38866 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

1Federal Implementation Plans; Interstate 

Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and 

Correction of SIP Approvals, 76 FR 48208 (August 

8, 2011) (codified as amended at 40 CFR 52.38 and 

52.39 and subparts AAAAA through EEEEE of 40 

CFR part 97). 

2Under Georgia’s regulations, the State will retain 

EPA’s default allowance allocation methodology 

and EPA will remain the implementing authority 

for administration of the trading program. See 

sections IV and V.B.2, below. 

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. Akers 

can be reached via telephone at (404) 

562–9089 or via electronic mail at 

akers.brad@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules Section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving the State’s 

SIP 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final rule will be withdrawn and all 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 3, 2017. 

V. Anne Heard, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2017–17245 Filed 8–15–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2017–0452; FRL–9966–43– 

Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; Georgia; CrossState Air Pollution Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

portions of a revision to the Georgia 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

concerning the Cross-State Air Pollution 

Rule (CSAPR) and the Clean Air 

Interstate Rule (CAIR) that was 

submitted by Georgia on July 26, 2017. 

Under CSAPR, large electricity 

generating units (EGUs) in Georgia are 

subject to Federal Implementation Plans 

(FIPs) requiring the units to participate 

in CSAPR’s federal trading program for 

annual emissions of nitrogen oxides 

(NOX), one of CSAPR’s two federal 

trading programs for annual emissions 

of sulfur dioxide (SO2), and one of 

CSAPR’s two federal trading programs 

for ozone season emissions of NOX. This 

action would approve the State’s 

regulations requiring large Georgia 

EGUs to participate in new CSAPR state 

trading programs for annual NOX, 

annual SO2, and ozone season NOX

emissions integrated with the CSAPR 

federal trading programs, replacing the 

corresponding FIP requirements. EPA is 

proposing to approve the portions of the 

SIP revision concerning these CSAPR 

state trading programs because these 

portions of the SIP revision meet the 

requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act) and EPA’s regulations for 

approval of a CSAPR full SIP revision 

replacing the requirements of a CSAPR 

FIP. Under the CSAPR regulations, 

approval of these portions of the SIP 

revision would automatically eliminate 

Georgia’s units’ obligations under the 

corresponding CSAPR FIPs addressing 

interstate transport requirements for the 

1997 Annual Fine Particulate Matter 

(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS), the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 1997 8-hour 

Ozone NAAQS. Approval of these 

portions of the SIP revision would 

satisfy Georgia’s good neighbor 

obligation for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS, the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, and the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS. In addition, approval of this 

revision would remove from Georgia’s 

SIP those state trading program rules 

adopted to comply with CAIR. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 15, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2017–0452 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: 

Ashten Bailey, Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. Bailey 

can be reached by telephone at (404) 

562–9164 or via electronic mail at 

bailey.ashten@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Summary 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

portions of the July 26, 2017, revision to 

the Georgia SIP concerning CSAPR 1

trading programs for annual emissions 

of NOX and SO2 and ozone season 

emissions of NOX. Large EGUs in 

Georgia are subject to CSAPR FIPs that 

require the units to participate in the 

federal CSAPR NOX Annual Trading 

Program, the federal CSAPR SO2 Group 

2 Trading Program, and the federal 

CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 1 

Trading Program. CSAPR also provides 

a process for the submission and 

approval of SIP revisions to replace the 

requirements of CSAPR FIPs with SIP 

requirements under which a state’s 

units participate in CSAPR state trading 

programs that are integrated with and, 

with certain permissible exceptions, 

substantively identical to the CSAPR 

federal trading programs. 

The portions of the SIP revision 

proposed for approval would 

incorporate into Georgia’s SIP state 

trading program regulations for annual 

NOX and SO2 and ozone season NOX

emissions that would replace EPA’s 

federal trading program regulations for 

those emissions from Georgia units.2

EPA is proposing to approve these 

portions of the SIP revision because 

they meet the requirements of the CAA 

and EPA’s regulations for approval of a 

CSAPR full SIP revision replacing a 

federal trading program with a state 

trading program that is integrated with 

and substantively identical to the 

federal trading program. Under the 

CSAPR regulations, approval of these 

portions of the SIP revision would 

automatically eliminate the obligations 

of large EGUs in Georgia to participate 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Proposed Rules 38867 

3EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA (EME 

Homer City II), 795 F.3d 118, 138 (D.C. Cir. 2015). 4Although the court in EME Homer City II 

remanded Georgia’s Phase 2 SO2 budget because it 

determined that the budget may be too stringent, 

nothing in the court’s decision affects Georgia’s 

authority to seek incorporation into its SIP of a 

state-established budget as stringent as the 

remanded federally-established budget or limits 

EPA’s authority to approve such a SIP revision. See 

42 U.S.C. 7416, 7410(k)(3). 5 70 FR 25172 (May 12, 2005). 

6See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). 

7Order of December 30, 2011, in EME Homer City 

Generation, L.P. v. EPA, D.C. Cir. No. 11–1302. 

8EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 

F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), cert. granted 133 U.S. 2857 

(2013). 

9EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. 

Ct. 1584, 1600–01 (2014). 

10See 40 CFR 51.123(ff) (sunsetting CAIR 

requirements related to NOX); 40 CFR 51.124(s) 

(sunsetting CAIR requirements related to SO2). 

in CSAPR’s federal trading programs for 

annual NOX, annual SO2 and ozone 

season NOX emissions under the 

corresponding CSAPR FIPs. EPA 

proposes to find that approval of these 

portions of the SIP revision would 

satisfy Georgia’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 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, and the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS in any other state. 

The Phase 2 SO2 budget established 

for Georgia in the CSAPR rulemaking 

has been remanded to EPA for 

reconsideration.3 If EPA finalizes 

approval of the portions of the SIP 

revision as proposed, Georgia will have 

fulfilled its obligations to provide a SIP 

that addresses the interstate transport 

provisions of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Thus, EPA 

would no longer be under an obligation 

to (nor would EPA have the authority 

to) address those interstate transport 

requirements through implementation 

of a FIP, and approval of these portions 

of the SIP revision would eliminate 

Georgia units’ obligations to participate 

in the federal CSAPR NOX Annual 

Trading Program and the federal CSAPR 

SO2 Group 2 Trading Program. 

Elimination of Georgia units’ obligations 

to participate in the federal trading 

programs would include elimination of 

the federally-established Phase 2 

budgets capping allocations of CSAPR 

NOX Annual allowances and CSAPR 

SO2 Group 2 allowances to Georgia 

units under those federal trading 

programs. As approval of these portions 

of the SIP revision would eliminate 

Georgia’s remanded federallyestablished Phase 2 SO2 budget and 

eliminate EPA’s authority to subject 

units in Georgia to a FIP, it is EPA’s 

opinion that finalization of approval of 

this SIP action would address the 

judicial remand of Georgia’s federallyestablished Phase 2 SO2 budget.4

In addition, approval of the portions 

of the SIP revision identified above 

would remove Georgia’s state trading 

programs provisions adopted to 

implement CAIR. EPA is proposing 

approval of this removal because CAIR 

is no longer in effect and has been 

replaced by CSAPR. As a result, the 

removal of CAIR is consistent with the 

CAA. 

At this time, EPA is not acting on the 

portions of the submittal related to 

Georgia’s Regional Haze SIP under the 

Clean Air Act or the visibility transport 

(prong 4) infrastructure SIP. 

Section II provides background 

information on CAIR. Section III of this 

document summarizes the relevant 

aspects of the CSAPR federal trading 

programs and FIPs as well as the range 

of opportunities states have to submit 

SIP revisions to modify or replace the 

FIP requirements while continuing to 

rely on CSAPR’s trading programs to 

address the states’ obligations to 

mitigate interstate air pollution. Section 

IV describes the specific conditions for 

approval of such SIP revisions. Section 

V contains EPA’s analysis of Georgia’s 

SIP submittal, and Section VI sets forth 

EPA’s proposed action on the submittal. 

Section VII addresses statutory and 

Executive Order reviews. 

II. Background on CAIR 

To help reduce interstate transport of 

ozone and PM2.5 pollution in the eastern 

half of the United States, EPA finalized 

CAIR in May 2005.5 CAIR addressed 

both the 1997 Ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS 

and required 28 states, including 

Georgia, and the District of Columbia to 

limit emissions of NOX and SO2. For 

CAIR, EPA developed three separate cap 

and trade programs that could be used 

to achieve the required reductions: the 

CAIR NOX ozone season trading 

program, the CAIR NOX annual trading 

program, and the CAIR SO2 trading 

program. Georgia was subject to CAIR 

requirements only with respect to 

annual NOX and SO2 emissions. 

On December 23, 2008, CAIR was 

remanded to EPA by the United States 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) in North 

Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 

2008), modified on rehearing, 550 F.3d 

1176. This ruling allowed CAIR to 

remain in effect until a new interstate 

transport rule consistent with the 

Court’s opinion was developed. While 

EPA worked on developing a new rule 

to address the interstate transport of air 

pollution, the CAIR program continued 

as planned with the NOX annual and 

ozone season programs beginning in 

2009 and the SO2 annual program 

beginning in 2010. 

In response to the remand of CAIR, 

EPA promulgated CSAPR on July 6, 

2011.6 Along with provisions discussed 

more fully in the following section, the 

rule contained provisions that would 

sunset CAIR-related obligations on a 

schedule coordinated with the 

implementation of CSAPR compliance 

requirements. CSAPR was to become 

effective January 1, 2012; however, the 

timing of CSAPR’s implementation was 

impacted by a number of court actions. 

On December 30, 2011, the D.C. Circuit 

stayed CSAPR prior to its 

implementation, and EPA was ordered 

to continue administering CAIR on an 

interim basis.7 In a subsequent decision 

on the merits, the Court vacated CSAPR 

based on a subset of petitioners’ claims.8

However, on April 29, 2014, the U.S. 

Supreme Court reversed that decision 

and remanded the case to the D.C. 

Circuit for further proceedings.9

Throughout the initial round of D.C. 

Circuit proceedings and the ensuing 

Supreme Court proceedings, the stay on 

CSAPR remained in place, and EPA 

continued to implement CAIR. 

Following the April 2014 Supreme 

Court decision, EPA filed a motion 

asking the D.C. Circuit to lift the stay in 

order to allow CSAPR to replace CAIR 

in an equitable and orderly manner 

while further D.C. Circuit proceedings 

were held to resolve remaining claims 

from petitioners. Additionally, EPA’s 

motion requested to toll, by three years, 

all CSAPR compliance deadlines that 

had not passed as of the approval date 

of the stay. On October 23, 2014, the 

D.C. Circuit granted EPA’s request, and 

on December 3, 2014 (79 FR 71663), in 

an interim final rule, EPA set the 

updated effective date of CSAPR as 

January 1, 2015, and tolled the 

implementation of CSAPR Phase 1 to 

2015 and CSAPR Phase 2 to 2017. In 

accordance with the interim final rule, 

the sunset date for CAIR was December 

31, 2014, and EPA began implementing 

CSAPR on January 1, 2015.10

III. Background on CSAPR and CSAPRRelated SIP Revisions 

As discussed above, EPA issued 

CSAPR in July 2011 to address the 

requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) concerning interstate 

transport of air pollution. As amended 

(including by the 2016 CSAPR 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
38868 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

11See 81 FR 74504 (October 26, 2016). The 

CSAPR Update was promulgated to address 

interstate pollution with respect to the 2008 8-hour 

Ozone NAAQS and to address a judicial remand of 

certain original CSAPR ozone season NOX budgets 

promulgated with respect to the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS. See 81 FR at 74505. The CSAPR Update 

established new emission reduction requirements 

addressing the more recent NAAQS and 

coordinated them with the remaining emission 

reduction requirements addressing the older ozone 

NAAQS, so that starting in 2017, CSAPR includes 

two geographically separate trading programs for 

ozone season NOX emissions covering EGUs in a 

total of 23 states. See 40 CFR 52.38(b)(1)–(2). 

12States are required to submit good neighbor 

SIPs within three years (or less, if the Administrator 

so prescribes) after a NAAQS is promulgated. CAA 

section 110(a)(1) and (2). Where EPA finds that a 

state fails to submit a required SIP or disapproves 

a SIP, EPA is obligated to promulgate a FIP 

addressing the deficiency. CAA section 110(c). EPA 

found that Georgia failed to make timely 

submissions required to address the good neighbor 

provision with respect to the 1997 Annual PM2.5

and 8-hour Ozone NAAQS (70 FR 21147, April 25, 

2005), and the 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS (80 FR 

39961, June 13, 2015). In addition, EPA 

disapproved Georgia’s SIP revision submitted to 

address the good neighbor provision with respect to 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 76 FR 43159 (July 

20, 2011). Accordingly, as a part of CSAPR and the 

CSAPR Update, EPA promulgated FIPs applicable 

to sources in Georgia addressing the good neighbor 

provision with respect to the 1997 annual PM2.5, 

1997 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, and the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. As discussed below, when EPA 

finalized the CSAPR Update, EPA determined that 

Georgia did not interfere with nonattainment or 

maintenance for the 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS. 

13See 40 CFR 52.38, 52.39. States also retain the 

ability to submit SIP revisions to meet their 

transport-related obligations using mechanisms 

other than the CSAPR federal trading programs or 

integrated state trading programs. 14States covered by both the CSAPR Update and 

the NOX SIP Call have the additional option to 

expand applicability under the CSAPR NOX Ozone 

Season Group 2 Trading Program to include nonEGUs that would have participated in the former 

NOX Budget Trading Program. 15CSAPR also provides for a third, more 

streamlined form of SIP revision that is effective 

only for control periods in 2016 and is not relevant 

here. See 40 CFR 52.38(a)(3), (b)(3), (b)(7); 52.39(d), 

(g). 

16 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4), (b)(4), (b)(8); 52.39(e), (h). 

17 40 CFR 52.38(a)(5), (b)(5), (b)(9); 52.39(f), (i). 

18 40 CFR 52.38(a)(6), (b)(10)(i); 52.39(j). 

19 40 CFR 52.38(a)(5)(iv)–(v), (a)(6), (b)(5)(v)–(vi), 

(b)(9)(vi)–(vii), (b)(10)(i); 52.39(f)(4)–(5), (i)(4)–(5), 

(j). 

Update 11), CSAPR requires 27 Eastern 

states to limit their statewide emissions 

of SO2 and/or NOX in order to mitigate 

transported air pollution unlawfully 

impacting other states’ ability to attain 

or maintain four NAAQS: The 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS, the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS, and the 2008 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS. The CSAPR emissions 

limitations are defined in terms of 

maximum statewide ‘‘budgets’’ for 

emissions of annual SO2, annual NOX, 

and/or ozone season NOX by each 

covered state’s large EGUs. The CSAPR 

state budgets are implemented in two 

phases of generally increasing 

stringency, with the Phase 1 budgets 

applying to emissions in 2015 and 2016 

and the Phase 2 (and CSAPR Update) 

budgets applying to emissions in 2017 

and later years. As a mechanism for 

achieving compliance with the 

emissions limitations, CSAPR 

establishes five federal emissions 

trading programs: a program for annual 

NOX emissions, two geographically 

separate programs for annual SO2

emissions, and two geographically 

separate programs for ozone-season NOX

emissions. CSAPR also establishes FIP 

requirements applicable to the large 

EGUs in each covered state.12 Currently, 

the CSAPR FIP provisions require each 

state’s units to participate in up to three 

of the five CSAPR trading programs. 

CSAPR includes provisions under 

which states may submit and EPA will 

approve SIP revisions to modify or 

replace the CSAPR FIP requirements 

while allowing states to continue to 

meet their transport-related obligations 

using either CSAPR’s federal emissions 

trading programs or state emissions 

trading programs integrated with the 

federal programs, provided that the SIP 

revisions meet all relevant criteria.13

Through such a SIP revision, a state may 

replace EPA’s default provisions for 

allocating emission allowances among 

the state’s units, employing any stateselected methodology to allocate or 

auction the allowances, subject to 

timing conditions and limits on overall 

allowance quantities. In the case of 

CSAPR’s federal trading programs for 

ozone season NOX emissions (or an 

integrated state trading program), a state 

may also expand trading program 

applicability to include certain smaller 

EGUs.14 If a state wants to replace 

CSAPR FIP requirements with SIP 

requirements under which the state’s 

units participate in a state trading 

program that is integrated with and 

identical to the federal trading program 

even as to the allocation and 

applicability provisions, the state may 

submit a SIP revision for that purpose 

as well. However, no emissions budget 

increases or other substantive changes 

to the trading program provisions are 

allowed. A state whose units are subject 

to multiple CSAPR FIPs and federal 

trading programs may submit SIP 

revisions to modify or replace either 

some or all of those FIP requirements. 

States can submit two basic forms of 

CSAPR-related SIP revisions effective 

for emissions control periods in 2017 or 

later years.15 Specific conditions for 

approval of each form of SIP revision 

are set forth in the CSAPR regulations, 

as described in section IV below. Under 

the first alternative—an ‘‘abbreviated’’ 

SIP revision—a state may submit a SIP 

revision that upon approval replaces the 

default allowance allocation and/or 

applicability provisions of a CSAPR 

federal trading program for the state.16

Approval of an abbreviated SIP revision 

leaves the corresponding CSAPR FIP 

and all other provisions of the relevant 

federal trading program in place for the 

state’s units. 

Under the second alternative—a 

‘‘full’’ SIP revision—a state may submit 

a SIP revision that upon approval 

replaces a CSAPR federal trading 

program for the state with a state trading 

program integrated with the federal 

trading program, so long as the state 

trading program is substantively 

identical to the federal trading program 

or does not substantively differ from the 

federal trading program except as 

discussed above with regard to the 

allowance allocation and/or 

applicability provisions.17 For purposes 

of a full SIP revision, a state may either 

adopt state rules with complete trading 

program language, incorporate the 

federal trading program language into its 

state rules by reference (with 

appropriate conforming changes), or 

employ a combination of these 

approaches. 

The CSAPR regulations identify 

several important consequences and 

limitations associated with approval of 

a full SIP revision. First, upon EPA’s 

approval of a full SIP revision as 

correcting the deficiency in the state’s 

implementation plan that was the basis 

for a particular set of CSAPR FIP 

requirements, the obligation to 

participate in the corresponding CSAPR 

federal trading program is automatically 

eliminated for units subject to the state’s 

jurisdiction without the need for a 

separate EPA withdrawal action, so long 

as EPA’s approval of the SIP is full and 

unconditional.18 Second, approval of a 

full SIP revision does not terminate the 

obligation to participate in the 

corresponding CSAPR federal trading 

program for any units located in any 

Indian country within the borders of the 

state, and if and when a unit is located 

in Indian country within a state’s 

borders, EPA may modify the SIP 

approval to exclude from the SIP, and 

include in the surviving CSAPR FIP 

instead, certain trading program 

provisions that apply jointly to units in 

the state and to units in Indian country 

within the state’s borders.19 Finally, if at 

the time a full SIP revision is approved 

EPA has already started recording 

allocations of allowances for a given 

control period to a state’s units, the 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Proposed Rules 38869 

20 40 CFR 52.38(a)(7), (b)(11)(i); 52.39(k). 21EME Homer City II, 795 F.3d 118; See also EME 

Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7 

(D.C. Cir. 2012), EPA v. EME Homer City 

Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). The D.C. 

Circuit also remanded SO2 budgets for Alabama, 

South Carolina, and Texas. The court also 

remanded Phase 2 ozone-season NOX budgets for 

eleven states, which did not include Georgia. 22See memo entitled ‘‘The U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency’s Plan for Responding to the 

Remand of the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Phase 

2 SO2 Budgets for Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina 

and Texas’’ from Janet G. McCabe, EPA Acting 

Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, to 

EPA Regional Air Division Directors (June 27, 

2016), available at https://www.regulations.gov/ 

document?D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0598-0003. The 

memo directs the Regional Air Division Directors to 

share the memo with state officials. The EPA also 

communicated orally with officials in Alabama, 

Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas in advance of 

the memo. 23 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4)(ii), (a)(5)(vi), (b)(4)(iii), 

(b)(5)(vii), (b)(8)(iv), (b)(9)(viii); 52.39(e)(2), (f)(6), 

(h)(2), (i)(6). 24 In the context of the approval conditions for 

CSAPR-related SIP revisions, an ‘‘existing unit’’ is 

a unit for which EPA has determined default 

allowance allocations (which could be allocations 

of zero allowances) in the rulemakings establishing 

and amending CSAPR. A document describing 

EPA’s default allocations to existing units is 

available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/ 

files/2017-05/documents/csapr_allowance_

allocations_final_rule_tsd.pdf. 

25 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4)(i), (a)(5)(i), (b)(4)(ii), 

(b)(5)(ii), (b)(8)(iii), (b)(9)(iii); 52.39(e)(1), (f)(1), 

(h)(1), (i)(1). 

26See 40 CFR 97.412(b)(10)(ii), 97.512(b)(10)(ii), 

97.612(b)(10)(ii), 97.712(b)(10)(ii), 97.812(b)(10)(ii). 

27 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4)(i)(A), (a)(5)(i)(A), 

(b)(4)(ii)(A), (b)(5)(ii)(A), (b)(8)(iii)(A), (b)(9)(iii)(A); 

52.39(e)(1)(i), (f)(1)(i), (h)(1)(i), (i)(1)(i). 

28 40 CFR 52.38(b)(8)(iii)(A), (b)(9)(iii)(A). 

29 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4)(i)(B)–(C), (a)(5)(i)(B)–(C), 

(b)(4)(ii)(B)–(C), (b)(5)(ii)(B)–(C), (b)(8)(iii)(B)–(C), 

(b)(9)(iii)(B)–(C); 52.39(e)(1)(ii)–(iii), (f)(1)(ii)–(iii), 

(h)(1)(ii)–(iii), (i)(1)(ii)–(iii). 

federal trading program provisions 

authorizing EPA to complete the process 

of allocating and recording allowances 

for that control period to those units 

will continue to apply, unless EPA’s 

approval of the SIP revision provides 

otherwise.20

On July 28, 2015, the D.C. Circuit 

issued a decision on a number of 

petitions related to CSAPR, which 

found that EPA required more emissions 

reductions than may have been 

necessary to address the downwind air 

quality problems to which some states 

contribute. The Court remanded several 

CSAPR emission budgets to EPA for 

reconsideration, including the Phase 2 

SO2 trading budget for Georgia.21

However, Georgia has proposed to 

voluntarily adopt into their SIP a 

CSAPR state trading program that is 

integrated with the federal trading 

program and includes a stateestablished SO2 budget equal to the 

state’s remanded Phase 2 SO2 emission 

budget.22 EPA notes that nothing in the 

Court’s decision affects Georgia’s 

authority to seek incorporation into its 

SIP of a state-established budget as 

stringent as the remanded federallyestablished budget or limits EPA’s 

authority to approve such a SIP 

revision. The CSAPR regulations 

provide each covered state with the 

option to meet its transport obligations 

through SIP revisions replacing the 

federal trading programs and requiring 

the state’s EGUs to participate in 

integrated CSAPR state trading 

programs that apply emissions budgets 

of the same or greater stringency. Under 

the CSAPR regulations, when such a SIP 

revision is approved, the corresponding 

FIP provisions are automatically 

withdrawn. 

IV. Conditions for Approval of CSAPRRelated SIP Revisions 

Each CSAPR-related abbreviated or 

full SIP revision must meet the 

following general submittal conditions: 

• Timeliness and completeness of SIP 

submittal. The SIP submittal 

completeness criteria in section 2.1 of 

appendix V to 40 CFR part 51 apply. In 

addition, if a state wants to replace the 

default allowance allocation or 

applicability provisions of a CSAPR 

federal trading program, the complete 

SIP revision must be submitted to EPA 

by December 1 of the year before the 

deadlines described below for 

submitting allocation or auction 

amounts to EPA for the first control 

period for which the state wants to 

replace the default allocation and/or 

applicability provisions.23 This SIP 

submission deadline is inoperative in 

the case of a SIP revision that seeks only 

to replace a CSAPR FIP and federal 

trading program with a SIP and a 

substantively identical state trading 

program integrated with the federal 

trading program. 

In addition to the general submittal 

conditions, a CSAPR-related abbreviated 

or full SIP seeking to address the 

allocation or auction of emission 

allowances must meet the following 

further conditions: 

• Methodology covering all 

allowances potentially requiring 

allocation. For each federal trading 

program addressed by a SIP revision, 

the SIP revision’s allowance allocation 

or auction methodology must replace 

both the federal program’s default 

allocations to existing units 24 at 40 CFR 

97.411(a), 97.511(a), 97.611(a), 

97.711(a), or 97.811(a) as applicable, 

and the federal trading program’s 

provisions for allocating allowances 

from the new unit set-aside (NUSA) for 

the state at 40 CFR 97.411(b)(1) and 

97.412(a), 97.511(b)(1) and 97.512(a), 

97.611(b)(1) and 97.612(a), 97.711(b)(1) 

and 97.712(a), or 97.811(b)(1) and 

97.812(a), as applicable.25 In the case of 

a state with Indian country within its 

borders, while the SIP revision may 

neither alter nor assume the federal 

program’s provisions for administering 

the Indian country NUSA for the state, 

the SIP revision must include 

procedures addressing the disposition of 

any otherwise unallocated allowances 

from an Indian country NUSA that may 

be made available for allocation by the 

state after EPA has carried out the 

Indian country NUSA allocation 

procedures.26

• Assurance that total allocations will 

not exceed the state budget. For each 

federal trading program addressed by a 

SIP revision, the total amount of 

allowances auctioned or allocated for 

each control period under the SIP 

revision (prior to the addition by EPA of 

any unallocated allowances from any 

Indian country NUSA for the state) 

generally may not exceed the state’s 

emissions budget for the control period 

less the sum of the amount of any 

Indian country NUSA for the state for 

the control period and any allowances 

already allocated to the state’s units for 

the control period and recorded by 

EPA.27 Under its SIP revision, a state is 

free to not allocate allowances to some 

or all potentially affected units, to 

allocate or auction allowances to 

entities other than potentially affected 

units, or to allocate or auction fewer 

than the maximum permissible quantity 

of allowances and retire the remainder. 

Under the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season 

Group 2 Trading Program only, 

additional allowances may be allocated 

if the state elects to expand applicability 

to non-EGUs that would have been 

subject to the NOX Budget Trading 

Program established for compliance 

with the NOX SIP Call.28

• Timely submission of statedetermined allocations to EPA. The SIP 

revision must require the state to submit 

to EPA the amounts of any allowances 

allocated or auctioned to each unit for 

each control period (other than 

allowances initially set aside in the 

state’s allocation or auction process and 

later allocated or auctioned to such 

units from the set-aside amount) by the 

following deadlines.29 Note that the 

submission deadlines differ for amounts 

allocated or auctioned to units 

considered existing units for CSAPR 

purposes and amounts allocated or 

auctioned to other units. 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
38870 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

30 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4)(i)(D), (a)(5)(i)(D), 

(b)(4)(ii)(D), (b)(5)(ii)(D), (b)(8)(iii)(D), (b)(9)(iii)(D); 

52.39(e)(1)(iv), (f)(1)(iv), (h)(1)(iv), (i)(1)(iv). 31 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4), (a)(5), (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(8), 

(b)(9); 52.39(e), (f), (h), (i). 32 40 CFR 52.38(a)(4)(i), (a)(5)(ii), (b)(4)(ii), 

(b)(5)(iii), (b)(8)(iii), (b)(9)(iv); 52.39(e)(1), (f)(2), 

(h)(1), (i)(2). 

33 40 CFR 52.38(b)(4)(i), (b)(5)(i), (b)(8)(i), (b)(9)(i). 

34 40 CFR 52.38(b)(8)(ii), (b)(9)(ii). 

35 40 CFR 52.38(b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(8), (b)(9). 

36 40 CFR 52.38(a)(5), (b)(5), (b)(9); 52.39(f), (i). 

37 40 CFR 52.38(a)(5)(iii), (b)(5)(iv), (b)(9)(v); 

52.39(f)(3), (i)(3). 

38 40 CFR 52.38(a)(5)(iv), (b)(5)(v), (b)(9)(vi); 

52.39(f)(4), (i)(4). 

39 76 FR 48208, 48213 (August 8, 2011). 

40 81 FR 74504, 74506 (October 26, 2016). EPA 

also determined in the CSAPR Update rulemaking 

that Georgia had no further transport obligation 

under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to 

the 1997 Ozone NAAQS beyond the ozone season 

NOX emission reduction requirements established 

in the original CSAPR rulemaking. Id. at 74525. 

Units Year of the control period Deadline for submission to EPA of allocations or 

auction results 

CSAPR NOX Annual, CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 1, CSAPR SO2 Group 1, and CSAPR SO2 Group 2 Trading Programs: 

Existing .................. 2017 and 2018 ....................................................................... June 1, 2016. 

2019 and 2020 ....................................................................... June 1, 2017. 

2021 and 2022 ....................................................................... June 1, 2018. 

2023 and later years .............................................................. June 1 of the fourth year before the year of the control period. 

Other ...................... All years .................................................................................. July 1 of the year of the control period. 

CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 Trading Program: 

Existing .................. 2019 and 2020 ....................................................................... June 1, 2018. 

2021 and 2022 ....................................................................... June 1, 2019. 

2023 and 2024 ....................................................................... June 1, 2020. 

2025 and later years .............................................................. June 1 of the fourth year before the year of the control period. 

Other ...................... All years .................................................................................. July 1 of the year of the control period. 

• No changes to allocations already 

submitted to EPA or recorded. The SIP 

revision must not provide for any 

change to the amounts of allowances 

allocated or auctioned to any unit after 

those amounts are submitted to EPA or 

any change to any allowance allocation 

determined and recorded by EPA under 

the federal trading program 

regulations.30

• No other substantive changes to 

federal trading program provisions. The 

SIP revision may not substantively 

change any other trading program 

provisions, except in the case of a SIP 

revision that also expands program 

applicability as described below.31 Any 

new definitions adopted in the SIP 

revision (in addition to the federal 

trading program’s definitions) may 

apply only for purposes of the SIP 

revision’s allocation or auction 

provisions.32

In addition to the general submittal 

conditions, a CSAPR-related abbreviated 

or full SIP revision seeking to expand 

applicability under the CSAPR NOX

Ozone Season Group 1 or CSAPR NOX

Ozone Season Group 2 Trading 

Programs (or an integrated state trading 

program) must meet the following 

further conditions: 

• Only electricity generating units 

with nameplate capacity of at least 15 

MWe. The SIP revision may expand 

applicability only to additional fossil 

fuel-fired boilers or combustion turbines 

serving generators producing electricity 

for sale, and only by lowering the 

generator nameplate capacity threshold 

used to determine whether a particular 

boiler or combustion turbine serving a 

particular generator is a potentially 

affected unit. The nameplate capacity 

threshold adopted in the SIP revision 

may not be less than 15 MWe.33 In 

addition or alternatively, applicability 

under the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season 

Group 2 Trading Program may be 

expanded to non-EGUs that would have 

been subject to the NOX Budget Trading 

Program established for compliance 

with the NOX SIP Call.34

• No other substantive changes to 

federal trading program provisions. The 

SIP revision may not substantively 

change any other trading program 

provisions, except in the case of a SIP 

revision that also addresses the 

allocation or auction of emission 

allowances as described above.35

In addition to the general submittal 

conditions and the other applicable 

conditions described above, a CSAPRrelated full SIP revision must meet the 

following further conditions: 

• Complete, substantively identical 

trading program provisions. The SIP 

revision must adopt complete state 

trading program regulations 

substantively identical to the complete 

federal trading program regulations at 

40 CFR 97.402 through 97.435, 97.502 

through 97.535, 97.602 through 97.635, 

97.702 through 97.735, or 97.802 

through 97.835, as applicable, except as 

described above in the case of a SIP 

revision that seeks to replace the default 

allowance allocation and/or 

applicability provisions.36

• Only non-substantive substitutions 

for the term ‘‘State.’’ The SIP revision 

may substitute the name of the state for 

the term ‘‘State’’ as used in the federal 

trading program regulations, but only to 

the extent that EPA determines that the 

substitutions do not substantively 

change the trading program 

regulations.37

• Exclusion of provisions addressing 

units in Indian country. The SIP 

revision may not impose requirements 

on any unit in any Indian country 

within the state’s borders and must not 

include the federal trading program 

provisions governing allocation of 

allowances from any Indian country 

NUSA for the state.38

V. Georgia’s SIP Submittal and EPA’s 

Analysis 

A. Georgia’s SIP Submittal as It Relates 

to CSAPR 

In the CSAPR rulemaking, EPA 

determined that air pollution 

transported from EGUs in Georgia 

would unlawfully affect other states’ 

ability to attain or maintain the 1997 8- 

hour Ozone NAAQS, the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS, and included Georgia in 

the CSAPR ozone season NOX trading 

program and the annual SO2 and NOX

trading programs.39 In the CSAPR 

Update rulemaking, EPA determined 

that Georgia was not linked to any 

identified downwind nonattainment or 

maintenance receptors for the 2008 8- 

hour Ozone NAAQS.40 Georgia’s units 

meeting the CSAPR applicability criteria 

are consequently currently subject to 

CSAPR FIPs that require participation in 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Proposed Rules 38871 

41 40 CFR 52.38(a)(2), (b)(2); 52.39(c); 52.584(a), 

(b); 52.585. 

42 In addition and as discussed above, the EPA is 

also proposing to take action on the portions of the 

SIP submittal related to removal of CAIR. 43 Georgia’s rules incorporate the provisions of, 

and, if approved, would replace the federal CSAPR 

NOX Ozone Season Group 1 Trading Program. See 

40 CFR 52.38(b)(5). Following the CSAPR Update, 

Georgia is the only state whose units participate in 

this trading program; units in other states 

participate in the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 

2 Trading Program. See 40 CFR 52.38(b)(2)(i); 

CSAPR Update, 81 FR at 74509. As a result, Georgia 

units will be unable to trade allowances with units 

in other states. See CSAPR Update, 81 FR at 74509. 

EPA notes that federal regulations provide an 

option for Georgia to join the Group 2 trading 

program. 40 CFR 52.38(b)(6); CSAPR Update, 81 FR 

at 74509. 

44The other portions of the state submittal will 

be addressed in separate actions. 

45See 40 CFR 52.38(a)(5)(vi), (b)(5)(vii); 

52.39(i)(6). 

46As clarified in a letter from Georgia dated July 

21, 2017, there is a typographical error such that 

each of Georgia’s three CSAPR rules references 40 

CFR 97.402, instead of referencing 40 CFR 97.702 

in 391–3–1–.02(13)(a) and 40 CFR 97.502 in 

paragraph 391–3–1–.02(14)(a). See July 21, 2017 

Continued 

the CSAPR NOX Annual Trading 

Program, the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season 

Group 1 Trading Program, and the 

CSAPR SO2 Group 2 Trading Program.41

Georgia’s July 26, 2017, SIP revision 

incorporates into the SIP CSAPR state 

trading program regulations that would 

replace the CSAPR federal trading 

program regulations with regard to 

Georgia units’ SO2 and NOX emissions. 

The SIP submittal includes revisions to 

two Georgia rules: Rule 391–3–1– 

.02(12), ‘‘Clean Air Interstate Rule NOX

Annual Trading Program,’’ is replaced 

by ‘‘Cross State Air Pollution Rule NOX

Annual Trading Program;’’ and Rule 

391–3–1–.02(13), ‘‘Clean Air Interstate 

Rule SO2 Annual Trading Program,’’ is 

replaced by ‘‘Cross State Air Pollution 

Rule SO2 Annual Trading Program.’’ In 

addition, the submittal adds Rule 391– 

3–1–.02(14), ‘‘Cross State Air Pollution 

Rule NOX Ozone Season Trading 

Program.’’ In general, each rule in 

Georgia’s CSAPR state trading program 

rule is designed to replace the 

corresponding federal trading program 

regulations. For example, Georgia Rule 

391–3–1–.02(12), Cross State Air 

Pollution Rule NOX Annual Trading 

Program, is designed to replace subpart 

AAAAA of 40 CFR part 97 (i.e., 40 CFR 

97.401 through 97.435). 

With regard to form, some of the 

individual rules for each Georgia 

CSAPR state trading program are set 

forth as full regulatory text—notably the 

rules identifying the trading budgets, 

NUSA, Indian country NUSA, and the 

definition of ‘‘Permitting Authority’’— 

but most of the rules incorporate the 

corresponding federal trading program 

section or sections by reference. 

With regard to substance, the rules for 

each Georgia CSAPR state trading 

program differ from the corresponding 

CSAPR federal trading program 

regulations in two main ways. First, the 

term permitting authority is defined as 

the Georgia Environmental Protection 

Division of the Georgia Department of 

Natural Resources for units in Georgia 

only. Second, the Georgia rules omit 

some federal trading program provisions 

not applicable to Georgia’s state trading 

programs, including provisions setting 

forth the amounts of emissions budgets, 

NUSAs, Indian country NUSAs, and 

variability limits for other states and 

provisions relating to EPA’s 

administration of Indian country 

NUSAs. 

The Georgia rules adopt the Phase 2 

annual NOX and SO2 budgets and the 

Group 1 ozone season NOX budgets 

found at 40 CFR 97.410(a)(2)(iv), 

97.710(a)(2)(iv), and 97.510(a)(4)(iv), 

respectively. Accordingly, EPA will 

evaluate the approvability of the Georgia 

SIP submission consistent with these 

budgets. 

At this time, EPA is proposing to take 

action on the portions of Georgia’s SIP 

submission designed to replace the 

federal CSAPR NOX Annual Trading 

Program, the federal CSAPR SO2 Group 

2 Trading Program, and the federal 

CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 1 

Trading Program with regard to Georgia 

units.42

B. EPA’s Analysis of Georgia’s SIP 

Submittal as It Relates to CSAPR 

As described in section V.A above, at 

this time EPA is proposing to take 

action on the portions of Georgia’s SIP 

submittal designed to replace the federal 

CSAPR NOX Annual Trading Program, 

the federal CSAPR SO2 Group 2 Trading 

Program, and the federal CSAPR NOX

Ozone Season Group 1 Trading 

Program 43 for Georgia units.44 The 

analysis discussed in this section 

addresses only the portions of Georgia’s 

SIP submittal related to CSAPR on 

which EPA is taking action at this time. 

For simplicity, throughout this section 

EPA refers to the portions of the 

submittal on which EPA is proposing to 

take action as ‘‘the submittal’’ or ‘‘the 

SIP revision’’ without repeating the 

qualification that at this time EPA is 

analyzing and proposing to act on only 

portions of the SIP submittal. 

1. Timeliness and Completeness of SIP 

Submittal 

Georgia submitted its SIP revision to 

EPA on July 26, 2017, and EPA has 

determined that the submittal complies 

with the applicable minimum 

completeness criteria in section 2.1 of 

appendix V to 40 CFR part 51. The SIP 

submission deadline specified in 40 

CFR 52.38(a)(5)(vi) and (b)(5)(vii) and 

52.39(i)(6) is defined with reference to 

certain separate CSAPR deadlines for 

submission of state-determined 

allowance allocations to EPA and is 

therefore inoperative in the case of a SIP 

revision that does not seek to replace 

the EPA-administered allowance 

allocation methodology and process set 

forth in the federal trading program 

rules. Because Georgia is seeking to 

replace the federal trading program 

rules with substantively identical state 

trading program rules and is not seeking 

to replace the EPA-administered 

allowance allocation methodology and 

process, the SIP submission deadline 

does not apply.45

2. Complete, Substantively Identical 

Trading Program Provisions 

As discussed above, the Georgia SIP 

revision adopts state budgets identical 

to the Phase 2 budgets for Georgia under 

the federal trading programs and adopts 

almost all of the provisions of the 

federal CSAPR NOX Annual Trading 

Program, CSAPR SO2 Group 2 Trading 

Program, and CSAPR NOX Ozone 

Season Group 1 Trading Program, 

including the default allocation 

provisions. Under the State’s rules, EPA 

will administer the programs and will 

retain the authority to allocate and 

record allowances. 

With a few exceptions, the Georgia 

rules comprising Georgia’s CSAPR state 

trading program for annual NOX

emissions either incorporate by 

reference or adopt full-text replacements 

for all of the provisions of 40 CFR 

97.401 through 97.435; the Georgia rules 

comprising Georgia’s CSAPR state 

trading program for SO2 emissions 

either incorporate by reference or adopt 

full-text replacements for all of the 

provisions of 40 CFR 97.701 through 

97.735; and the Georgia rules 

comprising Georgia’s CSAPR state 

trading program for NOX ozone season 

emissions either incorporate by 

reference or adopt full-text replacements 

for all of the provisions of 40 CFR 

97.501 through 97.535. 

The first exception is that paragraphs 

391–3–1–.02(12)(a), 391–3–1–.02(13)(a), 

and 391–3–1–.02(14)(a) of the Georgia 

rules substitute ‘‘Environmental 

Protection Division of the Georgia 

Department of Natural Resources’’ for 

the term ‘‘permitting authority’’ for 

units located within the state of Georgia. 

This substitution properly retains the 

definition in 40 CFR 97.402 46 for units 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
38872 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

Letter from Karen Hayes (Director, Air Protection 

Division, Georgia EPD) to V. Anne Heard (Acting 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region 4), available in 

the docket to this action. EPA views this 

typographical error as non-substantive because the 

underlying definition for the term ‘‘permitting 

authority’’ is the same for all three trading 

programs. Compare, e.g., 40 CFR 97.402 (Permitting 

authority means ‘‘permitting authority’’ as defined 

in 40 CFR 70.2 and 71.2) with 40 CFR 97.502 

(Permitting authority means ‘‘permitting authority’’ 

as defined in 40 CFR 70.2 and 71.2). Regardless, 

Georgia has committed to fixing this error in the 

future. 

47As discussed above in section V.A., the State 

seeks to replace these provisions with state rules 

related to CSAPR. 

48 40 CFR 51.123(ff) (requirements related to 

NOX); 40 CFR 51.124(s) (requirements related to 

SO2). 

outside of the State’s jurisdiction. This 

modification of the federal trading 

program rules merely provides clarity to 

Georgia sources, and these substitutions 

do not substantively change the 

provisions of CSAPR’s federal trading 

program regulations. As a result, this 

change is permitted under 40 CFR 

52.38(a)(5), 52.38(b)(5) and 52.39(i). 

The second exception is that 

paragraphs 391–3–1–.02(12), 391–3–1– 

.02(13), and 391–3–1–.02(14) of the 

Georgia rules omit the provisions of 40 

CFR 97.410(a) and (b), 97.710(a) and (b), 

and 97.510(a) and (b), setting forth the 

amounts of the Phase 1 emissions 

budgets, NUSAs, and variability limits 

for Georgia and the amounts of the 

Phase 1 and Phase 2 emissions budgets, 

NUSAs, Indian country NUSAs, and 

variability limits for other states. 

Omission of the Georgia Phase 1 

emissions budget, NUSA, and 

variability limit amounts is appropriate 

because Georgia’s state trading programs 

do not apply to emissions occurring in 

Phase 1 of CSAPR. Omission of the 

Phase 1 and Phase 2 budget, NUSA, 

Indian country NUSA, and variability 

limit amounts for other states from state 

trading programs in which only Georgia 

units participate does not undermine 

the completeness of the state trading 

programs. Georgia’s rules include fulltext replacement provisions for the 

remaining provisions of 40 CFR 97.410, 

97.710, and 97.510 that are relevant to 

trading programs applicable only to 

Georgia units during Phase 2 of CSAPR. 

The third exception is that Georgia 

Rules 391–3–1–.02(12), 391–3–1– 

.02(13), and 391–3–1–.02(14) omit 40 

CFR 97.411(b)(2), 97.411(c)(5)(iii), 

97.412(b), 97.421(h), 97.421(j), 

97.711(b)(2), 97.711(c)(5)(iii), 97.712(b), 

97.721(h), 97.721(j), 97.511(b)(2), 

97.511(c)(5)(iii), 97.512(b), 97.521(h), 

and 97.521(j) concerning EPA’s 

administration of Indian country 

NUSAs. Omission of these provisions 

from Georgia’s state trading program 

rules is required, as discussed in section 

V.B.4 below. 

None of the omissions undermine the 

completeness of Georgia’s state trading 

programs, and EPA has preliminarily 

determined that Georgia’s SIP revision 

makes no substantive changes to the 

provisions of the federal trading 

program regulations. Thus, Georgia’s 

SIP revision meets the condition under 

40 CFR 52.38(a)(5), 52.39(i), and 

52.38(b)(5) that the SIP revision must 

adopt complete state trading program 

regulations substantively identical to 

the complete federal trading program 

regulations at 40 CFR 97.402 through 

97.435, 97.702 through 97.735, and 

97.502 through 97.535, respectively, 

except to the extent permitted in the 

case of a SIP revision that seeks to 

replace the default allowance allocation 

and/or applicability provisions. 

3. Only Non-Substantive Substitutions 

for the Term ‘‘State’’ 

The Georgia rules do not make any 

substitutions for the term ‘‘State.’’ 

4. Exclusion of Provisions Addressing 

Units in Indian Country 

Georgia Rules 391–3–1–.02(12)(b), 

391–3–1–.02(13)(b), and 391–3–1– 

.02(14)(b) incorporate by reference the 

applicability provisions of the federal 

trading program rules at 40 CFR 97.402, 

97.702, and 97.502, respectively. There 

is no Indian country (as defined for 

purposes of CSAPR) within Georgia’s 

borders, so the applicability provisions 

of the Georgia rules necessarily do not 

extend to any units in Indian country. 

In addition, as required under 40 CFR 

52.38(a)(5)(iv), 52.39(i)(4) and 

52.38(b)(5)(v), Georgia’s SIP revision 

excludes federal trading program 

provisions related to EPA’s process for 

allocating and recording allowances 

from Indian country NUSAs (i.e., 40 

CFR 97.411(b)(2), 97.411(c)(5)(iii), 

97.412(b), 97.421(h), 97.421(j), 

97.711(b)(2), 97.711(c)(5)(iii), 97.712(b), 

97.721(h), 97.721(j), 97.511(b)(2), 

97.511(c)(5)(iii), 97.512(b), 97.521(h) 

and 40 CFR 97.521(j)). Georgia’s SIP 

revision therefore meets the conditions 

under 52.38(a)(5)(iv), 52.39(i)(4) and 

52.38(b)(5)(v) that a SIP submittal must 

not impose any requirement on any unit 

in Indian country within the borders of 

the State and must exclude certain 

provisions related to administration of 

Indian country NUSAs. 

C. Georgia’s SIP Submittal as It Relates 

to CAIR, and EPA’s Analysis 

In addition, Georgia’s July 26, 2017, 

submittal seeks to remove state trading 

program rules adopted to comply with 

the CAIR from Georgia’s SIP at 391–3– 

1–.02(12), ‘‘Clean Air Interstate Rule 

NOX Annual Trading Program,’’ and 

Rule 391–3–1–.02(13), ‘‘Clean Air 

Interstate Rule SO2 Annual Trading 

Program,’’ because the CAIR program 

has been replaced by CSAPR.47

In this action, EPA proposes to 

approve the removal of these CAIRrelated provisions from Georgia’s SIP. 

As explained above, the D.C. Circuit 

remanded CAIR to EPA in 2008; 

however, the Court left CAIR in place 

while EPA worked to develop a new 

interstate transport rule. CSAPR was 

promulgated to respond to the Court’s 

concerns and to replace CAIR. The 

implementation of CSAPR was delayed 

for several years beyond its originally 

expected implementation timeframe of 

2012, and therefore, the sunsetting of 

CAIR was also deferred. CAIR was 

implemented through the 2014 

compliance periods and was replaced 

by CSAPR on January 1, 2015. EPA 

promulgated regulations to sunset the 

CAIR program and it is no longer in 

effect.48 EPA therefore proposes to 

approve the removal of Georgia’s SIP 

provisions related to CAIR. 

VI. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, 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, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

Georgia Rules for Air Quality Control, 

Rule 391–3–1–.02(12), Rule 391–3–1– 

.02(13), and Rule 391–3–1–.02(14), state 

effective on July 20, 2017, comprising 

Georgia’s Cross State Air Pollution Rule 

NOX Annual Trading Program, Georgia’s 

Cross State Air Pollution Rule SO2

Annual Trading Program, and Georgia’s 

Cross State Air Pollution Rule NOX

Ozone Season Trading Program, 

respectively. EPA has made, and will 

continue to make, these materials 

generally available through 

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). 

VII. EPA’s Proposed Action on 

Georgia’s Submittal 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

portions of Georgia’s July 26, 2017, SIP 

submittal concerning the establishment 

for Georgia units of CSAPR state trading 

programs for annual NOX, annual SO2

emissions and ozone season NOX

emissions. The proposed revision would 

revise Georgia Rules for Air Quality 

Control to include CSAPR as follows: 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Proposed Rules 38873 

49As previously discussed in sections IV and 

V.B.2, under Georgia’s regulations, the State will 

retain EPA’s default allowance allocation 

methodology and EPA will remain the 

implementing authority for administration of the 

trading program. 

50 40 CFR 52.38(a)(6), (b)(10), 52.39(j); see also 

52.584(a)(1), 52.584(b)(1); 52.585(a). 

51 40 CFR 51.123(ff) (requirements related to 

NOX); 40 CFR 51.124(s) (requirements related to 

SO2). 

391–3–1–.02(12) will be revised to 

include Georgia’s ‘‘Cross State Air 

Pollution Rule NOX Annual Trading 

Program;’’ 391–3–1–.02(13) will be 

revised to include Georgia’s ‘‘Cross State 

Air Pollution Rule SO2 Annual Trading 

Program;’’ and 391–3–1–.02(14) will be 

added to include ‘‘Georgia’s Cross State 

Air Pollution Rule NOX Ozone Season 

Trading Program.’’ These Georgia 

CSAPR state trading programs would be 

integrated with the federal CSAPR NOX

Annual Trading Program, the federal 

CSAPR SO2 Group 2 Trading Program, 

and the federal CSAPR NOX Ozone 

Season Group 1 Trading Program, 

respectively, and would be 

substantively identical to the federal 

trading programs.49 If EPA approves 

these portions of the SIP revision, 

Georgia units would generally be 

required to meet requirements under 

Georgia’s CSAPR state trading programs 

equivalent to the requirements the units 

otherwise would have been required to 

meet under the corresponding CSAPR 

federal trading programs. EPA is 

proposing to approve these portions of 

the SIP revision because they meet the 

requirements of the CAA and EPA’s 

regulations for approval of a CSAPR full 

SIP revision replacing a federal trading 

program with a state trading program 

that is integrated with and substantively 

identical to the federal trading program 

except for permissible differences, as 

discussed in section V above. 

EPA promulgated FIPs requiring 

Georgia units to participate in the 

federal CSAPR NOX Annual Trading 

Program, the federal CSAPR SO2 Group 

2 Trading Program, and the federal 

CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 1 

Trading Program in order to address 

Georgia’s obligations under CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 1997 8- 

hour Ozone NAAQS in the absence of 

SIP provisions addressing those 

requirements. Approval of the portions 

of Georgia’s SIP submittal adopting 

CSAPR state trading program rules for 

annual NOX, annual SO2, and 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 

Georgia’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 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, and the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS in any other state and therefore 

would correct the same deficiency in 

the SIP that otherwise would be 

corrected by those CSAPR FIPs. 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).50 Approval of the 

portions of Georgia’s SIP submittal 

establishing CSAPR state trading 

program rules for annual NOX, annual 

SO2, and ozone season NOX emissions 

therefore would result in automatic 

termination of the obligations of Georgia 

units to participate in the federal 

CSAPR NOX Annual Trading Program, 

the federal CSAPR SO2 Group 2 Trading 

Program, and the federal CSAPR NOX

Ozone Season Group 1 Trading 

Program. 

As noted in section III above, the 

Phase 2 SO2 budget established for 

Georgia in the CSAPR rulemaking has 

been remanded to EPA for 

reconsideration. If EPA finalizes 

approval of these portions of the SIP 

revision as proposed, Georgia will have 

fulfilled its obligations to provide a SIP 

that addresses the interstate transport 

provisions of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 1997 8- 

hour Ozone NAAQS. Thus, EPA would 

no longer be under an obligation to (nor 

would EPA have the authority to) 

address those transport requirements 

through implementation of a FIP, and 

approval of these portions of the SIP 

revision would eliminate Georgia units’ 

obligations to participate in the federal 

CSAPR NOX Annual Trading Program, 

the federal CSAPR SO2 Group 2 Trading 

Program, and the federal CSAPR NOX

Ozone Season Group 1 Trading 

Program. Elimination of Georgia units’ 

obligations to participate in the federal 

trading programs would include 

elimination of the federally-established 

Phase 2 budgets capping allocations of 

CSAPR NOX Annual allowances, 

CSAPR SO2 Group 2 allowances, and 

CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 1 

allowances to Georgia units under those 

federal trading programs. As approval of 

these portions of the SIP revision would 

eliminate Georgia’s remanded federallyestablished Phase 2 SO2 budget and 

eliminate EPA’s authority to subject 

units in Georgia to a FIP, it is EPA’s 

opinion that finalization of approval of 

this SIP action would address the 

judicial remand of Georgia’s federallyestablished Phase 2 SO2 budget. 

In addition, EPA is proposing to 

approve the portions of Georgia’s July 

26, 2017, SIP revision removing 

Georgia’s state trading provisions 

adopted to implement CAIR: Georgia 

Rules for Air Quality control at 

provisions 391–3–1–.02(12), ‘‘Clean Air 

Interstate Rule NOX Annual Trading 

Program’’ and 391–3–1–.02(13) ‘‘Clean 

Air Interstate Rule SO2 Annual Trading 

Program.’’ If EPA finalizes approval of 

the proposed SIP revision, these CAIR 

provisions will be removed from the 

SIP. As explained above, CAIR was 

implemented through the 2014 

compliance periods and was replaced 

by CSAPR on January 1, 2015. EPA has 

promulgated regulations to sunset the 

CAIR program and it is no longer in 

effect.51 EPA therefore proposes to 

approve the removal of Georgia’s SIP 

provisions related to CAIR. 

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submittal 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 submittals, 

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 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS
38874 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 157 / Wednesday, August 16, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

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, Particulate 

Matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides. 

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

Dated: August 7, 2017. 

V. Anne Heard, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2017–17227 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–9966–19– 

Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; SC: Multiple 

Revisions to Air Pollution Control 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

changes to the South Carolina State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) to revise 

several miscellaneous rules covering air 

pollution control standards. EPA is 

proposing to approve portions of SIP 

revisions submitted by the State of 

South Carolina, through the South 

Carolina Department of Health and 

Environmental Control on 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 

proposed pursuant to the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before September 15, 

2017. 

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: In the 

Final Rules section of this issue of the 

Federal Register, EPA is approving the 

State’s implementation plan revisions as 

a direct final rule without prior proposal 

because the Agency views these as 

noncontroversial submittals 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. 2017–17228 Filed 8–15–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


pmangrum on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS