38828 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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

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

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

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by October 16, 2017. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. See section 

307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: August 3, 2017. 

Anne Heard, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart PP—South Carolina 

■ 2. Section 52.2120(c) is amended 

under ‘‘Regulation No. 62.5’’ by: 

■ a. Under ‘‘Standard No. 5’’: 

■ i. Revising the entry ‘‘Section I’’; 

■ ii. Under ‘‘Section I’’ revising the 

entries ‘‘Part A’’ and ‘‘Part G’’; 

■ iii. Revising the entry ‘‘Section II’’; 

■ iv. Adding under ‘‘Section II’’ the 

entry ‘‘Part A’’; and 

■ v. Revising under ‘‘Section II’’ the 

entries ‘‘Part B’’ and ‘‘Part Q’’. 

■ b. Revising the entry ‘‘Standard No. 

5.2’’. 

The revisions and additions read as 

follows: 

§ 52.2120 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS FOR SOUTH CAROLINA

State citation Title/subject 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval 

date 

Federal Register 

notice 

*******

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

*******

Standard No. 5 .......... Volatile Organic Compounds .................... ........................ ........................

Section I ..................... General Provisions ................................... 4/26/2013 8/16/2017 [Insert citation of publication]. 

Part A ......................... Definitions ................................................. 4/26/2013 8/16/2017 [Insert citation of publication]. 

*******

Part G ........................ Equivalency Calculations .......................... 4/26/2013 8/16/2017 [Insert citation of publication]. 

Section II .................... Provisions for Specific Sources ................ 11/27/2015 8/16/2017 [Insert citation of publication]. 

Part A ......................... Surface Coating of Cans .......................... 11/27/2015 8/16/2017 [Insert citation of publication]. 

Part B ......................... Surface Coating of Coils .......................... 11/27/2015 8/16/2017 [Insert citation of publication]. 

*******

Part Q ........................ Manufacture of Synthesized Pharmaceutical Products.4/26/2013 8/16/2017 [Insert citation of publication]. 

*******

Standard No. 5.2 ....... Control of Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) ........ 5/25/2007 8/16/2017 [Insert citation of publication]. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2017–17242 Filed 8–15–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2017–0385; FRL–9966–20– 

Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; SC: Multiple 

Revisions to Air Pollution Control 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve changes to the South 

Carolina State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) to revise miscellaneous rules 

covering air pollution control standards. 

EPA is approving portions of SIP 

revisions submitted by the State of 

South Carolina, through the South 

Carolina Department of Health and 

Environmental Control (SC DHEC), on 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 38829 

the following dates: October 1, 2007, 

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

2014, August 12, 2015, July 27, 2016, 

and November 4, 2016. These actions 

are being taken pursuant to the Clean 

Air Act (CAA or Act). 

DATES: This direct final rule is effective 

October 16, 2017 without further notice, 

unless EPA receives adverse comment 

by September 15, 2017. If EPA receives 

such comments, it will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register and inform the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2017–0385 at https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

EPA may publish any comment received 

to its public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. EPA will generally 

not consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

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

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard Wong, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. Wong 

can be reached via telephone at (404) 

562–8726 or via electronic mail at 

wong.richard@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On October 1, 2007, July 18, 2011, 

June 17, 2013, August 8, 2014, August 

12, 2015, July 27, 2016, and November 

4, 2016, SC DHEC submitted SIP 

revisions to EPA for approval that 

involve changes to South Carolina’s SIP 

regulations to make administrative and 

clarifying amendments, revise 

regulations, and correct typographical 

errors. These SIP submittals make 

changes to several air quality rules in 

South Carolina Code of Regulations 

Annotated (S.C. Code Ann. Regs.). The 

changes EPA is approving into the SIP 

in this action modify portions of 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 1— 

Emissions From Fuel Burning 

Operations and Regulation 61–62.5, 

Standard No. 4—Emissions From 

Process Industries. EPA is not acting on 

other revisions that are included in 

these submittals. EPA will act on those 

changes in separate actions. 

II. Analysis of South Carolina’s 

Submittals 

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

Emissions From Fuel Burning 

Operations 

South Carolina is amending multiple 

sections at Regulation 61–62.5, Standard 

No. 1—Emissions from Fuel Burning 

Operations. The July 18, 2011, submittal 

revises subparagraph C of Section I 

—Visible Emissions by excluding 

natural gas fired units from maintaining 

an information log to determine periods 

of startup and shutdown. The August 

12, 2015, submittal further revises the 

subparagraph adding propane fired 

units to the log keeping exception and 

corrects typographical errors in the 

Standard. 

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. SC DHEC 

considered CAA section 110(l) in 

making these changes and explains in a 

letter dated December 30, 2016, that the 

state expects no increase in actual 

emissions as a result of exempting units 

burning only natural gas and propane 

fuels from maintaining logs because 

there are no opacity concerns with these 

type of fuels during startup, shutdown, 

or normal operations. Because natural 

gas and propane contain relatively 

minor amounts of the constituents 

(particulate matter and sulfur) that 

could result in visible emissions, this 

change to subparagraph C will not result 

in any increase in emissions and will 

not affect the State’s ability to attain or 

maintain state or federal standards or 

reasonable further progress. 

The August 8, 2014, submittal makes 

the following changes: (1) Clarifies 

sulfur dioxide maximum allowable 

discharge limits at Section III—Sulfur 

Dioxide Emissions and (2) makes 

administrative and clarifying edits 

throughout Standard No. 1. The revision 

in Section III—Sulfur Dioxide Emissions 

streamlines the requirement by setting a 

maximum sulfur dioxide (SO2) limit of 

2.3 pounds per million British thermal 

units (lb/MMBtu) from fuel burning 

operations. The current approved 

Standard sets two SO2 limits, 2.3 lb/ 

MMBtu or 3.5 lb/MMBtu across various 

classification categories. Therefore, this 

revision would streamline the rule to 

the lower of the two limits allowed for 

such sources. Lastly, this submittal 

makes administrative and clarifying 

edits in Section I —Visible Emissions, 

Section III—Sulfur Dioxide Emissions, 

Section IV—Opacity Monitoring 

Requirements, and Section VI—Periodic 

Testing. 

The November 4, 2016, submittal 

makes typographical corrections under 

Section IV—Opacity Reporting 

Requirements. EPA has reviewed the 

aforementioned changes to South 

Carolina’s Regulation 61–62.5, Standard 

No. 1 and is approving the changes into 

the SIP pursuant to CAA section 110. 

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

Emissions From Process Industries 

South Carolina is amending multiple 

sections at Regulation 61–62.5, Standard 

No. 4—Emissions from Process 

Industries. The October 1, 2007, 

submittal removes Section IV—Portland 

Cement Manufacturing from the SIP. 

This rule contains particulate matter 

(PM) emission limits for cement kilns 

with a production rate of up to 120 tons 

per hour and it establishes a 20 percent 

allowable stack opacity limit for certain 

components of Portland cement plants. 

SC DHEC states that there are no 

Portland cement plants operating at 120 

tons per hour or less in the State 

because it is not economically feasible. 

SC DHEC asserts that removing this rule 

would not create a relaxation as there 

are no applicable sources subject to this 

regulation. Additionally, should such a 

source start operation, it would be 

subject to more stringent PM emissions 

limits in New Source Performance 

Standards (NSPS) subpart F (Standards 

of Performance for Portland Cement 

Plants). 

