6954 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

1EPA notes that while the July 27, 2016, 

submittal was signed and dated by SC DHEC on 

July 25, 2016, it was received via EPA’s SPeCS for 

SIPs system on July 27, 2016. 

2On July 1, 2024, SC DHEC was restructured into 

a health agency, the Department of Public Health, 

and an environmental agency, the Department of 

Environmental Services (DES). In a letter dated June 

20, 2024, South Carolina represented to EPA that 

all the functions, powers, and duties of the 

environmental divisions, offices, and programs of 

DHEC, including the authority to administer and 

enforce State implementation plans, are retained 

and continued in full force and effect under DES. 

This letter is in the docket for this proposed 

rulemaking. Throughout this proposal, the terms, 

‘‘Department’’, ‘‘South Carolina Department of 

Health and Environmental Services’’, ‘‘SCDHEC’’, 

‘‘South Carolina Department of Environmental 

Services’’, and ‘‘SCDES’’ are all interchangeable. 

negative environmental consequences of 

industrial, governmental, and 

commercial operations or programs and 

policies.’’ West Virginia did not 

evaluate EJ considerations as part of its 

SIP submittal; the CAA and applicable 

implementing regulations neither 

prohibit nor require such an evaluation. 

The EPA did not perform an EJ analysis 

and did not consider EJ in this action. 

Due to the nature of the action being 

taken here, this action is expected to 

have a neutral impact on the air quality 

of the affected area. Consideration of EJ 

is not required as part of this action, and 

there is no information in the record 

inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 

12898 of achieving environmental 

justice for people of color, low-income 

populations, and Indigenous peoples. 

• In addition, this action 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 the EPA notes 

that it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. Thus, Executive Order 13175 

does not apply to this action. 

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. 

Adam Ortiz, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2025–01101 Filed 1–17–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2024–0241; FRL–12545– 

01–R4] 

Air Plan Partial Approval and Partial 

Disapproval; South Carolina; Minor 

Source Permit Program Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to partially 

approve and partially disapprove 

changes to South Carolina’s State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) to revise 

regulations prescribing minor source 

permit program requirements, including 

minor new source review (NSR) 

requirements as 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; January 20, 2016; July 27, 2016; 

and April 24, 2020. This action is being 

proposed pursuant to the Clean Air Act 

(CAA or Act). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 20, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2024–0241 at regulations.gov. 

Follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. Once submitted, 

comments cannot be edited or removed 

from regulations.gov. EPA may publish 

any comment received to its public 

docket. Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. EPA will generally not consider 

comments or comment contents located 

outside of the primary submission (i.e., 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 

system). For additional submission 

methods, the full EPA public comment 

policy, information about CBI or 

multimedia submissions, and general 

guidance on making effective 

comments, please visit https://

www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Weston Freund, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air and 

Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 

Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

The telephone number is (404) 562– 

8773. Mr. Freund can also be reached 

via electronic mail at freund.weston@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What action is EPA proposing? 

II. Analysis of the State’s Submittals 

A. Overview and Analysis of Changes to 

Regulation 61–62.1, Section II, Permit 

Requirements 

1. Subsection II(B)—Exemptions From the 

Requirement To Obtain a Construction 

Permit 

a. Paragraph II(B)(2) 

i. Subparagraph II(B)(2)(b) 

ii. Subparagraph II(B)(2)(f) 

iii. Subparagraph II(B)(2)(h) 

b. Paragraph II(B)(3) 

c. Paragraph II(B)(5) 

d. Paragraph II(B)(6) 

e. Paragraph II(B)(7) 

2. Subsection II(C)—Construction Permit 

Applications 

3. Subsection II(D)—General Construction 

Permits 

4. Subsection II(E)—Synthetic Minor 

Construction Permits 

a. Subparagraphs II(E)(4)(a)–(E)(4)(d) 

b. Subparagraph II(E)(4)(c) 

c. Subparagraph II(E)(4)(e) 

d. Subparagraph II(E)(4)(g) 

5. Subsection II(F)—Operating Permits 

a. Paragraphs II(F)(2) and (F)(3) 

b. Paragraph II(F)(5) 

6. Subsection II(G)—Conditional Major 

Operating Permits 

a. Subparagraph II(G)(2)(d) 

b. Subparagraph II(G)(7)(c) 

c. Subparagraph II(G)(7)(g) 

7. Subsection II(H)—Operating Permit 

Renewal Requests 

8. Subsection II(I)—Registration Permits 

a. Subparagraph II(I)(2)(a)(ii) 

b. Subparagraph II(I)(2)(e) 

9. Subsection II(K)—Exceptions 

10. Subsection II(N)—Public Participation 

Procedures 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

IV. Proposed Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA proposing? 

On October 1, 2007; July 18, 2011; 

June 17, 2013; August 8, 2014; January 

20, 2016; July 27, 2016; 1 September 5, 

2017; April 24, 2020; and February 4, 

2022, SC DHEC2 submitted SIP 

revisions to EPA for approval that 

include changes to South Carolina’s 

minor source permitting regulations to 

clarify and streamline the State’s 

federally approved minor 

preconstruction and minor operating 

permitting program. This federally 

approved program requires stationary 

sources of air pollutants planning to 

construct or modify to first obtain a 

construction permit and to obtain and 

maintain operating permits in 

accordance with the South Carolina 

Code of Regulations Annotated (S.C. 

Code Ann. Regs. hereinafter 

‘‘Regulation’’) 61–62.1, Section II, 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 6955 

3EPA proposed to approve and did not receive 

comments on changes in the 2017 NPRM to the 

following: 61–62.1, subsection II.A; 61–62.1, 

paragraphs II(B)(1) and II(B)(4); 61–62.1, subsection 

II(C); 61–62.1, paragraphs II(E)(1), II(E)(2), II(E)(3), 

and II(E)(5); 61–62.1 subsection II(F); 61–62.1, 

subsection II(J); 61–62.1, subsection II(M); 61–62.1, 

paragraph II(N)(5); and 61–62.1, subsection II(O). 

For more information on these proposed changes, 

see 82 FR 39083 (August 17, 2017). However, in this 

document, EPA is now proposing to disapprove 

Regulation 61–62.1, subsection II(E) in its entirety 

and subsection II(F) in its entirety, as discussed in 

Sections II.A.4 and II.A.5 of this NPRM. 

Permit Requirements. CAA section 

110(a)(2)(C) provides that SIPs must 

include a program to regulate the 

construction and modification of any 

stationary source as necessary to assure 

that the national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS) are achieved, and it 

cites to more detailed CAA permitting 

requirements that pertain to the 

construction of major sources of air 

pollution. These CAA requirements for 

regulating the construction and 

modification of stationary sources, 

known collectively as the New Source 

Review (NSR) program, consists of the 

following three programs: (1) Prevention 

of significant deterioration (PSD) for 

major stationary sources and major 

modifications in attainment and 

unclassifiable areas; (2) nonattainment 

new source review (NNSR) for major 

stationary sources and major 

modifications locating in or impacting 

nonattainment areas, and (3) minor 

NSR, which applies generally to 

attainment, unclassifiable, and 

nonattainment areas for new sources 

and modifications that fall below the 

major NSR thresholds. Federal 

regulations setting forth these NSR 

programs are prescribed at 40 CFR part 

51, subpart I, Review of New Sources 

and Modifications, and Appendix S to 

part 51, Emission Offset Interpretive 

Ruling. Specifically, 40 CFR 51.165 

generally details components of the 

NNSR program in conjunction with 

Appendix S to part 51. Next, 40 CFR 

51.166 prescribes minimum 

requirements for SIP-approved PSD 

programs. The regulations at 40 CFR 

51.160–164 are generally applicable to 

all NSR programs, but because of the 

more specific implementing regulations 

for the NNSR and PSD programs at 40 

CFR 51.165 and 51.166, and 40 CFR 

51.160–164 serve primarily as the basis 

for EPA’s evaluation of minor NSR 

programs. Accordingly, in this proposed 

action, EPA is evaluating submitted 

changes to South Carolina’s existing 

SIP-approved minor NSR program 

against the generally applicable Federal 

NSR rules and is proposing to approve 

in part, and disapprove in part, these 

revisions. EPA is also evaluating 

changes to provisions for obtaining 

minor source operating permits, which 

are already approved into the South 

Carolina SIP. These regulations include 

provisions for federally enforceable 

State operating permits (FESOPs), 

which include limits on potential to 

emit (PTE) to enable a source or 

modification to qualify as minor and 

avoid major NSR applicability (PSD and 

NNSR programs) as well as title V major 

source status. 

Through a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) published on 

August 17, 2017 (82 FR 39083), EPA 

proposed to approve changes to the 

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

2013; August 8, 2014; January 20, 2016; 

and July 25, 2016 SIP submissions. A 

comprehensive discussion of EPA’s 

analysis and rationale for those 

proposed changes to the South Carolina 

SIP is described in the August 17, 2017 

NPRM. Comments on the August 17, 

2017 NPRM were due on or before 

September 18, 2017. Adverse comments 

were received on the proposed changes 

to Regulation 61–62.1, subparagraph 

II(B)(2)(h); Regulation 61–62.1, 

paragraph II(B)(3); Regulation 61–62.1, 

paragraph II(B)(5); Regulation 61–62.1, 

paragraph II(B)(6); Regulation 61–62.1, 

subsection II(D); Regulation 61–62.1, 

paragraph II(E)(4); Regulation 61–62.1, 

Section II(I); Regulation 61–62.1, 

subsection II(K); Regulation 61–62.1, 

paragraph II(N)(1); and Regulation 61– 

62.1, paragraph II(N)(6). The comments 

are available in the docket for this 

proposed action. EPA did not finalize 

action on the August 2017 NPRM. 

Comments on that action have 

persuaded EPA to reconsider some 

elements of the SIP submissions 

described above. EPA is now proposing 

to disapprove several provisions that 

received adverse comment. In addition, 

EPA is proposing to disapprove several 

provisions that did not receive adverse 

comment, and is re-proposing approval 

of several provisions that received 

adverse comment in the 2017 NPRM. 

EPA is not reconsidering or seeking 

additional comment on certain 

provisions found in the 2017 NPRM that 

did not receive comments.3 In this 

proposed action, EPA is also proposing 

to act on the SIP revisions requested by 

South Carolina since the 2017 NPRM in 

its submittals from September 5, 2017; 

April 24, 2020; and February 4, 2022. 

II. Analysis of the State’s Submittals 

A. Overview and Analysis of Changes to 

Regulation 61–62.1, Section II, Permit 

Requirements 

Section 110(a)(2)(C) of the CAA 

requires that SIPs include a program to 

regulate the construction and 

modification of stationary sources as 

necessary to ensure that the NAAQS are 

maintained. Federal regulations at 40 

CFR 51.160(e) require that such a State 

program identify the types and sizes of 

sources subject to review and the basis 

for determining which sources are 

subject. Additionally, CAA section 

110(l) provides that EPA shall not 

approve a revision to a plan if the 

revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress (as defined in CAA section 

171), or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. 

