Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana, 20846-20850 [2011-8867]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
20846
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 72 / Thursday, April 14, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2010–0998; FRL–9295–3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is approving a request
submitted by the Indiana Department of
Environmental Management on
November 24, 2010, to revise the
Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP)
under the Clean Air Act (CAA). These
revisions address sulfur dioxide (SO2)
and particulate matter (PM) limits for
Cargill, Incorporated (Cargill) at its
facility in Hammond (Lake County),
Indiana. Indiana’s SO2 revisions tighten
emission limits for some existing units
at Cargill’s Hammond facility and
remove the references to other emission
units that are no longer in operation, in
accordance with the terms of a
September 2005 Federal consent decree.
The PM revisions reflect the permanent
shutdown of, and changes in unit
identification for other Cargill units.
DATES: This direct final rule will be
effective June 13, 2011, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by May 16,
2011. If adverse comments are received,
EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal
Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2010–0998, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 408–2279.
4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief,
Control Strategies Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano,
Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office
normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The
Regional Office official hours of
business are Monday through Friday,
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:30 Apr 13, 2011
Jkt 223001
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2010–
0998. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. This facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We
recommend that you telephone Matt
Rau, Environmental Engineer, at (312)
886–6524 before visiting the Region 5
office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt
Rau, Environmental Engineer, Control
Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR–18J), Environmental Protection
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,
(312) 886–6524, rau.matthew@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What is the background for this action?
II. What is EPA’s analysis of the revision?
III. What are the environmental effects of this
action?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background for this
action?
a. Sulfur Dioxide Emissions
Cargill entered into a Federal consent
decree with EPA and a number of states,
including Indiana, to resolve a
complaint filed against the company in
the United States District Court for the
District of Minnesota. The consent
decree was lodged on September 1,
2005. It covers 24 Cargill facilities in 13
states.
Paragraph 15 of the consent decree
requires, among other things, that
Cargill submit permit applications to
applicable permitting authorities that
will contain annual SO2 emission limits
for the facilities and boilers listed in
Appendix B of the decree. Appendix B
lists four boilers at the Hammond
facility—Numbers 6, 7, 8, and 10. It
requires the retirement of Boiler
Number 7, while removing the emission
limits, recordkeeping requirements, and
reporting requirements for the other
three boilers. All four boilers have been
permanently shutdown.
Paragraph 27 of the consent decree
requires SO2 emission reductions at the
Hammond facility to be achieved
through the installation of pollution
control technologies and the
implementation of emission reduction
projects to meet a level of control
specified for the sources in Appendix L
of the decree.
Indiana has revised SIP rule 326
Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 7–
4.1–5 to address these consent decree
provisions.
b. Particulate Matter
Indiana revised Cargill’s emission
limits in 326 IAC 6.8–2–8 to remove the
emission units that are no longer in
operation at the Hammond facility.
These revisions were not required by
the consent decree, but were made to
reflect the permanent shutdown of
Cargill units—ten process sources and
two natural gas-fired boilers. Those
units now have no emission limits and,
as such, they cannot be operated. In
E:\FR\FM\14APR1.SGM
14APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 72 / Thursday, April 14, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
addition, Indiana has made changes in
unit identification to reflect current
operations.
II. What is EPA’s analysis of the
revision?
The revisions to the SO2 emission
limits in 326 IAC 7–4.1–5 should result
in improved air quality. There will no
longer be emissions from the four
boilers that Cargill has permanently
shutdown, as referenced in Appendix B
of the consent decree. In addition, there
should be substantial SO2 emission
reductions resulting from the eight units
required to be controlled in Appendix L
of the consent decree. The revisions to
the PM emission rule, 326 IAC 6.8–2–
8, help to clarify the PM requirements
for Cargill.
EPA, therefore, finds these revisions
to the SO2 and PM SIP rules acceptable.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
III. What are the environmental effects
of this action?
As a result of the SO2 emission
reduction requirements in the consent
decree, Cargill shutdown eight units and
tightened emission limits on four other
units. The total allowable SO2 emissions
rate from all Cargill units is now 622
pounds per hour lower. The revisions
have the potential to reduce SO2
emissions by 2730 tons per year.
Sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere can
aggravate respiratory and cardiovascular
disease. Sulfur dioxide emissions also
contribute to acid rain and fine
particulate matter formation.
Indiana also removed the PM
emission limits for ten units that are
permanently shutdown. The emission
limit revisions do not cause a reduction
in PM emissions as the units have
already ceased operation, but they are
indicative of the reduction in total
allowable PM emissions that has
occurred at the Cargill facility. The
facility’s cumulative allowable PM
emissions are now 71 pounds per hour
lower. That yields a potential annual
reduction of 311 tons of PM emissions.
Particulate matter interferes with lung
function when inhaled. Exposure to
particulates can cause heart and lung
disease. Particulate matter also
aggravates asthma. Airborne particulate
matter or PM is the main source of haze
that causes a reduction in visibility.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving revisions to the
Indiana SIP. This consists of revisions of
the PM emission rule, 326 IAC 6.8–2–
8, and the SO2 emission rule, 326 IAC
7–4.1–5.
We are publishing this action without
prior proposal because we view this as
a noncontroversial amendment and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:30 Apr 13, 2011
Jkt 223001
anticipate no adverse comments.
However, in the proposed rules section
of this Federal Register publication, we
are publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposal to approve the
state plan if relevant adverse written
comments are filed. This rule will be
effective June 13, 2011 without further
notice unless we receive relevant
adverse written comments by May 16,
2011. If we receive such comments, we
will withdraw this action before the
effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will
withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. The EPA
will not institute a second comment
period. Any parties interested in
commenting on this action should do so
at this time. Please note that if EPA
receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of
this rule and if that provision may be
severed from the remainder of the rule,
EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment. If we do not receive
any comments, this action will be
effective June 13, 2011.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this 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 action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
20847
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).
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by June 13, 2011. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. Parties with
objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in
response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action
published in the proposed rules section
E:\FR\FM\14APR1.SGM
14APR1
20848
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 72 / Thursday, April 14, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
of today’s Federal Register, rather than
file an immediate petition for judicial
review of this direct final rule, so that
EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
and address the comment in the
proposed rulemaking. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides.
Dated: April 4, 2011.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
PART 52—[AMENDED]
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart P—Indiana
2. In § 52.770 the table in paragraph
(c) is amended by revising the entries
for ‘‘Article 6.8. Particulate Matter
Limitations For Lake County’’ and
‘‘Article 7. Sulfur Dioxide Rules’’ to read
as follows:
■
§ 52.770
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED INDIANA REGULATIONS
Indiana citation
*
Indiana
effective date
Subject
*
*
*
EPA approval date
*
*
*
Article 6.8. Particulate Matter Limitations for Lake County
Rule 1. General Provisions
6.8–1–1 .............
6.8–1–1.5 ..........
6.8–1–2 .............
6.8–1–3
6.8–1–4
6.8–1–5
6.8–1–6
6.8–1–7
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
Applicability .........................................................................
Definitions ...........................................................................
Particulate emission limitations; fuel combustion steam
generators, asphalt concrete plant, grain elevators,
foundries, mineral aggregate operations; modification
by commissioner.
Compliance determination ..................................................
Compliance schedules ........................................................
Control strategies ................................................................
State implementation plan revisions ...................................
Scope ..................................................................................
2/22/2008
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
4/30/2008, 73 FR 23356.
3/22/2006, 71 FR 14383.
3/22/2006, 71 FR 14383.
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
2/22/2008
9/9/2005
2/22/2008
3/22/2006,
3/22/2006,
4/30/2008,
3/22/2006,
4/30/2008,
71
71
73
71
73
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
14383.
14383.
23356.
14383.
23356.
Rule 2. Lake County: PM10 Emission Requirements
6.8–2–1 .............
6.8–2–2 .............
6.8–2–4
6.8–2–6
6.8–2–7
6.8–2–8
.............
.............
.............
.............
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
6.8–2–9 .............
6.8–2–13 ...........
6.8–2–14
6.8–2–16
6.8–2–17
6.8–2–18
6.8–2–19
6.8–2–20
6.8–2–21
6.8–2–22
6.8–2–24
6.8–2–25
6.8–2–26
6.8–2–27
6.8–2–28
6.8–2–29
6.8–2–30
6.8–2–31
6.8–2–32
6.8–2–33
6.8–2–34
6.8–2–35
6.8–2–36
6.8–2–37
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
VerDate Mar<15>2010
General provisions and definitions .....................................
Lake County: PM10 and total suspended particulates
(TSP) emissions.
ASF-Keystone, Inc.—Hammond .........................................
BP Products North America, Inc.—Whiting Refinery .........
Bucko Construction Company, Inc .....................................
Cargill, Inc ...........................................................................
W.R. Grace and Co.—Conn ...............................................
Hammond Group, Inc. (HGI) Halox Division, Lead Products Division, and Hammond Expander Division.
Hammond Group, Inc.—Halstab Division ...........................
Resco Products, Inc ...........................................................
Mittal Steel—Indiana Harbor East Inc ................................
Jupiter Aluminum Corporation ............................................
Dover Chemical Corporation—Hammond ..........................
LaSalle Steel Company ......................................................
Mittal Steel—Indiana Harbor West Inc ...............................
Carmeuse Lime Inc ............................................................
Methodist Hospital Inc ........................................................
National Recovery Systems ...............................................
NIPSCo—Dean H. Mitchell Station ....................................
Praxair Inc ...........................................................................
Premiere Candy Company .................................................
Reed Minerals—Plant #14 ..................................................
Rhodia, Inc ..........................................................................
Silgan Containers Manufacturing Corporation ...................
Smith Ready Mix, Inc .........................................................
State Line Energy, LLC ......................................................
Huhtamaki Foodservice, Inc ...............................................
Conopco, Inc. d/b/a Unilever HPC USA .............................
Union Tank Car Company, Plant 1 ....................................
United States Gypsum Company .......................................
17:30 Apr 13, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
11/19/2010
4/30/2008, 73 FR 23356.
4/30/2008, 73 FR 23356.
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
4/30/2008, 73 FR 23356.
4/30/2008, 73 FR 23356.
4/30/2008, 73 FR 23356.
4/14/2011, [Insert page number where the document
begins].
4/30/2008, 73 FR 23356.
4/30/2008, 73 FR 23356.
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
2/22/2008
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
4/30/2008,
E:\FR\FM\14APR1.SGM
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
73
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
14APR1
Notes
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
23356.
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 72 / Thursday, April 14, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
20849
EPA-APPROVED INDIANA REGULATIONS—Continued
Indiana
effective date
Indiana citation
Subject
6.8–2–38 ...........
U.S. Steel—Gary Works .....................................................
2/22/2008
EPA approval date
4/30/2008, 73 FR 23356.
Rule 4. Lake County: Opacity Limits; Test Methods
6.8–4–1 .............
Test methods ......................................................................
2/22/2008
4/30/2008, 73 FR 23356.
Rule 8. Lake County: Continuous Compliance Plan
6.8–8–1
6.8–8–2
6.8–8–3
6.8–8–4
6.8–8–5
6.8–8–6
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
.............
6.8–8–7 .............
6.8–8–8 .............
Applicability .........................................................................
Documentation; operation and maintenance procedures ..
Plan requirements ...............................................................
Plan; schedule for complying with 326 IAC 6.8–7 .............
Plan; source categories ......................................................
Plan; particulate matter control equipment; operation and
maintenance.
Plan; particulate matter control equipment; recording; operation; inspection.
Plan; department review .....................................................
2/22/2008
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
4/30/2008,
3/22/2006,
3/22/2006,
3/22/2006,
3/22/2006,
3/22/2006,
73
71
71
71
71
71
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
23356.
14383.
14383.
14383.
14383.
14383.
9/9/2005
3/22/2006, 71 FR 14383.
9/9/2005
3/22/2006, 71 FR 14383.
Rule 9. Lake County: PM10 Coke Battery Emission Requirements
6.8–9–1 .............
6.8–9–2 .............
6.8–9–3 .............
Applicability .........................................................................
Definitions ...........................................................................
Emission limitations ............................................................
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
2/22/2008
3/22/2006, 71 FR 14383.
3/22/2006, 71 FR 14383.
4/30/2008, 73 FR 23356.
Rule 10. Lake County: Fugitive Particulate Matter
6.8–10–1
6.8–10–2
6.8–10–3
6.8–10–4
...........
...........
...........
...........
Applicability .........................................................................
Definitions ...........................................................................
Particulate matter emission limitations ...............................
Compliance requirements; control plans ............................
2/22/2008
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
4/30/2008,
3/22/2006,
3/22/2006,
3/22/2006,
73
71
71
71
FR
FR
FR
FR
23356.
14383.
14383.
14383.
71
71
71
71
71
71
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
14383.
14383.
14383.
14383.
14383.
14383.
Rule 11. Lake County: Particulate Matter Contingency Measures
6.8–11–1
6.8–11–2
6.8–11–3
6.8–11–4
6.8–11–5
6.8–11–6
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
...........
Applicability .........................................................................
‘‘Ambient monitoring data’’ defined .....................................
Exceedances ......................................................................
Violation of 24-hour standard .............................................
Violation of annual standard ...............................................
Reduction measures ...........................................................
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
9/9/2005
3/22/2006,
3/22/2006,
3/22/2006,
3/22/2006,
3/22/2006,
3/22/2006,
Article 7. Sulfur Dioxide Rules
Rule 1.1. Sulfur Dioxide Emission Limitations
7–1.1–1 .............
7–1.1–2 .............
Applicability .........................................................................
Sulfur dioxide emission limitations .....................................
6/24/2005
6/24/2005
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
6/24/2005
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
Rule 2. Compliance
7–2–1 ................
Reporting requirements; methods to determine compliance.
Rule 3. Ambient Monitoring
7–3–2 ................
Ambient monitoring .............................................................
........................
5/13/1982, 47 FR 20583.
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
Rule 4. Emission Limitations and Requirements by County
7–4–2 ................
7–4–3 ................
7–4–4 ................
7–4–5 ................
7–4–6 ................
7–4–7 ................
7–4–8 ................
7–4–9 ................
7–4–10 ..............
7–4–11 ..............
7–4–12.1 ...........
7–4–13 ..............
7–4–14 ..............
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Marion County sulfur dioxide emission limitations .............
Vigo County sulfur dioxide emission limitations .................
Wayne County sulfur dioxide emission limitations .............
LaPorte County sulfur dioxide emission limitations ............
Jefferson County sulfur dioxide emission limitations .........
Sullivan County sulfur dioxide emission limitations ............
Vermillion County sulfur dioxide emission limitations ........
Floyd County sulfur dioxide emission limitations ...............
Warrick County sulfur dioxide emission limitations ............
Morgan County sulfur dioxide emission limitations ............
Gibson County sulfur dioxide emission limitations .............
Dearborn County sulfur dioxide emission limitations .........
Porter County sulfur dioxide emission limitations ..............
17:30 Apr 13, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3/11/1999
9/30/2004
4/10/1988
4/10/1988
4/10/1988
4/10/1988
4/10/1988
4/10/1988
8/30/2008
5/13/1988
12/5/1990
3/16/2005
10/23/1988
8/2/2000, 65 FR 47336.
2/28/2005, 70 FR 9533.
9/1/1988, 53 FR 33808.
9/1/1988, 53 FR 33808.
9/1/1988, 53 FR 33808.
9/1/1988, 53 FR 33808.
1/19/1989, 54 FR 2112.
9/1/1988, 53 FR 33808.
11/10/2009, 74 FR 57904.
12/16/1988, 53 FR 50521.
9/19/1994, 59 FR 47804.
2/28/2006, 71 FR 9936.
1/19/1989, 54 FR 2112.
E:\FR\FM\14APR1.SGM
14APR1
Notes
20850
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 72 / Thursday, April 14, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
EPA-APPROVED INDIANA REGULATIONS—Continued
Indiana citation
Indiana
effective date
Subject
EPA approval date
Notes
Rule 4.1. Lake County Sulfur Dioxide Emission Limitations
7–4.1–1 .............
7–4.1–2 .............
7–4.1–3 .............
7–4.1–4 .............
7–4.1–5 .............
7–4.1–6 .............
7–4.1–7 .............
7–4.1–8 .............
7–4.1–9 .............
7–4.1–10 ...........
7–4.1–11 ...........
7–4.1–12 ...........
7–4.1–13 ...........
7–4.1–14 ...........
7–4.1–15 ...........
7–4.1–16 ...........
7–4.1–17 ...........
7–4.1–18 ...........
7–4.1–19 ...........
7–4.1–20 ...........
7–4.1–21 ...........
Lake County sulfur dioxide emission limitations ................
Sampling and analysis protocol ..........................................
BP Products North America Inc. sulfur dioxide emission
limitations.
Bucko Construction sulfur dioxide emission limitations .....
Cargill, Inc. sulfur dioxide emission limitations ...................
Carmeuse Lime sulfur dioxide emission limitations ...........
Cokenergy Inc. sulfur dioxide emission limitations ............
Indiana Harbor Coke Company sulfur dioxide emission
limitations.
Ironside Energy, LLC sulfur dioxide emission limitations ...
ISG Indiana Harbor Inc. sulfur dioxide emission limitations
Ispat Inland Inc. sulfur dioxide emission limitations ...........
Methodist Hospital sulfur dioxide emission limitations .......
National Recovery Systems sulfur dioxide emission limitations.
NIPSCO Dean H. Mitchell Generating Station sulfur dioxide emission limitations.
Rhodia sulfur dioxide emission limitations .........................
Safety-Kleen Oil Recovery Company sulfur dioxide emission limitations.
SCA Tissue North America LLC sulfur dioxide emission
limitations.
State Line Energy, LLC sulfur dioxide emission limitations
Unilever HPC USA sulfur dioxide emission limitations ......
U.S. Steel—Gary Works sulfur dioxide emission limitations.
Walsh and Kelly sulfur dioxide emission limitations ...........
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–8867 Filed 4–13–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2010–0545; FRL–9295–1]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana;
Stage I Vapor Recovery Rule
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with RULES
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:30 Apr 13, 2011
Jkt 223001
6/24/2005
11/19/2010
6/24/2005
6/24/2005
6/24/2005
6/24/2005
6/24/2005
6/24/2005
6/24/2005
6/24/2005
9/26/2005,
9/26/2005,
9/26/2005,
9/26/2005,
9/26/2005,
6/24/2005
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
6/24/2005
6/24/2005
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
6/24/2005
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
6/24/2005
6/24/2005
6/24/2005
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
6/24/2005
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
*
making the rule applicable to smaller
tanks and revising the requirements for
newer submerged fill pipes. These new
State requirements update the SIP
consistent with new Federal
requirements from January 10, 2008 area
source National Emissions Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs)
for gasoline dispensing facilities. The
revisions also delete references to
compliance dates which have passed.
The rules are approvable because they
are consistent with the Clean Air Act
(Act) and EPA regulations, and should
result in additional emission reductions
of VOCs throughout Indiana.
This direct final rule will be
effective June 13, 2011, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by May 16,
2011. If adverse comments are received,
EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal
Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2010–0545, by one of the
following methods:
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
4/14/2011, [Insert page number where the document
begins].
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
9/26/2005, 70 FR 56129.
DATES:
EPA is approving into the
Indiana State Implementation Plan
(SIP), amendments to the stage I vapor
recovery rule and administrative
changes to stage II vapor recovery rule
submitted by the Indiana Department of
Environmental Management on June 11,
2010. These rule revisions made volatile
organic compounds (VOC) emission
control requirements for filling at
gasoline dispensing facilities more
stringent by applying them statewide,
SUMMARY:
*
6/24/2005
6/24/2005
6/24/2005
Sfmt 4700
70
70
70
70
70
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
*
56129.
56129.
56129.
56129.
56129.
*
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 408–2279.
4. Mail: Doug Aburano, Chief, Control
Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Doug Aburano,
Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office
normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The
Regional Office official hours of
business are Monday through Friday,
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2010–
0545. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
E:\FR\FM\14APR1.SGM
14APR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 72 (Thursday, April 14, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 20846-20850]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-8867]
[[Page 20846]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2010-0998; FRL-9295-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Indiana
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a request submitted by the Indiana Department
of Environmental Management on November 24, 2010, to revise the Indiana
State Implementation Plan (SIP) under the Clean Air Act (CAA). These
revisions address sulfur dioxide (SO2) and particulate
matter (PM) limits for Cargill, Incorporated (Cargill) at its facility
in Hammond (Lake County), Indiana. Indiana's SO2 revisions
tighten emission limits for some existing units at Cargill's Hammond
facility and remove the references to other emission units that are no
longer in operation, in accordance with the terms of a September 2005
Federal consent decree. The PM revisions reflect the permanent shutdown
of, and changes in unit identification for other Cargill units.
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective June 13, 2011, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by May 16, 2011. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2010-0998, by one of the following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. E-mail: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 408-2279.
4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Control Strategies
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2010-0998. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal
holidays. We recommend that you telephone Matt Rau, Environmental
Engineer, at (312) 886-6524 before visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Rau, Environmental Engineer,
Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6524, rau.matthew@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What is the background for this action?
II. What is EPA's analysis of the revision?
III. What are the environmental effects of this action?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background for this action?
a. Sulfur Dioxide Emissions
Cargill entered into a Federal consent decree with EPA and a number
of states, including Indiana, to resolve a complaint filed against the
company in the United States District Court for the District of
Minnesota. The consent decree was lodged on September 1, 2005. It
covers 24 Cargill facilities in 13 states.
Paragraph 15 of the consent decree requires, among other things,
that Cargill submit permit applications to applicable permitting
authorities that will contain annual SO2 emission limits for
the facilities and boilers listed in Appendix B of the decree. Appendix
B lists four boilers at the Hammond facility--Numbers 6, 7, 8, and 10.
It requires the retirement of Boiler Number 7, while removing the
emission limits, recordkeeping requirements, and reporting requirements
for the other three boilers. All four boilers have been permanently
shutdown.
Paragraph 27 of the consent decree requires SO2 emission
reductions at the Hammond facility to be achieved through the
installation of pollution control technologies and the implementation
of emission reduction projects to meet a level of control specified for
the sources in Appendix L of the decree.
Indiana has revised SIP rule 326 Indiana Administrative Code (IAC)
7-4.1-5 to address these consent decree provisions.
b. Particulate Matter
Indiana revised Cargill's emission limits in 326 IAC 6.8-2-8 to
remove the emission units that are no longer in operation at the
Hammond facility. These revisions were not required by the consent
decree, but were made to reflect the permanent shutdown of Cargill
units--ten process sources and two natural gas-fired boilers. Those
units now have no emission limits and, as such, they cannot be
operated. In
[[Page 20847]]
addition, Indiana has made changes in unit identification to reflect
current operations.
II. What is EPA's analysis of the revision?
The revisions to the SO2 emission limits in 326 IAC 7-
4.1-5 should result in improved air quality. There will no longer be
emissions from the four boilers that Cargill has permanently shutdown,
as referenced in Appendix B of the consent decree. In addition, there
should be substantial SO2 emission reductions resulting from
the eight units required to be controlled in Appendix L of the consent
decree. The revisions to the PM emission rule, 326 IAC 6.8-2-8, help to
clarify the PM requirements for Cargill.
EPA, therefore, finds these revisions to the SO2 and PM
SIP rules acceptable.
III. What are the environmental effects of this action?
As a result of the SO2 emission reduction requirements
in the consent decree, Cargill shutdown eight units and tightened
emission limits on four other units. The total allowable SO2
emissions rate from all Cargill units is now 622 pounds per hour lower.
The revisions have the potential to reduce SO2 emissions by
2730 tons per year.
Sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere can aggravate respiratory and
cardiovascular disease. Sulfur dioxide emissions also contribute to
acid rain and fine particulate matter formation.
Indiana also removed the PM emission limits for ten units that are
permanently shutdown. The emission limit revisions do not cause a
reduction in PM emissions as the units have already ceased operation,
but they are indicative of the reduction in total allowable PM
emissions that has occurred at the Cargill facility. The facility's
cumulative allowable PM emissions are now 71 pounds per hour lower.
That yields a potential annual reduction of 311 tons of PM emissions.
Particulate matter interferes with lung function when inhaled.
Exposure to particulates can cause heart and lung disease. Particulate
matter also aggravates asthma. Airborne particulate matter or PM is the
main source of haze that causes a reduction in visibility.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving revisions to the Indiana SIP. This consists of
revisions of the PM emission rule, 326 IAC 6.8-2-8, and the
SO2 emission rule, 326 IAC 7-4.1-5.
We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective June 13, 2011
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written
comments by May 16, 2011. If we receive such comments, we will withdraw
this action before the effective date by publishing a subsequent
document that will withdraw the final action. All public comments
received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the
proposed action. The EPA will not institute a second comment period.
Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at
this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may
be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective June
13, 2011.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
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 action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by June 13, 2011. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section
[[Page 20848]]
of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for
judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw
this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: April 4, 2011.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart P--Indiana
0
2. In Sec. 52.770 the table in paragraph (c) is amended by revising
the entries for ``Article 6.8. Particulate Matter Limitations For Lake
County'' and ``Article 7. Sulfur Dioxide Rules'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA-Approved Indiana Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indiana
Indiana citation Subject effective date EPA approval date Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 6.8. Particulate Matter Limitations for Lake County
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 1. General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.8-1-1................. Applicability........... 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-1-1.5............... Definitions............. 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
14383.
6.8-1-2................. Particulate emission 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
limitations; fuel 14383.
combustion steam
generators, asphalt
concrete plant, grain
elevators, foundries,
mineral aggregate
operations;
modification by
commissioner.
6.8-1-3................. Compliance determination 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
14383.
6.8-1-4................. Compliance schedules.... 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
14383.
6.8-1-5................. Control strategies...... 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-1-6................. State implementation 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
plan revisions. 14383.
6.8-1-7................. Scope................... 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 2. Lake County: PM10 Emission Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.8-2-1................. General provisions and 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
definitions. 23356.
6.8-2-2................. Lake County: PM10 and 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
total suspended 23356.
particulates (TSP)
emissions.
6.8-2-4................. ASF-Keystone, Inc.-- 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Hammond. 23356.
6.8-2-6................. BP Products North 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
America, Inc.--Whiting 23356.
Refinery.
6.8-2-7................. Bucko Construction 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Company, Inc. 23356.
6.8-2-8................. Cargill, Inc............ 11/19/2010 4/14/2011, [Insert
page number where
the document
begins].
6.8-2-9................. W.R. Grace and Co.--Conn 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-2-13................ Hammond Group, Inc. 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
(HGI) Halox Division, 23356.
Lead Products Division,
and Hammond Expander
Division.
6.8-2-14................ Hammond Group, Inc.-- 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Halstab Division. 23356.
6.8-2-16................ Resco Products, Inc..... 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-2-17................ Mittal Steel--Indiana 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Harbor East Inc. 23356.
6.8-2-18................ Jupiter Aluminum 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Corporation. 23356.
6.8-2-19................ Dover Chemical 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Corporation--Hammond. 23356.
6.8-2-20................ LaSalle Steel Company... 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-2-21................ Mittal Steel--Indiana 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Harbor West Inc. 23356.
6.8-2-22................ Carmeuse Lime Inc....... 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-2-24................ Methodist Hospital Inc.. 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-2-25................ National Recovery 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Systems. 23356.
6.8-2-26................ NIPSCo--Dean H. Mitchell 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Station. 23356.
6.8-2-27................ Praxair Inc............. 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-2-28................ Premiere Candy Company.. 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-2-29................ Reed Minerals--Plant 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
14. 23356.
6.8-2-30................ Rhodia, Inc............. 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-2-31................ Silgan Containers 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Manufacturing 23356.
Corporation.
6.8-2-32................ Smith Ready Mix, Inc.... 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-2-33................ State Line Energy, LLC.. 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-2-34................ Huhtamaki Foodservice, 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Inc. 23356.
6.8-2-35................ Conopco, Inc. d/b/a 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Unilever HPC USA. 23356.
6.8-2-36................ Union Tank Car Company, 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Plant 1. 23356.
6.8-2-37................ United States Gypsum 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
Company. 23356.
[[Page 20849]]
6.8-2-38................ U.S. Steel--Gary Works.. 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 4. Lake County: Opacity Limits; Test Methods
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.8-4-1................. Test methods............ 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 8. Lake County: Continuous Compliance Plan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.8-8-1................. Applicability........... 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-8-2................. Documentation; operation 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
and maintenance 14383.
procedures.
6.8-8-3................. Plan requirements....... 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
14383.
6.8-8-4................. Plan; schedule for 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
complying with 326 IAC 14383.
6.8-7.
6.8-8-5................. Plan; source categories. 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
14383.
6.8-8-6................. Plan; particulate matter 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
control equipment; 14383.
operation and
maintenance.
6.8-8-7................. Plan; particulate matter 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
control equipment; 14383.
recording; operation;
inspection.
6.8-8-8................. Plan; department review. 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
14383.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 9. Lake County: PM10 Coke Battery Emission Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.8-9-1................. Applicability........... 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
14383.
6.8-9-2................. Definitions............. 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
14383.
6.8-9-3................. Emission limitations.... 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 10. Lake County: Fugitive Particulate Matter
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.8-10-1................ Applicability........... 2/22/2008 4/30/2008, 73 FR
23356.
6.8-10-2................ Definitions............. 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
14383.
6.8-10-3................ Particulate matter 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
emission limitations. 14383.
6.8-10-4................ Compliance requirements; 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
control plans. 14383.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 11. Lake County: Particulate Matter Contingency Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.8-11-1................ Applicability........... 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
14383.
6.8-11-2................ ``Ambient monitoring 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
data'' defined. 14383.
6.8-11-3................ Exceedances............. 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
14383.
6.8-11-4................ Violation of 24-hour 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
standard. 14383.
6.8-11-5................ Violation of annual 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
standard. 14383.
6.8-11-6................ Reduction measures...... 9/9/2005 3/22/2006, 71 FR
14383.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 7. Sulfur Dioxide Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 1.1. Sulfur Dioxide Emission Limitations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7-1.1-1................. Applicability........... 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
56129.
7-1.1-2................. Sulfur dioxide emission 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
limitations. 56129.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 2. Compliance
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7-2-1................... Reporting requirements; 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
methods to determine 56129.
compliance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 3. Ambient Monitoring
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7-3-2................... Ambient monitoring...... .............. 5/13/1982, 47 FR
20583.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 4. Emission Limitations and Requirements by County
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7-4-2................... Marion County sulfur 3/11/1999 8/2/2000, 65 FR
dioxide emission 47336.
limitations.
7-4-3................... Vigo County sulfur 9/30/2004 2/28/2005, 70 FR
dioxide emission 9533.
limitations.
7-4-4................... Wayne County sulfur 4/10/1988 9/1/1988, 53 FR
dioxide emission 33808.
limitations.
7-4-5................... LaPorte County sulfur 4/10/1988 9/1/1988, 53 FR
dioxide emission 33808.
limitations.
7-4-6................... Jefferson County sulfur 4/10/1988 9/1/1988, 53 FR
dioxide emission 33808.
limitations.
7-4-7................... Sullivan County sulfur 4/10/1988 9/1/1988, 53 FR
dioxide emission 33808.
limitations.
7-4-8................... Vermillion County sulfur 4/10/1988 1/19/1989, 54 FR
dioxide emission 2112.
limitations.
7-4-9................... Floyd County sulfur 4/10/1988 9/1/1988, 53 FR
dioxide emission 33808.
limitations.
7-4-10.................. Warrick County sulfur 8/30/2008 11/10/2009, 74 FR
dioxide emission 57904.
limitations.
7-4-11.................. Morgan County sulfur 5/13/1988 12/16/1988, 53 FR
dioxide emission 50521.
limitations.
7-4-12.1................ Gibson County sulfur 12/5/1990 9/19/1994, 59 FR
dioxide emission 47804.
limitations.
7-4-13.................. Dearborn County sulfur 3/16/2005 2/28/2006, 71 FR
dioxide emission 9936.
limitations.
7-4-14.................. Porter County sulfur 10/23/1988 1/19/1989, 54 FR
dioxide emission 2112.
limitations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 20850]]
Rule 4.1. Lake County Sulfur Dioxide Emission Limitations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7-4.1-1................. Lake County sulfur 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
dioxide emission 56129.
limitations.
7-4.1-2................. Sampling and analysis 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
protocol. 56129.
7-4.1-3................. BP Products North 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
America Inc. sulfur 56129.
dioxide emission
limitations.
7-4.1-4................. Bucko Construction 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
sulfur dioxide emission 56129.
limitations.
7-4.1-5................. Cargill, Inc. sulfur 11/19/2010 4/14/2011, [Insert
dioxide emission page number where
limitations. the document
begins].
7-4.1-6................. Carmeuse Lime sulfur 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
dioxide emission 56129.
limitations.
7-4.1-7................. Cokenergy Inc. sulfur 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
dioxide emission 56129.
limitations.
7-4.1-8................. Indiana Harbor Coke 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
Company sulfur dioxide 56129.
emission limitations.
7-4.1-9................. Ironside Energy, LLC 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
sulfur dioxide emission 56129.
limitations.
7-4.1-10................ ISG Indiana Harbor Inc. 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
sulfur dioxide emission 56129.
limitations.
7-4.1-11................ Ispat Inland Inc. sulfur 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
dioxide emission 56129.
limitations.
7-4.1-12................ Methodist Hospital 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
sulfur dioxide emission 56129.
limitations.
7-4.1-13................ National Recovery 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
Systems sulfur dioxide 56129.
emission limitations.
7-4.1-14................ NIPSCO Dean H. Mitchell 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
Generating Station 56129.
sulfur dioxide emission
limitations.
7-4.1-15................ Rhodia sulfur dioxide 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
emission limitations. 56129.
7-4.1-16................ Safety-Kleen Oil 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
Recovery Company sulfur 56129.
dioxide emission
limitations.
7-4.1-17................ SCA Tissue North America 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
LLC sulfur dioxide 56129.
emission limitations.
7-4.1-18................ State Line Energy, LLC 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
sulfur dioxide emission 56129.
limitations.
7-4.1-19................ Unilever HPC USA sulfur 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
dioxide emission 56129.
limitations.
7-4.1-20................ U.S. Steel--Gary Works 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
sulfur dioxide emission 56129.
limitations.
7-4.1-21................ Walsh and Kelly sulfur 6/24/2005 9/26/2005, 70 FR
dioxide emission 56129.
limitations.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2011-8867 Filed 4-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
