Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5, 41379-41386 [2017-18503]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 168 / Thursday, August 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Furthermore, the emission standards
under the CPS, which are based on
group averaging, remain unchanged,
except that the averaging method for
determining compliance with the SO2
emission standard will become more
stringent, because the averaging will
exclude natural gas units.
Therefore, the proposed revisions to
CPS in Part 225 are approvable under
Section 110(l) because: (1) There are no
proposed changes to any SIP emission
limits, except to make the SO2 limit
more stringent; (2) the conversion of the
EGUs from coal to natural gas will result
in a significant decrease in emissions of
SO2, no increase in emissions of NOX,
and reductions in emissions of PM; and
(3) the changes are consistent with
Illinois’ long-term strategy for making
reasonable progress toward meeting the
visibility goals of Section 169A of the
CAA contained in the state’s regional
haze rules.
III. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve the
revisions to the Illinois air pollution
control rules at 35 IAC Part 225,
specifically, sections 225.291, 225.292,
225.293, 225.295 (except for
225.295(a)(4)), and 225.296 (except for
225.296(d)) and 225.Appendix A.
Illinois EPA submitted the revisions to
Part 225 on June 23, 2016, and
submitted supplemental information on
January 9, 2017.
Illinois’ final rule also included
revisions to Parts 214 (Sulfur
limitations) and 217 (Nitrogen oxide
emissions), and other sections of the
Part 225 rules. EPA is not taking any
action on those revisions, and, as noted
above, Illinois’ addition of 35 IAC
225.295(a)(4).
nlaroche on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. 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
revisions to Title 35 of Illinois
Administrative Code Rule Part 225—
Control of Emissions from Large
Combustion Sources, sections 225.291,
225.292, 225.293, 225.295 (except for
225.295(a)(4)), and 225.296 (except for
225.296(d)) and 225.Appendix A,
effective December 7, 2015. 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).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:12 Aug 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive 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 (Public Law 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
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
41379
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,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides.
Dated: August 21, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2017–18502 Filed 8–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0343; FRL–9967–18–
Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana;
Infrastructure SIP Requirements for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
elements of a state implementation plan
(SIP) submission from Indiana regarding
the infrastructure requirements of
section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
for the 2012 fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) 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 October 2, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2016–0343 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.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
41380
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 168 / Thursday, August 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
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: Eric
Svingen, 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) 353–4489,
svingen.eric@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What is the background of this SIP
submission?
II. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate
this SIP submission?
III. What is EPA’s analysis of this SIP
submission?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background of this SIP
submission?
A. What state submission does this
rulemaking address?
nlaroche on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
In this rulemaking, EPA is proposing
to take action on a June 10, 2016,
submission from the Indiana
Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM) intended to
address all applicable infrastructure
requirements for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. On December 28, 2016, IDEM
supplemented this submittal with
additional documentation intended to
address the transport requirements of
Section 110(a)(2)(D) for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS; EPA will take action on this
supplement in a separate rulemaking.
B. Why did the state make this SIP
submission?
Under section 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 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. These submissions must
contain any revisions needed for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:12 Aug 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
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 1 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards’’ (2007
Guidance) and has issued additional
guidance documents, the most recent on
September 13, 2013, entitled ‘‘Guidance
on Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan (SIP) Elements under CAA
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)’’ (2013
Guidance). The SIP submission
referenced in this rulemaking pertains
to the applicable requirements of
section 110(a)(1) and (2), and addresses
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
C. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
EPA is acting upon the SIP
submission from Indiana that addresses
the infrastructure requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS. The requirement for
states to make SIP submissions of this
type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1),
which states that 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
section 110(a)(1) and (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 SIP submissions that address
the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D and the
prevention of significant deterioration
(PSD) requirements of part C of title I of
1 PM
2.5 refers to particles with an aerodynamic
diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers,
oftentimes referred to as ‘‘fine’’ particles.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the CAA, and ‘‘regional haze SIP’’
submissions required to address the
visibility protection requirements of
CAA section 169A.
In this rulemaking, EPA will not take
action on three substantive areas of
section 110(a)(2): (i) Existing provisions
related to excess emissions during
periods of start-up, shutdown, or
malfunction (‘‘SSM’’) at sources, that
may be contrary to the CAA and EPA’s
policies addressing such excess
emissions; (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
notice or without requiring further
approval by EPA, that may be contrary
to the CAA; and, (iii) existing provisions
for PSD programs that may be
inconsistent with current requirements
of EPA’s ‘‘Final 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).
II. What guidance is EPA using to
evaluate this SIP submission?
EPA’s guidance for this infrastructure
SIP submission is embodied in the 2007
Guidance referenced above.
Specifically, attachment A of the 2007
Guidance (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. As
discussed above, EPA issued additional
guidance, the most recent being the
2013 Guidance that further clarifies
aspects of infrastructure SIPs that are
not NAAQS specific.
III. What is EPA’s analysis of this SIP
submission?
Pursuant to section 110(a), states must
provide reasonable notice and
opportunity for public hearing for all
infrastructure SIP submissions. On
April 26, 2016, IDEM opened a 30-day
comment period, and provided the
opportunity for public hearing. No
comments or requests for public hearing
were received.
Indiana provided a detailed synopsis
of how various components of its SIP
meet each of the applicable
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 168 / Thursday, August 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
requirements in section 110(a)(2) for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, as applicable. The
following review evaluates the state’s
submission.
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.2 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 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS, Indiana implements controls
and emission limits for particulate
matter in 326 Indiana Administrative
Code (IAC) 6. Additionally, Indiana
provides emission limits for Clark,
Dearborn, Dubois, Howard, Marion, St.
Joseph, Vanderburgh, Vigo, and Wayne
counties at 326 IAC 6.5, and Lake
County at 326 IAC 6.8. EPA proposes
that Indiana has met the infrastructure
SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 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).
nlaroche on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
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 EPAapproved 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
2 See, e.g., EPA’s final rule on ‘‘National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for Lead.’’ 73 FR 66964 at
67034.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:12 Aug 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
changes to monitoring sites or the
network plan.
IDEM continues to operate an air
monitoring network; EPA approved the
state’s 2017 Annual Air Monitoring
Network Plan on October 31, 2016,
including the plan for PM2.5. IDEM
enters air monitoring data into 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 2012 PM2.5 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 new source
review (NSR) requirements under PSD
and nonattainment NSR (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 PM2.5 and
the identification of PM2.5 and PM10 3
condensables in the PSD program; (iv)
PM2.5 increments in the PSD program;
and, (v) greenhouse gas (GHG)
permitting and the ‘‘Tailoring Rule.’’ 4
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
3 PM
10 refers to particles with an aerodynamic
diameter of less than or equal to 10 micrometers.
4 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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
41381
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 2012
PM2.5 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 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 51.166.5
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 2012 PM2.5 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
5 Similar
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
changes were codified in 40 CFR 52.21.
31AUP1
41382
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 168 / Thursday, August 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
nlaroche on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
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 volatile organic
compounds (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).6
6 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:12 Aug 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
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 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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
TABLE 1—PM2.5 INCREMENTS ESTABLISHED BY THE 2010 NSR RULE IN
MICROGRAMS PER CUBIC METER—
Continued
Annual
arithmetic
mean
Class III .............
24-Hour
max
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
Sub-Element 4: PM2.5 Increments in the
increments established by the 2010 NSR
PSD Program
Rule for incorporation into the SIP, as
On October 20, 2010, EPA issued the
well as the revised major source
final rule on the ‘‘Prevention of
baseline date, trigger date, and baseline
Significant Deterioration (PSD) for
area level of significance for PM2.5.
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5
IDEM also requested that these revisions
Micrometers (PM2.5)—Increments,
satisfy any applicable infrastructure SIP
Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and
requirements related to PSD.
Significant Monitoring Concentration
Specifically, revisions to 326 IAC 2–2–
(SMC)’’ (2010 NSR Rule). This rule
6(b) contain the Federal increments for
established several components for
PM2.5, 326 IAC 2–2–1(ee)(3) contains the
making PSD permitting determinations
new major source baseline date for
for PM2.5, including a system of
PM2.5 of October 20, 2010, 326 IAC 2–
‘‘increments’’ which is the mechanism
2–1(gg)(1)(C) contains the new trigger
used to estimate significant
date for PM2.5 of October 20, 2011, and
deterioration of ambient air quality for
326 IAC 2–2–1(f)(1) contains the new
a pollutant. These increments are
baseline area level of significance for
codified in 40 CFR 51.166(c) and 40
PM2.5. It should be noted that Indiana’s
CFR 52.21(c), and are included in the
submitted revisions explicitly include
table below.
only the PM2.5 increments as they apply
to Class II areas, and not the PM2.5
TABLE 1—PM2.5 INCREMENTS ESTAB- increments as they apply to Class I or
LISHED BY THE 2010 NSR RULE IN Class III areas. However, Indiana’s
MICROGRAMS PER CUBIC METER
requested revisions specify that if areas
in the state are classified as Class I or
Annual
III in the future, it would require that,
24-Hour
arithmetic
max
pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21, those PSD
mean
increments be adhered to.
On August 11, 2014 (79 FR 46709),
Class I ...............
1
2
Class II ..............
4
9 EPA finalized approval of the applicable
infrastructure SIP PSD revisions;
therefore, we are proposing that Indiana
does not affect EPA’s action on the present
infrastructure action. EPA interprets the CAA to
has met this set of infrastructure SIP
exclude nonattainment area requirements,
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C)
including requirements associated with a
with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Sub-Element 5: GHG Permitting and the
‘‘Tailoring Rule’’
With respect to the requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(C) as well as section
110(a)(2)(J), EPA interprets the CAA to
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
nlaroche on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 168 / Thursday, August 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
require each state to make an
infrastructure SIP submission for a new
or revised NAAQS that demonstrates
that the state 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 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 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:12 Aug 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
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 2012 PM2.5
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), and
most recently approved revisions to the
program on March 16, 2015 (see 80 FR
13493). IDEM and EPA rely on the
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 2012 PM2.5 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.
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. EPA is not
taking action on this infrastructure
element in regards to the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS and will do so in a future
rulemaking.
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires
SIPs to include provisions prohibiting
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
41383
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 2012 PM2.5 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
2012 PM2.5 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 in 326 IAC 2–
3, and are consistent with 40 CFR
51.165. Therefore, EPA proposes that
Indiana has met all of the applicable
PSD requirements for the 2012 PM2.5
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
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
41384
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 168 / Thursday, August 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
visibility protection requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS. Instead, EPA will
evaluate Indiana’s compliance with
these requirements in a separate
rulemaking.7
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 2012
PM2.5 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).
nlaroche on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
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
7 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:12 Aug 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
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 2012
PM2.5 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. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 2012 PM2.5 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 2012 PM2.5 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 1–5 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
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 168 / Thursday, August 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
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 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)—Future SIP
Revisions
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 to 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 in 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. In
addition, IDEM 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
PM2.5.8 EPA proposes that Indiana has
met the infrastructure SIP requirements
of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J)
with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
nlaroche on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
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.
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:12 Aug 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
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 above 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
8 See https://www.in.gov/idem/airquality/
2489.htm.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
41385
section 110(a)(2)(D)(J) for the 2012 PM2.5
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 2012 PM2.5
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 all 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 2012 PM2.5 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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
41386
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 168 / Thursday, August 31, 2017 / Proposed Rules
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 public hearing 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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve most
elements of a submission from Indiana
certifying that its current SIP is
sufficient to meet the required
infrastructure elements under sections
110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2012 PM2.5
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.
nlaroche on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Element
(A)—Emission limits and
other control measures .....
(B)—Ambient air quality
monitoring/data system .....
(C)1—Program for enforcement of control measures
(C)2—PSD ............................
(D)1—I Prong 1: Interstate
transport—significant contribution .............................
(D)2—I Prong 2: Interstate
transport—interfere with
maintenance ......................
(D)3—II Prong 3: Interstate
transport—prevention of
significant deterioration .....
(D)4—II Prong 4: Interstate
transport—protect visibility
(D)5—Interstate and international pollution abatement ..................................
(E)1—Adequate resources ...
(E)2—State board requirements ................................
(F)—Stationary source monitoring system .....................
(G)—Emergency power ........
(H)—Future SIP revisions ....
(I)—Nonattainment planning
requirements of part D ......
(J)1—Consultation with government officials ................
(J)2—Public notification ........
(J)3—PSD .............................
(J)4—Visibility protection ......
(K)—Air quality modeling/
data ...................................
(L)—Permitting fees ..............
(M)—Consultation and participation by affected local
entities ...............................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:12 Aug 30, 2017
2012 PM2.5
A
A
A
A
NA
NA
A
NA
A
A
A
A
A
A
*
A
A
A
*
A
A
A
Jkt 241001
In the above table, the key is as
follows:
A ..............
NA ...........
* ..............
Approve.
No Action/Separate Rulemaking.
Not germane to infrastructure
SIPs.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive 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).
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: August 21, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2017–18503 Filed 8–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0154; FRL–9967–20–
Region 9]
Approval of Nevada Air Plan
Revisions, Washoe Oxygenated Fuels
Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
revision to the Nevada State
Implementation Plan (SIP). This
revision concerns emissions of carbon
monoxide (CO) from passenger vehicles.
We are proposing to approve the
suspension of a local rule that regulated
these emission sources under the Clean
Air Act (CAA or the Act). We are taking
comments on this proposal and plan to
follow with a final action.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by
October 2, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
OAR–2017–0154 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
Buss.Jeffrey@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, the EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\31AUP1.SGM
31AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 168 (Thursday, August 31, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 41379-41386]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18503]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0343; FRL-9967-18-Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve elements of a state implementation plan (SIP) submission from
Indiana regarding the infrastructure requirements of section 110 of the
Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2012 fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) 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 October 2, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2016-0343 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.
[[Page 41380]]
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: Eric Svingen, 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) 353-4489,
svingen.eric@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What is the background of this SIP submission?
II. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate this SIP submission?
III. What is EPA's analysis of this SIP submission?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background of this SIP submission?
A. What state submission does this rulemaking address?
In this rulemaking, EPA is proposing to take action on a June 10,
2016, submission from the Indiana Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM) intended to address all applicable infrastructure
requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. On December 28, 2016,
IDEM supplemented this submittal with additional documentation intended
to address the transport requirements of Section 110(a)(2)(D) for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS; EPA will take action on this supplement in
a separate rulemaking.
B. Why did the state make this SIP submission?
Under section 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 2012 PM2.5 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 \1\ National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (2007
Guidance) and has issued additional guidance documents, the most recent
on September 13, 2013, entitled ``Guidance on Infrastructure State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under CAA Sections 110(a)(1) and
(2)'' (2013 Guidance). The SIP submission referenced in this rulemaking
pertains to the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2),
and addresses the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ PM2.5 refers to particles with an aerodynamic
diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers, oftentimes
referred to as ``fine'' particles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
EPA is acting upon the SIP submission from Indiana that addresses
the infrastructure requirements of CAA section 110(a)(1) and (2) for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The requirement for states to make SIP
submissions of this type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1), which
states that 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 section 110(a)(1) and (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 SIP submissions that address the nonattainment planning requirements
of part D and the prevention of significant deterioration (PSD)
requirements of part C of title I of the CAA, and ``regional haze SIP''
submissions required to address the visibility protection requirements
of CAA section 169A.
In this rulemaking, EPA will not take action on three substantive
areas of section 110(a)(2): (i) Existing provisions related to excess
emissions during periods of start-up, shutdown, or malfunction
(``SSM'') at sources, that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA's
policies addressing such excess emissions; (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 notice or without requiring further approval by EPA,
that may be contrary to the CAA; and, (iii) existing provisions for PSD
programs that may be inconsistent with current requirements of EPA's
``Final 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).
II. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate this SIP submission?
EPA's guidance for this infrastructure SIP submission is embodied
in the 2007 Guidance referenced above. Specifically, attachment A of
the 2007 Guidance (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. As discussed above,
EPA issued additional guidance, the most recent being the 2013 Guidance
that further clarifies aspects of infrastructure SIPs that are not
NAAQS specific.
III. What is EPA's analysis of this SIP submission?
Pursuant to section 110(a), states must provide reasonable notice
and opportunity for public hearing for all infrastructure SIP
submissions. On April 26, 2016, IDEM opened a 30-day comment period,
and provided the opportunity for public hearing. No comments or
requests for public hearing were received.
Indiana provided a detailed synopsis of how various components of
its SIP meet each of the applicable
[[Page 41381]]
requirements in section 110(a)(2) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS,
as applicable. The following review evaluates the state's submission.
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.\2\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 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 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS, Indiana implements controls and emission limits for particulate
matter in 326 Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 6. Additionally,
Indiana provides emission limits for Clark, Dearborn, Dubois, Howard,
Marion, St. Joseph, Vanderburgh, Vigo, and Wayne counties at 326 IAC
6.5, and Lake County at 326 IAC 6.8. EPA proposes that Indiana has met
the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) with
respect to the 2012 PM2.5 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 2017 Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan on October 31,
2016, including the plan for PM2.5. IDEM enters air
monitoring data into 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 2012
PM2.5 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 new source review (NSR)
requirements under PSD and nonattainment NSR (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 PM2.5
and the identification of PM2.5 and PM10 \3\
condensables in the PSD program; (iv) PM2.5 increments in
the PSD program; and, (v) greenhouse gas (GHG) permitting and the
``Tailoring Rule.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ PM10 refers to particles with an aerodynamic
diameter of less than or equal to 10 micrometers.
\4\ 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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 2012
PM2.5 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.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 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 2012
PM2.5 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
[[Page 41382]]
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 volatile organic compounds (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).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 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
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 2012 PM2.5 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 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, pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21, those PSD increments 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 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 5: GHG Permitting and the ``Tailoring Rule''
With respect to the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) as well as
section 110(a)(2)(J), EPA interprets the CAA to
[[Page 41383]]
require each state to make an infrastructure SIP submission for a new
or revised NAAQS that demonstrates that the state 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 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 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 2012 PM2.5 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), and most recently
approved revisions to the program on March 16, 2015 (see 80 FR 13493).
IDEM and EPA rely on the 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 2012
PM2.5 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.
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. EPA is not taking action on
this infrastructure element in regards to the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS and will do so in a future rulemaking.
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 2012 PM2.5 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 2012 PM2.5 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 in 326 IAC 2-
3, and are consistent with 40 CFR 51.165. Therefore, EPA proposes that
Indiana has met all of the applicable PSD requirements for the 2012
PM2.5 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
[[Page 41384]]
visibility protection requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Instead, EPA will evaluate Indiana's
compliance with these requirements in a separate rulemaking.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 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 2012 PM2.5 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 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 2012 PM2.5 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. 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 2012 PM2.5 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 2012 PM2.5 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 1-5 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
[[Page 41385]]
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 2012 PM2.5 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 2012 PM2.5 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.
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 2012 PM2.5 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 to 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 in 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. In addition, IDEM 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
PM2.5.\8\ EPA proposes that Indiana has met the
infrastructure SIP requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J)
with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 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 above 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 2012 PM2.5 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
2012 PM2.5 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 all 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 2012 PM2.5 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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
[[Page 41386]]
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 public hearing 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 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve most elements of a submission from
Indiana certifying that its current SIP is sufficient to meet the
required infrastructure elements under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for
the 2012 PM2.5 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 2012 PM2.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A)--Emission limits and other control measures........ A
(B)--Ambient air quality monitoring/data system........ A
(C)1--Program for enforcement of control measures...... A
(C)2--PSD.............................................. A
(D)1--I Prong 1: Interstate transport--significant NA
contribution..........................................
(D)2--I Prong 2: Interstate transport--interfere with NA
maintenance...........................................
(D)3--II Prong 3: Interstate transport--prevention of A
significant deterioration.............................
(D)4--II Prong 4: Interstate transport--protect NA
visibility............................................
(D)5--Interstate and international pollution abatement. A
(E)1--Adequate resources............................... A
(E)2--State board requirements......................... A
(F)--Stationary source monitoring system............... A
(G)--Emergency power................................... A
(H)--Future SIP revisions.............................. A
(I)--Nonattainment planning requirements of part D..... *
(J)1--Consultation with government officials........... A
(J)2--Public notification.............................. A
(J)3--PSD.............................................. A
(J)4--Visibility protection............................ *
(K)--Air quality modeling/data......................... A
(L)--Permitting fees................................... A
(M)--Consultation and participation by affected local A
entities..............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the above table, the key is as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A......................................... Approve.
NA........................................ No Action/Separate
Rulemaking.
*........................................ Not germane to
infrastructure SIPs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 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, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: August 21, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2017-18503 Filed 8-30-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P