeting the CSAPR applicability
criteria were consequently made subject to FIP provisions requiring
participation in CSAPR federal trading programs for annual
SO2 and annual NOX emissions.\14\ On May 26,
2017, South Carolina submitted to EPA a draft SIP revision including
provisions that, if all portions were approved, would incorporate into
South Carolina's SIP CSAPR state trading program regulations that would
replace the CSAPR regulations for the two federal trading programs with
regard to South Carolina units.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See 76 FR at 48213. The NPRM contains a more detailed
summary of EPA's determinations with regard to South Carolina in the
CSAPR and the CSAPR Update rulemakings.
    \14\ 40 CFR 52.38(a)(2), (b)(2); 52.39(c); 52.2140; 52.2141.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on August 10,
2017 (82 FR 37389), EPA proposed to approve the portions of South
Carolina's May 26, 2017, draft SIP submittal designed to replace the
CSAPR federal annual SO2 and NOX trading
programs. Because South Carolina submitted the draft SIP revision for
parallel processing, EPA's August 10, 2017, proposed rulemaking

was contingent upon South Carolina providing a final SIP revision that
was substantively the same as the draft SIP revision. See 82 FR 37389.
Comments on the NPRM were due on or before September 11, 2017. EPA
received no adverse comments on the proposed action.
    South Carolina submitted the final version of its SIP revision on
September 5, 2017.\15\ The September 5, 2017, SIP submittal had no
substantive changes from the May 26, 2017, draft. Please refer to the
NPRM for more detailed information regarding the SIP revision and the
Agency's rationale for today's final rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Both the draft and final SIP revisions are provided in the
docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of South
Carolina Regulation 61-62.97, entitled ``Cross-State Air Pollution Rule
(CSAPR) Trading Program,'' state effective on August 25, 2017. EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available
through www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 4 Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this preamble for more information). Therefore, these
materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in the State
implementation plan, have been incorporated by reference by EPA into
that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110 and 113
of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of EPA's
approval, and will be incorporated by reference by the Director of the
Federal Register in the next update to the SIP compilation.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Actions

    EPA is approving the portions of South Carolina's September 5,
2017, final SIP submittal concerning the establishment for South
Carolina units of CSAPR state trading programs for annual
NOX and SO2 emissions and adopting into the SIP
the state trading program rules codified in South Carolina regulation
61-62.97 (``Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Trading Program'').
These South Carolina CSAPR state trading programs will be integrated
with the federal CSAPR NOX Annual Trading Program and the
federal CSAPR SO2 Group 2 Trading Program, respectively, and
are substantively identical to the federal trading programs. South
Carolina units therefore will generally be required to meet
requirements under South Carolina's CSAPR state trading programs
equivalent to the requirements the units otherwise would have been
required to meet under the corresponding CSAPR federal trading
programs. Under the State's regulations, the State will retain EPA's
default allowance allocation methodology and EPA will remain the
implementing authority for administration of the trading programs. EPA
is approving these portions of the SIP revision because they meet the
requirements of the CAA and EPA's regulations for approval of a CSAPR
full SIP revision replacing a federal trading program with a state
trading program that is integrated with and substantively identical to
the federal trading program.
    EPA promulgated the FIP provisions requiring South Carolina units
to participate in the federal CSAPR NOX Annual Trading
Program and the federal CSAPR SO2 Group 2 Trading Program in
order to address South Carolina's obligations under CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in
the absence of SIP provisions addressing those requirements. Approving
the portions of South Carolina's SIP submittal adopting CSAPR state
trading program rules for annual NOX and SO2
substantively identical to the corresponding CSAPR federal trading
program regulations (or differing only with respect to the allowance
allocation methodology) corrects the same deficiency in the SIP that
otherwise would be corrected by those CSAPR FIPs. Under the CSAPR
regulations, upon EPA's full and unconditional approval of a SIP
revision as correcting the SIP's deficiency that is the basis for a
particular CSAPR FIP, the obligation to participate in the
corresponding CSAPR federal trading program is automatically eliminated
for units subject to the state's jurisdiction (but not for any units
located in any Indian country within the state's borders).\17\ EPA's
approval of the portions of South Carolina's SIP submittal establishing
CSAPR state trading program rules for annual NOX and
SO2 emissions therefore results in automatic termination of
the obligations of South Carolina units to participate in the federal
CSAPR NOX Annual Trading Program and the federal CSAPR
SO2 Group 2 Trading Program. Further, when promulgating the
FIP provisions requiring South Carolina units to participate in those
two CSAPR trading programs, EPA found that those FIP requirements would
fully satisfy South Carolina's obligation pursuant to CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) to prohibit emissions which will significantly
contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state.\18\ This approval of
portions of South Carolina's SIP revision as correcting the SIP's
deficiency that was the basis for those FIP requirements therefore
likewise fully satisfies the state's transport obligation with respect
to the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 40 CFR 52.38(a)(6); 52.39(j); see also 52.2140(a)(1);
52.2141(a).
    \18\ See 76 FR at 48210.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted in EPA's NPRM, the Phase 2 SO2 budget
established for South Carolina in the CSAPR rulemaking was remanded to
EPA for reconsideration.\19\ With the approval of these portions of the
SIP revision as proposed, South Carolina has fulfilled its obligations
to provide a SIP that addresses the interstate transport provisions of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS. Thus, EPA no longer has an obligation to (nor
does EPA have the authority to) address those transport requirements
through implementation of a FIP, and approval of these portions of the
SIP revision eliminates South Carolina units' obligations to
participate in the federal CSAPR NOX Annual Trading Program
and the federal CSAPR SO2 Group 2 Trading Program.
Elimination of South Carolina units' obligations to participate in the
federal trading programs includes elimination of the requirements to
comply with the federally-established Phase 2 budgets capping
allocations of CSAPR NOX Annual allowances and CSAPR
SO2 Group 2 allowances to South Carolina units under those
federal trading programs. As approval of these portions of the SIP
revision eliminates requirements to comply with South Carolina's
remanded federally-established Phase 2 SO2 budget and
eliminates EPA's authority to subject units in South Carolina to a FIP,
it is EPA's opinion that this action addresses the judicial remand of
South Carolina's federally-established Phase 2 SO2
budget.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ EME Homer City II, 795 F.3d at 138.
    \20\ Although the court in EME Homer City II remanded South
Carolina's Phase 2 SO2 budget because it determined that
the budget was too stringent, nothing in the court's decision
affects South Carolina's authority to seek incorporation into its
SIP of a state-established budget as stringent as the remanded
federally-established budget or limits EPA's authority to approve
such a SIP revision. See 42 U.S.C. 7416, 7410(k)(3).

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

IV. 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. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this 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).

This rule for South Carolina does not have Tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because it does not have substantial direct effects on an Indian Tribe.
The Catawba Indian Nation Reservation is located within the state of
South Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba Indian Claims Settlement Act,
S.C. Code Ann. 27-16-120, ``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.'' However, the rules proposed for approval exclude units
in Indian country from the applicable requirements of the rules and
exclude federal trading provisions related to EPA's process for
allocating and recording allowances from Indian country NUSAs. EPA
notes this action will not impose substantial direct costs on Tribal
governments or preempt Tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by December 12, 2017. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides.

    Dated: September 29, 2017.
Onis ``Trey'' Glenn, III,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42.U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart A--General Provisions

Sec.  52.38  [Amended]

0
2. Amend Sec.  52.38, paragraph (a)(8)(iii) by removing the words
``Alabama and Georgia'' and adding the words ``Alabama, Georgia, and
South Carolina'' in its place.

Sec.  52.39   [Amended]

0
3. Amend Sec.  52.39 paragraph (m)(3) by removing the words ``Alabama
and Georgia'' and adding the words ``Alabama, Georgia, and South
Carolina'' in its place.

Subpart PP--South Carolina

0
4. Amend Sec.  52.2120 in the table in paragraph (c) by adding in
numerical order an entry for ``Regulation No. 62.97'' to read as
follows:

Sec.  52.2120  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                                  Air Pollution Control Regulations for South Carolina
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                State
          State citation                Title/subject      effective date             EPA approval date                   Federal Register notice
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                      * * * * * * *
Regulation No. 62.97..............  Cross-State Air             8/25/2017  10/13/2017............................  [Insert Federal Register citation]
                                     Pollution Rule
                                     (CSAPR) Trading
                                     Program.

                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-22128 Filed 10-12-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 81 (Thursday, April 26, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24857-24858]
[FR Doc No: 2012-10077]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R09-OAR-2012-0266; FRL-9665-5]

Interim Final Determination To Stay and Defer Sanctions, San
Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Interim final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is making an interim final determination to stay the
imposition of offset sanctions and to defer the imposition of highway
sanctions based on a proposed approval of revisions to the San Joaquin
Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the
California State Implementation Plan (SIP) published elsewhere in this
Federal Register. The revisions concern SJVUAPCD Rule 4352, Solid Fuel
Fired Boilers, Steam Generators and Process Heaters.

DATES: This interim final determination is effective on April 26, 2012.
However, comments will be accepted until May 29, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-
2012-0266, by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-
line instructions.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail or deliver: Andrew Steckel (Air-4), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA
94105-3901.
    Instructions: All comments will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided, unless the comment
includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you
consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as
such and should not be submitted through www.regulations.gov or email.
www.regulations.gov is an ``anonymous access'' system, and EPA will not
know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
    Docket: Generally, documents in the docket for this action are
available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA
Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all
documents in the docket are listed at www.regulations.gov, some
information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location
(e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly
available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours
with the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Steckel, EPA Region IX, (415)
947-4115<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us'' and
``our'' refer to EPA.

I. Background

    On October 1, 2010 (75 FR 60623), we published a limited approval
and limited disapproval of SJVUAPCD Rule 4352 as adopted locally on May
18, 2006 and submitted by the State on October 5, 2006. We based our
limited disapproval action on certain deficiencies in the submittal.
This disapproval action started a sanctions clock for imposition of
offset sanctions 18 months after November 1, 2010 and highway sanctions
6 months later, pursuant to section 179 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and
our regulations at 40 CFR 52.31. Under 40 CFR 52.31(d)(1), offset
sanctions apply eighteen months after the effective date of a
disapproval and highway sanctions apply six months after the offset
sanctions, unless we determine that the deficiencies forming the basis
of the disapproval have been corrected.
    On December 15, 2011, SJVUAPCD adopted revisions to Rule 4352 that
were intended to correct the deficiencies identified in our October 1,
2010 limited approval and limited disapproval action. On February 23,
2012, the State submitted the revised rule to EPA. In the Proposed
Rules section of today's Federal Register, we are proposing to fully
approve this revised rule because we believe it corrects the
deficiencies identified in our October 1, 2010 disapproval action.
Based on today's proposed approval, we are taking this final rulemaking
action, effective on publication, to stay the imposition of the offset
sanctions and to defer the imposition of the highway sanctions that
were triggered by our October 1, 2010 limited disapproval.
    EPA is providing the public with an opportunity to comment on this
stay/deferral of sanctions. If comments are submitted that change our
assessment described in this final determination and the proposed full
approval of

revised SJVUAPCD Rule 4352, we intend to take subsequent final action
to reimpose sanctions pursuant to 40 CFR 52.31(d). If no comments are
submitted that change our assessment, then all sanctions and sanction
clocks will be permanently terminated on the effective date of a final
rule approval.

II. EPA Action

    We are making an interim final determination to stay the imposition
of the offset sanctions and to defer the imposition of the highway
sanctions associated with SJVUAPCD Rule 4352 based on our concurrent
proposal to approve the State's SIP revision as correcting deficiencies
that initiated sanctions.
    Because EPA has preliminarily determined that the State has
corrected the deficiencies identified in EPA's limited disapproval
action, relief from sanctions should be provided as quickly as
possible. Therefore, EPA is invoking the good cause exception under the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in not providing an opportunity for
comment before this action takes effect (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)). However,
by this action EPA is providing the public with a chance to comment on
EPA's determination after the effective date, and EPA will consider any
comments received in determining whether to reverse such action.
    EPA believes that notice-and-comment rulemaking before the
effective date of this action is impracticable and contrary to the
public interest. EPA has reviewed the State's submittal and, through
its proposed action, is indicating that it is more likely than not that
the State has corrected the deficiencies that started the sanctions
clocks. Therefore, it is not in the public interest to initially impose
sanctions or to keep applied sanctions in place when the State has most
likely done all it can to correct the deficiencies that triggered the
sanctions clocks. Moreover, it would be impracticable to go through
notice-and-comment rulemaking on a finding that the State has corrected
the deficiencies prior to the rulemaking approving the State's
submittal. Therefore, EPA believes that it is necessary to use the
interim final rulemaking process to stay and defer sanctions while EPA
completes its rulemaking process on the approvability of the State's
submittal. Moreover, with respect to the effective date of this action,
EPA is invoking the good cause exception to the 30-day notice
requirement of the APA because the purpose of this notice is to relieve
a restriction (5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1)).

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action stays and defers Federal sanctions and imposes no
additional requirements.
    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.
    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a
significant regulatory action.
    The administrator certifies that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
    This rule 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).
    This rule does not have tribal implications because it will not
have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    This action does not have Federalism implications because it does
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government,
as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).
    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
    The requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272) do not apply to
this rule because it imposes no standards.
    This rule does not impose an information collection burden under
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report to Congress and the Comptroller
General. However, section 808 provides that any rule for which the
issuing agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure
thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest, shall take effect at such time as the agency promulgating the
rule determines. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). EPA has made such a good cause
finding, including the reasons therefor, and established an effective
date of April 26, 2012. EPA will submit a report containing this rule
and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 25, 2012. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purpose of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
regulations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: April 13, 2012.
Jared Blumenfeld,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2012-10077 Filed 4-25-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P