This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

4796 

Vol. 78, No. 15 

Wednesday, January 23, 2013 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0837; FRL–9771–4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; South Carolina: 

New Source Review—Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

changes to the South Carolina State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the South Carolina Department of 

Health and Environmental Control (SC 

DHEC) to EPA in five separate SIP 

submittals dated May 1, 2012, July 18, 

2011, February 16, 2011, December 23, 

2009, and December 4, 2008. The SIP 

revisions make changes to South 

Carolina’s New Source Review (NSR) 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) program to adopt federal PSD 

requirements regarding fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5) and changes to the State’s 

provisions related to the national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) 

and volatile organic compounds (VOC). 

EPA is proposing to approve portions of 

the submittals as revisions to South 

Carolina’s SIP because the Agency has 

preliminarily determined that they are 

consistent with section 110 of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA 

regulations regarding NSR permitting. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 22, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2012–0837 by one of the following 

methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0837, 

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–2012– 

0837.’’ EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

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 email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

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 

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 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; email address: 

bradley.twunjala@epa.gov. For 

information regarding NSR or PSD, 

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 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? 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed action? 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of South 

Carolina’s SIP submittals? 

IV. Proposed Actions 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 15 / Wednesday, January 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules 4797 

1South Carolina’s May 1, 2012 submission to 

EPA also included changes to Regulation 61– 

62.63—National Emissions Standards for Hazardous 

Air Pollutants which is not part of the South 

Carolina federally approved SIP. 2South Carolina’s May 1, 2012, SIP submittal did 

not include the SILs-SMC screening tools also 

promulgated in the PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILsSMC Rule. Furthermore, EPA’s authority to 

implement the SILs and SMC for PSD purposes has 

been challenged by the Sierra Club. Sierra Club v. 

EPA, Case No 10–1413 (D.C. Circuit Court). 

3EPA’s May 16, 2008, Rule entitled 

‘‘Implementation of the New Source Review 

Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 

Micrometers,’’ Final Rule (73 FR 28321) and the 

PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule establish the 

framework for implementing preconstruction 

permit review for the PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA approved 

South Carolina’s SIP submittal to adopt the May 16, 

2008, PM2.5 NSR requirements on June 23, 2011. 

See 76 FR 36875. 

4As part of the response to comments on the 

October 20, 2010, final rulemaking, EPA explained 

that the Agency agrees that the SILs and SMCs used 

as de minimis thresholds for the various pollutants 

are useful tools that enable permitting authorities 

and PSD applicants to screen out ‘‘insignificant’’ 

activities; however, these values are not required by 

the Act as part of an approvable SIP program. EPA 

believes that most states are likely to adopt the SILs 

and SMCs because of the useful purpose they serve 

regardless of EPA’s position that the values are not 

mandatory. Alternatively, states may develop more 

stringent values if they desire to do so. In any case, 

states are not under any SIP-related deadline for 

revising their PSD programs to add these screening 

tools. See 75 FR 64864, 64900. 

5On April 6, 2012, EPA filed a brief with the D.C. 

Circuit Court defending the Agency’s authority to 

implement SILs and SMC for PSD purposes. 

6Section 169(4) of the CAA provides that the 

baseline concentration of a pollutant for a particular 

baseline area is generally the air quality at the time 

of the first application for a PSD permit in the area. 

I. What action is EPA proposing? 

EPA is proposing to approve portions 

of SIP submittals provided by SC DHEC 

to EPA on May 1, 2012,1 July 18, 2011, 

February 16, 2011, December 23, 2009, 

and December 4, 2008, to adopt NSR 

permitting requirements for 

implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS, 

federal changes to the NAAQS, an 

update to the federal definition for VOC, 

and an administrative correction to the 

State’s VOC rule. South Carolina’s May 

1, 2012, SIP submittal amends the 

State’s PSD regulations at Regulation 

61–62.5, Standard No. 7—Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration to adopt the 

PM2.5 PSD increments promulgated in 

the rule entitled ‘‘Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) for 

Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 

Micrometers (PM2.5)—Increments, 

Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and 

Significant Monitoring Concentration 

(SMC),’’ Final Rule, 75 FR 64864, 

(October 20, 2010) (hereafter referred to 

as ‘‘PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC 

Rule’’).2 The December 4, 2008, 

December 23, 2009, and July 18, 2011, 

SIP submissions, as well as the May 1, 

2012, submission, all update South 

Carolina’s ambient air quality standards 

table at 61–62.5, Standard No. 2— 

Ambient Air Quality Standards to be 

consistent with EPA’s NAAQS at 40 

CFR part 50 and table at http:// 

www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html. Also, 

South Carolina’s December 4, 2008, and 

February 16, 2011, SIP submittals 

amend the State’s definition for VOC to 

be consistent with the federal definition 

at 40 CFR 51.100(s). Lastly, the 

December 4, 2008, submittal makes an 

administrative correction to Regulation 

61–62.5, Standard 5—Volatile Organic 

Compounds. Details concerning each 

SIP submittal are summarized below. 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed action? 

Today’s proposed action regarding the 

PSD provisions relate to EPA’s PM2.5

PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule. 

Today’s proposed actions on 

administrative changes to South 

Carolina’s ambient air quality standards 

and to South Carolina’s definition for 

VOC relate to other federal rule changes 

including the federal VOC definition at 

40 CFR 51.100(s). More detail on the 

PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule 

can be found in EPA’s October 20, 2010, 

final rule and is summarized below. See 

75 FR 64864. 

A. PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC-Rule 

On October 20, 2010, EPA finalized 

the PM2.5 PSD Increments-SILs-SMC 

Rule to provide additional regulatory 

requirements under the PSD program 

regarding the implementation of the 

PM2.5 NAAQS for NSR.3 Specifically, 

the rule establishes: (1) PM2.5

increments pursuant to section 166(a) of 

the CAA to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality in areas 

meeting the NAAQS; (2) SILs used as a 

screening tool (by a major source subject 

to PSD) to evaluate the impact a 

proposed major source or modification 

may have on the NAAQS or PSD 

increment; and (3) a SMC (also a 

screening tool) used by a major source 

subject to PSD to determine if a source 

must submit to the permitting authority 

one year of pre-construction air quality 

monitoring data prior to constructing or 

modifying a facility. South Carolina’s 

May 1, 2012, SIP submittal adopts the 

PM2.5 increments portion of the PM2.5

PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule to be 

consistent with the federal NSR 

regulations and to appropriately 

implement the State’s NSR program for 

the PM2.5 NAAQS. South Carolina’s May 

1, 2012, SIP submittal did not adopt the 

SILs and SMC screening tools also 

promulgated in the October 20, 2010, 

rule as the screening tools are not 

required by the Act as part of an 

approvable SIP program.4 EPA’s 

authority to implement the SILs and 

SMC for PSD purposes has been 

challenged by the Sierra Club. Sierra 

Club v. EPA, Case No 10–1413 (D.C. 

Circuit Court).5

1. What are PSD increments? 

As established in part C of title I of 

the CAA, EPA’s PSD program protects 

public health from adverse effects of air 

pollution by ensuring that construction 

of new or modified sources in 

attainment or unclassifiable areas does 

not lead to significant deterioration of 

air quality while simultaneously 

ensuring that economic growth will 

occur in a manner consistent with 

preservation of clean air resources. 

Under section 165(a)(3) of the CAA, a 

PSD permit applicant must demonstrate 

that emissions from the proposed 

construction and operation of a facility 

‘‘will not cause, or contribute to, air 

pollution in excess of any maximum 

allowable increase or allowable 

concentration for any pollutant.’’ In 

other words, when a source applies for 

a permit to emit a regulated pollutant in 

an area that meets the NAAQS, the state 

and EPA must determine if emissions of 

the regulated pollutant from the source 

will cause significant deterioration in 

air quality. Significant deterioration 

occurs when the amount of the new 

pollution exceeds the applicable PSD 

increment, which is the ‘‘maximum 

allowable increase’’ of an air pollutant 

allowed to occur above the applicable 

baseline concentration 6 for that 

pollutant. PSD increments prevent air 

quality in clean areas from deteriorating 

to the level set by the NAAQS. 

Therefore, an increment is the 

mechanism used to estimate ‘‘significant 

deterioration’’ of air quality for a 

pollutant in an area. 

For PSD baseline purposes, a baseline 

area for a particular pollutant emitted 

from a source includes the attainment or 

unclassifiable area in which the source 

is located as well as any other 

attainment or unclassifiable area in 

which the source’s emissions of that 

pollutant are projected (by air quality 

modeling) to result in an ambient 

pollutant increase of at least 1 

microgram per meter cubed (mg/m3) 

(annual average). See 40 CFR 

52.21(b)(15)(i). Under EPA’s existing 

regulations, the establishment of a 

baseline area for any PSD increment 

results from the submission of the first 

complete PSD permit application and is 

based on the location of the proposed 

source and its emissions impact on the 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with 
4798 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 15 / Wednesday, January 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

7Baseline dates are pollutant specific. That is, a 

complete PSD application establishes the baseline 

date only for those regulated NSR pollutants that 

are projected to be emitted in significant amounts 

(as defined in the regulations) by the applicant’s 

new source or modification. Thus, an area may have 

different baseline dates for different pollutants. 

8EPA generally characterized the PM2.5 NAAQS 

as a NAAQS for a new indicator of PM. EPA did 

not replace the PM10 NAAQS with the NAAQS for 

PM2.5 when the PM2.5 NAAQS were promulgated in 

1997. EPA rather retained the annual and 24-hour 

NAAQS for PM2.5 as if PM2.5 was a new pollutant 

even though EPA had already developed air quality 

criteria for PM generally. See 75 FR 64864 (October 

20, 2010). 9EPA interprets 166(a) to authorize EPA to 

promulgate pollutant-specific PSD regulations 

meeting the requirements of section 166(c) and 

166(d) for any pollutant for which EPA promulgates 

a NAAQS after 1977. 

area. Once the baseline area is 

established, subsequent PSD sources 

locating in that area need to consider 

that a portion of the available increment 

may have already been consumed by 

previous emissions increases. In 

general, the submittal date of the first 

complete PSD permit application in a 

particular area is the operative ‘‘baseline 

date’’ after which new sources must 

evaluate increment consumption.7 On 

or before the date of the first complete 

PSD application, emissions generally 

are considered to be part of the baseline 

concentration, except for certain 

emissions from major stationary 

sources. Most emissions increases that 

occur after the baseline date will be 

counted toward the amount of 

increment consumed. Similarly, 

emissions decreases after the baseline 

date restore or expand the amount of 

increment that is available. See 75 FR 

64864. As described in the PM2.5 PSD 

Increments-SILs-SMC Rule, and 

pursuant to the authority under section 

166(a) of the CAA, EPA promulgated 

numerical increments for PM2.5 as a new 

pollutant 8 for which NAAQS were 

established after August 7, 1977,9 and 

derived 24-hour and annual PM2.5

increments for the three area 

classifications (Class I, II and III) using 

the ‘‘contingent safe harbor’’ approach. 

See 75 FR 64864 at 64869 and ambient 

air increment table at 40 CFR 

51.166(c)(1) and 52.21(c). 

In addition to PSD increments for the 

PM2.5 NAAQS, the PM2.5 PSD 

Increments-SILs-SMC Rule amended the 

definition at 40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21 

for ‘‘major source baseline date’’ and 

‘‘minor source baseline date’’ (including 

trigger dates) to establish the PM2.5

NAAQS specific dates associated with 

the implementation of PM2.5 PSD 

increments. See 75 FR 64864. In 

accordance with section 166(b) of the 

CAA, EPA required the states to submit 

revised implementation plans to EPA 

for approval (to adopt the PM2.5 PSD 

increments) within 21 months from 

promulgation of the final rule (by July 

20, 2012). Regardless of when a state 

submits its revised SIP, the emissions 

from major sources subject to PSD for 

PM2.5 for which construction 

commenced after October 20, 2010 

(major source baseline date), consume 

PM2.5 increment and should be included 

in the increment analyses occurring 

after the minor source baseline date is 

established for an area under the state’s 

revised PSD program. See 75 FR 64864. 

As discussed in detail in Section III, 

South Carolina’s May 1, 2012, SIP 

submission adopts the PM2.5 PSD 

increment permitting requirements 

promulgated in the PM2.5 PSD 

Increments-SILs-SMC Rule. 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of South 

Carolina’s SIP submittals? 

South Carolina currently has a SIPapproved NSR program for new and 

modified stationary sources. SC DHEC’s 

PSD preconstruction rules are found at 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7– 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

and apply to major stationary sources or 

modifications constructed in areas 

designated attainment or unclassifiable/ 

attainment as required under part C of 

title I of the CAA with respect to the 

NAAQS. EPA is proposing to approve 

changes to South Carolina’s SIP to adopt 

the PM2.5 PSD increments, 

administrative updates to the State’s 

NAAQS table at Regulation 61–62.5, 

Standard No. 2, and a revision to the 

VOC definition at Regulation 61–62.1— 

Definitions and General Requirements— 

VOC. See below for more details on 

South Carolina’s changes to its SIP. 

A. Regulation 62–62.5, Standard No. 7— 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

South Carolina’s May 1, 2012, SIP 

submittal adopts PM2.5 PSD increments 

for the PM2.5 annual and 24-hour 

NAAQS (pursuant to section 166(a) of 

the CAA) into the South Carolina SIP (at 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7) as 

promulgated in the October 20, 2010, 

and includes: (1) Addition of PM2.5 PSD 

increments at SC DEHC’s increments at 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7 (c) 

and (p)(5) (for Class I variances) 

(consistent with the tables at 40 CFR 

51.166(c)), including replacing the term 

‘‘particulate matter’’ with ‘‘PM10’’ in the 

tables at Regulation 61–62.5, Standard 

No. 7 paragraphs (c) and (p)(5) (for Class 

I Variances) and replacing the term 

‘‘particulate matter’’ with ‘‘PM2.5, PM10’’ 

in the text at Regulation 61–62.5, 

Standard No. 7 paragraph (p)(5) (for 

Class I Variances); (2) revision to the 

definition at Regulation 61–62.5, 

Standard No. 7, paragraph (b)(31)(i)(a)– 

(c) for ‘‘major source baseline date’’ 

(consistent with 40 CFR 

51.166(b)(14)(i)(a) and (c)), to establish 

major source baseline date for PM2.5 and 

removing the term ‘‘particulate matter’’ 

to distinguish between PM10 and PM2.5; 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7, 

paragraph (b)(31)(ii)(a)–(c) for ‘‘minor 

source baseline date,’’ to establish the 

PM2.5 ‘‘trigger date’’ (consistent with 40 

CFR 51.166(b)(14)(ii)(c)) and remove the 

term ‘‘particulate matter’’ to distinguish 

between PM10 and PM2.5; (3) revisions to 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 7, 

paragraph (5)(i) for ‘‘baseline area’’ 

(consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i) 

and (ii)) to specify pollutant air quality 

impact annual averages and amend the 

regulatory reference for section 107(d) of 

the CAA at paragraph (5)(ii); and (4) 

amendment to Regulation 61–62.5, 

Standard No. 7 paragraph (b)(31)(iii)(a) 

to also amend the regulatory reference 

for section 107(d) of the CAA and to add 

a reference to 40 CFR 51.166. These 

changes provide for the implementation 

of the PM2.5 PSD increments for the 

PM2.5 NAAQS in South Carolina’s PSD 

program. In today’s action, EPA is 

proposing to approve South Carolina’s 

May 1, 2012, SIP submittal to address 

PM2.5 PSD increments. As mentioned 

above, South Carolina’s May 1, 2012, 

SIP submittal did not propose to adopt 

the SILs and SMC screening tools also 

promulgated in the PM2.5 PSD 

Increments-SILs-SMC Rule. 

B. Regulation 61.62.5, Standard No. 2— 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

Sections 108 and 109 of the CAA 

govern the establishment, review, and 

revision, as appropriate, of the NAAQS 

to protect public health and welfare. 

The CAA requires periodic review of the 

air quality criteria—the science upon 

which the standards are based—and the 

standards themselves. EPA’s regulatory 

provisions that govern the NAAQS are 

found at 40 CFR part 50—National 

Primary and Secondary Ambient Air 

Quality Standards. In this rulemaking, 

EPA is proposing to approve portions of 

multiple South Carolina SIP 

submissions amending the State’s 

NAAQS table for PM2.5, PM10, ozone and 

lead that are found at Regulation 61.62– 

5, Standard No. 2. The four SIP 

submittals amending SC DEHC’s 

NAAQS table can be found in the 

Docket for this proposed rulemaking at 

www.regulations.gov and are 

summarized below. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 15 / Wednesday, January 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules 4799 

10This SIP submittal also included changes to SC 

DHEC’s Regulation 61.62–96—Nitrogen Oxides 

(NOX) and Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Budget Trading 

Program General Provisions. EPA took final action 

to approve this portion of the December 4, 2008, 

submittal on October 16, 2009 (74 FR 53167). 

11This submittal also make changes to South 

Carolina’s State Regulations 61–62.60, 62.61, 62.63 

and 62.72 regarding New Source Performance 

Standards (NSPS), National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and Acid Rain, 

respectively. However, these regulations are not 

part of South Carolina’s federally approved SIP; 

therefore, EPA is not proposing action on these 

changes. 

12On June 15, 2005 (one year after the effective 

date of the 1997 8-hour ozone designations), EPA 

revoked the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for all areas 

except the 8-hour ozone nonattainment-deferred 

Early Action Compact Areas (EAC) areas. The 1- 

hour ozone NAAQS for the EAC nonattainmentdeferred areas including those in South Carolina 

(Greenville-Spartanburg-Anderson, SC and Central 

Midlands Columbia Area) was revoked on April 15, 

2009 (one year after the effective date of the EAC 

areas 8-hour ozone designations to attainment). See 

64 FR 17897 (April 2, 2008), 69 FR 23858 and 69 

23951 (April 30, 2004). 

13This SIP submittal also make changes to South 

Carolina’s SIP at Regulations 61–62.1—Definitions 

and General Requirements; 61–62.5, Standard 1— 

Emissions from Fuel Burning Operations; 61–62.5, 

Standard No. 4—Emissions from Process Industries; 

and 61–62.5, Standard 6—Alternative Emission 

Limitation Options (‘‘Bubble’’). EPA will consider 

action on these changes to South Carolina SIP in a 

separate rulemaking. 

14EPA initially established NAAQS for PM in 

1971 measured by the TSP indicator. On July 1, 

1987, EPA revised the PM NAAQS by changing the 

indicator to PM10 (establishing an annual and 24- 

hour standard) and revoking the TSP NAAQS. See 

52 FR 24634. 

15This submittal also make changes to South 

Carolina’s regulations 61–62.63—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. However, 

these regulations are not part of South Carolina’s 

federally approved SIP; therefore, EPA is not 

proposing action on these changes. 

16This submittal also make changes to South 

Carolina’s State Regulations 61–62.60, 62.61, 62.63 

and 62.72 regarding NSPS, NESHAP, NESHAP for 

Source Categories, and Acid Rain, respectively. 

However, these regulations are not part of South 

Carolina’s federally approved SIP; therefore, EPA is 

not proposing action on these changes. 

17Tropospheric ozone, commonly known as 

smog, occurs when VOC and nitrogen oxide (NOX) 

react in the atmosphere. Because of the harmful 

health effects of ozone, EPA limits the amount of 

VOC and NOX that can be released into the 

atmosphere. VOC are those compounds of carbon 

(excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, 

carbonic acid, metallic carbides, or carbonates, and 

ammonium carbonate) which form ozone through 

atmospheric photochemical reactions. Compounds 

of carbon (or organic compounds) have different 

levels of reactivity; they do not react at the same 

speed, or do not form ozone to the same extent. It 

has been EPA’s policy that compounds of carbon 

with a negligible level of reactivity need not be 

regulated to reduce ozone (42 FR 35314, July 8, 

1977). EPA determines whether a given carbon 

compound has ‘‘negligible’’ reactivity by comparing 

the compound’s reactivity to the reactivity of 

ethane. EPA lists these compounds in its 

regulations at 40 CFR 51.100(s), and excludes them 

from the definition of VOC. The chemicals on this 

list are often called ‘‘negligibly reactive.’’ EPA may 

periodically revise the list of negligibly reactive 

compounds to add compounds to or delete them 

from the list. 

1. South Carolina’s December 4, 2008, 

SIP Submittal 10

On October 17, 2006, EPA revised the 

24-hour primary NAAQS for PM2.5 from 

a level of 65 micrograms per cubic meter 

(mg/m3) to 35 mg/m3. See 71 FR 61144. 

Accordingly, South Carolina’s December 

4, 2008, SIP submittal amends the 

State’s NAAQS table to address the 

amendment to the 24-hour primary 

NAAQS for PM2.5 from 65 mg/m3 to 35 

mg/m3. EPA is proposing to approve this 

change to South Carolina’s NAAQS 

table at Regulation 61.62–5, Standard 

No. 2, based on a preliminary 

determination that this change is 

consistent with EPA’s regulations for 

the 24-hour primary NAAQS for PM2.5. 

2. South Carolina’s December 23, 2009, 

SIP Submittal 11

On March 27, 2008, EPA revised the 

primary and secondary NAAQS for the 

8-hour ozone to 75 parts per billion 

(ppb) to provide increased protection of 

public health and welfare, respectively. 

See 73 FR 16436. Accordingly, South 

Carolina’s December 23, 2009, SIP 

submittal amends the State’s NAAQS 

table to: (1) add the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS of 75 ppb, and (2) remove the 

1-hour ozone NAAQS, which EPA 

revoked on June 15, 2005, one year after 

the effective date of the 1997 8-hour 

ozone designations. See 70 FR 44470 

(August 3, 2005), 69 FR 23858 and 69 

FR 23951 (April 30, 2004).12

Additionally, on November 12, 2008, 

EPA revised the lead NAAQS from 1.5 

mg/m3 to 0.15 mg/m3 based on a rolling 

3-month average for both the primary 

and secondary standards. See 73 FR 

66964. South Carolina’s December 23, 

2009, SIP submittal amends the State’s 

NAAQS table to adopt the 2008 lead 

NAAQS of 0.15 mg/m3 based on a rolling 

3-month average for both the primary 

and secondary standards. 

EPA is proposing to approve these 

change to South Carolina’s NAAQS 

table at Regulation 61.62–5, Standard 

No. 2, based on a preliminary 

determination that these changes are 

consistent with EPA’s regulations for 

the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 

2008 lead NAAQS. Further, EPA is 

proposing to approve South Carolina’s 

removal of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS 

from its SIP at Regulation 61.62–5, 

Standard No. 2, because this NAAQS 

has been revoked by the Agency for 

South Carolina areas. 

3. South Carolina’s July 18, 2011, SIP 

Submittal 13

South Carolina’s July 18, 2011, SIP 

submittal removes the annual total 

suspended particulate (TSP) standard 

from South Carolina’s NAAQS table.14

This SIP submittal also clarifies that the 

carbon monoxide 1-hour and 8-hour 

average concentrations are not to be 

exceeded more than once a year (in 

accordance with 40 CFR 50.8) and adds 

a footnote referencing 40 CFR 50.16 for 

detailed explanation concerning 

calculation of the rolling 3-month 

average for the lead NAAQS. However, 

these two revisions are superseded by 

SC’s DHEC’s May 1, 2012, SIP submittal 

which streamlines and reformats the 

State’s NAAQS table. See discussion 

below. 

4. South Carolina’s May 1, 2012, SIP 

Submittal 15

South Carolina’s May 1, 2012, 

submittal removes from the State’s 

NAAQS table the PM10 annual standard 

to be consistent with EPA’s October 17, 

2006, revocation of the annual PM10

NAAQS. See 71 FR 61144. Additionally, 

this SIP submittal reformats SC DEHC’s 

NAAQS table in an effort to ensure 

information found therein is consistent 

with EPA’s NAAQS at 40 CFR 50 and 

the table at http://www.epa.gov/air/ 

criteria.html including (1) removing the 

table’s footnotes and instead adding a 

column referencing the federal CFR for 

each NAAQS; (2) streamlining the units 

column; and (3) updating test method 

references. 

C. Regulation 61–62.1—Definitions and 

General Requirements 

South Carolina’s December 4, 2008, 

and February 16, 2011,16 SIP submittals 

revise the definition for VOC at 

Regulation 61–62.1—Definitions and 

General Requirements to include 

additional compounds 

1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-3- 

methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane 

(HFE–7300) (as amended on January 18, 

2007 (72 FR 2193)) and propylene 

carbonate and dimethyl carbonate 

(amended on January 21, 2009 (74 FR 

3437)) respectively to the list of 

compounds excluded from the 

definition of VOC on the basis that they 

have a negligible contribution to 

tropospheric formation of ozone.17 EPA 

has preliminarily determined that these 

changes are consistent with EPA’s 

federal regulations at 40 CFR 51.100 and 

as such is proposing to approve these 

changes into the South Carolina SIP. 

D. Regulation 61–62.5, Standard 5— 

Volatile Organic Compounds 

South Carolina’s December 4, 2008, 

SIP submittal makes an administrative 

correction to subparagraphs 2.a.(i)(a) 

and (b) of Regulation 61–62.5, Standard 

5, Section II, Part Q (Manufacture of 

Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products) 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with 
4800 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 15 / Wednesday, January 23, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

by adding the term and symbol ‘‘minus 

(¥)’’ to express the outlet gas 

temperature threshold for surface 

condensers. 

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve multiple 

submissions revising South Carolina’s 

SIP to adopt the PM2.5 increments as 

amended in the October 20, 2010, PM2.5

PSD Increments-SILs-SMC Rule, to 

adopt federal NAAQS updates and VOC 

definition updates, and to make an 

administrative correction. EPA has 

made the preliminary determination 

that these SIP submittals, with regard to 

the aforementioned proposed actions, 

are approvable because they are 

consistent with section 110 of the CAA 

and EPA regulations regarding NSR 

permitting. 

V. 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 

have tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

being proposed for approval to apply 

PSD permitting program statewide 

including the Catawba Indian Nation. 

Accordingly, EPA and the Catawba 

Indian Nation discussed South 

Carolina’s SIP submittals prior to 

today’s proposed action. EPA notes that 

this rulemaking 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, Greenhouse gases, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

oxides, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: January 7, 2013. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2013–01205 Filed 1–22–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2009–0449; A–1–FRL– 

9773–2] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Connecticut; Reasonably Available 

Control Technology for the 1997 8- 

Hour Ozone Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing approval of 

State Implementation Plan revisions 

submitted by the State of Connecticut. 

These SIP revisions consist of a 

demonstration that Connecticut meets 

the requirements of reasonably available 

control technology for oxides of 

nitrogen and volatile organic 

compounds set forth by the Clean Air 

Act with respect to the 1997 8-hour 

ozone standard. Additionally, we are 

proposing approval of three single 

source orders. This action is being taken 

in accordance with the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before February 22, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R01–OAR–2009–0449 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: arnold.anne@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (617) 918–0047. 

4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification 

Number EPA–R01–OAR–2009–0449,’’ 

Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA New England 

Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem 

Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 

Post Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail 

code OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109– 

3912. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver 

your comments to: Anne Arnold, 

Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

EPA New England Regional Office, 

Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air 

Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office 

Square—Suite 100, (mail code OEP05– 

2), Boston, MA 02109–3912. 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 legal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R01–OAR–2009– 

0449. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov, or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

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 email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov your email address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the comment that is 

placed in the public docket and made 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with