The July 18, 2011, submittal amends 

Section V—Cotton Gins by removing 

established specific emission limits 

based on production rate (output) of 

bales of cotton per hour and replacing 

that with specific, measurable 

performance requirements and 

operating standards. SC DHEC 

considered CAA section 110(l) in 

making this change. SC DEHC explains 

that the rule development is based on 

best management practices outlined in 

the USDA’s Cotton Ginners Handbook, 

staff experience with effective emission 

reduction techniques, the review of 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
38830 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

1SC DHEC’s July 18, 2011, submittal makes 

changes to TRS in Section XII. The August 8, 2014, 

submittal, if approved, would supersede the 2011 

revision. 2 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997). 

other state regulations on cotton gins, 

and several discussions with the 

affected industry. The new rule assures 

a greater degree of control of these 

emissions than that which would result 

from the existing process weight rate 

curve and also allows the state to more 

effectively determine compliance. The 

revised rule requires enforceable control 

of emissions from specific point sources 

in the ginning process rather than an 

allowable emission rate, and it 

establishes requirements to minimize 

fugitive emissions from various sources 

at cotton ginning facilities. The revised 

rule also sets applicable requirements 

for good housekeeping practices in the 

gin yard, weekly monitoring of control 

efficiency, recordkeeping, and reporting. 

The revised regulation will provide for 

improved emissions control through 

practicably enforceable control of 

emissions, use of state of the art 

pollution control devices, and 

minimization of fugitive emissions. The 

June 17, 2013, submittal makes a 

subsequent typographical correction to 

Section V. 

The August 8, 2014, submittal makes 

the following changes: (1) Removes a 

PM emissions limit at Section III—Kraft 

Pulp and Paper Manufacturing; (2) 

revises the frequency required for 

reporting excess emissions at Section 

XI—Total Reduced Sulfur Emissions of 

Kraft Pulp Mills; (3) removes periodic 

testing requirement for Total Reduce 

Sulfur (TRS) at Section XII—Periodic 

Testing; and (4) makes administrative 

and clarifying edits throughout 

Standard No. 4. At Section III, the 

submittal removes the table column 

‘‘Maximum Allowable Emissions of PM 

in pounds/equivalent Ton of Air Dried, 

Unbleached Pulp Produced’’ and retains 

the ‘‘Maximum Allowable Stack 

Opacity.’’ SC DEHC asserts that this will 

not result in a relaxation of emission 

limits because the subject sources are 

covered under more stringent PM limits 

under the National Emission Standards 

for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) 

(subpart S—National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

from the Pulp and Paper Industry). 

Additionally, the word ‘‘opacity’’ 

replaces ‘‘rate of emissions.’’ 

At Section XI, the August 8, 2014, 

submittal revises the required excess 

emissions reporting frequency in 

subparagraph D.3. from quarterly to 

semi-annual. SC DHEC considered CAA 

sections 110(l) and 193 in making the 

revision and asserts changing reporting 

from quarterly to semi-annual will not 

affect the level of emissions or 

compromise the national ambient air 

quality standards. SC DHEC cites to 

several Federal and state regulations 

that address excess emissions reporting, 

including NSPS subpart BB Standards 

of Performance for Kraft Pulp Mills; 

South Carolina Regulation 61–62.5, 

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

Reduced Sulfur (TRS) Emissions of Kraft 

Pulp Mills; South Carolina Regulations 

61–62.1, Section II(J)(2) Permit 

Requirements; and South Carolina 

Regulation 61–62.70 Title V Operating 

Permit Program. 

At Section XII, the August 8, 2014, 

submittal removes the periodic testing 

requirement for TRS at Kraft pulp 

mills.1 SC DHEC states that most 

sources are required to test under NSPS 

or NESHAP rules. The few sources that 

are not required to test have enough 

historical test data to develop an 

approvable operating range which can 

be handled during the permitting 

process. Additionally, the S.C. Pollution 

Control Act (48–1–50, Powers of the 

Department) makes provision for the SC 

DHEC to ask for a source test and 

permits are often drafted with language 

allowing the SC DEHC to ask for source 

tests. Therefore, the requirements will 

be no less stringent than what is 

allowed through current regulatory and 

permitting authority to review testing 

requirements. 

Lastly, the August 8, 2014, submittal 

makes minor typographical, 

renumbering, and clarifying edits to 

Standard No. 4 in Section II—Sulfuric 

Acid Manufacturing, Section V—Cotton 

Gins, Section XI—Total Reduced Sulfur 

Emissions of Kraft Pulp Mills, and 

Section XII—Periodic Testing. 

The July 27, 2016, submittal revises 

Section VIII—Other Manufacturing by 

excluding Kraft Pulp and Paper 

Manufacturing facilities. This Section 

sets PM emission for source categories 

not specified elsewhere in Standard No. 

4. The revision to exclude Kraft Pulp 

and Paper Manufacturing facilities 

aligns with the August 8, 2014, revision, 

as previously discussed in this notice. 

The submittal also makes minor 

typographical, renumbering, and 

clarifying edits to Section XII —Periodic 

Testing. 

EPA has reviewed the aforementioned 

changes to South Carolina’s Regulation 

61–62.5, Standard No. 4 and is 

approving the revisions into the SIP 

pursuant to CAA section 110. 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, EPA is finalizing 

regulatory text that includes 

incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation 

by reference of South Carolina 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 1— 

Emissions From Fuel Burning 

Operations, effective September 23, 

2016, which makes administrative and 

clarifying revisions for consistency, 

removes log reporting requirements, 

revises monitoring requirements, and 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 4— 

Emissions From Process Industries, 

effective June 24, 2016, which makes 

administrative and clarifying revisions 

for consistency, removes specific 

emission rates, and reporting 

requirements. Therefore, these materials 

have been approved by EPA for 

inclusion in the SIP, have been 

incorporated by reference by EPA into 

that plan, are fully federally enforceable 

under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA 

as of the effective date of the final 

rulemaking of EPA’s approval, and will 

be incorporated by reference by the 

Director of the Federal Register in the 

next update to the SIP compilation.2

EPA has made, and will continue to 

make, these materials generally 

available through https://

www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA 

Region 4 Office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

IV. Final Action 

EPA is approving the aforementioned 

changes to the South Carolina SIP, 

submitted on October 1, 2007, July 18, 

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

August 12, 2015, July 27, 2016, and 

November 4, 2016 because they are 

consistent with the CAA and federal 

regulations. EPA is publishing this rule 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

submittal and anticipates no adverse 

comments. However, in the proposed 

rules section of this Federal Register 

publication, EPA is publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposal to approve the SIP revision 

should adverse comments be filed. This 

rule will be effective October 16, 2017 

without further notice unless the 

Agency receives adverse comments by 

September 15, 2017. 

If EPA receives such comments, then 

EPA will publish a document 

withdrawing the final rule and 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. All adverse comments 

received will then be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period. Parties 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 38831 

interested in commenting should do so 

at this time. If no such comments are 

received, the public is advised that this 

rule will be effective on October 16, 

2017 and no further action will be taken 

on the proposed rule. 

Please note that if we receive adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, we may adopt as 

final those provisions of the rule that are 

not the subject of an adverse comment. 

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 approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, these actions 

merely approve state law as meeting 

federal requirements and do not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

these actions: 

• Are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

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

January 21, 2011); 

• do not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• are certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• do not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• do not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• are not economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 

• are not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• do not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this direct final action for 

the State of South Carolina does not 

have Tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because it does not 

have substantial direct effects on an 

Indian Tribe. The Catawba Indian 

Nation Reservation is located within the 

South Carolina portion of the bi-state 

Charlotte Area. Pursuant to the Catawba 

Indian Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code 

Ann. 27–16–120, ‘‘all state and local 

environmental laws and regulations 

apply to the [Catawba Indian Nation] 

and Reservation and are fully 

enforceable by all relevant state and 

local agencies and authorities.’’ EPA 

notes this action will not impose 

substantial direct costs on Tribal 

governments or preempt Tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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

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

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

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by October 16, 2017. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. See section 

307(b)(2). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: August 4, 2017. 

A. Anne Heard, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart PP—South Carolina 

■ 2. Section 52.2120(c) is amended by: 

■ a. Revising the entries under 

Regulation No. 62.5, Standard No. 1, for 

‘‘Section I,’’ ‘‘Section III,’’ and ‘‘Section 

VI,’’ 

■ b. Revising the entries under 

Regulation No. 62.5, Standard No. 4, for 

‘‘Section II,’’ ‘‘Section III,’’ ‘‘Section IV,’’ 

‘‘Section V,’’ ‘‘Section VIII,’’ ‘‘Section 

XI,’’ and ‘‘Section XII’’ to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.2120 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
38832 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

1 ‘‘Where an air agency determines that the 

provisions in or referred to by its existing EPA 

approved SIP are adequate with respect to a given 

infrastructure SIP element (or subelement) even in 

light of the promulgation of a new or revised 

NAAQS, the air agency may make a SIP submission 

in the form of a certification.’’ EPA’s ‘‘Guidance on 

Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) 

and (2),’’ September 13, 2013, at 7. 

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL REGULATIONS FOR SOUTH CAROLINA

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date 

EPA approval 

date Federal Register notice 

*******

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

Section I ..................... Visible Emissions ...................................... 9/23/2016 8/16/2017 [Insert Federal Register citation]. 

* * * * * * * 

Section III ................... Sulfur Dioxide Emissions .......................... 9/23/2016 8/16/2017 [Insert Federal Register citation]. 

* * * * * * * 

Section VI .................. Periodic Testing ........................................ 9/23/2016 8/16/2017 [Insert Federal Register citation]. 

* * * * * * * 

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

* * * * * * * 

Section II .................... Sulfuric Acid Manufacturing ...................... 6/24/2016 8/16/2017 [Insert Federal Register citation]. 

Section III ................... Kraft Pulp and Paper Manufacturing 

Plants.

6/24/2016 8/16/2017 [Insert Federal Register citation]. 

Section IV .................. Portland Cement Manufacturing ............... 6/24/2016 8/16/2017 [Insert Federal Register citation]. 

Section V ................... Cotton Gins ............................................... 6/24/2016 8/16/2017 [Insert Federal Register citation]. 

* * * * * * * 

Section VIII ................ Other Manufacturing ................................. 6/24/2016 8/16/2017 [Insert Federal Register citation]. 

* * * * * * * 

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

Pulp Mills.

6/24/2016 8/16/2017 [Insert Federal Register citation]. 

Section XII ................. Periodic Testing ........................................ 6/24/2016 8/16/2017 [Insert Federal Register citation]. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2017–17226 Filed 8–15–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2016–0709, FRL–9966–05- 

Region 8] 

Promulgation of State Implementation 

Plan Revisions; Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 2010 SO2 and 

2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards; South Dakota 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving elements of 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revisions from the State of South Dakota 

to demonstrate the State meets 

infrastructure requirements of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA) for the National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 

promulgated for sulfur dioxide (SO2) on 

June 2, 2010 and fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) on December 14, 2012. 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

September 15, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R08–OAR–2016–0709. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

http://www.regulations.gov or in hard 

copy at the Air Program, Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. The EPA requests that if at 

all possible, you contact the individual 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to view the hard copy 

of the docket. You may view the hard 

copy of the docket Monday through 

Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding 

federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Abby Fulton, Air Program, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129, (303) 312–6563, 

fulton.abby@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Infrastructure requirements for SIPs 

are set forth in section 110(a)(1) and (2) 

of the CAA. Section 110(a)(2) lists the 

specific infrastructure elements that a 

SIP must contain or satisfy. The 

elements that are the subject of this 

action are described in detail in our 

notice of proposed rulemaking 

published on June 6, 2017 (82 FR 

26007). 

In our proposed rule, the EPA 

proposed to approve and take no action 

on some infrastructure elements for the 

2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS from 

the State’s certifications.1 In this 

rulemaking, we are taking final action to 

approve infrastructure elements from 

the State’s certifications. 

II. Response to Comments 

No comments were received on our 

June 6, 2017 notice of proposed 

rulemaking. 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES