13962 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

ten-year planning period, through 2018; 

the state has addressed adequately the 

application of Best Available Retrofit 

Technology to specific stationary 

sources; the state has an adequate 

regional haze monitoring strategy; the 

state has provided for consultation and 

coordination with federal land managers 

in producing its regional haze plan; and, 

provided for the regional haze plan’s 

future revisions. 

In addition, we are proposing to 

approve California’s 2007 Transport SIP 

and the following specific elements of 

the CRHP as satisfying the CAA Section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requirement to 

prohibit emissions that will interfere 

with measures to protect visibility in 

another state for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS: Chapter 3 

(Emissions Inventory), chapter 4 

(California 2018 Progress Strategy), and, 

chapter 8 (Consultation). 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 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 Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves State law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by State law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Visibility, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

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

Dated: March 9, 2011. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6003 Filed 3–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0958–201104; FRL– 

9280–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; South Carolina: 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

and Nonattainment New Source 

Review; Fine Particulate Matter and 

Nitrogen Oxides as a Precursor to 

Ozone 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a revision to the South Carolina State 

Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted 

by the State of South Carolina, through 

the South Carolina Department of 

Health and Environmental Control (SC 

DHEC), to EPA on December 2, 2010, for 

parallel processing. The proposed SIP 

revision modifies South Carolina’s New 

Source Review (NSR) Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) and 

Nonattainment New Source Review 

(NNSR) programs. The proposed 

revision makes two changes for which 

EPA is proposing approval in today’s 

rulemaking. First, the revision 

incorporates NSR provisions for fine 

particulate matter (also known as PM2.5) 

as amended in EPA’s 2008 NSR PM2.5

Implementation Rule (hereafter referred 

to as the ‘‘NSR PM2.5 Rule’’) into the 

South Carolina SIP. Second, the 

proposed revision addresses a PSD 

permitting requirement promulgated in 

the 1997 8–Hour Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) Implementation Rule NSR 

Update Phase II (hereafter referred to as 

the ‘‘Ozone Implementation NSR Update 

or Phase II Rule’’). Both changes in the 

proposed SIP revision are necessary to 

comply with federal regulations related 

to South Carolina’s NSR permitting 

program. EPA is proposing approval of 

the December 2, 2010, proposed SIP 

revision because the Agency has 

preliminarily determined that the 

revisions are in accordance with the 

Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA 

regulations regarding NSR permitting. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 14, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2010–0958 by one of the following 

methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0958, 

Regulatory Development Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. 

Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2010– 

0958.’’ EPA’s policy is that all comments 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 13963 

1While the transmittal letter for South Carolina’s 

submission is dated October 20, 2010, EPA did not 

officially receive South Carolina’s request for 

parallel processing until December 2, 2010. 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

http://www.regulations.gov, including 

any personal information provided, 

unless the comment includes 

information claimed to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Do not submit 

through http://www.regulations.gov or 

e-mail, information that you consider to 

be CBI or otherwise protected. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http://

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information regarding the South 

Carolina SIP, contact Ms. Twunjala 

Bradley, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. 

Bradley’s telephone number is (404) 

562–9352; e-mail address: 

bradley.twunjala@epa.gov. For 

information regarding NSR, contact Ms. 

Yolanda Adams, Air Permits Section, at 

the same address above. Ms. Adams’ 

telephone number is (404) 562–9241; email address: adams.yolanda@epa.gov. 

For information regarding the Phase II 

Rule, contact Ms. Jane Spann, 

Regulatory Development Section, at the 

same address above. Ms. Spann’s 

telephone number is (404) 562–9029; email address: spann.jane@epa.gov. For 

information regarding the PM2.5

NAAQS, contact Mr. Joel Huey, 

Regulatory Development Section, at the 

same address above. Mr. Huey’s 

telephone number is (404) 562–9104; email address: huey.joel@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What action is EPA proposing in today’s 

notice? 

II. What is the background for the action 

proposed by EPA in today’s notice 

regarding NSR permitting requirements 

for the PM2.5 NAAQS? 

III. What is the background for the action 

proposed by EPA in today’s notice 

regarding the Phase II Rule for NOX as 

an ozone precursor? 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of South 

Carolina’s SIP revision? 

V. Proposed Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA proposing in 

today’s notice? 

On December 2, 2010, SC DHEC 

submitted a proposed revision to EPA 

for approval into the South Carolina SIP 

to adopt Federal requirements for NSR 

permitting. The December 2, 2010, 

submittal addresses PSD and NNSR 

requirements related to the 

implementation of the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS as well as adding a provision of 

the PSD NOX as a precursor requirement 

established in the Phase II Rule. 

Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, 

EPA is proposing to approve these 

changes into the South Carolina SIP. 

South Carolina’s December 2, 2010, 

SIP revision was submitted as a draft 

SIP revision and is not yet stateeffective. Therefore, South Carolina 

requested that EPA ‘‘parallel process’’ 

the SIP revision.1 Under this procedure, 

the EPA Regional Office works closely 

with the state while developing new or 

revised regulations. Generally, the state 

submits a copy of the proposed 

regulation or other revisions to EPA 

before conducting its public hearing. 

EPA reviews this proposed state action 

and prepares a notice of proposed 

rulemaking. EPA publishes this notice 

of proposed rulemaking in the Federal 

Register and solicits public comment in 

approximately the same time frame 

during which the state is holding its 

public hearing. The state and EPA thus 

provide for public comment periods on 

both the State and the Federal actions in 

parallel. 

After South Carolina submits the 

formal state-effective SIP revision 

request (including a response to all 

public comments raised during the 

state’s public participation process), 

EPA will prepare a final rulemaking 

notice for the SIP revision. If changes 

are made to the SIP revision after EPA’s 

notice of proposed rulemaking, such 

changes must be acknowledged in EPA’s 

final rulemaking action. If the changes 

are significant, then EPA may be 

obligated to re-propose the action. In 

addition, if the changes render the SIP 

revision not approvable, EPA’s reproposal of the action would be a 

disapproval of the revision. 

II. What is the background for the 

action proposed by EPA in today’s 

notice regarding NSR permitting 

requirements for the PM2.5 NAAQS? 

Today’s proposed action to revise the 

South Carolina SIP relates to EPA’s 

‘‘Implementation of the New Source 

Review (NSR) Program for Particulate 

Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers 

(PM2.5),’’ Final Rule, 73 FR 28321 (May 

16, 2008) (the ‘‘NSR PM2.5 Rule’’). In the 

NSR PM2.5 Rule, EPA finalized 

regulations to implement the NSR 

program for the PM2.5 NAAQS. As a 

result of EPA’s final NSR PM2.5 Rule, 

states are required to provide SIP 

submissions no later than May 16, 2011, 

to address these requirements for both 

the PSD and NNSR programs. South 

Carolina’s December 2, 2010, proposed 

SIP revision addresses the PSD and 

NNSR requirements for the PM2.5

NAAQS. More detail on the NSR PM2.5

Rule can be found in EPA’s May 16, 

2008, final rule and is summarized 

below. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

13964 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

A. Fine Particulate Matter and the 

NAAQS 

Fine particles in the atmosphere are 

made up of a complex mixture of 

components. Common constituents 

include sulfate (SO4); nitrate (NO3); 

ammonium; elemental carbon; a great 

variety of organic compounds; and 

inorganic material (including metals, 

dust, sea salt, and other trace elements) 

generally referred to as ‘‘crustal’’ 

material, although it may contain 

material from other sources. Airborne 

particulate matter (PM) with a nominal 

aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 

micrometers or less (a micrometer is 

one-millionth of a meter, and 2.5 

micrometers is less than one-seventh the 

average width of a human hair) are 

considered to be ‘‘fine particles’’ and are 

also known as PM2.5. ‘‘Primary’’ particles 

are emitted directly into the air as a 

solid or liquid particle (e.g., elemental 

carbon from diesel engines or fire 

activities, or condensable organic 

particles from gasoline engines). 

‘‘Secondary’’ particles (e.g., sulfate and 

nitrate) form in the atmosphere as a 

result of various chemical reactions. 

The health effects associated with 

exposure to PM2.5 include potential 

aggravation of respiratory and 

cardiovascular disease (i.e., lung 

disease, decreased lung function asthma 

attacks and certain cardiovascular 

issues). Epidemiological studies have 

indicated a correlation between elevated 

PM2.5 levels and premature mortality. 

Groups considered especially sensitive 

to PM2.5 exposure include older adults, 

children, and individuals with heart 

and lung diseases. For more details 

regarding health effects and PM2.5 see 

EPA’s Web site at http://www.epa.gov/ 

oar/particlepollution/ (see heading 

‘‘Health and Welfare’’). 

On July 18, 1997, EPA revised the 

NAAQS for PM to add new standards 

for fine particles, using PM2.5 as the 

indicator. Previously, EPA used PM10

(inhalable particles smaller than or 

equal to 10 micrometers in diameter) as 

the indicator for the PM NAAQS. EPA 

established health-based (primary) 

annual and 24-hour standards for PM2.5, 

setting an annual standard at a level of 

15 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) 

and a 24-hour standard at a level of 65 

μg/m3. 62 FR 38652. At the time the 

1997 primary standards were 

established, EPA also established 

welfare-based (secondary) standards 

identical to the primary standards. The 

secondary standards are designed to 

protect against major environmental 

effects of PM2.5, such as visibility 

impairment, soiling, and materials 

damage. On October 17, 2006, EPA 

revised the primary and secondary 

NAAQS for PM2.5. In that rulemaking, 

EPA reduced the 24-hour NAAQS for 

PM2.5 to 35 μg/m3 and retained the 

existing annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15 μg/ 

m3. 71 FR 61236. 

B. What is the NSR program? 

The CAA NSR program is a 

preconstruction review and permitting 

program applicable to certain new and 

modified stationary sources of air 

pollutants regulated under the CAA. 

The program includes a combination of 

air quality planning and air pollution 

control technology requirements. The 

CAA NSR program is composed of three 

separate programs: PSD, NNSR, and 

Minor NSR. PSD is established in Part 

C of title I of the CAA and applies in 

areas that meet the NAAQS ‘‘attainment 

areas’’ as well as areas where there is 

insufficient information to determine if 

the area meets the NAAQS— 

‘‘unclassifiable areas.’’ The NNSR 

program is established in Part D of title 

I of the CAA and applies in areas that 

are not in attainment of the NAAQS— 

‘‘nonattainment areas.’’ The Minor NSR 

program addresses construction or 

modification activities that do not 

quality as ‘‘major’’ and applies regardless 

of the designation of the area in which 

a source is located. Together, these 

programs are referred to as NSR 

programs. EPA regulations governing 

the implementation of these programs 

are contained in 40 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) Parts 51.165, 51.166, 

52.21, 52.24, and part 51, Appendix S. 

Section 109 of the CAA requires EPA 

to promulgate a primary NAAQS to 

protect public health and a secondary 

NAAQS to protect public welfare. Once 

EPA sets those standards, states must 

develop, adopt, and submit a SIP to EPA 

for approval that includes emission 

limitations and other control measures 

to attain and maintain the NAAQS. See 

CAA § 110. Each SIP is also required to 

include a preconstruction review 

program for the construction and 

modification of any stationary source of 

air pollution to assure the maintenance 

of the NAAQS. The December 2, 2010, 

SIP submittal revises South Carolina’s 

PSD and NNSR programs. 

C. Implementation of NSR Requirements 

for PM2.5

After EPA promulgated the NAAQS 

for PM2.5 in 1997, the Agency issued a 

guidance document entitled ‘‘Interim 

Implementation of New Source Review 

Requirements for PM2.5.’’ John S. Seitz, 

EPA, October 23, 1997 (the ‘‘Seitz 

memo’’). The Seitz memo was designed 

to help states implement NSR 

requirements pertaining to the new 

PM2.5 NAAQS in light of technical 

difficulties posed by PM2.5 at that time. 

Specifically, the Seitz memo stated: 

‘‘PM–10 may properly be used as a 

surrogate for PM–2.5 in meeting NSR 

requirements until these difficulties are 

resolved.’’ 

EPA also issued a guidance document 

entitled ‘‘Implementation of New Source 

Review Requirements in PM–2.5 

Nonattainment Areas’’ (the ‘‘2005 PM2.5

Nonattainment NSR Guidance’’), on 

April 5, 2005, the date that EPA’s PM2.5

nonattainment area designations became 

effective for the 1997 NAAQS. This 

memorandum provided guidance on the 

implementation of the nonattainment 

major NSR provisions in PM2.5

nonattainment areas in the interim 

period between the effective date of the 

PM2.5 nonattainment area designations 

(April 5, 2005) and EPA’s promulgation 

of final PM2.5 NNSR regulations. Besides 

re-affirming the continuation of the 

PM10 Surrogate Policy for PM2.5

attainment areas set forth in the Seitz 

memo, the 2005 PM2.5 NNSR Guidance 

recommended that until EPA 

promulgated the PM2.5 major NSR 

regulations, ‘‘States should use a PM10

nonattainment major NSR program as a 

surrogate to address the requirements of 

nonattainment major NSR for the PM2.5

NAAQS.’’ 

On May 16, 2008, EPA finalized a rule 

to implement the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, 

including changes to the NSR program. 

73 FR 28321. The 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule 

revised the NSR program requirements 

to establish the framework for 

implementing preconstruction permit 

review for the PM2.5 NAAQS in both 

attainment and nonattainment areas. 

The 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule requires that 

major stationary sources seeking permits 

must begin directly satisfying the PM2.5

requirements, as of the effective date of 

the rule, rather than relying on PM10 as 

a surrogate, with two exceptions. The 

first exception is a ‘‘grandfathering’’ 

provision in the Federal PSD program at 

40 CFR 52.21(i)(1)(xi). This 

grandfathering provision applied to 

sources that had applied for, but had not 

yet received, a final and effective PSD 

permit before the July 15, 2008, effective 

date of the May 2008 final rule. The 

second exception was that states with 

SIP-approved PSD programs could 

continue to implement the Seitz Memo’s 

PM10 Surrogate Policy for up to three 

years (until May 2011) or until the 

individual revised state PSD programs 

for PM2.5 are approved by EPA, 

whichever comes first. For additional 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 13965 

2Additional information on this issue can also be 

found in an August 12, 2009, final order on a title 

V petition describing the use of PM10 as a surrogate 

for PM2.5. In the Matter of Louisville Gas & Electric 

Company, Petition No. IV–2008–3, Order on 

Petition (August 12, 2009). 

3On December 31, 2002 (67 FR 80186), EPA 

published final rule changes to 40 CFR parts 51 and 

52, regarding the CAA’s PSD and NNSR programs. 

On November 7, 2003 (68 FR 63021), EPA 

published a notice of final action on the 

reconsideration of the December 31, 2002, final rule 

changes. The December 31, 2002, and the November 

7, 2003, final actions are collectively referred to as 

the ‘‘2002 NSR Reform Rules.’’ 

information on the NSR PM2.5 Rule, see 

73 FR 28321.2

On February 11, 2010, EPA proposed 

to repeal the grandfathering provision 

for PM2.5 contained in the federal PSD 

program at 40 CFR 52.21(i)(1)(xi) and to 

end early the PM10 Surrogate Policy 

applicable in states that have a SIPapproved PSD program. 75 FR 6827. In 

support of this proposal, EPA explained 

that the PM2.5 implementation issues 

that led to the adoption of the PM10

Surrogate Policy in 1997 have been 

largely resolved to a degree sufficient for 

sources and permitting authorities to 

conduct meaningful permit-related 

PM2.5 analyses. EPA has not yet taken 

final action on this proposal. Though 

EPA has not finalized a repeal of the 

PM2.5 grandfathering provision at 40 

CFR 52.21(i)(1)(xi), South Carolina 

elected not to include this provision in 

its SIP submittal. 

The NSR PM2.5 Rule also established 

the following NSR requirements to 

implement the PM2.5 NAAQS: (1) 

Require NSR permits to address directly 

emitted PM2.5 and precursor pollutants; 

(2) establish significant emission rates 

for direct PM2.5 and precursor pollutants 

(including sulfur dioxide (SO2) and 

NOX); (3) establish PM2.5 emission 

offsets; and (4) require states to account 

for gases that condense to form particles 

(‘‘condensables’’) in PM2.5 emission 

limits. In addition, the NSR PM2.5 Rule 

gives states the option of allowing 

interpollutant trading for the purpose of 

offsets under the PM2.5 NNSR program. 

South Carolina’s December 2, 2010, 

proposed submittal addresses the PSD 

and NNSR requirements related to 

EPA’s May 16, 2008, NSR PM2.5 Rule. 

III. What is the background for the 

action proposed by EPA in today’s 

notice regarding the Phase II Rule for 

NOX as an ozone precursor? 

Today’s proposed action on the South 

Carolina SIP also relates to EPA’s Phase 

II Rule. 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 

2005). In the Phase II Rule, EPA 

finalized regulations to address permit 

requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS to implement the NSR program 

by specifically identifying NOX as an 

ozone precursor. 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a 

revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.08 

parts per million—also referred to as the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. On April 

30, 2004, EPA designated areas as 

attainment, nonattainment and 

unclassifiable for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. As part of the 2004 

designations, EPA also promulgated an 

implementation rule for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS in two phases. Phase I of 

EPA’s 1997 8-hour ozone 

implementation rule (Phase I Rule), 

published on April 30, 2004, effective 

on June 15, 2004, provided the 

implementation requirements for 

designating areas under subpart 1 and 

subpart 2 of the CAA (69 FR 23951). 

On November 29, 2005, EPA 

promulgated the second phase for 

implementation provisions related to 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS—also 

known as the Phase II Rule (70 FR 

71612). The Phase II Rule addressed 

control and planning requirements as 

they applied to areas designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS such as reasonably 

available control technology, reasonably 

available control measures, reasonable 

further progress, modeling and 

attainment demonstrations and NSR, 

and the impact to reformulated gas for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

transition. The Phase II Rule 

requirements include, among other 

changes, a provision stating that NOX is 

an ozone precursor. 70 FR 71612, 71679. 

In the Phase II Rule, EPA stated as 

follows: 

‘‘The EPA has recognized NOX as an ozone 

precursor in several national rules because of 

its contribution to ozone transport and the 

ozone nonattainment problem. The EPA’s 

recognition of NOX as an ozone precursor is 

supported by scientific studies, which have 

long recognized the role of NOX in ozone 

formation and transport. Such formation and 

transport is not limited to nonattainment 

areas. Therefore, we believe NOX should be 

treated consistently as an ozone precursor in 

both our PSD and nonattainment NSR 

regulations. For these reasons, we have 

promulgated final regulations providing that 

NOX is an ozone precursor in attainment 

areas.’’ 

Specific to this rulemaking, the Phase II 

Rule made changes to federal 

regulations 40 CFR 51.165 and 51.166 

(which governs the NNSR and PSD 

permitting programs respectively). 

Pursuant to these requirements, states 

were required to submit SIP revisions 

adopting the federal requirements of the 

Phase II Rule (at 40 CFR 51.165 and 

51.166) into their SIP no later than June 

15, 2007. On July 1, 2005, South 

Carolina submitted a SIP revision to 

adopt the PSD and NNSR provisions 

amended in the 2002 NSR Reform 

rules.3 The SIP revision became stateeffective on June 24, 2005, and adopted 

PSD and applicable NNSR provisions at 

40 CFR 51.165 and 51.166, respectively. 

Also in the July 1, 2005 submittal, South 

Carolina recognized NOX as an ozone 

precursor for NSR permitting purposes 

by adopting provisions into its SIP. At 

the time of South Carolina’s NSR 

Reform SIP submittal, the Phase II Rule 

had not been finalized by EPA. 

However, the South Carolina NSR 

program had recognized NOX emissions 

as an ozone precursor in their PSD 

permitting practice. EPA took final 

action to approve South Carolina’s NSR 

Reform SIP revision as well as NOX as 

a precursor provisions into the South 

Carolina SIP on June 2, 2008. 73 FR 

31368. The December 2, 2010, proposed 

SIP revision (the subject of this action), 

incorporates a NOX as ozone precursor 

PSD requirement that was not included 

in the South Carolina’s July 1, 2005, SIP 

submittal to be consistent with Federal 

regulations for NSR permitting 

purposes. Together, South Carolina’s 

July 1, 2005 (73 FR 31368) and 

December 2, 2010, SIP revisions 

incorporate the Phase II Rule permitting 

requirements pertaining to NOX as an 

ozone precursor into the South Carolina 

SIP. 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of South 

Carolina’s SIP revisions? 

South Carolina currently has a SIPapproved NSR program for new and 

modified stationary sources. South 

Carolina’s Regulation 61–62.5, Standard 

Number 7, contains the PSD 

preconstruction review program and 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard Number 

7.1 contains the permitting 

requirements for major sources in or 

impacting nonattainment areas (NNSR 

program). Today, EPA is proposing to 

approve changes to South Carolina’s 

Regulation 61–62.5 to update South 

Carolina’s existing NSR program to be 

consistent with current federal NSR 

regulations, including adopting 

regulations amended in the NSR PM2.5

Rule and the Phase II Rule (at 40 CFR 

51.165 and 51.166). More detail is 

provided below regarding EPA’s 

analysis of the changes to South 

Carolina’s SIP as provided in the 

December 2, 2010, SIP revision. 

A. EPA’s Analysis of South Carolina’s 

NSR Rule Revision To Adopt the NSR 

PM2.5 Requirements 

South Carolina’s Regulation 61–62.5, 

Standards Number 7 and 7.1 adopt the 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS

13966 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 50 / Tuesday, March 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

provisions at 40 CFR 51.165 and 51.166, 

respectively, as amended by the 

promulgation of the NSR PM2.5 Rule for 

PSD and NNSR. Specifically, South 

Carolina’s December 2, 2010, proposed 

SIP revision addresses the following 

NSR PM2.5 provisions: (1) Requirement 

for NSR permits to address directly 

emitted PM2.5 and precursor pollutants; 

(2) significant emission rates for direct 

PM2.5 and precursor pollutants (SO2 and 

NOX); and (3) requirement of states to 

address condensable PM in establishing 

enforceable emission limits for PM10 or 

PM2.5. In light of EPA’s February 11, 

2010, proposed rulemaking to repeal the 

PM10 ‘‘grandfathering’’ provision, as 

noted in Section II.C above, South 

Carolina’s December 2, 2010, SIP 

revision does not address 40 CFR 

52.21(i)(1)(ix) promulgated in the NSR 

PM2.5 Rule. Even if EPA’s proposed 

repeal of the PM10 ‘‘grandfathering’’ 

provision is not finalized before today’s 

action, South Carolina’s SIP revision is 

approvable because it is at least as 

stringent as current federal law, and is 

consistent with section 110 of the CAA. 

In addition, South Carolina’s SIP 

revision does not incorporate optional 

provisions set forth at 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(11) authorizing the use of 

interpollutant trading for the purpose of 

offsets under the PM2.5 NNSR program. 

Because the NSR PM2.5 Rule gives states 

discretion regarding whether to include 

interpollutant trading provisions in 

their PM2.5 NNSR programs, South 

Carolina’s decision not to adopt such 

provisions does not affect the 

approvability of South Carolina’s 

December 2, 2010, draft SIP revision. 

EPA has preliminarily determined that 

South Carolina’s December 2, 2010, 

draft SIP revision is consistent with the 

NSR PM2.5 Rule for PSD and NNSR and 

with section 110 of the CAA. See, e.g., 

NSR PM2.5 Rule, 75 FR 31514. 

B. EPA’s Analysis of South Carolina’s 

NSR Rule Revision To Adopt the Phase 

II Rule Requirement for NOX as an 

Ozone Precursor 

South Carolina’s December 2, 2010, 

proposed SIP revision also updates its 

PSD permitting regulations at 61–62–5 

Standard No. 7. The submittal adds the 

requirement related to NOX as an ozone 

precursor provision as amended in the 

Phase II Rule. Specifically, the change 

addresses the inclusion of ‘‘nitrogen 

oxides’’ in the footnote at 61–62.5(i)(5)(i) 

(as amended at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(e)) 

to recognize NOX as an ozone precursor. 

The provision at 40 CFR 

51.166(i)(5)(i)(e) requires sources with a 

net increase of 100 tons per year or more 

of NOX to perform an ambient impact 

analysis. 

As mentioned above in Section III, 

South Carolina submitted a SIP revision 

on July 1, 2005, to update its PSD and 

NNSR Regulations (at Regulation 61– 

62.5, Standards No. 7 and 7.1) to adopt 

the 2002 NSR Reform permitting 

requirements as well as incorporate 

provisions recognizing NOX as an ozone 

precursor. The SIP revision became 

state-effective on June 24, 2005 and EPA 

took final action to approve the SIP 

revision on June 2, 2008. 73 FR 31368. 

Together, South Carolina’s July 1, 2005, 

SIP revision (73 FR 31368, June 2, 2008) 

and the December 2, 2010, SIP revision 

(the subject of today’s action), 

incorporate into South Carolina’s SIP (at 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standards No. 7 

and 7.1) all of the requirements for 

permitting pertaining to NOX as an 

ozone precursor as required by the 

Phase II Rule, 70 FR 71612 (November 

29, 2005). EPA is proposing to 

determine that South Carolina’s 

December 2, 2010, SIP revision is 

consistent with the federal requirements 

of the Phase II Rule and the CAA. 

V. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve South 

Carolina’s December 2, 2010, SIP 

revision adopting federal regulations 

amended in the NSR PM2.5 Rule and the 

Phase II Rule (recognizing NOX as an 

ozone precursor) into the South 

Carolina SIP. EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that this SIP 

revision is approvable because it is in 

accordance with the CAA and EPA 

regulations regarding NSR permitting. 

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. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 F43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: March 7, 2011 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6009 Filed 3–14–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 73 

[MB Docket No. 11–33, RM–11623; DA 11– 

406] 

Television Broadcasting Services; 

Topeka, KS 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS