Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Commissioner's Order for SABIC Innovative Plastics, 21703-21706 [2017-09385]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
21703
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
State
submittal
date
Name of non-regulatory
SIP revision
Applicable geographic area
*
Documents Incorporated
by Reference (9 VAC
5–20–21, Section B.).
*
*
*
Northern Virginia (Metropolitan Washington)
Ozone Nonattainment Area, Fredericksburg
Ozone Maintenance Area, Richmond-Petersburg Ozone Maintenance Area.
*
Documents Incorporated
by Reference (9 VAC
5–20–21, Section
E.15.).
*
*
*
Northern Virginia (Metropolitan Washington)
Ozone Nonattainment Area, Fredericksburg
Ozone Maintenance Area, Richmond-Petersburg Ozone Maintenance Area.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–09387 Filed 5–9–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0645; FRL–9962–11Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana;
Commissioner’s Order for SABIC
Innovative Plastics
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving, as a revision
to the Indiana State Implementation
Plan (SIP), a submittal from the Indiana
Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM) to EPA, dated
December 5, 2016. The submittal
consists of an order issued by the
Commissioner of IDEM that establishes
permanent and enforceable sulfur
dioxide (SO2) emission limits for SABIC
Innovative Plastics (SABIC). IDEM
submitted this order so the area near
SABIC can be 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 this this
order would make these SO2 emission
limits and applicable reporting,
recordkeeping, and compliance
demonstration requirements part of the
federally enforceable Indiana SIP.
DATES: This direct final rule is be
effective July 10, 2017, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by June 9,
2017. If adverse comments are received,
EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:27 May 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
*
EPA approval date
*
*
05/10/2017 [Insert Federal Register Citation].
*
State effective date is
7/30/15.
*
*
05/10/2017 [Insert Federal Register Citation].
*
State effective date is
7/30/15.
10/1/2015
10/1/2015
*
Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA–R05–
OAR–2016–0645 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:
Joseph Ko, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–7947,
ko.joseph@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Additional explanation
*
*
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. Why did IDEM issue this Commissioner’s
Order?
II. What are the SO2 limits in this
Commissioner’s Order?
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 this
Commissioner’s Order?
On December 5, 2016, IDEM
submitted for approval, as a revision to
the Indiana SIP, an order issued by
IDEM’s Commissioner that establishes
SO2 emission limits for SABIC. SO2
emission limits for SABIC previously
did not exist in the Indiana SIP. IDEM
established these emission limits so the
area near SABIC can qualify in the
future for being designated ‘‘attainment’’
of the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS. The
history of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
designation process and the applicable
Data Requirements Rule (DRR) is
explained below in order to provide a
more detailed explanation of the context
for IDEM’s request.
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 title 40 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) section 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
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
21704
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
available information as meeting or not
meeting the NAAQS.
On August 5, 2013, EPA published a
final rule designating 29 areas in the
United States as nonattainment 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 that EPA had failed to
perform a nondiscretionary duty under
the CAA by not designating all portions
of the country by June 2013, three years
after the promulgation of the revised
SO2 NAAQS, as required by Section
107(d) of the CAA. 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 The consent
decree required EPA to complete the
designations in three additional rounds
following EPA’s original designations
(Round 1): Round 2 by July 2, 2016,
Round 3 by December 31, 2017, and
Round 4 by December 31, 2020. This
action falls within Round 3 of the
designation process.
Under the DRR (80 FR 51052), each
state air agency was required to submit
a list to the EPA by January 15, 2016,
that identified all sources within the
state that had SO2 emissions exceeding
2,000 tons per year (tpy) during the
most recent year for which emissions
data for those sources were available,
plus any additional sources and their
associated areas identified by the state
air agency or by the EPA as also
warranting air quality characterization
due to their potential to contribute to an
SO2 NAAQS violation.
According to IDEM, SABIC emitted
4,030 tons of SO2 in 2014, exceeding the
2,000 tpy threshold, and therefore
Indiana identified SABIC as one of
eleven facilities in the state as being
subject to the air quality
characterization requirements of the
DRR. To satisfy the requirements of the
DRR, states must characterize local SO2
1 Sierra Club et al. v. EPA, No. 3:13–cv–3953–SI
(N.D.Cal.).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:27 May 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
concentrations with either air
dispersion modeling or ambient air
monitoring. States also have the option
to establish a permanent and federally
enforceable facility-wide limit on SO2
emissions from a listed source to below
2,000 tpy. On June 30, 2016, Indiana
informed EPA that SABIC had selected
the dispersion modeling option to
characterize the local SO2
concentrations in the area surrounding
the facility. Indiana also wrote on
September 26, 2016, to inform EPA that
it planned to pursue federally
enforceable limits for SABIC as a means
to provide for attainment in the area.
Under the DRR, for sources such as
SABIC that the state has elected to
address through modeling, the state is
required to submit modeling by January
13, 2016, characterizing nearby air
quality. Under the DRR, Indiana may
submit modeling showing that the
applicable limits provide for attainment
of the standard, but only if these limits
are federally enforceable.
SABIC requested a Commissioner’s
Order from IDEM to be submitted to
EPA so as to establish federally
enforceable and permanent SO2
emission limits that will ensure
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 40 CFR part 51 to determine SO2
emission limits for SABIC that should
result in modeled attainment of the
2010 SO2 NAAQS in the area near this
facility.
IDEM has requested that EPA approve
Commissioner’s Order 2016–03 for
SABIC as part of Indiana’s SIP. If EPA
approves the SO2 emission limits
contained in these orders, they would
become federally enforceable. Once
these SO2 emission limits have become
federally enforceable, IDEM intends to
use them to demonstrate modeled
attainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS for
the area near SABIC. To be clear, the
purpose of this rulemaking is to take
action on IDEM’s request to approve
these SO2 emission 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 emission limits are
2 Draft SO NAAQS Designations Modeling
2
Technical Assistance Document. December 2013.
https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/sulfurdioxide/pdfs/
SO2ModelingTAD.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
adequate for EPA to designate
attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS for
the area near SABIC. EPA intends to
complete 2010 SO2 NAAQS
designations for areas under the Federal
consent decree deadlines, including the
area near SABIC, in separate
rulemakings.
II. What are the SO2 limits in these
Commissioner’s Orders?
For SABIC, Indiana issued
Commissioner’s Order 2016–03 on
October 20, 2016, with an effective date
of January 13, 2017. This order
established SO2 emission limits for 20
emission units within the SABIC
facility. According to IDEM, the COS
Vent Oxidizer and the COS Flare units
contribute the most to SO2 ambient air
concentrations in the area. Within the
SABIC process line, the COS Vent
Oxidizer is the primary control device,
and the COS Flare serves as a back-up
to the oxidizer or is used during safety
interlock of the system. The function of
both units is to eliminate the sulfurcontaining compounds in the
regeneration gas via thermal
combustion. The order established the
following emissions rates for the COS
Vent Oxidizer and the COS Flare: (a)
415 lb/hr, one-hour average; and (b)
269.21 lb/hr, twenty-four hour rolling
average, based on daily coke usage and
daily sulfur input. The 18 other
emission limits for ancillary units are
minor contributors to the overall SO2
ambient air concentrations in the area,
and are listed in Table 1 below.
TABLE 1—EMISSION LIMITS FOR
ANCILLARY UNITS
Unit name
NE Boiler (01–101) .........................
BW Gas (01–014) ...........................
H–790 (12–701) ..............................
H–520 (03–007) ..............................
H–530A (03–008) ............................
H–530B (03–008) ............................
H–390 (12–169) ..............................
H–900 (13–049) ..............................
H–900B (13–321) ............................
SC 1/2 (13–155) ..............................
H–7090 (04–063) ............................
H–6060 (04–050) ............................
F–972 (08–001) ...............................
COGEN (19–001) ............................
AUX BOILER (19–002) ...................
AUX2 BOILER (19–003) .................
CG1 BOILER (19–004) ...................
R BOILER (09–106) ........................
Emission limit
(lb/hr, onehour average)
0.15
0.15
0.02
0.0045
27.8
27.8
0.0102
1.86
0.0188
0.0008
0.00235
0.00153
0.518
1.17
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.11
III. By what criterion is EPA reviewing
this SIP revision?
EPA has evaluated this revision on
the basis of whether it strengthens
Indiana’s SIP. Prior to Commissioner’s
Order 2016–03, there were no specific
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
SO2 emission limitations in the SIP
applicable to SABIC. The SO2 emission
limits contained in Commissioner’s
Order 2016–03 for SABIC establish
permanent and enforceable limits, and
should, 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 ultimately to provide for attainment,
and EPA is working with Indiana to
assure a proper analysis of the adequacy
of these limits for this purpose.
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving Commissioner’s
Order 2016–03 as part of the Indiana
SIP. The Commissioner’s Order
strengthens Indiana’s SIP by
incorporating SO2 emission limits for
SABIC, which did not have any specific
SO2 emission limits for SABIC
previously. By approving the
Commissioner’s Order into the Indiana
SIP, these SO2 emission limits and
applicable reporting, recordkeeping, and
compliance demonstration requirements
contained in the order would become
federally enforceable, and strengthen
the Indiana SIP.
We are publishing this action without
prior proposal because we view this as
a noncontroversial amendment and
anticipate no adverse comments.
However, in the proposed rules section
of this Federal Register publication, we
are publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposal to approve the
state plan if relevant adverse written
comments are filed. This rule will be
effective July 10, 2017 without further
notice unless we receive relevant
adverse written comments by June 9,
2017. If we receive such comments, we
will withdraw this action before the
effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will
withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. EPA will
not institute a second comment period.
Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph,
or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment. If we do not receive any
comments, this action will be effective
July 10, 2017.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:27 May 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is finalizing
regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation
by reference of the Indiana
Commissioner’s Order described in the
amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. Therefore, these materials have
been approved by EPA for inclusion in
the State implementation plan, have
been incorporated by reference by EPA
into that plan, are fully federally
enforceable under sections 110 and 113
of the CAA as of the effective date of the
final rulemaking of EPA’s approval, and
will be incorporated by reference by the
Director of the Federal Register in the
next update to the SIP compilation.3
EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these documents generally
available through www.regulations.gov,
and/or at the EPA Region 5 Office
(please contact the person identified in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
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
3 62
PO 00000
FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
21705
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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by July 10, 2017. Filing a petition
for reconsideration by the Administrator
of this final rule does not affect the
finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the
time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule
or action. Parties with objections to this
direct final rule are encouraged to file a
comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
21706
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 89 / Wednesday, May 10, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
action published in the proposed rules
section of today’s Federal Register,
rather than file an immediate petition
for judicial review of this direct final
rule, so that EPA can withdraw this
direct final rule and address the
comment in the proposed rulemaking.
This action may not be challenged later
in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: April 20, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. In § 52.770 the table in paragraph
(d) is amended by adding an entry for
‘‘SABIC Innovative Plastics’’ to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.770
*
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
Identification of plan.
*
*
(d) * * *
*
*
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
EPA-APPROVED INDIANA SOURCE-SPECIFIC PROVISIONS
CO date
Title
*
10/20/2016 ........
*
*
SABIC Innovative Plastics ............
*
*
*
SIP rule
*
*
*
*
*
N.A
Explanation
*
5/10/2017, [Insert Federal Register citation].
*
*
Limitation intended to support attainment designation.
*
*
enforced, and maintained in Tennessee.
EPA is finalizing its determination that
Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP
submission, provided to EPA on
December 16, 2015, satisfies certain
required infrastructure elements for the
2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
*
[FR Doc. 2017–09385 Filed 5–9–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
DATES:
[EPA–R04–OAR–2014–0430; FRL–9961–89Region 4]
ADDRESSES:
Air Quality Plans; Tennessee;
Infrastructure Requirements for the
2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Quality Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action to
approve the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submission, submitted by the State
of Tennessee, through the Tennessee
Department of Environment and
Conservation (TDEC), on December 16,
2015, to demonstrate that the State
meets the infrastructure requirements of
the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the
2012 annual fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS). The CAA requires
that each state adopt and submit a SIP
for the implementation, maintenance
and enforcement of each NAAQS
promulgated by EPA, which is
commonly referred to as an
‘‘infrastructure SIP submission.’’ TDEC
certified that the Tennessee SIP contains
provisions that ensure the 2012 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS is implemented,
SUMMARY:
jstallworth on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with RULES
EPA approval
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:27 May 09, 2017
Jkt 241001
This rule will be effective June
9, 2017.
EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR–
2014–0430. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov
Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Regulatory Management Section,
Air Planning and Implementation
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tiereny Bell, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. Bell
can be reached via electronic mail at
bell.tiereny@epa.gov or via telephone at
(404) 562–9088.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background and Overview
On December 14, 2012, EPA
promulgated a revised primary annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. The standard was
strengthened from 15.0 micrograms per
cubic meter (mg/m3) to 12.0 mg/m3. See
78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013). Pursuant
to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, states
are required to submit SIPs meeting the
applicable requirements of section
110(a)(2) within three years after
promulgation of a new or revised
NAAQS or within such shorter period
as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(2)
requires states to address basic SIP
elements such as requirements for
monitoring, basic program requirements
and legal authority that are designed to
assure attainment and maintenance of
the NAAQS. States were required to
submit such SIPs for the 2012 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS to EPA no later than
December 14, 2015.
In a proposed rulemaking published
on January 9, 2017 (82 FR 2295), EPA
proposed to approve portions of
Tennessee’s December 16, 2015, SIP
submission for the 2012 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS. The details of Tennessee’s
E:\FR\FM\10MYR1.SGM
10MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 89 (Wednesday, May 10, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21703-21706]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09385]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0645; FRL-9962-11-Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Commissioner's Order for SABIC
Innovative Plastics
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving, as a
revision to the Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP), a submittal
from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) to EPA,
dated December 5, 2016. The submittal consists of an order issued by
the Commissioner of IDEM that establishes permanent and enforceable
sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission limits for SABIC Innovative
Plastics (SABIC). IDEM submitted this order so the area near SABIC can
be 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 this this
order would make these SO2 emission limits and applicable
reporting, recordkeeping, and compliance demonstration requirements
part of the federally enforceable Indiana SIP.
DATES: This direct final rule is be effective July 10, 2017, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by June 9, 2017. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA-R05-
OAR-2016-0645 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: Joseph Ko, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-7947, ko.joseph@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 this Commissioner's Order?
II. What are the SO2 limits in this Commissioner's Order?
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 this Commissioner's Order?
On December 5, 2016, IDEM submitted for approval, as a revision to
the Indiana SIP, an order issued by IDEM's Commissioner that
establishes SO2 emission limits for SABIC. SO2
emission limits for SABIC previously did not exist in the Indiana SIP.
IDEM established these emission limits so the area near SABIC can
qualify in the future for being designated ``attainment'' of the 2010
primary SO2 NAAQS. The history of the 2010 SO2
NAAQS designation process and the applicable Data Requirements Rule
(DRR) is explained below in order to provide a more detailed
explanation of the context for IDEM's request.
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 title 40 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) section 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
[[Page 21704]]
available information as meeting or not meeting the NAAQS.
On August 5, 2013, EPA published a final rule designating 29 areas
in the United States as nonattainment 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 that
EPA had failed to perform a nondiscretionary duty under the CAA by not
designating all portions of the country by June 2013, three years after
the promulgation of the revised SO2 NAAQS, as required by
Section 107(d) of the CAA. 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\ The consent decree required
EPA to complete the designations in three additional rounds following
EPA's original designations (Round 1): Round 2 by July 2, 2016, Round 3
by December 31, 2017, and Round 4 by December 31, 2020. This action
falls within Round 3 of the designation process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sierra Club et al. v. EPA, No. 3:13-cv-3953-SI (N.D.Cal.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the DRR (80 FR 51052), each state air agency was required to
submit a list to the EPA by January 15, 2016, that identified all
sources within the state that had SO2 emissions exceeding
2,000 tons per year (tpy) during the most recent year for which
emissions data for those sources were available, plus any additional
sources and their associated areas identified by the state air agency
or by the EPA as also warranting air quality characterization due to
their potential to contribute to an SO2 NAAQS violation.
According to IDEM, SABIC emitted 4,030 tons of SO2 in
2014, exceeding the 2,000 tpy threshold, and therefore Indiana
identified SABIC as one of eleven facilities in the state as being
subject to the air quality characterization requirements of the DRR. To
satisfy the requirements of the DRR, states must characterize local
SO2 concentrations with either air dispersion modeling or
ambient air monitoring. States also have the option to establish a
permanent and federally enforceable facility-wide limit on
SO2 emissions from a listed source to below 2,000 tpy. On
June 30, 2016, Indiana informed EPA that SABIC had selected the
dispersion modeling option to characterize the local SO2
concentrations in the area surrounding the facility. Indiana also wrote
on September 26, 2016, to inform EPA that it planned to pursue
federally enforceable limits for SABIC as a means to provide for
attainment in the area.
Under the DRR, for sources such as SABIC that the state has elected
to address through modeling, the state is required to submit modeling
by January 13, 2016, characterizing nearby air quality. Under the DRR,
Indiana may submit modeling showing that the applicable limits provide
for attainment of the standard, but only if these limits are federally
enforceable.
SABIC requested a Commissioner's Order from IDEM to be submitted to
EPA so as to establish federally enforceable and permanent
SO2 emission limits that will ensure 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 40 CFR part 51 to
determine SO2 emission limits for SABIC that should result
in modeled attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS in the area near
this facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\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 2016-03
for SABIC as part of Indiana's SIP. If EPA approves the SO2
emission limits contained in these orders, they would become federally
enforceable. Once these SO2 emission limits have become
federally enforceable, IDEM intends to use them to demonstrate modeled
attainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS for the area near SABIC.
To be clear, the purpose of this rulemaking is to take action on IDEM's
request to approve these SO2 emission 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
emission limits are adequate for EPA to designate attainment of the
2010 SO2 NAAQS for the area near SABIC. EPA intends to
complete 2010 SO2 NAAQS designations for areas under the
Federal consent decree deadlines, including the area near SABIC, in
separate rulemakings.
II. What are the SO2 limits in these Commissioner's Orders?
For SABIC, Indiana issued Commissioner's Order 2016-03 on October
20, 2016, with an effective date of January 13, 2017. This order
established SO2 emission limits for 20 emission units within
the SABIC facility. According to IDEM, the COS Vent Oxidizer and the
COS Flare units contribute the most to SO2 ambient air
concentrations in the area. Within the SABIC process line, the COS Vent
Oxidizer is the primary control device, and the COS Flare serves as a
back-up to the oxidizer or is used during safety interlock of the
system. The function of both units is to eliminate the sulfur-
containing compounds in the regeneration gas via thermal combustion.
The order established the following emissions rates for the COS Vent
Oxidizer and the COS Flare: (a) 415 lb/hr, one-hour average; and (b)
269.21 lb/hr, twenty-four hour rolling average, based on daily coke
usage and daily sulfur input. The 18 other emission limits for
ancillary units are minor contributors to the overall SO2
ambient air concentrations in the area, and are listed in Table 1
below.
Table 1--Emission Limits for Ancillary Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission limit
Unit name (lb/hr, one-
hour average)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NE Boiler (01-101)...................................... 0.15
BW Gas (01-014)......................................... 0.15
H-790 (12-701).......................................... 0.02
H-520 (03-007).......................................... 0.0045
H-530A (03-008)......................................... 27.8
H-530B (03-008)......................................... 27.8
H-390 (12-169).......................................... 0.0102
H-900 (13-049).......................................... 1.86
H-900B (13-321)......................................... 0.0188
SC 1/2 (13-155)......................................... 0.0008
H-7090 (04-063)......................................... 0.00235
H-6060 (04-050)......................................... 0.00153
F-972 (08-001).......................................... 0.518
COGEN (19-001).......................................... 1.17
AUX BOILER (19-002)..................................... 0.15
AUX2 BOILER (19-003).................................... 0.15
CG1 BOILER (19-004)..................................... 0.15
R BOILER (09-106)....................................... 0.11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. By what criterion is EPA reviewing this SIP revision?
EPA has evaluated this revision on the basis of whether it
strengthens Indiana's SIP. Prior to Commissioner's Order 2016-03, there
were no specific
[[Page 21705]]
SO2 emission limitations in the SIP applicable to SABIC. The
SO2 emission limits contained in Commissioner's Order 2016-
03 for SABIC establish permanent and enforceable limits, and should,
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 ultimately to provide for attainment, and EPA is
working with Indiana to assure a proper analysis of the adequacy of
these limits for this purpose.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving Commissioner's Order 2016-03 as part of the
Indiana SIP. The Commissioner's Order strengthens Indiana's SIP by
incorporating SO2 emission limits for SABIC, which did not
have any specific SO2 emission limits for SABIC previously.
By approving the Commissioner's Order into the Indiana SIP, these
SO2 emission limits and applicable reporting, recordkeeping,
and compliance demonstration requirements contained in the order would
become federally enforceable, and strengthen the Indiana SIP.
We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective July 10, 2017
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written
comments by June 9, 2017. If we receive such comments, we will withdraw
this action before the effective date by publishing a subsequent
document that will withdraw the final action. All public comments
received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the
proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any
parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this
time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. If we do
not receive any comments, this action will be effective July 10, 2017.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Indiana
Commissioner's Order described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set
forth below. Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for
inclusion in the State implementation plan, have been incorporated by
reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under
sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final
rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference by
the Director of the Federal Register in the next update to the SIP
compilation.\3\ EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
documents generally available through www.regulations.gov, and/or at
the EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the person identified in the
For Further Information Contact section of this preamble for more
information).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by July 10, 2017. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this
[[Page 21706]]
action published in the proposed rules section of today's Federal
Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of
this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: April 20, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 52.770 the table in paragraph (d) is amended by adding an
entry for ``SABIC Innovative Plastics'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
EPA-Approved Indiana Source-Specific Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO date Title SIP rule EPA approval Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
10/20/2016................. SABIC Innovative N.A 5/10/2017, [Insert Limitation intended
Plastics. Federal Register to support
citation]. attainment
designation.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-09385 Filed 5-9-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
