Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 29455 

1EPA is taking final action to approve the 

revisions in Section I, with a state effective date of 

June 27, 2014. EPA has two revisions pertaining to 

subparagraph C ‘‘Special Provisions’’ submitted by 

the State on July 18, 2011, and August 12, 2015, 

with state effective dates of May 27, 2011 and June 

26, 2015, respectively, and will address these 

changes in a separate action. 

2EPA is taking final action to approve the 

revisions in Section IV, with the exception of 

subparagraph B ‘‘Continuous Opacity Monitor 

Reporting Requirements,’’ submitted by the State on 

August 8, 2014 with a state effective date of June 

27, 2014. EPA will address revisions in 

subparagraph B, also in an August 12, 2015, 

submittal, in a separate action. 

3The November 4, 2016, submittal with a state 

effective date of September 23, 2016, would 

supersede the 2014 revision with the exception of 

subparagraph B as mentioned in footnote #2. 

4SC DHEC’s July 18, 2011 submittal makes a 

change to Section XII, subparagraph B regarding 

Total Reduced Solids (TRS). The August 8, 2014, 

submittal would supersede the 2011 revision. 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2017–0385; FRL–9979– 

80—Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; SC: Multiple 

Revisions to Air Pollution Control 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action to 

approve changes to the South Carolina 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) to 

revise miscellaneous rules covering air 

pollution control standards. EPA is 

approving portions of SIP revisions 

submitted by the State of South 

Carolina, through the South Carolina 

Department of Health and 

Environmental Control (SC DHEC), on 

the following dates: October 1, 2007, 

July 18, 2011, June 17, 2013, August 8, 

2014, July 27, 2016, and November 4, 

2016. These actions are being taken 

pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA or 

Act). 

DATES: This rule will be effective July 

25, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR– 

2017–0385. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the www.regulations.gov 

website. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., Confidential Business 

Information or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Regulatory Management Section, 

Air Planning and Implementation 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, 

Georgia 30303–8960. EPA requests that 

if at all possible, you contact the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to schedule your 

inspection. The Regional Office’s 

official hours of business are Monday 

through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard Wong, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, 

Region 4, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, 

Georgia 30303–8960. The telephone 

number is (404) 562–8726. Mr. Wong 

can also be reached via electronic mail 

at wong.richard@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On October 1, 2007, July 18, 2011, 

June 17, 2013, August 8, 2014, July 27, 

2016, and November 4, 2016, SC DHEC 

submitted SIP revisions to EPA for 

approval that involve changes to South 

Carolina’s SIP regulations to make 

administrative and clarifying 

amendments, revise regulations, and 

correct typographical errors. These SIP 

submittals make changes to several air 

quality rules in the South Carolina Code 

of Regulations Annotated (S.C. Code 

Ann. Regs.). The changes EPA is 

approving into the SIP in this action 

modify portions of Regulation 61–62.5, 

Standard No. 1—Emissions From Fuel 

Burning Operations and Regulation 61– 

62.5, Standard No. 4—Emissions From 

Process Industries. EPA is not acting on 

other changes that are included in these 

submittals. EPA will act on those 

changes in separate actions. 

II. Analysis of South Carolina’s 

Submittals 

A. Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 1— 

Emissions From Fuel Burning 

Operations 

South Carolina is amending multiple 

sections at Regulation 61–62.5, Standard 

No. 1—Emissions from Fuel Burning 

Operations. The August 8, 2014, 

submittal makes the following changes: 

(1) Clarifies sulfur dioxide (SO2) 

maximum allowable discharge limits at 

Section III—Sulfur Dioxide Emissions; 

and (2) makes administrative and 

clarifying edits throughout Standard No. 

1. The revision in Section III—Sulfur 

Dioxide Emissions streamlines the 

requirement by setting a maximum SO2

limit of 2.3 pounds per million British 

thermal units (lb/MMBtu) from fuel 

burning operations. The current 

approved Standard sets two SO2 limits, 

2.3 lb/MMBtu or 3.5 lb/MMBtu across 

various classification categories. 

Therefore, this revision would 

streamline the rule to the lower of the 

two limits allowed for such sources. 

Lastly, this submittal makes 

administrative and clarifying edits in 

Section I—Visible Emissions,1 Section 

II—Particulate Matter Emissions, 

Section III—Sulfur Dioxide Emissions, 

Section IV—Opacity Monitoring 

Requirements,2 and Section VI— 

Periodic Testing. 

The November 4, 2016, submittal 

makes typographical corrections under 

Section IV—Opacity Reporting 

Requirements.3 EPA has reviewed the 

aforementioned changes to South 

Carolina’s Regulation 61–62.5, Standard 

No. 1 and is approving the changes into 

the SIP pursuant to CAA section 110. 

B. Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 4— 

Emissions From Process Industries 

South Carolina is amending multiple 

sections at Regulation 61–62.5, Standard 

No. 4—Emissions from Process 

Industries. The October 1, 2007, 

submittal removes Section IV—Portland 

Cement Manufacturing from the SIP. 

This rule contains particulate matter 

(PM) emission limits for cement kilns 

with a production rate of up to 120 tons 

per hour and it establishes a 20 percent 

allowable stack opacity limit for certain 

components of Portland cement plants. 

SC DHEC states that there are no 

Portland cement plants operating at 120 

tons per hour or less in the State 

because it is not economically feasible. 

SC DHEC asserts that removing this rule 

would not create a relaxation as there 

are no applicable sources subject to this 

regulation. Additionally, should such a 

source start operation, it would be 

subject to more stringent PM emissions 

limits in New Source Performance 

Standards (NSPS) subpart F (Standards 

of Performance for Portland Cement 

Plants). 

The July 18, 2011, submittal amends 

Section V—Cotton Gins by removing 

established specific emission limits 

based on production rate (output) of 

bales of cotton per hour and replacing 

that with specific, measurable 

performance requirements and 

operating standards.4 SC DHEC 

considered CAA section 110(l) in 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
29456 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

5The Commenter also made a comment on 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 1—Emissions 

From Fuel Burning Operations, subparagraph C of 

Section I—Visible Emissions. EPA will address that 

in a separate action. 

6U.S. EPA Applicability Determination Index for 

NSPS on August 29, 1990, for Florida Portland 

Cement. Document is available in the Docket. 

7Letter is located in the Federal Docket. 

making this change. SC DEHC explains 

that the rule development is based on 

best management practices outlined in 

the United States Department of 

Agriculture’s Cotton Ginners Handbook, 

staff experience with effective emission 

reduction techniques, the review of 

other state regulations on cotton gins, 

and several discussions with the 

affected industry. The new rule assures 

a greater degree of control of these 

emissions than that which would result 

from the existing process weight rate 

curve and also allows the State to more 

effectively determine compliance. The 

revised rule requires enforceable control 

of emissions from specific point sources 

in the ginning process rather than an 

allowable emission rate, and it 

establishes requirements to minimize 

fugitive emissions from various sources 

at cotton ginning facilities. The revised 

rule also sets applicable requirements 

for good housekeeping practices in the 

gin yard, weekly monitoring of control 

efficiency, recordkeeping, and reporting. 

The revised regulation will provide for 

improved emissions control through 

practicably enforceable control of 

emissions, use of state of the art 

pollution control devices, and 

minimization of fugitive emissions. The 

June 17, 2013, submittal makes a 

subsequent typographical correction to 

Section V. 

The August 8, 2014, submittal makes 

the following changes: (1) Removes a 

PM emissions limit at Section III—Kraft 

Pulp and Paper Manufacturing; (2) 

revises the frequency required for 

reporting excess emissions at Section 

XI—Total Reduced Sulfur Emissions of 

Kraft Pulp Mills; (3) removes the 

periodic testing requirement for TRS at 

Section XII—Periodic Testing; and (4) 

makes administrative and clarifying 

edits throughout Standard No. 4. At 

Section III, the submittal removes the 

table column ‘‘Maximum Allowable 

Emissions of PM in pounds/equivalent 

Ton of Air Dried, Unbleached Pulp 

Produced’’ and retains the ‘‘Maximum 

Allowable Stack Opacity.’’ SC DEHC 

asserts that this will not result in a 

relaxation of emission limits because 

the subject sources are covered under 

more stringent PM limits under the 

NESHAP (subpart S—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

from the Pulp and Paper Industry). 

Additionally, the word ‘‘opacity’’ 

replaces ‘‘rate of emissions.’’ 

At Section XI, the August 8, 2014, 

submittal changes the required excess 

emissions reporting frequency in 

subparagraph D.3. from quarterly to 

semi-annual. SC DHEC considered CAA 

sections 110(l) and 193 in making the 

change and asserts changing reporting 

from quarterly to semi-annual will not 

affect the level of emissions or 

compromise the national ambient air 

quality standards. SC DHEC cites to 

several Federal and state regulations 

that address excess emissions reporting, 

including NSPS subpart BB Standards 

of Performance for Kraft Pulp Mills; 

South Carolina Regulation 61–62.5, 

Standard No. 4 Section XI(D)(3) Total 

Reduced Sulfur Emissions of Kraft Pulp 

Mills; South Carolina Regulations 61– 

62.1, Section II(J)(2) Permit 

Requirements; and South Carolina 

Regulation 61–62.70 Title V Operating 

Permit Program. 

At Section XII, the August 8, 2014, 

submittal removes the periodic testing 

requirement for TRS. SC DHEC states 

that most sources are required to test 

under NSPS or NESHAP rules. The few 

sources that are not required to test have 

enough historical test data to develop an 

allowable operating range which can be 

handled during the permitting process. 

Additionally, the S.C. Pollution Control 

Act (48–1–50, Powers of the 

Department) makes provision for SC 

DHEC to ask for a source test and 

permits are often drafted with language 

allowing SC DEHC to ask for source 

tests. Therefore, the requirements will 

be no less stringent than what is 

allowed through current regulatory and 

permitting authority to review testing 

requirements. 

Lastly, the August 8, 2014, submittal 

makes minor typographical, 

renumbering, and clarifying edits to 

Standard No. 4 in Section II—Sulfuric 

Acid Manufacturing, Section V—Cotton 

Gins, Section XI—Total Reduced Sulfur 

Emissions of Kraft Pulp Mills, and 

Section XII—Periodic Testing. 

The July 27, 2016, submittal changes 

Section VIII—Other Manufacturing by 

excluding Kraft Pulp and Paper 

Manufacturing facilities. This Section 

sets PM emission limits for source 

categories not specified elsewhere in 

Standard No. 4. The change to exclude 

Kraft Pulp and Paper Manufacturing 

facilities aligns with the August 8, 2014, 

revision, as previously discussed in this 

notice. The submittal also makes minor 

typographical, renumbering, and 

clarifying edits to Section XII—Periodic 

Testing. 

EPA has reviewed the aforementioned 

changes to South Carolina’s Regulation 

61–62.5, Standard No. 4 and is 

approving the revisions into the SIP 

pursuant to CAA section 110, and where 

applicable CAA section 193. 

III. Response to Comments 

EPA previously proposed to approve 

these changes, and others, to the South 

Carolina SIP on August 16, 2017 (82 FR 

38874) along with a direct final rule 

published the same date (82 FR 38828). 

The proposed rule stated that if EPA 

received adverse comment on the direct 

final rule, the direct final rule would be 

withdrawn and all public comments 

received would be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. EPA received one 

adverse comment from a Commenter 

regarding the portion of the SIP 

submittals that EPA is addressing in this 

action, specifically regarding revision of 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 4— 

Emissions from Process Industries, 

Section IV—Portland Cement 

Manufacturing. EPA accordingly 

withdrew those portions of the direct 

final rule on October 13, 2017 (82 FR 

47640).5 EPA has considered the 

adverse comment received and is now 

approving the change to Regulation 61– 

62.5, Section IV. 

Comment: The Commenter states EPA 

needs to ensure that no mothballed 

facilities would be able to restart under 

the new standard. The Commenter also 

states that mothballed facilities may still 

maintain operating permits and may 

restart under these permits without 

becoming new sources and subject to 

NSPS requirements. 

Response: EPA notes that operating 

permits are not issued in perpetuity. A 

source must renew the permit to 

continue operations and is required to 

operate within the emissions limitations 

established in the permit. If operations 

resume at a source that has ceased 

operations for more than two 6 years, 

that source is subject to new source 

requirements, regardless of whether that 

source had previously indicated that it 

would cease operations permanently. 

Additionally, SC DHEC provided a letter 

on February 22, 2018,7 stating there are 

no mothballed sources below the 120 

tons per hour level anywhere in the 

State. 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, EPA is finalizing 

regulatory text that includes 

incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation 

by reference of South Carolina 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 1 

Section I—Visible Emissions, Section 

II—Particulate Matter Emissions, 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 29457 

8 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997). 

Section III—Sulfur Dioxide Emissions, 

Section VI—Periodic Testing, state 

effective June 27, 2014, and Section 

IV—Opacity Monitoring Requirements 

state effective September 23, 2016, 

which makes administrative and 

clarifying changes for consistency, 

removes log reporting requirements, 

revises monitoring requirements, and 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 4 

Section II—Sulfuric Acid 

Manufacturing, Section III—Kraft Pulp 

and Paper Manufacturing, Section V— 

Cotton Gins, Section XI—Total Reduced 

Sulfur Emissions of Kraft Pulp Mills 

state effective June 27, 2014, and 

Section VIII—Other Manufacturing, 

Section XII—Periodic Testing state 

effective June 24, 2016, which makes 

administrative and clarifying changes 

for consistency, removes specific 

emission rates, and reporting 

requirements. EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these materials 

generally available through 

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region 4 Office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

Therefore, these materials have been 

approved by EPA for inclusion in the 

SIP, have been incorporated by 

reference by EPA into that plan, are 

fully federally enforceable under 

sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of 

the effective date of the final rulemaking 

of EPA’s approval, and will be 

incorporated in the next update to the 

SIP compilation.8

V. Final Action 

This is a final action based on the 

proposed rule (82 FR 38874). For the 

reasons discussed above, EPA is 

approving the aforementioned changes 

to the South Carolina SIP, submitted on 

October 1, 2007, July 18, 2011, June 17, 

2013, August 8, 2014, July 27, 2016, and 

November 4, 2016, because they are 

consistent with the CAA and federal 

regulations. 

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 approve 

state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

these actions: 

• Are not a significant regulatory 

action subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Are not an Executive Order 13771 

(82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) 

regulatory action 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 action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Are not a significant regulatory 

action 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). 

In addition, this final action for the 

State of South Carolina does not have 

Tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because it does not 

have substantial direct effects on an 

Indian Tribe. The Catawba Indian 

Nation Reservation is located within the 

State of South Carolina. Pursuant to the 

Catawba Indian Claims Settlement Act, 

S.C. Code Ann. 27–16–120, ‘‘all state 

and local environmental laws and 

regulations apply to the [Catawba Indian 

Nation] and Reservation and are fully 

enforceable by all relevant state and 

local agencies and authorities.’’ EPA 

notes this action will not impose 

substantial direct costs on Tribal 

governments or preempt Tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by August 24, 2018. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. See section 

307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: June 12, 2018. 

Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn III, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart PP—South Carolina 

■ 2. Section 52.2120, paragraph (c) is 

amended by: 

■ a. Revising the entries under 

Regulation No. 62.5, Standard No. 1, for 

‘‘Section I,’’ ‘‘Section II,’’ ‘‘Section III,’’ 

‘‘Section IV,’’ and ‘‘Section VI;’’ 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
29458 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 

■ b. Revising the entries under 

Regulation No. 62.5, Standard No. 4, for 

‘‘Section II,’’ ‘‘Section III,’’ ‘‘Section V,’’ 

‘‘Section VIII,’’ ‘‘Section XI,’’ and 

‘‘Section XII’’; and 

■ c. Removing the entry under 

Regulation No. 62.5, Standard No. 4, for 

‘‘Section IV’’ 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 52.2120 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS FOR SOUTH CAROLINA

State citation Title/subject 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanation 

*******

Regulation No. 62.5 ......... Air Pollution Control Standards.

Standard No. 1 ................ Emissions from Fuel Burning Operations.

Section I ........................... Visible Emissions ............................................. 6/27/2014 6/25/2018, [Insert citation of publication].Except for subparagraph C ‘‘Special Provisions,’’ including those versions submitted 

by the State on July 18, 2011 and August 

12, 2015. Therefore, subparagraph C retains the version that was state effective 

October 26, 2001. 

Section II ......................... Particulate Matter Emissions ........................... 6/27/2014 6/25/2018, [Insert citation of publication].

Section III ........................ Sulfur Dioxide Emissions ................................. 6/27/2014 6/25/2018, [Insert citation of publication].

Section IV ........................ Opacity Monitoring Requirements ................... 9/23/2016 6/25/2018, [Insert citation of publication].Except subparagraph B ‘‘Continuous Opacity 

Monitor Reporting Requirements,’’ including 

those versions submitted by the State on 

August 8, 2014 and August 12, 2015. 

Therefore, subparagraph B retains the 

version that was state effective September 

28, 2012. 

* * * * * * * 

Section VI ........................ Periodic Testing ............................................... 6/27/2014 6/25/2018, [Insert citation of publication].

* * * * * * * 

Standard No. 4 ................ Emissions From Process Industries.

* * * * * * * 

Section II ......................... Sulfuric Acid Manufacturing ............................. 6/27/2014 6/25/2018, [Insert citation of publication].

Section III ........................ Kraft Pulp and Paper Manufacturing Plants .... 6/27/2014 6/25/2018, [Insert citation of publication].

Section V ......................... Cotton Gins ...................................................... 6/27/2014 6/25/2018, [Insert citation of publication].

* * * * * * * 

Section VIII ...................... Other Manufacturing ........................................ 6/24/2016 6/25/2018, [Insert citation of publication].

* * * * * * * 

Section XI ........................ Total Reduced Sulfur Emissions of Kraft Pulp 

Mills.

6/27/2014 6/25/2018, [Insert citation of publication].

Section XII ....................... Periodic Testing ............................................... 6/24/2016 6/25/2018, [Insert citation of publication].

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2018–13446 Filed 6–22–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 62 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2018–0069; FRL–9979–29– 

Region 1] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Plans for Designated Facilities and 

Pollutants; New Hampshire; Delegation 

of Authority 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is finalizing its action to 

codify into the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) the delegation of 

authority to implement and enforce the 

Federal Plan Requirements for Sewage 

Sludge Incineration Units Constructed 

on or before October 14, 2010 (SSI 

Federal Plan) to the New Hampshire 

Department of Environmental Services 

(NH DES). The SSI Federal Plan 

addresses the implementation and 

enforcement of the emission guidelines 

applicable to existing SSI units located 

in areas not covered by an approved and 

currently effective state plan. The SSI 

Federal Plan imposes emission limits 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES