[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 228 (Tuesday, November 26, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65051-65061]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25577]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0014; FRL-10002-54-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; AL and SC: Infrastructure Requirements for the
2015 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve portions of the Alabama and South Carolina State Implementation
Plan (SIP) submissions provided on August 20, 2018 and September 7,
2018, respectively, for inclusion into their respective SIPs. This
proposal pertains to the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act) for the 2015 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS). Whenever EPA promulgates a new or revised NAAQS, the
CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the
implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated
by EPA. Alabama and South Carolina certified that their SIPs contain
provisions that ensure the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS is implemented,
enforced, and maintained in their State. EPA is proposing to determine
that Alabama and South Carolina infrastructure SIP submissions satisfy
certain required infrastructure elements for the 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 26, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2019-0014 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 and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Bell can be reached
via telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via electronic mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background and Overview
II. What elements are required under sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2)?
III. What is EPA's approach to the review of infrastructure SIP
submissions?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of how Alabama and South Carolina
addressed the elements of the section 110(a)(1) and (2)
``infrastructure'' provisions?
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Overview

    On October 1, 2015 (published October 26, 2015, see 80 FR 65292),
EPA promulgated a revised primary and secondary NAAQS for ozone,
revising the 8-hour ozone standards from 0.075 parts per million (ppm)
to a new more protective level of 0.070 ppm. Pursuant to section
110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required to submit SIP revisions
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. This particular type of
SIP is commonly referred to as an ``infrastructure SIP.'' States were
required to submit such SIPs for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS to EPA no
later than October 1, 2018.\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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This action is proposing to approve Alabama's August 20, 2018,\2\
revision provided to EPA through the Alabama Department of
Environmental Management (ADEM)) and South Carolina's September 7,
2018, revision provided to EPA through the Department of Health and
Environmental Control (SC DEHC), for the applicable infrastructure SIP
requirements of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS, with the exception of the
interstate transport provisions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I),
pertaining to contribution to nonattainment or interference with
maintenance in other states. With respect to the interstate transport
provisions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), EPA will address these
provisions in separate rulemaking actions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The August 20, 2018, SIP submission provided by ADEM was
received by EPA on August 27, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. What elements are required under sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(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 infrastructure SIP requirements related to a
newly established or revised NAAQS. As mentioned above, 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 of section 110(a)(2) are summarized in section IV below,
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 are 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 permitting 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\ As mentioned above, the Part D permit program for
construction and modification of major stationary sources is not
relevant to this proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 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 also mentioned above, 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 portions of the SIP submissions from Alabama and
South Carolina that address certain infrastructure requirements of CAA
sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Whenever EPA promulgates a new or revised

NAAQS, CAA section 110(a)(1) requires states to make SIP submissions to
provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the
NAAQS, commonly referred to as ``infrastructure SIPs.'' These
infrastructure SIP submissions must meet the various requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2), as applicable. Due to ambiguity in some of the
language of CAA section 110(a)(2), EPA believes that it is appropriate
to interpret these provisions in the specific context of acting on
infrastructure SIP submissions. EPA has previously provided
comprehensive guidance on the application of these provisions through a
guidance document for infrastructure SIP submissions and through
regional actions on infrastructure submissions.\6\ Unless otherwise
noted below, we are following that existing approach in acting on these
submissions. In addition, in the context of acting on such
infrastructure submissions, EPA evaluates the submitting state's SIP
for facial compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements, not
for the state's implementation of its SIP.\7\ The EPA has other
authority to address any issues concerning a state's implementation of
the rules, regulations, consent orders, etc. that comprise its SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ EPA explains and elaborates on these ambiguities and its
approach to address them in its September 13, 2013 Infrastructure
SIP Guidance (available at https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/urbanair/sipstatus/docs/Guidance_on_Infrastructure_SIP_Elements_Multipollutant_FINAL_Sept_2013.pdf), as well as in numerous agency actions, including EPA's prior
actions on Alabama and South Carolina infrastructure SIPs to address
the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide NAAQS (81 FR 47124 (July 20, 2016) and 81
FR 63704 (September 16, 2016), respectively).
    \7\ See Mont. Envtl. Info. Ctr. v. Thomas, 902 F.3d 971 (9th
Cir. 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    Alabama's and South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submissions
address certain provisions of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as described
below.
    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 Alabama's and
South Carolina's SIPs and state statutes are relevant to air quality
control regulations. Below provides more detail for each state
addressed in this proposed rulemaking.

Alabama

    Alabama cites to the following regulations to satisfy this
requirement. ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-3-1-.03--Ambient Air Quality
Standards,\8\ authorizes ADEM to provide for attainment of the NAAQS.
ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-3-1-.06--Compliance Schedule, sets the schedule
for compliance with the State's Air Pollution Control rules and
regulations. ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-3-1-.05--Sampling and Testing
Methods, details the authority and means with which ADEM can require
testing and emissions verification. ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-3-
14-.03(l)(g)--Standard for Granting Permits, which authorizes ADEM to
grant permits. Also, the following ADEM Administrative Code rules
address this element: 335-3-14-.03(2)--Stack Heights, subparagraphs (d)
and (e), 335-3-15-.02(9) --Stack Heights, subparagraphs (d) and (e),
and 335-3-16-.02(10) --General Provisions, subparagraphs (d) and (e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Throughout this rulemaking, unless otherwise indicated, the
term ``ADEM Administrative Code (Admin. Code r).'' indicates that
the cited regulation has either been approved or submitted for
approval into Alabama's federally-approved SIP. The term ``Alabama
Code'' (Ala. Code) indicates cited Alabama state statutes, which are
not a part of the SIP unless otherwise indicated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

South Carolina

    South Carolina cites to the following provisions to satisfy this
requirement. South Carolina's Regulation \9\ 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 provisions establish enforceable
emissions limitations and other control measures, means or techniques,
for activities that contribute to ozone 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Throughout this rulemaking when referring to the South
Carolina SIP, 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 Code of Laws'' or
``S.C. Code Ann.'' Indicates cited South Carolina state statutes,
which are not a part of the SIP unless otherwise indicated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has made the preliminary determination that the provisions
contained in Alabama's and South Carolina's SIP-approved State
regulations and State statutes 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 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS in each of the
states.
    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. Below
provides more detail for each state addressed in this proposed
rulemaking.

Alabama

    ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-3-1-.04--Monitoring, Records, and
Reporting, authorizes the Director of ADEM to require sources to
install, use and maintain monitoring equipment and submit emissions
monitoring reports as prescribed by the Director. Pursuant to this
regulation, these sources collect air monitoring data, quality assure
the results, and report the data as prescribed by the Director. ADEM
Admin. Code r. 335-3-1-.05--Sampling and Testing Methods, details the
authority and means through which ADEM can require testing and
emissions verification.

South Carolina

    South Carolina's Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7, Prevention of
Significant Deterioration, addresses ambient monitoring requirements
for major new source review. The South Carolina Network Description and
Ambient Air Network Monitoring Plan provides 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 ``collect and
disseminate information on air and water control.''

Ambient Monitoring Network Plans

    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 and
includes the annual ambient monitoring network design plan and a
certified evaluation of the agency's ambient monitors and auxiliary
support equipment.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ On occasion, proposed changes to the monitoring network are
evaluated outside of the network plan approval process in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 8, 2019 and July 1, 2019, Alabama and South Carolina,
submitted their monitoring network plans to EPA, respectively. On
October 30, 2019 and October 25, 2019, EPA approved these monitoring
network plans. Alabama's and South Carolina's, approved monitoring
network plan can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No.
EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0014. EPA has made the preliminary determination that
Alabama's and South Carolina's SIPs and practices are adequate for the
ambient air quality monitoring and data system related to the 2015 8-
hour ozone NAAQS.
    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 a
NAAQS as required by CAA title I part C (i.e., the major source PSD
program).
    For the PSD sub-element, EPA interprets the CAA 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 PSD requirements for all regulated NSR
pollutants.\11\ 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 PSD requirements that are due
under EPA regulations or the CAA on or before the date of EPA's
proposed action on the infrastructure SIP submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ See 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Alabama's and South Carolina's 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS
infrastructure SIP submissions cited a number of SIP provisions to
address these requirements. See below for more details on these SIP
provisions.

Alabama

    Alabama's infrastructure SIP submission cited the following
provisions of the ADEM Admin. Code to satisfy 110(a)(2)(C):
    Enforcement: Alabama's infrastructure SIP submission cited SIP-
approved regulations Admin. Code r. 335-3-14-.01, General Provisions,
and Admin. Code r. 335-3-14-.03, Standards for Granting Permits, which
provide for enforcement of ozone precursor emission limits and control
measures through permitting for new or modified stationary sources.
ADEM has authority to issue enforcement orders and assess penalties
through Code sections 22-22A-5, 22-28-10 and 22-28-22.
    PSD Permitting for Major Sources: Alabama's infrastructure SIP
submission cited ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-3-14-.04, Prevention of
Significant Deterioration in Permitting, 335-3-14-.02, Permit Procedure
and 335-3-14-.03--Standards for Granting Permits. These SIP-approved
regulations provide that new major sources and major modifications in
areas of the State designated attainment or unclassifiable for any
given 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.
    Regulation of minor sources and modifications: Alabama's
infrastructure SIP submission cited ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-3-14-.01
General Provisions, 335-3-14-.02 Permit Procedure, and 335-3-14-.03--
Standards for Granting Permits. These SIP approved regulations govern
the preconstruction permitting of minor modifications and construction
of minor stationary sources.

South Carolina

    South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission cited the following
provisions to satisfy 110(a)(2)(C):
    Enforcement: SC DHEC's SIP-approved permitting regulations,
described below in this section, provide for enforcement of ozone
emission limits and control measures through construction permitting
for new or modified stationary sources. South Carolina's infrastructure
SIP submission 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 SC DHEC to
require and approve construction plans for sources and inspect the
construction thereof for compliance with the approved plan.
Additionally, SC DHEC 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: 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. These regulations provide
that new major sources and major modifications in such areas are
subject to a federally-approved PSD permitting program meeting all the
current structural requirements of part C of title I of the CAA, which
satisfies the infrastructure SIP PSD elements.
    Regulation of minor sources and modifications: 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 Alabama's and South
Carolina's SIPs are adequate for enforcement of control measures, the
PSD element, and regulation of construction of minor stationary sources
and minor modifications for the 2015 8-hour ozone 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 address prongs 1 and 2 in separate rulemakings.
    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 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.

Alabama

    As explained regarding 110(a)(2)(C), Alabama's SIP contains a PSD
program meeting current federal requirements for such programs at 335-
3-14-.04--Prevention of Significant Deterioration in Permitting, which
satisfies prong 3 with respect to areas in the State designated as
attainment and unclassifiable. Alabama's SIP also contains a NNSR
program at 335-3-14-.05--Air Permits Authorizing Construction in or
Near Nonattainment Areas, which satisfies prong 3 to the extent there
are nonattainment areas within the State.

South Carolina

    As explained regarding 110(a)(2)(C), South Carolina's SIP contains
a PSD program meeting current federal requirements for such programs at
Regulation 61-62.5, Standard No. 7, Prevention of Significant
Deterioration which satisfies prong 3 with respect to areas in the
State designated as attainment and unclassifiable. South Carolina's SIP
also contains a NNSR program at 61-62.5, Standard No. 7.1,
Nonattainment New Source Review, which satisfies prong 3 to the extent
there are nonattainment areas within the State.
    EPA has made the preliminary determination that Alabama's and South
Carolina's SIPs are adequate for interstate transport for PSD
permitting of major sources and major modifications related to the 2015
8-hour ozone NAAQS for section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3).
    110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--prong 4: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires
that the SIP contain adequate provisions to protect visibility in other
states. This requirement is satisfied for any relevant NAAQS when the
state has a fully approved regional haze SIP.

Alabama

    Alabama's SIP contains a fully-approved regional haze plan, which
was submitted to EPA on July 15, 2008, amended on October 16, 2015, and
fully approved by EPA on October 12, 2017 (82 FR 47385). EPA's approval
of the Alabama regional haze SIP therefore ensures that emissions from
Alabama are not interfering with measures to protect visibility in
other states, satisfying the requirements of prong 4 of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

South Carolina

    South Carolina's SIP contains a fully-approved regional haze plan.
At the time of the SIP submittal, EPA had proposed full approval of the
plan on June 4, 2018 (83 FR 25604). EPA fully approved South Carolina's
regional haze plan into the South Carolina SIP on September 24, 2018
(83 FR 48237). EPA's approval of South Carolina's regional haze SIP
therefore ensures that emissions from South Carolina are not
interfering with measures to protect visibility in other states,
satisfying the requirements of prong 4 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)
for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    EPA has made the preliminary determination that Alabama's and South
Carolina's SIPs meet the requirements of prong 4 of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    5. 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) Interstate and International Transport
Provisions: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to include
provisions ensuring compliance with section 115 and 126 of the Act,
relating to interstate and international pollution abatement.

Alabama

    ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-3-14-.04--Prevention of Significant
Deterioration in Permitting describes how Alabama notifies neighboring
states of potential emission impacts from new or modified sources
applying for PSD permits. This regulation requires ADEM to provide an
opportunity for a public hearing to the public, which includes state or
local air pollution control agencies, ``whose lands may be affected by
emissions from the source or modification.'' Additionally, Alabama does
not have any pending obligation under sections 115 and 126 of the CAA.

South Carolina

    South Carolina's 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 Alabama's and South
Carolina's SIPs and practices are adequate for ensuring compliance with
the applicable requirements relating to interstate and international
pollution abatement for the 2015 8-hour ozone 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's rationale respecting each
sub-element for which EPA is proposing action in this rulemaking is
described below.

Alabama

    In support of sub-elements 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii), the ADEM SIP
submission cites to Ala. Code section 22-28-11, which authorizes ADEM
to adopt emission requirements through regulations, and section 22-28-
9, which authorizes ADEM to employ necessary staff to carry out its
responsibilities. As evidence of the adequacy of ADEM's resources with
respect to sub-elements (i) and (iii), EPA submitted a letter to
Alabama on March 25, 2019, outlining 105 grant commitments and current
status of these commitments for fiscal year 2018. The letter EPA
submitted to Alabama can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using
Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0014.

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 2018, therefore, Alabama's grants were finalized and
closed out. Alabama's funding is also met through the State's title V
fee program at ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-1-7--Air Division Operating
Permit Fees \12\ and ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-1-6--Application Fees.\13\
For 110(a)(2)(E)(iii), requirements dictating the roles of local or
regional governments are derived from Ala. Code section 22-28-23, which
do not allow local programs to be less strict than the Alabama SIP and
allows for oversight from the Alabama Environmental Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Title V program regulations are federally-approved but not
incorporated into the federally-approved SIP.
    \13\ This regulation has not been incorporated into the
federally-approved SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires that the state comply with
section 128 of the CAA. Section 128 requires that the SIP contain
requirements providing that: (a)(1) The majority of members of the
state board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders
represent the public interest and do not derive any significant portion
of their income from persons subject to permitting or enforcement
orders under the CAA; and (a)(2) any potential conflicts of interest by
such board or body, or the head of an executive agency with similar
powers be adequately disclosed. Alabama's infrastructure SIP submission
cites to the following SIP-approved provisions: ADEM Admin. Code r.
335-1-1.03, ``Organization and Duties of the Commission'', 335-1-1.04,
``Organization of the department''. These regulations mandate that
members of the Alabama Environmental Management Commission (EMC), and
the ADEM Director, Deputy Director, Division Chiefs, and all ADEM
personnel meet all requirements of the state ethics law and the
conflict of interest provisions of applicable Federal laws. ADEM and
the EMC are the entities that have the authority to issue and approve
CAA permits and enforcement orders. The ADEM Air Director has the
authority to approve permits and enforcement orders for Alabama. In the
case of appeal, permits and enforcement orders are sent to the EMC and
the EMC has final approval authority.

South Carolina

    In support of sub-elements 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii), South
Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission cites to several provisions.
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. 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 notes that it
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 implementing
any portion of the CAA.
    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
May 2, 2019, outlining 105 grant commitments and the current status of
these commitments for fiscal year 2018. The letter EPA submitted to
South Carolina can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID
No. EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0014. 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 2018,
therefore, SC DHEC's grants were finalized and closed out.
    With respect to 110(a)(2)(E)(ii),\14\ 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. Sections 8-13-100, 8-13-700(A) and
(B), and 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 a
public official, public member or public employee. These State statutes
have been approved into the South Carolina SIP as required by CAA
section 128 and meet the requirement of CAA Section 128(a)(1)
concerning boards and bodies representing the public interest and not
deriving significant income from regulated entities; and 128(2)
concerning adequate disclosure of potential conflicts of interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See the description of the section 128 requirements
provided above regarding for the Alabama submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has made the preliminary determination that Alabama's and South
Carolina's SIPs have adequately addressed the requirements of section
128(a), and accordingly have met the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) with respect to infrastructure SIP requirements. EPA
is proposing to approve Alabama's and South Carolina's, infrastructure
SIP submissions as meeting the requirements of sub-elements
110(a)(2)(E)(i), (ii) and (iii).
    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. EPA's rules regarding how SIPs need to address source
monitoring requirements at 40 CFR 51.212 require SIPs to exclude any
provision that would prevent the use of credible evidence of
noncompliance.
    Additionally, States are required to submit emissions data to EPA
for purposes of the National Emissions Inventory (NEI), pursuant to
Subpart A

to 40 CFR part 51--``Air Emissions Reporting Requirements.'' The NEI is
EPA's central repository for air emissions data. All states are
required to submit a comprehensive emission 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 the precursors that form them--nitrogen
oxides, sulfur dioxides, ammonia, lead, carbon monoxide, particulate
matter, and volatile organic compounds. Many states also voluntarily
report emissions of hazardous air pollutants.

Alabama

    Alabama's infrastructure SIP submission cites to ADEM Admin. Code
r. 335-3-1-.04--Monitoring, Records, and Reporting, 335-3-12--
Continuous Monitoring Requirements for Existing Source, and ADEM Admin.
Code r. 335-3-1-.13--Credible Evidence for this requirement. ADEM
Admin. Code r. 335-3-1-.04--Monitoring, Records, and Reporting,
authorizes the Director of ADEM to require sources to install, use and
maintain monitoring equipment and submit emissions monitoring reports
as prescribed by the Director. Pursuant to this regulation, these
sources collect air monitoring data, quality assure the results, and
report the data as prescribed by the Director. ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-
3-12--Continuous Monitoring Requirements for Existing Sources requires
certain existing sources to continuously monitor emissions of specified
pollutants. Additionally, ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-3-12-.02 requires
owners and operators of emissions sources to ``install, calibrate,
operate and maintain all monitoring equipment necessary for
continuously monitoring the pollutants.'' \15\ ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-
3-1-.13--Credible Evidence, makes allowances for owners and/or
operators to utilize ``any credible evidence or information relevant''
to demonstrate compliance with applicable requirements if the
appropriate performance or compliance test had been performed, for the
purpose of submitting compliance certification and can be used to
establish whether or not an owner or operator has violated or is in
violation of any rule or standard. Accordingly, EPA is unaware of any
provision preventing the use of credible evidence in the Alabama SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-3-12-.02 establishes that data
reporting requirements for sources required to conduct continuous
monitoring in the state should comply with data reporting
requirements set forth at 40 CFR part 51, Appendix P.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Alabama's most recently published triennial compiled emissions
information is available as part of the 2014 NEI. EPA compiles the
emissions data, supplementing it where necessary, and releases it to
the public through the website: https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2014-national-emissions-inventory-nei-data.

South Carolina

    The South Carolina submissions cites to SIP-approved Regulation 61-
62.1, Definitions and General Requirements, Section III, Emission
Inventory which provides for emission inventories and other emission
monitoring and reporting requirements for stationary sources.
Specifically, this regulation provides 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.
    South Carolina's most recently published triennial compiled
emissions information is available as part of the 2014 NEI. EPA
compiles the emissions data, supplementing it where necessary, and
releases it to the public through the website: https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2014-national-emissions-inventory-nei-data.
    EPA has made the preliminary determination that Alabama's and South
Carolina's SIP and practices are adequate for the stationary source
monitoring systems related to the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Accordingly,
EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's and South Carolina's
infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(F).
    8. 110(a)(2)(G) Emergency Powers: This section requires that states
demonstrate authority comparable with section 303 of the CAA and
adequate contingency plans to implement such authority.

Alabama

    Alabama's infrastructure SIP submission cites Ala. Code sections
22-28-22, 22-28-14 and 22-28-21, which gives ADEM authority to adopt
regulations for the purpose of protecting human health, welfare and the
environment as required by section 303 of the CAA. ADEM Admin. Code r.
335-3-2--Air Pollution Emergency, provides for the identification of
air pollution emergency episodes, episode criteria, and emissions
reduction plans. Alabama's compliance with section 303 of the CAA and
adequate contingency plans to implement such authority is also met by
Ala. Code section 22-28-21 Air Pollution Emergencies. Ala. Code Section
22-28-21 provides ADEM the authority to order the ``person or persons
responsible for the operation or operations of one or more air
contaminants sources'' causing ``imminent danger to human health or
safety in question to reduce or discontinue emissions immediately.''
The order triggers a hearing no later than 24-hours after issuance
before the Environmental Management Commission which can affirm, modify
or set aside the Director's order. Additionally, the Governor can, by
proclamation, declare, as to all or any part of said area, that an air
pollution emergency exists and exercise certain powers in whole or in
part, by the issuance of an order or orders to protect the public
health. Under Ala. Code sections 22-28-3(a) and 22-28-10(2), ADEM also
has the authority to issue such orders as may be necessary to
effectuate the purposes of the Alabama Pollution Control Act, which
includes achieving and maintaining such levels of air quality as will
protect human health and safety and, to the greatest degree
practicable, prevent injury to plant and animal life and property,
foster the comfort and convenience of the people, promote the social
development of this state and facilitate the enjoyment of the natural
attractions of the state.

South Carolina

    South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submission cites Regulation 61-
62.3, Air Pollution Episodes, which 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 Alabama's and South
Carolina's SIPs state laws are adequate for emergency powers related to
the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama's and 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.

Alabama

    As previously discussed, ADEM is responsible for adopting air
quality rules and revising SIPs as needed to attain or maintain the
NAAQS. Alabama 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. ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-1-1-.03--
Organization and Duties of the Commission,\16\ provides the Alabama
Environmental Management Commission with the authority to establish,
adopt, promulgate, modify, repeal and suspend rules, regulations, or
environmental standards which may be applicable to Alabama or ``any of
its geographic parts.'' Admin. Code r. 335-3-1-.03--Ambient Air Quality
Standards, incorporates NAAQS, as amended or revised, and provides that
the NAAQS apply throughout the State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ This regulation has not been incorporated into the
federally-approved SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

South Carolina

    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 Alabama's and South
Carolina's SIP submissions, adequately provide for future SIP revisions
related to the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA
is proposing to approve Alabama's, and 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 Alabama's, and South Carolina's infrastructure SIP for the 2015
8-hour ozone 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 and PSD.
    With regard to the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J), this
requirement is met by a state's confirmation in an infrastructure SIP
submission that the state has a SIP-approved PSD program meeting all
the current requirements of part C of title I of the CAA for all NSR
regulated pollutants. As discussed in more detail above under the
section discussing 110(a)(2)(C), the Alabama and South Carolina SIPs
contain provisions for the State's PSD programs that reflect current
PSD requirements to satisfy the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J).
    With regard to the visibility protection element of section
110(a)(2)(J), 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. 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.
As such, Alabama's and South Carolina's infrastructure SIP submissions
related to the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS do not address the visibility
protection element of section 110(a)(2)(J).
    With regard to 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. EPA's rationale for the consultation and
public notice sub-elements for Alabama and South Carolina are described
below.
    Alabama Consultation with government officials (121 consultation):
ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-3-1-.03--Ambient Air Quality Standards, as well
as its Regional Haze Implementation Plan (which allows for continued
consultation with appropriate state, local, and tribal air pollution
control agencies as well as the corresponding FLMs), provide for
consultation with government officials whose jurisdictions might be
affected by SIP development activities. In addition, Alabama adopted
state-wide consultation procedures for the implementation of
transportation conformity which includes the development of mobile
inventories for SIP development. Required partners covered by Alabama's
consultation procedures include federal, state and local transportation
and air quality agency officials.
    Public notification (127 public notification): ADEM Admin. Code r.
335-3-14-.01(7)--Public Participation, and 335-3-14-.05(13)--Public
Participation, and Ala. Code section 22-28-21--Air Pollution
Emergencies, provide for public notification when air pollution
episodes occur. Furthermore, ADEM has several public notice mechanisms
in place to notify the public of ozone forecasting. Alabama maintains a
public website on which daily air quality index forecasts are posted
for the Birmingham, Huntsville, and Mobile areas. This website can be
accessed at: http://adem.alabama.gov/programs/air/airquality.cnt.

South Carolina

    Consultation with government officials (121 consultation): South
Carolina's 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. 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.''
    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 website that provides the
public with notice of ozone 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  https://www.scdhec.gov/environment/your-air/most-common-air-pollutants/ozone-forecast.
    EPA has made the preliminary determination that Alabama's and South
Carolina's SIPs and practices adequately demonstrate that the States
meets applicable requirements related to consultation with government
officials, ability to provide public notification, and PSD of section
110(a)(2)(J) for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Thus, EPA is proposing to
approve Alabama's, and South Carolina's infrastructure SIP for the 2015
8-hour ozone NAAQS with respect to the general requirement in section
110(a)(2)(J).
    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 EPA can be made.

Alabama

    ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-3-14-.04--Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Permitting, specifically sub-paragraph (11)--Air Quality
Models, specifies that required air modeling be conducted in accordance
with the applicable EPA air quality models specified in the ``Guideline
on Air Quality Models.'' ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-3-1-.04--Monitoring,
Records, and Reporting details how sources are required as appropriate
to establish and maintain records; make reports; install, use, and
maintain such monitoring equipment or methods; and provide periodic
emission reports as the regulation requires. These reports and records
are required to be compiled and submitted to the State. These
regulations also demonstrate that Alabama has the authority to provide
relevant data for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air
quality of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
    Additionally, Alabama participates in a regional effort to
coordinate the development of emissions inventories and conduct
regional modeling for several NAAQS, including the 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, for the southeastern states. Taken as a whole, Alabama's air
quality regulations and practices demonstrate that ADEM 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 has been promulgated, and to provide such information to
EPA Administrator upon request.

South Carolina

    South Carolina's 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. 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 2015 8-hour ozone
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
EPA Administrator upon request.
    EPA has made the preliminary determination that Alabama's and 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 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Accordingly,
EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's and South Carolina's
infrastructure SIP submissions with respect to section 110(a)(2)(K).
    12. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting Fees: This section 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.

Alabama

    ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-1-6--Application Fees \17\ requires ADEM to
charge permit-specific fees to the applicant/source as authorized by
Ala. Code section 22-22A-5. ADEM relies on these State requirements to
demonstrate that its permitting fee structure is

sufficient for the reasonable cost of reviewing and acting upon PSD and
NNSR permits. Additionally, Alabama has a fully-approved title V
operating permit program--ADEM Admin. Code r. 335-1-7--Air Division
Operating Permit Fees \18\--that covers the cost of implementation and
enforcement of PSD and NNSR permits after they have been issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ This regulation has not been incorporated into the
federally-approved SIP.
    \18\ Title V program regulations are federally approved but not
incorporated into the federally-approved SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

South Carolina

    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 \19\ 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 appeal process for refuting fees.
Additionally, South Carolina has a federally-approved title V program,
Regulation 61-62.70, Title V Operating Permit Program,\20\ which
assesses fees to provide for the implementation and enforcement of the
requirements of PSD and NNSR for facilities once they begin operating.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ This regulation has not been incorporated into the
federally-approved SIP.
    \20\ Title V program regulations are federally-approved but not
incorporated into the federally-approved SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has made the preliminary determination that Alabama's and South
Carolina's state rules and practices adequately provide for permitting
fees related to the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS, when necessary.
Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's and South Carolina's
infrastructure SIP submissions with respect to section 110(a)(2)(L).
    13. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation and 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.

Alabama

    ADEM coordinates with local governments affected by the SIP. ADEM
Administrative Code 335-3-17-.01--Transportation Conformity is one way
that Alabama provides for consultation with affected local entities.
More specifically, Alabama adopted state-wide consultation procedures
for the implementation of transportation conformity which includes the
development of mobile inventories for SIP development and the
requirements that link transportation planning and air quality planning
in nonattainment and maintenance areas. Required partners covered by
Alabama's consultation procedures include federal, state and local
transportation and air quality agency officials. Furthermore, ADEM has
worked with the Federal Land Managers as a requirement of the regional
haze rule.

South Carolina

    South Carolina's 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 above, 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 worked closely with local
political subdivisions during the development of its Transportation
Conformity SIP and Regional Haze Implementation Plan.
    EPA has made the preliminary determination that Alabama's and South
Carolina's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate consultation with
affected local entities related to the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS when
necessary.

V. Proposed Action

    With the exception of interstate transport provisions pertaining to
contribution to nonattainment or interference with maintenance in other
states of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (prongs 1 and 2), EPA is proposing
to approve Alabama's and South Carolina's August 20, 2018 and September
7, 2018, SIP submissions for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the above
described infrastructure SIP requirements, respectively. EPA is
proposing to approve Alabama's and South Carolina's infrastructure SIP
submissions for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS because the submissions 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. These actions merely
propose to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and do not
impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, these proposed actions:
     Are not significant regulatory actions 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);
     Are not Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory actions because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Are 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.);
     Do 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);
     Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Are not an economically significant regulatory actions
based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Are 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
     Do 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).
    The Alabama SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation
land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated
that a

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    Because this SIP action merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law, this proposed SIP
action for the State of South Carolina does not have Tribal
implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000). Therefore, this action will not impose substantial
direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law. The Catawba
Indian Nation (CIN) Reservation is located within the boundary of York
County, South Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba Indian Claims
Settlement Act, S.C. Code Ann. 27-16-120 (Settlement Act), ``all state
and local environmental laws and regulations apply to the [Catawba
Indian Nation] and Reservation and are fully enforceable by all
relevant state and local agencies and authorities.'' The CIN also
retains authority to impose regulations applying higher environmental
standards to the Reservation than those imposed by state law or local
governing bodies, in accordance with the Settlement Act.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

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

    Dated: November 13, 2019.
Mary S. Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2019-25577 Filed 11-25-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 112 (Wednesday, June 11, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33639-33641]
[FR Doc No: 2014-13540]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2014-0068]

Toyota Motor North America, Inc.; Receipt of Petition for
Temporary Exemption From an Electrical Safety Requirement of FMVSS No.
305

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of receipt of a petition for a temporary exemption from
a provision of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 305,
Electric-powered vehicles: electrolyte spillage and electrical shock
protection.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the procedures in 49 CFR part 555, Toyota
Motor North America, Inc. (Toyota) has petitioned the agency for a
temporary exemption from one requirement of FMVSS No. 305. That portion
of FMVSS No. 305 requires manufacturers to maintain a certain level of
electrical isolation (or reduce the voltage below specified levels) of
high voltage electrical components of an electric vehicle (EV) in the
event of a crash in order to protect the vehicle's occupants and first
responders. Toyota states that a forthcoming fuel cell vehicle (FCV)
model cannot meet this requirement due to certain design
characteristics of their FCVs. Instead, Toyota states that it is using
alternative strategies to help ensure that occupants and first
responders are protected in the event of a crash. NHTSA has made no
judgment on the merits of the application. This notice of receipt of an
application for a temporary exemption is published in accordance with
statutory and administrative provisions.

DATES: You should submit your comments not later than July 11, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jesse Chang, Office of the Chief
Counsel, NCC-112, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>;
Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

ADDRESSES: We invite you to submit comments on the application
described above. You may submit comments identified by docket number in
the heading of this notice by any of the following methods:
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number. Note that all comments received will be posted without
change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided. Please see the Privacy Act discussion below. We
will consider all comments received before the close of business on the
comment closing date indicated above. To the extent possible, we will
also consider comments filed after the closing date.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or to
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf
of an association, business, labor union, etc.). You may review DOT's
complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476) or you may visit http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.
    Confidential Business Information: If you wish to submit any
information under a claim of confidentiality, you should submit three
copies of your complete submission, including the information you claim
to be confidential business information, to the Chief Counsel, NHTSA,
at the address given under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. In
addition, you should submit two copies, from which you have deleted the
claimed confidential business information, to Docket Management at the
address given above. When you send a comment containing information
claimed to be confidential business information, you should include a
cover letter setting forth the information specified in our
confidential business information regulation (49 CFR part 512).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. The Electrical Safety Requirement in FMVSS No. 305 and its Purpose

    In 2000, the agency created Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(FMVSS) No. 305 to help facilitate the safe introduction of EVs into
the marketplace.\1\ While FMVSS No. 305 addresses a number of safety
concerns relevant to EVs (e.g., battery retention and electrolyte
spillage), paragraph S5.3 of the standard, at issue here, requires EVs
to maintain electrical isolation of various major electrical components
(e.g., components related to the vehicle's propulsion) after specified
crash tests. The purpose of the requirements in S5.3 is to reduce the
risk of high voltage electrical shock to the vehicle's occupants and
the first responders in the event of a crash.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See 65 FR 57980 (September 27, 2000).
    \2\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA published its most recent major update to the S5.3
requirements in 2010.\3\ In this update, NHTSA expanded the types of
electrical components that would be covered by the requirement and the
options available for complying with the requirement. Namely, the
agency expanded the coverage of the standard to include other high
voltage

components of the EV beyond the propulsion battery. Further, the
updated requirements recognize the different safety implications
between Alternating Current (AC) and Direct Current (DC) by
establishing different requirements for each type of electrical
component. FMVSS No. 305 further specifies various crash test
conditions under which a vehicle is required to meet the aforementioned
requirements. Depending on the particular crash scenario (e.g., frontal
barrier, rear moving barrier, and side moving deformable barrier), the
tests can be conducted at any speed up to a maximum speed of 48, 80, or
54 km/h, respectively.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See 75 FR 33515 (June 14, 2010). NHTSA also answered
petitions for reconsideration on this final rule on July 29, 2011
dealing with clarifying the definitions and test procedures of the
June 14, 2010 final rule. See 76 FR 45436.
    \4\ The speed condition for each test is specified in paragraphs
S6.1 to S6.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The subject of Toyota's petition is these electrical safety
requirements in paragraph S5.3 of FMVSS No. 305. Toyota states in its
petition that certain design aspects of their Fuel Cell Vehicles (FCVs)
preclude the vehicle from meeting the electrical safety requirements in
paragraph S5.3 of FMVSS No. 305. However, Toyota states that it will
implement various alternative strategies to ensure that the vehicle
occupants and first responders are protected from an undue risk of high
voltage electrical shock after a crash. Section III below describes
Toyota's petition in more detail.

II. Statutory Authority for Temporary Exemptions

    The National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Safety Act),
codified at 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301, provides the Secretary of
Transportation authority to exempt, on a temporary basis and under
specified circumstances, motor vehicles from a motor vehicle safety
standard or bumper standard. This authority is set forth at 49 U.S.C.
30113. The Secretary has delegated the authority for implementing this
section to NHTSA.
    The Act authorizes the Secretary to grant a temporary exemption to
a vehicle manufacturer under certain conditions. The relevant
conditions for this petition require the Secretary to find:
    (1) That ``the exemption would make the development or field
evaluation of a low-emission motor vehicle easier and would not
unreasonably lower the safety level of that vehicle;'' or
    (2) that ``compliance with the standard would prevent the
manufacturer from selling a motor vehicle with an overall safety level
at least equal to the overall safety level of nonexempt vehicles.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See 49 U.S.C. 30113.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    NHTSA established 49 CFR part 555, Temporary Exemption from Motor
Vehicle Safety and Bumper Standards, to implement the statutory
provisions concerning temporary exemptions. The requirements specified
in 49 CFR 555.5 state that the petitioner must set forth the basis of
the application by providing the required information under part 555.6,
and the reasons why the exemption would be in the public interest and
consistent with the objectives of 49 U.S.C. Chapter 301.
    A petition under the basis that the exemption would make easier the
development or field evaluation of a low-emission motor vehicle must
include the information specified in 49 CFR 555.6(c). The main
requirements of that section include: (1) Substantiation that the
vehicle is a low-emission vehicle; (2) documentation establishing that
a temporary exemption would not unreasonably degrade the safety of a
vehicle; (3) substantiation that a temporary exemption would facilitate
the development or field evaluation of the vehicle; and (4) a statement
of whether the petitioner intends to conform to the standard at the end
of the exemption period.
    A petition under the basis that compliance with the standard would
prevent the manufacturer from selling a motor vehicle with an overall
safety level at least equal to the overall safety level of nonexempt
vehicles must include the information specified in 49 CFR 555.6(d). The
main requirements of that section include: (1) A detailed description
of how the motor vehicle differs from one that conforms with the
standard; (2) a detailed description of any safety features that are
offered as standard equipment that are not required by an FMVSS; (3)
the results of any tests showing that the vehicle doesn't meet the
standard but has an overall level of safety at least equal to nonexempt
vehicles; and (4) a statement of whether the petitioner intends to
conform to the standard at the end of the exemption period.

III. Overview of Petition

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 30113 and the procedures in 49 CFR
part 555, Toyota Motor North America, Inc. (Toyota) submitted a
petition asking the agency for a temporary exemption from the
electrical safety requirements in paragraph S5.3 of FMVSS No. 305. They
state that they plan to manufacture an FCV model and that certain
aspects of their FCV design prevent it from meeting the requirements in
S5.3 of FMVSS No. 305.
    As described above, the requirements of paragraph S5.3 state that
(after certain specified crash tests) a vehicle must maintain an
electrical isolation of 500 ohms/volt for AC high voltage sources (and
DC high voltage sources without electrical isolation monitoring) or 100
ohms/volt for DC high voltage sources with electrical isolation
monitoring. Vehicles subject to FMVSS No. 305 must meet these
requirements when tested under any speed up to a maximum speed of 48,
54, or 80 km/h (depending on the particular crash test).
    Toyota states in its petition that its vehicle will be able to meet
the requirements of paragraph S5.3 of FMVSS No. 305 under some, but not
all, of the specified test speeds. The company states that under higher
speeds (e.g., speeds similar to when an air bag would deploy), an
automatic disconnect mechanism activates to ensure that the high
voltage components will meet the requirements of paragraph S5.3.
However, Toyota states that the automatic disconnect mechanism in its
FCVs will not be triggered in impacts at relatively low speeds. Toyota
believes it would not be appropriate to equip FCVs with sensors that
would trigger the automatic disconnect mechanism following minor
impacts (such as parking lot collisions or curb contacts), since it is
not possible to drive the vehicle after the system is disconnected.
Toyota states that its FCV would be unable to meet the requirements of
paragraph S5.3 in such low speed crash conditions where the automatic
disconnect mechanism is not triggered.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Additional information is available in Toyota's petition.
The petition is available in the docket referenced at the beginning
of this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Toyota applies for this exemption under two alternative bases.\7\
First, Toyota states that this exemption would make the development or
field evaluation of a low-emission motor vehicle easier and would not
unreasonably lower the safety level of the vehicle. Second, Toyota
believes that compliance with FMVSS No. 305 would prevent it from
selling a motor vehicle with an overall safety level at least equal to
the overall safety level of non-exempt vehicles. Toyota requests the
exemption (under either basis) for 2 years and has stated that it would
not produce more than 2,500 exempted FCVs within any 12-month period
during the exemption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ To view the application, go to http://www.regulations.gov
and enter the docket number set forth in the heading of this
document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In support of its first basis (low-emission vehicle) Toyota states
that its FCV qualifies as a low-emission vehicle because its FCV will
not emit particulate matter. Further, Toyota states that the FCV's
noncompliance

with paragraph S5.3 of FMVSS No. 305 would not unreasonably degrade the
safety of the vehicle because the vehicle has additional safety
features designed to protect vehicle occupants and first responders in
the event of a crash. First, Toyota equipped the FCV high voltage
sources with physical barriers that they believe would prevent any
direct physical contact with live voltage sources after the crash.
Second, Toyota ensured that all physical barriers would be grounded to
the chassis with a grounding resistance of less than 0.1 ohms. The
company states that this would protect against any indirect contact
with high voltage sources. Finally, Toyota states that the high voltage
sources would continue to maintain an electrical isolation of 100 ohms/
volt. Through the combination of these three attributes, Toyota
believes that the noncompliance with paragraph S5.3 would not
unreasonably degrade the safety of its FCV.
    In support of the second basis (overall safety is at least equal to
a nonexempt vehicle), Toyota states that its FCV would not meet the
current requirements of FMVSS No. 305 in low speed crashes where the
automatic disconnect does not activate and Toyota would not be able to
sell the vehicle in the United States. However, due to the additional
safety features that the company plans to incorporate into its FCVs
(i.e., physical barrier + grounding of the physical barriers to the
chassis + maintaining electrical isolation of 100 ohms/volt), Toyota
believes that their FCV maintains a level of safety that is at least
equivalent to a vehicle complying with FMVSS No. 305. In support of
this contention, Toyota cites their belief that their FCV would comply
with the relevant European standard (ECE R.100) and Global Technical
Regulation (GTR) No. 13 which allow manufacturers to ensure electrical
safety through methods such as encasing high voltage sources in a
physical barrier.

IV. Completeness and Comment Period

    Upon receiving a petition, NHTSA conducts an initial review of the
petition with respect to whether the petition is complete and whether
the petitioner appears to be eligible to apply for the requested
exemption. The agency has tentatively concluded that the petition from
Toyota is complete and that Toyota is eligible to apply for a temporary
exemption. The agency has not made any judgment on the merits of the
application, and is placing a non-confidential copy of the petition in
the docket.
    The agency seeks comment from the public on the merits of Toyota's
application for a temporary exemption from the electrical safety
requirements in paragraph S5.3 of FMVSS No. 305. We are providing a 30-
day comment period. After considering public comments and other
available information, we will publish a notice of final action on the
application in the Federal Register.

    Dated: May 29, 2014.
Claude H. Harris,
Acting Associate Administrator, for Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2014-13540 Filed 6-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P


[Federal Register: March 21, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 56)]
[Notices]
[Page 15224]
[DOCID:fr21mr08-110]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC
20549-0213.

Extension: Form 40-F, OMB Control No. 3235-0381, SEC File No. 270-
335.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget the request for approval of extension of the previously
approved collection of information discussed below.
    Form 40-F (17 CFR 249.240f) is used by certain Canadian issuers to
register securities pursuant to Section 12 of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') (15 U.S.C. 78l ) or an annual report
pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C.
78m(a) or 78o(d)). The information required under cover of Form 40-F
can be used by security holders, investors, broker-dealers, investment
banking firms, professional securities analysts and others in
evaluating securities and making investment decisions with respect to
securities of certain Canadian companies. All information provided to
the Commission is available for public review. Information provided by
Form 40-F is mandatory. Form 40-F takes approximately 427 hours per
response and is filed by approximately 205 respondents. We estimate
that 25% of the 427 hours per response (106.75 hours) is prepared by
the issuer for a total reporting burden of 21,884 (106.75 hours per
response x 205 responses).
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid control number.
    Written comments regarding the above information should be directed
to the following persons: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office
Building, Washington, DC 20503 or send an e-mail to Alexander--T.--
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and (ii) R. Corey Booth, Director/Chief Information
Officer, Office of Information Technology, Securities and Exchange
Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria,
VA 22312; or send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments must be
submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice

    Dated: March 13, 2008.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-5675 Filed 3-20-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P