Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Commissioner's Orders for A.B. Brown and Clifty Creek, 9395-9397 [2016-03893]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:27 Feb 24, 2016
Jkt 238001
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 oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: February 11, 2016.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2016–03894 Filed 2–24–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0075; EPA–R05–
OAR–2016–0090; FRL–9942–72–Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana;
Commissioner’s Orders for A.B. Brown
and Clifty Creek
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
revisions to the Indiana State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by
the Indiana Department of
Environmental Management (IDEM) to
EPA on January 27, 2016, and February
5, 2016, for parallel processing. The
submittal consists of orders issued by
the Commissioner of IDEM that require
more stringent sulfur dioxide (SO2)
emissions limits than those currently
contained in the SIP for Vectren’s A. B.
Brown Generating Station (‘‘A.B.
Brown’’) and Indiana-Kentucky Electric
Corporation’s Clifty Creek Generating
Station (‘‘Clifty Creek’’). IDEM
submitted these limits to enable the
areas near these generating stations to
qualify for being designated
‘‘attainment’’ of the 2010 primary SO2
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS), a matter that will be
addressed in a separate future
rulemaking. EPA’s approval of these
revisions to the Indiana SIP would make
the Commissioner’s orders’ SO2
emissions limits federally enforceable.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before March 28, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA–R05–
OAR–2016–0075 for A.B. Brown or
EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0090 for Clifty
Creek at https://www.regulations.gov or
via email to aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
9395
For comments submitted at
Regulations.gov, follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
For either manner of submission, EPA
may publish any comment received to
its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. EPA will generally
not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jenny Liljegren, Physical Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6832,
Liljegren.Jennifer@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. Why did IDEM issue these Commissioner’s
Orders?
II. What are the SO2 limits in these
Commissioner’s Orders?
III. By what criterion is EPA reviewing this
SIP revision?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Why did IDEM issue these
Commissioner’s Orders?
On January 27, 2016, and February 5,
2016, IDEM submitted for parallel
processing draft revisions to its SIP
consisting of orders issued by IDEM’s
Commissioner that establish more
stringent SO2 emissions limits than
those currently contained in the SIP for
A.B. Brown and Clifty Creek. IDEM
established these SO2 emissions limits
to enable the areas near A.B. Brown and
Clifty Creek to qualify in the future for
being designated ‘‘attainment’’ of the
2010 primary SO2 NAAQS. Under a
E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM
25FEP1
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
9396
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Federal consent decree, EPA is required
to designate, under the 2010 SO2
NAAQS, certain areas in the United
States including the areas near A.B.
Brown and Clifty Creek by July 2, 2016.
The history of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
and the consent decree is explained
below in order to provide a more
detailed explanation of the context for
IDEM’s request for EPA approval of
these SO2 limits into the SIP.
On June 3, 2010, pursuant to section
109 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA
revised the primary (health-based) SO2
NAAQS by establishing a new one-hour
standard codified at 40 CFR 50.17 (75
FR 35520). Pursuant to section 107(d) of
the CAA, EPA must designate areas as
either ‘‘unclassifiable,’’ ‘‘attainment,’’ or
‘‘nonattainment’’ for the 2010 one-hour
SO2 primary NAAQS. Under Section
107(d) of the CAA, a nonattainment area
is any area that does not meet the
NAAQS or that contributes to a
violation in a nearby area. An
attainment area is any area, other than
a nonattainment area, that meets the
NAAQS. Unclassifiable areas are those
that cannot be classified on the basis of
available information as meeting or not
meeting the NAAQS.
On August 5, 2013, EPA published a
final rule establishing air quality
designations for 29 areas in the United
States for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, based
on recorded air quality monitoring data
from 2009–2011 that showed violations
of the NAAQS (78 FR 47191). In that
rulemaking, EPA committed to address,
in separate future actions, the
designations for all other areas for
which EPA was not yet prepared to
issue designations.
Following the initial August 5, 2013,
designations, three lawsuits were filed
against EPA in different U.S. District
Courts, alleging EPA had failed to
perform a nondiscretionary duty under
the CAA by not designating all portions
of the country by the June 2013
deadline. In an effort intended to
resolve the litigation in one of those
cases, plaintiffs Sierra Club and the
Natural Resources Defense Council and
EPA filed a proposed consent decree
with the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California. On
March 2, 2015, the court entered the
consent decree and issued an
enforceable order for EPA to complete
the area designations according to the
court-ordered schedule.1
By no later than July 2, 2016, (16
months from the court’s order), EPA
must designate two groups of areas: (1)
Areas that have newly monitored
1 Sierra Club et al. v. EPA, No. 3:13–cv–3953–SI
(N.D.Cal.)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:27 Feb 24, 2016
Jkt 238001
violations of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and
(2) areas that contain any stationary
sources that had not been announced as
of March 2, 2015, for retirement and that
according to the EPA’s Air Markets
Database emitted in 2012 either (i) more
than 16,000 tons of SO2 or (ii) more than
2,600 tons of SO2 with an annual
average emission rate of at least 0.45
pounds (lbs) of SO2 per million British
thermal units (MMBTU). In the consent
decree, ‘‘announced for retirement’’
means any stationary source with a coalfired unit that as of January 1, 2010, had
a capacity of over 5 megawatts and
otherwise meets the emissions criteria is
excluded from the July 2, 2016, deadline
if it had announced through a company
public announcement, public utilities
commission filing, consent decree,
public legal settlement, final state or
federal permit filing, or other similar
means of communication, by March 2,
2015, that it will cease burning coal at
that unit.
A.B. Brown and Clifty Creek each
meet the second criterion for the July 2,
2016, deadline. That is, neither has been
‘‘announced for retirement’’ and both
emitted in 2012 either (i) more than
16,000 tons of SO2 or (ii) more than
2,600 tons of SO2 with an annual
average emission rate of at least 0.45 lbs
of SO2 per MMBTU. Specifically, A.B.
Brown emitted 7,091 tons of SO2 in
2012 and had an emissions rate of 0.521
lbs SO2/MMBTU in 2012. Clifty Creek
emitted 52,839 tons of SO2 in 2012 and
had an emissions rate of 1.767 lbs SO2/
MMBTU in 2012. In absence of new SO2
emissions limits, A.B. Brown and Clifty
Creek cannot demonstrate modeled
attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS in
accordance with EPA’s Draft SO2
NAAQS Designations Modeling
Technical Assistance Document.2
Therefore, IDEM conducted air
dispersion modeling using the
American Meteorological Society/
Environmental Protection Agency
Regulatory Model (AERMOD) version
15181 in accordance with appendix W
of part 51 of chapter 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) to determine
new, more stringent SO2 emissions
limits for A.B. Brown and Clifty Creek
that should result in the areas near these
generating stations showing modeled
attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
IDEM has requested that EPA approve
Commissioner’s Order 2016–01 for A.B.
Brown and Commissioner’s Order 2016–
02 for Clifty Creek into Indiana’s SIP.
EPA’s approval of the new SO2
2 Draft SO NAAQS Designations Modeling
2
Technical Assistance Document. December 2013.
https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/sulfurdioxide/pdfs/
SO2ModelingTAD.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
emissions limits contained in these
orders into Indiana’s SIP would make
these SO2 emissions limits federally
enforceable. Once these SO2 emissions
limits have become federally
enforceable, IDEM intends to use them
to demonstrate AERMOD-modeled
attainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS for
the areas near A.B. Brown and Clifty
Creek. To be clear, the purpose of this
rulemaking is to take action on IDEM’s
request to approve these SO2 emissions
limits into the Indiana SIP and thereby
make them federally enforceable. The
purpose of this rulemaking is not to take
action on whether these SO2 emissions
limits are adequate for EPA to designate
attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS for
the areas near A.B. Brown and Clifty
Creek. EPA intends to designate the
areas near the sources that meet the
criteria for the first phase of the consent
decree designations, including the areas
near A.B. Brown and Clifty Creek, under
a separate rulemaking.
EPA cannot take final action to
approve the orders into Indiana’s SIP
until the state completes its public
comment process and submits the final
orders to EPA as SIP revision requests.
In the meantime, Indiana requested that
EPA ‘‘parallel process’’ the SIP revision
to expedite action on the
Commissioner’s orders. Under this
procedure, the state submitted a copy of
the proposed revisions to EPA before
completing its public comment process.
EPA is publishing this proposed
rulemaking in the Federal Register and
is soliciting public comment in
approximately the same timeframe
during which the state is soliciting
public comment. After Indiana submits
the final SIP revision request, EPA will
prepare a final rulemaking for the SIP
revision. If changes are made to the SIP
revision after EPA’s proposed
rulemaking, such changes must be
acknowledged in EPA’s final
rulemaking. If the changes are
significant, then EPA may need to
repropose the rulemaking.
II. What are the SO2 limits in these
Commissioner’s Orders?
For A.B. Brown, Indiana issued
Commissioner’s Order 2016–01 on
January 11, 2016, with a compliance
date of April 19, 2016. This order
established two new limits for A.B.
Brown: One limit for Unit 1 when
running alone and one limit for Units 1
and 2 when running simultaneously.
The emissions limits are 0.855 lbs of
SO2 per MMBTU for coal-fired boiler
Unit 1 operating alone and 0.426 lbs of
SO2 per MMBTU for Units 1 and 2
operating simultaneously. These limits
supplement a limit contained in a
E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM
25FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules
rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
February 22, 1979, Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit
of 0.69 pounds per MMBTU for coalfired boiler Unit 2. Note that the limit
on Unit 1 emissions alone (0.855 lbs per
MMBTU) is higher (less restrictive) than
the limit on combined emissions from
Units 1 and 2 (0.426 lbs per MMBTU).
Because Unit 2 has more impact per
pound of emissions than Unit 1 due to
dispersion characteristics, the plant can
emit more and still not cause violations
of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS when only Unit
1 is operating than when both Units 1
and 2 are operating.
For Clifty Creek, Indiana issued
Commissioner’s Order 2016–02 on
February 1, 2016, with a compliance
date of April 19, 2016. This order
established a combined emission limit
for the six coal-fired boilers (Units No.
1 through No. 6) located at Clifty Creek
of 2,624.5 lbs of SO2 per hour as a 720
operating hour rolling average when any
of Units No.1 through No. 6, or any
combination thereof, is operating.
III. By what criteria is EPA reviewing
this SIP revision?
EPA is evaluating this revision on the
basis of whether it strengthens Indiana’s
SIP. Prior to Commissioner’s Order
2016–01, A.B. Brown had an SO2
emissions limit in its operating permit
of 6.0 lbs SO2 per MMBTU for coal-fired
boiler Unit 1. Prior to Commissioner’s
Order 2016–02 Clifty Creek had an SO2
emissions limit in its operating permit
for Units 1 through 6 not to exceed 7.52
lbs of SO2 per MMBTU on a thirty (30)
day rolling weighted average. The new
SO2 emissions limits established by
IDEM in Commissioner’s Order 2016–01
and Commissioner’s Order 2016–02 for
A.B. Brown and Clifty Creek,
respectively, are more stringent than the
previous limits and will therefore
strengthen Indiana’s SIP.
The adequacy of these limits for
providing for attainment is not a
prerequisite for approval of these limits.
Nevertheless, the purpose of these limits
is to provide for attainment, and EPA is
working with Indiana to assure a proper
analysis of the adequacy of these limits
for this purpose. If these limits become
SIP-approved and thereby federally
enforceable in a timely fashion, formal
evaluation of the adequacy of these
limits to provide for attainment will be
conducted as part of the process of
rulemaking on the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
designation for these areas.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve the SO2
emissions limits in Commissioner’s
Order 2016–01 and Commissioner’s
Order 2016–02 into the Indiana SIP.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:27 Feb 24, 2016
Jkt 238001
EPA confirms that the SO2 emissions
limits for A. B. Brown (Commissioner’s
Order 2016–01) and Clifty Creek
(Commissioner’s Order 2016–02) are
more stringent than the previous SO2
emissions limits for these sources. By
approving these Commissioner’s orders
into the Indiana SIP, these SO2
emissions limits will become federally
enforceable and strengthen the Indiana
SIP.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
Commissioner’s Order No. 2016–01
issued to Vectren’s A. B. Brown
Generating Station, effective January 11,
2016, and Commissioner’s Order No.
2016–02 issued to Indiana-Kentucky
Electric Corporation’s Clifty Creek
Generating Station, effective February 1,
2016. EPA has made, and will continue
to make, these documents generally
available electronically through
www.regulations.gov and/or in hard
copy at the appropriate EPA office (see
the ADDRESSES section of this preamble
for more information).
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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
9397
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,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: February 11, 2016.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2016–03893 Filed 2–24–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2015–0438; FRL 9942–75–
Region 7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; State of
Missouri; Emissions Inventory and
Emissions Statement for the Missouri
Portion of the St. Louis MO-IL Ozone
Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\25FEP1.SGM
25FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 37 (Thursday, February 25, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 9395-9397]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03893]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0075; EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0090; FRL-9942-72-Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Commissioner's Orders for A.B. Brown
and Clifty Creek
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve revisions to the Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP)
submitted by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM)
to EPA on January 27, 2016, and February 5, 2016, for parallel
processing. The submittal consists of orders issued by the Commissioner
of IDEM that require more stringent sulfur dioxide (SO2)
emissions limits than those currently contained in the SIP for
Vectren's A. B. Brown Generating Station (``A.B. Brown'') and Indiana-
Kentucky Electric Corporation's Clifty Creek Generating Station
(``Clifty Creek''). IDEM submitted these limits to enable the areas
near these generating stations to qualify for being designated
``attainment'' of the 2010 primary SO2 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS), a matter that will be addressed in a
separate future rulemaking. EPA's approval of these revisions to the
Indiana SIP would make the Commissioner's orders' SO2
emissions limits federally enforceable.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 28, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA-R05-
OAR-2016-0075 for A.B. Brown or EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0090 for Clifty Creek
at https://www.regulations.gov or via email to aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of
submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio,
video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written
comment is considered the official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public
comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and
general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jenny Liljegren, Physical Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6832,
Liljegren.Jennifer@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. Why did IDEM issue these Commissioner's Orders?
II. What are the SO2 limits in these Commissioner's
Orders?
III. By what criterion is EPA reviewing this SIP revision?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Why did IDEM issue these Commissioner's Orders?
On January 27, 2016, and February 5, 2016, IDEM submitted for
parallel processing draft revisions to its SIP consisting of orders
issued by IDEM's Commissioner that establish more stringent
SO2 emissions limits than those currently contained in the
SIP for A.B. Brown and Clifty Creek. IDEM established these
SO2 emissions limits to enable the areas near A.B. Brown and
Clifty Creek to qualify in the future for being designated
``attainment'' of the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS. Under a
[[Page 9396]]
Federal consent decree, EPA is required to designate, under the 2010
SO2 NAAQS, certain areas in the United States including the
areas near A.B. Brown and Clifty Creek by July 2, 2016. The history of
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and the consent decree is explained below
in order to provide a more detailed explanation of the context for
IDEM's request for EPA approval of these SO2 limits into the
SIP.
On June 3, 2010, pursuant to section 109 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), EPA revised the primary (health-based) SO2 NAAQS by
establishing a new one-hour standard codified at 40 CFR 50.17 (75 FR
35520). Pursuant to section 107(d) of the CAA, EPA must designate areas
as either ``unclassifiable,'' ``attainment,'' or ``nonattainment'' for
the 2010 one-hour SO2 primary NAAQS. Under Section 107(d) of
the CAA, a nonattainment area is any area that does not meet the NAAQS
or that contributes to a violation in a nearby area. An attainment area
is any area, other than a nonattainment area, that meets the NAAQS.
Unclassifiable areas are those that cannot be classified on the basis
of available information as meeting or not meeting the NAAQS.
On August 5, 2013, EPA published a final rule establishing air
quality designations for 29 areas in the United States for the 2010
SO2 NAAQS, based on recorded air quality monitoring data
from 2009-2011 that showed violations of the NAAQS (78 FR 47191). In
that rulemaking, EPA committed to address, in separate future actions,
the designations for all other areas for which EPA was not yet prepared
to issue designations.
Following the initial August 5, 2013, designations, three lawsuits
were filed against EPA in different U.S. District Courts, alleging EPA
had failed to perform a nondiscretionary duty under the CAA by not
designating all portions of the country by the June 2013 deadline. In
an effort intended to resolve the litigation in one of those cases,
plaintiffs Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council and
EPA filed a proposed consent decree with the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of California. On March 2, 2015, the court
entered the consent decree and issued an enforceable order for EPA to
complete the area designations according to the court-ordered
schedule.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sierra Club et al. v. EPA, No. 3:13-cv-3953-SI (N.D.Cal.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
By no later than July 2, 2016, (16 months from the court's order),
EPA must designate two groups of areas: (1) Areas that have newly
monitored violations of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and (2) areas
that contain any stationary sources that had not been announced as of
March 2, 2015, for retirement and that according to the EPA's Air
Markets Database emitted in 2012 either (i) more than 16,000 tons of
SO2 or (ii) more than 2,600 tons of SO2 with an
annual average emission rate of at least 0.45 pounds (lbs) of
SO2 per million British thermal units (MMBTU). In the
consent decree, ``announced for retirement'' means any stationary
source with a coal-fired unit that as of January 1, 2010, had a
capacity of over 5 megawatts and otherwise meets the emissions criteria
is excluded from the July 2, 2016, deadline if it had announced through
a company public announcement, public utilities commission filing,
consent decree, public legal settlement, final state or federal permit
filing, or other similar means of communication, by March 2, 2015, that
it will cease burning coal at that unit.
A.B. Brown and Clifty Creek each meet the second criterion for the
July 2, 2016, deadline. That is, neither has been ``announced for
retirement'' and both emitted in 2012 either (i) more than 16,000 tons
of SO2 or (ii) more than 2,600 tons of SO2 with
an annual average emission rate of at least 0.45 lbs of SO2
per MMBTU. Specifically, A.B. Brown emitted 7,091 tons of
SO2 in 2012 and had an emissions rate of 0.521 lbs
SO2/MMBTU in 2012. Clifty Creek emitted 52,839 tons of
SO2 in 2012 and had an emissions rate of 1.767 lbs
SO2/MMBTU in 2012. In absence of new SO2
emissions limits, A.B. Brown and Clifty Creek cannot demonstrate
modeled attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS in accordance with
EPA's Draft SO2 NAAQS Designations Modeling Technical Assistance
Document.\2\ Therefore, IDEM conducted air dispersion modeling using
the American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency
Regulatory Model (AERMOD) version 15181 in accordance with appendix W
of part 51 of chapter 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to
determine new, more stringent SO2 emissions limits for A.B.
Brown and Clifty Creek that should result in the areas near these
generating stations showing modeled attainment of the 2010
SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Draft SO2 NAAQS Designations Modeling Technical Assistance
Document. December 2013. https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/sulfurdioxide/pdfs/SO2ModelingTAD.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IDEM has requested that EPA approve Commissioner's Order 2016-01
for A.B. Brown and Commissioner's Order 2016-02 for Clifty Creek into
Indiana's SIP. EPA's approval of the new SO2 emissions
limits contained in these orders into Indiana's SIP would make these
SO2 emissions limits federally enforceable. Once these
SO2 emissions limits have become federally enforceable, IDEM
intends to use them to demonstrate AERMOD-modeled attainment for the
2010 SO2 NAAQS for the areas near A.B. Brown and Clifty
Creek. To be clear, the purpose of this rulemaking is to take action on
IDEM's request to approve these SO2 emissions limits into
the Indiana SIP and thereby make them federally enforceable. The
purpose of this rulemaking is not to take action on whether these
SO2 emissions limits are adequate for EPA to designate
attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS for the areas near A.B.
Brown and Clifty Creek. EPA intends to designate the areas near the
sources that meet the criteria for the first phase of the consent
decree designations, including the areas near A.B. Brown and Clifty
Creek, under a separate rulemaking.
EPA cannot take final action to approve the orders into Indiana's
SIP until the state completes its public comment process and submits
the final orders to EPA as SIP revision requests. In the meantime,
Indiana requested that EPA ``parallel process'' the SIP revision to
expedite action on the Commissioner's orders. Under this procedure, the
state submitted a copy of the proposed revisions to EPA before
completing its public comment process. EPA is publishing this proposed
rulemaking in the Federal Register and is soliciting public comment in
approximately the same timeframe during which the state is soliciting
public comment. After Indiana submits the final SIP revision request,
EPA will prepare a final rulemaking for the SIP revision. If changes
are made to the SIP revision after EPA's proposed rulemaking, such
changes must be acknowledged in EPA's final rulemaking. If the changes
are significant, then EPA may need to repropose the rulemaking.
II. What are the SO2 limits in these Commissioner's Orders?
For A.B. Brown, Indiana issued Commissioner's Order 2016-01 on
January 11, 2016, with a compliance date of April 19, 2016. This order
established two new limits for A.B. Brown: One limit for Unit 1 when
running alone and one limit for Units 1 and 2 when running
simultaneously. The emissions limits are 0.855 lbs of SO2
per MMBTU for coal-fired boiler Unit 1 operating alone and 0.426 lbs of
SO2 per MMBTU for Units 1 and 2 operating simultaneously.
These limits supplement a limit contained in a
[[Page 9397]]
February 22, 1979, Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit
of 0.69 pounds per MMBTU for coal-fired boiler Unit 2. Note that the
limit on Unit 1 emissions alone (0.855 lbs per MMBTU) is higher (less
restrictive) than the limit on combined emissions from Units 1 and 2
(0.426 lbs per MMBTU). Because Unit 2 has more impact per pound of
emissions than Unit 1 due to dispersion characteristics, the plant can
emit more and still not cause violations of the 2010 SO2
NAAQS when only Unit 1 is operating than when both Units 1 and 2 are
operating.
For Clifty Creek, Indiana issued Commissioner's Order 2016-02 on
February 1, 2016, with a compliance date of April 19, 2016. This order
established a combined emission limit for the six coal-fired boilers
(Units No. 1 through No. 6) located at Clifty Creek of 2,624.5 lbs of
SO2 per hour as a 720 operating hour rolling average when
any of Units No.1 through No. 6, or any combination thereof, is
operating.
III. By what criteria is EPA reviewing this SIP revision?
EPA is evaluating this revision on the basis of whether it
strengthens Indiana's SIP. Prior to Commissioner's Order 2016-01, A.B.
Brown had an SO2 emissions limit in its operating permit of
6.0 lbs SO2 per MMBTU for coal-fired boiler Unit 1. Prior to
Commissioner's Order 2016-02 Clifty Creek had an SO2
emissions limit in its operating permit for Units 1 through 6 not to
exceed 7.52 lbs of SO2 per MMBTU on a thirty (30) day
rolling weighted average. The new SO2 emissions limits
established by IDEM in Commissioner's Order 2016-01 and Commissioner's
Order 2016-02 for A.B. Brown and Clifty Creek, respectively, are more
stringent than the previous limits and will therefore strengthen
Indiana's SIP.
The adequacy of these limits for providing for attainment is not a
prerequisite for approval of these limits. Nevertheless, the purpose of
these limits is to provide for attainment, and EPA is working with
Indiana to assure a proper analysis of the adequacy of these limits for
this purpose. If these limits become SIP-approved and thereby federally
enforceable in a timely fashion, formal evaluation of the adequacy of
these limits to provide for attainment will be conducted as part of the
process of rulemaking on the 2010 SO2 NAAQS designation for
these areas.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve the SO2 emissions limits in
Commissioner's Order 2016-01 and Commissioner's Order 2016-02 into the
Indiana SIP. EPA confirms that the SO2 emissions limits for
A. B. Brown (Commissioner's Order 2016-01) and Clifty Creek
(Commissioner's Order 2016-02) are more stringent than the previous
SO2 emissions limits for these sources. By approving these
Commissioner's orders into the Indiana SIP, these SO2
emissions limits will become federally enforceable and strengthen the
Indiana SIP.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference Commissioner's Order No. 2016-01 issued to Vectren's A. B.
Brown Generating Station, effective January 11, 2016, and
Commissioner's Order No. 2016-02 issued to Indiana-Kentucky Electric
Corporation's Clifty Creek Generating Station, effective February 1,
2016. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or
in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES section
of this preamble for more information).
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 Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
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, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: February 11, 2016.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2016-03893 Filed 2-24-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P