Federal Register/Vol. 85, No. 207/Monday, October 26, 2020

Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 207 / Monday, October 26, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 67653

NEW HAMPSHIRE NONREGULATORY

Name of nonregulatory SIP Applicable geographic or State submittal date/ provision nonattainment area effective date EPA approved date Explanations

******* Submittals to meet Section Statewide ...... 12/22/2015; supplement 12/4/2018, 83 FR 62464 These submittals are approved with respect to the 110(a)(2) Infrastructure submitted 6/8/2016. following CAA requirements: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), Requirements for the (C), (D), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (L), and (M). 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS...... 12/22/2015 ...... [Insert Federal Register This submittal is conditionally approved with re- citation]. spect to provisions of CAA 110(a)(2)(K). The following previously approved items are corrected and changed from approval to conditional approval: 110(a)(C) (PSD only), (D)(i)(II) (prong 3 only), and (J) (PSD only).

******* Submittal to meet Section Statewide ...... 9/5/2018 ...... [Insert Federal Register This submittal is approved with respect to the fol- 110(a)(2) Infrastructure citation]. lowing CAA requirements: 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C) Requirements for the (except PSD), (D)(i)(II) (except prong 3), (D)(ii), 2015 Ozone NAAQS. (E), (F), (G), (H), (J) (except PSD), (L), and (M), and conditionally approved for the following CAA requirements: 110(a)(2)(K) and (C) (PSD only), (D)(i)(II) (prong 3 only), and (J) (PSD only). Request for exemption Merrimack Valley— 9/5/2018 ...... [Insert Federal Register State’s request for exemption from contingency from contingency plan Southern New Hamp- citation]. plan obligation, made pursuant to 40 CFR obligation for 2015 ozone shire AQCR. 51.152(d)(1), is granted. NAAQS.

[FR Doc. 2020–21809 Filed 10–23–20; 8:45 am] continuous emission monitoring I. Background BILLING CODE 6560–50–P systems, State facilities in Rapid City On March 12, 2008, the EPA area, construction permits and regional promulgated a new NAAQS for ozone, haze program administrative rules. The revising the levels of primary and ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EPA is taking this action pursuant to the secondary 8-hour ozone standards from AGENCY Clean Air Act (CAA). 0.08 parts per million (ppm) to 0.075 ppm (73 FR 16436). More recently, on 40 CFR Part 52 DATES: This rule is effective on October 1, 2015, the EPA promulgated November 25, 2020. [EPA–R08–OAR–2019–0642; FRL–10014– and revised the NAAQS for ozone, 86–Region 8] ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a further strengthening the primary and secondary 8-hour standards to 0.070 Air Quality State Implementation docket for this action under Docket ID ppm (80 FR 65292). The October 1, 2015 Plans; Approval and Promulgation of No. EPA–R08–OAR–2019–0642. All standards are known as the 2015 ozone Implementation Plans; South Dakota; documents in the docket are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov website. NAAQS. Infrastructure Requirements for the Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA directs 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, each state to make an infrastructure SIP Quality Standards; Revisions to submission to the EPA within 3 years of e.g., CBI or other information whose Administrative Rules promulgation of a new or revised disclosure is restricted by statute. AGENCY: NAAQS. Infrastructure requirements for Environmental Protection Certain other material, such as Agency (EPA). SIPs are provided in section 110(a)(1) copyrighted material, is not placed on ACTION: Final rule. and (2) of the CAA. Section 110(a)(2) the internet and will be publicly lists the specific infrastructure elements SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection available only in hard copy form. that a state’s infrastructure SIP Agency (EPA) is approving the State of Publicly available docket materials are submission must address, as applicable. South Dakota’s January 15, 2020, State available through http:// The state’s infrastructure SIP Implementation Plan (SIP) submission www.regulations.gov, or please contact submission must establish that the that addresses infrastructure the person identified in the FOR FURTHER state’s existing SIP meets the applicable requirements for the 2015 ozone INFORMATION CONTACT section for requirements or make revisions to National Ambient Air Quality Standards additional availability information. satisfy those requirements as necessary. (NAAQS). Additionally, in this action, The elements that are the subject of this FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kate we are approving a SIP revision action are described in detail in our submitted by the State of South Dakota Gregory, telephone number: (303) 312– notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on January 3, 2020, that revises the 6175, email address: gregory.kate@ published on May 19, 2020 (85 FR Administrative Rules of South Dakota epa.gov. Mail can be directed to the Air 29882) for South Dakota’s infrastructure (ARSD), Air Pollution Control Program, and Radiation Division, U.S. EPA, SIP submission, submitted to the EPA updating the date of incorporation by Region 8, Mail-code 8ARD–QP, 1595 on January 15, 2020, and SIP revisions reference of federal rules in ARSD Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado to the ARSD submitted to the EPA on chapters pertaining to definitions, 80202–1129. January 3, 2020. ambient air quality, air quality episodes, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Prevention of Significant Deterioration II. Response to Comments (PSD), new source review, performance Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ Comments on our NPRM were due on testing, control of visible emissions, and ‘‘our’’ means the EPA. or before June 18, 2020. The EPA

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Oct 23, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM 26OCR1 67654 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 207 / Monday, October 26, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

received four comments. The first purposes of evaluating interstate ozone as it pertains to the Good Neighbor comment was supportive of the transport under the Good Neighbor provision. As an initial matter, in regard proposed action. We summarize and provision, CAA section to the comment that South Dakota must respond to all other significant adverse 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). On September 13, conduct its own air quality analysis, comments below. 2019, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision EPA has authority and indeed an Comments: One commenter contends in Wisconsin v. EPA, remanding the obligation to take into consideration any that our May 19, 2020 South Dakota Cross-State Air Pollution Rule relevant information in the record, infrastructure SIP NPRM is a ‘‘blatantly (‘‘CSAPR’’) Update 4 to the extent that including its own air quality modeling illegal rule’’ which should be retracted Good Neighbor FIPs in the CSAPR analysis, to determine how to act on a and disapproved because the EPA has Update did not fully eliminate upwind SIP submission. Here, the State had ignored ‘‘the courts,’’ specifically the states’ ‘‘significant contribution’’ by the concluded in its infrastructure SIP May 19, 2020 decision of the D.C. next applicable attainment date 5 by submission that it has no emissions Circuit Court of Appeals in Maryland v. which downwind states must attain the reduction obligations for purposes of 1 EPA. The commenter contests the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See 938 F.3d at section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), on the basis EPA’s use of 2023 as the analytic year 313. The EPA had interpreted that that its emissions are not linked to any for evaluation of South Dakota’s ‘‘Good holding as limited to the attainment nonattainment or maintenance Neighbor’’ obligations for the 2015 dates for Moderate or higher 2 receptors, remains approvable. ozone NAAQS, which the agency based classifications under CAA section 181 Specifically, relying in part on the same on its interpretation of the relevant on the basis that Marginal data that informed its analysis of the holding in Wisconsin v. EPA regarding nonattainment areas have reduced year 2023, the EPA finds it reasonable the appropriate timeframes for analysis planning requirements and other to conclude that the impacts from and implementation of Good Neighbor considerations. See, e.g., 85 FR 29882, emissions from South Dakota will not obligations.3 Commenter maintains that 29888–89 (May 19, 2020). exceed a contribution threshold of 1 the 2021 Marginal attainment year for On May 19, 2020, the D.C. Circuit in percent of the 2015 ozone NAAQS to the 2015 ozone NAAQS is the correct Maryland v. EPA, applying the analytical year per the Maryland any downwind nonattainment and Wisconsin decision, held that the EPA maintenance sites in 2021. This finding decision. must assess the impacts of interstate Similarly, another commenter alleges is sufficient basis for EPA to conclude transport on air quality at the next that South Dakota is not linked to any that EPA cannot approve the South downwind attainment date, including Dakota infrastructure SIP submission downwind receptors at step 2 of the Marginal area attainment dates, in four-step interstate transport ‘‘as it relates to the good neighbor evaluating the basis for EPA’s denial of framework.8 provision because it relies on the flawed a petition under CAA section 126(b). modeling,’’ and thus the EPA should 958 F.3d at 1203–04. The EPA signed South Dakota’s January 15, 2020 disapprove it because the State relied on the NPRM proposing approval of South infrastructure SIP submission includes the wrong analysis. The commenter Dakota’s Good Neighbor SIP prior to the an interstate ozone transport analysis for asserts that, ‘‘courts have opined several D.C. Circuit’s decision in Maryland. In the Good Neighbor provision that times that 2023 is the improper year to accordance with the Maryland decision, focused on the modeling information evaluate for downwind contributions’’ the Agency now, in taking this final provided in the EPA’s March 2018 and the EPA must disapprove South action approving the South Dakota SIP, memorandum,9 which used 2023 as the Dakota’s SIP submission due to 2021 considers the Marginal area attainment analytic year (corresponding with the being the correct analytical year to date 6 as the relevant analytic year for evaluate for Good Neighbor downwind the purposes of determining whether 8 Thus, it is not necessary for the EPA to proceed contributions. sources in South Dakota will to evaluate whether the state’s infrastructure SIP The commenter further argues that the submission may also be approvable using an significantly contribute to downwind Good Neighbor provision require states alternative contribution threshold of 1 ppb. The nonattainment or interfere with to perform the modeling analysis EPA released a memorandum in August 2018 which maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS indicates that, based on the EPA’s analysis of its themselves, and thus because the EPA in any other states.7 most recent modeling data, the amount of upwind cannot perform the analysis for the collective contribution capture using a 1 ppb EPA disagrees with the commenters’ threshold is generally comparable, overall, to the State, that the EPA consequently cannot assertion that this change in analysis supplement South Dakota’s amount captured using a threshold equivalent to 1 means EPA must disapprove South percent of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Accordingly, infrastructure SIP submission with Dakota’s infrastructure SIP submission the EPA indicated that it may be reasonable and ‘‘new manufactured’’ modeling to appropriate for states to use a 1 ppb contribution support approval of the proposal. The threshold, as an alternative to the 1 percent 4 81 FR 74504 (October 26, 2016). commenter also asserts that if the EPA threshold, at step 2 of the four-step Good Neighbor 5 See CAA 181(a); 40 CFR 51.1303. framework in developing their SIP revisions were to ‘‘fix’’ the modeling for the State, 6 The attainment date for nonattainment areas addressing the Good Neighbor provision for the EPA must then disapprove the State’s classified as Marginal for the 2015 ozone NAAQS 2015 ozone NAAQS. See Analysis of Contribution infrastructure SIP submission and is August 3, 2021. See CAA 181(a); 40 CFR 51.1303; Thresholds for Use in Clean Air Act Section promulgate a Federal Implementation 83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018). 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) Interstate Transport State 7 We note that the court in Maryland did not have Implementation Plan Submissions for the 2015 Plan (FIP). occasion to evaluate circumstances in which EPA Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, Response: The commenters are may determine that an upwind linkage to a August 31, 2018, available in the docket for this referring to recent D.C. Circuit court downwind air quality problem exists at steps 1 and action or at https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/memo- decisions addressing, in part, the issue 2 of the four-step Good Neighbor framework by a and-supplemental-information-regarding-interstate- of the relevant analytic year for the particular attainment date, but for reasons of transport-sips-2015-ozone-naaqs. impossibility or profound uncertainty the Agency is 9 Information on the Interstate Transport State unable to mandate upwind pollution controls by Implementation Plan Submissions for the 2015 1 Maryland v. EPA, 958 F.3d 1185 (D.C. Cir. that date. See 938 F.3d at 319–320. The D.C. Circuit Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards 2020). noted in Wisconsin that upon a sufficient showing, under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), 2 CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) is colloquially these circumstances may warrant a certain degree March 27, 2018, available in the docket for this referred to as the ‘‘Good Neighbor’’ provision. of flexibility in effectuating the implementation of action or at https://www.epa.gov/interstate-air- 3 Wisconsin v. EPA, 938 F.3d 303, 313–320 (D.C. the Good Neighbor provision. Id. Such pollution-transport/memos-and-notices-regarding- Cir. 2019). circumstances are not at issue in the present action. interstate-air-pollution-transport.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Oct 23, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM 26OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 207 / Monday, October 26, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 67655

2024 Moderate area attainment date).10 emissions data to assess air quality in EPA also analyzed ozone precursor Based on the contribution modeling this year. In general, this analysis emissions trends in South Dakota to included in the March 2018 utilizes 2019 measured design values 12 support the findings from the air quality memorandum, the EPA concludes that and 2023 modeled design values to analysis. In evaluating emissions trends, South Dakota’s largest impact on any estimate design values at each we focused on State-wide emissions of downwind nonattainment or monitoring site in 2021. Specifically, nitrogen oxides (‘‘NOX’’) and volatile maintenance receptors in 2023 are 0.07 2021 average and maximum design organic compounds (‘‘VOCs’’) in South parts per billion (ppb) and 0.05 ppb, values were calculated by straight-line Dakota.16 17 Emissions from mobile 11 respectively. These values are both far linear interpolation between the 2019 sources, electric generating units less than 1 percent of the 2015 ozone measured data and the 2023 modeled (‘‘EGUs’’), industrial facilities, gasoline NAAQS (0.70 ppb). In response to these data. EPA believes that the linear vapors, and chemical solvents are some comments and the Maryland decision, interpolation methodology using of the major anthropogenic sources of using the best available information measured data and 2023 model ozone precursors. This evaluation looks (including the same data that informed projections provides a technically sound at both past emissions trends, as well as EPA’s 2023 modeling) to analyze South basis for estimation of ozone design projected trends. Dakota’s air quality impacts in the year values in 2021 in part because of the 2021, the EPA finds it reasonable to relatively short two-year span between As shown in Table 1, between 2011 conclude that South Dakota’s impact on 2021 and 2023. and 2017, annual total NOX and VOC any potential downwind nonattainment EPA calculated ozone contributions in emissions have declined, by 32 percent and maintenance receptor in 2021 2021 by applying the following two-step and 9 percent, respectively. The would be similar to those projected in process. First, the contributions (in ppb) projected reductions are a result of ‘‘on 2023, and likewise well below 1 percent from each state to each monitoring site the books’’ and ‘‘on the way’’ of the 2015 ozone NAAQS, as detailed in 2023 were converted to a fractional regulations that will continue to in the methodology described below. portion of the 2023 average design value decrease NOX and VOC emissions in Therefore, EPA finds that South by dividing the contribution by the 2023 South Dakota, as indicated by our 2023 Dakota’s infrastructure SIP submission design value. In the second step, the projected emissions. The large decrease satisfies the State’s Good Neighbor resulting contribution fractions were in NOX emissions between 2017 obligations for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. multiplied by the estimated 2021 emissions and projected 2023 emissions The EPA’s analysis of receptors and average design value to produce 2021 in South Dakota are primarily driven by contributions in 2021 relies in part on contributions from each state to each reductions in emissions from on-road the 2023 modeling used in the NPRM of monitoring site.13 14 and nonroad vehicles. EPA projects that this action, the results of which were The 2021 design values and the downward trend in both VOC and included with the March 2018 contributions were examined to NO emissions from 2011 through 2017 memorandum. These data are the most X determine if South Dakota contributes at is expected to continue at a steady rate recent published applicable modeling or above the 1 percent of the 2015 ozone out to 2023 and further into the future data available at the time of this final NAAQS threshold (0.70 ppb) to a action. To estimate South Dakota’s due to the replacement of higher downwind nonattainment or emissions vehicles with lower emitting maximum contribution to a maintenance receptor. The data indicate nonattainment or maintenance receptor vehicles as a result of several mobile that the highest contribution in 2021 18 in 2021, EPA developed an source control programs. This from South Dakota to a downwind interpolation analysis that evaluates downward trend in emissions in South receptor is 0.14 ppb to the available modeling, monitoring, and Dakota adds support to the air quality nonattainment receptor site in Cook analysis presented above, which County, Illinois.15 Based on this 10 The year 2023 was used as the analytic year indicates that the contributions from because that year aligns with the expected analysis, EPA finds it reasonable to emissions from sources in South Dakota attainment year for Moderate ozone nonattainment conclude that South Dakota will to ozone in downwind states will areas. The attainment date for nonattainment areas contribute less than 1 percent of the classified as Moderate for the 2015 ozone NAAQS continue to decline and remain below 1 is August 3, 2024. See CAA 181(a); 40 CFR 51.1303; 2015 ozone NAAQS to any potential percent of the NAAQS. 83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018). nonattainment or maintenance receptors 11 The EPA’s analysis indicates that South Dakota in 2021. 16 will have a 0.07 ppb impact at the nonattainment This is because ground-level ozone is not receptor in Tarrant County, Texas (Site ID emitted directly into the air but is a secondary air 12 The 2019 design values at each monitoring site 484392003), which has a 2023 projected average pollutant created by chemical reactions between nationwide are available at https://www.epa.gov/ design value of 72.5 ppb, and a 2023 projected ozone precursors, chiefly NOX and non-methane air-trends/air-quality-design-values. maximum design value of 74.8 ppb. The EPA’s VOCs, in the presence of sunlight. 13 analysis further indicates that South Dakota will Note that the method used here for calculating 17 81 FR 74504, 74513–14. have a 0.05 ppb impact at the maintenance contributions in 2021 is similar to the method used 18 Tier 3 Standards (March 2014), the Light-Duty receptors in Allegan, Michigan (Site ID 260050003) by EPA to calculate the 2023 contributions from Greenhouse Gas Rule (March 2013), Heavy (and and Queens, New York (Site ID 360810124), which 2023 air quality modeling. Medium)-Duty Greenhouse Gas Rule (August 2011), both had projected 2023 average design values 14 Design values for 2019, 2021, and 2023 along the Renewable Fuel Standard (February 2010), the below the 2015 ozone NAAQS (69.0 and 70.2 ppb, with the contributions in 2021 and 2023 are Light Duty Greenhouse Gas Rule (April 2010), the respectively), and 2023 projected maximum design provided in a file in the docket for this rule. Corporate-Average Fuel Economy standards for values above the NAAQS (71.7 and 72.0 ppb, 15 This downwind receptor site has Air Quality 2008–2011 (April 2010), the 2007 Onroad Heavy- respectively). See the March 2018 memorandum, System (AQS) monitoring ID #170310001 and is Duty Rule (February 2009), and the Final Mobile attachment C. located in Cook County, Illinois. Source Air Toxics Rule (MSAT2) (February 2007).

