[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 163 (Tuesday, August 23, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57509-57519]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20141]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0429; FRL-9951-16-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; SC; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve portions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission,
submitted by the State of South Carolina, through the South Carolina
Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC DHEC), on December
18, 2015, to demonstrate that the State meets the infrastructure
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2012 Annual Fine
Particulate Matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS). The CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a
SIP for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS
promulgated by EPA, which is commonly referred to as an
``infrastructure'' SIP. SC DHEC certified that the South Carolina SIP
contains provisions that ensure the 2012 Annual

PM2.5 NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and maintained in
South Carolina. EPA is proposing to determine that portions of South
Carolina's infrastructure submission, submitted to EPA on December 18,
2015, satisfy certain required infrastructure elements for the 2012
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 22,
2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2014-0429 at http://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 http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tiereny Bell, 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. Bell can be reached via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

I. Background and Overview

    On December 14, 2012 (78 FR 3086, January 15, 2013), EPA
promulgated a revised primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The
standard was strengthened from 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/
m\3\) to 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\. Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA,
States are required to submit SIPs meeting the applicable requirements
of section 110(a)(2) within three years after promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe.
Section 110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP elements such as
requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal
authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the
NAAQS. States were required to submit such SIPs for the 2012 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS to EPA no later than December 14, 2015.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In these infrastructure SIP submissions States generally
certify evidence of compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of
the CAA through a combination of state regulations and statutes,
some of which have been incorporated into the federally-approved
SIP. In addition, certain federally-approved, non-SIP regulations
may also be appropriate for demonstrating compliance with sections
110(a)(1) and (2). Throughout this rulemaking, unless otherwise
indicated, the term ``South Carolina Air Pollution Control
Regulation'' or ``Regulation'' indicates that the cited regulation
has been approved into South Carolina's federally-approved SIP. The
term ``South Carolina statute'' indicates cited South Carolina state
statutes, which are not a part of the SIP unless otherwise
indicated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This rulemaking is proposing to approve portions of South
Carolina's PM2.5 infrastructure SIP submissions \2\ for the
applicable requirements of the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, with
the exception of the interstate transport requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4), for which EPA is not
proposing any action in this rulemaking regarding these requirements.
For the aspects of South Carolina's submittal proposed for approval in
this rulemaking, EPA notes that the Agency is not approving any
specific rule, but rather proposing that South Carolina's already
approved SIP meets certain CAA requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ South Carolina's 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
infrastructure SIP submission dated December 18, 2015, is referred
to as ``South Carolina's PM2.5 infrastructure SIP'' in
this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. What elements are required under sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?

    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit SIPs to provide
for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a new or
revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such
NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section
110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP submission to
EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but the contents of that submission may
vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the
data and analytical tools available at the time the state develops and
submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the
submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary
depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP already
contains.
    More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and
timing requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements
that states must meet for the ``infrastructure'' SIP requirements
related to a newly established or revised NAAQS. As mentioned
previously, these requirements include basic SIP elements such as
requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal
authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the
NAAQS. The requirements that are the subject of this proposed
rulemaking are summarized later on and in EPA's September 13, 2013,
memorandum entitled ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2).'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not
governed by the three year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1)
because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area
controls are not due within three years after promulgation of a new
or revised NAAQS, but rather due at the time the nonattainment area
plan requirements are due pursuant to section 172. These
requirements are: (1) Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C)
to the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as required
in part D title I of the CAA; and (2) submissions required by
section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D, title I of the CAA. This proposed rulemaking
does not address infrastructure elements related to section
110(a)(2)(I) or the nonattainment planning requirements of
110(a)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures
 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System
 110(a)(2)(C): Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and
for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ This rulemaking only addresses requirements for this element
as they relate to attainment areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II): Interstate Pollution Transport
 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution Abatement and
International Air Pollution
 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of
Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies
 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting
 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency Powers
 110(a)(2)(H): SIP Revisions
 110(a)(2)(I): Plan Revisions for Nonattainment Areas \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ As mentioned previously, this element is not relevant to
this proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with Government Officials, Public
Notification, and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and
Visibility Protection
     110(a)(2)(K): Air Quality Modeling and Submission of
Modeling Data
     110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees
     110(a)(2)(M): Consultation and Participation by Affected
Local Entities

III. What is EPA's approach to the review of infrastructure SIP
submissions?

    EPA is acting upon the SIP submission from South Carolina that
addresses the infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The requirement
for states to make a SIP submission of this type arises out of CAA
section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP
submissions ``within 3 years (or such shorter period as the
Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national
primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),'' and
these SIP submissions are to provide for the ``implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The statute directly
imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the
requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA's
taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that ``[e]ach
such plan'' submission must address.
    EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the
purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term
``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to
distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions
that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA, such
as ``nonattainment SIP'' or ``attainment plan SIP'' submissions to
address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I of
the CAA, ``regional haze SIP'' submissions required by EPA rule to
address the visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A, and
nonattainment new source review (NNSR) permit program submissions to
address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D. Section
110(a)(1) addresses the timing and general requirements for
infrastructure SIP submissions, and section 110(a)(2) provides more
details concerning the required contents of these submissions. The list
of required elements provided in section 110(a)(2) contains a wide
variety of disparate provisions, some of which pertain to required
legal authority, some of which pertain to required substantive program
provisions, and some of which pertain to requirements for both
authority and substantive program provisions.\6\ EPA therefore believes
that while the timing requirement in section 110(a)(1) is unambiguous,
some of the other statutory provisions are ambiguous. In particular,
EPA believes that the list of required elements for infrastructure SIP
submissions provided in section 110(a)(2) contains ambiguities
concerning what is required for inclusion in an infrastructure SIP
submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides that states
must provide assurances that they have adequate legal authority
under state and local law to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C)
provides that states must have a SIP-approved program to address
certain sources as required by part C of title I of the CAA; and
section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that states must have legal authority
to address emergencies as well as contingency plans that are
triggered in the event of such emergencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following examples of ambiguities illustrate the need for EPA
to interpret some section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) requirements
with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions for a given new or
revised NAAQS. One example of ambiguity is that section 110(a)(2)
requires that ``each'' SIP submission must meet the list of
requirements therein, while EPA has long noted that this literal
reading of the statute is internally inconsistent and would create a
conflict with the nonattainment provisions in part D of title I of the
Act, which specifically address nonattainment SIP requirements.\7\
Section 110(a)(2)(I) pertains to nonattainment SIP requirements and
part D addresses when attainment plan SIP submissions to address
nonattainment area requirements are due. For example, section 172(b)
requires EPA to establish a schedule for submission of such plans for
certain pollutants when the Administrator promulgates the designation
of an area as nonattainment, and section 107(d)(1)(B) allows up to two
years, or in some cases three years, for such designations to be
promulgated.\8\ This ambiguity illustrates that rather than apply all
the stated requirements of section 110(a)(2) in a strict literal sense,
EPA must determine which provisions of section 110(a)(2) are applicable
for a particular infrastructure SIP submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See, e.g., ``Rule To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine
Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions
to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to the NOX SIP Call;
Final Rule,'' 70 FR 25162, at 25163-65 (May 12, 2005) (explaining
relationship between timing requirement of section 110(a)(2)(D)
versus section 110(a)(2)(I)).
    \8\ EPA notes that this ambiguity within section 110(a)(2) is
heightened by the fact that various subparts of part D set specific
dates for submission of certain types of SIP submissions in
designated nonattainment areas for various pollutants. Note, e.g.,
that section 182(a)(1) provides specific dates for submission of
emissions inventories for the ozone NAAQS. Some of these specific
dates are necessarily later than three years after promulgation of
the new or revised NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Another example of ambiguity within sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) with respect to infrastructure SIPs pertains to whether
states must meet all of the infrastructure SIP requirements in a single
SIP submission, and whether EPA must act upon such SIP submission in a
single action. Although section 110(a)(1) directs states to submit ``a
plan'' to meet these requirements, EPA interprets the CAA to allow
states to make multiple SIP submissions separately addressing
infrastructure SIP elements for the same NAAQS. If states elect to make
such multiple SIP submissions to meet the infrastructure SIP
requirements, EPA can elect to act on such submissions either
individually or in a larger combined action.\9\ Similarly, EPA
interprets the CAA to allow it to take action on the individual parts
of one larger, comprehensive infrastructure SIP submission for a given
NAAQS without concurrent action on the entire submission. For example,
EPA has sometimes elected to act at different times on various elements
and sub-elements of the same infrastructure SIP submission.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See, e.g., ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation
Plans; New Mexico; Revisions to the New Source Review (NSR) State
Implementation Plan (SIP); Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) Permitting,'' 78 FR
4339 (January 22, 2013) (EPA's final action approving the structural
PSD elements of the New Mexico SIP submitted by the State separately
to meet the requirements of EPA's 2008 PM2.5 NSR rule),
and ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
New Mexico; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport Requirements for
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,'' (78 FR 4337) (January 22, 2013)
(EPA's final action on the infrastructure SIP for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS).
    \10\ On December 14, 2007, the State of Tennessee, through the
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, made a SIP
revision to EPA demonstrating that the State meets the requirements
of sections 110(a)(1) and (2). EPA proposed action for
infrastructure SIP elements (C) and (J) on January 23, 2012 (77 FR
3213) and took final action on March 14, 2012 (77 FR 14976). On
April 16, 2012 (77 FR 22533) and July 23, 2012 (77 FR 42997), EPA
took separate proposed and final actions on all other section
110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP elements of Tennessee's December 14,
2007 submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ambiguities within sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) may also arise
with respect to infrastructure SIP submission requirements for
different NAAQS. Thus, EPA notes that not every element of section
110(a)(2) would be relevant, or as relevant, or relevant in the same
way, for each new or revised NAAQS. The states' attendant
infrastructure SIP submissions for each NAAQS therefore could be
different. For example, the monitoring requirements that a state

might need to meet in its infrastructure SIP submission for purposes of
section 110(a)(2)(B) could be very different for different pollutants
because the content and scope of a state's infrastructure SIP
submission to meet this element might be very different for an entirely
new NAAQS than for a minor revision to an existing NAAQS.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ For example, implementation of the 1997 fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) NAAQS required the deployment of a system
of new monitors to measure ambient levels of that new indicator
species for the new NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA notes that interpretation of section 110(a)(2) is also
necessary when EPA reviews other types of SIP submissions required
under the CAA. Therefore, as with infrastructure SIP submissions, EPA
also has to identify and interpret the relevant elements of section
110(a)(2) that logically apply to these other types of SIP submissions.
For example, section 172(c)(7) requires that attainment plan SIP
submissions required by part D have to meet the ``applicable
requirements'' of section 110(a)(2). Thus, for example, attainment plan
SIP submissions must meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
regarding enforceable emission limits and control measures and section
110(a)(2)(E)(i) regarding air agency resources and authority. By
contrast, it is clear that attainment plan SIP submissions required by
part D would not need to meet the portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) that
pertains to the PSD program required in part C of title I of the CAA,
because PSD does not apply to a pollutant for which an area is
designated nonattainment and thus subject to part D planning
requirements. As this example illustrates, each type of SIP submission
may implicate some elements of section 110(a)(2) but not others. Given
the potential for ambiguity in some of the statutory language of
section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2), EPA believes that it is
appropriate to interpret the ambiguous portions of section 110(a)(1)
and section 110(a)(2) in the context of acting on a particular SIP
submission. In other words, EPA assumes that Congress could not have
intended that each and every SIP submission, regardless of the NAAQS in
question or the history of SIP development for the relevant pollutant,
would meet each of the requirements, or meet each of them in the same
way. Therefore, EPA has adopted an approach under which it reviews
infrastructure SIP submissions against the list of elements in section
110(a)(2), but only to the extent each element applies for that
particular NAAQS.
    Historically, EPA has elected to use guidance documents to make
recommendations to states for infrastructure SIPs, in some cases
conveying needed interpretations on newly arising issues and in some
cases conveying interpretations that have already been developed and
applied to individual SIP submissions for particular elements.\12\ EPA
most recently issued guidance for infrastructure SIPs on September 13,
2013 (2013 Guidance).\13\ EPA developed this document to provide states
with up-to-date guidance for infrastructure SIPs for any new or revised
NAAQS. Within this guidance, EPA describes the duty of states to make
infrastructure SIP submissions to meet basic structural SIP
requirements within three years of promulgation of a new or revised
NAAQS. EPA also made recommendations about many specific subsections of
section 110(a)(2) that are relevant in the context of infrastructure
SIP submissions.\14\ The guidance also discusses the substantively
important issues that are germane to certain subsections of section
110(a)(2). Significantly, EPA interprets sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) such that infrastructure SIP submissions need to address
certain issues and need not address others. Accordingly, EPA reviews
each infrastructure SIP submission for compliance with the applicable
statutory provisions of section 110(a)(2), as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ EPA notes, however, that nothing in the CAA requires EPA to
provide guidance or to promulgate regulations for infrastructure SIP
submissions. The CAA directly applies to states and requires the
submission of infrastructure SIP submissions, regardless of whether
or not EPA provides guidance or regulations pertaining to such
submissions. EPA elects to issue such guidance in order to assist
states, as appropriate.
    \13\ ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan
(SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2),'' Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013.
    \14\ EPA's September 13, 2013, guidance did not make
recommendations with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions to
address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA issued the guidance shortly
after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the D.C. Circuit
decision in EME Homer City, 696 F.3d7 (D.C. Cir. 2012) which had
interpreted the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). In light
of the uncertainty created by ongoing litigation, EPA elected not to
provide additional guidance on the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) at that time. As the guidance is neither binding
nor required by statute, whether EPA elects to provide guidance on a
particular section has no impact on a state's CAA obligations. On
March 17, 2016, EPA released a memorandum titled, ``Information on
the Interstate Transport `Good Neighbor' Provision for the 2012 Fine
Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards under
Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)'' to provide guidance to
states for interstate transport requirements specific to the
PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an example, section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) is a required element of
section 110(a)(2) for infrastructure SIP submissions. Under this
element, a state must meet the substantive requirements of section 128,
which pertain to state boards that approve permits or enforcement
orders and heads of executive agencies with similar powers. Thus, EPA
reviews infrastructure SIP submissions to ensure that the state's
implementation plan appropriately addresses the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and section 128. The 2013 Guidance explains EPA's
interpretation that there may be a variety of ways by which states can
appropriately address these substantive statutory requirements,
depending on the structure of an individual state's permitting or
enforcement program (e.g., whether permits and enforcement orders are
approved by a multi-member board or by a head of an executive agency).
However they are addressed by the state, the substantive requirements
of section 128 are necessarily included in EPA's evaluation of
infrastructure SIP submissions because section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
explicitly requires that the state satisfy the provisions of section
128.
    As another example, EPA's review of infrastructure SIP submissions
with respect to the PSD program requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C),
(D)(i)(II), and (J) focuses upon the structural PSD program
requirements contained in part C and EPA's PSD regulations. Structural
PSD program requirements include provisions necessary for the PSD
program to address all regulated sources and new source review (NSR)
pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHGs). By contrast, structural
PSD program requirements do not include provisions that are not
required under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 but are merely
available as an option for the state, such as the option to provide
grandfathering of complete permit applications with respect to the 2012
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Accordingly, the latter optional
provisions are types of provisions EPA considers irrelevant in the
context of an infrastructure SIP action.
    For other section 110(a)(2) elements, however, EPA's review of a
state's infrastructure SIP submission focuses on assuring that the
state's implementation plan meets basic structural requirements. For
example, section 110(a)(2)(C) includes, among other things, the
requirement that states have a program to regulate minor new sources.
Thus, EPA evaluates whether the state has an EPA-approved minor NSR
program and whether the program addresses the pollutants relevant to
that NAAQS. In the context of acting on an

infrastructure SIP submission, however, EPA does not think it is
necessary to conduct a review of each and every provision of a state's
existing minor source program (i.e., already in the existing SIP) for
compliance with the requirements of the CAA and EPA's regulations that
pertain to such programs.
    With respect to certain other issues, EPA does not believe that an
action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission is necessarily the
appropriate type of action in which to address possible deficiencies in
a state's existing SIP. These issues include: (i) Existing provisions
related to excess emissions from sources during periods of startup,
shutdown, or malfunction that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA's
policies addressing such excess emissions (``SSM''); (ii) existing
provisions related to ``director's variance'' or ``director's
discretion'' that may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to
allow revisions to SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public
process or not requiring further approval by EPA; and (iii) existing
provisions for PSD programs that may be inconsistent with current
requirements of EPA's ``Final NSR Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR 80186
(December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (``NSR
Reform''). Thus, EPA believes it may approve an infrastructure SIP
submission without scrutinizing the totality of the existing SIP for
such potentially deficient provisions and may approve the submission
even if it is aware of such existing provisions.\15\ It is important to
note that EPA's approval of a state's infrastructure SIP submission
should not be construed as explicit or implicit re-approval of any
existing potentially deficient provisions that relate to the three
specific issues just described.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ By contrast, EPA notes that if a state were to include a
new provision in an infrastructure SIP submission that contained a
legal deficiency, such as a new exemption for excess emissions
during SSM events, then EPA would need to evaluate that provision
for compliance against the rubric of applicable CAA requirements in
the context of the action on the infrastructure SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's approach to review of infrastructure SIP submissions is to
identify the CAA requirements that are logically applicable to that
submission. EPA believes that this approach to the review of a
particular infrastructure SIP submission is appropriate, because it
would not be reasonable to read the general requirements of section
110(a)(1) and the list of elements in 110(a)(2) as requiring review of
each and every provision of a state's existing SIP against all
requirements in the CAA and EPA regulations merely for purposes of
assuring that the state in question has the basic structural elements
for a functioning SIP for a new or revised NAAQS. Because SIPs have
grown by accretion over the decades as statutory and regulatory
requirements under the CAA have evolved, they may include some outmoded
provisions and historical artifacts. These provisions, while not fully
up to date, nevertheless may not pose a significant problem for the
purposes of ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of a new
or revised NAAQS when EPA evaluates adequacy of the infrastructure SIP
submission. EPA believes that a better approach is for states and EPA
to focus attention on those elements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA
most likely to warrant a specific SIP revision due to the promulgation
of a new or revised NAAQS or other factors.
    For example, EPA's 2013 Guidance gives simpler recommendations with
respect to carbon monoxide than other NAAQS pollutants to meet the
visibility requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), because carbon
monoxide does not affect visibility. As a result, an infrastructure SIP
submission for any future new or revised NAAQS for carbon monoxide need
only state this fact in order to address the visibility prong of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Finally, EPA believes that its approach
with respect to infrastructure SIP requirements is based on a
reasonable reading of sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) because the CAA
provides other avenues and mechanisms to address specific substantive
deficiencies in existing SIPs. These other statutory tools allow EPA to
take appropriately tailored action, depending upon the nature and
severity of the alleged SIP deficiency. Section 110(k)(5) authorizes
EPA to issue a ``SIP call'' whenever the Agency determines that a
state's implementation plan is substantially inadequate to attain or
maintain the NAAQS, to mitigate interstate transport, or to otherwise
comply with the CAA.\16\ Section 110(k)(6) authorizes EPA to correct
errors in past actions, such as past approvals of SIP submissions.\17\
Significantly, EPA's determination that an action on a state's
infrastructure SIP submission is not the appropriate time and place to
address all potential existing SIP deficiencies does not preclude EPA's
subsequent reliance on provisions in section 110(a)(2) as part of the
basis for action to correct those deficiencies at a later time. For
example, although it may not be appropriate to require a state to
eliminate all existing inappropriate director's discretion provisions
in the course of acting on an infrastructure SIP submission, EPA
believes that section 110(a)(2)(A) may be among the statutory bases
that EPA relies upon in the course of addressing such deficiency in a
subsequent action.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ For example, EPA issued a SIP call to Utah to address
specific existing SIP deficiencies related to the treatment of
excess emissions during SSM events. See ``Finding of Substantial
Inadequacy of Implementation Plan; Call for Utah State
Implementation Plan Revisions,'' 74 FR 21639 (April 18, 2011).
    \17\ EPA has used this authority to correct errors in past
actions on SIP submissions related to PSD programs. See ``Limitation
of Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions
Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State Implementation
Plans; Final Rule,'' 75 FR 82536 (December 30, 2010). EPA has
previously used its authority under CAA section 110(k)(6) to remove
numerous other SIP provisions that the Agency determined it had
approved in error. See, e.g., 61 FR 38664 (July 25, 1996) and 62 FR
34641 (June 27, 1997) (corrections to American Samoa, Arizona,
California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 FR 67062 (November 16,
2004) (corrections to California SIP); and 74 FR 57051 (November 3,
2009) (corrections to Arizona and Nevada SIPs).
    \18\ See, e.g., EPA's disapproval of a SIP submission from
Colorado on the grounds that it would have included a director's
discretion provision inconsistent with CAA requirements, including
section 110(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., 75 FR 42342 at 42344 (July 21,
2010) (proposed disapproval of director's discretion provisions); 76
FR 4540 (Jan. 26, 2011) (final disapproval of such provisions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. What is EPA's analysis of how South Carolina addressed the elements
of the sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``infrastructure'' provisions?

    South Carolina's December 18, 2015, infrastructure SIP submission
addresses the provisions of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as described
later in this preamble.
    1. 110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures:
Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that each implementation plan include
enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means, or
techniques (including economic incentives such as fees, marketable
permits, and auctions of emissions rights), as well as schedules and
timetables for compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to meet
the applicable requirements. Several regulations within South
Carolina's SIP are relevant to air quality control regulations. The
regulations described later have been federally-approved in the South
Carolina SIP and include enforceable emission limitations and other
control measures. Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 2, Ambient Air
Quality Standards and Regulation 61-62.1, Definitions and General
Requirements, provide enforceable emission limits and other control

measures, means, and techniques. Section 48-1-50(23) of the 1976 South
Carolina Code of Laws, as amended, (S.C. Code Ann.) provides SC DHEC
with the authority to ``Adopt emission and effluent control regulations
standards and limitations that are applicable to the entire state, that
are applicable only within specified areas or zones of the state, or
that are applicable only when a specified class of pollutant is
present.'' Collectively these regulations establish enforceable
emissions limitations and other control measures, means or techniques,
for activities that contribute to PM2.5 concentrations in
the ambient air and provide authority for SC DHEC to establish such
limits and measures as well as schedules for compliance to meet the
applicable requirements of the CAA. EPA has made the preliminary
determination that the provisions contained in these State regulations
and State statute are adequate for enforceable emission limitations and
other control measures, means, or techniques, as well as schedules and
timetables for compliance to satisfy the requirements of Section
110(a)(2(A) for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the State.
    In this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any
existing state provisions with regard to excess emissions during start
up, shut down and malfunction (SSM) operations at a facility. EPA
believes that a number of states have SSM provisions which are contrary
to the CAA and existing EPA guidance, ``State Implementation Plans:
Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and
Shutdown'' (September 20, 1999), and the Agency is addressing such
state regulations in a separate action.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ On June 12, 2015, EPA published a final action entitled,
``State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for Rulemaking;
Restatement and Update of EPA's SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs;
Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend
Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup,
Shutdown, and Malfunction.'' See 80 FR 33840.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, in this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or
disapprove any existing state rules with regard to director's
discretion or variance provisions. EPA believes that a number of states
have such provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA
guidance (52 FR 45109 (November 24, 1987)), and the Agency plans to
take action in the future to address such state regulations. In the
meantime, EPA encourages any state having a director's discretion or
variance provision which is contrary to the CAA and EPA guidance to
take steps to correct the deficiency as soon as possible.
    2. 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System: Section
110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to provide for establishment and operation
of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to:
(i) Monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and (ii)
upon request, make such data available to the Administrator. South
Carolina's Air Pollution Control Regulations, Regulation 61-62.5,
Standard No. 7, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, along with the
South Carolina Network Description and Ambient Air Network Monitoring
Plan, provide for an ambient air quality monitoring system in the
State. S.C. Code Ann. Sec.  48-1-50(14) provides the Department with
the necessary authority to ``[c]ollect and disseminate information on
air and water control.'' Annually, states develop and submit to EPA for
approval statewide ambient monitoring network plans consistent with the
requirements of 40 CFR parts 50, 53, and 58. The annual network plan
involves an evaluation of any proposed changes to the monitoring
network, includes the annual ambient monitoring network design plan and
a certified evaluation of the agency's ambient monitors and auxiliary
support equipment.\20\ On July 20, 2015, South Carolina submitted its
plan to EPA. On November 19, 2015, EPA approved South Carolina's
monitoring network plan. South Carolina's approved monitoring network
plan can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-
R04-OAR-2014-0429. EPA has made the preliminary determination that
South Carolina's SIP and practices are adequate for the ambient air
quality monitoring and data system requirements related to the 2012
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ On occasion, proposed changes to the monitoring network are
evaluated outside of the network plan approval process in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. 110(a)(2)(C) Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and
for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources: This element
consists of three sub-elements: Enforcement, state-wide regulation of
new and modified minor sources and minor modifications of major
sources, and preconstruction permitting of major sources and major
modifications in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable for the
subject NAAQS as required by CAA title I part C (i.e., the major source
PSD program). These requirements are met through Regulation 61-62.5,
Standard No. 7, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, and Regulation
61-62.5, Standard No. 7.1, Nonattainment New Source Review, and 61-
62.1, Section II, Permit Requirements, of South Carolina's SIP, which
pertain to the construction of any new major stationary source or any
modification at an existing major stationary source in an area
designated as attainment or unclassifiable. These regulations enable SC
DHEC to regulate sources contributing to the 2012 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.
    Enforcement: SC DHEC's above-described, SIP-approved regulations
provide for enforcement of PM2.5 emission limits and control
measures through construction permitting for new or modified stationary
sources. South Carolina cites to statute 48-1-50(11), which provides SC
DHEC the authority to administer penalties for violations of any order,
permit, regulation or standards; and 48-1-50(10), which authorizes
SCDHEC to require and approve construction plans for sources and
inspect the construction thereof for compliance with the approved plan.
Additionally, SCDHEC is authorized under 48-1-50(3) and (4) to issue
orders requiring the discontinuance of the discharge of air
contaminants into the ambient air that create an undesirable level, and
seek an injunction to compel compliance with the Pollution Control Act
and permits, permit conditions and orders.
    PSD Permitting for Major Sources: EPA interprets the PSD sub-
element to require that a state's infrastructure SIP submission for a
particular NAAQS demonstrate that the state has a complete PSD
permitting program in place covering the structural PSD requirements
for all regulated NSR pollutants. A state's PSD permitting program is
complete for this sub-element (and prong 3 of D(i) and J related to
PSD) if EPA has already approved or is simultaneously approving the
state's implementation plan with respect to all structural PSD
requirements that are due under the EPA regulations or the CAA on or
before the date of the EPA's proposed action on the infrastructure SIP
submission.
    For the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, South Carolina's
authority to regulate new and modified sources to assist in the
protection of air quality in South Carolina is established in
Regulations 61-62.1, Section II, Permit Requirements; 61-62.5, Standard
No. 7, Prevention of Significant Deterioration of South Carolina's SIP.
These regulations pertain to the construction of any new major
stationary source or any modification at an existing major

stationary source in an area designated as attainment or
unclassifiable. South Carolina also cites to 61-62.5, Standard No. 7.1,
Nonattainment New Source Review. South Carolina's infrastructure SIP
submission demonstrates that new major sources and major modifications
in areas of the State designated attainment or unclassifiable for the
specified NAAQS are subject to a federally-approved PSD permitting
program meeting all the current structural requirements of part C of
title I of the CAA to satisfy the infrastructure SIP PSD elements.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ More information concerning how the South Carolina
infrastructure SIP submission currently meets applicable
requirements for the PSD elements (110(a)(2)(C); (D)(i)(I), prong 3;
and (J)) can be found in the technical support document in the
docket for this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regulation of minor sources and modifications: Section 110(a)(2)(C)
also requires the SIP to include provisions that govern the minor
source preconstruction program that regulates emissions of the 2012
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Regulation 61-62.1, Section II, Permit
Requirements governs the preconstruction permitting of minor
modifications and construction of minor stationary sources in South
Carolina.
    EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's
SIP and practices are adequate for enforcement of control measures, PSD
permitting for major sources, and regulation of minor sources and
modifications related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
    4. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II): Interstate Pollution Transport:
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Each of these components has two subparts
resulting in four distinct components, commonly referred to as
``prongs,'' that must be addressed in infrastructure SIP submissions.
The first two prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I),
are provisions that prohibit any source or other type of emissions
activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment
of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 1''), and interfering with
maintenance of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 2''). The third and
fourth prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are
provisions that prohibit emissions activity in one state from
interfering with measures required to prevent significant deterioration
of air quality in another state (``prong 3''), or to protect visibility
in another state (``prong 4'').
    110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--prongs 1 and 2: EPA is not proposing any action
in this rulemaking related to the interstate transport provisions
pertaining to the contribution to nonattainment or interference with
maintenance in other states of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (prongs 1 and
2). EPA will consider these requirements in relation to South
Carolina's 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure submission
in a separate rulemaking.
    110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--prong 3: With regard to section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), the PSD element, referred to as prong 3, this
requirement may be met by a state's confirmation in an infrastructure
SIP submission that new major sources and major modifications in the
state are subject to: A PSD program meeting all the current structural
requirements of part C of title I of the CAA, or (if the state contains
a nonattainment area that has the potential to impact PSD in another
state) a NNSR program. As discussed in more detail previously under
section 110(a)(2)(C), South Carolina's SIP contains provisions for the
State's PSD program that reflect the required structural PSD
requirements to satisfy the requirement of prong 3 and a NNSR program
at 61-62.5, Standard No. 7.1, Nonattainment New Source Review. EPA has
made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP is
adequate for interstate transport for PSD permitting of major sources
and major modifications related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS for section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3).
    110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--prong 4: EPA is not proposing any action in
this rulemaking related to provisions pertaining to visibility
protection in other states of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 4) and
will consider these requirements in relation to South Carolina's 2012
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure submission in a separate
rulemaking.
    5. 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution Abatement and
International Air Pollution: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to
include provisions ensuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the
Act, relating to interstate and international pollution abatement.
Regulation 61-62.5, Standards 7 and 7.1 (q)(2)(iv), Public
Participation, requires SC DHEC to notify air agencies ``whose lands
may be affected by emissions'' from each new or modified major source
if such emissions may significantly contribute to levels of pollution
in excess of a NAAQS in any air quality control region outside of South
Carolina. Additionally, South Carolina does not have any pending
obligation under section 115 and 126 of the CAA. EPA has made the
preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP and practices are
adequate for ensuring compliance with the applicable requirements
relating to interstate and international pollution abatement for the
2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
    6. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of
Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies:
Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires that each implementation plan provide:
(i) Necessary assurances that the State will have adequate personnel,
funding, and authority under state law to carry out its implementation
plan, (ii) that the state comply with the requirements respecting state
boards pursuant to section 128 of the Act, and (iii) necessary
assurances that, where the state has relied on a local or regional
government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any
plan provision, the state has responsibility for ensuring adequate
implementation of such plan provisions. EPA is proposing to approve
South Carolina's SIP as meeting the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(E). EPA's rationale for this proposal respecting each
requirement of section 110(a)(2)(E) is described in turn later in this
preamble.
    With respect to section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii), SC DHEC
develops, implements and enforces EPA-approved SIP provisions in the
State. S.C. Code Ann. Section 48, Title 1, as referenced in South
Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission, provides the SC DHEC's
general legal authority to establish a SIP and implement related plans.
In particular, S.C. Code Ann. Section 48-1-50(12) grants SC DHEC the
statutory authority to ``[a]ccept, receive and administer grants or
other funds or gifts for the purpose of carrying out any of the
purposes of this chapter; [and to] accept, receive and receipt for
federal money given by the Federal government under any Federal law to
the State of South Carolina for air or water control activities,
surveys or programs.'' S.C. Code Ann. Section 48, Title 2 grants SC
DHEC statutory authority to establish environmental protection funds,
which provide resources for SC DHEC to carry out its obligations under
the CAA. Specifically, in Regulation 61-30, Environmental Protection
Fees, SC DHEC established fees for sources subject to air permitting
programs. SC DHEC implements the SIP in accordance with the provisions
of S.C. Code Ann Sec.  1-23-40 (the Administrative Procedures Act) and
S.C. Code Ann. Section 48, Title 1. For Section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii), the
submission states that South Carolina does not rely on localities for
specific SIP implementation.
    The requirements of 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii) are further confirmed
when EPA performs a completeness

determination for each SIP submittal. This provides additional
assurances that each submittal includes information addressing the
adequacy of personnel, funding, and legal authority under State law
used to carry out the State's implementation plan and related issues.
This information is included in all prehearings and final SIP submittal
packages for approval by EPA.
    As evidence of the adequacy of SC DHEC's resources with respect to
sub-elements (i) and (iii), EPA submitted a letter to South Carolina on
April 19, 2016, outlining 105 grant commitments and the current status
of these commitments for fiscal year 2015. The letter EPA submitted to
South Carolina can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID
No. EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0429. Annually, states update these grant
commitments based on current SIP requirements, air quality planning,
and applicable requirements related to the NAAQS. There were no
outstanding issues in relation to the SIP for fiscal year 2015,
therefore, SC DHEC's grants were finalized and closed out.
    Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires that states comply with section
128 of the CAA. Section 128 of the CAA requires that states include
provisions in their SIP to address conflicts of interest for state
boards or bodies that oversee CAA permits and enforcement orders and
disclosure of conflict of interest requirements. Specifically, CAA
section 128(a)(1) necessitates that each SIP shall require that at
least a majority of any board or body which approves permits or
enforcement orders shall be subject to the described public interest
service and income restrictions therein. Subsection 128(a)(2) requires
that the members of any board or body, or the head of an executive
agency with similar power to approve permits or enforcement orders
under the CAA, shall also be subject to conflict of interest disclosure
requirements.
    With respect to 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), South Carolina satisfies the
requirements of CAA section 128(a)(1) for the South Carolina Board of
Health and Environmental Control, which is the ``board or body which
approves permits and enforcement orders'' under the CAA in South
Carolina, through S.C. Code Ann. Section 8-13-730. S.C. Code Ann.
Section 8-13-730 provides that ``[u]nless otherwise provided by law, no
person may serve as a member of a governmental regulatory agency that
regulates business with which that person is associated,'' and S.C.
Code Ann. Section 8-13-700(A) which provides in part that ``[n]o public
official, public member, or public employee may knowingly use his
official office, membership, or employment to obtain an economic
interest for himself, a member of his immediate family, an individual
with whom he is associated, or a business with which he is
associated.'' S.C. Code Ann. Section 8-13-700(B)(1)-(5) provides for
disclosure of any conflicts of interest by public official, public
member or public employee, which meets the requirement of CAA Section
128(a)(2) that ``any potential conflicts of interest . . . be
adequately disclosed.'' These State statutes--S.C. Code Ann. Sections
8-13-730, 8-13-700(A), and 8-13-700(B)(1)-(5)--have been approved into
the South Carolina SIP as required by CAA section 128.
    EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina has
satisfied the requirements of 110(a)(2)(E) for implementation of the
2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
    7. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting: Section
110(a)(2)(F) requires SIPs to meet applicable requirements addressing
(i) the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, and
the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators of
stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources, (ii)
periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions and emissions
related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of such reports
by the state agency with any emission limitations or standards
established pursuant to this section, which reports shall be available
at reasonable times for public inspection. SC DHEC's infrastructure SIP
submission describes the establishment of requirements for compliance
testing by emissions sampling and analysis, and for emissions and
operation monitoring to ensure the quality of data in the State. SC
DHEC uses these data to track progress towards maintaining the NAAQS,
develop control and maintenance strategies, identify sources and
general emission levels, and determine compliance with emission
regulations and additional EPA requirements. These SIP requirements are
codified at Regulation 61-62.1, Definitions and General Requirements,
which provides for emission inventories and other emission monitoring
and reporting requirements for stationary sources. R. 61-62.1, Section
III, Emission Inventory, provides for an emission inventory plan that
establishes reporting requirements for various pollutants from
permitted facilities on annual or three year cycles, depending on
emission levels and nonattainment area status. Further, S.C. Code Ann.
Sec.  48-1-22 provides the Department with the necessary authority to
``Require the owner of operator of any source or disposal system to
establish and maintain such operational records; make reports; install,
use and maintain monitoring equipment or methods; samples and analyze
emissions or discharges in accordance with prescribed methods, at
locations, intervals, and procedures as the Department shall prescribe;
and provide such other information as the Department reasonably may
require.'' Finally, R. 61-62.1, Section V, Credible Evidence, specifies
that non-reference test data and other information already available
and utilized for other purposes may be used to demonstrate compliance
or noncompliance with emission standards. Accordingly, EPA is unaware
of any provision preventing the use of credible evidence in the South
Carolina SIP.
    Additionally, South Carolina is required to submit emissions data
to EPA for purposes of the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). The NEI
is EPA's central repository for air emissions data. EPA published the
Air Emissions Reporting Rule (AERR) on December 5, 2008, which modified
the requirements for collecting and reporting air emissions data (73 FR
76539). The AERR shortened the time states had to report emissions data
from 17 to 12 months, giving states one calendar year to submit
emissions data. All states are required to submit a comprehensive
emissions inventory every three years and report emissions for certain
larger sources annually through EPA's online Emissions Inventory
System. States report emissions data for the six criteria pollutants
and their associated precursors--NOX, SO2,
ammonia, lead, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and volatile
organic compounds. Many states also voluntarily report emissions of
hazardous air pollutants. South Carolina made its latest update to the
2011 NEI on April 8, 2014. EPA compiles the emissions data,
supplementing it where necessary, and releases it to the general public
through the Web site http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html.
EPA has made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP
and practices are adequate for the stationary source monitoring systems
related to the Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is
proposing to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission
with respect to section 110(a)(2)(F).
    8. 110(a)(2)(G) Emergency Powers: This section of the Act requires
that states demonstrate authority comparable

with section 303 of the CAA and adequate contingency plans to implement
such authority. Regulation 61-62.3, Air Pollution Episodes, provides
for contingency measures when an air pollution episode or exceedance
may lead to a substantial threat to the health of persons in the state
or region. S.C. Code Ann. Section 48-1-290 provides SC DHEC, with
concurrent notice to the Governor, the authority to issue an order
recognizing the existence of an emergency requiring immediate action as
deemed necessary by SC DHEC to protect the public health or property.
Any person subject to this order is required to comply immediately.
Additionally, S.C. Code Ann. Section 1-23-130 provides SC DHEC with the
authority to establish emergency regulations to address an imminent
peril to public health, or welfare, and authorizes emergency
regulations to protect natural resources if any natural resource
related agency in the State finds that abnormal or unusual conditions,
immediate need, or the State's best interest require such emergency
action. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South
Carolina's SIP, State laws, and practices are adequate for emergency
powers related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Accordingly,
EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP
submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(G).
    9. 110(a)(2)(H) SIP Revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H), in summary,
requires each SIP to provide for revisions of such plan: (i) As may be
necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or
secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved
or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii)
whenever the Administrator finds that the plan is substantially
inadequate to attain the NAAQS or to otherwise comply with any
additional applicable requirements. SC DHEC is responsible for adopting
air quality rules and revising SIPs as needed to attain or maintain the
NAAQS in South Carolina. The State has the ability and authority to
respond to calls for SIP revisions, and has provided a number of SIP
revisions over the years for implementation of the NAAQS. S.C. Code
Ann. Section 48, Title 1, provides SC DHEC with the necessary authority
to revise the SIP to accommodate changes in the NAAQS and thus revise
the SIP as appropriate. EPA has made the preliminary determination that
South Carolina adequately demonstrates a commitment to provide future
SIP revisions related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS when
necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's
infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(H).
    10. 110(a)(2)(J) Consultation with Government Officials, Public
Notification, and PSD and Visibility Protection: EPA is proposing to
approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission for the 2012
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to the general requirement
in section 110(a)(2)(J) to include a program in the SIP that complies
with the applicable consultation requirements of section 121, the
public notification requirements of section 127, PSD and visibility
protection. EPA's rationale for each sub-element is described later in
this preamble.
    Consultation with government officials (121 consultation): Section
110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA requires states to provide a process for
consultation with local governments, designated organizations and
Federal Land Managers (FLMs) carrying out NAAQS implementation
requirements pursuant to section 121 relative to consultation.
Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7, Prevention of Significant
Deterioration, as well as the State's Regional Haze Implementation Plan
(which allows for consultation between appropriate state, local, and
tribal air pollution control agencies as well as the corresponding
FLM), provide for consultation with government officials whose
jurisdictions might be affected by SIP development activities. South
Carolina has SIP-approved state-wide consultation procedures for the
implementation of transportation conformity (see 69 FR 4245).
Implementation of transportation conformity as outlined in the
consultation procedures requires SC DHEC to consult with federal, state
and local transportation and air quality agency officials on the
development of motor vehicle emissions budgets. Additionally, S.C. Code
Section 48-1-50(8) provides SC DHEC with the necessary authority to
``Cooperate with the governments of the United States or other states
or state agencies or organizations, official or unofficial, in respect
to pollution control matters or for the formulation of interstate
pollution control compacts or agreements.'' EPA has made the
preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP and practices
adequately demonstrate consultation with government officials related
to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly,
EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP
submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(J) consultation with
government officials.
    Public notification (127 public notification): Regulation 61-62.3,
Air Pollution Episodes, requires that SC DHEC notify the public of any
air pollution episode or NAAQS violation. S.C. Code Ann. Sec.  48-1-60
establishes that ``Classification and standards of quality and purity
of the environment [are] authorized after notice and hearing.''
Additionally, Regulation 61-62.5, Standard 7.1 (q), Public
Participation, notifies the public by advertisement in a newspaper of
general circulation in each region in which a proposed plant or
modifications will be constructed of the degree of increment
consumption that is expected from the plant or modification, and the
opportunity for comment at a public hearing as well as the opportunity
to provide written public comment. An opportunity for a public hearing
for interested persons to appear and submit written or oral comments on
the air quality impact of the plant or modification, alternatives to
the plant or modification, the control technology required, and other
appropriate considerations is also offered.
    EPA also notes that SC DHEC maintains a Web site that provides the
public with notice of the health hazards associated with
PM2.5 NAAQS exceedances, measures the public can take to
help prevent such exceedances, and the ways in which the public can
participate in the regulatory process. See http://www.scdhec.gov/HomeAndEnvironment/Air/MostCommonPollutants/ParticulateMatter/. EPA has
made the preliminary determination that South Carolina's SIP and
practices adequately demonstrate the State's ability to provide public
notification related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS when
necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's
infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(J)
public notification.
    PSD: With regard to the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J), this
requirement is be met by a state's confirmation in an infrastructure
SIP submission that the state has a SIP-approved PSD program meeting
all the current structural requirements of part C of title I of the CAA
for all NSR regulated pollutants. As discussed in more detail
previously under the section discussing 110(a)(2)(C), South Carolina's
SIP contains provisions for the State's PSD program that reflect
required structural PSD requirements to satisfy the PSD element of
section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA has made the preliminary determination

that South Carolina's SIP is adequate for PSD permitting of major
sources and major modifications for the PSD element of section
110(a)(2)(J).
    Visibility protection: EPA's 2013 Guidance notes that it does not
treat the visibility protection aspects of section 110(a)(2)(J) as
applicable for purposes of the infrastructure SIP approval process. SC
DHEC referenced its regional haze program as germane to the visibility
component of section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA recognizes that states are
subject to visibility protection and regional haze program requirements
under part C of the Act (which includes sections 169A and 169B).
However, there are no newly applicable visibility protection
obligations after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Thus, EPA
has determined that states do not need to address the visibility
component of 110(a)(2)(J) in infrastructure SIP submittals so SC DHEC
does not need to rely on its regional haze program to fulfill its
obligations under section 110(a)(2)(J). As such, EPA has made the
preliminary determination that South Carolina's infrastructure SIP
submission related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS is
approvable for the visibility protection element of section
110(a)(2)(J) and that South Carolina does not need to rely on its
regional haze program.
    11. 110(a)(2)(K) Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling
Data: Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA requires that SIPs provide for
performing air quality modeling so that effects on air quality of
emissions from NAAQS pollutants can be predicted and submission of such
data to the EPA can be made. Regulations 61-62.5, Standard No. 2,
Ambient Air Quality Standards, and Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7,
Prevention of Significant Deterioration, of the South Carolina SIP
specify that required air modeling be conducted in accordance with 40
CFR part 51, Appendix W, Guideline on Air Quality Models, as
incorporated into the South Carolina SIP. Also, S.C. Code Ann. Sec.
48-1-50(14) provides SC DHEC with the necessary authority to ``Collect
and disseminate information on air and water control.'' Additionally,
South Carolina participates in a regional effort to coordinate the
development of emissions inventories and conduct regional modeling for
several NAAQS, including the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, for
the southeastern states. Taken as a whole, South Carolina's air quality
regulations and practices demonstrate that SC DHEC has the authority to
provide relevant data for the purpose of predicting the effect on
ambient air quality of any emissions of any pollutant for which a NAAQS
had been promulgated, and to provide such information to the EPA
Administrator upon request. EPA has made the preliminary determination
that South Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate the
State's ability to provide for air quality modeling, along with
analysis of the associated data, related to the 2012 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve South
Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section
110(a)(2)(K).
    12. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting fees: Section 110(a)(2)(L) requires the
owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the
permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under the
CAA, a fee sufficient to cover: (i) The reasonable costs of reviewing
and acting upon any application for such a permit, and (ii) if the
owner or operator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable
costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any
such permit (not including any court costs or other costs associated
with any enforcement action), until such fee requirement is superseded
with respect to such sources by the Administrator's approval of a fee
program under title V.
    S.C. Code Ann. Section 48-2-50 prescribes that SC DHEC charge fees
for environmental programs it administers pursuant to federal and State
law and regulations including those that govern the costs to review,
implement and enforce PSD and NNSR permits. Regulation 61-30,
Environmental Protection Fees \22\ prescribes fees applicable to
applicants and holders of permits, licenses, certificates,
certifications, and registrations, establishes procedures for the
payment of fees, provides for the assessment of penalties for
nonpayment, and establishes an appeals process for refuting fees. This
regulation may be amended as needed to meet the funding requirements of
the State's permitting program. Additionally, South Carolina has a
federally-approved title V program, Regulation 61-62.70, Title V
Operating Permit Program,\23\ which fees provide for the implementation
and enforcement of the requirements of PSD and NNSR for facilities once
they begin operating. EPA has made the preliminary determination that
South Carolina's SIP and practices adequately provide for permitting
fees related to the 2012 NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is
proposing to approve South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission
with respect to section 110(a)(2)(L).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ This regulation has not been incorporated into the
federally-approved SIP.
    \23\ Title V program regulations are federally-approved but not
incorporated into the federally-approved SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    13. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation/participation by affected local
entities: Section 110(a)(2)(M) of the Act requires states to provide
for consultation and participation in SIP development by local
political subdivisions affected by the SIP. Regulation 61-62.5,
Standard No. 7, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, of the South
Carolina SIP requires that SC DHEC notify the public, which includes
local entities, of an application, preliminary determination, the
activity or activities involved in the permit action, any emissions
change associated with any permit modification, and the opportunity for
comment prior to making a final permitting decision. Also, as noted
previously, S.C. Code Ann. Section 48-1-50(8) allows SC DHEC to
``Cooperate with the governments of the United States or other states
or state agencies or organizations, officials, or unofficial, in
respect to pollution control matters or for the formulation of
interstate pollution control compacts or agreements.'' By way of
example, SC DHEC has recently worked closely with local political
subdivisions during the development of its Transportation Conformity
SIP, Regional Haze Implementation Plan, and Ozone Early Action
Compacts. EPA has made the preliminary determination that South
Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate consultation with
affected local entities related to the 2012 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's
infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(M).

V. Proposed Action

    With the exception of interstate transport provisions pertaining to
the contribution to nonattainment or interference with maintenance in
other states and visibility protection requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4), EPA is proposing to
approve South Carolina's December 18, 2015, SIP submission for the 2012
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the previously described
infrastructure SIP requirements. EPA is proposing to approve these
portions of South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission for the 2012
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS because these aspects of the submission
are consistent with section 110 of the CAA.

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. Accordingly, this
proposed 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 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).
    In addition, 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). The Catawba Indian Nation Reservation
is located within the State of South Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba
Indian Claims Settlement Act, South Carolina statute 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, EPA
has determined that because this proposed rule does not have
substantial direct effects on an Indian Tribe because, as noted
previously, this action is not approving any specific rule, but rather
proposing that South Carolina's already approved SIP meets certain CAA
requirements. EPA notes this action will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate Matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.

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

    Dated: August 9, 2016.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2016-20141 Filed 8-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P