![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Indiana
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: January 15, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 10)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 1970-1972]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15ja03-9]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[IN 140-1a; FRL-7433-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Indiana
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
conditionally approves rules, submitted by the State of Indiana as
revisions to its State Implementation Plan (SIP), for Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) provisions for attainment areas for the
Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM).
DATES: This rule will become effective March 3, 2003 unless EPA
receives adverse written comments by February 14, 2003. If EPA receives
adverse written comments, it will publish a timely withdrawal of the
rule in the Federal Register, and inform the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relevant to this action are
available for inspection during normal business hours at the following
location: Permits and Grants Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Please contact Julie Capasso at
(312) 886-1426 before visiting the Region 5 office. Written comments
should be sent to: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Permits and Grants Section
(IL/IN/OH), Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie Capasso, Environmental
Scientist, Permits and Grants Section (IL/IN/OH), Air Programs Branch,
(AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, telephone (312) 886-1426.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This supplementary information section is
organized as follows:
A. What is the purpose of this document?
B. What is the history of IDEM's PSD program?
C. Who is affected by this action?
D. Approvability Analysis
E. What is today's final action?
F. Regulatory Assessment Requirements
A. What Is the Purpose of This Document?
This document is our conditional approval of the SIP revision
request that IDEM has submitted for its PSD program.
B. What Is the History of IDEM's PSD Program?
On September 30, 1980, EPA delegated to IDEM the authority to
implement and enforce the federal PSD program. On April 11, 2001, IDEM
submitted a request to EPA to revise its SIP to incorporate its PSD
regulations. On February 1, 2002, IDEM submitted to EPA a revised
request resolving issues identified by EPA during an informal review.
IDEM withdrew the previous request on February 27, 2002. On May 28,
2002, EPA sent a letter to IDEM deeming the February 1, 2002 submittal
complete, and initiated the processing of the request.
Indiana's February 1, 2002 submission consists of the addition to
the SIP of: 326 IAC 2-2, PSD rules; 326 IAC 2-1.1-6, Public notice; and
326 IAC 2-1.1-8, Time periods for determination on permit applications.
IDEM previously submitted sections 326 IAC 2-1.1-6 and 326 IAC 2-1.1-8,
and at EPA's request, is resubmitting them as part of this SIP
submittal request.
C. Who Is Affected by This Action?
Indiana has already adopted these PSD rules; therefore, air
pollution sources will not be subject to any additional requirements.
This action merely approves the State rules into the SIP, making them
federally enforceable under the Clean Air Act (CAA). Because this is
now a federally-approved State program instead of a delegated federal
program, anyone wishing to appeal a PSD permit will have to do so under
the State's environmental appeals process.
D. Approvability Analysis
I. 326 IAC 2-2-1: Definitions
Unless otherwise specified below, definitions in 326 IAC 2-2-1 are
consistent with definitions in 40 CFR 51.166(b).
EPA has noted wording discrepancies between the Federal rules and
the following rules: In 326 IAC 2-2-1(y)(5), the words ``and this
subdivision'' are superfluous. In 326 IAC 2-2-1(gg), IDEM should
replace ``U.S. EPA'' with ``IDEM'' in the following sentence: ``U.S.
EPA shall give expedited consideration to permit applications * * *.''
In 326 IAC 2-2-6(b)(5), the words ``whichever is later'' are not
necessary. These wording differences do not constitute approvability
issues. IDEM agrees to
[[Page 1971]]
address them the first time that it reopens the rules.
The Federal definition of ``major modification'' excludes from a
physical change or a change in the method of operation the use by a
stationary source of an alternative fuel or raw material which the
source was capable of accommodating before January 1, 1975, unless the
change is prohibited under any permit condition established after
January 6, 1975 pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21 or under regulations approved
pursuant to 40 CFR Subpart I or 40 CFR 51.166. 40 CFR Subpart I
contains requirements pertaining to minor new source review permits.
Indiana's rule 326 IAC 2-2-1(x)(2)(E)(i) provides that the use of an
alternative fuel or raw material is a change in the method of operation
if prohibited by a condition of a permit issued pursuant to the
authority of the PSD or major new source review programs, but does not
address other new source review provisions. The omission of the
reference to minor new source review provisions in 326 IAC 2-2-
1(x)(2)(E)(i) was inadvertent. Indiana is not aware of any new source
review permits that were not issued pursuant to PSD or major new source
review authority that contain restrictions on the use of an alternative
fuel or raw material; however, Indiana agrees to address this
inadvertent omission within one year of the effective date of this
conditional approval.
II. 326 IAC 2-2-6: Increment Consumption
326 IAC 2-2-6(a) only allows a source or major modification to
consume 80% of the maximum increase allowed in the 40 CFR 51.166(c).
The State's increment consumption requirements are more stringent than
the Federal rule, and are therefore approvable.
III. 326 IAC 2-2-12: Permit Rescission
326 IAC 2-2-12 provides that sources may request that IDEM rescind
requirements in permits issued prior to January 1, 2002. The comparable
federal rule, 40 CFR 52.21(w)(2), provides for rescission of terms from
permits issued prior to August 7, 1987. The Federal provision relates
to the transition between Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) and
particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns or less
(PM-10). IDEM has informed EPA that it interprets 326 IAC 2-2-12 to be
consistent with 40 CFR 52.21(w) in that it would only consider use of
this subsection to rescind conditions related to TSP. Therefore, EPA
believes that these provisions are approvable.
E. What Is Today's Final Action?
EPA is conditionally approving the following rules because with the
exception of the inadvertent omission of minor new source review
permits from the exemption to the definition of ``major modification,''
the following sections of the State's Rules are consistent with EPA's
regulations at 40 CFR 51.166:326 IAC 2-2-2, Applicability; 326 IAC 2-2-
3, Control technology; 326 IAC 2-2-4, Air quality analysis; 326 IAC 2-
2-5, Air quality impact; 326 IAC 2-2-7, Additional analysis; 326 IAC 2-
2-8, Source obligation; 326 IAC 2-2-9, Innovative control technology;
326 IAC 2-2-10, Source information; 326 IAC 2-2-11, Stack height
provisions; 326 IAC 2-2-13, Area designation and redesignation; 326 IAC
2-2-14, Sources impacting Federal Class I areas: Additional
requirements; 326 IAC 2-2-15, Public participation; 326 IAC 2-2-16,
Ambient air ceilings; 326 IAC 2-1.1-6, Public notice, and 326 IAC 2-
1.1-8, Time periods for determination on permit applications. Because
it is unlikely that Indiana has limited the ability of any sources to
use alternative fuels or raw materials through a minor new source
review permit, and because Indiana has committed in a December 12, 2002
letter to correct this minor deficiency within one year of the
effective date of this approval, EPA believes that it is appropriate to
grant conditional approval. However, should Indiana fail to correct
this deficiency within a year of this action, EPA will initiate
withdrawal of this approval. Although EPA is approving Indiana's PSD
SIP, EPA emphasizes that it has a responsibility to insure that all
states properly implement their preconstruction permitting programs.
EPA's approval of Indiana's PSD program does not divest the Agency of
the duty to continue appropriate oversight to insure that PSD
determinations made by Indiana are consistent with the requirements of
the CAA, EPA regulations and the SIP.
Today's approval of Indiana's SIP revision submission is limited to
existing rules. EPA is taking no position on whether Indiana will need
to make changes to its new source review rules to meet any requirements
that EPA may promulgate as part of new source review reform.
EPA is publishing this direct final conditional approval of the
Indiana PSD SIP submitted on February 1, 2002. We view this action as
noncontroversial, and anticipate no adverse comments. However, in a
separate document in this Federal Register publication, EPA is
proposing to withdraw the State Plan should adverse or critical written
comments be filed. This approval action will be effective without
further notice unless EPA receives relevant adverse written comment by
February 14, 2003. Should EPA receive such comments, it will publish a
final rule informing the public that this action will not take effect.
Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at
this time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that
this action will be effective on March 3, 2003.
F. Regulatory Assessment Requirements
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. For this
reason, 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). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this 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.). Because
this rule approves 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).
This 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 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 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 approves a state rule
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power
[[Page 1972]]
and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This 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.
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 requirements
of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This 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.). 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 rule 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 Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by March 3, 2003. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: December 18, 2002.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, of
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-et seq.
2. Section 52.770 is amended by adding (c)(147) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(147) On February 1, 2002, Indiana submitted its Prevention of
Significant Deterioration rules as a revision to the State
implementation plan.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(A) Title 326 of the Indiana Administrative Code, Rules 2-2-1, 2-2-
2, 2-2-3, 2-2-4, 2-2-5, 2-2-6, 2-2-7, 2-2-8, 2-2-9, 2-2-10, 2-2-11, 2-
2-12, 2-2-13, 2-2-14, 2-2-15 and 2-2-16. Filed with the Secretary of
State on March 23, 2001, effective April 22, 2001.
(B) Title 326 of the Indiana Administrative Code, Rules 2-1.1-6 and
2-1.1-8. Filed with the Secretary of State on November 25, 1998,
effective December 25, 1998. Errata filed with the Secretary of State
on May 12, 1999, effective June 11, 1999.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 03-616 Filed 1-14-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P