39078 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 158 / Thursday, August 17, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

46 40 CFR 52.38(b)(10); see also 40 CFR 

52.54(b)(1) & (2). 

with respect to the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS and the 2008 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS in the absence of SIP provisions 

addressing those requirements. Under 

the CSAPR regulations, upon EPA’s full 

and unconditional approval of a SIP 

revision as correcting the SIP’s 

deficiency that is the basis for a 

particular CSAPR FIP, the obligation to 

participate in the corresponding CSAPR 

federal trading program is automatically 

eliminated for units subject to the state’s 

jurisdiction (but not for any units 

located in any Indian country within the 

state’s borders).46 Approval of the 

portions of Alabama’s SIP submittal 

adopting CSAPR state trading program 

rules for ozone season NOX

substantively identical to the 

corresponding CSAPR federal trading 

program regulations (or differing only 

with respect to the allowance allocation 

methodology) would satisfy Alabama’s 

obligation pursuant to CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) to prohibit emissions 

which will significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS in any other state. This 

proposed approval would also partially 

satisfy Alabama’s obligation pursuant to 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) to prohibit 

emissions which will significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2008 8-hour 

Ozone NAAQS in any other state. Thus, 

the proposed approval would correct 

the same deficiency in the SIP that 

otherwise would be corrected by those 

CSAPR FIPs. The proposed approval of 

the portions of Alabama’s SIP submittal 

establishing CSAPR state trading 

program rules for ozone season NOX

emissions therefore would result in 

automatic termination of the obligations 

of Alabama units to participate in the 

federal CSAPR NOX Ozone Season 

Group 2 Trading Program. 

VII. 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, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

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

January 21, 2011); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The SIP is not approved to apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), nor will it impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: August 7, 2017. 

V. Anne Heard, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2017–17341 Filed 8–16–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2017–0174; FRL–9966–27– 

Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; Alabama; 

Transportation Conformity 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

the portion of a revision to the Alabama 

State Implementation plan submitted by 

the State of Alabama on May 8, 2013, for 

the purpose of amending the 

transportation conformity rules to be 

consistent with Federal requirements. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 18, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2017–0174 at http://

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 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kelly Sheckler, 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., 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 158 / Thursday, August 17, 2017 / Proposed Rules 39079 

1Areas designated as mandatory Class I federal 

areas consist of national parks exceeding 6000 

acres, wilderness areas and national memorial parks 

exceeding 5000 acres, and all international parks 

that were in existence on August 7, 1977. 42 U.S.C. 

7472(a). These areas are listed at 40 CFR part 81, 

subpart D. 

2EPA promulgated a rule to address regional 

haze, the RHR, on July 1, 1999. See 64 FR 35713. 

The RHR revised the existing visibility regulations 

to integrate into the regulation provisions 

addressing regional haze impairment and 

established a comprehensive visibility protection 

program for Class I areas. See 40 CFR 51.308 and 

51.309. EPA revised the RHR on January 10, 2017. 

See 82 FR 3078. 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9222. 

Ms. Sheckler can also be reached via 

electronic mail at sheckler.kelly@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules Section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

implementation plan revision as a direct 

final rule without prior proposal 

because the Agency views this as a 

noncontroversial submittal and 

anticipates no adverse comments. A 

detailed rationale for the approval is set 

forth in the direct final rule. If no 

adverse comments are received in 

response to this rule, no further activity 

is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse 

comments, the direct final rule will be 

withdrawn and all public comments 

received will be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period on this 

document. Any parties interested in 

commenting on this document should 

do so at this time. 

Dated: August 4, 2017. 

V. Anne Heard, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2017–17239 Filed 8–16–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0389; FRL–9966–16– 

Region 4] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; South Carolina; 

Regional Haze State Implementation 

Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; supplemental. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is issuing a supplement to 

its proposed approval of a revision to 

the South Carolina State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the State of South Carolina through the 

South Carolina Department of Health 

and Environmental Control (SC DHEC) 

on December 28, 2012. South Carolina’s 

SIP revision (Progress Report) addresses 

requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act) and EPA’s rules that require 

each state to submit periodic reports 

describing progress towards reasonable 

progress goals (RPGs) established for 

regional haze and a determination of the 

adequacy of the state’s existing SIP 

addressing regional haze (regional haze 

plan). EPA’s proposed approval of 

South Carolina’s Progress Report was 

published in the Federal Register on 

January 17, 2014. This supplemental 

proposal addresses the potential effects 

on EPA’s proposed approval from the 

April 29, 2014, decision of the United 

States Supreme Court (Supreme Court) 

remanding to the United States Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit (D.C. Circuit) EPA’s Cross-State 

Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) for further 

proceedings and the D.C. Circuit’s July 

28, 2015, decision on remand. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 18, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2013–0389 at http://

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 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michele Notarianni, 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. Ms. 

Notarianni can be reached via telephone 

at (404) 562–9031 and via electronic 

mail at notarianni.michele@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

Each state is required to submit a 

progress report in the form of a SIP 

revision during the first implementation 

period that evaluates progress towards 

the RPGs for each mandatory Class I 

federal area (Class I area) 1 within the 

state and in each mandatory Class I area 

outside the state that may be affected by 

emissions from within the state. See 40 

CFR 51.308(g). In addition, the 

provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(h) 

require states to submit, at the same 

time as the progress report, a 

determination of the adequacy of the 

state’s existing regional haze plan. The 

first progress report is due five years 

after submittal of the initial regional 

haze plan. 

SC DHEC submitted its first regional 

haze plan on December 17, 2007, and 

submitted its Progress Report on 

December 28, 2012. The Progress Report 

and accompanying cover letter included 

a determination that South Carolina’s 

existing regional haze plan requires no 

substantive revision to achieve the 

established regional haze visibility 

improvement and emissions reduction 

goals for 2018. EPA proposed to find 

that the State’s Progress Report satisfied 

the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g) 

and (h) in a notice of proposed 

rulemaking (NPRM) published on 

January 17, 2014 (79 FR 3147). Today’s 

notice supplements that 2014 NPRM by 

more fully explaining and soliciting 

comment on the basis for the Agency’s 

proposed approval as it relates to the 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and 

CSAPR. 

II. Summary of South Carolina’s 

Progress Report and EPA’s 2014 NPRM 

In accordance with requirements in 

EPA’s Regional Haze Rule (RHR), South 

Carolina’s Progress Report describes the 

progress made towards the RPGs of 

Class I areas in and outside South 

Carolina that are affected by emissions 

from South Carolina’s sources.2 See 40 

CFR 51.308(g). This Progress Report also 

included an assessment of whether 

South Carolina’s existing regional haze 

plan is sufficient to allow it and other 

nearby states with Class I areas to 

achieve their RPGs by the end of the 

first implementation period. See 40 CFR 

51.308(h). In the 2014 NPRM, EPA 

proposed to approve the State’s Progress 

Report as adequately addressing 40 CFR 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS