[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 89 (Wednesday, May 10, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 21703-21706]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-09385]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0645; FRL-9962-11-Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Commissioner's Order for SABIC
Innovative Plastics
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving, as a
revision to the Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP), a submittal
from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) to EPA,
dated December 5, 2016. The submittal consists of an order issued by
the Commissioner of IDEM that establishes permanent and enforceable
sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission limits for SABIC Innovative
Plastics (SABIC). IDEM submitted this order so the area near SABIC can
be designated ``attainment'' of the 2010 primary SO2
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), a matter that will be
addressed in a separate future rulemaking. EPA's approval of this this
order would make these SO2 emission limits and applicable
reporting, recordkeeping, and compliance demonstration requirements
part of the federally enforceable Indiana SIP.
DATES: This direct final rule is be effective July 10, 2017, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by June 9, 2017. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA-R05-
OAR-2016-0645 at http://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 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 http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph Ko, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-7947, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. Why did IDEM issue this Commissioner's Order?
II. What are the SO2 limits in this Commissioner's Order?
III. By what criterion is EPA reviewing this SIP revision?
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Why did IDEM issue this Commissioner's Order?
On December 5, 2016, IDEM submitted for approval, as a revision to
the Indiana SIP, an order issued by IDEM's Commissioner that
establishes SO2 emission limits for SABIC. SO2
emission limits for SABIC previously did not exist in the Indiana SIP.
IDEM established these emission limits so the area near SABIC can
qualify in the future for being designated ``attainment'' of the 2010
primary SO2 NAAQS. The history of the 2010 SO2
NAAQS designation process and the applicable Data Requirements Rule
(DRR) is explained below in order to provide a more detailed
explanation of the context for IDEM's request.
On June 3, 2010, pursuant to section 109 of the Clean Air Act
(CAA), EPA revised the primary (health-based) SO2 NAAQS by
establishing a new one-hour standard codified at title 40 Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) section 50.17 (75 FR 35520). Pursuant to
section 107(d) of the CAA, EPA must designate areas as either
``unclassifiable,'' ``attainment,'' or ``nonattainment'' for the 2010
one-hour SO2 primary NAAQS. Under Section 107(d) of the CAA,
a nonattainment area is any area that does not meet the NAAQS or that
contributes to a violation in a nearby area. An attainment area is any
area, other than a nonattainment area, that meets the NAAQS.
Unclassifiable areas are those that cannot be classified on the basis
of
[[Page 21704]]
available information as meeting or not meeting the NAAQS.
On August 5, 2013, EPA published a final rule designating 29 areas
in the United States as nonattainment for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS, based on recorded air quality monitoring data from 2009-2011
that showed violations of the NAAQS (78 FR 47191). In that rulemaking,
EPA committed to address, in separate future actions, the designations
for all other areas for which EPA was not yet prepared to issue
designations.
Following the initial August 5, 2013, designations, three lawsuits
were filed against EPA in different U.S. District Courts, alleging that
EPA had failed to perform a nondiscretionary duty under the CAA by not
designating all portions of the country by June 2013, three years after
the promulgation of the revised SO2 NAAQS, as required by
Section 107(d) of the CAA. In an effort intended to resolve the
litigation in one of those cases, plaintiffs Sierra Club and the
Natural Resources Defense Council and EPA filed a proposed consent
decree with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California. On March 2, 2015, the Court entered the consent decree and
issued an enforceable order for EPA to complete the area designations
according to the Court-ordered schedule.\1\ The consent decree required
EPA to complete the designations in three additional rounds following
EPA's original designations (Round 1): Round 2 by July 2, 2016, Round 3
by December 31, 2017, and Round 4 by December 31, 2020. This action
falls within Round 3 of the designation process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Sierra Club et al. v. EPA, No. 3:13-cv-3953-SI (N.D.Cal.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the DRR (80 FR 51052), each state air agency was required to
submit a list to the EPA by January 15, 2016, that identified all
sources within the state that had SO2 emissions exceeding
2,000 tons per year (tpy) during the most recent year for which
emissions data for those sources were available, plus any additional
sources and their associated areas identified by the state air agency
or by the EPA as also warranting air quality characterization due to
their potential to contribute to an SO2 NAAQS violation.
According to IDEM, SABIC emitted 4,030 tons of SO2 in
2014, exceeding the 2,000 tpy threshold, and therefore Indiana
identified SABIC as one of eleven facilities in the state as being
subject to the air quality characterization requirements of the DRR. To
satisfy the requirements of the DRR, states must characterize local
SO2 concentrations with either air dispersion modeling or
ambient air monitoring. States also have the option to establish a
permanent and federally enforceable facility-wide limit on
SO2 emissions from a listed source to below 2,000 tpy. On
June 30, 2016, Indiana informed EPA that SABIC had selected the
dispersion modeling option to characterize the local SO2
concentrations in the area surrounding the facility. Indiana also wrote
on September 26, 2016, to inform EPA that it planned to pursue
federally enforceable limits for SABIC as a means to provide for
attainment in the area.
Under the DRR, for sources such as SABIC that the state has elected
to address through modeling, the state is required to submit modeling
by January 13, 2016, characterizing nearby air quality. Under the DRR,
Indiana may submit modeling showing that the applicable limits provide
for attainment of the standard, but only if these limits are federally
enforceable.
SABIC requested a Commissioner's Order from IDEM to be submitted to
EPA so as to establish federally enforceable and permanent
SO2 emission limits that will ensure modeled attainment of
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS in accordance with EPA's Draft SO2 NAAQS
Designations Modeling Technical Assistance Document.\2\ Therefore, IDEM
conducted air dispersion modeling using the American Meteorological
Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD)
version 15181 in accordance with appendix W of 40 CFR part 51 to
determine SO2 emission limits for SABIC that should result
in modeled attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS in the area near
this facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Draft SO2 NAAQS Designations Modeling Technical Assistance
Document. December 2013. http://www3.epa.gov/airquality/sulfurdioxide/pdfs/SO2ModelingTAD.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IDEM has requested that EPA approve Commissioner's Order 2016-03
for SABIC as part of Indiana's SIP. If EPA approves the SO2
emission limits contained in these orders, they would become federally
enforceable. Once these SO2 emission limits have become
federally enforceable, IDEM intends to use them to demonstrate modeled
attainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS for the area near SABIC.
To be clear, the purpose of this rulemaking is to take action on IDEM's
request to approve these SO2 emission limits into the
Indiana SIP and thereby make them federally enforceable. The purpose of
this rulemaking is not to take action on whether these SO2
emission limits are adequate for EPA to designate attainment of the
2010 SO2 NAAQS for the area near SABIC. EPA intends to
complete 2010 SO2 NAAQS designations for areas under the
Federal consent decree deadlines, including the area near SABIC, in
separate rulemakings.
II. What are the SO2 limits in these Commissioner's Orders?
For SABIC, Indiana issued Commissioner's Order 2016-03 on October
20, 2016, with an effective date of January 13, 2017. This order
established SO2 emission limits for 20 emission units within
the SABIC facility. According to IDEM, the COS Vent Oxidizer and the
COS Flare units contribute the most to SO2 ambient air
concentrations in the area. Within the SABIC process line, the COS Vent
Oxidizer is the primary control device, and the COS Flare serves as a
back-up to the oxidizer or is used during safety interlock of the
system. The function of both units is to eliminate the sulfur-
containing compounds in the regeneration gas via thermal combustion.
The order established the following emissions rates for the COS Vent
Oxidizer and the COS Flare: (a) 415 lb/hr, one-hour average; and (b)
269.21 lb/hr, twenty-four hour rolling average, based on daily coke
usage and daily sulfur input. The 18 other emission limits for
ancillary units are minor contributors to the overall SO2
ambient air concentrations in the area, and are listed in Table 1
below.
Table 1--Emission Limits for Ancillary Units
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission limit
Unit name (lb/hr, one-
hour average)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NE Boiler (01-101)...................................... 0.15
BW Gas (01-014)......................................... 0.15
H-790 (12-701).......................................... 0.02
H-520 (03-007).......................................... 0.0045
H-530A (03-008)......................................... 27.8
H-530B (03-008)......................................... 27.8
H-390 (12-169).......................................... 0.0102
H-900 (13-049).......................................... 1.86
H-900B (13-321)......................................... 0.0188
SC 1/2 (13-155)......................................... 0.0008
H-7090 (04-063)......................................... 0.00235
H-6060 (04-050)......................................... 0.00153
F-972 (08-001).......................................... 0.518
COGEN (19-001).......................................... 1.17
AUX BOILER (19-002)..................................... 0.15
AUX2 BOILER (19-003).................................... 0.15
CG1 BOILER (19-004)..................................... 0.15
R BOILER (09-106)....................................... 0.11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. By what criterion is EPA reviewing this SIP revision?
EPA has evaluated this revision on the basis of whether it
strengthens Indiana's SIP. Prior to Commissioner's Order 2016-03, there
were no specific
[[Page 21705]]
SO2 emission limitations in the SIP applicable to SABIC. The
SO2 emission limits contained in Commissioner's Order 2016-
03 for SABIC establish permanent and enforceable limits, and should,
therefore, strengthen Indiana's SIP.
The adequacy of these limits for providing for attainment is not a
prerequisite for approval of these limits. Nevertheless, the purpose of
these limits is ultimately to provide for attainment, and EPA is
working with Indiana to assure a proper analysis of the adequacy of
these limits for this purpose.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving Commissioner's Order 2016-03 as part of the
Indiana SIP. The Commissioner's Order strengthens Indiana's SIP by
incorporating SO2 emission limits for SABIC, which did not
have any specific SO2 emission limits for SABIC previously.
By approving the Commissioner's Order into the Indiana SIP, these
SO2 emission limits and applicable reporting, recordkeeping,
and compliance demonstration requirements contained in the order would
become federally enforceable, and strengthen the Indiana SIP.
We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective July 10, 2017
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written
comments by June 9, 2017. If we receive such comments, we will withdraw
this action before the effective date by publishing a subsequent
document that will withdraw the final action. All public comments
received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the
proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any
parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this
time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment,
paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed
from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions
of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. If we do
not receive any comments, this action will be effective July 10, 2017.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Indiana
Commissioner's Order described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set
forth below. Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for
inclusion in the State implementation plan, have been incorporated by
reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under
sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final
rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference by
the Director of the Federal Register in the next update to the SIP
compilation.\3\ EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
documents generally available through www.regulations.gov, and/or at
the EPA Region 5 Office (please contact the person identified in the
For Further Information Contact section of this preamble for more
information).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by July 10, 2017. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this
[[Page 21706]]
action published in the proposed rules section of today's Federal
Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of
this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: April 20, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 52.770 the table in paragraph (d) is amended by adding an
entry for ``SABIC Innovative Plastics'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
EPA-Approved Indiana Source-Specific Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO date Title SIP rule EPA approval Explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
10/20/2016................. SABIC Innovative N.A 5/10/2017, [Insert Limitation intended
Plastics. Federal Register to support
citation]. attainment
designation.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-09385 Filed 5-9-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P