[Federal Register: July 29, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 145)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 43820-43826]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr29jy05-36]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[R05-OAR-2005-IN-0004; FRL-7946-3]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Indiana; Lake County Sulfur
Dioxide Regulations, Redesignation and Maintenance Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision for the control of sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions
in Lake County, Indiana. The SIP revision submitted by the Indiana
Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) on April 8, 2005, and
supplemented on July 6, 2005, amends 326 Indiana Administrative Code
(IAC) Article 7. Indiana's revised SO2 rule consists of
changes to 326 IAC 7-4 which sets forth facility-specific
SO2 emission limitations and recordkeeping requirements for
Lake County. The rule revision also reflects updates to company names,
updates to emission limits currently in permits, deletion of facilities
that are already covered by natural gas limits, or other corrections or
updates. Due to changes in section numbers, references to citations in
other parts of the rule have also been updated. EPA is also proposing
to approve a request to redesignate the Lake County nonattainment area
to attainment of the SO2 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS), which was submitted for parallel processing by IDEM
on June 21, 2005. In conjunction with these actions, EPA is also
proposing to approve the maintenance plan for the Lake County
nonattainment area to ensure that attainment of the NAAQS will be
maintained. The SIP revision, redesignation request and maintenance
plan are approvable because they satisfy the requirements of the Clean
Air Act (Act). The rationale for the approval and other information are
provided in this notice.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before August 29, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments, identified by Regional Material in EDocket
(RME) ID No. R05-OAR-2005-IN-0004, by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Agency Web site: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. Regional RME, EPA's
electronic public docket and comments system, is EPA's preferred method
for receiving comments. Once in the system, select ``quick search,''
then key in the appropriate RME Docket identification number. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov.
Fax: (312) 886-5824.
Mail: You may send written comments to: John M. Mooney, Chief,
Criteria Pollutant Section, (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Hand delivery: Deliver your comments to: John M. Mooney, Chief,
Criteria Pollutant Section, (AR-18J),
[[Page 43821]]
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, 18th floor, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are
only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to RME ID No. R05-OAR-2005-IN-
0004. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through RME, regulations.gov,
or e-mail. The EPA RME Web site and the Federal regulations.gov Web
site are ``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know
your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body
of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through RME or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
RME index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically in RME
or in hard copy at Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and
Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
We recommend that you telephone Christos Panos, Environmental Engineer,
at (312) 353-8328 before visiting the Region 5 office. This Facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christos Panos, Environmental
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8328.
panos.christos@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplemental information
section is arranged as follows:
I. General Information
1. What action is EPA taking today?
2. Why is EPA taking this action?
II. Review of the State Submittals
1. What is the background for this action?
2. What information did Indiana submit, and what were its
requests?
3. What changes did Indiana make to the Lake County
SO2 rules?
4. What are the results of the modeled attainment demonstration?
III. State Implementation Plan Approval
1. What requirements do SO2 nonattainment areas have
to meet?
2. How does the State's SIP revision meet the requirements of
the Act?
IV. Redesignation Evaluation
1. What are the criteria used to review redesignation requests?
2. How are these criteria satisfied for Lake County?
V. Maintenance Plan
What are the maintenance plan requirements?
VI. Proposed Rulemaking Action and Solicitation of Public Comment
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. General Information
1. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
In this action, EPA is proposing to approve into the Indiana SIP
SO2 emission limitations applicable in Lake County, Indiana.
Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve amendments to rules 326 IAC
7-1.1-1, 326 IAC 7-1.1-2, 326 IAC 7-2-1, and newly created 326 IAC 7-
4.1. The revised rules were adopted by the Indiana Air Pollution
Control Board on March 2, 2005, and were submitted by IDEM to EPA on
April 8, 2005. IDEM submitted a supplement to its submission on July 6,
2005, indicating that the revised rules became effective June 24, 2005
and were published in the Indiana Register on July 1, 2005. EPA is also
proposing to approve the SO2 redesignation request submitted
by the State of Indiana to redesignate the Lake County SO2
nonattainment area to attainment of the SO2 NAAQS. Finally,
EPA is proposing to approve the maintenance plan submitted for this
area.
2. Why Is EPA Taking This Action?
EPA is taking this action because the State's submittal for the
Lake County SO2 nonattainment area is fully approvable. The
revised rules amend SO2 requirements for many sources in the
nonattainment area, and reflect a reduction of over 30,000 tons of
SO2 per year of allowable emissions compared to the emission
limits in the previously approved 1989 SIP. The SIP revision provides
for attainment and maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS and
satisfies the requirements of part D of the Act applicable to
SO2 nonattainment areas. Further, EPA is approving the
maintenance plan and redesignating the Lake County SO2
nonattainment area to attainment because the State has met the
redesignation and maintenance plan requirements of the Act. Under the
Act, EPA may redesignate nonattainment areas to attainment if
sufficient data are available to warrant such changes and the area
meets the criteria contained in section 107(d)(3)(E). This includes
full approval of a maintenance plan for the area. The requirements for
a maintenance plan are found in section 175A of the Act. A more
detailed explanation of how the State's submittal meets these
requirements is contained below.
II. Review of the State Submittals
1. What Is the Background for This Action?
Lake County is located in northwest Indiana and is surrounded by
the Indiana counties of Porter, Jasper and Newton. On March 3, 1978, at
43 FR 8962, EPA designated a portion of Lake County as a primary
SO2 nonattainment area, based on monitored violations of the
primary SO2 NAAQS. The SO2 nonattainment area of
Lake County is bounded by Lake Michigan to the north, the Indiana-
Illinois State line to the west, the Lake-Porter County line on the
east, and on the south it is bounded by U.S. 30 from the State line to
the intersection of I-65, then following I-65 to the intersection of I-
94, then following I-94 to the Lake-Porter County line. EPA approved a
SO2 SIP revision for Lake County on January 19, 1989 (54 FR
2112), consisting of source specific emission limits and other
requirements in Indiana's county-specific rules. There are numerous
SO2 sources in Lake County, including steel mills, an oil
refinery, and other industrial processes, that have SO2
limits established in 326 IAC 7-4-1.1. Because these limits were
outdated and did not demonstrate attainment, IDEM worked with the
affected sources to update their emission limits in the rule, and
performed emission modeling based on these limits that demonstrates
[[Page 43822]]
attainment of the SO2 NAAQS in the Lake County area.
2. What Information Did Indiana Submit, and What Were Its Requests?
The SIP revision submitted by IDEM on April 8, 2005, and
supplemented on July 6, 2005, consists of amendments to rules
previously approved as part of the Lake County SO2 SIP. In
this submittal the State requested that we:
Amend 326 IAC 7-1.1-1 concerning applicability;
Amend 326 IAC 7-1.1-2 concerning SO2 limitations;
Amend 326 IAC 7-2-1 concerning reporting requirements and methods to
determine compliance;
Add 326 IAC 7-4.1 concerning Lake County SO2 emission
limitations; and,
Repeal 326 IAC 7-4-1.1.
The June 21, 2005, submittal requests that we use parallel
processing to redesignate the Lake County SO2 nonattainment
area to attainment of the SO2 NAAQS and classify it as a
maintenance area.
3. What Changes Did Indiana Make to the Lake County SO2
Rules?
The amendments to 326 IAC 7-1.1-1, 326 IAC 7-1.1-2, and 326 IAC 7-
2-1 consist of clerical corrections and updates to citations made for
consistency.
Section 326 IAC 7-4-1.1 is repealed and is being replaced by 326
IAC 7-4.1 as follows:
326 IAC 7-4.1-1 Lake County SO2 emission limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-2 Sampling and analysis protocol
326 IAC 7-4.1-3 BP Products North America Inc. SO2 emission
limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-4 Bucko Construction SO2 emission limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-5 Cargill, Inc. SO2 emission limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-6 Carmeuse Lime SO2 emission limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-7 Cokenergy Inc. SO2 emission limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-8 Indiana Harbor Coke Company SO2 emission
limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-9 Ironside Energy, LLC SO2 emission
limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-10 ISG Indiana Harbor Inc. SO2 emission
limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-11 Ispat Inland Inc. SO2 emission limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-12 Methodist Hospital SO2 emission limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-13 National Recovery Systems SO2 emission
limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-14 NIPSCO Dean H. Mitchell Generating Station
SO2 emission limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-15 Rhodia SO2 emission limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-16 Safety-Kleen Oil Recovery Company SO2
emission limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-17 SCA Tissue North America LLC SO2 emission
limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-18 State Line Energy, LLC SO2 emission
limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-19 Unilever HPC USA SO2 emission limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-20 U.S. Steel-Gary Works SO2 emission
limitations
326 IAC 7-4.1-21 Walsh and Kelly SO2 emission limitations
A. 326 IAC 7-4.1-1 Lake County SO2 emission limitations. This
section restricts all new and existing fossil fuel-fired combustion
sources and facilities located in Lake County to burning only natural
gas unless an alternate SO2 emission limit is provided in
the rule. Facilities with fuel combustion units that have a maximum
capacity of less than twenty (20) million British thermal units (MMBtu)
per hour actual heat input not located at a source specifically listed
in the rule, may burn distillate oil with SO2 emissions
limited to three-tenths (0.3) pound per MMBtu. The restriction to
natural gas for new and existing units that are not listed in the rule
is necessary for protection of the SO2 NAAQS.
B. 326 IAC 7-4.1-2 Sampling and analysis protocol. This section
requires facilities owned and/or operated by Cargill, Inc., BP Products
North America Inc., Ispat Inland Inc., ISG Indiana Harbor Inc.,
Carmeuse Lime, and U.S. Steel-Gary Works to maintain a sampling and
analysis protocol that specifies the frequency of sampling, analysis,
and measurement for each fuel and material. This protocol will be
incorporated into each facility's operating permit. The protocol may be
revised as necessary to establish acceptable sampling, analysis, and
measurement procedures and frequency, but the revised protocol must be
submitted to IDEM for approval. The source may also be required to
conduct a stack test at any facility listed in this section, subject to
a thirty day written notification.
C. 326 IAC 7-4.1-3 through 326 IAC 7-4.1-21. The remaining sections
of 326 IAC 7-4.1 revise the format and style from the Table in 326 IAC
7-4-1.1(c) for clarity and ease of future revision by placing facility-
specific requirements into the separate sections as listed above. Since
the last time the rule was amended, certain facilities are operating
under new permits, variances, or other agency actions, including new or
updated information or emission limits. IDEM has updated the rule to
reflect the current information in these documents. The changes made in
the revised rule include the following:
i. Emission limits in pounds per hour and operating and production
restrictions consistent with the modeled attainment demonstration have
been added for all facilities.
ii. Changes to facility names have been updated as follows: BP
Products North America Inc. (formerly AMOCO), Carmeuse Lime (formerly
Marblehead Lime), Cerestar USA (formerly AMAIZO), ISG Indiana Harbor
Inc. (formerly LTV Steel), Ispat Inland Inc. (formerly Inland Steel),
National Recovery Systems (formerly National Briquette), SCA Tissue
North America LLC (formerly Georgia Pacific), Rhodia (formerly
Stauffer), Unilever (formerly Lever Brothers), and U.S. Steel-Gary
Works (formerly USX).
iii. Specific changes to emission limits have been made to be
consistent with permitted limits or to demonstrate attainment, through
modeling, with the SO2 NAAQS. Facilities with emission limit
changes include: BP Products North America Inc., Carmeuse Lime,
Cerestar USA, ISG Indiana Harbor Inc., Ispat Inland Inc., Methodist
Hospital, Safety Kleen Oil Recovery Company, Rhodia, and U.S. Steel-
Gary Works.
iv. New facilities that were previously part of a facility listed
in the Table in 326 IAC 7-4-1.1 have been added. These include: Indiana
Harbor Coke Company and Cokenergy (both affiliated with Ispat Inland
Inc.)
v. Closed facilities have been removed. These facilities include:
C&A Wallcovering, East Chicago Incinerator, Kaiser, Lehigh Portland
Cement, and U.S. Reduction.
vi. Units that burn only natural gas and facilities with only
natural gas units listed are subject to the natural gas emission limit
in 326 IAC 7-4.1-1 and are no longer listed individually in the rule.
Facilities removed from the rule for this purpose include: ASF-Keystone
(formerly American Steel-Hammond), Ferro Corporation (formerly Keil
Chemical), Horace Mann School, Huhtamaki Foods (formerly Keyes Fibre),
Premiere Candy, Resco Products (formerly Harbison Walker), Silgan
Containers Corporation (formerly American Can Company), and U.S.
Gypsum.
vii. Equipment inventories have been updated, either adding or
deleting units.
viii. Source codes for each facility have been added.
ix. Other minor corrections and clarifications have been made, such
as correcting unit descriptions.
[[Page 43823]]
4. What Are the Results of the Modeled Attainment Demonstration?
The ambient impact of the SO2 sources in Lake County was
determined using the ISCST3 regulatory dispersion model (version 02035)
with surface meteorological data from Hammond, Indiana from 1991
through 1995. The State ran the model with 1987 meteorological data as
well, to show that the new SIP would be protective of the NAAQS using
the worst-case year from the previous Lake County SO2 SIP
demonstration. The emission inventory for the Lake County attainment
demonstration includes all the SO2 emission points from the
facilities subject to 326 IAC 7, and reflects an up-to-date inventory
of the Lake County area's SO2 emissions. For some
facilities, the State performed separate modeling runs to evaluate
alternate operating scenarios. This ensured that the facilities could
be more flexible in their day-to-day operations, while still protecting
the NAAQS. Representative background SO2 concentrations were
developed from monitored data at seven monitoring locations in Lake,
LaPorte, and Porter Counties, and added to the final modeling results.
The Lake County modeling demonstration, including background
SO2 levels, showed that the 3-hour, 24-hour, and annual
SO2 NAAQS would be protected under the current
SO2 rules.
III. State Implementation Plan Approval
1. What Requirements Do SO2 Nonattainment Areas Have To
Meet?
The Part D SIP requirements for SO2 nonattainment areas
are contained in section 172(c) of the Act, and pertain to: Reasonably
Available Control Measures; Reasonable Further Progress; Inventory;
Identification and Quantification; Permits for New and Modified Major
Stationary Sources; Other Measures; Compliance with section 110(a)(2);
Equivalent Techniques; and, Contingency Measures.
2. How Does the State's SIP Revision Meet the Requirements of the Act?
With this submission, Indiana will have a fully approvable
SO2 SIP. As described below, Indiana's submitted revision to
its SO2 SIP for the Lake County nonattainment area fully
complies with the Part D requirements as set forth in section 172(c) of
the Act.
A. Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM). The plan complies
with the requirements to implement RACM by providing for immediate
attainment of the SO2 NAAQS through the emission limits and
operating restrictions imposed on the relevant sources by the revised
rules.
B. Reasonable Further Progress. Reasonable further progress is
achieved due to the immediate effect of the emission limits required by
the plan.
C. Inventory. An inventory of the SO2 emissions in the
Lake County nonattainment area was provided by the State and has been
found to be acceptable.
D. Identification and Quantification. This information is
unnecessary because the area has not been identified as a zone for
which economic development should be targeted.
E. Permits for New and Modified Major Stationary Sources. Any new
or modified sources constructed in the area must comply with a state
submitted and federally approved New Source Review (NSR) program. The
Federal requirements for NSR in nonattainment areas are contained in
section 172(c)(5) of the Act. EPA guidance indicates the requirements
of the part D NSR program will be replaced by the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) program when an area has reached
attainment and been redesignated, provided there are assurances that
PSD will become fully effective upon redesignation. Indiana's PSD
program was approved into the Indiana SIP on May 20, 2004 (69 FR
29071). The PSD program will become fully effective in the Lake County
area immediately upon redesignation.
F. Other Measures. The plan provides for immediate attainment of
the SO2 NAAQS through the emission limitations, operating
requirements, and compliance schedules that are set forth within state
rules.
G. Compliance with section 110(a)(2). This submission complies with
section 110(a)(2) of the Act, which identifies the requirements that a
SIP shall meet. All of the applicable provisions of section 110(a)(2)
are already required by the statutory provisions discussed in this
plan, or they have already been met by Indiana's original SIP
submission to EPA.
H. Equivalent Techniques. The modeling for this SIP submittal was
conducted using EPA's ``Guideline on Air Quality Models (Revised).'' No
equivalent techniques were used for modeling, emission inventory, or
planning procedures.
I. Contingency Measures. Section 172(c)(9) of the Act defines
contingency measures as measures in a SIP which are to be implemented
if an area fails to make RFP or fails to attain the NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date and shall consist of other control measures
that are not included in the control strategy. However, the General
Preamble to the 1990 Amendments to the Act (57 FR 13498), states that
SO2 measures present special considerations because they are
based upon what is necessary to attain the NAAQS. Because
SO2 control measures are well established and understood,
they are far less prone to uncertainty. It is considered unlikely that
an area would fail to attain the standards after it has demonstrated,
through modeling, that attainment is reached after the limits and
restrictions are fully implemented and enforced. Therefore, for
SO2 programs, contingency measures mean that the state
agency has the ability to identify sources of violations of the
SO2 NAAQS and to undertake an aggressive follow-up for
compliance and enforcement. In order to respond to NAAQS violations
IDEM will: (1) Determine whether an exceedance could be classified as
an exceptional event; (2) evaluate available meteorological data and
conduct modeling studies to determine which SO2 sources, if
any, are the cause of the problem; and (3) review the operating records
of SO2 sources to identify equipment malfunctions or permit
or rule violations. Although the point sources listed in the State's
inventory will be the primary focus, the study will not be limited to
only those sources but will encompass all potential sources of
SO2. IDEM has the necessary enforcement and compliance
programs, as well as the means to identify violators as described
above, thus satisfying the contingency measures requirement.
IV. Redesignation Evaluation
1. What Are the Criteria Used To Review Redesignation Requests?
Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Act establishes the requirements to be
met before an area may be redesignated from nonattainment to
attainment. Approvable redesignation requests must meet the following
conditions: The area has attained the applicable NAAQS; the area has a
fully approved SIP under section 110(k) of the Act; the air quality
improvement in the area is due to permanent and enforceable emission
reductions; the maintenance plan for the area has met all the
requirements of section 175A of the Act; and, the state has met all the
requirements applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the
Act.
2. How Are These Criteria Satisfied for Lake County?
A. Demonstrated Attainment of the NAAQS. Indiana's June 21, 2005,
submittal includes a table summarizing
[[Page 43824]]
ambient air monitoring data showing no exceedances of the
SO2 NAAQS in Lake County since 1996. There are currently two
monitors operating within the Lake County area, one in Gary and one in
Hammond. The redesignation request is based upon air quality data
collected and quality assured for the most recent three whole calendar
years (2002-2004). This data indicates that the ambient air quality
attains the annual and 24-hour health-based primary standards, and the
3-hour secondary standard.
Dispersion modeling is commonly used to demonstrate attainment of
the SO2 NAAQS. The State's modeling analysis was included in
the April 8, 2005, submittal. The modeling demonstrates that, under all
the operating scenarios allowed for in the SIP, the SO2
emission limits for the relevant sources in Lake County are adequate to
show attainment and maintenance of the SO2 standards. A more
detailed discussion of the modeling evaluation is included elsewhere in
this notice.
B. Fully Approved SIP. The SIP for the area must be fully approved
under section 110(k) of the Act and must satisfy all requirements that
apply under section 110 and part D of the Act. To satisfy these
requirements, EPA is proposing to approve the State's April 8, 2005,
submittal containing Lake County SO2 limits into the SIP, as
discussed in other sections of this rulemaking. Therefore, both the SIP
revision and the redesignation request for Lake County will comply with
the section 110(k) and part D requirements of the Act upon final
approval of these actions.
EPA approval of a transportation conformity SIP revision for the
area is not required for this redesignation because the nature of the
area's previous SO2 nonattainment problem has been
determined to be overwhelmingly attributable to stationary sources. The
April 8, 2005, submittal contains a detailed emissions inventory of the
allowable emissions for all of the major SO2 sources in the
area. Area and mobile source SO2 emissions are insignificant
in comparison to the emissions from stationary sources and estimated
background concentrations used in the modeled attainment demonstration.
C. Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions. Lake County
was designated nonattainment of the SO2 NAAQS based on
violations that occurred prior to 1978. Air quality improvement in the
Lake County SO2 nonattainment area is attributed to
SO2 emission limits and operating restrictions imposed on
the facilities that contributed to the nonattainment status in Lake
County. These limits are permanent and enforceable by means of non-
expiring state regulations. Emissions from these sources were modeled
with the control measures in place. The data submitted by the State
shows modeled attainment of the SO2 NAAQS in Lake County.
D. Fully Approved Maintenance Plan. EPA has concluded that the
SO2 emissions limitations contained in the plan submitted by
the State will assure maintenance of the SO2 standards. EPA
is proposing to approve the maintenance plan in today's action as
discussed below.
E. Part D and Other Section 110 Requirements. Section
107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the Act states that the Administrator may not
redesignate an area to attainment unless the area has met the
applicable requirements under section 110 and Part D. As, discussed
above, the requirements under section 110 and Part D will be met upon
final approval of the SIP revision submitted by the State on April 8,
2005, and supplemented on July 6, 2005.
V. Maintenance Plan
What Are the Maintenance Plan Requirements?
Section 175A of the Act requires states to submit a SIP revision
which provides for the maintenance of the NAAQS in the area for at
least 10 years after approval of the redesignation. Consistent with the
Act's requirements, EPA developed procedures for redesignation of
nonattainment areas that are contained in a September 4, 1992,
memorandum titled, ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment.'' This EPA guidance document contains a number of
maintenance plan provisions that a State should consider before it can
request a change in designation for a federally designated
nonattainment area. The basic components needed to ensure proper
maintenance of the NAAQS are: Attainment inventory, maintenance
demonstration, ambient air monitoring network, verification of
continued attainment, and a contingency plan.
A. Attainment Inventory. The air dispersion modeling included in
the State's submittal contains the emission inventory of SO2
sources for Lake County.
B. Maintenance Demonstration. The modeled attainment demonstration
submitted by Indiana on April 8, 2005, shows attainment and maintenance
of the SO2 NAAQS. Steel mills, an oil refinery, and other
industrial processes are the primary sources of SO2 in the
Lake County area. Permanent and enforceable reductions of
SO2 emissions in Lake County contributed to the attainment
of the SO2 standards. Reductions of SO2 emissions
between the year that violations occurred (pre-1979) and the year
attainment was achieved (2004) are attributable to the closure of
stationary sources or emissions units, substantial emissions reductions
at U.S. Steel-Gary Works, and reduced emission limits for certain units
at Cargill, Ispat Inland, and Carmeuse Lime facilities. Subsequent to
redesignation, any future increases in emissions and/or significant
changes to the stack configuration parameters from those modeled in the
attainment demonstration due to new or modifying stationary sources,
would be subject to the Indiana SIP's NSR and/or PSD requirements
including a demonstration that the NAAQS and applicable PSD increments
are protected. Although total SO2 emissions from all sources
are projected to increase between 2004 and 2015 due to economic growth,
the submitted modeling results indicate future NAAQS maintenance of the
area. Emissions in 2015 are projected to be higher than 2002 and 2003,
however, emissions in 2001 and prior years were higher than the
projections for 2015, and there were no exceedances of the
SO2 NAAQS recorded in 2001. Further, the attainment modeling
assumes a potential to emit of 120,800 tons per year of SO2.
This therefore confirms that the projected growth in actual emissions
to 43,568 tons of SO2 in 2015, will not cause a violation of
the SO2 NAAQS.
C. Monitoring Network. Indiana has indicated in the submitted
maintenance plan that it will continue to monitor SO2 in the
Lake County area in accordance with 40 CFR parts 53 and 58 to verify
continued attainment with the NAAQS for SO2. The data will
continue to be entered into the Air Quality Subsystem (AQS) of the
Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS). IDEM will consult with
EPA Region 5 staff prior to making any changes to the existing
monitoring network should changes be necessary in the future.
D. Verification of Continued Attainment. Indiana has committed in
the maintenance plan to review the monitored data annually, and to
submit a maintenance plan update eight years after redesignation which
will contain IDEM's plan for maintaining the SO2 NAAQS for
10 years beyond the first 10-year period after redesignation (2015-
2025). Further, IDEM commits to maintain the control measures listed
above after redesignation and that any changes to its rules or emission
limits applicable to SO2 sources, as required
[[Page 43825]]
for maintenance of the SO2 standards in Lake County, will be
submitted to EPA for approval as a SIP revision. This will include,
where appropriate, a demonstration based on modeling that the standard
will be maintained.
E. Contingency Plan. Section 175A of the Act requires that the
maintenance plan include contingency provisions to correct any
violation of the NAAQS after redesignation of the area. These
contingency measures are distinguished from those generally required
for nonattainment areas under section 172(c)(9). IDEM will rely on
ambient air monitoring data in the Lake County area to track compliance
with the SO2 NAAQS and to determine the need to implement
contingency measures. In the event that an exceedance of the
SO2 NAAQS occurs, the State will expeditiously investigate
and determine the source(s) that caused the exceedance and/or
violation, and enforce any SIP or permit limit that is violated. If
there is a violation of the SO2 NAAQS, and it is not due to
an exceptional event, malfunction, or noncompliance with a permit
condition or rule requirement, IDEM will determine additional control
measures needed to assure future attainment of the SO2
NAAQS. Control measures that can be implemented in a short time will be
selected in order to be in place within eighteen (18) months from the
time that IDEM is aware that the violation occurred. Although the point
sources listed in the inventory will be the primary focus, the
possibility that the problem is attributable to new or previously
unknown SO2 sources will also be considered. Indiana will
submit to EPA an analysis to demonstrate the proposed measures are
adequate to return the area to attainment. Adoption of any additional
control measures is subject to the necessary administrative and legal
process. This process will include publication of notices, an
opportunity for public hearing, and other measures required by Indiana
law for rulemaking by state environmental boards.
VI. Proposed Rulemaking Action and Solicitation of Public Comment
EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision for the control of
SO2 emissions in Lake County, Indiana, as requested by the
State on April 8, 2005, and supplemented on July 6, 2005. The revision
consists of the amended rule at 326 Indiana Administrative Code (IAC)
Article 7. In this rule, the requirements in the Table in 326 IAC 7-4-
1.1 have been divided into separate sections for each facility for
clarity and ease of future rule actions. The new rule, 326 IAC 7-4.1,
replaces 326 IAC 7-4-1.1, which will be repealed. Because the State has
complied with the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Act, EPA
is also proposing to approve the redesignation of the Lake County
nonattainment area to attainment of the SO2 NAAQS, as
requested by the State on June 21, 2005. In conjunction with these
actions, EPA is also proposing to approve Indiana's maintenance plan
for the Lake County SO2 nonattainment area as a SIP revision
because it meets the requirements of section 175A of the Act.
You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand
delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the
appropriate rulemaking identification number by including the text
``Public comment on proposed rulemaking Region 5 Air Docket R05-OAR-
2005-IN-0004'' in the subject line on the first page of your comment.
Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the specified
comment period. Comments received after the close of the comment period
will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider these late
comments.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Executive Order 12866; Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.
Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed action merely proposes to approve State law as
meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by State law. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Because this rule proposes to approve pre-existing requirements
under State law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty
beyond that required by State law, it 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).
Executive Order 13175 Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because
it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 13132 Federalism
This action also does not have federalism implications because it
does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999). This action merely proposes to approve a state rule
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act.
Executive Order 13045 Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically
significant.
National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the
[[Page 43826]]
requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule does not impose an information collection burden
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.
Dated: July 21, 2005.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 05-15058 Filed 7-28-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P