Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2010 NO2, 10644-10652 [2015-04014]
Download as PDF
10644
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules
i. Under the heading ‘‘Uterus’’ remove
the entry ‘‘Displacement’’ and its
diagnostic code ‘‘7622’’.
■
j. Remove the heading ‘‘Vulva disease
or injury of’’ and add in its place ‘‘Vulva
or clitoris, disease or injury of’’.
■
The additions and revisions to read as
follows:
Appendix C to Part 4—Alphabetical
Index of Disabilities
Diagnostic
code No.
*
*
*
*
*
*
Female sexual arousal disorder (FSAD) .............................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
7632
*
Injury:
*
*
*
*
*
*
Breast ...........................................................................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Neoplasms:
Benign:
Breast ....................................................................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Gynecological ........................................................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Malignant:
Breast ....................................................................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Gynecological ........................................................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Pelvic organ prolapse due to injury or disease or surgical complications of pregnancy, including uterine or vaginal vault
prolapse, cystocele, urethrocele, rectocele, enterocele, or combination .........................................................................................
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Vulva or clitoris, disease or injury of ...................................................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2015–03851 Filed 2–26–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0991; EPA–R05–
OAR–2013–0435; FRL–9923–43–Region 5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana;
Infrastructure SIP Requirements for
the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
elements of state implementation plan
(SIP) submissions from Indiana
regarding the infrastructure
requirements of section 110 of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) for the 2010 nitrogen
dioxide (NO2) and sulfur dioxide (SO2)
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
*
*
(NAAQS). The infrastructure
requirements are designed to ensure that
the structural components of each
state’s air quality management program
are adequate to meet the state’s
responsibilities under the CAA.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before March 30, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2012–0991 (2010 NO2
infrastructure SIP elements) and Docket
ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0435
(2010 SO2 infrastructure SIP elements)
by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 408–2279.
4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano,
Chief, Attainment Planning and
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
*
7631
7631
7628
7630
7627
7621
7610
*
Maintenance 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. EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0991
and EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0435. EPA’s
policy is that all comments received
will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made
available online at 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
www.regulations.gov or email. The
E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM
27FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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 email comment directly
to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov your email 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 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
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the U.S. 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 Sarah Arra,
Environmental Scientist, at (312) 886–
9401 before visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–9401,
arra.sarah@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 should I consider as I prepare my
comments for EPA?
II. What is the background of these SIP
submissions?
III. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate
these SIP submissions?
IV. What is the result of EPA’s review of
these SIP submissions?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
When submitting comments,
remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date, and page number).
2. Follow directions—EPA may ask
you to respond to specific questions or
organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
8. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. What is the background of these SIP
submissions?
A. What state SIP submissions does this
rulemaking address?
This rulemaking addresses
submissions from the Indiana
Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM). The state
submitted its infrastructure SIP for the
2010 NO2 NAAQS on January 15, 2013,
and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS on May 22,
2013.
B. Why did the state make these SIP
submissions?
Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the
CAA, states are required to submit
infrastructure SIPs to ensure that their
SIPs provide for implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of the
NAAQS, including the 2010 NO2 and
SO2 NAAQS. These submissions must
contain any revisions needed for
meeting the applicable SIP requirements
of section 110(a)(2), or certifications that
their existing SIPs for the NAAQS
already meet those requirements.
EPA highlighted this statutory
requirement in an October 2, 2007,
guidance document entitled ‘‘Guidance
on SIP Elements Required Under
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997
8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards’’ (2007
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
10645
Memo) and has issued additional
guidance documents, the most recent on
September 13, 2013, ‘‘Guidance on
Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)’’ (2013
Memo). The SIP submissions referenced
in this rulemaking pertain to the
applicable requirements of section
110(a)(1) and (2), and address the 2010
NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. To the extent that
the prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) program is nonNAAQS specific, a narrow evaluation of
other NAAQS will be included in the
appropriate sections.
C. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
EPA is acting upon the SIP
submissions from IDEM that address the
infrastructure requirements of CAA
sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the
2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. The
requirement for states to make a SIP
submission of this type arises out of
CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to
section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP
submissions ‘‘within 3 years (or such
shorter period as the Administrator may
prescribe) after the promulgation of a
national primary ambient air quality
standard (or any revision thereof),’’ and
these SIP submissions are to provide for
the ‘‘implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement’’ of such NAAQS. The
statute directly imposes on states the
duty to make these SIP submissions,
and the requirement to make the
submissions is not conditioned upon
EPA’s taking any action other than
promulgating a new or revised NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of
specific elements that ‘‘[e]ach such
plan’’ submission must address.
EPA has historically referred to these
SIP submissions made for the purpose
of satisfying the requirements of CAA
sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as
‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ submissions.
Although the term ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’
does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses
the term to distinguish this particular
type of SIP submission from
submissions that are intended to satisfy
other SIP requirements under the CAA,
such as ‘‘nonattainment SIP’’ or
‘‘attainment plan SIP’’ submissions to
address the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D of title I of the
CAA, ‘‘regional haze SIP’’ submissions
required by EPA rule to address the
visibility protection requirements of
CAA section 169A, and nonattainment
new source review (NNSR) permit
program submissions to address the
permit requirements of CAA, title I, part
D.
This rulemaking will not cover three
substantive areas that are not integral to
E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM
27FEP1
10646
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules
acting on a state’s infrastructure SIP
submission: (i) Existing provisions
related to excess emissions during
periods of start-up, shutdown, or
malfunction at sources, that may be
contrary to the CAA and EPA’s policies
addressing such excess emissions
(‘‘SSM’’); (ii) existing provisions related
to ‘‘director’s variance’’ or ‘‘director’s
discretion’’ that purport to permit
revisions to SIP-approved emissions
limits with limited public process or
without requiring further approval by
EPA, that may be contrary to the CAA
(‘‘director’s discretion’’); and, (iii)
existing provisions for PSD programs
that may be inconsistent with current
requirements of EPA’s ‘‘Final New
Source Review (NSR) Improvement
Rule,’’ 67 FR 80186 (December 31,
2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June
13, 2007) (‘‘NSR Reform’’). Instead, EPA
has the authority to address each one of
these substantive areas in separate
rulemakings. A detailed history,
interpretation, and rationale as they
relate to infrastructure SIP requirements
can be found in EPA’s May 13, 2014,
proposed rule entitled, ‘‘Infrastructure
SIP Requirements for the 2008 Lead
NAAQS’’ in the section, ‘‘What is the
scope of this rulemaking?’’ (see 79 FR
27241 at 27242–27245).
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
III. What guidance is EPA using to
evaluate these SIP submissions?
EPA’s guidance for these
infrastructure SIP submissions is
embodied in the 2007 Memo.
Specifically, attachment A of this
memorandum (Required Section 110
SIP Elements) identifies the statutory
elements that states need to submit in
order to satisfy the requirements for an
infrastructure SIP submission. EPA
issued additional guidance documents,
the most recent being the 2013 Memo
which further clarifies aspects of
infrastructure SIPs that are not NAAQS
specific.
IV. What is the result of EPA’s review
of these SIP submissions?
As noted in the 2013 Memo, pursuant
to section 110(a), states must provide
reasonable notice and opportunity for
public hearing for all infrastructure SIP
submissions. IDEM provided the
opportunity for public comment for its
2010 NO2 NAAQS infrastructure SIP
that ended on January 14, 2013. The
state did not receive any comments
during the comment period. IDEM
provided the opportunity for public
comment for its 2010 SO2 NAAQS
infrastructure SIP that ended on May 17,
2013. The state did not receive any
comments during the comment period.
EPA is also soliciting comment on our
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
evaluation of the state’s infrastructure
SIP submission in this notice of
proposed rulemaking. IDEM provided
detailed synopses of how various
components of its SIP meet each of the
requirements in section 110(a)(2) for the
2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS, as
applicable. The following review
evaluates the state’s submissions.
A. Section 110(a)(2)(A)—Emission
Limits and Other Control Measures
This section requires SIPs to include
enforceable emission limits and other
control measures, means or techniques,
schedules for compliance, and other
related matters. EPA has long
interpreted emission limits and control
measures for attaining the standards as
being due when nonattainment
planning requirements are due.1 In the
context of an infrastructure SIP, EPA is
not evaluating the existing SIP
provisions for this purpose. Instead,
EPA is only evaluating whether the
state’s SIP has basic structural
provisions for the implementation of the
NAAQS.
IDEM’s authority to adopt emissions
standards and compliance schedules is
found at Indiana Code (IC) 13–14–8, IC
13–17–3–4, IC 13–17–3–11, and IC 13–
17–3–14. To maintain the 2010 NO2
NAAQS, Indiana implements nitrogen
oxide controls and emission limits in
326 Indiana Administrative Code (IAC)
10–1, 326 IAC 10–3, 326 IAC 10–5, and
326 IAC 10–6. To maintain the 2010 SO2
NAAQS, Indiana implements SO2
controls and emission limits in 326 IAC
7–1.1, 326 IAC 7–3, 326 IAC 7–4, and
326 IAC 7–4.1 EPA proposes that
Indiana has met the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
As previously noted, EPA is not
proposing to approve or disapprove any
existing state provisions or rules related
to SSM or director’s discretion in the
context of section 110(a)(2)(A).
B. Section 110(a)(2)(B)—Ambient Air
Quality Monitoring/Data System
This section requires SIPs to include
provisions to provide for establishing
and operating ambient air quality
monitors, collecting and analyzing
ambient air quality data, and making
these data available to EPA upon
request. This review of the annual
monitoring plan includes EPA’s
determination that the state: (i) Monitors
air quality at appropriate locations
throughout the state using EPA1 See, e.g., EPA’s final rule on ‘‘National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for Lead.’’ 73 FR 66964 at
67034.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
approved Federal Reference Methods or
Federal Equivalent Method monitors;
(ii) submits data to EPA’s Air Quality
System (AQS) in a timely manner; and,
(iii) provides EPA Regional Offices with
prior notification of any planned
changes to monitoring sites or the
network plan.
IDEM continues to operate an air
monitoring network; EPA approved the
state’s 2014 Annual Air Monitoring
Network Plan on October 30, 2013,
including the plan for NO2 and SO2.
IDEM enters air monitoring data into Air
Quality System (AQS), and the state
provides EPA with prior notification
when changes to its monitoring network
or plan are being considered. EPA
proposes that Indiana has met the
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(B) with respect to the
2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
C. Section 110(a)(2)(C)—Program for
Enforcement of Control Measures; PSD
States are required to include a
program providing for enforcement of
all SIP measures and the regulation of
construction of new or modified
stationary sources to meet NSR
requirements under PSD and NNSR
programs. Part C of the CAA (sections
160–169B) addresses PSD, while part D
of the CAA (sections 171–193) addresses
NNSR requirements.
The evaluation of each state’s
submission addressing the
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(C) covers: (i)
Enforcement of SIP measures; (ii) PSD
provisions that explicitly identify
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) as a precursor
to ozone in the PSD program; (iii)
identification of precursors to fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) and the
identification of PM2.5 and PM10 2
condensables in the PSD program; (iv)
PM2.5 increments in the PSD program;
and, (v) GHG permitting and the
‘‘Tailoring Rule.’’ 3
2 PM
10 refers to particles with diameters between
2.5 and 10 microns, oftentimes referred to as
‘‘coarse’’ particles.
3 In EPA’s April 28, 2011, proposed rulemaking
for infrastructure SIPS for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5
NAAQS, we stated that each state’s PSD program
must meet applicable requirements for evaluation of
all regulated NSR pollutants in PSD permits (see 76
FR 23757 at 23760). This view was reiterated in
EPA’s August 2, 2012, proposed rulemaking for
infrastructure SIPs for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (see
77 FR 45992 at 45998). In other words, if a state
lacks provisions needed to adequately address NOX
as a precursor to ozone, PM2.5 precursors, PM2.5 and
PM10 condensables, PM2.5 increments, or the
Federal GHG permitting thresholds, the provisions
of section 110(a)(2)(C) requiring a suitable PSD
permitting program must be considered not to be
met irrespective of the NAAQS that triggered the
requirement to submit an infrastructure SIP,
including the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.
E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM
27FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Sub-Element 1: Enforcement of SIP
Measures
IDEM maintains an enforcement
program to ensure compliance with SIP
requirements. IC 13–14–1–12 provides
the Commissioner with the authority to
enforce rules ‘‘consistent with the
purpose of the air pollution control
laws.’’ Additionally, IC 13–14–2–7 and
IC 13–17–3–3 provide the
Commissioner with the authority to
assess civil penalties and obtain
compliance with any applicable rule a
board has adopted in order to enforce
air pollution control laws. Lastly, IC 13–
14–10–2 allows for an emergency
restraining order that prevents any
person from causing, or introducing
contaminants, that cause or contribute
to air pollution. EPA proposes that
Indiana has met the enforcement of SIP
measures requirements of section
110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2010
NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Sub-Element 2: PSD Provisions that
Explicitly Identify NOX as a Precursor to
Ozone in the PSD Program
EPA’s ‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8Hour Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard—Phase 2; Final Rule
to Implement Certain Aspects of the
1990 Amendments Relating to New
Source Review and Prevention of
Significant Deterioration as They Apply
in Carbon Monoxide, Particulate Matter,
and Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for
Reformulated Gasoline’’ (Phase 2 Rule)
was published on November 29, 2005
(see 70 FR 71612). Among other
requirements, the Phase 2 Rule
obligated states to revise their PSD
programs to explicitly identify NOX as
a precursor to ozone (70 FR 71612 at
71679, 71699–71700). This requirement
was codified in 40 CFR 51.166.4
The Phase 2 Rule required that states
submit SIP revisions incorporating the
requirements of the rule, including
these specific NOX as a precursor to
ozone provisions, by June 15, 2007 (see
70 FR 71612 at 71683, November 29,
2005).
EPA approved revisions to Indiana’s
PSD SIP reflecting these requirements
on July 2, 2014 (see 79 FR 37646, July
2, 2014), and therefore proposes that
Indiana has met this set of infrastructure
SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C)
with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
4 Similar
changes were codified in 40 CFR 52.21.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
Sub-Element 3: Identification of
Precursors to PM2.5 and the
Identification of PM2.5 and PM10
Condensables in the PSD Program
On May 16, 2008 (see 73 FR 28321),
EPA issued the Final Rule on the
‘‘Implementation of the New Source
Review (NSR) Program for Particulate
Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers
(PM2.5)’’ (2008 NSR Rule). The 2008
NSR Rule finalized several new
requirements for SIPs to address sources
that emit direct PM2.5 and other
pollutants that contribute to secondary
PM2.5 formation. One of these
requirements is for NSR permits to
address pollutants responsible for the
secondary formation of PM2.5, otherwise
known as precursors. In the 2008 rule,
EPA identified precursors to PM2.5 for
the PSD program to be SO2 and NOX
(unless the state demonstrates to the
Administrator’s satisfaction or EPA
demonstrates that NOX emissions in an
area are not a significant contributor to
that area’s ambient PM2.5
concentrations). The 2008 NSR Rule
also specifies that VOCs are not
considered to be precursors to PM2.5 in
the PSD program unless the state
demonstrates to the Administrator’s
satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that
emissions of VOCs in an area are
significant contributors to that area’s
ambient PM2.5 concentrations.
The explicit references to SO2, NOX,
and VOCs as they pertain to secondary
PM2.5 formation are codified at 40 CFR
51.166(b)(49)(i)(b) and 40 CFR
52.21(b)(50)(i)(b). As part of identifying
pollutants that are precursors to PM2.5,
the 2008 NSR Rule also required states
to revise the definition of ‘‘significant’’
as it relates to a net emissions increase
or the potential of a source to emit
pollutants. Specifically, 40 CFR
51.166(b)(23)(i) and 40 CFR
52.21(b)(23)(i) define ‘‘significant’’ for
PM2.5 to mean the following emissions
rates: 10 tpy of direct PM2.5; 40 tpy of
SO2; and 40 tpy of NOX (unless the state
demonstrates to the Administrator’s
satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that
NOX emissions in an area are not a
significant contributor to that area’s
ambient PM2.5 concentrations). The
deadline for states to submit SIP
revisions to their PSD programs
incorporating these changes was May
16, 2011 (see 73 FR 28321 at 28341, May
16, 2008).5
5 EPA notes that on January 4, 2013, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in Natural
Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428
(D.C. Cir.), held that EPA should have issued the
2008 NSR Rule in accordance with the CAA’s
requirements for PM10 nonattainment areas (Title I,
Part D, subpart 4), and not the general requirements
for nonattainment areas under subpart 1 (Natural
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
10647
The 2008 NSR Rule did not require
states to immediately account for gases
that could condense to form particulate
matter, known as condensables, in PM2.5
and PM10 emission limits in NSR
permits. Instead, EPA determined that
states had to account for PM2.5 and PM10
condensables for applicability
determinations and in establishing
emissions limitations for PM2.5 and
PM10 in PSD permits beginning on or
after January 1, 2011. This requirement
is codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(a)
and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)(a). Revisions
to states’ PSD programs incorporating
the inclusion of condensables were
required to be submitted to EPA by May
16, 2011 (see 73 FR 28321 at 28341, May
16, 2008).
EPA approved revisions to Indiana’s
PSD SIP reflecting these requirements
on July 2, 2014 (see 79 FR 37646), and
therefore proposes that Indiana has met
this set of infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C)
with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
Sub-Element 4: PM2.5 Increments in the
PSD Program
On October 20, 2010, EPA issued the
final rule on the ‘‘Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) for
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5
Micrometers (PM2.5)—Increments,
Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and
Significant Monitoring Concentration
(SMC)’’ (2010 NSR Rule). This rule
established several components for
making PSD permitting determinations
for PM2.5, including a system of
‘‘increments’’ which is the mechanism
used to estimate significant
deterioration of ambient air quality for
a pollutant. These increments are
Resources Defense Council v. EPA, No. 08–1250).
As the subpart 4 provisions apply only to
nonattainment areas, EPA does not consider the
portions of the 2008 rule that address requirements
for PM2.5 attainment and unclassifiable areas to be
affected by the court’s opinion. Moreover, EPA does
not anticipate the need to revise any PSD
requirements promulgated by the 2008 NSR rule in
order to comply with the court’s decision.
Accordingly, EPA’s approval of Indiana’s
infrastructure SIP as to elements (C), (D)(i)(II), or (J)
with respect to the PSD requirements promulgated
by the 2008 implementation rule does not conflict
with the court’s opinion. The Court’s decision with
respect to the nonattainment NSR requirements
promulgated by the 2008 implementation rule also
does not affect EPA’s action on the present
infrastructure action. EPA interprets the CAA to
exclude nonattainment area requirements,
including requirements associated with a
nonattainment NSR program, from infrastructure
SIP submissions due three years after adoption or
revision of a NAAQS. Instead, these elements are
typically referred to as nonattainment SIP or
attainment plan elements, which would be due by
the dates statutorily prescribed under subpart 2
through 5 under part D, extending as far as 10 years
following designations for some elements.
E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM
27FEP1
10648
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
codified in 40 CFR 51.166(c) and 40
CFR 52.21(c), and are included in the
table below.
Sub-Element 5: GHG Permitting and the
‘‘Tailoring Rule’’
With respect to Elements C and J, EPA
interprets the CAA to require each state
TABLE 1—PM2.5 INCREMENTS ESTAB- to make an infrastructure SIP
LISHED BY THE 2010 NSR RULE IN submission for a new or revised NAAQS
MICROGRAMS PER CUBIC METER
that demonstrates that the air agency
has a complete PSD permitting program
Annual
meeting the current requirements for all
arithmetic
24-hour max
regulated NSR pollutants. The
mean
requirements of Element D(i)(II) may
Class I .......
1
2 also be satisfied by demonstrating that
Class II ......
4
9 the air agency has a complete PSD
Class III .....
8
18 permitting program correctly addressing
all regulated NSR pollutants. Indiana
The 2010 NSR Rule also established a has shown that it currently has a PSD
new ‘‘major source baseline date’’ for
program in place that covers all
PM2.5 as October 20, 2010, and a new
regulated NSR pollutants, including
trigger date for PM2.5 as October 20,
greenhouse gases (GHGs).
2011. These revisions are codified in 40
On June 23, 2014, the United States
CFR 51.166(b)(14)(i)(c) and (b)(14)(ii)(c), Supreme Court issued a decision
and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(14)(i)(c) and
addressing the application of PSD
(b)(14)(ii)(c). Lastly, the 2010 NSR Rule
permitting requirements to GHG
revised the definition of ‘‘baseline area’’ emissions. Utility Air Regulatory Group
to include a level of significance of 0.3
v. Environmental Protection Agency,
micrograms per cubic meter, annual
134 S.Ct. 2427. The Supreme Court said
average, for PM2.5. This change is
that the EPA may not treat GHGs as an
codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i) and
air pollutant for purposes of
40 CFR 52.21(b)(15)(i).
determining whether a source is a major
On July 12, 2012, and supplemented
source required to obtain a PSD permit.
on December 12, 2012, IDEM submitted The Court also said that the EPA could
revisions intended to address the
continue to require that PSD permits,
increments established by the 2010 NSR otherwise required based on emissions
Rule for incorporation into the SIP, as
of pollutants other than GHGs, contain
well as the revised major source
limitations on GHG emissions based on
baseline date, trigger date, and baseline
the application of Best Available
area level of significance for PM2.5.
Control Technology (BACT).
IDEM also requested that these revisions
In order to act consistently with its
satisfy any applicable infrastructure SIP understanding of the Court’s decision
requirements related to PSD.
pending further judicial action to
Specifically, revisions to 326 IAC 2–2–
effectuate the decision, the EPA is not
6(b) contain the Federal increments for
continuing to apply EPA regulations
PM2.5, 326 IAC 2–2–1(ee)(3) contains the that would require that SIPs include
new major source baseline date for
permitting requirements that the
PM2.5 of October 20, 2010, 326 IAC 2–
Supreme Court found impermissible.
2–1(gg)(1)(C) contains the new trigger
Specifically, EPA is not applying the
date for PM2.5 of October 20, 2011, and
requirement that a state’s SIP-approved
326 IAC 2–2–1(f)(1) contains the new
PSD program require that sources obtain
baseline area level of significance for
PSD permits when GHGs are the only
PM2.5. It should be noted that Indiana’s
pollutant (i) that the source emits or has
submitted revisions explicitly include
the potential to emit above the major
only the PM2.5 increments as they apply source thresholds, or (ii) for which there
to Class II areas, and not the PM2.5
is a significant emissions increase and a
increments as they apply to Class I or
significant net emissions increase from
Class III areas. However, Indiana’s
a modification (e.g. 40 CFR
requested revisions specify that if areas
51.166(b)(48)(v)).
in the state are classified as Class I or
EPA anticipates a need to revise
III in the future, it would require that
Federal PSD rules in light of the
the PSD increments pursuant to 40 CFR Supreme Court opinion. In addition,
52.21 be adhered to.
EPA anticipates that many states will
On August 11, 2014 (79 FR 46709),
revise their existing SIP-approved PSD
EPA finalized approval of the applicable programs in light of the Supreme
infrastructure SIP PSD revisions;
Court’s decision. The timing and
therefore, we are proposing that Indiana content of subsequent EPA actions with
has met this set of infrastructure SIP
respect to the EPA regulations and state
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C)
PSD program approvals are expected to
with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2
be informed by additional legal process
NAAQS.
before the United States Court of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit. At this juncture, EPA is not
expecting states to have revised their
PSD programs for purposes of
infrastructure SIP submissions and is
only evaluating such submissions to
assure that the state’s program correctly
addresses GHGs consistent with the
Supreme Court’s decision.
At present, EPA is proposing that
Indiana’s SIP is sufficient to satisfy
Elements C, D(i)(II), and J with respect
to GHGs because the PSD permitting
program previously approved by EPA
into the SIP continues to require that
PSD permits (otherwise required based
on emissions of pollutants other than
GHGs) contain limitations on GHG
emissions based on the application of
BACT. Although the approved Indiana
PSD permitting program may currently
contain provisions that are no longer
necessary in light of the Supreme Court
decision, this does not render the
infrastructure SIP submission
inadequate to satisfy Elements C,
(D)(i)(II), and J. The SIP contains the
necessary PSD requirements at this
time, and the application of those
requirements is not impeded by the
presence of other previously-approved
provisions regarding the permitting of
sources of GHGs that EPA does not
consider necessary at this time in light
of the Supreme Court decision.
For the purposes of the 2010 NO2 and
SO2 NAAQS infrastructure SIPs, EPA
reiterates that NSR reform regulations
are not within the scope of these
actions. Therefore, we are not taking
action on existing NSR reform
regulations for Indiana. EPA approved
Indiana’s minor NSR program on
October 7, 1994 (see 59 FR 51108); 6 and
since that date, IDEM and EPA have
relied on the existing minor NSR
program to ensure that new and
modified sources not captured by the
major NSR permitting programs do not
interfere with attainment and
maintenance of the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
Certain sub-elements in this section
overlap with elements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i), section 110(a)(2)(E) and
section 110(a)(2)(J). These links will be
discussed in the appropriate areas
below.
6 EPA proposed approval of revisions updating
Indiana’s minor NSR construction permit rules on
January 5, 2015 (see 80 FR 201). However, EPA
believes that the rules that were in place at the time
of Indiana’s submittal were adequate for the
purposes of infrastructure for the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM
27FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
D. Section 110(a)(2)(D)—Interstate
Transport
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires SIPs
to include provisions prohibiting any
source or other type of emissions
activity in one state from contributing
significantly to nonattainment, or
interfering with maintenance, of the
NAAQS in another state.
On February 17, 2012, EPA
promulgated designations for the 2010
NO2 NAAQS, stating for the entire
country that, ‘‘The EPA is designating
areas as ‘‘unclassifiable/attainment’’ to
mean that available information does
not indicate that the air quality in these
areas exceeds the 2010 NO2 NAAQS’’
(see 77 FR 9532). For comparison
purposes, EPA examined the design
values 7 from NO2 monitors in Indiana
and surrounding states. The highest
design value based on data collected
between 2011 and 2013 was 64 ppb at
a monitor in Chicago, IL, compared to
the standard which is 100 ppb for the
2010 NO2 NAAQS. Additionally,
Indiana has SIP approved rules that
limit NOX emissions, including rules in
response to the Clean Air Interstate Rule
at 326 IAC 24–1, controls for Clark and
Floyd Counties at 326 IAC 10–1,
specific source categories at 326 IAC
10–3, limits on Internal Combustion
Engines at 326 IAC 10–5 and limits for
Indiana Gas and Electric Company at
326 IAC 10–6. EPA believes that, in
conjunction with the continued
implementation of the state’s SIPapproved PSD and NNSR regulations
found in 26 IAC 2–2, these low
monitored values of NO2 will continue
in and around Indiana. In other words,
the NO2 emissions from Indiana are not
expected to cause or contribute to a
violation of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS in
another state, and these emissions are
not likely to interfere with the
maintenance of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS
in another state. Therefore, EPA
proposes that Indiana has met this set of
requirements related to section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 NO2
NAAQS. EPA is not taking action on
this infrastructure element in regards to
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and will do so in
a future rule making.
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires
SIPs to include provisions prohibiting
any source or other type of emissions
activity in one state from interfering
with measures required to prevent
7 The level of the 2010 NO NAAQS for is 100
2
parts per billion (ppb) and the form is the 3-year
average of the annual 98th percentile of the daily
1-hour maximum. For the most recent design
values, see https://www.epa.gov/airtrends/
values.html.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
significant deterioration of air quality or
to protect visibility in another state.
EPA notes that Indiana’s satisfaction
of the applicable infrastructure SIP PSD
requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS
has been detailed in the section
addressing section 110(a)(2)(C). EPA
further notes that the proposed actions
in that section related to PSD are
consistent with the proposed actions
related to PSD for section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and they are reiterated
below.
EPA has previously approved
revisions to Indiana’s SIP that meet
certain requirements obligated by the
Phase 2 Rule and the 2008 NSR Rule.
These revisions included provisions
that: Explicitly identify NOX as a
precursor to ozone, explicitly identify
SO2 and NOX as precursors to PM2.5,
and regulate condensable PM2.5 and
PM10 in applicability determinations
and establishing emissions limits. EPA
has also previously approved revisions
to Indiana’s SIP that incorporate the
PM2.5 increments and the associated
implementation regulations including
the major source baseline date, trigger
date, and level of significance for PM2.5
per the 2010 NSR Rule. EPA is
proposing that Indiana’s SIP contains
provisions that adequately address the
2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
States also have an obligation to
ensure that sources located in
nonattainment areas do not interfere
with a neighboring state’s PSD program.
One way that this requirement can be
satisfied is through an NNSR program
consistent with the CAA that addresses
any pollutants for which there is a
designated nonattainment area within
the state.
Indiana’s EPA-approved NNSR
regulations are contained as part of its
PSD program regulations, and can be
found in 326 IAC 2–3 consistent with 40
CFR 51.165, or appendix S to 40 CFR
part 51. Therefore, EPA proposes that
Indiana has met all of the applicable
PSD requirements for the 2010 NO2 and
SO2 NAAQS related to section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).
With regard to the applicable
requirements for visibility protection of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), states are
subject to visibility and regional haze
program requirements under part C of
the CAA (which includes sections 169A
and 169B). The 2013 Memo states that
these requirements can be satisfied by
an approved SIP addressing reasonably
attributable visibility impairment, if
required, or an approved SIP addressing
regional haze.
In this rulemaking, EPA is not
proposing to approve or disapprove
Indiana’s satisfaction of the visibility
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
10649
protection requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2010 NO2 or
SO2 NAAQs. Instead, EPA will evaluate
Indiana’s compliance with these
requirements in a separate rulemaking.8
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires each
SIP to contain adequate provisions
requiring compliance with the
applicable requirements of section 126
and section 115 (relating to interstate
and international pollution abatement,
respectively).
Section 126(a) requires new or
modified sources to notify neighboring
states of potential impacts from the
source. The statute does not specify the
method by which the source should
provide the notification. States with
SIP-approved PSD programs must have
a provision requiring such notification
by new or modified sources. A lack of
such a requirement in state rules would
be grounds for disapproval of this
element.
Indiana has provisions in its EPAapproved PSD program in 326 IAC 2–2–
15(b)(3) requiring new or modified
sources to notify neighboring states of
potential negative air quality impacts,
and has referenced this program as
having adequate provisions to meet the
requirements of section 126(a). EPA is
proposing that Indiana has met the
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 126(a) with respect to the 2010
NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. Indiana does not
have any obligations under any other
subsection of section 126, nor does it
have any pending obligations under
section 115. EPA, therefore, is proposing
that Indiana has met all applicable
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii).
E. Section 110(a)(2)(E)—Adequate
Resources
This section requires each state to
provide for adequate personnel,
funding, and legal authority under state
law to carry out its SIP, and related
issues. Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) also
requires each state to comply with the
requirements respecting state boards
under section 128.
Sub-Element 1: Adequate Personnel,
Funding, and Legal Authority Under
State Law To Carry Out Its SIP, and
Related Issues
Indiana’s biennial budget and its
environmental performance partnership
agreement with EPA document funding
and personnel levels for IDEM every
two years. As discussed in earlier
8 Indiana does have an approved regional haze
plan for non-EGUs. Indiana’s plan for EGUs relied
on the Clean Air Interstate Rule that has been
recently superseded by the Cross State Air Pollution
Rule to which Indiana EGU sources are also subject.
E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM
27FEP1
10650
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
sections, IC 13–14–1–12 provides the
Commissioner of IDEM with the
authority to enforce air pollution control
laws. Furthermore, IC 13–14–8, IC 13–
17–3–11, and IC 13–17–3–14 contain
the authority for IDEM to adopt air
emissions standards and compliance
schedules. EPA proposes that Indiana
has met the infrastructure SIP
requirements of this portion of section
110(a)(2)(E) with respect to the 2010
NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: State Board
Requirements Under Section 128 of the
CAA
Section 110(a)(2)(E) also requires each
SIP to contain provisions that comply
with the state board requirements of
section 128 of the CAA. That provision
contains two explicit requirements: (i)
That any board or body which approves
permits or enforcement orders under
this chapter shall have at least a
majority of members who represent the
public interest and do not derive any
significant portion of their income from
persons subject to permits and
enforcement orders under this chapter,
and (ii) that any potential conflicts of
interest by members of such board or
body or the head of an executive agency
with similar powers be adequately
disclosed.
On November 29, 2012, IDEM
submitted rules regarding its
Environmental Rules Board at IC 13–13–
8 for incorporation into the SIP,
pursuant to section 128 of the CAA. On
December 12, 2012, IDEM provided a
supplemental submission clarifying that
the Environmental Rules Board
established by IC 13–13–8, which has
the authority to adopt environmental
regulations under IC 4–22–2 and IC 13–
14–9, does not have the authority to
approve enforcement orders or
permitting actions as outlined in section
128(a)(1) of the CAA. Therefore, section
128(a)(1) of the CAA is not applicable in
Indiana.
Under section 128(a)(2), the head of
the executive agency with the power to
approve enforcement orders or permits
must adequately disclose any potential
conflicts of interest. IC 13–13–8–11
‘‘Disclosure of conflicts of interest’’
contains provisions that adequately
satisfy the requirements of section
128(a)(2). This section requires that each
member of the board shall fully disclose
any potential conflicts of interest
relating to permits or enforcement
orders under the Federal CAA, as
amended by the CAA Amendments of
1990. IC 13–13–8–4 defines the
membership of the board, and the
commissioner (of IDEM) or his/her
designee is explicitly included as a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
member of the board. Therefore, when
evaluated together in the context of
section 128(a)(2), the commissioner (of
IDEM) or his/her designee must fully
disclose any potential conflicts of
interest relating to permits or
enforcement orders under the CAA. EPA
concludes that IDEM’s submission as it
relates to the state board requirements
under section 128 is consistent with
applicable CAA requirements. EPA
approved these rules on December 6,
2013 (78 FR 77599). Therefore, EPA is
proposing that IDEM has satisfied the
applicable infrastructure SIP
requirements for this section of
110(a)(2)(E) for the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
F. Section 110(a)(2)(F)—Stationary
Source Monitoring System
States must establish a system to
monitor emissions from stationary
sources and submit periodic emissions
reports. Each plan shall also require the
installation, maintenance, and
replacement of equipment, and the
implementation of other necessary
steps, by owners or operators of
stationary sources to monitor emissions
from such sources. The state plan shall
also require periodic reports on the
nature and amounts of emissions and
emissions-related data from such
sources, and correlation of such reports
by each state agency with any emission
limitations or standards established
pursuant to this chapter. Lastly, the
reports shall be available at reasonable
times for public inspection.
The Indiana state rules for monitoring
requirements are contained in 326 IAC
3. Additional emissions reporting
requirements are found in 326 IAC 2–6.
Emission reports are available upon
request by EPA or other interested
parties. EPA proposes that Indiana has
satisfied the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F)
with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)—Emergency
Powers
This section requires that a plan
provide for authority that is analogous
to what is provided in section 303 of the
CAA, and adequate contingency plans
to implement such authority. The 2013
Memo states that infrastructure SIP
submissions should specify authority,
rested in an appropriate official, to
restrain any source from causing or
contributing to emissions which present
an imminent and substantial
endangerment to public health or
welfare, or the environment.
326 IAC 11–5 establishes air pollution
episode levels based on concentrations
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
of criteria pollutants. This rule requires
that emergency reduction plans be
submitted to the Commissioner of IDEM
by major air pollution sources, and
these plans must include actions that
will be taken when each episode level
is declared, to reduce or eliminate
emissions of the appropriate air
pollutants. Similarly, under IC 13–17–4,
Indiana also has the ability to declare an
air pollution emergency and order all
persons causing or contributing to the
conditions warranting the air pollution
emergency to immediately reduce or
discontinue emission of air
contaminants. EPA proposes that
Indiana has met the applicable
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(G) related to authority
to implement measures to restrain
sources from causing or contributing to
emissions which present an imminent
and substantial endangerment to public
health or welfare, or the environment
with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)—Future SIP
Revisions
This section requires states to have
the authority to revise their SIPs in
response to changes in the NAAQS,
availability of improved methods for
attaining the NAAQS, or to an EPA
finding that the SIP is substantially
inadequate.
IDEM continues to update and
implement needed revisions to
Indiana’s SIP as necessary to meet
ambient air quality standards. As
discussed in previous sections,
authority to adopt emissions standards
and compliance schedules is found at IC
13–4–8, IC 13–17–3–4, IC 13–17–3–11,
and IC 13–17–3–14. EPA proposes that
Indiana has met the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(H)
with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
I. Section 110(a)(2)(I)—Nonattainment
Area Plan or Plan Revisions Under Part
D
The CAA requires that each plan or
plan revision for an area designated as
a nonattainment area meet the
applicable requirements of part D of the
CAA. Part D relates to nonattainment
areas.
EPA has determined that section
110(a)(2)(I) is not applicable to the
infrastructure SIP process. Instead, EPA
takes action on part D attainment plans
through separate processes.
E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM
27FEP1
10651
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules
J. Section 110(a)(2)(J)—Consultation
With Government Officials; Public
Notifications; PSD; Visibility Protection
The evaluation of the submissions
from Indiana with respect to the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) are
described below.
Sub-Element 1: Consultation With
Government Officials
States must provide a process for
consultation with local governments
and Federal Land Managers (FLMs)
carrying out NAAQS implementation
requirements.
IDEM actively participates in the
regional planning efforts that include
state rule developers, representatives
from the FLMs, and other affected
stakeholders. Additionally, Indiana is
an active member of the Lake Michigan
Air Director’s Consortium, which
consists of collaboration with the States
of Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan,
Minnesota, and Ohio. EPA proposes that
Indiana has met the infrastructure SIP
requirements of this portion of section
110(a)(2)(J) with respect to the 2010 NO2
and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: Public Notification
Section 110(a)(2)(J) also requires
states to notify the public if NAAQS are
exceeded in an area and must enhance
public awareness of measures that can
be taken to prevent exceedances.
IDEM monitors air quality data daily,
and reports the air quality index to the
interested public and media if
necessary. IDEM also participates and
submits information to EPA’s AIRNOW
program, and maintains SmogWatch,
which is an informational tool created
by IDEM to share air quality forecasts
for each day. SmogWatch provides daily
information about ground-level ozone,
particulate matter concentration levels,
health information, and monitoring data
for seven regions in Indiana. IDEM also
maintains a publicly available Web site
that allows interested members of the
community and other stakeholders to
view current monitoring data
summaries, including those for NO2 and
SO2.9 EPA proposes that Indiana has
met the infrastructure SIP requirements
of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J)
with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
Sub-Element 3: PSD
States must meet applicable
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C)
related to PSD. IDEM’s PSD program in
the context of infrastructure SIPs has
already been discussed in the
paragraphs addressing section
110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and
EPA notes that the proposed actions for
those sections are consistent with the
proposed actions for this portion of
section 110(a)(2)(J).
Therefore, EPA proposes that Indiana
has met all of the infrastructure SIP
requirements for PSD associated with
section 110(a)(2)(D)(J) for the 2010 NO2
and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 4: Visibility Protection
With regard to the applicable
requirements for visibility protection,
states are subject to visibility and
regional haze program requirements
under part C of the CAA (which
includes sections 169A and 169B). In
the event of the establishment of a new
NAAQS, however, the visibility and
regional haze program requirements
under part C do not change. Thus, we
find that there is no new visibility
obligation ‘‘triggered’’ under section
110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS
becomes effective. In other words, the
visibility protection requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(J) are not germane to
infrastructure SIPs for the 2010 NO2 and
SO2 NAAQS.
K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)—Air Quality
Modeling/Data
SIPs must provide for performing air
quality modeling for predicting effects
on air quality of emissions from any
NAAQS pollutant and submission of
such data to EPA upon request.
IDEM continues to review the
potential impact of major and some
minor new and modified sources using
computer models. Indiana’s rules
regarding air quality modeling are
contained in 326 IAC 2–2–4, 326 IAC 2–
2–5, 326 IAC 2–2–6, and 326 IAC 2–2–
7. These modeling data are available to
EPA or other interested parties upon
request. EPA proposes that Indiana has
met the infrastructure SIP requirements
of section 110(a)(2)(K) with respect to
the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
L. Section 110(a)(2)(L)—Permitting Fees
This section requires SIPs to mandate
each major stationary source to pay
permitting fees to cover the cost of
reviewing, approving, implementing,
and enforcing a permit.
IDEM implements and operates the
title V permit program, which EPA
approved on December 4, 2001 (66 FR
62969); revisions to the program were
approved on August 13, 2002 (67 FR
52615). In addition to the title V permit
program, IDEM’s EPA-approved PSD
program, specifically contained in 326
IAC 2–1.1–07 contains the provisions,
requirements, and structures associated
with the costs for reviewing, approving,
implementing, and enforcing various
types of permits. EPA proposes that
Indiana has met the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(L)
with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
M. Section 110(a)(2)(M)—Consultation/
Participation by Affected Local Entities
States must consult with and allow
participation from local political
subdivisions affected by the SIP.
Any IDEM rulemaking procedure
contained in IC 13–14–9 requires public
participation in the SIP development
process. In addition, IDEM ensures that
the requirements of 40 CFR 51.102 are
satisfied during the SIP development
process. EPA proposes that Indiana has
met the infrastructure SIP requirements
of section 110(a)(2)(M) with respect to
the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
V. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve most
elements of submissions from IDEM
certifying that its current SIP is
sufficient to meet the required
infrastructure elements under sections
110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2010 NO2 and
SO2 NAAQS. EPA’s proposed actions
for the state’s satisfaction of
infrastructure SIP requirements, by
element of section 110(a)(2) are
contained in the table below.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Element
2010 NO2
2010 SO2
(A): Emission limits and other control measures ....................................................................................................
(B): Ambient air quality monitoring and data system ..............................................................................................
(C): Program for enforcement of control measures ................................................................................................
(D)1: Interstate Transport- Significant contribution .................................................................................................
(D)2: Interstate Transport- interfere with maintenance ...........................................................................................
(D)3: PSD ................................................................................................................................................................
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
NA
NA
A
9 See https://www.in.gov/idem/airquality/
2489.htm.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM
27FEP1
10652
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Proposed Rules
Element
2010 NO2
2010 SO2
(D)4: Visibility ...........................................................................................................................................................
(D)5: Interstate and International Pollution Abatement ...........................................................................................
(E): Adequate resources ..........................................................................................................................................
(E): State boards .....................................................................................................................................................
(F): Stationary source monitoring system ...............................................................................................................
(G): Emergency power ............................................................................................................................................
(H): Future SIP revisions .........................................................................................................................................
(I): Nonattainment area plan or plan revisions under part D ..................................................................................
(J)1: Consultation with government officials ............................................................................................................
(J)2: Public notification ............................................................................................................................................
(J)3: PSD .................................................................................................................................................................
(J)4: Visibility protection ...........................................................................................................................................
(K): Air quality modeling and data ...........................................................................................................................
(L): Permitting fees ..................................................................................................................................................
(M): Consultation and participation by affected local entities .................................................................................
NA
A
A
A
A
A
A
+
A
A
A
+
A
A
A
NA
A
A
A
A
A
A
+
A
A
A
+
A
A
A
In the above table, the key is as follows:
A ....................
NA ..................
+ ....................
Approve.
No Action/Separate Rulemaking.
Not germane to infrastructure
SIPs.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
VI. 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) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
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, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Sulfur dioxide,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Dated: February 12, 2015.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2015–04014 Filed 2–26–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0969; EPA–R05–
OAR–2012–0991; EPA–R05–OAR–2013–
0435; FRL–9923–42–Region 5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Illinois;
Emission Limit Infrastructure SIP
Requirements for the 2008 Ozone, 2010
NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
some elements of a state
implementation plan (SIP) submission
from Illinois regarding the infrastructure
requirements of section 110 of the Clean
Air Act (CAA) for the 2008 8-hour
ground level ozone, 2010 nitrogen
dioxide (NO2), and 2010 sulfur dioxide
(SO2) National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS). The infrastructure
requirements are designed to ensure that
the structural components of each
state’s air quality management program
are adequate to meet the state’s
responsibilities under the CAA. This
action is specifically looking at
infrastructure requirements concerning
emission limits and other control
measures.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received on
or before March 30, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2011–0969 (2008 ozone
infrastructure elements), EPA–R05–
OAR–2012–0991 (2010 NO2
infrastructure elements), or EPA–R05–
OAR–2013–0435 (2010 SO2
infrastructure elements) by one of the
following methods:
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\27FEP1.SGM
27FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 39 (Friday, February 27, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10644-10652]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04014]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0991; EPA-R05-OAR-2013-0435; FRL-9923-43-Region 5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Indiana; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2010 NO2
and SO2 NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve elements of state implementation plan (SIP) submissions from
Indiana regarding the infrastructure requirements of section 110 of the
Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and
sulfur dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS). The infrastructure requirements are designed to ensure that
the structural components of each state's air quality management
program are adequate to meet the state's responsibilities under the
CAA.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 30, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2012-0991 (2010 NO2 infrastructure SIP elements) and
Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2013-0435 (2010 SO2 infrastructure
SIP elements) by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 408-2279.
4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance 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. EPA-R05-OAR-2012-
0991 and EPA-R05-OAR-2013-0435. EPA's policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public docket without change and may
be made available online at 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
www.regulations.gov or email. The
[[Page 10645]]
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 email comment
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email
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
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 www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the U.S. 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 Sarah Arra, Environmental
Scientist, at (312) 886-9401 before visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-9401, arra.sarah@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 should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. What is the background of these SIP submissions?
III. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate these SIP submissions?
IV. What is the result of EPA's review of these SIP submissions?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
When submitting comments, remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number).
2. Follow directions--EPA may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
II. What is the background of these SIP submissions?
A. What state SIP submissions does this rulemaking address?
This rulemaking addresses submissions from the Indiana Department
of Environmental Management (IDEM). The state submitted its
infrastructure SIP for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS on January 15,
2013, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS on May 22, 2013.
B. Why did the state make these SIP submissions?
Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, states are required to
submit infrastructure SIPs to ensure that their SIPs provide for
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS, including
the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. These submissions
must contain any revisions needed for meeting the applicable SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2), or certifications that their
existing SIPs for the NAAQS already meet those requirements.
EPA highlighted this statutory requirement in an October 2, 2007,
guidance document entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (2007 Memo)
and has issued additional guidance documents, the most recent on
September 13, 2013, ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)''
(2013 Memo). The SIP submissions referenced in this rulemaking pertain
to the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2), and
address the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. To the extent
that the prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) program is non-
NAAQS specific, a narrow evaluation of other NAAQS will be included in
the appropriate sections.
C. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
EPA is acting upon the SIP submissions from IDEM that address the
infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for
the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. The requirement for
states to make a SIP submission of this type arises out of CAA section
110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP
submissions ``within 3 years (or such shorter period as the
Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national
primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),'' and
these SIP submissions are to provide for the ``implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The statute directly
imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the
requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA's
taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that ``[e]ach
such plan'' submission must address.
EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the
purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term
``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to
distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions
that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA, such
as ``nonattainment SIP'' or ``attainment plan SIP'' submissions to
address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I of
the CAA, ``regional haze SIP'' submissions required by EPA rule to
address the visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A, and
nonattainment new source review (NNSR) permit program submissions to
address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D.
This rulemaking will not cover three substantive areas that are not
integral to
[[Page 10646]]
acting on a state's infrastructure SIP submission: (i) Existing
provisions related to excess emissions during periods of start-up,
shutdown, or malfunction at sources, that may be contrary to the CAA
and EPA's policies addressing such excess emissions (``SSM''); (ii)
existing provisions related to ``director's variance'' or ``director's
discretion'' that purport to permit revisions to SIP-approved emissions
limits with limited public process or without requiring further
approval by EPA, that may be contrary to the CAA (``director's
discretion''); and, (iii) existing provisions for PSD programs that may
be inconsistent with current requirements of EPA's ``Final New Source
Review (NSR) Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as
amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (``NSR Reform''). Instead, EPA
has the authority to address each one of these substantive areas in
separate rulemakings. A detailed history, interpretation, and rationale
as they relate to infrastructure SIP requirements can be found in EPA's
May 13, 2014, proposed rule entitled, ``Infrastructure SIP Requirements
for the 2008 Lead NAAQS'' in the section, ``What is the scope of this
rulemaking?'' (see 79 FR 27241 at 27242-27245).
III. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate these SIP submissions?
EPA's guidance for these infrastructure SIP submissions is embodied
in the 2007 Memo. Specifically, attachment A of this memorandum
(Required Section 110 SIP Elements) identifies the statutory elements
that states need to submit in order to satisfy the requirements for an
infrastructure SIP submission. EPA issued additional guidance
documents, the most recent being the 2013 Memo which further clarifies
aspects of infrastructure SIPs that are not NAAQS specific.
IV. What is the result of EPA's review of these SIP submissions?
As noted in the 2013 Memo, pursuant to section 110(a), states must
provide reasonable notice and opportunity for public hearing for all
infrastructure SIP submissions. IDEM provided the opportunity for
public comment for its 2010 NO2 NAAQS infrastructure SIP
that ended on January 14, 2013. The state did not receive any comments
during the comment period. IDEM provided the opportunity for public
comment for its 2010 SO2 NAAQS infrastructure SIP that ended
on May 17, 2013. The state did not receive any comments during the
comment period. EPA is also soliciting comment on our evaluation of the
state's infrastructure SIP submission in this notice of proposed
rulemaking. IDEM provided detailed synopses of how various components
of its SIP meet each of the requirements in section 110(a)(2) for the
2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS, as applicable. The
following review evaluates the state's submissions.
A. Section 110(a)(2)(A)--Emission Limits and Other Control Measures
This section requires SIPs to include enforceable emission limits
and other control measures, means or techniques, schedules for
compliance, and other related matters. EPA has long interpreted
emission limits and control measures for attaining the standards as
being due when nonattainment planning requirements are due.\1\ In the
context of an infrastructure SIP, EPA is not evaluating the existing
SIP provisions for this purpose. Instead, EPA is only evaluating
whether the state's SIP has basic structural provisions for the
implementation of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See, e.g., EPA's final rule on ``National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for Lead.'' 73 FR 66964 at 67034.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IDEM's authority to adopt emissions standards and compliance
schedules is found at Indiana Code (IC) 13-14-8, IC 13-17-3-4, IC 13-
17-3-11, and IC 13-17-3-14. To maintain the 2010 NO2 NAAQS,
Indiana implements nitrogen oxide controls and emission limits in 326
Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 10-1, 326 IAC 10-3, 326 IAC 10-5, and
326 IAC 10-6. To maintain the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, Indiana
implements SO2 controls and emission limits in 326 IAC 7-
1.1, 326 IAC 7-3, 326 IAC 7-4, and 326 IAC 7-4.1 EPA proposes that
Indiana has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section
110(a)(2)(A) with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
As previously noted, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove
any existing state provisions or rules related to SSM or director's
discretion in the context of section 110(a)(2)(A).
B. Section 110(a)(2)(B)--Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System
This section requires SIPs to include provisions to provide for
establishing and operating ambient air quality monitors, collecting and
analyzing ambient air quality data, and making these data available to
EPA upon request. This review of the annual monitoring plan includes
EPA's determination that the state: (i) Monitors air quality at
appropriate locations throughout the state using EPA-approved Federal
Reference Methods or Federal Equivalent Method monitors; (ii) submits
data to EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) in a timely manner; and, (iii)
provides EPA Regional Offices with prior notification of any planned
changes to monitoring sites or the network plan.
IDEM continues to operate an air monitoring network; EPA approved
the state's 2014 Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan on October 30,
2013, including the plan for NO2 and SO2. IDEM
enters air monitoring data into Air Quality System (AQS), and the state
provides EPA with prior notification when changes to its monitoring
network or plan are being considered. EPA proposes that Indiana has met
the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(B) with
respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
C. Section 110(a)(2)(C)--Program for Enforcement of Control Measures;
PSD
States are required to include a program providing for enforcement
of all SIP measures and the regulation of construction of new or
modified stationary sources to meet NSR requirements under PSD and NNSR
programs. Part C of the CAA (sections 160-169B) addresses PSD, while
part D of the CAA (sections 171-193) addresses NNSR requirements.
The evaluation of each state's submission addressing the
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) covers: (i)
Enforcement of SIP measures; (ii) PSD provisions that explicitly
identify oxides of nitrogen (NOX) as a precursor to ozone in
the PSD program; (iii) identification of precursors to fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) and the identification of PM2.5
and PM10 \2\ condensables in the PSD program; (iv)
PM2.5 increments in the PSD program; and, (v) GHG permitting
and the ``Tailoring Rule.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ PM10 refers to particles with diameters between
2.5 and 10 microns, oftentimes referred to as ``coarse'' particles.
\3\ In EPA's April 28, 2011, proposed rulemaking for
infrastructure SIPS for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS,
we stated that each state's PSD program must meet applicable
requirements for evaluation of all regulated NSR pollutants in PSD
permits (see 76 FR 23757 at 23760). This view was reiterated in
EPA's August 2, 2012, proposed rulemaking for infrastructure SIPs
for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (see 77 FR 45992 at 45998). In
other words, if a state lacks provisions needed to adequately
address NOX as a precursor to ozone, PM2.5
precursors, PM2.5 and PM10 condensables,
PM2.5 increments, or the Federal GHG permitting
thresholds, the provisions of section 110(a)(2)(C) requiring a
suitable PSD permitting program must be considered not to be met
irrespective of the NAAQS that triggered the requirement to submit
an infrastructure SIP, including the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 10647]]
Sub-Element 1: Enforcement of SIP Measures
IDEM maintains an enforcement program to ensure compliance with SIP
requirements. IC 13-14-1-12 provides the Commissioner with the
authority to enforce rules ``consistent with the purpose of the air
pollution control laws.'' Additionally, IC 13-14-2-7 and IC 13-17-3-3
provide the Commissioner with the authority to assess civil penalties
and obtain compliance with any applicable rule a board has adopted in
order to enforce air pollution control laws. Lastly, IC 13-14-10-2
allows for an emergency restraining order that prevents any person from
causing, or introducing contaminants, that cause or contribute to air
pollution. EPA proposes that Indiana has met the enforcement of SIP
measures requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2010
NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: PSD Provisions that Explicitly Identify NOX
as a Precursor to Ozone in the PSD Program
EPA's ``Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard--Phase 2; Final Rule to Implement Certain Aspects
of the 1990 Amendments Relating to New Source Review and Prevention of
Significant Deterioration as They Apply in Carbon Monoxide, Particulate
Matter, and Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for Reformulated Gasoline'' (Phase
2 Rule) was published on November 29, 2005 (see 70 FR 71612). Among
other requirements, the Phase 2 Rule obligated states to revise their
PSD programs to explicitly identify NOX as a precursor to
ozone (70 FR 71612 at 71679, 71699-71700). This requirement was
codified in 40 CFR 51.166.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Similar changes were codified in 40 CFR 52.21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Phase 2 Rule required that states submit SIP revisions
incorporating the requirements of the rule, including these specific
NOX as a precursor to ozone provisions, by June 15, 2007
(see 70 FR 71612 at 71683, November 29, 2005).
EPA approved revisions to Indiana's PSD SIP reflecting these
requirements on July 2, 2014 (see 79 FR 37646, July 2, 2014), and
therefore proposes that Indiana has met this set of infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2010
NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 3: Identification of Precursors to PM2.5 and the
Identification of PM2.5 and PM10 Condensables in
the PSD Program
On May 16, 2008 (see 73 FR 28321), EPA issued the Final Rule on the
``Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate
Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)'' (2008 NSR Rule).
The 2008 NSR Rule finalized several new requirements for SIPs to
address sources that emit direct PM2.5 and other pollutants
that contribute to secondary PM2.5 formation. One of these
requirements is for NSR permits to address pollutants responsible for
the secondary formation of PM2.5, otherwise known as
precursors. In the 2008 rule, EPA identified precursors to
PM2.5 for the PSD program to be SO2 and
NOX (unless the state demonstrates to the Administrator's
satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that NOX emissions in an
area are not a significant contributor to that area's ambient
PM2.5 concentrations). The 2008 NSR Rule also specifies that
VOCs are not considered to be precursors to PM2.5 in the PSD
program unless the state demonstrates to the Administrator's
satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that emissions of VOCs in an area are
significant contributors to that area's ambient PM2.5
concentrations.
The explicit references to SO2, NOX, and VOCs
as they pertain to secondary PM2.5 formation are codified at
40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(b) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)(b). As part of
identifying pollutants that are precursors to PM2.5, the
2008 NSR Rule also required states to revise the definition of
``significant'' as it relates to a net emissions increase or the
potential of a source to emit pollutants. Specifically, 40 CFR
51.166(b)(23)(i) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(23)(i) define ``significant'' for
PM2.5 to mean the following emissions rates: 10 tpy of
direct PM2.5; 40 tpy of SO2; and 40 tpy of
NOX (unless the state demonstrates to the Administrator's
satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that NOX emissions in an
area are not a significant contributor to that area's ambient
PM2.5 concentrations). The deadline for states to submit SIP
revisions to their PSD programs incorporating these changes was May 16,
2011 (see 73 FR 28321 at 28341, May 16, 2008).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ EPA notes that on January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the D.C. Circuit, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA,
706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir.), held that EPA should have issued the 2008
NSR Rule in accordance with the CAA's requirements for
PM10 nonattainment areas (Title I, Part D, subpart 4),
and not the general requirements for nonattainment areas under
subpart 1 (Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, No. 08-1250).
As the subpart 4 provisions apply only to nonattainment areas, EPA
does not consider the portions of the 2008 rule that address
requirements for PM2.5 attainment and unclassifiable
areas to be affected by the court's opinion. Moreover, EPA does not
anticipate the need to revise any PSD requirements promulgated by
the 2008 NSR rule in order to comply with the court's decision.
Accordingly, EPA's approval of Indiana's infrastructure SIP as to
elements (C), (D)(i)(II), or (J) with respect to the PSD
requirements promulgated by the 2008 implementation rule does not
conflict with the court's opinion. The Court's decision with respect
to the nonattainment NSR requirements promulgated by the 2008
implementation rule also does not affect EPA's action on the present
infrastructure action. EPA interprets the CAA to exclude
nonattainment area requirements, including requirements associated
with a nonattainment NSR program, from infrastructure SIP
submissions due three years after adoption or revision of a NAAQS.
Instead, these elements are typically referred to as nonattainment
SIP or attainment plan elements, which would be due by the dates
statutorily prescribed under subpart 2 through 5 under part D,
extending as far as 10 years following designations for some
elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2008 NSR Rule did not require states to immediately account for
gases that could condense to form particulate matter, known as
condensables, in PM2.5 and PM10 emission limits
in NSR permits. Instead, EPA determined that states had to account for
PM2.5 and PM10 condensables for applicability
determinations and in establishing emissions limitations for
PM2.5 and PM10 in PSD permits beginning on or
after January 1, 2011. This requirement is codified in 40 CFR
51.166(b)(49)(i)(a) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)(a). Revisions to states'
PSD programs incorporating the inclusion of condensables were required
to be submitted to EPA by May 16, 2011 (see 73 FR 28321 at 28341, May
16, 2008).
EPA approved revisions to Indiana's PSD SIP reflecting these
requirements on July 2, 2014 (see 79 FR 37646), and therefore proposes
that Indiana has met this set of infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2010 NO2 and
SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 4: PM2.5 Increments in the PSD Program
On October 20, 2010, EPA issued the final rule on the ``Prevention
of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5
Micrometers (PM2.5)--Increments, Significant Impact Levels
(SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC)'' (2010 NSR
Rule). This rule established several components for making PSD
permitting determinations for PM2.5, including a system of
``increments'' which is the mechanism used to estimate significant
deterioration of ambient air quality for a pollutant. These increments
are
[[Page 10648]]
codified in 40 CFR 51.166(c) and 40 CFR 52.21(c), and are included in
the table below.
Table 1--PM2.5 Increments Established by the 2010 NSR Rule in Micrograms
per Cubic Meter
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual
arithmetic 24-hour max
mean
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class I................................. 1 2
Class II................................ 4 9
Class III............................... 8 18
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2010 NSR Rule also established a new ``major source baseline
date'' for PM2.5 as October 20, 2010, and a new trigger date
for PM2.5 as October 20, 2011. These revisions are codified
in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(i)(c) and (b)(14)(ii)(c), and 40 CFR
52.21(b)(14)(i)(c) and (b)(14)(ii)(c). Lastly, the 2010 NSR Rule
revised the definition of ``baseline area'' to include a level of
significance of 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter, annual average, for
PM2.5. This change is codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i)
and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(15)(i).
On July 12, 2012, and supplemented on December 12, 2012, IDEM
submitted revisions intended to address the increments established by
the 2010 NSR Rule for incorporation into the SIP, as well as the
revised major source baseline date, trigger date, and baseline area
level of significance for PM2.5. IDEM also requested that
these revisions satisfy any applicable infrastructure SIP requirements
related to PSD. Specifically, revisions to 326 IAC 2-2-6(b) contain the
Federal increments for PM2.5, 326 IAC 2-2-1(ee)(3) contains
the new major source baseline date for PM2.5 of October 20,
2010, 326 IAC 2-2-1(gg)(1)(C) contains the new trigger date for
PM2.5 of October 20, 2011, and 326 IAC 2-2-1(f)(1) contains
the new baseline area level of significance for PM2.5. It
should be noted that Indiana's submitted revisions explicitly include
only the PM2.5 increments as they apply to Class II areas,
and not the PM2.5 increments as they apply to Class I or
Class III areas. However, Indiana's requested revisions specify that if
areas in the state are classified as Class I or III in the future, it
would require that the PSD increments pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21 be
adhered to.
On August 11, 2014 (79 FR 46709), EPA finalized approval of the
applicable infrastructure SIP PSD revisions; therefore, we are
proposing that Indiana has met this set of infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2010
NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 5: GHG Permitting and the ``Tailoring Rule''
With respect to Elements C and J, EPA interprets the CAA to require
each state to make an infrastructure SIP submission for a new or
revised NAAQS that demonstrates that the air agency has a complete PSD
permitting program meeting the current requirements for all regulated
NSR pollutants. The requirements of Element D(i)(II) may also be
satisfied by demonstrating that the air agency has a complete PSD
permitting program correctly addressing all regulated NSR pollutants.
Indiana has shown that it currently has a PSD program in place that
covers all regulated NSR pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHGs).
On June 23, 2014, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision
addressing the application of PSD permitting requirements to GHG
emissions. Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection
Agency, 134 S.Ct. 2427. The Supreme Court said that the EPA may not
treat GHGs as an air pollutant for purposes of determining whether a
source is a major source required to obtain a PSD permit. The Court
also said that the EPA could continue to require that PSD permits,
otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs,
contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of Best
Available Control Technology (BACT).
In order to act consistently with its understanding of the Court's
decision pending further judicial action to effectuate the decision,
the EPA is not continuing to apply EPA regulations that would require
that SIPs include permitting requirements that the Supreme Court found
impermissible. Specifically, EPA is not applying the requirement that a
state's SIP-approved PSD program require that sources obtain PSD
permits when GHGs are the only pollutant (i) that the source emits or
has the potential to emit above the major source thresholds, or (ii)
for which there is a significant emissions increase and a significant
net emissions increase from a modification (e.g. 40 CFR
51.166(b)(48)(v)).
EPA anticipates a need to revise Federal PSD rules in light of the
Supreme Court opinion. In addition, EPA anticipates that many states
will revise their existing SIP-approved PSD programs in light of the
Supreme Court's decision. The timing and content of subsequent EPA
actions with respect to the EPA regulations and state PSD program
approvals are expected to be informed by additional legal process
before the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit. At this juncture, EPA is not expecting states to have revised
their PSD programs for purposes of infrastructure SIP submissions and
is only evaluating such submissions to assure that the state's program
correctly addresses GHGs consistent with the Supreme Court's decision.
At present, EPA is proposing that Indiana's SIP is sufficient to
satisfy Elements C, D(i)(II), and J with respect to GHGs because the
PSD permitting program previously approved by EPA into the SIP
continues to require that PSD permits (otherwise required based on
emissions of pollutants other than GHGs) contain limitations on GHG
emissions based on the application of BACT. Although the approved
Indiana PSD permitting program may currently contain provisions that
are no longer necessary in light of the Supreme Court decision, this
does not render the infrastructure SIP submission inadequate to satisfy
Elements C, (D)(i)(II), and J. The SIP contains the necessary PSD
requirements at this time, and the application of those requirements is
not impeded by the presence of other previously-approved provisions
regarding the permitting of sources of GHGs that EPA does not consider
necessary at this time in light of the Supreme Court decision.
For the purposes of the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS infrastructure SIPs, EPA reiterates that NSR reform regulations
are not within the scope of these actions. Therefore, we are not taking
action on existing NSR reform regulations for Indiana. EPA approved
Indiana's minor NSR program on October 7, 1994 (see 59 FR 51108); \6\
and since that date, IDEM and EPA have relied on the existing minor NSR
program to ensure that new and modified sources not captured by the
major NSR permitting programs do not interfere with attainment and
maintenance of the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ EPA proposed approval of revisions updating Indiana's minor
NSR construction permit rules on January 5, 2015 (see 80 FR 201).
However, EPA believes that the rules that were in place at the time
of Indiana's submittal were adequate for the purposes of
infrastructure for the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certain sub-elements in this section overlap with elements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), section 110(a)(2)(E) and section 110(a)(2)(J).
These links will be discussed in the appropriate areas below.
[[Page 10649]]
D. Section 110(a)(2)(D)--Interstate Transport
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires SIPs to include provisions
prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in one state
from contributing significantly to nonattainment, or interfering with
maintenance, of the NAAQS in another state.
On February 17, 2012, EPA promulgated designations for the 2010
NO2 NAAQS, stating for the entire country that, ``The EPA is
designating areas as ``unclassifiable/attainment'' to mean that
available information does not indicate that the air quality in these
areas exceeds the 2010 NO2 NAAQS'' (see 77 FR 9532). For
comparison purposes, EPA examined the design values \7\ from
NO2 monitors in Indiana and surrounding states. The highest
design value based on data collected between 2011 and 2013 was 64 ppb
at a monitor in Chicago, IL, compared to the standard which is 100 ppb
for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. Additionally, Indiana has SIP
approved rules that limit NOX emissions, including rules in
response to the Clean Air Interstate Rule at 326 IAC 24-1, controls for
Clark and Floyd Counties at 326 IAC 10-1, specific source categories at
326 IAC 10-3, limits on Internal Combustion Engines at 326 IAC 10-5 and
limits for Indiana Gas and Electric Company at 326 IAC 10-6. EPA
believes that, in conjunction with the continued implementation of the
state's SIP-approved PSD and NNSR regulations found in 26 IAC 2-2,
these low monitored values of NO2 will continue in and
around Indiana. In other words, the NO2 emissions from
Indiana are not expected to cause or contribute to a violation of the
2010 NO2 NAAQS in another state, and these emissions are not
likely to interfere with the maintenance of the 2010 NO2
NAAQS in another state. Therefore, EPA proposes that Indiana has met
this set of requirements related to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the
2010 NO2 NAAQS. EPA is not taking action on this
infrastructure element in regards to the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and
will do so in a future rule making.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The level of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS for is 100 parts
per billion (ppb) and the form is the 3-year average of the annual
98th percentile of the daily 1-hour maximum. For the most recent
design values, see https://www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires SIPs to include provisions
prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in one state
from interfering with measures required to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility in another state.
EPA notes that Indiana's satisfaction of the applicable
infrastructure SIP PSD requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS
has been detailed in the section addressing section 110(a)(2)(C). EPA
further notes that the proposed actions in that section related to PSD
are consistent with the proposed actions related to PSD for section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and they are reiterated below.
EPA has previously approved revisions to Indiana's SIP that meet
certain requirements obligated by the Phase 2 Rule and the 2008 NSR
Rule. These revisions included provisions that: Explicitly identify
NOX as a precursor to ozone, explicitly identify
SO2 and NOX as precursors to PM2.5,
and regulate condensable PM2.5 and PM10 in
applicability determinations and establishing emissions limits. EPA has
also previously approved revisions to Indiana's SIP that incorporate
the PM2.5 increments and the associated implementation
regulations including the major source baseline date, trigger date, and
level of significance for PM2.5 per the 2010 NSR Rule. EPA
is proposing that Indiana's SIP contains provisions that adequately
address the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
States also have an obligation to ensure that sources located in
nonattainment areas do not interfere with a neighboring state's PSD
program. One way that this requirement can be satisfied is through an
NNSR program consistent with the CAA that addresses any pollutants for
which there is a designated nonattainment area within the state.
Indiana's EPA-approved NNSR regulations are contained as part of
its PSD program regulations, and can be found in 326 IAC 2-3 consistent
with 40 CFR 51.165, or appendix S to 40 CFR part 51. Therefore, EPA
proposes that Indiana has met all of the applicable PSD requirements
for the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS related to section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).
With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility
protection of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), states are subject to
visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C of the
CAA (which includes sections 169A and 169B). The 2013 Memo states that
these requirements can be satisfied by an approved SIP addressing
reasonably attributable visibility impairment, if required, or an
approved SIP addressing regional haze.
In this rulemaking, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove
Indiana's satisfaction of the visibility protection requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2010 NO2 or
SO2 NAAQs. Instead, EPA will evaluate Indiana's compliance
with these requirements in a separate rulemaking.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Indiana does have an approved regional haze plan for non-
EGUs. Indiana's plan for EGUs relied on the Clean Air Interstate
Rule that has been recently superseded by the Cross State Air
Pollution Rule to which Indiana EGU sources are also subject.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires each SIP to contain adequate
provisions requiring compliance with the applicable requirements of
section 126 and section 115 (relating to interstate and international
pollution abatement, respectively).
Section 126(a) requires new or modified sources to notify
neighboring states of potential impacts from the source. The statute
does not specify the method by which the source should provide the
notification. States with SIP-approved PSD programs must have a
provision requiring such notification by new or modified sources. A
lack of such a requirement in state rules would be grounds for
disapproval of this element.
Indiana has provisions in its EPA-approved PSD program in 326 IAC
2-2-15(b)(3) requiring new or modified sources to notify neighboring
states of potential negative air quality impacts, and has referenced
this program as having adequate provisions to meet the requirements of
section 126(a). EPA is proposing that Indiana has met the
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 126(a) with respect to the
2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. Indiana does not have any
obligations under any other subsection of section 126, nor does it have
any pending obligations under section 115. EPA, therefore, is proposing
that Indiana has met all applicable infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii).
E. Section 110(a)(2)(E)--Adequate Resources
This section requires each state to provide for adequate personnel,
funding, and legal authority under state law to carry out its SIP, and
related issues. Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) also requires each state to
comply with the requirements respecting state boards under section 128.
Sub-Element 1: Adequate Personnel, Funding, and Legal Authority Under
State Law To Carry Out Its SIP, and Related Issues
Indiana's biennial budget and its environmental performance
partnership agreement with EPA document funding and personnel levels
for IDEM every two years. As discussed in earlier
[[Page 10650]]
sections, IC 13-14-1-12 provides the Commissioner of IDEM with the
authority to enforce air pollution control laws. Furthermore, IC 13-14-
8, IC 13-17-3-11, and IC 13-17-3-14 contain the authority for IDEM to
adopt air emissions standards and compliance schedules. EPA proposes
that Indiana has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of this
portion of section 110(a)(2)(E) with respect to the 2010 NO2
and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: State Board Requirements Under Section 128 of the CAA
Section 110(a)(2)(E) also requires each SIP to contain provisions
that comply with the state board requirements of section 128 of the
CAA. That provision contains two explicit requirements: (i) That any
board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders under this
chapter shall have at least a majority of members who represent the
public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their
income from persons subject to permits and enforcement orders under
this chapter, and (ii) that any potential conflicts of interest by
members of such board or body or the head of an executive agency with
similar powers be adequately disclosed.
On November 29, 2012, IDEM submitted rules regarding its
Environmental Rules Board at IC 13-13-8 for incorporation into the SIP,
pursuant to section 128 of the CAA. On December 12, 2012, IDEM provided
a supplemental submission clarifying that the Environmental Rules Board
established by IC 13-13-8, which has the authority to adopt
environmental regulations under IC 4-22-2 and IC 13-14-9, does not have
the authority to approve enforcement orders or permitting actions as
outlined in section 128(a)(1) of the CAA. Therefore, section 128(a)(1)
of the CAA is not applicable in Indiana.
Under section 128(a)(2), the head of the executive agency with the
power to approve enforcement orders or permits must adequately disclose
any potential conflicts of interest. IC 13-13-8-11 ``Disclosure of
conflicts of interest'' contains provisions that adequately satisfy the
requirements of section 128(a)(2). This section requires that each
member of the board shall fully disclose any potential conflicts of
interest relating to permits or enforcement orders under the Federal
CAA, as amended by the CAA Amendments of 1990. IC 13-13-8-4 defines the
membership of the board, and the commissioner (of IDEM) or his/her
designee is explicitly included as a member of the board. Therefore,
when evaluated together in the context of section 128(a)(2), the
commissioner (of IDEM) or his/her designee must fully disclose any
potential conflicts of interest relating to permits or enforcement
orders under the CAA. EPA concludes that IDEM's submission as it
relates to the state board requirements under section 128 is consistent
with applicable CAA requirements. EPA approved these rules on December
6, 2013 (78 FR 77599). Therefore, EPA is proposing that IDEM has
satisfied the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements for this
section of 110(a)(2)(E) for the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
F. Section 110(a)(2)(F)--Stationary Source Monitoring System
States must establish a system to monitor emissions from stationary
sources and submit periodic emissions reports. Each plan shall also
require the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment,
and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators
of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources. The state
plan shall also require periodic reports on the nature and amounts of
emissions and emissions-related data from such sources, and correlation
of such reports by each state agency with any emission limitations or
standards established pursuant to this chapter. Lastly, the reports
shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection.
The Indiana state rules for monitoring requirements are contained
in 326 IAC 3. Additional emissions reporting requirements are found in
326 IAC 2-6. Emission reports are available upon request by EPA or
other interested parties. EPA proposes that Indiana has satisfied the
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) with respect to
the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)--Emergency Powers
This section requires that a plan provide for authority that is
analogous to what is provided in section 303 of the CAA, and adequate
contingency plans to implement such authority. The 2013 Memo states
that infrastructure SIP submissions should specify authority, rested in
an appropriate official, to restrain any source from causing or
contributing to emissions which present an imminent and substantial
endangerment to public health or welfare, or the environment.
326 IAC 11-5 establishes air pollution episode levels based on
concentrations of criteria pollutants. This rule requires that
emergency reduction plans be submitted to the Commissioner of IDEM by
major air pollution sources, and these plans must include actions that
will be taken when each episode level is declared, to reduce or
eliminate emissions of the appropriate air pollutants. Similarly, under
IC 13-17-4, Indiana also has the ability to declare an air pollution
emergency and order all persons causing or contributing to the
conditions warranting the air pollution emergency to immediately reduce
or discontinue emission of air contaminants. EPA proposes that Indiana
has met the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements of section
110(a)(2)(G) related to authority to implement measures to restrain
sources from causing or contributing to emissions which present an
imminent and substantial endangerment to public health or welfare, or
the environment with respect to the 2010 NO2 and
SO2 NAAQS.
H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)--Future SIP Revisions
This section requires states to have the authority to revise their
SIPs in response to changes in the NAAQS, availability of improved
methods for attaining the NAAQS, or to an EPA finding that the SIP is
substantially inadequate.
IDEM continues to update and implement needed revisions to
Indiana's SIP as necessary to meet ambient air quality standards. As
discussed in previous sections, authority to adopt emissions standards
and compliance schedules is found at IC 13-4-8, IC 13-17-3-4, IC 13-17-
3-11, and IC 13-17-3-14. EPA proposes that Indiana has met the
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(H) with respect to
the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
I. Section 110(a)(2)(I)--Nonattainment Area Plan or Plan Revisions
Under Part D
The CAA requires that each plan or plan revision for an area
designated as a nonattainment area meet the applicable requirements of
part D of the CAA. Part D relates to nonattainment areas.
EPA has determined that section 110(a)(2)(I) is not applicable to
the infrastructure SIP process. Instead, EPA takes action on part D
attainment plans through separate processes.
[[Page 10651]]
J. Section 110(a)(2)(J)--Consultation With Government Officials; Public
Notifications; PSD; Visibility Protection
The evaluation of the submissions from Indiana with respect to the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) are described below.
Sub-Element 1: Consultation With Government Officials
States must provide a process for consultation with local
governments and Federal Land Managers (FLMs) carrying out NAAQS
implementation requirements.
IDEM actively participates in the regional planning efforts that
include state rule developers, representatives from the FLMs, and other
affected stakeholders. Additionally, Indiana is an active member of the
Lake Michigan Air Director's Consortium, which consists of
collaboration with the States of Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan,
Minnesota, and Ohio. EPA proposes that Indiana has met the
infrastructure SIP requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J)
with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: Public Notification
Section 110(a)(2)(J) also requires states to notify the public if
NAAQS are exceeded in an area and must enhance public awareness of
measures that can be taken to prevent exceedances.
IDEM monitors air quality data daily, and reports the air quality
index to the interested public and media if necessary. IDEM also
participates and submits information to EPA's AIRNOW program, and
maintains SmogWatch, which is an informational tool created by IDEM to
share air quality forecasts for each day. SmogWatch provides daily
information about ground-level ozone, particulate matter concentration
levels, health information, and monitoring data for seven regions in
Indiana. IDEM also maintains a publicly available Web site that allows
interested members of the community and other stakeholders to view
current monitoring data summaries, including those for NO2
and SO2.\9\ EPA proposes that Indiana has met the
infrastructure SIP requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J)
with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See https://www.in.gov/idem/airquality/2489.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub-Element 3: PSD
States must meet applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C)
related to PSD. IDEM's PSD program in the context of infrastructure
SIPs has already been discussed in the paragraphs addressing section
110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and EPA notes that the proposed
actions for those sections are consistent with the proposed actions for
this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J).
Therefore, EPA proposes that Indiana has met all of the
infrastructure SIP requirements for PSD associated with section
110(a)(2)(D)(J) for the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 4: Visibility Protection
With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility
protection, states are subject to visibility and regional haze program
requirements under part C of the CAA (which includes sections 169A and
169B). In the event of the establishment of a new NAAQS, however, the
visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C do not
change. Thus, we find that there is no new visibility obligation
``triggered'' under section 110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS becomes
effective. In other words, the visibility protection requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(J) are not germane to infrastructure SIPs for the
2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)--Air Quality Modeling/Data
SIPs must provide for performing air quality modeling for
predicting effects on air quality of emissions from any NAAQS pollutant
and submission of such data to EPA upon request.
IDEM continues to review the potential impact of major and some
minor new and modified sources using computer models. Indiana's rules
regarding air quality modeling are contained in 326 IAC 2-2-4, 326 IAC
2-2-5, 326 IAC 2-2-6, and 326 IAC 2-2-7. These modeling data are
available to EPA or other interested parties upon request. EPA proposes
that Indiana has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section
110(a)(2)(K) with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
L. Section 110(a)(2)(L)--Permitting Fees
This section requires SIPs to mandate each major stationary source
to pay permitting fees to cover the cost of reviewing, approving,
implementing, and enforcing a permit.
IDEM implements and operates the title V permit program, which EPA
approved on December 4, 2001 (66 FR 62969); revisions to the program
were approved on August 13, 2002 (67 FR 52615). In addition to the
title V permit program, IDEM's EPA-approved PSD program, specifically
contained in 326 IAC 2-1.1-07 contains the provisions, requirements,
and structures associated with the costs for reviewing, approving,
implementing, and enforcing various types of permits. EPA proposes that
Indiana has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section
110(a)(2)(L) with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2
NAAQS.
M. Section 110(a)(2)(M)--Consultation/Participation by Affected Local
Entities
States must consult with and allow participation from local
political subdivisions affected by the SIP.
Any IDEM rulemaking procedure contained in IC 13-14-9 requires
public participation in the SIP development process. In addition, IDEM
ensures that the requirements of 40 CFR 51.102 are satisfied during the
SIP development process. EPA proposes that Indiana has met the
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(M) with respect to
the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
V. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve most elements of submissions from IDEM
certifying that its current SIP is sufficient to meet the required
infrastructure elements under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2010
NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. EPA's proposed actions for the
state's satisfaction of infrastructure SIP requirements, by element of
section 110(a)(2) are contained in the table below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Element 2010 NO2 2010 SO2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A): Emission limits and other control A A
measures.............................
(B): Ambient air quality monitoring A A
and data system......................
(C): Program for enforcement of A A
control measures.....................
(D)1: Interstate Transport- A NA
Significant contribution.............
(D)2: Interstate Transport- interfere A NA
with maintenance.....................
(D)3: PSD............................. A A
[[Page 10652]]
(D)4: Visibility...................... NA NA
(D)5: Interstate and International A A
Pollution Abatement..................
(E): Adequate resources............... A A
(E): State boards..................... A A
(F): Stationary source monitoring A A
system...............................
(G): Emergency power.................. A A
(H): Future SIP revisions............. A A
(I): Nonattainment area plan or plan + +
revisions under part D...............
(J)1: Consultation with government A A
officials............................
(J)2: Public notification............. A A
(J)3: PSD............................. A A
(J)4: Visibility protection........... + +
(K): Air quality modeling and data.... A A
(L): Permitting fees.................. A A
(M): Consultation and participation by A A
affected local entities..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the above table, the key is as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A......................................... Approve.
NA........................................ No Action/Separate
Rulemaking.
+......................................... Not germane to
infrastructure SIPs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. 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) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Sulfur
dioxide, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: February 12, 2015.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2015-04014 Filed 2-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P