South Carolina has a SIP-approved 

minor source permitting program that 

includes minor NSR permitting at 

Regulation 61–62.1, Section II, Permit 

Requirements. These regulations require 

stationary sources that are planning to 

construct, alter, or add to a source of air 

pollutants to first obtain a 

preconstruction permit from the 

permitting agency and to request an 

operating permit upon placing the new 

or altered source into operation. These 

stationary sources include different 

types of minor sources. The program 

covers ‘‘true minor’’ sources, which 

have the potential to emit (PTE) certain 

pollutants below major NSR thresholds 

for new sources and modifications. The 

SIP-approved minor source permitting 

program also includes provisions for 

issuing permits that establish federally 

enforceable emissions limits to restrict 

the PTE of certain pollutants below 

major stationary source and major 

modification applicability thresholds: 

‘‘synthetic minor’’ permits establish 

these enforceable emision limits for 

sources obtaining construction permits, 

and ‘‘conditional major’’ permits 

establish these emission limits in the 

corresponding operating permits. South 

Carolina initially revised its minor 

source permitting program rules in the 

October 1, 2007 submittal to clarify and 

streamline requirements for obtaining 

minor source construction and 

operating permits. Subsequent 

submittals make other changes, which 

are discussed for each subsection of the 

regulation, below. 

EPA has reviewed the proposed 

changes to the minor source 

construction and operating permitting 

regulations and is proposing to approve 

in part and disapprove in part for the 

reasons discussed below. 

1. Subsection II(B)—Exemptions From 

the Requirement To Obtain a 

Construction Permit 

Regulation 61–62.1, Section II(B)— 

Exemptions from the Requirement to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
6956 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

4Additional changes to the revised subsection 

II(F) are discussed later in this document. 

5This letter is included in the docket for this 

proposed action. 

6Seitz, John S, ‘‘Calculating Potential to Emit 

(PTE) for Emergency Generators.’’ Memorandum to 

Program Directors in EPA Regional Offices, Office 

of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research 

Triangle Park, NC (Sept. 6, 1995). 

7Peak shaving is the practice of reducing a 

facility’s consumption of utility-provided power by 

instead using limited onsite power during periods 

of high energy demand. 

8This letter is included in the docket for this 

proposed action. South Carolina submitted SIP 

revisions with changes to the NOX control rules at 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 5.2, Control of 

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX), dated October 1, 2007; 

July 25, 2016; September 5, 2017; and February 4, 

2022. EPA will address these revisions in a future 

rulemaking. 

9See 60 FR 63434 (December 11, 1995). 

Obtain a Construction Permit specifies 

which types of minor sources are 

exempt from obtaining minor source 

construction permits. The October 1, 

2007 submittal makes several changes to 

subsection II(B), including renumbering 

subsection II(F) 4 to subsection II(B) and 

modifying the title to clarify that the 

paragraph applies only to construction 

permits. Additional changes are made to 

subsection II(B) in the submittals from 

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

2014; and April 24, 2020, and are 

described below. 

One universal change to subsection 

II(B) from the April 24, 2020 submittal 

is administrative in nature by placing 

the alphanumeric provision dividers in 

parentheses. The submittal also makes 

other non-substantive and ministerial 

changes. EPA is proposing to approve 

these editorial and minor changes as 

they are consistent with CAA section 

110. 

a. Paragraph II(B)(2) 

The October 1, 2007 submittal revises 

paragraph II(B)(2) by clarifying that the 

permits described are ‘‘construction’’ 

permits. It also specifies that stationary 

sources exempt from the construction 

permit requirements are listed in 

subparagraphs II(B)(2)(a) through (h). 

Additionally, the 2007 submittal adds a 

statement that a source’s exemption 

status may change (and thus require a 

permit) upon the promulgation of new 

regulatory requirements. EPA has 

reviewed these ministerial changes and 

preliminarily found them to be 

consistent with CAA section 110. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve 

these changes to South Carolina’s SIP at 

Regulation 61–62.1, subsection II(B). 

i. Subparagraph II(B)(2)(b) 

In the October 1, 2007 submittal, a 

new subparagraph in Section II— 

(B)(2)(b)—adds an exemption to the 

requirement to obtain a construction 

permit for boilers and space heaters of 

less than 10 million British thermal 

units per hour (MMBtu/hr) rated input 

capacity that burn only virgin gas fuels. 

South Carolina has determined that 

these small boilers and space heaters do 

not require permits because they are not 

likely to have significant air quality 

impacts and permits for these units 

would be unlikely to set forth unique 

requirements. Units of this size would 

be generally consistent with other 

pollutant-rate based exemptions of 1 lb/ 

hr for particulate matter (PM) that are 

approved in the current SIP at 

paragraph II(F)(2) and that the State also 

put forward for additional pollutants at 

subparagraph II(B)(2)(h) in the October 

1, 2007, submittal, which is discussed 

below. EPA similarly does not prescribe 

specific requirements for boilers smaller 

than this threshold. See 40 CFR 

60.40c(a). 

EPA has reviewed this new 

exemption and supports the State’s 

determination to exempt auxiliary 

boilers and space heaters of less than 10 

MMBtu/hr rated input capacity that 

burn only virgin gas fuels because they 

are not expected to interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress or any other applicable CAA 

requirement. Therefore, EPA is 

proposing to approve subparagraph 

II(B)(2)(b) into the SIP pursuant to the 

CAA. 

By inserting the new subparagraph (b) 

under subparagraph (B)(2), the 

subparagraphs below are relettered, 

such that the old subparagraph (b) 

becomes the new subparagraph (c), and 

so forth. EPA is also proposing to 

approve this minor change. 

ii. Subparagraph II(B)(2)(f) 

The October 1, 2007 submittal revises 

subparagraph II(B)(2)(f) to expand the 

exemption from construction permitting 

requirements for certain emergency 

power generators. The current SIPapproved regulation provides an 

exemption from construction permits 

for emergency power generators of ‘‘less 

than’’ 150 kilowatt (KW) rated capacity, 

as well as larger emergency power 

generators that operate 250 hours per 

year or less and have a method to record 

the actual hour of use, such as an hour 

meter. The revision provides an 

exemption for emergency power 

generators of ‘‘less than or equal to’’ 150 

KW rated capacity, as well as generators 

that are designated for emergency use 

only and operate 500 hours or less per 

year for testing and maintenance and 

have a method to record the actual 

hours of use, such as an hour meter. 

South Carolina’s December 30, 2016 

letter explains that the State considered 

CAA section 110(l), and asserts that the 

State expects no increase in actual 

emissions as a result of raising this 

exemption threshold for emergency 

power generators.5 South Carolina 

further explains that the 500 hours per 

year threshold is commonly used to 

determine the PTE for title V and other 

major NSR applicability determinations, 

consistent with an EPA guidance 

memorandum.6 These sources are still 

restricted to emergency conditions, 

meaning that other types of nonemergency activities—such as peak 

shaving 7—would not qualify for the 

exemption under subparagraph 

II(B)(2)(f). Additionally, the State points 

to applicable Federal requirements for 

emergency generators at 40 CFR part 63 

at subpart ZZZZ and 40 CFR part 60 at 

subparts IIII and JJJJ that restrict nonemergency use of these sources to 100 

hours per year. 

Subsequently, South Carolina 

submitted a letter dated March 23, 2020, 

more specifically addressing equivalent 

changes to Regulation 61–62.1, Standard 

No. 5.2, Control of Oxides of Nitrogen 

(NOX), to provide further clarifying 

information.8 In this letter, the State 

notes that no Federal standards were in 

place for these emergency engines at the 

time they were developing the original 

Standard No. 5.2 in the 2004 timeframe. 

In fact, the exemption in place in 61– 

62.1, Section II had been in place over 

a decade before.9 The March 23, 2020 

letter explains that South Carolina had 

polled owners and operators in the past 

about typical usage for testing and 

maintenance for these emergency 

generators, and the State developed the 

250-hour per year threshold as a result. 

The State explains that the 250-hour per 

year threshold was never intended to 

limit actual emergency use of the 

generators but was meant to serve as a 

general exemption for a reasonable 

amount of non-emergency use. This is 

also a critical change to include in the 

SIP so that the Regulation is clear as to 

how the State applies it and emergency 

generators are not limited in their 

emergency use. Since that time, EPA 

promulgated 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

ZZZZ, which South Carolina confirms 

in its letter applies to all such 

emergency engines in the State. The 

exemption in subparagraph II(B)(2)(f) 

also clearly only applies to generators 

designated for emergency use. 

Consequently, all non-emergency use 

for these emergency generators is 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 6957 

10 If EPA finalizes disapproval of the changes to 

subsection II(B) at subparagraph II(B)(2)(h), 

subparagraph II(F)(2)(g), effective June 24, 2005, 

would remain in the SIP. 

restricted to 100 hours per year as per 

the Federal regulation, including for 

testing and maintenance. The change to 

provide that exemptions from 

permitting requirements extend to 500 

hours of testing and maintenance would 

have no practical effect on the universe 

of exempt sources, as detailed above, 

since all such units are subject to the 40 

CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ. Therefore, 

this change to subparagraph II(B)(2)(f) 

will not result in any actual increase in 

emissions, and therefore, will not 

interfere with any applicable 

requirement regarding attainment or 

reasonable further progress. The State 

also has the discretion to define the 

scope of its minor NSR program 

pursuant to 40 CFR 51.160(e) and has 

previously determined that these units 

(with the specified size and hourly 

operation restrictions) do not need to 

undergo unique case-by-case permit 

reviews. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

approve these changes to Regulation 61– 

62.1, subparagraph II(B)(2)(f) into the 

SIP pursuant to the CAA. 

iii. Subparagraph II(B)(2)(h) 

The October 1, 2007 submittal also 

makes changes to subparagraph 

II(B)(2)(h), formerly subparagraph 

II(F)(2)(g), by expanding the available 

exemption from a construction permit to 

sources with a total uncontrolled 

emissions rate of less than 1 pound per 

hour (lb/hr) each of sulfur dioxide, 

nitrogen oxides (NOX), and carbon 

monoxide. These exemptions expand on 

the current, SIP-approved exemptions 

that apply to sources with an 

uncontrolled PM emission rate of less 

than 1 lb/hr and/or uncontrolled 

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 

emission rate of less than 1,000 lbs/ 

month. The July 18, 2011 submittal adds 

language to require that emissions 

calculations or other information 

necessary to demonstrate that a source 

qualifies for the exemption must be kept 

on site and provided to the State upon 

request. 

Next, the August 8, 2014 submittal 

revises the emissions exemption 

threshold in subparagraph II(B)(2)(h) in 

two ways. First, it revises total 

uncontrolled PTE from 1 lb/hr to 5 ton 

per year (tpy). Second, it adds language 

stating that sources with a PTE higher 

than the 5 tpy applicability threshold 

may be exempted from the requirement 

to obtain a construction permit under 

this subparagraph if the sources 

demonstrate that they are not subject to 

any State or Federal limits or 

requirements. The State provided EPA 

with a December 30, 2016 letter, 

addressing the second revision, 

asserting that it is primarily intended to 

apply to sources with PTE only slightly 

above the 5 tpy threshold. The State 

further asserts that the rule contains a 

safeguard that sources subject to any 

applicable regulation, such as Federal 

requirements, cannot be exempt from 

obtaining construction permits via this 

case-by-case process. The letter then 

steps through an example of the process 

that small sources of VOC emissions 

would undergo, including an 

assessment of any potentially applicable 

requirements related to NAAQS, toxics, 

or hazardous air pollutants; 

consideration of the PTE relative to 

major NSR thresholds; and any other 

special considerations. South Carolina 

contends that it determines the 

applicability of construction permits for 

these sources under close scrutiny, on a 

case-by-case basis. However, the 

language in this provision from the 

August 8, 2014 submittal does not 

prescribe any upper bound on emissions 

for the case-by-case exemptions from 

minor NSR permitting, nor does it 

provide adequate justification for those 

higher thresholds being exempt from a 

case-by-case permitting process, and the 

safeguard therefore cannot cover the 

universe of possibly exempt sources. 

SIPs must contain a minor NSR 

program with enforceable procedures 

enabling the State to determine whether 

the construction or modification of a 

source will, among other things, 

interfere with attainment or 

maintenance of the NAAQS. See CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(C); 40 CFR 51.160(a). 

These procedures must identify the 

types and sizes of the sources subject to 

review, and the SIP must discuss the 

basis for determining which facilities 

will be subject to review. See 40 CFR 

51.160(e). Furthermore, CAA section 

110(l) prohibits EPA from approving a 

SIP revision that would interfere with 

any applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress toward attainment, or any other 

applicable requirement. The language 

introduced in the August 8, 2014 

submittal at subparagraph II(B)(2)(h) 

appears to be inconsistent with CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(C), 40 CFR 51.160, and 

CAA section 110(l) because it would 

allow the State to exempt sources 

without determining whether the 

sources would interfere with the 

NAAQS, and it does not adequately 

identify the types and sizes of sources 

subject to preconstruction review and 

the basis for determining which sources 

are subject to review. Because of these 

concerns, and because EPA cannot 

evaluate potential NAAQS impacts that 

may occur from undefined future 

exemptions from these SIP 

requirements, EPA is proposing to 

disapprove changes to subparagraph 

II(B)(2)(h) from the August 8, 2014 

submittal. EPA is also proposing to 

disapprove the changes to subparagraph 

II(B)(2)(h) that were requested in the 

October 1, 2007 submittal because those 

changes were superseded by the 

changes in the August 8, 2014 submittal 

and are no longer state-effective. 

The July 18, 2011 submittal makes a 

distinct change to the rule, which is 

found in the current, state-effective 

regulation. The revision adds the 

sentence ‘‘Emissions calculations and 

any other information necessary to 

document qualification for this 

exemption must be maintained onsite 

and provided to the Department upon 

request.’’ This revision adds an 

administrative requirement to show 

compliance. However, because the 

change is so closely linked to the 

changes in the October 1, 2007, and 

August 8, 2014 submittals, EPA is 

proposing to disapprove this change as 

well.10

b. Paragraph II(B)(3) 

In its October 1, 2007 submittal, 

South Carolina requested to add 

paragraph (B)(3) to Section II in its SIP. 

The new paragraph requires the State to 

maintain a list of sources exempted 

under subparagraphs II(B)(2)(a) through 

II(B)(2)(g) on a list of sources to be 

exempted without further review, along 

with any other sources determined to 

have total uncontrolled emissions less 

than the thresholds in subparagraph 

II(B)(2)(h). The list of sources that are 

exempt without further review from the 

requirement to obtain a construction 

permit will be maintained by the 

Department and periodically published 

in the South Carolina State Register for 

use by the public and regulated 

community. 

The July 18, 2011 submission revises 

language in paragraph II(B)(3) to clarify 

that source types which are added to the 

list of exempted sources will be 

determined not to interfere with the 

attainment or maintenance of any State 

or Federal standard, replacing the 

requirement for the list to include 

sources that have total uncontrolled 

emissions less than the thresholds in 

subparagraph II(B)(2)(h). Lastly, the 

August 8, 2014 submittal includes the 

addition of language to paragraph 

II(B)(3) asserting that the State may 

develop emission thresholds for 

exemptions that are determined not to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
6958 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

11Modifications to existing equipment include 

the reconstruction, relocation, and replacement of 

existing equipment, which may qualify for 

exemption pursuant to subparagraph II(B)(2)(h) and 

paragraph II(B)(4). 

interfere with attainment or 

maintenance of State or Federal 

standards to include in the list 

maintained pursuant to this 

subparagraph, and that South Carolina 

could be petitioned to consider adding 

additional sources to this list. 

While EPA notes that South Carolina 

has inherent flexibility to determine 

which types and sizes of sources need 

to undergo preconstruction review and 

permitting in the State pursuant to 40 

CFR 51.160(e), the language introduced 

in the August 8, 2014 submittal at 

paragraph II(B)(3) provides the State 

with the ability to modify the universe 

of sources subject to the minor NSR 

program without further regulatory 

changes and without any basis for 

determining which facilities will be 

subject to review. These changes are 

inconsistent with CAA section 

110(a)(2)(C) and 40 CFR 51.160(e) 

because they do not identify the types 

and sizes of sources subject to 

preconstruction review and the basis for 

determining which sources are subject 

to review. Furthermore, paragraph 

II(B)(3) as revised through the August 8, 

2014 submittal, is inconsistent with 

CAA section 110(l), which provides that 

EPA shall not approve a SIP revision 

that would interfere with any 

requirements concerning attainment and 

reasonable further progress, or any other 

applicable CAA requirement because 

EPA cannot evaluate potential future 

exemptions from these SIP 

requirements. Therefore, due to these 

reasons, as well as the enforceability 

issues described in the above Section 

II(A)(1)(a)(iii), EPA is proposing to 

disapprove paragraph II(B)(3). 

c. Paragraph II(B)(5) 

Paragraph II(B)(5) is a new provision 

that was added in the August 8, 2014 

submittal. The version of paragraph 

(B)(5) that is in the current SIP is moved 

to paragraph (B)(6) and is explained 

below. Paragraph (B)(5), as introduced 

in the August 8, 2014 submittal, states 

that sources of VOCs greater than 1,000 

lb/month (i.e., the emission threshold 

listed in subparagraph (B)(2)(h)) may be 

exempted from the requirement to 

obtain a construction permit on a caseby-case basis, and that exempt sources 

may later be required to be included in 

subsequent construction or operating 

permits. 

Similar to the revised subparagraph 

(B)(2)(h), the State could grant or deny 

exemptions from the requirement to 

obtain a construction permit on a caseby-case basis above SIP-specified 

thresholds with no upper bound other 

than the major stationary source or 

major modification threshold. While 

EPA notes that the State has inherent 

flexibility to determine which types and 

sizes of sources need to undergo 

preconstruction review and permitting 

in the State, the language introduced in 

the August 8, 2014 submittal at 

paragraph II(B)(5) provides the State 

with the ability to modify the universe 

of sources subject to the minor NSR 

program without further regulatory 

changes. These changes are inconsistent 

with CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) and 40 

CFR 51.160(e) because they do not 

identify the types and sizes of sources 

subject to preconstruction review and 

the basis for determining which sources 

are subject to review. Furthermore, 

paragraph II(B)(5) as introduced in the 

August 8, 2014 submittal, is 

inconsistent with CAA section 110(l), 

which provides that EPA shall not 

approve a SIP revision that would 

interfere with any requirements 

concerning attainment and reasonable 

further progress, or any other applicable 

CAA requirement because EPA cannot 

evaluate potential future exemptions 

from these SIP requirements. Therefore, 

EPA is proposing to disapprove 

paragraph II(B)(5). 

d. Paragraph II(B)(6) 

Paragraph II(B)(6) was added in the 

October 1, 2007 submittal as paragraph 

(B)(5). When the new paragraph (B)(5) 

was introduced in the August 8, 2014 

submittal, the paragraph was moved to 

(B)(6). This paragraph requires that any 

new sources similar to those already on 

the exempted source list established by 

paragraph II(B)(3), or sources with 

modifications to existing equipment,11

must include the following information 

in their request for exemption: (1) A 

complete description of the existing 

equipment and proposed modification; 

(2) the pollutant(s) being emitted and 

any deviation from the parameters 

provided in earlier permit applications, 

permit exemptions, and issued permits; 

(3) any ambient air quality 

demonstrations needed for Regulation 

61–62.5, Standards No. 2, Ambient Air 

Quality Standards, No. 7, Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration, and No. 8, 

Toxic Air Pollutants; and (4) a 

regulatory review to demonstrate the 

project is not a CAA title I modification, 

nor is subject to Regulation 61–62.5, 

Standards No. 7, Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration, and 7.1, 

Nonattainment New Source Review 

(NSR). EPA is proposing to disapprove 

paragraph II(B)(6) because it functions 

only in conjunction with subparagraph 

II(B)(2)(h) and paragraph II(B)(3), which 

the Agency is also proposing to 

disapprove for the aforementioned 

reasons. 

e. Paragraph II(B)(7) 

Paragraph II(B)(7) was added in the 

October 1, 2007 submittal as paragraph 

(B)(6). When the new paragraph (B)(5) 

was introduced in the August 8, 2014 

submittal, the paragraph was moved to 

(B)(7). It states that the construction 

permitting exemptions in subsection 

II(B) do not relieve the owner or 

operator of any source from any 

obligation to comply with any other 

applicable requirements. This clarifying 

statement simply notes that exemption 

from the requirement to obtain a 

construction permit under Regulation 

61–62.1, Section II does not result in an 

exemption from any other applicable 

requirements, such as Federal standards 

or other requirements under the SIP. 

Subsection II(B) was revised in the 

July 18, 2011 submittal with a twosentence addition that states that South 

Carolina reserves the right to require a 

construction permit and the need for 

permit(s) will be made by South 

Carolina on a case-by-case basis, and 

that the determination will take into 

consideration, but will not be limited to, 

the nature and amount of the pollutants, 

location, proximity to residences and 

commercial establishments, and other 

factors. This statement clarifies that, 

while subsection II(B) generally 

provides for a list of sources and 

projects that are exempt from minor 

NSR and the need to obtain a permit, 

the State may indeed require a permit. 

In the July 18, 2011 submittal, the State 

notes that this provision is intended to 

allow for requiring a permit in cases 

‘‘where other avenues of compliance are 

ineffective.’’ A minor formatting change 

was also made in the 2014 submittal. 

Because this provision is clarifying in 

nature, further describing how the State 

intends to make use of the exemptions 

paragraph, and because the provision is 

consistent with the CAA, EPA is 

proposing to approve the addition of 

paragraph II(B)(7) to South Carolina’s 

SIP and the changes to that paragraph 

discussed above. 

2. Subsection II(C)—Construction 

Permit Applications 

Subsection II(C), Construction Permit 

Applications, specifies the requirements 

for sources applying for and obtaining 

construction permits. The changes made 

to subsection II(C) in the submittals 

from October 1, 2007; June 17, 2013; 

January 20, 2016; and July 25, 2016, 

were explained and proposed for 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 6959 

12The SIP-approved version of subsection II(H), 

Synthetic Minor Plant Permits, requires public 

participation via a cross-reference to paragraph 

II(G)(5). 

approval in the NPRM published on 

August 17, 2017. See 82 FR 39083. No 

comments were received on these 

changes, and EPA is not seeking 

additional comments here. 

The April 24, 2020 submittal adds 

subparagraph II(C)(2)(d), which 

provides an exemption from 

professional engineering review for 

package-type concrete batch plants that 

are designed to be hauled to a site, set 

up, and broken down quickly, with little 

to no additional equipment needed to 

manufacture product. The submittal 

also makes administrative edits to 

Regulation 61–62.1, subsection II(C) by 

placing the alphanumeric paragraph 

titles in parentheses and making minor 

restructuring edits. 

EPA has reviewed the changes made 

to Regulation 61–62.1, subsection II(C) 

in the April 24, 2020, submittal and 

found them to be consistent with CAA 

sections 110(a)(2)(C) and 110(l). 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve 

the addition of subparagraph II(C)(2)(d) 

to South Carolina’s SIP. 

3. Subsection II(D)—General 

Construction Permits 

In the October 1, 2007 submittal, 

subsection II(D), Exceptions, is moved 

to subsection II(K) and is discussed 

subsequently in this document. A new 

section, General Construction Permits, 

is added in its place. The new 

subsection II(D) allows the State to 

develop and issue general construction 

permits applicable to similar types of 

sources for new construction projects or 

minor modifications to existing 

stationary sources. Subsection II(D) 

provides for the following: (1) General 

permits shall incorporate all applicable 

requirements for construction of similar 

sources and identify the criteria by 

which sources can qualify for the 

permit; (2) sources may submit 

applications to the State that request 

coverage under the general permit, and 

the State shall grant coverage to sources 

certifying qualification for and agreeing 

to the conditions and terms of the 

general construction permit for similar 

sources; sources later determined not to 

qualify for the general permit are subject 

to enforcement; (3) approval to operate 

under a permit is a final permit action 

for the purposes of judicial review; (4) 

the application for coverage may deviate 

from the provisions of subsection II(C) 

if enough information is included to 

determine the source’s qualification for, 

and compliance with, the general 

permit; and (5) sources qualifying for 

coverage under general construction 

permits are able to apply for individual 

construction permits in lieu of coverage 

under the general permit. 

The August 8, 2014 submittal makes 

minor restructuring edits to this section. 

It also adds a new paragraph (2), which 

states that general construction permits 

shall incorporate all requirements 

applicable to the construction of similar 

sources and shall identify criteria by 

which sources may qualify for coverage 

under a general construction permit. 

Additionally, the August 8, 2014 

submittal restructures paragraphs (3) 

and (4) to move the last sentence of 

paragraph (3) to its own paragraph (4). 

The April 24, 2020 submittal, in 

addition to minor reformatting 

revisions, creates two subparagraphs— 

(3)(a) and (3)(b)—under the title 

‘‘Coverage under a General Construction 

Permit.’’ Subparagraph (a) was the 

entirety of paragraph (3) in the October 

1, 2007 submittal. Subparagraph (b) is 

new language, stating that a source that 

has submitted an individual 

construction permit application to the 

State and has not requested coverage 

under the conditions and terms of a 

general construction permit for similar 

sources—but which is determined to 

qualify for coverage under a general 

construction permit—may be granted 

coverage under the general construction 

permit at the sole discretion of the State. 

While general permits can be an 

effective method of streamlining 

permitting requirements and 

procedures, any general permits 

developed pursuant to a SIP-approved 

minor NSR program must meet the 

Federal minimum requirements. Section 

II(D), as added in the October 1, 2007 

submittal and modified through the 

April 24, 2020 submittal, does not 

require any form of public notice and 

comment prior to the State issuing a 

general construction permit. While EPA 

regulations for minor NSR SIPs at 40 

CFR 51.160–164 do not use the term 

general permit or expressly describe 

general construction permits, EPA 

interprets the relevant statutory and 

regulatory provisions to allow State 

agencies to develop mechanisms such as 

South Carolina’s general construction 

permits to authorize construction for 

new minor sources and minor 

modifications of existing sources, 

provided that these mechanisms assure 

that the NAAQS are achieved and meet 

other applicable regulatory 

requirements. The rules require ‘‘legally 

enforceable procedures’’ that meet the 

requirements set forth therein and do 

not specify that a program to regulate 

construction must require an individual 

construction permit for every source. 

However, the requirements in Federal 

regulations include a provision that 

sources (projects) that are subject to the 

minor NSR program are subject to the 

public notice procedures in 40 CFR 

51.161. 40 CFR 51.161 provides that the 

legally enforceable procedures in 40 

CFR 51.160 must require that the SIP 

provide for public notice of the 

information submitted to the State, the 

State’s analysis of the effects of the 

construction or modification of the 

project, and the State’s proposed 

decision. In other words, the universe of 

sources subject to minor NSR 

procedures pursuant to 40 CFR 51.160, 

including individual permits and other 

permitting mechanisms such as general 

construction permits, would also be 

subject to public notice procedures in 

40 CFR 51.161 prior to issuing the 

permit. Importantly, in the case of a 

general permit, once a general permit 

has met the public notice procedures in 

40 CFR 51.161 and is issued in final 

form, approvals for coverage of 

individual sources under the general 

permit are not required to meet the 

public notice procedures in 40 CFR 

51.161 because the issuance of the 

general permit has already met the 

requirement. Since South Carolina’s 

general minor construction permits do 

not follow the public notice procedures 

in 40 CFR 51.161 when they are initially 

issued, EPA is proposing to disapprove 

subsection II(D). 

4. Subsection II(E)—Synthetic Minor 

Construction Permits 

Subsection II(E), Synthetic Minor 

Construction Permits, describes 

provisions for synthetic minor 

construction permits for any stationary 

source requesting federally enforceable 

permit limits to limit a source’s PTE so 

the source does not qualify as a major 

source (thus becoming a minor source 

‘‘synthetically’’). The October 1, 2007 

submittal moves the current subsection 

II(E), Transfer of Ownership/Operation, 

to subsection II(M). The Synthetic Minor 

Construction Permits Plant provisions, 

currently at subsection II(H), are moved 

in its place and the title is changed to 

‘‘Synthetic Minor Construction 

Permits.’’ In contrast to the General 

Construction Permits provisions under 

subsection II(D), the State rules require 

an opportunity for public notice and 

comment on Synthetic Minor 

Construction Permits under subsection 

II(E). However, these public 

participation requirements now refer to 

and depend on subsection II(N), Public 

Participation Procedures, which was 

modified from paragraph II(G)(5) in the 

October 1, 2007 submittal.12 For the 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
6960 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

reasons explained in Section II.A.10. of 

this preamble, EPA is proposing to 

disapprove subsection II(N). Because 

EPA is proposing to disapprove the 

changes to move paragraph II(G)(5) to 

subsection II(N), the updated subsection 

II(E) would not have a functional crossreference to those public notice 

procedures which would therefore have 

the effect of removing the current 

requirements for public notice from the 

synthetic minor construction permits 

subsection. EPA is therefore proposing 

to disapprove the entirety of subsection 

II(E). Specifically, EPA is proposing to 

disapprove the renumbering of 

subsection II(H) to subsection II(E) and 

other changes transmitted in the 

October 1, 2007, August 8, 2014, July 

27, 2016, and April 24, 2020 submittals. 

The revisions made to subsection II(E) 

in the submittals from October 1, 2007, 

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

explained and proposed for approval in 

the NPRM published on August 17, 

2017. See 82 FR 39083. No comments 

were received on revisions made to 

paragraphs (E)(1), (E)(2), (E)(3), and 

(E)(5), and these changes are not further 

explained here as their proposed 

disapproval is based solely on the lack 

of a public notice component. If EPA 

takes final action on subsection II(E) as 

proposed, the existing synthetic minor 

construction permitting portion of the 

minor NSR program at subsection II(H) 

in the SIP, State effective June 24, 2005, 

would continue to function. Other 

revisions to subsection II(E) which did 

receive comment or were submitted 

subsequent to the 2017 NPRM are 

explained below. 

a. Subparagraphs II(E)(4)(a)–(E)(4)(d) 

Paragraph II(E)(4) was revised in the 

October 1, 2007 submittal first by being 

renumbered from II(H)(3) and being 

retitled from ‘‘General Permits’’ to 

‘‘General Synthetic Minor Construction 

Permits’’ to reflect that the specific 

mechanism under subsection II(E) for 

establishing general construction 

permits is to establish general synthetic 

minor construction permits, which also 

helps distinguish this from the types of 

general permits the State intends to 

create for true minor sources pursuant 

to new Section II(D). The April 24, 2020 

submittal makes administrative and 

clarifying edits throughout paragraph 

II(E)(4). 

The provision is further revised to 

update the cross-reference from 

paragraph II(G)(5) to subsection II(N), 

which prescribes the required public 

notice procedures that South Carolina 

will follow prior to establishing a 

general synthetic minor construction 

permit and is further explained in 

Section II.A.10. of this document. The 

2007 revision also adds that sources 

may submit an application to the State 

requesting coverage under the 

conditions and terms of a general 

synthetic minor construction permit for 

similar sources, and the State shall grant 

coverage to sources certifying 

qualification for and agreeing to the 

conditions and terms of the general 

synthetic minor construction permit for 

similar sources. Subsequently, the 

August 8, 2014 submittal makes 

formatting changes to subparagraph 

(E)(4)(a) by breaking into four 

subparagraphs—(E)(4)(a) through (d)— 

without changing the wording of the 

rules. After the changes, subparagraphs 

(E)(4)(a)–(d) would allow the State to 

issue a general synthetic minor 

construction permit applicable to 

similar sources after providing notice 

and opportunity for public participation 

under subsection II(N). 

EPA has reviewed these changes 

made to Regulation 61–62.1, 

subparagraph II(E)(4)(a) and they appear 

to be consistent with CAA sections 

110(a)(2)(C) and 110(l). However, due to 

the proposed disapproval of subsection 

II(N) as described below, the revised 

subsection II(E) lacks the public 

participation component required under 

40 CFR 51.161. Therefore, EPA is 

proposing to disapprove the changes to 

South Carolina’s SIP at Regulation 61– 

62.1, subparagraph II(E)(4)(a). 

b. Subparagraph II(E)(4)(c) 

The April 24, 2020 submittal makes 

further edits to subparagraph II(E)(4)(c) 

by breaking up the subparagraph into 

two parts. The first part, II(E)(4)(c)(i), 

was the entirety of the subparagraph as 

reformatted in the 2014 submittal. The 

second part, II(E)(4)(c)(ii), introduces a 

new provision that gives South Carolina 

sole discretion to grant coverage under 

a general synthetic minor construction 

permit for a source that has not 

requested such coverage, but has 

submitted an individual synthetic minor 

construction permit application and the 

State has determined qualifies for a 

general synthetic minor construction 

permit for similar sources. 

