Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Revisions to NOX, 44738-44741 [2020-15220]
Download as PDF
44738
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Marine safety, Navigation (water),
Reporting and record keeping
requirements, Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
PART 165—REGULATED
NAVIGACTION AREAS AND LIMITED
ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 46 U.S.C. 70034, 70051; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
2. Add § 165.T01–0446 to read as
follows:
■
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
(a) Location. The following area is a
safety zone: all navigable waters of the
Northern Atlantic Ocean, within 100
yards of latitude 42°23.937′ N, longitude
070°52.525′ W, approximately 2 miles
southeast of Nahant, Massachusetts.
(b) Definitions. As used in this
section, designated representative
means a Coast Guard Patrol
Commander, including a Coast Guard
coxswain, petty officer, or other officer
operating a Coast Guard vessel and a
Federal, State, and local officer
designated by or assisting the COTP
Boston in the enforcement of the safety
zone.
(c) Regulations. When this safety zone
is enforced, the following regulations,
along with those contained in 33 CFR
165.23 apply:
(1) Under the general safety zone
regulations in subpart C of this part, you
may not enter the safety zone described
in paragraph (a) of this section unless
authorized by the COTP or the COTP’s
designated representative.
(2) To seek permission to enter,
contact the COTP or the COTP’s
representative via Channel 16 (VHF–
FM) or 617–223–5757 (Sector Boston
Command Center). Those in the safety
zone must comply with all lawful orders
or directions given to them by the COTP
or the COTP’s designated representative.
(d) Enforcement period. This section
will be enforced from 12:01 a.m. on July
21, 2020, to 11:59 p.m. on August 12,
2020.
(e) Penalties. Those who violate this
section are subject to the penalties set
forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232.
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
[FR Doc. 2020–16212 Filed 7–23–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2018–0634; FRL–10012–
07–Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Revisions
to NOX SIP Call and CAIR Rules
recommend that you telephone Eric
Svingen, Environmental Engineer, at
(312) 353–4489 before visiting the
Region 5 office.
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.
AGENCY:
I. What is the background for this final
rule?
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving under the
Clean Air Act (CAA) a request from the
Indiana Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM) to revise the
Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP)
to incorporate the following: A new rule
concerning nitrogen oxide (NOX)
emissions for the ozone season from
Electric Generating Units (EGUs) and
large non-EGUs; revisions concerning
NOX emission rate limits for specific
source categories; the repeal of the NOX
Budget Trading Program; and the repeal
of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
NOX ozone season trading program.
This SIP revision will ensure continued
compliance by EGUs and large nonEGUs with the requirements of the NOX
SIP Call.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
August 24, 2020.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R05–OAR–2018–0634. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov website.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either through
www.regulations.gov or at the
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. This facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays and
facility closures due to COVID–19. We
Under the ‘‘good neighbor provision’’
of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), states
are required to eliminate their
significant contributions to air quality
problems in downwind states. To
address the good neighbor provision for
progressively more protective National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for ozone and fine particulate
matter (PM2.5), EPA published a series of
regulations requiring eastern states,
including Indiana, to comply with
statewide budgets limiting ozone season
emissions of NOX, a precursor to ozone,
as well as annual emissions of NOX and
sulfur dioxide (SO2), precursors to
PM2.5.
On October 27, 1998, EPA published
the NOX SIP Call, which addressed the
good neighbor provision for the 1979
ozone NAAQS by requiring eastern
states to submit SIPs complying with
statewide budgets for ozone season NOX
emissions (63 FR 57356). The NOX SIP
Call also established the NOX Budget
Trading Program, an allowance trading
program that states could adopt to meet
most of their obligations under the NOX
SIP Call. On May 12, 2005, EPA
published CAIR, which addressed the
good neighbor provision for the 1997
ozone NAAQS and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS
by requiring eastern states to submit
SIPs complying with statewide budgets
for ozone season NOX emissions and
annual NOX and SO2 emissions (70 FR
25152). CAIR also established allowance
trading programs that states could adopt
to meet their obligations. Upon
implementation of the CAIR trading
program for ozone season NOX in 2009,
EPA discontinued administration of the
NOX Budget Trading Program. Both the
NOX SIP Call and CAIR allowed certain
sources to participate in the trading
programs: EGUs with capacity greater
than 25 megawatts; and large non-EGUs,
such as boilers and combustion
turbines, with a rated heat input greater
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY:
§ 165.T01–0446 Safety Zone; Northern
Atlantic Ocean, Nahant, MA.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Dated: July 21, 2020.
Eric J. Doucette,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Boston.
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
than 250 million British thermal units
(MMBtu) per hour.
To meet the requirements of the NOX
SIP Call, IDEM promulgated rules at 326
IAC 10–3 and 326 IAC 10–4, and to
meet the requirements of CAIR, IDEM
promulgated rules at 326 IAC 24–1, 326
IAC 24–2, and 326 IAC 24–3. EPA
approved the original versions of
Indiana’s NOX SIP Call rules and CAIR
rules into the SIP on November 8, 2001
(66 FR 56465) and October 22, 2007 (72
FR 59480), respectively; EPA most
recently approved revised versions of
these rules on November 29, 2010 (75
FR 72956).
On August 8, 2011, EPA published
the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule
(CSAPR), which replaced CAIR and
addressed the good neighbor provision
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS, and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by
establishing new statewide budgets in
eastern states for ozone season NOX
emissions and annual NOX and SO2
emissions (76 FR 48208). Participation
by a state’s EGUs in the CSAPR trading
program for ozone season NOX generally
addressed NOX SIP Call obligations for
EGUs. However, CSAPR did not initially
contain provisions allowing states to
incorporate large non-EGUs into that
trading program to meet the ongoing
requirements of the NOX SIP Call for
non-EGUs.
Most recently, on October 26, 2016,
EPA published the CSAPR Update,
which addressed the good neighbor
provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS by
establishing new statewide budgets in
eastern states for ozone season NOX
emissions (81 FR 74504). The CSAPR
Update also expanded options available
to states for meeting NOX SIP Call
requirements for large non-EGUs.
After evaluating the various options
available following promulgation of the
CSAPR Update, IDEM chose to meet
NOX SIP Call requirements for large
non-EGUs by adopting a new rule at 326
IAC 10–2 and revising its rule at 326
IAC 10–3. The new rule at 326 IAC 10–
2 makes the portion of the state’s NOX
SIP Call budget assigned to non-EGUs
enforceable without an allowance
trading mechanism, and the revised rule
at 326 IAC 10–3 provides source-bysource emission rate limits for certain
blast furnace gas-fired units formerly
regulated under the NOX Budget
Trading Program. IDEM also repealed its
CAIR rules at 326 IAC 24–1, 326 IAC
24–2, and 326 IAC 24–3 and its NOX
Budget Trading Program rule at 326 IAC
10–4. In its August 27, 2018 submission,
IDEM requested that EPA approve these
changes into the Indiana SIP.
On December 17, 2018 (83 FR 64472),
EPA approved a separate November 27,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
2017 submission from IDEM, which
removed 326 IAC 24–1, 326 IAC 24–2,
and portions of 326 IAC 24–3 from the
Indiana SIP. Following the December
17, 2018 SIP action, portions of 326 IAC
24–3 are the only part of Indiana’s CAIR
rules that remain in the Indiana SIP.
On February 21, 2020 (85 FR 10064),
EPA published a direct final rule
approving Indiana’s request to modify
its SIP to include the new rule at 326
IAC 10–2 and the revised rule at 326
IAC 10–3 and to remove 326 IAC 10–4
and 326 IAC 24–3. The direct final rule
contains a detailed analysis of Indiana’s
submittal. In the direct final rule, EPA
stated that if adverse comments were
received by March 23, 2020, the rule
would be withdrawn and would not
take effect. EPA received adverse
comments prior to the close of the
comment period; therefore, EPA
published a withdrawal of the direct
final rule on April 10, 2020 (85 FR
20165). EPA is addressing the adverse
comments in this final action, based
upon the proposed action also
published on February 21, 2020 (85 FR
10127).
II. What are EPA’s responses to
comments?
During the comment period, EPA
received three comments, all of which
are available in the docket for this
action. A summary of these comments,
and EPA’s response, is provided below.
Comment: A commenter refers to a
court case involving Monsanto. Without
further clarifying the source at issue, the
commenter alleges that these rule
revisions would allow an increase in
NOX emissions at ‘‘the plant’’. The
commenter raises concerns that hearings
have been closed to the public and
asserts that approving IDEM’s revisions
would violate the CAA by increasing
EPA’s regulatory authority.
Response: The commenter’s objection
does not appear to be relevant to EPA’s
approval of Indiana’s SIP submission
and is therefore outside of the scope of
this action. According to a list of
affected sources provided by IDEM,
these rule revisions would not modify
any requirements for any Monsanto
facility. Further, as discussed in EPA’s
direct final rule, the majority of these
revisions either add new requirements,
remove provisions that have no impact
on emissions, or replace existing
requirements under one rule with
identical requirements under another
rule. For two sources, ArcelorMittal
Indiana Harbor East and US Steel Gary
Works, these revisions modify
emissions monitoring requirements, but
the revisions are not expected to cause
a change in emissions levels. The
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44739
commenter did not raise any specific
objections to EPA’s conclusion that
IDEM’s revisions will not result in
increased NOX emissions from affected
sources. Finally, EPA notes that the
commenter did not explain why these
revisions might increase EPA’s
regulatory authority and did not explain
how any hearings were closed to the
public. In fact, there was no public
hearing associated with the comment
period for this rulemaking.
Comment: A commenter states that
‘‘EPA’s illegal approval of these
revisions is hampered by the Court’s
decision in Wisconsin v. EPA and New
York v. EPA.’’ The commenter alleges
that these cases require EPA to consider
the environmental impacts of its
decisions. The commenter writes that
‘‘EPA’s only primary consideration
should be whether the decision will
reduce adverse impacts on human
health or the environment, not whether
it will increase economic growth or
stave off any harm to the environment.’’
Response: The decisions apparently
referenced by this commenter,
Wisconsin v. EPA, 938 F.3d 303 (2019)
and New York v. EPA, 781 Fed. App’x
4 (2019), both involve challenges to the
CSAPR Update. In Wisconsin, the D.C.
Circuit considered consolidated
challenges from environmental
petitioners, who argued that the rule
was too lenient, as well as state and
industry petitioners, who argued that
the rule was too strict. The court’s
Wisconsin decision upheld the CSAPR
Update in most respects but found that
the rule improperly allows upwind
states to continue their significant
contributions to downwind air quality
problems beyond attainment dates
provided under the CAA. 938 F.3d at
312–20. On this issue, the court
remanded CSAPR Update to EPA. Id. at
336. In New York, the D.C. Circuit
considered a parallel challenge to EPA’s
CSAPR Close-Out, published December
21, 2018 (83 FR 65878). In the CloseOut, EPA determined that CSAPR
Update fully addressed eastern states’
obligations under the good neighbor
provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
However, consistent with the Wisconsin
court’s holding that EPA had not
properly considered the CAA
attainment dates, the court in New York
vacated the Close-Out. 781 Fed. App’x
at 6–7.
The commenter does not explain how
the decisions in Wisconsin or New York
would prevent EPA from approving
IDEM’s revisions. Aside from its holding
that EPA must adhere to the attainment
dates when addressing good neighbor
obligations under the 2008 ozone
NAAQS, the D.C. Circuit in Wisconsin
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
44740
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
otherwise found ‘‘that EPA acted
lawfully and rationally’’ in
promulgating the CSAPR Update. 938
F.3d at 309. In particular, the court in
Wisconsin upheld EPA’s analysis of
appropriate cost-control levels for
emissions reductions, which was the
primary economic issue considered by
the court. Id. at 322–23. The court’s
remand of the CSAPR Update was
focused solely on EPA’s obligation to
implement emission reductions
consistent with the attainment dates
associated with the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
The Wisconsin and New York decisions
have no impact on EPA’s evaluation of
NOX SIP Call requirements pertaining to
the 1979 ozone NAAQS, or CAIR
requirements pertaining to the 1997
ozone NAAQS and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS,
which are the requirements being
addressed under these rule revisions. In
the February 21, 2020 direct final rule,
EPA appropriately addressed the
environmental impacts of these
revisions and determined that the SIP
revisions would not result in a change
to NOX emissions from Indiana EGUs or
large non-EGUs.
Comment: A commenter alleges that
‘‘EPA can’t approve these revisions
because the Court vacated CSAPR
Update in the Wisconsin case leaving
EPA with a gaping regulatory hole.’’ The
commenter further asserts that the
court’s vacatur upended the reporting
and testing requirements in the NOX SIP
call rule. The commenter therefore
contends that EPA cannot approve
IDEM’s revisions until EPA replaces the
CSAPR Update and ‘‘fixes the Wisconsin
v. EPA and New York v. EPA
vacatures.’’
Response: This commenter also
apparently references Wisconsin v. EPA,
938 F.3d 303 (2019) and New York v.
EPA, 781 Fed. App’x 4 (2019). In
Wisconsin, the D.C. Circuit rejected
arguments that the CSAPR Update
should be vacated, holding that ‘‘as a
general rule, we do not vacate
regulations when doing so would risk
significant harm to the public health or
the environment.’’ 938 F.3d at 336.
Because the CSAPR Update remains in
place, there is no ‘‘regulatory hole’’ that
EPA must address before IDEM’s
revisions can be approved. Further, the
vacatur in New York involves only
EPA’s finding in the Close-Out that the
CSAPR Update resolves upwind states’
obligations under the good neighbor
provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Following EPA’s approval of these
revisions into the Indiana SIP, large
non-EGUs will satisfy their ongoing
obligations under the NOX SIP Call in a
manner that does not rely on the CSAPR
trading programs. IDEM continues to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
Jkt 250001
satisfy its obligations under the NOX SIP
Call as to EGUs through participation in
the CSAPR trading programs. Neither
the Wisconsin remand nor the New York
vacatur affect EPA’s finding in the
CSAPR Update that ‘‘compliance with
the budgets established under the
CSAPR Update would satisfy the
requirements of the NOX SIP Call’’ for
EGUs (81 FR 74504 at 74571), nor have
any of the monitoring and reporting
requirements of the CSAPR Update been
affected. Therefore, the decisions in
Wisconsin or New York have not created
any ‘‘regulatory hole’’ for either EGUs or
large non-EGUs which would prevent
EPA from approving these rule
revisions.
III. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving IDEM’s request to
modify its SIP to include the new rule
at 326 IAC 10–2 and the revised rule at
326 IAC 10–3 and to remove 326 IAC
10–4 and 326 IAC 24–3.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is finalizing
regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation
by reference of the Indiana Regulations
described in the amendments to 40 CFR
part 52 set forth below. 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).
Therefore, these materials have been
approved by EPA for inclusion in the
State implementation plan, have been
incorporated by reference by EPA into
that plan, are fully federally enforceable
under sections 110 and 113 of the CAA
as of the effective date of the final
rulemaking of EPA’s approval, and will
be incorporated by reference in the next
update to the SIP compilation.1
Also in this document, as described in
the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set
forth below, EPA is removing provisions
of the EPA-Approved Indiana
Regulations from the Indiana SIP, which
is incorporated by reference in
accordance with the requirements of 1
CFR part 51.
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.
PO 00000
1 62
FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
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).
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
44741
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 143 / Friday, July 24, 2020 / Rules and Regulations
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by September 22, 2020. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
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.
2. In § 52.770, the table in paragraph
(c) is amended by:
■ a. Revising the section entitled
‘‘Article 10. Nitrogen Oxides Rules’’;
and
■ b. Removing the heading ‘‘Rule 3.
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) NOX
Ozone Season Trading Program’’ and
the entries for ‘‘24–3–1’’, ‘‘24–3–2’’,
‘‘24–3–4’’, and ‘‘24–3–11’’.
The revision reads as follows:
■
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: July 9, 2020.
Kurt Thiede,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
§ 52.770
For the reasons states in the preamble,
the EPA amends 40 CFR part 52 as
follows:
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA—APPROVED INDIANA REGULATIONS
Indiana
citation
Indiana
effective
date
Subject
*
*
*
EPA approval date
*
*
*
Comments
*
Article 10. Nitrogen Oxides Rules
10–1 ........
Nitrogen Oxides Control in Clark and Floyd
Counties.
NOX Emissions from Large Affected Units ...........
Nitrogen Oxide Reduction Program for Specific
Source Categories.
Nitrogen Oxide Reduction Program for Internal
Combustion Engines (ICE).
Nitrogen Oxides Emission Limitations for Southern Indiana Gas and Electric Company.
10–2 ........
10–3 ........
10–5 ........
10–6 ........
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R10–OAR–2020–0143; FRL–10007–
42–Region 10]
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
8/26/2018
8/26/2018
7/24/2020, [Insert Federal Register citation].
7/24/2020, [Insert Federal Register citation].
2/26/2006
10/1/2007, 72 FR 55664.
8/30/2008
11/10/2009, 74 FR 57904.
*
*
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is updating the regulatory
materials incorporated by reference into
the Idaho State Implementation Plan
(SIP). The regulations addressed in this
action were previously submitted by the
Idaho Department of Environmental
Quality and approved by the EPA in
prior rulemakings. This action is an
administrative change that updates the
SIP materials available for public
inspection at the EPA Regional Office
and the National Archives and Records
Administration.
SUMMARY:
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Air Plan Approval; ID; Update to
Materials Incorporated by Reference
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule; administrative
change.
AGENCY:
16:42 Jul 23, 2020
6/3/1997, 62 FR 30253.
*
[FR Doc. 2020–15220 Filed 7–23–20; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
6/12/1996
Jkt 250001
DATES:
This action is effective July 24,
2020.
SIP materials which are
incorporated by reference into 40 CFR
part 52 are available for inspection at
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
the following locations: Online at
https://www.regulations.gov in the
docket for this action, by appointment at
the Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite
155, Seattle, WA 98101, and by
appointment at the National Archives
and Records Administration (NARA).
For information on the availability of
this material at the EPA Regional Office,
please contact the person in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document. For information on the
availability of this material at NARA,
email fedreg.legal@nara.gov, or go to:
https://www.archives.gov/federalregister/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kristin Hall at (206) 553–6357 or
hall.kristin@epa.gov.
E:\FR\FM\24JYR1.SGM
24JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 143 (Friday, July 24, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44738-44741]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-15220]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2018-0634; FRL-10012-07-Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Revisions to NOX SIP Call and CAIR
Rules
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving under
the Clean Air Act (CAA) a request from the Indiana Department of
Environmental Management (IDEM) to revise the Indiana State
Implementation Plan (SIP) to incorporate the following: A new rule
concerning nitrogen oxide (NOX) emissions for the ozone
season from Electric Generating Units (EGUs) and large non-EGUs;
revisions concerning NOX emission rate limits for specific
source categories; the repeal of the NOX Budget Trading
Program; and the repeal of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
NOX ozone season trading program. This SIP revision will
ensure continued compliance by EGUs and large non-EGUs with the
requirements of the NOX SIP Call.
DATES: This final rule is effective on August 24, 2020.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2018-0634. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either
through www.regulations.gov or at the Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays and facility
closures due to COVID-19. We recommend that you telephone Eric Svingen,
Environmental Engineer, at (312) 353-4489 before visiting the Region 5
office.
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,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
I. What is the background for this final rule?
Under the ``good neighbor provision'' of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), states are required to eliminate their significant
contributions to air quality problems in downwind states. To address
the good neighbor provision for progressively more protective National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone and fine particulate
matter (PM2.5), EPA published a series of regulations
requiring eastern states, including Indiana, to comply with statewide
budgets limiting ozone season emissions of NOX, a precursor
to ozone, as well as annual emissions of NOX and sulfur
dioxide (SO2), precursors to PM2.5.
On October 27, 1998, EPA published the NOX SIP Call,
which addressed the good neighbor provision for the 1979 ozone NAAQS by
requiring eastern states to submit SIPs complying with statewide
budgets for ozone season NOX emissions (63 FR 57356). The
NOX SIP Call also established the NOX Budget
Trading Program, an allowance trading program that states could adopt
to meet most of their obligations under the NOX SIP Call. On
May 12, 2005, EPA published CAIR, which addressed the good neighbor
provision for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by
requiring eastern states to submit SIPs complying with statewide
budgets for ozone season NOX emissions and annual
NOX and SO2 emissions (70 FR 25152). CAIR also
established allowance trading programs that states could adopt to meet
their obligations. Upon implementation of the CAIR trading program for
ozone season NOX in 2009, EPA discontinued administration of
the NOX Budget Trading Program. Both the NOX SIP
Call and CAIR allowed certain sources to participate in the trading
programs: EGUs with capacity greater than 25 megawatts; and large non-
EGUs, such as boilers and combustion turbines, with a rated heat input
greater
[[Page 44739]]
than 250 million British thermal units (MMBtu) per hour.
To meet the requirements of the NOX SIP Call, IDEM
promulgated rules at 326 IAC 10-3 and 326 IAC 10-4, and to meet the
requirements of CAIR, IDEM promulgated rules at 326 IAC 24-1, 326 IAC
24-2, and 326 IAC 24-3. EPA approved the original versions of Indiana's
NOX SIP Call rules and CAIR rules into the SIP on November
8, 2001 (66 FR 56465) and October 22, 2007 (72 FR 59480), respectively;
EPA most recently approved revised versions of these rules on November
29, 2010 (75 FR 72956).
On August 8, 2011, EPA published the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule
(CSAPR), which replaced CAIR and addressed the good neighbor provision
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS by establishing new statewide budgets in eastern
states for ozone season NOX emissions and annual
NOX and SO2 emissions (76 FR 48208).
Participation by a state's EGUs in the CSAPR trading program for ozone
season NOX generally addressed NOX SIP Call
obligations for EGUs. However, CSAPR did not initially contain
provisions allowing states to incorporate large non-EGUs into that
trading program to meet the ongoing requirements of the NOX
SIP Call for non-EGUs.
Most recently, on October 26, 2016, EPA published the CSAPR Update,
which addressed the good neighbor provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS by
establishing new statewide budgets in eastern states for ozone season
NOX emissions (81 FR 74504). The CSAPR Update also expanded
options available to states for meeting NOX SIP Call
requirements for large non-EGUs.
After evaluating the various options available following
promulgation of the CSAPR Update, IDEM chose to meet NOX SIP
Call requirements for large non-EGUs by adopting a new rule at 326 IAC
10-2 and revising its rule at 326 IAC 10-3. The new rule at 326 IAC 10-
2 makes the portion of the state's NOX SIP Call budget
assigned to non-EGUs enforceable without an allowance trading
mechanism, and the revised rule at 326 IAC 10-3 provides source-by-
source emission rate limits for certain blast furnace gas-fired units
formerly regulated under the NOX Budget Trading Program.
IDEM also repealed its CAIR rules at 326 IAC 24-1, 326 IAC 24-2, and
326 IAC 24-3 and its NOX Budget Trading Program rule at 326
IAC 10-4. In its August 27, 2018 submission, IDEM requested that EPA
approve these changes into the Indiana SIP.
On December 17, 2018 (83 FR 64472), EPA approved a separate
November 27, 2017 submission from IDEM, which removed 326 IAC 24-1, 326
IAC 24-2, and portions of 326 IAC 24-3 from the Indiana SIP. Following
the December 17, 2018 SIP action, portions of 326 IAC 24-3 are the only
part of Indiana's CAIR rules that remain in the Indiana SIP.
On February 21, 2020 (85 FR 10064), EPA published a direct final
rule approving Indiana's request to modify its SIP to include the new
rule at 326 IAC 10-2 and the revised rule at 326 IAC 10-3 and to remove
326 IAC 10-4 and 326 IAC 24-3. The direct final rule contains a
detailed analysis of Indiana's submittal. In the direct final rule, EPA
stated that if adverse comments were received by March 23, 2020, the
rule would be withdrawn and would not take effect. EPA received adverse
comments prior to the close of the comment period; therefore, EPA
published a withdrawal of the direct final rule on April 10, 2020 (85
FR 20165). EPA is addressing the adverse comments in this final action,
based upon the proposed action also published on February 21, 2020 (85
FR 10127).
II. What are EPA's responses to comments?
During the comment period, EPA received three comments, all of
which are available in the docket for this action. A summary of these
comments, and EPA's response, is provided below.
Comment: A commenter refers to a court case involving Monsanto.
Without further clarifying the source at issue, the commenter alleges
that these rule revisions would allow an increase in NOX
emissions at ``the plant''. The commenter raises concerns that hearings
have been closed to the public and asserts that approving IDEM's
revisions would violate the CAA by increasing EPA's regulatory
authority.
Response: The commenter's objection does not appear to be relevant
to EPA's approval of Indiana's SIP submission and is therefore outside
of the scope of this action. According to a list of affected sources
provided by IDEM, these rule revisions would not modify any
requirements for any Monsanto facility. Further, as discussed in EPA's
direct final rule, the majority of these revisions either add new
requirements, remove provisions that have no impact on emissions, or
replace existing requirements under one rule with identical
requirements under another rule. For two sources, ArcelorMittal Indiana
Harbor East and US Steel Gary Works, these revisions modify emissions
monitoring requirements, but the revisions are not expected to cause a
change in emissions levels. The commenter did not raise any specific
objections to EPA's conclusion that IDEM's revisions will not result in
increased NOX emissions from affected sources. Finally, EPA
notes that the commenter did not explain why these revisions might
increase EPA's regulatory authority and did not explain how any
hearings were closed to the public. In fact, there was no public
hearing associated with the comment period for this rulemaking.
Comment: A commenter states that ``EPA's illegal approval of these
revisions is hampered by the Court's decision in Wisconsin v. EPA and
New York v. EPA.'' The commenter alleges that these cases require EPA
to consider the environmental impacts of its decisions. The commenter
writes that ``EPA's only primary consideration should be whether the
decision will reduce adverse impacts on human health or the
environment, not whether it will increase economic growth or stave off
any harm to the environment.''
Response: The decisions apparently referenced by this commenter,
Wisconsin v. EPA, 938 F.3d 303 (2019) and New York v. EPA, 781 Fed.
App'x 4 (2019), both involve challenges to the CSAPR Update. In
Wisconsin, the D.C. Circuit considered consolidated challenges from
environmental petitioners, who argued that the rule was too lenient, as
well as state and industry petitioners, who argued that the rule was
too strict. The court's Wisconsin decision upheld the CSAPR Update in
most respects but found that the rule improperly allows upwind states
to continue their significant contributions to downwind air quality
problems beyond attainment dates provided under the CAA. 938 F.3d at
312-20. On this issue, the court remanded CSAPR Update to EPA. Id. at
336. In New York, the D.C. Circuit considered a parallel challenge to
EPA's CSAPR Close-Out, published December 21, 2018 (83 FR 65878). In
the Close-Out, EPA determined that CSAPR Update fully addressed eastern
states' obligations under the good neighbor provision for the 2008
ozone NAAQS. However, consistent with the Wisconsin court's holding
that EPA had not properly considered the CAA attainment dates, the
court in New York vacated the Close-Out. 781 Fed. App'x at 6-7.
The commenter does not explain how the decisions in Wisconsin or
New York would prevent EPA from approving IDEM's revisions. Aside from
its holding that EPA must adhere to the attainment dates when
addressing good neighbor obligations under the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the
D.C. Circuit in Wisconsin
[[Page 44740]]
otherwise found ``that EPA acted lawfully and rationally'' in
promulgating the CSAPR Update. 938 F.3d at 309. In particular, the
court in Wisconsin upheld EPA's analysis of appropriate cost-control
levels for emissions reductions, which was the primary economic issue
considered by the court. Id. at 322-23. The court's remand of the CSAPR
Update was focused solely on EPA's obligation to implement emission
reductions consistent with the attainment dates associated with the
2008 ozone NAAQS. The Wisconsin and New York decisions have no impact
on EPA's evaluation of NOX SIP Call requirements pertaining
to the 1979 ozone NAAQS, or CAIR requirements pertaining to the 1997
ozone NAAQS and 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, which are the requirements
being addressed under these rule revisions. In the February 21, 2020
direct final rule, EPA appropriately addressed the environmental
impacts of these revisions and determined that the SIP revisions would
not result in a change to NOX emissions from Indiana EGUs or
large non-EGUs.
Comment: A commenter alleges that ``EPA can't approve these
revisions because the Court vacated CSAPR Update in the Wisconsin case
leaving EPA with a gaping regulatory hole.'' The commenter further
asserts that the court's vacatur upended the reporting and testing
requirements in the NOX SIP call rule. The commenter
therefore contends that EPA cannot approve IDEM's revisions until EPA
replaces the CSAPR Update and ``fixes the Wisconsin v. EPA and New York
v. EPA vacatures.''
Response: This commenter also apparently references Wisconsin v.
EPA, 938 F.3d 303 (2019) and New York v. EPA, 781 Fed. App'x 4 (2019).
In Wisconsin, the D.C. Circuit rejected arguments that the CSAPR Update
should be vacated, holding that ``as a general rule, we do not vacate
regulations when doing so would risk significant harm to the public
health or the environment.'' 938 F.3d at 336. Because the CSAPR Update
remains in place, there is no ``regulatory hole'' that EPA must address
before IDEM's revisions can be approved. Further, the vacatur in New
York involves only EPA's finding in the Close-Out that the CSAPR Update
resolves upwind states' obligations under the good neighbor provision
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Following EPA's approval of these revisions into the Indiana SIP,
large non-EGUs will satisfy their ongoing obligations under the
NOX SIP Call in a manner that does not rely on the CSAPR
trading programs. IDEM continues to satisfy its obligations under the
NOX SIP Call as to EGUs through participation in the CSAPR
trading programs. Neither the Wisconsin remand nor the New York vacatur
affect EPA's finding in the CSAPR Update that ``compliance with the
budgets established under the CSAPR Update would satisfy the
requirements of the NOX SIP Call'' for EGUs (81 FR 74504 at
74571), nor have any of the monitoring and reporting requirements of
the CSAPR Update been affected. Therefore, the decisions in Wisconsin
or New York have not created any ``regulatory hole'' for either EGUs or
large non-EGUs which would prevent EPA from approving these rule
revisions.
III. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving IDEM's request to modify its SIP to include the
new rule at 326 IAC 10-2 and the revised rule at 326 IAC 10-3 and to
remove 326 IAC 10-4 and 326 IAC 24-3.
IV. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Indiana
Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth
below. 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).
Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for inclusion in
the State implementation plan, have been incorporated by reference by
EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under sections 110
and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final rulemaking of
EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference in the next
update to the SIP compilation.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also in this document, as described in the amendments to 40 CFR
part 52 set forth below, EPA is removing provisions of the EPA-Approved
Indiana Regulations from the Indiana SIP, which is incorporated by
reference in accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR part 51.
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);
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 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).
[[Page 44741]]
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by September 22, 2020. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides.
Dated: July 9, 2020.
Kurt Thiede,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
For the reasons states in the preamble, the EPA amends 40 CFR part
52 as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 52.770, the table in paragraph (c) is amended by:
0
a. Revising the section entitled ``Article 10. Nitrogen Oxides Rules'';
and
0
b. Removing the heading ``Rule 3. Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
NOX Ozone Season Trading Program'' and the entries for ``24-
3-1'', ``24-3-2'', ``24-3-4'', and ``24-3-11''.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 52.770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
EPA--Approved Indiana Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indiana
Indiana citation Subject effective EPA approval date Comments
date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article 10. Nitrogen Oxides Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10-1.................. Nitrogen Oxides Control 6/12/1996 6/3/1997, 62 FR 30253...
in Clark and Floyd
Counties.
10-2.................. NOX Emissions from Large 8/26/2018 7/24/2020, [Insert
Affected Units. Federal Register
citation].
10-3.................. Nitrogen Oxide Reduction 8/26/2018 7/24/2020, [Insert
Program for Specific Federal Register
Source Categories. citation].
10-5.................. Nitrogen Oxide Reduction 2/26/2006 10/1/2007, 72 FR 55664..
Program for Internal
Combustion Engines
(ICE).
10-6.................. Nitrogen Oxides Emission 8/30/2008 11/10/2009, 74 FR 57904.
Limitations for
Southern Indiana Gas
and Electric Company.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-15220 Filed 7-23-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P