Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Attainment Plan for the Morgan County Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area, 32672-32678 [2019-14474]
Download as PDF
32672
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2019 / Proposed Rules
submissions in accordance with 40 CFR
51.102. The submission also satisfied
the completeness criteria of 40 CFR part
51, appendix V. The state provided
public notice from May 15, 2018 to
August 2, 2018, and received no
comments on this rule. In addition, the
revision meets the substantive SIP
requirements of the CAA, including
section 110 and implementing
regulations.
IV. What action is the EPA taking?
We are processing this as a proposed
action because we are soliciting
comments on this proposed action.
Final rulemaking will occur after
consideration of any comments.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, as described in the
proposed amendments to 40 CFR part
52 set forth below, the EPA is proposing
to remove provisions of the EPAApproved Missouri Regulations from
the Missouri State Implementation Plan,
which is incorporated by reference in
accordance with the requirements of 1
CFR part 51.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act 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);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866.
• 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:55 Jul 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
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 the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTA) because this
rulemaking does not involve technical
standards; 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).
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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: June 24, 2019.
James Gulliford,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the EPA proposes to amend
40 CFR part 52 as set forth below:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart—AA Missouri
2. In § 52.1320, the table in paragraph
(c) is amended by removing the entry
‘‘10–2.390’’ under the heading ‘‘Chapter
2—Air Quality Standards and Air
■
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Pollution Control Regulations for the
Kansas City Metropolitan Area’’.
[FR Doc. 2019–14005 Filed 7–8–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0700; FRL–9996–34–
Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Attainment
Plan for the Morgan County Sulfur
Dioxide Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
as a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision the Morgan County-related
elements of an Indiana submission to
EPA dated October 2, 2015, as
supplemented on February 8, 2019. The
October 2015 submission addresses
attainment of the 2010 sulfur dioxide
(SO2) national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) for four areas. The
February 8, 2019 supplement provides
additional modeling information
regarding the adequacy of the plan for
Morgan County. EPA proposes to
conclude that Indiana has appropriately
demonstrated that the plan provisions
provided for attainment of the 2010 SO2
NAAQS in the Morgan County area by
the applicable attainment date and that
the plan meets the other applicable
requirements under the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 8, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2015–0700 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
aburano.douglas@epa.gov. For
comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed
from Regulations.gov. For either manner
of submission, EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. EPA will generally not consider
comments or comment contents located
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2019 / Proposed Rules
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: John
Summerhays, Environmental Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6067,
summerhays.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
following outline is provided to aid in
locating information in this preamble.
Table of Contents
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
I. Why was Indiana required to submit an
SO2 plan for Morgan County?
II. Requirements for SO2 Nonattainment Area
Plans
III. Requirements for Attainment
Demonstrations
IV. Review of Indiana’s Modeled Attainment
Plan for Morgan County
A. Model Selection and General Model
Inputs
B. Meteorological Data
C. Emissions Data
D. Emission Limits
E. Background Concentrations
F. Summary of Results
V. Review of Other Plan Requirements
A. Emissions Inventory
B. RACM/RACT
C. New Source Review (NSR)
D. RFP
E. Contingency Measures
VI. EPA’s Proposed Action
VII. Incorporation by Reference
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Why was Indiana required to submit
an SO2 plan for Morgan County?
On June 22, 2010, EPA promulgated a
new 1-hour primary SO2 NAAQS of 75
parts per billion (ppb), which is met at
an ambient air quality monitoring site
when the 3-year average of the annual
99th percentile of daily maximum 1hour average concentrations does not
exceed 75 ppb, as determined in
accordance with appendix T of 40 CFR
part 50. See 75 FR 35520, codified at 40
CFR 50.17(a)–(b). On August 5, 2013,
EPA designated a first set of 29 areas of
the country as nonattainment for the
2010 SO2 NAAQS, including the
Indianapolis (Marion County), Morgan
County, Southwest Indiana (Daviess and
Pike Counties), and Terre Haute (Vigo
County) areas within Indiana. See 78 FR
47191, codified at 40 CFR part 81,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:55 Jul 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
subpart C. These area designations were
effective October 4, 2013. Section 191(a)
of the Clean Air Act directs states to
submit SIPs for areas designated as
nonattainment for the SO2 NAAQS to
EPA within 18 months of the effective
date of the designation, i.e., by no later
than April 4, 2015 in this case. Under
Clean Air Act section 192(a), the states
are required to demonstrate that their
respective areas will attain the NAAQS
as expeditiously as practicable, but no
later than five years from the effective
date of designation, which is October 4,
2018.
In response to the requirement for SO2
nonattainment plan submittals, Indiana
submitted nonattainment plans for the
above four areas on October 2, 2015.
EPA published proposed action on three
of these areas, namely the Indianapolis,
Southwest Indiana, and Terre Haute
areas on August 15, 2018, at 83 FR
40487, and published final action on
two of these areas (Indianapolis and
Terre Haute) on March 22, 2019, at 84
FR 10692. Today’s action does not
address those three areas, but addresses
the fourth area, in Morgan County. The
remainder of this preamble describes
the requirements that SO2
nonattainment plans must meet in order
to obtain EPA approval, provides a
review of the state’s plan for Morgan
County with respect to these
requirements, and describes EPA’s
proposed action on the plan for Morgan
County.
In addition to its submittal, Indiana
sent multiple supplemental letters
addressing the Morgan County SO2
nonattainment plan. On November 15,
2017, Indiana provided clarifications on
the derivation of emissions inventories
and on other issues pertinent to the
Morgan County plan as well as to the
other three plans in the state’s October
2, 2015 submittal. On June 7, 2017,
Indiana withdrew the control
requirements for Hydraulic Press Brick
from consideration as part of the
Morgan County SIP. However, on
February 12, 2019, Indiana reactivated
its request for action on these control
requirements. Also, on February 8,
2019, Indiana submitted additional
technical information in support of a
conclusion that the Morgan County plan
provides for attainment even when
analyzed with a more conservative
background concentration.
II. Requirements for SO2
Nonattainment Area Plans
Nonattainment SIPs must meet the
applicable requirements of the Clean Air
Act, specifically Clean Air Act sections
110, 172, 191 and 192. EPA’s
regulations governing nonattainment
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
32673
SIPs are set forth at 40 CFR part 51, with
specific procedural requirements and
control strategy requirements residing at
subparts F and G, respectively. Soon
after Congress enacted the 1990
Amendments to the Clean Air Act, EPA
issued comprehensive guidance on SIPs,
in a document entitled the ‘‘General
Preamble for the Implementation of
Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments
of 1990,’’ published at 57 FR 13498
(April 16, 1992) (General Preamble).
Among other things, the General
Preamble addressed SO2 SIPs and
fundamental principles for SIP control
strategies. Id., at 57 FR 13545–13549,
13567–13568. On April 23, 2014, EPA
issued guidance for meeting the
statutory requirements in SO2 SIPs
submitted under the 2010 NAAQS, in a
document entitled, ‘‘Guidance for 1Hour SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP
Submissions,’’ available at https://
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/
2016-06/documents/20140423guidance_
nonattainment_sip.pdf. In this guidance
EPA described the statutory
requirements for a complete
nonattainment area SO2 SIP, which
includes: An accurate emissions
inventory of current emissions for all
sources of SO2 within the
nonattainment area; an attainment
demonstration; demonstration of
reasonable further progress (RFP);
implementation of reasonably available
control measures (RACM) (including
reasonably available control techniques
(RACT)); new source review (NSR);
enforceable emissions limitations and
control measures; and adequate
contingency measures for the affected
area. A synopsis of these requirements
is also provided in the notice of
proposed rulemaking on the Illinois SO2
nonattainment plans, published on
October 5, 2017 at 82 FR 46434.
In order for EPA to fully approve a
SIP as meeting the requirements of
Clean Air Act sections 110, 172 and
191–192 and EPA’s regulations at 40
CFR part 51, the SIP for the affected area
needs to demonstrate to EPA’s
satisfaction that each of the
aforementioned requirements have been
met. Under Clean Air Act sections 110(l)
and 193, EPA may not approve a SIP
that would interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning NAAQS
attainment and RFP, or any other
applicable requirement, and no
requirement in effect (or required to be
adopted by an order, settlement,
agreement, or plan in effect before
November 15, 1990) in any area which
is a nonattainment area for any air
pollutant, may be modified in any
manner unless it ensures equivalent or
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
32674
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2019 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
greater emission reductions of such air
pollutant.
III. Requirements for Attainment
Demonstrations
Clean Air Act sections 172(c)(1),
172(c)(6) and 192(a) direct states with
SO2 areas designated as nonattainment
to demonstrate that the submitted plan
provides for attainment of the NAAQS.
40 CFR part 51 subpart G further
delineates the control strategy
requirements that SIPs must meet, and
EPA has long required that all SIPs and
control strategies reflect four
fundamental principles of
quantification, enforceability,
replicability, and accountability.
General Preamble, at 13567–68. SO2
attainment plans must consist of two
components: (1) Emission limits and
other control measures that assure
implementation of permanent,
enforceable and necessary emission
controls, and (2) a modeling analysis
which meets the requirements of 40 CFR
part 51, appendix W (Guideline on Air
Quality Models) and demonstrates that
these emission limits and control
measures provide for timely attainment
of the primary SO2 NAAQS as
expeditiously as practicable, but by no
later than the attainment date for the
affected area. In all cases, the emission
limits and control measures must be
accompanied by appropriate methods
and conditions to determine compliance
with the respective emission limits and
control measures and must be
quantifiable (i.e., a specific amount of
emission reduction can be ascribed to
the measures), fully enforceable
(specifying clear, unambiguous and
measurable requirements for which
compliance can be practicably
determined), replicable (the procedures
for determining compliance are
sufficiently specific and objective so
that two independent entities applying
the procedures would obtain the same
result), and accountable (source specific
limits must be permanent and must
reflect the assumptions used in the SIP
demonstrations).
EPA’s April 2014 guidance
recommends that the emission limits be
expressed as short-term average limits
(e.g., addressing emissions averaged
over one or three hours), but also
describes the option to utilize emission
limits with longer averaging times of up
to 30 days so long as the state meets
various suggested criteria. Indiana’s
plan for Morgan County involves mostly
work practice requirements (i.e.,
requirements that the primary boilers at
Indianapolis Power and Light-Eagle
Valley burn natural gas and that
Hydraulic Press Brick employ sorbent
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:55 Jul 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
injection generally achieving 50 percent
emission control) and does not rely on
any longer term average limits.
Preferred air quality models for use in
regulatory applications are described in
appendix A of EPA’s Guideline on Air
Quality Models.1 In 2005, EPA
promulgated AERMOD as the Agency’s
preferred near-field dispersion modeling
for a wide range of regulatory
applications addressing stationary
sources (for example in estimating SO2
concentrations) in all types of terrain
based on extensive developmental and
performance evaluation. Supplemental
guidance on modeling for purposes of
demonstrating attainment of the SO2
standard is provided in appendix A to
the April 23, 2014 SO2 nonattainment
area SIP guidance document referenced
above. Appendix A provides extensive
guidance on the modeling domain, the
source inputs, assorted types of
meteorological data, and background
concentrations. Consistency with the
recommendations in this guidance is
generally necessary for the attainment
demonstration to offer adequately
reliable assurance that the plan provides
for attainment.
As stated previously, attainment
demonstrations for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS must demonstrate future
attainment and maintenance of the
NAAQS in the entire area designated as
nonattainment (i.e., not just at the
violating monitor) by using air quality
dispersion modeling (see Guideline on
Air Quality Models) to show that the
mix of sources and enforceable control
measures and emission rates in an
identified area will not lead to a
violation of the SO2 NAAQS. For a
short-term (i.e., 1-hour) standard, EPA
believes that dispersion modeling, using
allowable emissions and addressing
stationary sources in the affected area
(and in some cases those sources located
outside the nonattainment area which
may affect attainment in the area) is
technically appropriate, efficient and
effective in demonstrating attainment in
nonattainment areas because it takes
into consideration combinations of
meteorological and emission source
operating conditions that may
contribute to peak ground-level
concentrations of SO2.
The meteorological data used in the
analysis should generally be processed
with the most recent version of
AERMET. Estimated concentrations
should include ambient background
concentrations, should follow the form
of the standard, and should be
calculated as described in section
1 EPA published revisions to the Guideline on Air
Quality Models on January 17, 2017.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2.6.1.2 of the August 23, 2010
clarification memo on ‘‘Applicability of
Appendix W Modeling Guidance for the
1-hr SO2 National Ambient Air Quality
Standard’’.
IV. Review of Indiana’s Modeled
Attainment Plan for Morgan County
The following discussion evaluates
various features of the modeling that
Indiana used in its attainment
demonstration for Morgan County.
A. Model Selection and General Model
Inputs
Indiana’s attainment demonstrations
used AERMOD, the preferred model for
these applications as identified in the
Guideline on Air Quality Models.
Indiana’s October 2015 submittal used
version 14134 of this model, which was
the most recent version at the time the
state conducted its nonattainment
planning. However, the supplemental
modeling that Indiana submitted in
February 2019 used the current version
of AERMOD, version 18081. Indiana
utilized the regulatory default mode for
all air quality modeling runs.
Indiana’s receptor grid and modeling
domain for the Morgan County area
generally followed the recommended
approaches from the Guideline on Air
Quality Models. Receptor spacing for
each modeled facility fence line was
every 50 meters, then 100-meter spacing
of receptors out to a distance of 0.5
kilometers, every 250 meters out to 2.5
kilometers, every 500 meters out to 5
kilometers, and every 1000 meters out to
10 kilometers from each facility. The
resulting receptor grid contained 10,445
receptors. An examination of the modest
modeled spatial gradients near the
facility boundaries leads to the
conclusion that no facility in the area
contributes to violations within any
other facility’s property, so that the
exclusion of receptors within facility
fencelines was acceptable.
Indiana determined that Morgan
County should be modeled with rural
dispersion characteristics. Indiana did
not provide an Auer analysis or provide
other rationale for this selection.
Nevertheless, the nonattainment area,
consisting of two townships (Clay and
Washington Townships) have a 2016
estimated population of 21,379 people
in an area of 232.3 square kilometers, an
average population density of 92 people
per square kilometer. By comparison,
the Guideline on Air Quality Models
suggests that areas with less than 750
people per square kilometer warrant
being modeled with rural dispersion
characteristics. Therefore, EPA concurs
with Indiana’s determination that this
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2019 / Proposed Rules
area warrants being modeled with rural
dispersion coefficients.
B. Meteorological Data
Indiana used the Indianapolis
National Weather Service (NWS) surface
data and the Lincoln, Illinois upper air
station (WBAN 048233) data for
modeling Morgan County. EPA finds
these selections appropriate.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
C. Emissions Data
Indiana identified two sources in
Morgan County emitting over 100 tons
per year. Indianapolis Power and Light’s
Eagle Valley power plant, which
conducts continuous SO2 emissions
monitoring, emitted 3,436 tons of SO2 in
2012. Hydraulic Press Brick, a
manufacturer of building aggregate, has
a less certain emission rate (in part due
to uncertainties in the quantity of sulfur
in the shale that is a raw material in the
process), but was estimated to have
emitted 350 tons of SO2 in 2010. Further
discussion of the modeled emissions is
provided below.
D. Emission Limits
An important prerequisite for
approval of an attainment plan is that
the emission limits that provide for
attainment be quantifiable, fully
enforceable, replicable, and
accountable. See General Preamble at
13567–68.
In preparing its plans, Indiana
adopted revisions to a previously
approved state regulation governing
emissions of SO2. These rule revisions
were adopted by the Indiana
Environmental Rules Board following
established, appropriate public review
procedures. For Eagle Valley, the
revised rule identifies the four primary
emission sources and requires these
sources to burn natural gas. The
nominal compliance date for this
requirement is January 1, 2017, but in
fact Eagle Valley stopped burning coal
in April 2016, after which all electricity
generation at this facility has been based
on burning natural gas. For Hydraulic
Press Brick, the revised rule requires use
of a limestone injection system to
achieve either 50 percent control
efficiency or 2.5 pounds of SO2 per
million British thermal units (lbs/
MMBTU), and in no case to emit more
than 6.0 lbs/MMBTU. These
requirements were also effective on
January 1, 2017. These limits are
codified in 326 IAC 7, titled ‘‘Sulfur
Dioxide Rules,’’ specifically in 326
Indiana Administrative Code 7–4–11.1
(326 IAC 7–4–11.1). Indiana also
submitted rules specifying the
compliance date for these requirements
(in 326 IAC 7–1.1–3) and the associated
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:55 Jul 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
monitoring, testing, and recordkeeping
and reporting requirements (in 326 IAC
7–2–1). The rule provisions provide
unambiguous, permanent requirements
for emission control which, if violated,
would be clear grounds for an
enforcement action.
Given the requirement for Eagle
Valley to burn natural gas, EPA finds
the low emission rate that Indiana
modeled for this plant to be an
appropriate reflection of allowable
emissions. Indiana did not explicitly
model Hydraulic Press Brick, choosing
instead to address this source as part of
the background concentration. The
adequacy of Indiana’s background
concentration to reflect the impact of
this source and other unmodeled
emissions in the area is addressed in the
following section.
E. Background Concentrations
Indiana determined background
concentrations for Morgan County using
hourly measurements at the Centerton
School monitor (site number 18–109–
1001). In its original analysis,
documented in its submittal of October
2, 2015, Indiana determined background
concentrations for this area by selecting
the 99th percentile of a monitoring data
set that excluded values when the
monitor was downwind of either the
Eagle Valley plant or Hydraulic Press
Brick, except that values below 10 ppb
were retained in the analysis. The 99th
percentile among the pertinent values
was 9.4 ppb, or 24.6 micrograms per
cubic meter (mg/m3).
The purpose of background
concentrations in a model simulation is
to represent the impact of emissions
from sources that are not explicitly
modeled. Indiana explicitly modeled
the allowable emissions from Eagle
Valley, and so Indiana’s approach,
determining background concentrations
in a manner that excluded occasions
with significant impacts from Eagle
Valley, was appropriate for avoiding
double counting the impacts of this
source. However, Indiana did not
explicitly model Hydraulic Press Brick,
choosing instead to represent this
source as part of the background
concentration in the modeling. For this
reason, EPA found it inappropriate that
Indiana excluded occasions with
impacts from Hydraulic Press Brick in
its determination of a background
concentration.
To address this concern, Indiana
conducted additional analyses to
identify background concentrations that
would better represent the impacts of
Hydraulic Press Brick and minor other
SO2 sources in the area, which it
submitted on February 8, 2019. This
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
32675
analysis used data from the same
monitoring site as Indiana’s prior
analysis (site number 18–109–1001),
using data from the most recent
available three calendar years of data
(2015 to 2017). Indiana again used
meteorological data from the
Indianapolis National Weather Service
site for this analysis.
Examination of these data led to the
finding that aside from occasions when
Eagle Valley was upwind of the
monitor, the highest concentrations
were observed when winds were in a
relatively narrow band of wind
directions approximately centered on
Hydraulic Press Brick being upwind of
the monitor. Ordinarily background
concentrations are determined by
examining concentrations for almost all
wind directions, excluding data for a
modest set of directions when modeled
sources are upwind. However, in this
case Indiana followed the reverse
approach, excluding occasions when
Hydraulic Press Brick was not upwind
of the monitor and considering
concentrations only for a relatively
small band of wind directions in which
the largest unmodeled source
(Hydraulic Press Brick) was most
directly upwind. In particular, the data
set used in this analysis included
concentrations when the winds were
from between 25 degrees and 60 degrees
(roughly from NNE to ENE). This
approach was designed to estimate the
maximum background concentration
that could be attributed to unmodeled
sources in the area, including a
conservative representation of the
impacts of Hydraulic Press Brick.
EPA guidance offers both the option
to determine a single background
concentration, to be used for all seasons
and all hours, and the option to
determine separate season- and hourspecific background concentrations.
Indiana applied both options in this
case. The resulting single background
concentration was 96.0 mg/m3, or 36.7
ppb. The resulting season- and hourspecific background concentrations
ranged from 2.8 to 114.5 mg/m3 (1.1 ppb
to 43.7 ppb). Indiana then used these
background concentrations in additional
model runs to provide a supplemental
assessment of whether its plan provides
for attainment.
F. Summary of Results
Modeling for Morgan County in
Indiana’s October 2, 2015 submittal
showed a design value of 35.9 mg/m3
(13.7 ppb). Modeling in Indiana’s
February 8, 2019 submittal used two
approaches that provided a more
conservative representation of
background concentrations. The
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
32676
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2019 / Proposed Rules
modeling run using a single background
concentration for all seasons and hours
showed a design value of 103.69 mg/m3
(39.6 ppb). The modeling run using
season- and hour-specific background
concentrations yielded a design value of
117.33 mg/m3 (44.8 ppb), slightly higher
than the run using a single background
concentration. Both of these runs show
design values well below 196.4 mg/m3
(75 ppb). Therefore, EPA concludes that
Indiana’s plan provides for attainment
in this area.
Pursuant to the requirements in
Indiana’s rules, Hydraulic Press Brick
began sorbent injection, to achieve
either 50 percent control or 2.5 lbs/
MMBTU of SO2, beginning by January 1,
2017. With this approximate start date,
the period from 2015 to 2017 used in
Indiana’s assessment of background
concentrations reflected two years
without this control measure and one
year with it. While insufficient data are
available to estimate the air quality
benefits of this control measure, the
continued implementation of this
measure is expected to result in lower
future background concentrations and to
assure that background concentrations
will not increase above these levels.
Indiana’s letter of February 12, 2019
requests EPA approval of the control
requirements for Hydraulic Press Brick,
which will help assure that background
concentrations will remain at or below
the level in Indiana’s estimate, thereby
helping assure that Indiana’s plan
provides for attainment.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
V. Review of Other Plan Requirements
A. Emissions Inventory
The emissions inventory and source
emission rate data for an area serve as
the foundation for air quality modeling
and other analyses that enable states to:
(1) Estimate the degree to which
different sources within a
nonattainment area contribute to
violations within the affected area; and
(2) assess the expected improvement in
air quality within the nonattainment
area due to the adoption and
implementation of control measures. As
noted above, the state must develop and
submit to EPA a comprehensive,
accurate and current inventory of actual
emissions from all sources of SO2
emissions in each nonattainment area,
as well as any sources located outside
the nonattainment area which may
affect attainment in the area. See Clean
Air Act section 172(c)(3).
Indiana provided a comprehensive,
accurate, and current inventory of SO2
emissions for Morgan County. Indiana
identified two sources in the county that
emitted over 100 tons of SO2 per year,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:55 Jul 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
namely Eagle Valley and Hydraulic
Press Brick. Indiana also summarized
emissions in the following source
categories: Electric-generating units
(EGUs), non-EGUs (point), non-point
(area), non-road, and on-road sources of
SO2. This summary of emissions is
shown in Table 1. Indiana uploads point
source emissions to the National
Emissions Inventory (NEI) annually. For
the 2011 base year inventory, emissions
from EGU and non-EGUs are actual
reported emissions. Data for airport,
area, non-road, and on-road emissions
were compiled from the EPA Emissions
Modeling Clearinghouse (SO2 NAAQS
Emissions Modeling platform 2007/
2007v5) for the 2008 NEI and the 2018
projected inventory year. Data were
interpolated between 2008 and 2014 to
determine the airport, area, non-road,
and on-road emissions 2011 inventory
and between 2014–2020 for 2018. These
inventories can be found in appendix H
of the submitted attainment
demonstration. Also, for each of the four
areas addressed in its submittal,
including Morgan County, Indiana
provided modeling inputs that include
a listing of the individual sources with
sufficient proximity to and impact on
the nonattainment areas to warrant
being explicitly included in the
modeling analysis.
Indiana’s emission inventory
indicated that Eagle Valley in 2012
emitted 3,436 tons of SO2. This
precisely matches the emissions
quantity that Eagle Valley reported to
EPA under applicable emissions
monitoring and reporting requirements.
Indiana indicated that Hydraulic Press
Brick in 2010 emitted 350 tons of SO2.
This is similar to the SO2 emission rate
reported in the 2011 National Emission
Inventory, though no emissions of SO2
are reported in the 2014 National
Emission Inventory. Notwithstanding
the difficulty of estimating emissions
from this source, particularly as it
relates to the quantity of SO2 emissions
that arises from sulfur in the shale that
the facility uses as a raw material, EPA
believes that Indiana’s SIP submittal
provides a suitable estimate of the
emissions from this source for planning
purposes.
TABLE 1—2011 ACTUAL EMISSIONS
INVENTORY FOR MORGAN COUNTY—
Continued
2011 Emissions
in Morgan County
(tpy)
On-road ...........................
10
Total .........................
11,297
By providing a comprehensive,
accurate, and current inventory of SO2
emissions for Morgan County, Indiana
has met the emission inventory
requirement of Clean Air Act section
172(c)(3) for this area. This inventory
represents emissions in 2011, a time
when the areas were violating the
standard. The state also provided
allowable attainment year emissions in
its modeling analysis.
B. RACM/RACT
In its submission, Indiana discusses
its rationale for concluding that the
nonattainment plans meet the RACM/
RACT requirements in accordance with
EPA guidance. For most criteria
pollutants, RACT is control technology
as needed to meet the NAAQS that is
reasonably available considering
technological and economic feasibility.
However, Indiana cites EPA guidance
that the definition of RACT for SO2 is,
simply, ‘‘that control technology which
is necessary to achieve the NAAQS (40
CFR 51.100(o))’’. See General Preamble,
57 FR 13547 (April 16, 1992),
synopsizing the SO2 RACT requirement
in 40 CFR 51.100(o). Indiana in fact
requires the control technology that
modeling shows to be necessary to
ensure attainment of the SO2 NAAQS by
the applicable attainment date.
In addition, Indiana has adopted and
submitted limits that require effective
control of the most significant sources
in Morgan County. The requirement for
Eagle Valley to burn natural gas brings
the emissions of this source nearly to
zero. The requirement for Hydraulic
Press Brick to operate a sorbent
injection system in a manner that
generally achieves 50 percent emission
control requires operating a control that
is cost effective and achieves a relatively
high degree of control for this type of
source. Thus, while Indiana did not
TABLE 1—2011 ACTUAL EMISSIONS
conduct a cost effectiveness analysis of
INVENTORY FOR MORGAN COUNTY
these controls, and EPA does not require
2011 Emissions
such an analysis, the controls required
in Morgan County in this area appear to represent a full set
(tpy)
of reasonably available emission
EGU ................................
10,875 control.
Indiana has determined that these
Other Point .....................
387
Area ................................
24 measures suffice to provide for timely
Non-road .........................
1 attainment. EPA concurs and proposes
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2019 / Proposed Rules
to conclude that the state has satisfied
the requirements in sections 172(c)(1)
and (6) to adopt and submit all RACT/
RACM and emission limitations and
control measures as needed to attain the
standards as expeditiously as
practicable.
C. New Source Review (NSR)
As Indiana’s submittal explains, EPA
approved Indiana’s nonattainment new
source review rules on October 7, 1994
(94 FR 24838). As Indiana notes, these
rules provide for appropriate new
source review for SO2 sources
undergoing construction (or major
modification) in the Morgan County
area. No modification of the approved
rules is necessary to meet the NSR
requirements. Therefore, EPA concludes
that this requirement has already been
met for these areas.
D. RFP
Indiana’s adopted rules in 326 IAC 7
require that control measures be
implemented no later than January 1,
2017. Indiana has concluded that this
plan requires that affected sources
implement appropriate control
measures as expeditiously as practicable
in order to ensure attainment of the
standard by the applicable attainment
date. Indiana concludes that this plan
therefore provides for RFP in
accordance with the approach to RFP
described in EPA’s guidance. EPA
concurs and proposes to conclude that
the plan provides for RFP.
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
E. Contingency Measures
Indiana’s approach to contingency
measures is one of the subjects of a
clarification memo that Indiana
submitted on November 15, 2017. In
this memo, Indiana explained its
rationale for concluding that its plans
met the requirement for contingency
measures in accordance with EPA
guidance. Specifically, Indiana relies on
EPA’s guidance, noting the special
circumstances that apply to SO2, and
explaining on that basis why the
contingency measures requirement in
Clean Air Act section 172(c)(9) is met
for SO2 by having a comprehensive
program to identify sources of violations
of the SO2 NAAQS and to undertake an
aggressive follow-up for compliance and
enforcement of applicable emissions
limitations. Indiana stated that it has
such an enforcement program as
codified in Indiana Code Title 13,
Articles 14 and 15, identifying violators
and taking prompt, appropriate
enforcement action. On this basis, EPA
proposes to conclude that Indiana’s
nonattainment plans satisfy contingency
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:55 Jul 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
32677
measure requirements for the Morgan
County nonattainment area.
Indiana’s rules also provide for
additional contingency measures as
necessary, following a review of any air
quality problems that become identified
and following a review of options for
mitigating the problems that arise.
However, Indiana is not relying on these
provisions to satisfy the requirements
for contingency measures.
proposing to incorporate by reference
326 IAC 7–4–11.1, ‘‘Morgan County
sulfur dioxide emission limitations’’,
effective at the state on October 2, 2015.
EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these documents generally
available through www.regulations.gov,
and at the EPA Region 5 Office. (Please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information.)
VI. EPA’s Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve Indiana’s
SIP submission, which the state
submitted to EPA on October 2, 2015
and supplemented on November 15,
2017, June 7, 2017, February 8, 2019,
and February 12, 2019, for attaining the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for the Morgan
County area. This SO2 nonattainment
plan includes Indiana’s attainment
demonstration for this area. The
nonattainment plan also addresses
requirements for emission inventories,
RACT/RACM, RFP, and contingency
measures. Indiana has previously
addressed requirements regarding
nonattainment area NSR. EPA has
determined that Indiana’s SO2
nonattainment plan for Morgan County
meets the applicable requirements of
Clean Air Act sections 110, 172, 191,
and 192.
The rules that underpin Indiana’s
attainment plan for Morgan County
include Indiana Administrative Code,
Title 326, Rule 7–4–11.1 (326 IAC 7–4–
11.1, entitled ‘‘Morgan County sulfur
dioxide emission limitations’’), as well
as Rule 326 IAC 7–1.1–3 (entitled
‘‘Compliance date’’) and Rule 326 IAC
7–2–1 (entitled ‘‘Reporting
requirements; methods to determine
compliance’’). EPA has already
approved the latter two rules, as part of
its rulemaking on the plans for Marion
and Vigo Counties. These rules provide
compliance dates and recordkeeping
and compliance determination
provisions that apply to all four areas in
Indiana’s original submittal. Because
these latter two rules are already part of
the Indiana SIP, and no further action
on these rules is necessary, EPA is
proposing only to approve 326 IAC 7–
4–11.1.
EPA is taking public comments for
thirty days following the publication of
this proposed action in the Federal
Register. EPA will take all comments
into consideration in our final action.
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed 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 proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
VII. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
32678
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2019 / Proposed Rules
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
Reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: June 26, 2019.
Cheryl L. Newton,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2019–14474 Filed 7–8–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2019–0216; FRL–9996–09–
Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Second
Maintenance Plan for 1997 Ozone
NAAQS; Dayton-Springfield
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Table of Contents
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
under the Clean Air Act (CAA), as a
revision to the Ohio State
Implementation Plan (SIP), the State’s
plan for maintaining the 1997 ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS or standard) through 2028 in
the Dayton-Springfield area. The
Dayton-Springfield area consists of
Clark, Greene, Miami and Montgomery
Counties. The Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency (Ohio EPA)
submitted this SIP revision to EPA on
April 12, 2019.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 8, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket No. EPA–EPA–
R05–OAR–2019–0216 at https://
www.regulations.gov or via email to
aburano.douglas@epa.gov. For
comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:55 Jul 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed
from Regulations.gov. For either manner
of submission, EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. EPA will generally not consider
comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e.
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person
identified in the ‘‘For Further
Information Contact’’ section. For the
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathleen D’Agostino, Environmental
Scientist, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR–18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604, (312) 886–1767,
dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, the terms
‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’, and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
I. Summary of EPA’s Proposed Action
II. Background
III. EPA’s Evaluation of Ohio’s SIP Submittal
A. Second Maintenance Plan
B. Transportation Conformity
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Summary of EPA’s Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve, as a
revision to the Ohio SIP, an updated
1997 ozone NAAQS maintenance plan
for the Dayton-Springfield area. The
maintenance plan is designed to keep
the Dayton-Springfield area in
attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS
through 2028.
II. Background
Ground-level ozone is formed when
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) and volatile
organic compounds (VOC) react in the
presence of sunlight. These two
pollutants are referred to as ozone
precursors. Scientific evidence indicates
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
that adverse public health effects occur
following exposure to ozone.
In 1979, under section 109 of the
Clean Air Act (CAA), EPA established
primary and secondary NAAQS for
ozone at 0.12 parts per million (ppm),
averaged over a 1-hour period. 44 FR
8202 (February 8, 1979). On July 18,
1997, EPA revised the primary and
secondary NAAQS for ozone to set the
acceptable level of ozone in the ambient
air at 0.08 ppm, averaged over an 8-hour
period. 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997).1
EPA set the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based
on scientific evidence demonstrating
that ozone causes adverse health effects
at lower concentrations and over longer
periods of time than was understood
when the pre-existing 1-hour ozone
NAAQS was set.
Following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, EPA is required by the
CAA to designate areas throughout the
nation as attaining or not attaining the
NAAQS. On April 15, 2004 (69 FR
23857), EPA designated the DaytonSpringfield as nonattainment for the
1997 ozone NAAQS, and the
designations became effective on June
15, 2004. Under the CAA, states are also
required to adopt and submit SIPs to
implement, maintain, and enforce the
NAAQS in designated nonattainment
areas and throughout the state.
When a nonattainment area has three
years of complete, certified air quality
data that has been determined to attain
the 1997 ozone NAAQS, and the area
has met other required criteria described
in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, the
state can submit to EPA a request to be
redesignated to attainment, referred to
as a ‘‘maintenance area’’.2
One of the criteria for redesignation is
to have an approved maintenance plan
under CAA section 175A. The
maintenance plan must demonstrate
that the area will continue to maintain
the standard for the period extending 10
years after redesignation, and it must
contain such additional measures as
necessary to ensure maintenance and
1 In March 2008, EPA completed another review
of the primary and secondary ozone standards and
tightened them further by lowering the level for
both to 0.075 ppm. 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
Additionally, in October 2015, EPA completed a
review of the primary and secondary ozone
standards and tightened them by lowering the level
for both to 0.70 ppm. 80 FR 65292 (October 26,
2015).
2 Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA sets out the
requirements for redesignation. They include
attainment of the NAAQS, full approval under
section 110(k) of the applicable SIP, determination
that improvement in air quality is a result of
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions,
demonstration that the state has met all applicable
section 110 and part D requirements, and a fully
approved maintenance plan under CAA section
175A.
E:\FR\FM\09JYP1.SGM
09JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 131 (Tuesday, July 9, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32672-32678]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14474]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2015-0700; FRL-9996-34-Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Attainment Plan for the Morgan County
Sulfur Dioxide Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve as a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision the Morgan
County-related elements of an Indiana submission to EPA dated October
2, 2015, as supplemented on February 8, 2019. The October 2015
submission addresses attainment of the 2010 sulfur dioxide
(SO2) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for four
areas. The February 8, 2019 supplement provides additional modeling
information regarding the adequacy of the plan for Morgan County. EPA
proposes to conclude that Indiana has appropriately demonstrated that
the plan provisions provided for attainment of the 2010 SO2
NAAQS in the Morgan County area by the applicable attainment date and
that the plan meets the other applicable requirements under the Clean
Air Act.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 8, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2015-0700 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located
[[Page 32673]]
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: John Summerhays, Environmental
Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6067,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following outline is provided to aid in
locating information in this preamble.
Table of Contents
I. Why was Indiana required to submit an SO2 plan for
Morgan County?
II. Requirements for SO2 Nonattainment Area Plans
III. Requirements for Attainment Demonstrations
IV. Review of Indiana's Modeled Attainment Plan for Morgan County
A. Model Selection and General Model Inputs
B. Meteorological Data
C. Emissions Data
D. Emission Limits
E. Background Concentrations
F. Summary of Results
V. Review of Other Plan Requirements
A. Emissions Inventory
B. RACM/RACT
C. New Source Review (NSR)
D. RFP
E. Contingency Measures
VI. EPA's Proposed Action
VII. Incorporation by Reference
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Why was Indiana required to submit an SO2 plan for Morgan
County?
On June 22, 2010, EPA promulgated a new 1-hour primary
SO2 NAAQS of 75 parts per billion (ppb), which is met at an
ambient air quality monitoring site when the 3-year average of the
annual 99th percentile of daily maximum 1-hour average concentrations
does not exceed 75 ppb, as determined in accordance with appendix T of
40 CFR part 50. See 75 FR 35520, codified at 40 CFR 50.17(a)-(b). On
August 5, 2013, EPA designated a first set of 29 areas of the country
as nonattainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, including the
Indianapolis (Marion County), Morgan County, Southwest Indiana (Daviess
and Pike Counties), and Terre Haute (Vigo County) areas within Indiana.
See 78 FR 47191, codified at 40 CFR part 81, subpart C. These area
designations were effective October 4, 2013. Section 191(a) of the
Clean Air Act directs states to submit SIPs for areas designated as
nonattainment for the SO2 NAAQS to EPA within 18 months of
the effective date of the designation, i.e., by no later than April 4,
2015 in this case. Under Clean Air Act section 192(a), the states are
required to demonstrate that their respective areas will attain the
NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than five years
from the effective date of designation, which is October 4, 2018.
In response to the requirement for SO2 nonattainment
plan submittals, Indiana submitted nonattainment plans for the above
four areas on October 2, 2015. EPA published proposed action on three
of these areas, namely the Indianapolis, Southwest Indiana, and Terre
Haute areas on August 15, 2018, at 83 FR 40487, and published final
action on two of these areas (Indianapolis and Terre Haute) on March
22, 2019, at 84 FR 10692. Today's action does not address those three
areas, but addresses the fourth area, in Morgan County. The remainder
of this preamble describes the requirements that SO2
nonattainment plans must meet in order to obtain EPA approval, provides
a review of the state's plan for Morgan County with respect to these
requirements, and describes EPA's proposed action on the plan for
Morgan County.
In addition to its submittal, Indiana sent multiple supplemental
letters addressing the Morgan County SO2 nonattainment plan.
On November 15, 2017, Indiana provided clarifications on the derivation
of emissions inventories and on other issues pertinent to the Morgan
County plan as well as to the other three plans in the state's October
2, 2015 submittal. On June 7, 2017, Indiana withdrew the control
requirements for Hydraulic Press Brick from consideration as part of
the Morgan County SIP. However, on February 12, 2019, Indiana
reactivated its request for action on these control requirements. Also,
on February 8, 2019, Indiana submitted additional technical information
in support of a conclusion that the Morgan County plan provides for
attainment even when analyzed with a more conservative background
concentration.
II. Requirements for SO2 Nonattainment Area Plans
Nonattainment SIPs must meet the applicable requirements of the
Clean Air Act, specifically Clean Air Act sections 110, 172, 191 and
192. EPA's regulations governing nonattainment SIPs are set forth at 40
CFR part 51, with specific procedural requirements and control strategy
requirements residing at subparts F and G, respectively. Soon after
Congress enacted the 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act, EPA issued
comprehensive guidance on SIPs, in a document entitled the ``General
Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990,'' published at 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992)
(General Preamble). Among other things, the General Preamble addressed
SO2 SIPs and fundamental principles for SIP control
strategies. Id., at 57 FR 13545-13549, 13567-13568. On April 23, 2014,
EPA issued guidance for meeting the statutory requirements in
SO2 SIPs submitted under the 2010 NAAQS, in a document
entitled, ``Guidance for 1-Hour SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP
Submissions,'' available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-06/documents/20140423guidance_nonattainment_sip.pdf. In this
guidance EPA described the statutory requirements for a complete
nonattainment area SO2 SIP, which includes: An accurate
emissions inventory of current emissions for all sources of
SO2 within the nonattainment area; an attainment
demonstration; demonstration of reasonable further progress (RFP);
implementation of reasonably available control measures (RACM)
(including reasonably available control techniques (RACT)); new source
review (NSR); enforceable emissions limitations and control measures;
and adequate contingency measures for the affected area. A synopsis of
these requirements is also provided in the notice of proposed
rulemaking on the Illinois SO2 nonattainment plans,
published on October 5, 2017 at 82 FR 46434.
In order for EPA to fully approve a SIP as meeting the requirements
of Clean Air Act sections 110, 172 and 191-192 and EPA's regulations at
40 CFR part 51, the SIP for the affected area needs to demonstrate to
EPA's satisfaction that each of the aforementioned requirements have
been met. Under Clean Air Act sections 110(l) and 193, EPA may not
approve a SIP that would interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning NAAQS attainment and RFP, or any other applicable
requirement, and no requirement in effect (or required to be adopted by
an order, settlement, agreement, or plan in effect before November 15,
1990) in any area which is a nonattainment area for any air pollutant,
may be modified in any manner unless it ensures equivalent or
[[Page 32674]]
greater emission reductions of such air pollutant.
III. Requirements for Attainment Demonstrations
Clean Air Act sections 172(c)(1), 172(c)(6) and 192(a) direct
states with SO2 areas designated as nonattainment to
demonstrate that the submitted plan provides for attainment of the
NAAQS. 40 CFR part 51 subpart G further delineates the control strategy
requirements that SIPs must meet, and EPA has long required that all
SIPs and control strategies reflect four fundamental principles of
quantification, enforceability, replicability, and accountability.
General Preamble, at 13567-68. SO2 attainment plans must
consist of two components: (1) Emission limits and other control
measures that assure implementation of permanent, enforceable and
necessary emission controls, and (2) a modeling analysis which meets
the requirements of 40 CFR part 51, appendix W (Guideline on Air
Quality Models) and demonstrates that these emission limits and control
measures provide for timely attainment of the primary SO2
NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, but by no later than the
attainment date for the affected area. In all cases, the emission
limits and control measures must be accompanied by appropriate methods
and conditions to determine compliance with the respective emission
limits and control measures and must be quantifiable (i.e., a specific
amount of emission reduction can be ascribed to the measures), fully
enforceable (specifying clear, unambiguous and measurable requirements
for which compliance can be practicably determined), replicable (the
procedures for determining compliance are sufficiently specific and
objective so that two independent entities applying the procedures
would obtain the same result), and accountable (source specific limits
must be permanent and must reflect the assumptions used in the SIP
demonstrations).
EPA's April 2014 guidance recommends that the emission limits be
expressed as short-term average limits (e.g., addressing emissions
averaged over one or three hours), but also describes the option to
utilize emission limits with longer averaging times of up to 30 days so
long as the state meets various suggested criteria. Indiana's plan for
Morgan County involves mostly work practice requirements (i.e.,
requirements that the primary boilers at Indianapolis Power and Light-
Eagle Valley burn natural gas and that Hydraulic Press Brick employ
sorbent injection generally achieving 50 percent emission control) and
does not rely on any longer term average limits.
Preferred air quality models for use in regulatory applications are
described in appendix A of EPA's Guideline on Air Quality Models.\1\ In
2005, EPA promulgated AERMOD as the Agency's preferred near-field
dispersion modeling for a wide range of regulatory applications
addressing stationary sources (for example in estimating SO2
concentrations) in all types of terrain based on extensive
developmental and performance evaluation. Supplemental guidance on
modeling for purposes of demonstrating attainment of the SO2
standard is provided in appendix A to the April 23, 2014 SO2
nonattainment area SIP guidance document referenced above. Appendix A
provides extensive guidance on the modeling domain, the source inputs,
assorted types of meteorological data, and background concentrations.
Consistency with the recommendations in this guidance is generally
necessary for the attainment demonstration to offer adequately reliable
assurance that the plan provides for attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA published revisions to the Guideline on Air Quality
Models on January 17, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated previously, attainment demonstrations for the 2010
SO2 NAAQS must demonstrate future attainment and maintenance
of the NAAQS in the entire area designated as nonattainment (i.e., not
just at the violating monitor) by using air quality dispersion modeling
(see Guideline on Air Quality Models) to show that the mix of sources
and enforceable control measures and emission rates in an identified
area will not lead to a violation of the SO2 NAAQS. For a
short-term (i.e., 1-hour) standard, EPA believes that dispersion
modeling, using allowable emissions and addressing stationary sources
in the affected area (and in some cases those sources located outside
the nonattainment area which may affect attainment in the area) is
technically appropriate, efficient and effective in demonstrating
attainment in nonattainment areas because it takes into consideration
combinations of meteorological and emission source operating conditions
that may contribute to peak ground-level concentrations of
SO2.
The meteorological data used in the analysis should generally be
processed with the most recent version of AERMET. Estimated
concentrations should include ambient background concentrations, should
follow the form of the standard, and should be calculated as described
in section 2.6.1.2 of the August 23, 2010 clarification memo on
``Applicability of Appendix W Modeling Guidance for the 1-hr
SO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standard''.
IV. Review of Indiana's Modeled Attainment Plan for Morgan County
The following discussion evaluates various features of the modeling
that Indiana used in its attainment demonstration for Morgan County.
A. Model Selection and General Model Inputs
Indiana's attainment demonstrations used AERMOD, the preferred
model for these applications as identified in the Guideline on Air
Quality Models. Indiana's October 2015 submittal used version 14134 of
this model, which was the most recent version at the time the state
conducted its nonattainment planning. However, the supplemental
modeling that Indiana submitted in February 2019 used the current
version of AERMOD, version 18081. Indiana utilized the regulatory
default mode for all air quality modeling runs.
Indiana's receptor grid and modeling domain for the Morgan County
area generally followed the recommended approaches from the Guideline
on Air Quality Models. Receptor spacing for each modeled facility fence
line was every 50 meters, then 100-meter spacing of receptors out to a
distance of 0.5 kilometers, every 250 meters out to 2.5 kilometers,
every 500 meters out to 5 kilometers, and every 1000 meters out to 10
kilometers from each facility. The resulting receptor grid contained
10,445 receptors. An examination of the modest modeled spatial
gradients near the facility boundaries leads to the conclusion that no
facility in the area contributes to violations within any other
facility's property, so that the exclusion of receptors within facility
fencelines was acceptable.
Indiana determined that Morgan County should be modeled with rural
dispersion characteristics. Indiana did not provide an Auer analysis or
provide other rationale for this selection. Nevertheless, the
nonattainment area, consisting of two townships (Clay and Washington
Townships) have a 2016 estimated population of 21,379 people in an area
of 232.3 square kilometers, an average population density of 92 people
per square kilometer. By comparison, the Guideline on Air Quality
Models suggests that areas with less than 750 people per square
kilometer warrant being modeled with rural dispersion characteristics.
Therefore, EPA concurs with Indiana's determination that this
[[Page 32675]]
area warrants being modeled with rural dispersion coefficients.
B. Meteorological Data
Indiana used the Indianapolis National Weather Service (NWS)
surface data and the Lincoln, Illinois upper air station (WBAN 048233)
data for modeling Morgan County. EPA finds these selections
appropriate.
C. Emissions Data
Indiana identified two sources in Morgan County emitting over 100
tons per year. Indianapolis Power and Light's Eagle Valley power plant,
which conducts continuous SO2 emissions monitoring, emitted
3,436 tons of SO2 in 2012. Hydraulic Press Brick, a
manufacturer of building aggregate, has a less certain emission rate
(in part due to uncertainties in the quantity of sulfur in the shale
that is a raw material in the process), but was estimated to have
emitted 350 tons of SO2 in 2010. Further discussion of the
modeled emissions is provided below.
D. Emission Limits
An important prerequisite for approval of an attainment plan is
that the emission limits that provide for attainment be quantifiable,
fully enforceable, replicable, and accountable. See General Preamble at
13567-68.
In preparing its plans, Indiana adopted revisions to a previously
approved state regulation governing emissions of SO2. These
rule revisions were adopted by the Indiana Environmental Rules Board
following established, appropriate public review procedures. For Eagle
Valley, the revised rule identifies the four primary emission sources
and requires these sources to burn natural gas. The nominal compliance
date for this requirement is January 1, 2017, but in fact Eagle Valley
stopped burning coal in April 2016, after which all electricity
generation at this facility has been based on burning natural gas. For
Hydraulic Press Brick, the revised rule requires use of a limestone
injection system to achieve either 50 percent control efficiency or 2.5
pounds of SO2 per million British thermal units (lbs/MMBTU),
and in no case to emit more than 6.0 lbs/MMBTU. These requirements were
also effective on January 1, 2017. These limits are codified in 326 IAC
7, titled ``Sulfur Dioxide Rules,'' specifically in 326 Indiana
Administrative Code 7-4-11.1 (326 IAC 7-4-11.1). Indiana also submitted
rules specifying the compliance date for these requirements (in 326 IAC
7-1.1-3) and the associated monitoring, testing, and recordkeeping and
reporting requirements (in 326 IAC 7-2-1). The rule provisions provide
unambiguous, permanent requirements for emission control which, if
violated, would be clear grounds for an enforcement action.
Given the requirement for Eagle Valley to burn natural gas, EPA
finds the low emission rate that Indiana modeled for this plant to be
an appropriate reflection of allowable emissions. Indiana did not
explicitly model Hydraulic Press Brick, choosing instead to address
this source as part of the background concentration. The adequacy of
Indiana's background concentration to reflect the impact of this source
and other unmodeled emissions in the area is addressed in the following
section.
E. Background Concentrations
Indiana determined background concentrations for Morgan County
using hourly measurements at the Centerton School monitor (site number
18-109-1001). In its original analysis, documented in its submittal of
October 2, 2015, Indiana determined background concentrations for this
area by selecting the 99th percentile of a monitoring data set that
excluded values when the monitor was downwind of either the Eagle
Valley plant or Hydraulic Press Brick, except that values below 10 ppb
were retained in the analysis. The 99th percentile among the pertinent
values was 9.4 ppb, or 24.6 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\).
The purpose of background concentrations in a model simulation is
to represent the impact of emissions from sources that are not
explicitly modeled. Indiana explicitly modeled the allowable emissions
from Eagle Valley, and so Indiana's approach, determining background
concentrations in a manner that excluded occasions with significant
impacts from Eagle Valley, was appropriate for avoiding double counting
the impacts of this source. However, Indiana did not explicitly model
Hydraulic Press Brick, choosing instead to represent this source as
part of the background concentration in the modeling. For this reason,
EPA found it inappropriate that Indiana excluded occasions with impacts
from Hydraulic Press Brick in its determination of a background
concentration.
To address this concern, Indiana conducted additional analyses to
identify background concentrations that would better represent the
impacts of Hydraulic Press Brick and minor other SO2 sources
in the area, which it submitted on February 8, 2019. This analysis used
data from the same monitoring site as Indiana's prior analysis (site
number 18-109-1001), using data from the most recent available three
calendar years of data (2015 to 2017). Indiana again used
meteorological data from the Indianapolis National Weather Service site
for this analysis.
Examination of these data led to the finding that aside from
occasions when Eagle Valley was upwind of the monitor, the highest
concentrations were observed when winds were in a relatively narrow
band of wind directions approximately centered on Hydraulic Press Brick
being upwind of the monitor. Ordinarily background concentrations are
determined by examining concentrations for almost all wind directions,
excluding data for a modest set of directions when modeled sources are
upwind. However, in this case Indiana followed the reverse approach,
excluding occasions when Hydraulic Press Brick was not upwind of the
monitor and considering concentrations only for a relatively small band
of wind directions in which the largest unmodeled source (Hydraulic
Press Brick) was most directly upwind. In particular, the data set used
in this analysis included concentrations when the winds were from
between 25 degrees and 60 degrees (roughly from NNE to ENE). This
approach was designed to estimate the maximum background concentration
that could be attributed to unmodeled sources in the area, including a
conservative representation of the impacts of Hydraulic Press Brick.
EPA guidance offers both the option to determine a single
background concentration, to be used for all seasons and all hours, and
the option to determine separate season- and hour-specific background
concentrations. Indiana applied both options in this case. The
resulting single background concentration was 96.0 [mu]g/m\3\, or 36.7
ppb. The resulting season- and hour-specific background concentrations
ranged from 2.8 to 114.5 [mu]g/m\3\ (1.1 ppb to 43.7 ppb). Indiana then
used these background concentrations in additional model runs to
provide a supplemental assessment of whether its plan provides for
attainment.
F. Summary of Results
Modeling for Morgan County in Indiana's October 2, 2015 submittal
showed a design value of 35.9 [mu]g/m\3\ (13.7 ppb). Modeling in
Indiana's February 8, 2019 submittal used two approaches that provided
a more conservative representation of background concentrations. The
[[Page 32676]]
modeling run using a single background concentration for all seasons
and hours showed a design value of 103.69 [mu]g/m\3\ (39.6 ppb). The
modeling run using season- and hour-specific background concentrations
yielded a design value of 117.33 [mu]g/m\3\ (44.8 ppb), slightly higher
than the run using a single background concentration. Both of these
runs show design values well below 196.4 [mu]g/m\3\ (75 ppb).
Therefore, EPA concludes that Indiana's plan provides for attainment in
this area.
Pursuant to the requirements in Indiana's rules, Hydraulic Press
Brick began sorbent injection, to achieve either 50 percent control or
2.5 lbs/MMBTU of SO2, beginning by January 1, 2017. With
this approximate start date, the period from 2015 to 2017 used in
Indiana's assessment of background concentrations reflected two years
without this control measure and one year with it. While insufficient
data are available to estimate the air quality benefits of this control
measure, the continued implementation of this measure is expected to
result in lower future background concentrations and to assure that
background concentrations will not increase above these levels.
Indiana's letter of February 12, 2019 requests EPA approval of the
control requirements for Hydraulic Press Brick, which will help assure
that background concentrations will remain at or below the level in
Indiana's estimate, thereby helping assure that Indiana's plan provides
for attainment.
V. Review of Other Plan Requirements
A. Emissions Inventory
The emissions inventory and source emission rate data for an area
serve as the foundation for air quality modeling and other analyses
that enable states to: (1) Estimate the degree to which different
sources within a nonattainment area contribute to violations within the
affected area; and (2) assess the expected improvement in air quality
within the nonattainment area due to the adoption and implementation of
control measures. As noted above, the state must develop and submit to
EPA a comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions
from all sources of SO2 emissions in each nonattainment
area, as well as any sources located outside the nonattainment area
which may affect attainment in the area. See Clean Air Act section
172(c)(3).
Indiana provided a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory
of SO2 emissions for Morgan County. Indiana identified two
sources in the county that emitted over 100 tons of SO2 per
year, namely Eagle Valley and Hydraulic Press Brick. Indiana also
summarized emissions in the following source categories: Electric-
generating units (EGUs), non-EGUs (point), non-point (area), non-road,
and on-road sources of SO2. This summary of emissions is
shown in Table 1. Indiana uploads point source emissions to the
National Emissions Inventory (NEI) annually. For the 2011 base year
inventory, emissions from EGU and non-EGUs are actual reported
emissions. Data for airport, area, non-road, and on-road emissions were
compiled from the EPA Emissions Modeling Clearinghouse (SO2
NAAQS Emissions Modeling platform 2007/2007v5) for the 2008 NEI and the
2018 projected inventory year. Data were interpolated between 2008 and
2014 to determine the airport, area, non-road, and on-road emissions
2011 inventory and between 2014-2020 for 2018. These inventories can be
found in appendix H of the submitted attainment demonstration. Also,
for each of the four areas addressed in its submittal, including Morgan
County, Indiana provided modeling inputs that include a listing of the
individual sources with sufficient proximity to and impact on the
nonattainment areas to warrant being explicitly included in the
modeling analysis.
Indiana's emission inventory indicated that Eagle Valley in 2012
emitted 3,436 tons of SO2. This precisely matches the
emissions quantity that Eagle Valley reported to EPA under applicable
emissions monitoring and reporting requirements. Indiana indicated that
Hydraulic Press Brick in 2010 emitted 350 tons of SO2. This
is similar to the SO2 emission rate reported in the 2011
National Emission Inventory, though no emissions of SO2 are
reported in the 2014 National Emission Inventory. Notwithstanding the
difficulty of estimating emissions from this source, particularly as it
relates to the quantity of SO2 emissions that arises from
sulfur in the shale that the facility uses as a raw material, EPA
believes that Indiana's SIP submittal provides a suitable estimate of
the emissions from this source for planning purposes.
Table 1--2011 Actual Emissions Inventory for Morgan County
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011 Emissions in
Morgan County
(tpy)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EGU.................................................. 10,875
Other Point.......................................... 387
Area................................................. 24
Non-road............................................. 1
On-road.............................................. 10
------------------
Total............................................ 11,297
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By providing a comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of
SO2 emissions for Morgan County, Indiana has met the
emission inventory requirement of Clean Air Act section 172(c)(3) for
this area. This inventory represents emissions in 2011, a time when the
areas were violating the standard. The state also provided allowable
attainment year emissions in its modeling analysis.
B. RACM/RACT
In its submission, Indiana discusses its rationale for concluding
that the nonattainment plans meet the RACM/RACT requirements in
accordance with EPA guidance. For most criteria pollutants, RACT is
control technology as needed to meet the NAAQS that is reasonably
available considering technological and economic feasibility. However,
Indiana cites EPA guidance that the definition of RACT for
SO2 is, simply, ``that control technology which is necessary
to achieve the NAAQS (40 CFR 51.100(o))''. See General Preamble, 57 FR
13547 (April 16, 1992), synopsizing the SO2 RACT requirement
in 40 CFR 51.100(o). Indiana in fact requires the control technology
that modeling shows to be necessary to ensure attainment of the
SO2 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date.
In addition, Indiana has adopted and submitted limits that require
effective control of the most significant sources in Morgan County. The
requirement for Eagle Valley to burn natural gas brings the emissions
of this source nearly to zero. The requirement for Hydraulic Press
Brick to operate a sorbent injection system in a manner that generally
achieves 50 percent emission control requires operating a control that
is cost effective and achieves a relatively high degree of control for
this type of source. Thus, while Indiana did not conduct a cost
effectiveness analysis of these controls, and EPA does not require such
an analysis, the controls required in this area appear to represent a
full set of reasonably available emission control.
Indiana has determined that these measures suffice to provide for
timely attainment. EPA concurs and proposes
[[Page 32677]]
to conclude that the state has satisfied the requirements in sections
172(c)(1) and (6) to adopt and submit all RACT/RACM and emission
limitations and control measures as needed to attain the standards as
expeditiously as practicable.
C. New Source Review (NSR)
As Indiana's submittal explains, EPA approved Indiana's
nonattainment new source review rules on October 7, 1994 (94 FR 24838).
As Indiana notes, these rules provide for appropriate new source review
for SO2 sources undergoing construction (or major
modification) in the Morgan County area. No modification of the
approved rules is necessary to meet the NSR requirements. Therefore,
EPA concludes that this requirement has already been met for these
areas.
D. RFP
Indiana's adopted rules in 326 IAC 7 require that control measures
be implemented no later than January 1, 2017. Indiana has concluded
that this plan requires that affected sources implement appropriate
control measures as expeditiously as practicable in order to ensure
attainment of the standard by the applicable attainment date. Indiana
concludes that this plan therefore provides for RFP in accordance with
the approach to RFP described in EPA's guidance. EPA concurs and
proposes to conclude that the plan provides for RFP.
E. Contingency Measures
Indiana's approach to contingency measures is one of the subjects
of a clarification memo that Indiana submitted on November 15, 2017. In
this memo, Indiana explained its rationale for concluding that its
plans met the requirement for contingency measures in accordance with
EPA guidance. Specifically, Indiana relies on EPA's guidance, noting
the special circumstances that apply to SO2, and explaining
on that basis why the contingency measures requirement in Clean Air Act
section 172(c)(9) is met for SO2 by having a comprehensive
program to identify sources of violations of the SO2 NAAQS
and to undertake an aggressive follow-up for compliance and enforcement
of applicable emissions limitations. Indiana stated that it has such an
enforcement program as codified in Indiana Code Title 13, Articles 14
and 15, identifying violators and taking prompt, appropriate
enforcement action. On this basis, EPA proposes to conclude that
Indiana's nonattainment plans satisfy contingency measure requirements
for the Morgan County nonattainment area.
Indiana's rules also provide for additional contingency measures as
necessary, following a review of any air quality problems that become
identified and following a review of options for mitigating the
problems that arise. However, Indiana is not relying on these
provisions to satisfy the requirements for contingency measures.
VI. EPA's Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve Indiana's SIP submission, which the
state submitted to EPA on October 2, 2015 and supplemented on November
15, 2017, June 7, 2017, February 8, 2019, and February 12, 2019, for
attaining the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for the Morgan County
area. This SO2 nonattainment plan includes Indiana's
attainment demonstration for this area. The nonattainment plan also
addresses requirements for emission inventories, RACT/RACM, RFP, and
contingency measures. Indiana has previously addressed requirements
regarding nonattainment area NSR. EPA has determined that Indiana's
SO2 nonattainment plan for Morgan County meets the
applicable requirements of Clean Air Act sections 110, 172, 191, and
192.
The rules that underpin Indiana's attainment plan for Morgan County
include Indiana Administrative Code, Title 326, Rule 7-4-11.1 (326 IAC
7-4-11.1, entitled ``Morgan County sulfur dioxide emission
limitations''), as well as Rule 326 IAC 7-1.1-3 (entitled ``Compliance
date'') and Rule 326 IAC 7-2-1 (entitled ``Reporting requirements;
methods to determine compliance''). EPA has already approved the latter
two rules, as part of its rulemaking on the plans for Marion and Vigo
Counties. These rules provide compliance dates and recordkeeping and
compliance determination provisions that apply to all four areas in
Indiana's original submittal. Because these latter two rules are
already part of the Indiana SIP, and no further action on these rules
is necessary, EPA is proposing only to approve 326 IAC 7-4-11.1.
EPA is taking public comments for thirty days following the
publication of this proposed action in the Federal Register. EPA will
take all comments into consideration in our final action.
VII. 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 326 IAC 7-4-11.1, ``Morgan County sulfur dioxide emission
limitations'', effective at the state on October 2, 2015. EPA has made,
and will continue to make, these documents generally available through
www.regulations.gov, and at the EPA Region 5 Office. (Please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this preamble for more information.)
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed 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 proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as
[[Page 32678]]
appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects,
using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
Reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: June 26, 2019.
Cheryl L. Newton,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2019-14474 Filed 7-8-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P