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Oct 23, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM 26OCR1 67656 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 207 / Monday, October 26, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 1—ANNUAL EMISSIONS OF NOX AND VOC FROM ANTHROPOGENIC EMISSION SOURCES IN SOUTH DAKOTA [tons]

Projected 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2023

NOX ...... 73,995 71,438 68,881 66,323 56,548 52,664 50,590 34,096 VOC ...... 66,430 64,229 62,028 59,826 58,873 57,627 56,528 51,313

Thus, the EPA concludes the air 110(a)(1) and (2) to require the Agency the State’s SIP for purposes of meeting quality and emission analyses indicate to focus on whether the state has a SIP the infrastructure SIP requirements. that emissions from South Dakota will that provides the requisite legal The EPA appreciates and takes not significantly contribute to framework for implementation, seriously the commenters’ assertions nonattainment or interfere with maintenance and enforcement of the that the Agency should evaluate the maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS NAAQS. Generally speaking, the EPA’s strength of the South Dakota permit in any other state in 2021. Therefore, review of infrastructure SIP submissions program in the SIP as approved by the EPA concludes that South Dakota’s is limited to whether, pursuant to CAA EPA. However, because this action infrastructure SIP submission satisfies section 110(a)(2), the submission involves a review of the infrastructure the State’s Good Neighbor obligations facially meets the requirements of the SIP submission itself, the EPA is not for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. statutory criteria outlined therein, as evaluating the merits of assertions Comment: One commenter asserts applicable. In the case of section concerning implementation of the SIP in that the EPA should not approve South 110(a)(2)(C), for example, the statute the context of this action. At this time, Dakota’s infrastructure SIP submission requires a state to have a SIP that the EPA is finalizing its proposed with respect to PSD requirements ‘‘include[s] a program to provide for approval of the infrastructure SIP because the Agency isn’t required to do . . . regulation of the modification and submission that is currently before the so under current rules. The commenter construction of any stationary sources Agency. If the EPA later determines that seems to allege that South Dakota’s PSD . . . including a permit program as there are indeed concerns with respect program is under consideration at the required in parts C and D of this to the implementation of the PSD time of the proposed action and there subchapter.’’ Thus, the EPA reviews a program in South Dakota, the Agency will be legal challenges regarding the state’s infrastructure SIP submission to intends to take appropriate action to approval of construction permits. assure that the structural elements of the ensure those problems are rectified Additionally, the commenter alleges state’s PSD permitting program meets using whatever statutory tools are that the EPA should ‘evaluate the current CAA requirements for such appropriate to the implementation strength of the S.D. permit program and programs. problem identified. its financial health.’ This is not to say that the EPA has no With respect to the requirements Response: The EPA disagrees with the role in reviewing whether a state is related to PSD relevant to this approval commenter. The commenters’ concerns faithfully implementing its approved of the infrastructure SIP submission, the appear to be directed not to whether the SIP, or otherwise complying with the EPA has determined that the State’s SIP existing SIP for South Dakota meets the CAA and its implementing regulations. as previously approved, meets the relevant structural requirements for PSD To the contrary, there are multiple relevant structural requirements for programs, but rather to whether South statutory tools that the EPA can use to purposes of PSD in section 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II) element 3, and (J). Some Dakota is in fact faithfully implementing rectify problems with a state’s examples of these basic structural SIP the existing provisions of its EPA- implementation of its SIP, and the requirements include having state law approved SIP. As the EPA has explained existence of these tools is consistent authority to implement the SIP, an in other infrastructure SIP actions, with the EPA’s interpretation of section overarching permitting program in comments like these highlight an 110(a)(2) with respect to the Agency’s place, and a properly deployed important distinction between whether role in reviewing infrastructure SIP monitoring network. As to the PSD an infrastructure SIP submission meets submissions. For example, the CAA provides the EPA the authority to issue program in particular, these basic the applicable requirements of the CAA a SIP call, 42 U.S.C. 7410(k)(5); make a structural requirements include those on its face (i.e., pertain to the facial finding of failure to implement, id. provisions necessary for the permitting sufficiency of the state’s SIP), and sections 7410(m), 7509(a)(4); and take program to address all regulated NSR whether a state is actually complying measures to address specific permits pollutants and the proper sources. The with the requirements of that SIP (i.e., pursuant to the EPA’s case-by-case EPA considers action on the pertain to adequacy of the state’s permitting oversight. See, e.g., sections infrastructure SIP submissions required implementation of the SIP).19 This 7475(a)(2); 7477. The appropriateness of by section 110(a)(1) and (2) to be an comment implicates the question of the employing these authorities depends on evaluation of a state’s SIP to assure that degree to which implementation the nature and extent of the particular it meets the basic structural concerns are relevant in the context of implementation problems at issue. requirements for the new or revised acting on a state’s infrastructure SIP With respect to South Dakota’s NAAQS, not a time to address all submission. In the context of an infrastructure SIP submission, the EPA potential substantive defects in existing infrastructure SIP submission, the EPA analyzed the submission itself, and SIP provisions, or alleged defects in interprets the requirements of section evaluated the text of its provisions for implementation of the SIP. compliance with the relevant elements The EPA concludes that South 19 See ‘‘Approval and Disapproval and of section 110(a)(2). The EPA has Dakota’s infrastructure SIP submission Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport evaluated the State’s submission on a satisfies the State’s obligations for the Requirements of the 1997 Ozone and the 1997 and requirement-by-requirement basis and 2015 ozone NAAQS with respect to PSD 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,’’ 76 FR 81371 (Dec. 28, 2011). explained its views on the adequacy of program requirements.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Oct 23, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM 26OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 207 / Monday, October 26, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 67657

III. Final Action The EPA is approving South Dakota’s are approving a SIP revision submitted January 15, 2020 SIP submission that by the State of South Dakota on January In this rulemaking, we are approving addresses infrastructure requirements 3, 2020 that revises the ARSD, Air multiple elements of the infrastructure for the 2015 ozone NAAQS SIP Pollution Control Program. SIP requirements for the 2015 ozone submission for the following CAA In the table below, the key is as NAAQS for South Dakota along with section 110(a)(2) infrastructure follows: approving revisions to the ARSD, Air elements: (A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(I) Prongs 1 Pollution Control Program. The actions and 2, (D)(i)(II) Prong 3, (D)(i)(II) Prong A—Approve. we are approving are contained in Table 4, (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), D—Disapprove. 1 below. and (M). Additionally, in this action, we NA—No Action.

TABLE 2—INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENTS THAT THE EPA IS PROPOSING TO ACT ON

2015 Ozone NAAQS Infrastructure SIP Elements: South Dakota

(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures ...... A (B): Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System ...... A (C): Program for Enforcement of Control Measures ...... A (D)(i)(I): Prong 1 Interstate Transport—significant contribution ...... A (D)(i)(I): Prong 2 Interstate Transport—interference with maintenance ...... A (D)(i)(II): Prong 3 Interstate Transport—prevention of significant deterioration ...... A (D)(i)(II): Prong 4 Interstate Transport—visibility ...... A (D)(ii): Interstate and International Pollution Abatement ...... A (E): Adequate Resources ...... A (F): Stationary Source Monitoring System ...... A (G): Emergency Episodes ...... A (H): Future SIP revisions ...... A (J): Consultation with Government Officials, Public Notification, PSD and Visibility Protection ...... A (K): Air Quality and Modeling/Data ...... A (L): Permitting Fees ...... A (M): Consultation/Participation by Affected Local Entities ...... A South Dakota ARSD; revisions to South Dakota’s Air Quality Program; chapters pertaining to definitions, ambient air quality, air quality episodes, PSD, new source review, performance testing, control of visible emissions, continuous emission monitoring systems, state facilities in Rapid City area, construction permits and regional haze program administrative rules ...... A

IV. Incorporation by Reference sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of action because SIP approvals are the effective date of the final rulemaking exempted under Executive Order 12866; In this document, the EPA is • finalizing regulatory text that includes of the EPA’s approval, and will be Does not impose an information incorporation by reference. In incorporated by reference in the next collection burden under the provisions accordance with requirements of 1 CFR update to the SIP compilation.20 of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 51.5, the EPA is finalizing the U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); V. Statutory and Executive Order • Is certified as not having a incorporation by reference of a SIP Reviews significant economic impact on a revision submitted by the State of South substantial number of small entities Dakota on January 3, 2020 that revises Under the Clean Air Act, the under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 the ARSD, Air Pollution Control Administrator is required to approve a U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Program, updating the date of SIP submission that complies with the • Does not contain any unfunded incorporation by reference of federal provisions of the Act and applicable mandate or significantly or uniquely rules in ARSD chapters pertaining to Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); affect small governments, described in definitions, ambient air quality, air 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of quality episodes, PSD, new source submissions, the EPA’s role is to 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); review, performance testing, control of approve state choices, provided that • Does not have Federalism visible emissions, continuous emission they meet the criteria of the Clean Air implications as specified in Executive monitoring systems, State facilities in Act. Accordingly, this action merely Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, Rapid City area, construction permits approves state law as meeting Federal 1999); and regional haze program requirements and does not impose • Is not an economically significant administrative rules as is described in additional requirements beyond those regulatory action based on health or the preamble. The EPA has made, and imposed by state law. For that reason, safety risks subject to Executive Order will continue to make, these materials this action: 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); generally available through • • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Is not a significant regulatory action www.regulations.gov and at the EPA subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR Region 8 Office (please contact the action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under 28355, May 22, 2001); person identified in the FOR FURTHER • Is not subject to requirements of Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, INFORMATION CONTACT section of this section 12(d) of the National October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, preamble for more information). Technology Transfer and Advancement January 21, 2011); Therefore, these materials have been Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because approved by the EPA for inclusion in • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 application of those requirements would the SIP, have been incorporated by FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory be inconsistent with the CAA; and reference by the EPA into that plan, are • Does not provide EPA with the fully federally enforceable under 20 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997). discretionary authority to address, as

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Oct 23, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM 26OCR1 67658 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 207 / Monday, October 26, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

appropriate, disproportionate human this action must be filed in the United Subpart QQ—South Dakota health or environmental effects, using States Court of Appeals for the practicable and legally permissible appropriate circuit by December 28, ■ 2. In § 52.2170: methods, under Executive Order 12898 2020. Filing a petition for ■ a. The table in paragraph (c) is (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). reconsideration by the Administrator of amended by: In addition, the SIP is not approved this final rule does not affect the finality ■ to apply on any Indian reservation land of this action for the purposes of judicial i. Revising the entries ‘‘74:36:01:01’’, or in any other area where EPA or an review nor does it extend the time ‘‘74:36:01:05’’, ‘‘74:36:01:19’’, Indian tribe has demonstrated that a within which a petition for judicial ‘‘74:36:01:20’’, ‘‘74:36:02:02’’, tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of review may be filed, and shall not ‘‘74:36:02:03’’, ‘‘74:36:02:04’’, Indian country, the rule does not have postpone the effectiveness of such rule ‘‘74:36:02:05’’, ‘‘74:36:03:01’’, tribal implications and will not impose or action. This action may not be ‘‘74:36:03:02’’, ‘‘74:36:09:02’’, substantial direct costs on tribal challenged later in proceedings to ‘‘74:36:09:03’’, ‘‘74:36:10:02’’, governments or preempt tribal law as enforce its requirements. (See section ‘‘74:36:10:03.01’’, ‘‘74:36:10:05’’, specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 307(b)(2)). ‘‘74:36:10:07’’, ‘‘74:36:10:08’’, FR 67249, November 9, 2000). ‘‘74:36:11:01’’, ‘‘74:36:11:02’’, The Congressional Review Act, 5 List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 ‘‘74:36:11:03’’, ‘‘74:36:11:04’’, U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Environmental protection, Air ‘‘74:36:12:01’’, ‘‘74:36:12:03’’, Business Regulatory Enforcement pollution control, Carbon monoxide, ‘‘74:36:13:02’’, ‘‘74:36:13:03’’, Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides Greenhouse gases, Incorporation by ‘‘74:36:13:04’’, ‘‘74:36:13:06’’, that before a rule may take effect, the reference, Intergovernmental relations, ‘‘74:36:13:07’’, ‘‘74:36:18:10’’, agency promulgating the rule must Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, ‘‘74:36:20:05’’, ‘‘74:36:21:02’’, submit a rule report, which includes a Particulate matter, Reporting and ‘‘74:36:21:04’’, ‘‘74:36:21:05’’, and copy of the rule, to each House of the recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur ‘‘74:36:21:09’’ and Congress and to the Comptroller General oxides, Volatile organic compounds. ■ ii. Adding an entry for ‘‘74:36:21:13’’ of the United States. EPA will submit a Dated: September 23, 2020. in numerical order; and report containing this action and other ■ required information to the U.S. Senate, Debra Thomas, b. The table in paragraph (e) is the U.S. House of Representatives, and Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8. amended by adding an entry for ‘‘XXVI. the Comptroller General of the United 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure States prior to publication of the rule in Requirements for the 2015 8-hour Ozone the Federal Register. A major rule PART 52—APPROVAL AND NAAQS’’ at the end of the table. cannot take effect until 60 days after it PROMULGATION OF The revisions and additions read as is published in the Federal Register. IMPLEMENTATION PLANS follows: This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as ■ § 52.2170 Identification of plan. defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 1. The authority citation for part 52 Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean continues to read as follows: * * * * * Air Act, petitions for judicial review of Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. (c) * * *

State effective EPA effective Rule No. Rule title date date Final rule citation, date Comments

*******

74:36:01. Definitions

74:36:01:01 ...... Definitions ...... 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register citation], 10/26/2020.

******* 74:36:01:05 ...... Applicable requirements 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register of the Clean Air Act de- citation], 10/26/2020. fined.

******* 74:36:01:19 ...... Existing municipal solid 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register waste landfill defined. citation], 10/26/2020. 74:36:01:20 ...... Physical change in or 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register change in the method citation], 10/26/2020. of operation defined.

*******

74:36:02. Ambient Air Quality

******* 74:36:02:02 ...... Ambient air quality stand- 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register ards. citation], 10/26/2020. 74:36:02:03 ...... Methods of sampling and 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register analysis. citation], 10/26/2020.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Oct 23, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM 26OCR1 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 207 / Monday, October 26, 2020 / Rules and Regulations 67659

State effective EPA effective Rule No. Rule title date date Final rule citation, date Comments

74:36:02:04 ...... Ambient air monitoring 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register network. citation], 10/26/2020. 74:36:02:05 ...... Air quality monitoring re- 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register quirements. citation], 10/26/2020.

74:36:03. Air Quality Episodes

74:36:03:01 ...... Air pollution emergency 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register episode. citation], 10/26/2020. 74:36:03:02 ...... Episode emergency con- 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register tingency plan. citation], 10/26/2020.

*******

74:36:09. Prevention of Significant Deterioration

******* 74:36:09:02 ...... Prevention of Significant 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register Deterioration. citation], 10/26/2020. 74:36:09:03 ...... Public participation ...... 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register citation], 10/26/2020.

74:36:10. New Source Review

******* 74:36:10:02 ...... Definitions ...... 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register citation], 10/26/2020. 74:36:10:03.01 ...... New source review 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register preconstruction permit citation], 10/26/2020. required. 74:36:10:05 ...... New source review 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register preconstruction permit citation], 10/26/2020. required.

******* 74:36:10:07 ...... Determining credit for 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register emissions Offsets. citation], 10/26/2020. 74:36:10:08 ...... Projected actual emis- 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register sions. citation], 10/26/2020.

*******

74:36:11. Performance Testing

74:36:11:01 ...... Stack performance test- 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register ing or other testing citation], 10/26/2020. methods. 74:36:11:02 ...... Secretary may require 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register performance tests. citation], 10/26/2020. 74:36:11:03 ...... Notice to department of 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register performance test. citation], 10/26/2020. 74:36:11:04 ...... Testing new fuels or raw 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register materials. citation], 10/26/2020.

74:36:12. Control of Visible Emissions

74:36:12:01 ...... Restrictions on visible 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register emissions. citation], 10/26/2020.

******* 74:36:12:03 ...... Exceptions granted to al- 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register falfa pelletizers or citation], 10/26/2020. dehydrators.

74:36:13. Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems

******* 74:36:13:02 ...... Minimum performance 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register specifications for all citation], 10/26/2020. continuous emission monitoring systems.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Oct 23, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM 26OCR1 67660 Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 207 / Monday, October 26, 2020 / Rules and Regulations

State effective EPA effective Rule No. Rule title date date Final rule citation, date Comments

74:36:13:03 ...... Reporting requirements .. 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register citation], 10/26/2020. 74:36:13:04 ...... Notice to department of 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register exceedance. citation], 10/26/2020.

******* 74:36:13:06 ...... Compliance certification .. 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register citation], 10/26/2020. 74:36:13:07 ...... Credible evidence ...... 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register citation], 10/26/2020.

*******

74:36:18. Regulations for State Facilities in the Rapid City Area

******* 74:36:18:10 ...... Visible emission limit for 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register construction and con- citation], 10/26/2020. tinuous operation ac- tivities.

*******

74:36:20. Construction Permits for New Sources or Modifications

******* 74:36:20:05 ...... Standard for issuance of 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register construction permit. citation], 10/26/2020.

*******

74:36:21. Regional Haze Program

******* 74:36:21:02 ...... Definitions ...... 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register citation], 10/26/2020.

******* 74:36:21:04 ...... Visibility impact analysis 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register citation], 10/26/2020. 74:36:21:05 ...... BART determination ...... 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register citation], 10/26/2020.

******* 74:36:21:09 ...... Monitoring, record- 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register keeping, and reporting. citation], 10/26/2020.

******* 74:36:21:13 ...... Calculate a 30-day rolling 11/25/2019 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register average. citation], 10/26/2020.

*******

* * * * * (e) ** *

State effec- EPA effec- Rule title tive date tive date Final rule citation, date Comments

******* XXVI. Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 01/15/2020 11/25/2020 [insert Federal Register cita- 2015 8-hour Ozone NAAQS. tion], 10/26/2020.

[FR Doc. 2020–21474 Filed 10–23–20; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Oct 23, 2020 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\26OCR1.SGM 26OCR1