The April 24, 2020 submittal notes 

that this reflects current permitting 

practices for the State and is intended 

to streamline the application process. It 

explains that there may be situations 

where a source has submitted a 

synthetic minor construction permit 

application and is unaware of the 

available general synthetic minor 

construction permit. In this scenario, if 

the proposed project qualifies for an 

issued general synthetic minor 

construction permit, the State would not 

require the source to submit a separate 

request for coverage under the 

corresponding general synthetic minor 

permit. The State would, on its own 

initiative, process the application as an 

application for coverage under the 

general synthetic minor construction 

permit. EPA believes that this flexibility 

reflects inherent discretion that the 

State has within its program to process 

applications in an efficient manner and 

is reasonable given that the source has 

provided enough information for the 

State to determine that the project 

would qualify under the general 

construction permit. 

EPA has reviewed these changes 

made to Regulation 61–62.1, 

subparagraph II(E)(4)(c), and they 

appear to be consistent with CAA 

sections 110(a)(2)(C) and 110(l). 

However, due to the proposed 

disapproval of subsection II(N) as 

described below, the revised subsection 

II(E) lacks the public participation 

component required under 40 CFR 

51.161. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

disapprove these changes to South 

Carolina’s SIP at Regulation 61– 

62.1,subparagraph II(E)(4)(c). 

c. Subparagraph II(E)(4)(e) 

The October 1, 2007 submittal 

rewrites and simplifies subparagraph 

(E)(4)(b), which is relettered in the 

August 8, 2014 submittal to become 

(E)(4)(e). The 2007 submittal provides 

the State authority to grant a source’s 

request for authorization to operate 

under a general permit without further 

public notice and says that such a grant 

shall be a final permit action for 

purposes of judicial review. The 

changes made in the October 1, 2007 

submittal also removes a redundant 

sentence that essentially re-stated this 

and made an additional cross-reference 

to the public notice procedures. 

Subsequently, the April 24, 2020 

submittal makes minor changes to 

subparagraph (E)(4)(e) to clarify that the 

coverage is available for ‘‘general 

synthetic minor construction’’ permits 

rather than ‘‘general’’ permits. 

EPA has reviewed these changes 

made to Regulation 61–62.1, 

subparagraph II(E)(4)(e) and they appear 

to be consistent with CAA sections 

110(a)(2)(C) and 110(l). However, due to 

the proposed disapproval of Subsection 

II(N) as described below, the revised 

subsection II(E) lacks the public 

participation component required under 

40 CFR 51.161. Therefore, EPA is 

proposing to disapprove the 

aforementioned changes to South 

Carolina’s SIP at Regulation 61–62.1, 

subparagraph II(E)(4)(e). 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 6961 

13EPA approved subsection II(G) into the SIP 

because, among other things, it provides EPA and 

the public with timely notice of the proposal and 

issuance of such permits; provides EPA, on a timely 

basis, with a copy of each proposed (or draft) and 

final permit; and provides for an opportunity for 

public comment on the permit applications prior to 

issuance of the final permit. See 60 FR 63434, 

63435 (December 11, 1995). 

14Final disapproval of subsection II(F) and 

changes to subsection II(B) at subparagraph 

II(B)(2)(h) would leave in place a portion of 

subsection II(F), Exemptions, at subparagraph 

II(F)(2)(g), State effective June 24, 2005. 

d. Subparagraph II(E)(4)(g) 

The April 24, 2020 submittal adds 

new subparagraph (E)(4)(g), which states 

that a source that qualifies for coverage 

under a general synthetic minor 

construction permit may submit a 

construction permit application to the 

State and request an individual 

synthetic minor construction permit in 

lieu of coverage under a general 

synthetic minor construction permit. 

South Carolina had similar language 

included in subsection II(D) of the State 

effective version of Regulation 61–62.1 

for general permits since the October 1, 

2007 submittal. The State notes that an 

aim of its submittal is to improve 

consistency in language for general and 

registration permits. This provision 

acknowledges that sources can request 

that the State issue an individual 

synthetic minor permits in lieu of 

coverage under a corresponding general 

synthetic minor construction permit. 

This language states that use of a general 

synthetic minor construction permit is 

not required, and the State will consider 

the preference of the source. 

EPA has reviewed these changes 

made to Regulation 61–62.1, 

subparagraph II(E)(4)(g) and they appear 

to be consistent with CAA sections 

110(a)(2)(C) and 110(l). However, due to 

the proposed disapproval of subsection 

II(N) as described below, the revised 

subsection II(E) lacks the public 

participation component required under 

40 CFR 51.161. Therefore, EPA is 

proposing to disapprove the 

aforementioned changes to South 

Carolina’s SIP at Regulation 61–62.1, 

subparagraph II(E)(4)(g). 

5. Subsection II(F)—Operating Permits 

Subsection II(F), Operating Permits, 

describes provisions for minor operating 

permits for any true minor stationary 

source, meaning those sources smaller 

than the major source thresholds at 

Regulation 61–62.70, Title V Operating 

Permit Program, and which do not need 

federally enforceable emission limits to 

restrict PTE to avoid title V major source 

status pursuant to subsection II(G). The 

October 1, 2007 submittal adds a new 

subsection II(F), Operating Permits, in 

place of former subsection II(F), 

Exemptions, which is renumbered to 

subsection II(B). In contrast to 

subsection II(G), Conditional Major 

Operating Permits, subsection II(F) does 

not require an opportunity for public 

notice and comment on the covered 

minor source operating permits.13 EPA 

does not require States to submit minor 

source operating permit programs to the 

Agency for incorporation into their SIPs; 

however, EPA set forth criteria for the 

approvability of such programs into 

SIPs in a June 28, 1989 final rule. See 

54 FR 27274. Among EPA’s criteria for 

an approvable program is that the 

operating permits are subject to public 

participation prior to issuance, which is 

not the case under subsection II(F). See 

id. at 27282. EPA is therefore proposing 

to disapprove the entirety of subsection 

II(F). Specifically, EPA is proposing to 

disapprove the addition of subsection 

II(F) transmitted in the October 1, 2007 

submittal and other changes made in the 

August 8, 2014; July 27, 2016; and April 

24, 2020.14 The revisions made to 

subsection II(F) in the submittals from 

October 1, 2007; August 8, 2014; and 

July 27, 2016 submittals were explained 

and proposed for approval in the NPRM 

published on August 17, 2017. See 82 

FR 39083. No comments were received 

on the addition of, and changes made to, 

subsection II(F), and these paragraphs 

and changes to subsection II(F) are not 

further explained here as their 

disapproval is based not on the content 

of the changes but on the lack of a 

public notice component. The April 24, 

2020 submittal makes several 

subsequent changes to subsection II(F), 

as discussed below. 

a. Paragraphs II(F)(2) and (F)(3) 

The April 24, 2020 submittal adds 

subparagraph II(F)(2) to distinguish a 

specific situation for sources awaiting 

the issuance of an operating permit from 

the State. Paragraph II(F)(3), as 

renumbered from II(F)(2) in this 

submittal, provides that the professional 

engineer in charge of the project shall 

certify that the construction completed 

under the corresponding construction 

permit has been completed in 

accordance with the construction permit 

and application. This provision allows 

for the source to operate under the 

issued construction permit until the 

State has issued the operating permit if 

the certification is provided by the 

engineer. If, however, the construction 

is not completed in accordance with the 

permit application and construction 

permit, this provision requires the 

owner or operator to submit a 

description of the modifications from 

the permit prior to commencing 

operation. The provision further 

requires that any construction variances 

that would trigger additional 

requirements that have not been 

addressed prior to commencing 

operation will be treated as construction 

without a permit for compliance 

purposes. 

The April 24, 2020 submittal also 

adds the phrase ‘‘when a Department 

issued construction permit includes 

engineering and/or construction 

specifications’’ to clarify that this 

provision is intended to function for 

projects with unique engineering and 

construction requirements. The new 

paragraph II(F)(2) covers situations for 

which construction permits do not 

include engineering and/or construction 

specifications for the project. 

Specifically, this subparagraph allows 

for these sources to operate under the 

issued construction permit until the 

State issues the operating permit. In 

applicable situations, there are no 

engineering or construction 

specifications that the professional 

engineer would need to certify. 

Regardless of the type of minor source 

construction project, these minor source 

operating permits must be applied for 

within 15 days of initial startup. This 

addition, therefore, is a clarification that 

not all minor source construction 

permits will need certification from a 

professional engineer. However, as 

discussed above, EPA is proposing to 

disapprove the entirety of subsection 

II(F) due to a lack of public notice 

procedures. Therefore, EPA is proposing 

to disapprove these changes to South 

Carolina’s SIP at Regulation 61–62.1, 

paragraphs II(F)(2) and (F)(3). 

b. Paragraph II(F)(5) 

The April 24, 2020 submittal also 

adds an entire section on the ability to 

develop general minor source operating 

permits at paragraph II(F)(5). However, 

similar to Section II(D) for general minor 

source construction permits, paragraph 

II(F)(5) would allow for the 

development and issuance of general 

true minor source operating permits 

without first going through public 

notice and comment. As noted above, 

States are not required to include minor 

source operating permit programs in 

their SIPs, and EPA has identified 

criteria, including public participation, 

for approving minor source operating 

permits into SIPs for those States that 

elect to submit a program to EPA for 

incorporation. 

EPA has evaluated the changes to 

subsection II(F) transmitted in the April 

24, 2020, submittal and found them to 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
6962 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

15The revision to subsection II(G) would move 

the public participation provision at II(G)(5) to II(N) 

and include a cross-reference to (II)(N) within II(G). 

16Subparagraph II(G)(2)(d) has not been approved 

into the SIP. 

be inconsistent with EPA’s criteria for 

approving minor source operating 

permit programs into SIPs. Therefore, 

EPA is proposing to disapprove the 

ability to create general minor source 

operating permits at paragraph II(F)(5). 

6. Subsection II(G)—Conditional Major 

Operating Permits 

Subsection II(G), Conditional Major 

Operating Permits, describes provisions 

for synthetic minor operating permits 

for any stationary source requesting 

federally enforceable permit limits to 

limit a source’s PTE so the source does 

not qualify as a major source (thus 

becoming a minor source 

‘‘synthetically’’). As noted above, EPA 

set forth criteria for approval of minor 

source operating permits in its June 28, 

1989 final rule. See 54 FR 27274. EPA 

evaluated these criteria, including 

adequate public notice procedures, and 

approved subsection II(G) for 

conditional major (synthetic minor) 

operating permits in its December 11, 

1995 final rule. See 60 FR 63434. 

However, these public participation 

requirements now refer to and depend 

on subsection II(N), Public Participation 

Procedures, which was modified from 

paragraph II(G)(5) in the October 1, 2007 

submittal.15 For the reasons explained 

in Section II.A.10. of this document, 

EPA is proposing to disapprove 

subsection II(N). Because EPA is 

proposing to disapprove the changes 

that include moving paragraph II(G)(5) 

to subsection II(N), the updated 

subsection II(G) would not have a 

functional cross-reference to applicable 

public notice procedures and would 

therefore have the effect of removing the 

current requirements for public notice 

from the conditional major operating 

permits subsection. EPA is therefore 

proposing to disapprove the changes to 

subsection II(G). Specifically, EPA is 

proposing to disapprove the changes 

transmitted in the October 1, 2007; July 

18, 2011; August 8, 2014; July 27, 2016; 

and April 24, 2020 submittals. The 

revisions made to subsection II(G) in the 

submittals from October 1, 2007; July 

18, 2011; August 8, 2014; and July 27, 

2016 submittals were explained and 

proposed for approval in the NPRM 

published on August 17, 2017. See 82 

FR 39083. No comments were received 

on revisions made to subsection II(G), 

and these changes are not further 

explained here as their proposed 

disapproval is based solely on the lack 

of a public notice component. If EPA 

takes final action as proposed, the 

existing SIP-approved conditional major 

operating permitting program at 

subsection II(G) in the SIP, State 

effective June 24, 2005, would continue 

to function. Other revisions to 

subsection II(G) which were submitted 

subsequent to the August 17, 2017 

NPRM are explained below. 

a. Subparagraph II(G)(2)(d) 

The April 24, 2020 submittal removes 

subparagraph II(G)(2)(d), which was 

added to II(G)(2)(c) in the October 1, 

2007 submittal and restructured to 

II(G)(2)(d) in the August 8, 2014 

submittal.16 Subparagraph II(G)(2)(d) 

would allow the owner or operator to 

continue operating a source pursuant to 

the most recent conditional major 

operating permit after submitting a 

request for renewing its operating 

permit until the State acts on the permit 

application. The renewal request must 

meet requirements in subsection II(H). 

Subparagraph II(G)(2)(d) is removed, but 

a substantially similar provision 

allowing the owner or operator to 

continue operating a source if a timely 

renewal application for any operating 

permit meeting the requirements of 

subsection II(H) is introduced at 

subparagraph II(H)(1) in the April 24, 

2020 submittal. This is discussed 

further under changes to subsection 

II(H) below. For the purposes of 

subparagraph II(G)(2)(d), removing this 

provision from subsection II(G) and 

including the same requirement at 

subsection II(H) concerning operating 

permit renewal requests is reasonable 

because the provision merely requires 

any request for renewal of conditional 

major operating permits to comply with 

requirements in subsection II(H) in 

order for the source to continue 

operating while awaiting State action on 

its timely application. However, due to 

the disapproval of subsection II(N) as 

described below, subsection II(G) lacks 

the public participation component 

which was a basis for EPA’s approval of 

subsection II(G) into the SIP. EPA is 

therefore proposing to disapprove this 

change to subparagraph II(G)(2)(d). 

b. Subparagraph II(G)(7)(c) 

The April 24, 2020, submittal breaks 

subparagraph (G)(7)(c) into two parts. 

Subparagraph (G)(7)(c)(i) is a 

reformatting of the language introduced 

in the August 8, 2014 submittal. The 

new provision in the April 24, 2020 

submittal is at subparagraph (G)(7)(c)(ii). 

It states that a source that has submitted 

an individual permit application to the 

State and has not requested coverage 

under the conditions and terms of a 

general conditional major operating 

permit for similar sources, but which is 

determined to qualify for coverage 

under a general conditional major 

operating permit, may be granted 

coverage under the general conditional 

major operating permit at the sole 

discretion of the State. 

The April 24, 2020 submittal notes 

that this reflects current permitting 

practices for South Carolina and is 

intended to streamline the application 

process. It explains that there may be 

situations where a source has submitted 

an individual conditional major 

operating permit application and is 

unaware of the available general 

conditional major operating permit. In 

this scenario, if the proposed project 

qualifies for an issued general 

conditional major operating permit, the 

State would not require the source to 

submit a separate request for coverage 

under the corresponding general 

conditional major operating permit. The 

State would, on its own initiative, 

process the application as an 

application for coverage under the 

general conditional major operating 

permit. EPA has reviewed these changes 

made to Regulation 61–62.1, 

subparagraph II(G)(7)(c) and they appear 

to not be inconsistent with EPA’s 

criteria for federally enforceable 

operating permits. EPA believes that the 

flexibility in the State’s rule reflects 

inherent discretion that the State has 

within its program to process 

applications in an efficient manner and 

is reasonable if the source has provided 

enough information for the State to 

determine that the project would qualify 

under the general conditional major 

operating permit. However, due to the 

proposed disapproval of subsection 

II(N) as described below, subsection 

II(G) lacks the public participation 

component which was a basis for EPA’s 

approval of subsection II(G) into the SIP. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

disapprove these changes to South 

Carolina’s SIP at Regulation 61–62.1, 

subparagraph II(G)(7)(c). 

c. Subparagraph II(G)(7)(g) 

The April 24, 2020 submittal adds 

subparagraph (G)(7)(g), which states that 

a source that qualifies for coverage 

under a general conditional major 

operating permit may submit a permit 

application to the State and request an 

individual conditional major operating 

permit in lieu of coverage under a 

general conditional major operating 

permit. The State had similar language 

included in Section II(D) for general 

permits since the October 1, 2007 

submittal. The State notes that an aim 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 6963 

17The State references Regulation 61–62.70, Title 

V Operating Permit Program; Regulation 61–62.5, 

Standard No. 7, Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration; and Regulation 61–62.5, Standard 

No. 7.1, Nonattainment New Source Review, which 

prescribe requirements for major sources for the 

construction and operating permit programs. 

18The August 7, 2017, withdrawal letter is 

available in the docket for this NPRM. 

of its submittal is to improve 

consistency in language for general and 

registration permits. This provision 

acknowledges that sources can request 

that the State issue an individual 

conditional major operating permit in 

lieu of coverage under a corresponding 

general conditional major operating 

permit. This language states that use of 

a general conditional major operating 

permit is not required, and that the State 

will consider the preference of the 

source. EPA has reviewed these changes 

made to Regulation 61–62.1, 

subparagraph II(G)(7)(g) and they appear 

found them to not be inconsistent with 

EPA’s criteria for federally enforceable 

operating permits. However, due to the 

proposed disapproval of subsection 

II(N) as described below, subsection 

II(G) would lack the public participation 

component which was a basis for EPA’s 

approval of subsection II(G) into the SIP. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

disapprove the aforementioned changes 

to South Carolina’s SIP at Regulation 

61–62.1, subparagraph II(G)(7)(g). 

7. Subsection II(H)—Operating Permit 

Renewal Requests 

South Carolina’s October 1, 2007; July 

18, 2011; June 17, 2013; August 8, 2014, 

and July 27, 2016 submittals revised 

subsection II(H), Operating Permit 

Renewal Requests, which specifies 

requirements for requesting renewals of 

operating permits for sources which are 

not subject to the State’s title V program 

at Regulation 61–62.70. Those changes 

to former paragraph II(B)(2), recodified 

to subsection II(H) in the October 1, 

2007, submittal, were reviewed and 

proposed for approval in the August 17, 

2017 NPRM and are not further 

discussed here. See 82 FR 39083. The 

April 24, 2020 submittal makes several 

subsequent changes to subsection II(G), 

as discussed below. 

First, subparagraph II(H)(1) is added. 

This subparagraph would allow the 

owner or operator to continue operating 

a source pursuant to the most recent 

conditional major operating permit after 

submitting a request for renewing its 

operating permit until South Carolina 

takes final action on the request for 

renewal. The renewal request must meet 

requirements in subparagraphs II(H)(2)– 

(5), as renumbered from (H)(1)–(4). 

Next, subparagraph II(H)(5), formerly 

II(H)(4), is revised to include 

requirements that the name, mailing 

address, email address, and telephone 

number of both the owner or operator of 

the facility and the permit contact 

person for the facility be included in the 

renewal application. Finally, minor 

edits are made throughout subsection 

II(H), including placing the 

alphanumeric provision dividers in 

parentheses. The changes to subsection 

II(H) in the April 24, 2020 submittal are 

reasonable changes make to these 

renewal provisions for operating 

permits. The ability for the source to 

continue to operate under the 

previously issued operating permit if a 

timely renewal submittal has been made 

and the State has not yet acted to issue 

the renewal permit functions like the 

permit application shield provisions 

under the Federal title V operating 

permitting program for major sources at 

40 CFR part 70 and approved for South 

Carolina at Regulation 61–62.70. The 

remaining changes to subsection II(H) in 

this submittal are either ministerial or 

minor in nature, such as requiring 

additional information to be included in 

the renewal request compared to what is 

presently required in the SIP and what 

EPA also previously proposed to 

approve in this recodified subsection in 

the August 17, 2017 NPRM. EPA has 

reviewed these changes made to 

Regulation 61–62.1, subsection II(H) and 

found them to not be inconsistent with 

EPA’s criteria for federally enforceable 

operating permits, and to be consistent 

with similar provisions for Federal 

provisions for major source operating 

permits. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

approve the aforementioned changes to 

South Carolina’s SIP at Regulation 61– 

62.1, subsection II(H). EPA notes that 

the effect of approving subsection II(H), 

Operating Permit Renewal Requests, as 

renumbered from paragraph II(B)(2), 

while disapproving the changes to 

existing subsection II(H), Synthetic 

Minor Plant Permits, would create a 

second subsection II(H) in the SIP. If 

both proposed actions are finalized, the 

provisions for subsection II(H), 

Synthetic Minor Plant Permits, would 

retain the June 24, 2005 State effective 

date, and the provisions for subsection 

II(H), Operating Permit Renewal 

Requests, would have a April 24, 2020 

State effective date. 

8. Subsection II(I)—Registration Permits 

Subsection II(I), Registration Permits, 

prescribes regulations by which South 

Carolina can issue registration permits 

that cover construction and operation of 

similar types of stationary sources. The 

October 1, 2007 submittal introduces 

the new subsection (I) to Section II. 

South Carolina explains that the 

difference between registration permits 

and general construction permits or 

general operating permits is that 

registration permits are permits issued 

for stationary sources that that fall 

within a specified industrial grouping or 

sector and have the PTE less than the 

threshold for major NSR or title V 

applicability (i.e., they are true minor 

sources).17 The equipment similarities 

within the grouping or sector remove 

the need for in depth site-specific 

review. In contrast, general construction 

permits pursuant to subsection II(D) 

could be for any source that meets 

criteria across sections (e.g., similar 

units, overall emissions threshold). 

The July 18, 2011 submittal makes 

subsequent changes to subsection II(I) as 

follows: (1) Makes administrative edits; 

(2) adds language to assert that, 

regardless of qualification for 

registration permits, South Carolina 

reserves the right to require individual 

construction and operating permits, as 

determined on a case-by-case basis; and 

(3) changes language to clarify that 

registration permits shall contain any 

applicable permit conditions under 

subsection II(J), rather than all permit 

conditions listed in subsection II(J), as 

the State finds appropriate. 

The August 8, 2014 submittal 

includes other changes to paragraph 

II(I), including administrative edits 

throughout and adding language to 

assert that the State can reopen 

registration permits for cause or to 

include new standards or regulations 

that become applicable during the 

lifetime of the permit. The August 8, 

2014 submittal also removes language at 

subparagraph (I)(1)(a) requiring the State 

to provide notice and opportunity for 

public participation prior to developing 

new registration permits. However, the 

State withdrew this change from EPA’s 

consideration in a letter dated August 7, 

2017. In the letter, the State explained 

that its intent in withdrawing the 

change was to require the Department to 

comply with the public participation 

procedures at subsection II(N) when 

developing registration permits.18

South Carolina has added subsection 

II(I) to the permitting program to allow 

for the creation of a subcategory of 

general permits called registration 

construction and/or operating permits, 

which would be for certain industry 

categories of qualifying true minor 

sources. This permitting mechanism is 

intended to streamline permitting 

requirements and procedures. Any 

general permits developed pursuant to a 

SIP-approved minor NSR program must 

meet the Federal minimum 

requirements. Unlike the general minor 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
6964 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

19One of the revisions to subsection in the 

October 1, 2007, submittal was retitling subsection 

G from ‘‘Conditional Major Source Permits’’ to 

‘‘Conditional Major Operating Permits.’’ 

NSR permits provided for at Section 

II(D) of Regulation 61–62.1, subsection 

II(I) would require public notice and 

comment in developing the general 

construction and/or operating permits. 

However, these public participation 

requirements refer to and depend on 

subsection II(N), Public Participation 

Procedures, which was moved and 

modified from paragraph II(G)(5) in the 

October 1, 2007 submittal. For the 

reasons explained in Section II.A.10. of 

this document, EPA is proposing to 

disapprove subsection II(N). Because 

EPA is proposing to disapprove the 

changes to move paragraph II(G)(5) to 

subsection II(N), the new subsection II(I) 

would not have a functional crossreference to those public notice 

procedures in the SIP as the State 

intends. EPA is therefore proposing to 

disapprove the entirety of subsection 

II(I). Specifically, EPA is proposing to 

disapprove the addition of subsection 

II(I) and subsequent changes transmitted 

in the October 1, 2007, July 18, 2011, 

August 8, 2014, and April 24, 2020 

submittals. The revisions made to 

subsection II(I) in the submittals from 

October 1, 2007; July 18, 2011; and 

August 8, 2014 submittals were 

explained and proposed for approval in 

the NPRM published on August 17, 

2017. See 82 FR 39083. However, EPA 

received adverse comments on 

subsection II(I). Other revisions to 

subsection II(I) which were submitted 

subsequent to the August 17, 2017 

NPRM are explained below. 

a. Subparagraph II(I)(2)(a)(ii) 

The April 24, 2020 submittal breaks 

subparagraph (I)(2)(a) into two parts. 

The first part—(I)(2)(a)(i)—revises and 

clarifies language from (I)(2)(a). The 

second part—(I)(2)(a)(ii)—gives the State 

sole discretion to grant coverage under 

a registration permit to a qualifying 

source that applied for a construction 

and operating permit under Sections 

II(A) and II(F) even if the source did not 

request coverage under the registration 

permit. 

The April 24, 2020 submittal notes 

that this reflects current permitting 

practices for the State and is intended 

to streamline the application process. It 

explains that there may be situations 

where a source has submitted a minor 

construction permit application and is 

unaware of the available registration 

minor construction permit. In this 

scenario, if the proposed project 

qualifies for an issued registration minor 

construction permit, the State would not 

require the source to submit the separate 

request for coverage under the 

corresponding registration minor 

permit. The State would, on its own 

initiative, process the application as an 

application for coverage under the 

general conditional major operating 

permit. EPA has reviewed these changes 

made to Regulation 61–62.1, 

subparagraph II(I)(2)(a)(ii) and they 

appear to be consistent with CAA 

sections 110(a)(2)(C) and 110(l) and 40 

CFR 51.160–164. EPA believes that this 

flexibility reflects inherent discretion 

that the State has within its program to 

process applications in an efficient 

manner and is reasonable given that the 

source has provided enough information 

for the State to determine that the 

project would qualify under the 

registration (general) permit. However, 

due to the proposed disapproval of 

subsection II(N) as described below, this 

provision lacks the public participation 

component required under 40 CFR 

51.161. Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

disapprove these changes to South 

Carolina’s SIP at Regulation 61–62.1, 

subparagraph II(I)(2)(a)(ii). 

b. Subparagraph II(I)(2)(e) 

South Carolina’s April 24, 2020 

submittal adds subparagraph (I)(2)(e), 

which states that a source that qualifies 

for coverage under a registration permit 

may submit a permit application to the 

State and request an individual permit 

in lieu of coverage under a general 

registration permit. 

South Carolina had similar language 

in Section II(D) for general permits since 

the October 1, 2007 submittal. South 

Carolina notes that an aim of its April 

24, 2020, submittal is to improve 

consistency in language for general and 

registration permits. This provision 

acknowledges that sources can request 

that the State issue an individual minor 

construction permit in lieu of coverage 

under a corresponding registration 

(general) minor construction permit. 

This language notes that use of a 

registration minor construction permit 

is not required and that the State will 

consider the preference of the source. 

EPA has reviewed these changes to 

Regulation 61–62.1, subparagraph 

II(I)(2)(e) and they appear to be 

consistent with CAA section 110. 

However, due to the proposed 

disapproval of subsection II(N) as 

described below, this provision lacks 

the public participation component 

required under 40 CFR 51.161. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to 

disapprove the aforementioned changes 

to Regulation 61–62.1, subparagraph 

II(I)(I)(2)(e). 

9. Subsection II(K)—Exceptions 

Regulation 61–62.1, subsection II(K) 

sets forth factors that the State will 

consider in determining whether to 

impose alternative emissions limits, 

compliance schedules, or other 

restrictions. The October 1, 2007 

submittal makes non-substantive 

changes to this subsection, including 

moving subsection II(K), Exceptions, 

from subsection II(D) and makes minor 

administrative and typographical 

changes. This provision says that this 

subsection does not apply to mass 

emission limitations imposed by 

Federal New Source Performance 

Standards, Federal National Emissions 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, 

Federal or State PSD regulations, or any 

nonattainment requirements. Therefore, 

the provisions in subsection II(K) cannot 

be utilized for changing any emission 

limits set via those requirements. 

Subsection II(K) also requires an air 

quality demonstration to revise 

emission limits or visibility standards. 

Any alternative compliance schedules 

requested would need to provide for 

compliance with the applicable 

regulations as expeditiously as 

practicable. Finally, the exceptions from 

otherwise previously established 

restrictions on operation would be 

subject to public notice and opportunity 

for a public hearing. The April 24, 2020 

submittal makes formatting changes by 

placing the alphanumeric provision 

dividers in parentheses. 

EPA has reviewed these nonsubstantive changes made to subsection 

II(K), Exceptions, and found them to be 

consistent with CAA sections 

110(a)(2)(C) and 110(l) and 40 CFR 

51.160–164. This process for 

establishing alternative permit 

conditions, compliance schedules, or 

other restrictions on operation of a 

source, which is already part of the SIP, 

provides for a substantive evaluation of 

the impacts of making the changes to 

otherwise applicable requirements. 

These provisions effectively require 

substantively similar provisions to the 

issuance of a construction permit to 

approve the exceptions to previously 

established permit terms. Therefore, 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

aforementioned changes to Regulation 

61–62.1, subsection II(K), into the SIP. 

10. Subsection II(N)—Public 

Participation Procedures 

The October 1, 2007 submittal makes 

changes to the public notice provisions 

in Section II, as follows. SIP-approved 

subparagraph II(G)(5) is moved from 

under the subsection titled Conditional 

Major Operating Permits 19 to a new 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 6965 

20 In addition to the publication outlets, the SIPapproved regulation requires the State to notify 

persons who requested in writing to be on a mailing 

list, as well as others on a mailing list developed 

by the State. 

21The SIP-approved regulation also requires the 

State to consider and provide a written response to 

all written comments received by mail within the 

time specified for the public comment period. 

22EPA has previously noted that the public notice 

requirement at 40 CFR 51.161(b)(3) is media 

neutral, and EPA modified 40 CFR 51.161 in an 

October 18, 2016, final rule to specifically allow for 

electronic notice of the draft permit and other 

information, including for synthetic minor sources. 

See 81 FR 71613. 

23 If EPA finalizes disapproval of subsection II(E), 

Synthetic Minor Construction Permits, subsection 

II(H), Synthetic Minor Plant Permits, State effective 

June 24, 2005, would remain in the SIP. 

Additionally, final approval of subsection II(H), 

Operating Permit Renewal Requests, State effective 

April 24, 2020, would result in two subsections 

II(H) within into the SIP. 

standalone subsection at II(N) titled 

Public Participation Procedures. The 

submittal adds the following language 

providing the State with discretion to 

require notice of permitting activity, 

even when not otherwise required by 

the State’s regulations: ‘‘When 

determined to be appropriate by the 

Department (or specified by regulation) 

notice of permitting activity shall be 

provided to the public and other entities 

for their review and comment.’’ SIPapproved Section II only requires public 

notice for conditional major (operating) 

permits and synthetic minor 

(construction) permits. By adding this 

new language and moving the public 

participation procedures to a new 

standalone paragraph, the rule expands 

the types of permits potentially subject 

to public notice. The October 1, 2007 

submittal also adds language stating that 

the State may use means other than 

publishing in newspapers, the State 

Register, and mailing lists to notify the 

public of minor source permitting. 

The July 18, 2011 submittal removes 

the phrase ‘‘or operating’’ from the 

restriction in subparagraph II(N)(5) that 

prevents sources from commencing any 

construction prior to completing the 

required public participation 

procedures because the State authorizes 

construction via a construction permit 

rather than a minor source operating 

permit. Sources are required by 

Regulation 61–62.1 subparagraph 

II(F)(4)(b) to submit a postmarked 

written application for minor source 

operating permits within 15 days after 

the actual date of initial startup of each 

new or modified source. 

Next, the August 8, 2014 submittal 

modifies paragraph (N)(1) to add the 

Department’s website as another option 

for notifying the public of permitting 

activity in addition to newspapers and 

the South Carolina State Register.20 The 

submittal then changes paragraph (N)(2) 

to restructure the required elements of 

the public notice into new subsections, 

(a) through (g). The submittal also 

revises language and adds 

subparagraphs (a) and (b) to paragraph 

(N)(3) to identify how the State will 

address and record comments, and 

broadens the State’s procedures to 

require the State to consider all 

comments received at any public 

hearing rather than only those received 

in writing at a public hearing.21 The 

August 8, 2014 revision to paragraph 

(N)(3) also removes language requiring 

the State to provide a written response 

to all written comments received by 

mail and at the public hearing, 

providing that all comments received 

within the time specified in the public 

notice will be considered, and that the 

State will maintain a record of 

commenters and the comments made. 

Finally, the April 24, 2020 submittal 

revises paragraph (N)(1) to change the 

option to post on the Department’s 

website to an option to post on a public 

website identified by the Department. 

The submittal also makes minor and 

ministerial changes to paragraph (N)(1), 

including to note that ‘‘additional 

means of public notice’’ may include 

public meetings. This submittal also 

changes the word ‘‘other’’ to 

‘‘additional’’ means of public notice, to 

clarify that the other methods are 

required, while avenues like public 

meetings can also be used on a case-bycase basis. 

The changes in the October 1, 2007 

submittal to allow for other methods of 

public notice, and in the April 24, 2020 

submittal to explicitly list a public 

website identified by the Department as 

a possible method of public notice, are 

consistent with the minor NSR public 

notice regulations at 40 CFR 51.161.22

The Department can therefore make use 

of a website, public hearings, and other 

methods in lieu of or in addition to 

publication in a newspaper. The 

provisions at subsection II(N) prescribe 

generally applicable public notice 

procedures, and additional public 

notice requirements are contained in the 

major NSR and major operating permit 

(title V) regulations at Regulation 61– 

62.5, Standard No. 7, Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD), 61– 

62.5, Standard No. 7.1, Nonattainment 

New Source Review (NSR), and 61– 

62.70, Title V Operating Permit 

Program. 

While the changes to the public notice 

requirements in the October 1, 2007 

submittal applying public notice 

procedures to permitting activities 

beyond conditional major (operating) 

permits and synthetic minor 

(construction) permits at the State’s 

discretion are an improvement, they do 

not fully satisfy the public notice 

procedures in 40 CFR 51.161. The 

Federal regulations provide that the 

legally enforceable procedures in 40 

CFR 51.160 must require that the State 

provide for opportunity for public 

comment on the information submitted 

to the State by owners and operators, 

the State’s analysis of the effects of the 

construction or modification of the 

project, and the State’s proposed 

decision. In other words, in order for the 

SIP to meet the public notice 

requirements in 40 CFR 51.161, all of 

the projects that South Carolina 

determines are subject to minor NSR 

procedures pursuant to 40 CFR 

51.160(e) need to be subject to public 

notice procedures prescribed in the SIP. 

While the changes transmitted in the 

October 1, 2007 submittal may increase 

the level of public participation in the 

minor NSR program, subsection II(N) as 

submitted, and as modified further in 

the July 18, 2011; August 8, 2014; and 

April 20, 2020 submittals, does not meet 

the minimum requirements in 40 CFR 

51.160 and 51.161. Accordingly, EPA is 

proposing to disapprove subsection 

II(N). 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

In this document, EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, and as 

discussed in Section II of this preamble, 

EPA is proposing to incorporate by 

reference South Carolina Regulation 61– 

62.1, Section II, Permit Requirements, 

State effective April 24, 2020, except for 

the following: subsection II(G), which is 

incorporated by reference with a State 

effective version of June 24, 2005; 

subsection II(B) at paragraph II(B)(2)(h); 

subsection II(B) at paragraph II(B)(3); 

subsection II(B) at paragraph II(B)(5); 

subsection II(B) at paragraph II(B)(6); 

subsection II(D); subsection II(F), except 

for the title and subparagraph II(F)(2)(g), 

which are incorporated by reference 

with a State effective date of June 24, 

2005; and subsection II(I).23 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). 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
6966 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 

24See footnote 21. 

25Final disapproval of subsection II(F) and 

subparagraph II(B)(2)(h) would leave subparagraph 

II(F)(2)(g), State effective June 24, 2005, in the SIP. 

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

portions of the SIP revisions consisting 

of the following changes: parenthesizing 

of the lettering and numbering of the 

titles of the sections and spelling out 

certain words instead of using 

numerical notation in Regulation 61– 

62.1, Section II, Permit Requirements, in 

the April 24, 2020, submittal; the 

aforementioned changes to Regulation 

61–62.1, subsection II(B), except for 

subparagraph II(B)(2)(h), and paragraphs 

II(B)(3), II(B)(5), or II(B)(6); the changes 

to subsection II(C); the addition of and 

changes to subsection II(H), and the 

restructuring of and changes to 

subsection II(K). EPA is proposing to 

approve the aforementioned changes to 

the SIP for the reasons discussed in 

Section II of this document. 

For the aforementioned reasons, EPA 

is also proposing to disapprove the 

portions of the South Carolina SIP 

revisions consisting of changes to: 

Regulation 61–62.1, subsection II(B) at 

paragraph (2)(h); paragraphs II(B)(3), 

II(B)(5), and II(B)(6); the addition of and 

changes to subsection II(D); the 

restructuring of and changes to 

subsection II(E); 24 the addition of and 

changes to subsection II(F); 25 the 

addition of and changes to subsection 

II(I); and the restructuring of and 

changes to subsection II(N). 

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. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to review State choices, 

and approve those choices if they meet 

the minimum criteria of the Act. 

Accordingly, this proposed approval 

proposes to partially approve and 

partially disapprove a SIP submission as 

meeting or not meeting Federal 

requirements, respectively, and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by State law. 

Additional information about these 

statutes and Executive Orders can be 

found at https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/laws-and-executive-orders. 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 14094: Modernizing Regulatory 

Review 

This proposed action is not a 

significant regulatory action as defined 

in Executive Order 12866, as amended 

by Executive Order 14094, and was 

therefore not subject to a requirement 

for Executive Order 12866 review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This proposed action does not impose 

an information collection burden under 

the PRA because it does not contain any 

information collection activities. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this proposed action will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. This proposed action 

will not impose any requirements on 

small entities because it merely partially 

approves and partially disapproves a 

SIP submission as meeting or not 

meeting Federal requirements, 

respectively. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This proposed action does not contain 

an unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. The proposed action 

imposes no enforceable duty on any 

State, local or Tribal governments or the 

private sector. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This proposed action does not have 

federalism implications. It will not have 

substantial direct effects on the States, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments 

Because this proposed action merely 

partially approves and partially 

disapproves State law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by State law, this 

proposed action for the State of South 

Carolina does not have Tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000). Therefore, this action will not 

impose substantial direct costs on Tribal 

governments or preempt Tribal law. The 

Catawba Indian Nation (CIN) 

Reservation is located within the 

boundary of York County, South 

Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba 

Indian Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code 

Ann. 27–16–120 (Settlement Act), ‘‘all 

state and local environmental laws and 

regulations apply to the [Catawba Indian 

Nation] and Reservation and are fully 

enforceable by all relevant State and 

local agencies and authorities.’’ The CIN 

also retains authority to impose 

regulations applying higher 

environmental standards to the 

Reservation than those imposed by State 

law or local governing bodies, in 

accordance with the Settlement Act. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 

as applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern environmental 

health or safety risks that EPA has 

reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. Therefore, this 

proposed action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 because it 

merely proposed to partially approve 

and partially disapprove a SIP 

submission as meeting or not meeting 

Federal requirements, respectively. 

Furthermore, EPA’s Policy on 

Children’s Health does not apply to this 

action. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This proposed action is not subject to 

Executive Order 13211 because it is not 

a significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This proposed rulemaking does not 

involve technical standards. 

J. Executive Order 12898 and Executive 

Order 14096: Federal Actions to 

Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations and Revitalizing Our 

Nation’s Commitment to Environmental 

Justice for All 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority 

Populations and Low-Income 

Populations, 59 FR 7629, February 16, 

1994) directs Federal agencies to 

identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on communities with EJ 

concerns to the greatest extent 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 12 / Tuesday, January 21, 2025 / Proposed Rules 6967 

practicable and permitted by law. 

Executive Order 14096 (Revitalizing Our 

Nation’s Commitment to Environmental 

Justice for All, 88 FR 25251, April 26, 

2023) builds on and supplements E.O. 

12898 and defines EJ as among other 

things, the just treatment and 

meaningful involvement of all people 

regardless of income, race, color, 

national origin, or Tribal affiliation, or 

disability in agency decision-making 

and other Federal activities that affect 

human health and the environment. 

South Carolina did not evaluate EJ 

considerations as part of its SIP 

submittal; the CAA and applicable 

implementing regulations neither 

prohibit nor require such an evaluation. 

EPA did not perform an EJ analysis and 

did not consider EJ in this proposed 

action. Due to the nature of the 

proposed action being taken here, this 

proposed action is expected to have a 

neutral to positive impact on the air 

quality of the affected area. 

Consideration of EJ is not required as 

part of this action, and there is no 

information in the record inconsistent 

with the stated goal of E.O. 12898/14096 

of achieving EJ for communities with EJ 

concerns. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation byreference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: January 6, 2025. 

Jeaneanne Gettle, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2025–00438 Filed 1–17–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 136 

[EPA–HQ–OW–2024–0328; FRL 11799–01– 

OW] 

RIN 2040–AG37 

Clean Water Act Methods Update Rule 

22 for the Analysis of Contaminants in 

Effluent 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 

promulgate new methods and update 

the tables of approved methods for the 

Clean Water Act. The Clean Water Act 

requires the EPA to promulgate test 

procedures for the analysis of 

pollutants. Promulgating new methods 

and updating the tables of approved 

methods increases the quality and 

consistency of data collected for the 

purposes of the Clean Water Act. In this 

rule, the EPA proposes to add new EPA 

methods for per- and polyfluoroalkyl 

substances (PFAS) and polychlorinated 

biphenyl (PCB) congeners, and add 

methods previously published by 

voluntary consensus bodies that 

industries and municipalities would use 

for reporting under the EPA’s National 

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

permit program. The EPA also proposes 

to withdraw the seven Aroclor (PCB 

mixtures) parameters. In addition, the 

EPA is proposing to simplify the 

sampling requirements for two volatile 

organic compounds, and make a series 

of minor corrections to existing tables of 

approved methods. This proposed rule 

does not mandate when a parameter 

must be monitored or establish a 

discharge limit. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 20, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OW–2024–0328, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov/ (our 

preferred method). Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Mail: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, 

Office of Water Docket, Mail Code 

28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20460. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: EPA 

Docket Center, WJC West Building, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Docket 

Center’s hours of operations are 8:30 

a.m.–4:30 p.m., Monday–Friday (except 

Federal Holidays). 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the Docket ID No. for this 

rulemaking. Comments received may be 

posted without change to https://

www.regulations.gov/, including any 

personal information provided. For 

detailed instructions on sending 

comments and additional information 

on the rulemaking process, see the 

‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adrian Hanley, Engineering and 

Analysis Division, Office of Water 

(4303T), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001; 

telephone number: 202–564–1564; 

email address: hanley.adrian@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of 

Contents 

I. Public Participation 

II. General Information 

III. Background 

IV. Corrections or Amendments to the Text 

and Tables of 40 CFR part 136 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Public Participation 

A. Written Comments 

Submit your comments, identified by 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2024– 

0328, at https://www.regulations.gov 

(our preferred method), or the other 

methods identified in the ADDRESSES

section. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from the 

docket. The EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit to the EPA’s docket at 

https://www.regulations.gov any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI), 

Proprietary Business Information (PBI), 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). Please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets for 

additional submission information; the 

full EPA public comment policy; 

information about CBI, PBI, or 

multimedia submissions; and general 

guidance on making effective 

comments. Publicly available docket 

materials are available electronically in 

https://www.regulations.gov at the 

Water Docket in EPA Docket Center, 

EPA/DC, EPA West William J. Clinton 

Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue NW, Washington, DC. The 

Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 

a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays. Any 

copyright material can be viewed at the 

Reading Room, please contact the EPA 

Docket Center, Public Reading Room. 

The telephone number for the Public 

Reading Room is 202–566–1744, and the 

telephone number for the Water Docket 

is 202–566–2426. Fax: 202–566–9744. 

Email: docket-customerservice@epa.gov. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1