Browse: Departments Dates Agencies
IN ID: [IN100-1a, IN120-1a; FRL-6728-2a]
SUBJECT CATEGORY: Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Indiana
DOCUMENT SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to total suspended particulate
(TSP) and Sulfur Dioxide (SO
SUMMARY: Indiana,
Throughout this document wherever ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' are used we mean EPA.
Table of Contents
I. What is the EPA Approving?
II. What are the changes from current rules?
A. Sources eliminated from the rules.
B. Revised limits.
C. Combined annual limits.
D. Recordkeeping requirements.
III. Analysis of supporting materials provided by Indiana.
IV. What are the environmental effects of these actions?
V. EPA rulemaking actions.
VI. Administrative requirements.
A. Executive Order 12866
B. Executive Order 13045
C. Executive Order 13084
D. Executive Order 13132
E. Regulatory Flexibility
F. Unfunded Mandates
G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
I. Petitions for Judicial Review
We are approving revisions to TSP and SO
The revisions for National Starch include the elimination of TSP
limits for 35 units and SO
For Allison, the revisions include combining the annual TSP
emissions limits for 5 boilers into one, and the addition of
recordkeeping requirements for these boilers. There are no changes to
the shortterm emissions limits for individual boilers. These revisions will not change the overall allowed emissions for Allison.
II. What are the changes from current rules?
Indiana has eliminated 35 emission units at National Starch from
TSP rule 326 IAC 6112, and 4 boilers from SO
Indiana has revised some shortterm and some longterm TSP
emissions limits for sources at National Starch. Indiana has increased
the annual limits for processes 619, 562, 561, 404, 403, and 402
from 2.3, 1.1, 0.2, 6.7, 7.9, and 8.6 tpy to 4.1, 11.3, 7.02, 44.1,
42.3, and 31.9 tpy, respectively. Indiana has increased the hourly concentration limits for processes 562, 561, 404,
[[Page 47337]]
403, and 402 from 0.001, 0.001, 0.005, 0.005, 0.005 grains per dry
standard cubic foot (gr/dscf) to 0.010, 0.020, 0.020, 0.020. 0.020 gr/
dscf, respectively. Indiana has decreased the hourly concentration limit for process 5752 from 0.018 to 0.011 gr/dscf.
Indiana combined the annual emissions limits for boilers 1 through 5 at Allison into one overall limit. The previous version of the rule contained limits of 0.6, 3.9, 6.4, 19.9, and 8.5 tpy for boilers 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. The revised rule contains one PM limit of 39.3 tpy for boilers 1 through 5 combined.
Indiana added recordkeeping requirements for Allison. Under these requirements, Allison is to maintain fuel type, fuel usage, and fuel heat content information for each boiler. Allison must also submit quarterly reports of this information to IDEM, and maintain the records for 5 years.
The general criteria used by the EPA to evaluate such emissions
trades, or ``bubbles'', under the Clean Air Act and applicable
regulations are set out in the EPA's December 4, 1986, Emissions
Trading Policy Statement (ETPS) (see 51 FR 43814). Emissions trades
which result in an overall decrease in allowable emissions require a
``Level II'' modeling analysis under the ETPS to ensure that the NAAQS
will be protected. A Level II analysis must include emissions from the
sources involved in the trade, and must demonstrate that the air
quality impact of the trade does not exceed set significance levels.
For particulate matter, the significance levels are 10 micrograms per
cubic meter (
While the limits for Marion County, Indiana apply to TSP, the
current National Ambient Air Quality Standards apply to particulate
matter 10 microns or less in diameter (PM
Indiana's PM
The modeling analyses submitted by the IDEM in support of the
requested SIP revisions are consistent with a Level II analysis. The
analyses shows that the SIP revisions will not cause or contribute to
any exceedances of the PM
These SIP revisions will result in a decrease in allowable TSP
emissions of 406 tons per year for National Starch, and no change in
overall annual TSP emissions for Allison. This equates to a reduction
of 316 tpy of PM
We are approving, through direct final rulemaking, revisions to TSP
and SO
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these regulatory actions from Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and Review.''
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not involve decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Indian tribal governments. These
[[Page 47338]]
actions do not involve or impose any requirements that affect Indian
Tribes. Accordingly, the requirements of section 3(b) of Executive Order 13084 do not apply to this rule.
Federalism (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999) revokes and replaces Executive Orders 12612 (Federalism) and 12875 (Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership). Executive Order 13132 requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the Executive Order to include regulations that 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.'' Under Executive Order 13132, EPA may not issue a regulation that has federalism implications, that imposes substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not required by statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State and local governments, or EPA consults with State and local officials early in the process of developing the proposed regulation. EPA also may not issue a regulation that has federalism implications and that preempts State law unless the Agency consults with State and local officials early in the process of developing the proposed regulation.
This rule will 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, because it merely approves 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. Thus, the requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order do not apply to this rule.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, small notforprofit enterprises, and small governmental jurisdictions.
This rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create any new requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not create any new requirements, I certify that these actions will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Moreover, due to the nature of the FederalState relationship under the Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 25566 (1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
Under sections 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate; or to the private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA must select the most costeffective and least burdensome alternative that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan for informing and advising any small governments that may be significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval actions promulgated do not include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated costs of $100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the private sector. These Federal actions approve pre existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from these actions.
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. Section 804, however, exempts from section 801 the following types of rules: rules of particular applicability; rules relating to agency management or personnel; and rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect the rights or obligations of nonagency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3). EPA is not required to submit a rule report regarding these actions under section 801 because this is a rule of particular applicability. H. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
Section 12 of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal agencies to evaluate existing technical standards when developing a new regulation. To comply with NTTAA, EPA must consider and use ``voluntary consensus standards'' (VCS) if available and applicable when developing programs and policies unless doing so would be inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical.
The EPA believes that VCS are inapplicable to these actions. Today's actions do not require the public to perform activities conducive to the use of VCS.
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of these actions must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 2, 2000. 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. These actions may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce their requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
[[Page 47339]]
Dated: June 16, 2000.
Francis X. Lyons,
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, 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 paragraphs (c)(124) and (c)(136) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.770 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(124) On February 3, 1999, and May 17, 2000, Indiana submitted
revised particulate matter emissions regulations for Allison
Transmission in Marion County, Indiana. The submittal amends 326 IAC 6
112, and includes the combination of annual emissions limits for 5
boilers into one overall limit as well as new recordkeeping requirements.
Emissions limits and recordkeeping requirements for Allison
Transmission in Marion County contained in Indiana Administrative Code
Title 326: Air Pollution Control Board, Article 6: Particulate Rules,
Rule 1: Nonattainment Area Limitations, Section 12: Marion County. Added at 22 In. Reg. 416. Effective October 16, 1998.
* * * * *
(136) On August 30, 1999, and May 17, 2000, Indiana submitted
revised particulate matter and sulfur dioxide emissions regulations for
National Starch in Marion County, Indiana. The submittal amends 326 IAC
6112, and includes elimination of shut down sources from the rules, increases in some limits, and a decrease in one limit.
(i) Incorporation by reference.
(a) Emissions limits for National Starch in Marion County contained
in Indiana Administrative Code Title 326: Air Pollution Control Board,
Article 6: Particulate Rules, Rule 1: Nonattainment Area Limitations,
Section 12: Marion County. Added at 22 In. Reg. 1953. Effective March 11, 1999.
(b) Emissions limits for National Starch in Marion County contained
in Indiana Administrative Code Title 326: Air Pollution Control Board,
Article 7: Sulfur Dioxide Rules, Rule 4: Emission Limitations and
Requirements by County, Section 2: Marion County Sulfur Dioxide
Emission Limitations. Added at 22 In. Reg. 1953. Effective March 11, 1999.
[FR Doc. 0019369 Filed 8100; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 656050P
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT David Pohlman, Environmental Scientist, Regulation Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR 18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 8863299.
14 CFR Part 39 40 CFR Part 52 14 CFR Part 71 33 CFR Part 165 50 CFR Part 679 26 CFR Part 1 40 CFR Part 180 47 CFR Part 73 50 CFR Part 17 33 CFR Part 117 44 CFR Part 67 50 CFR Part 648 14 CFR Part 97 33 CFR Part 100 40 CFR Part 63 26 CFR Part 301 50 CFR Part 622 39 CFR Part 111 40 CFR Part 300 44 CFR Part 65 50 CFR Part 660 40 CFR Part 271 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 47 CFR Part 64 50 CFR Part 665 49 CFR Part 571 44 CFR Part 64 21 CFR Part 522 14 CFR Part 23 47 CFR Part 76