[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 146 (Monday, July 30, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 39293-39295]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-18884]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 70

[IN003; FRL-7020-7]


Clean Air Act Proposed Full Approval of 40 CFR Part 70 Operating 
Permits Program; Indiana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes full approval of the operating permits 
program submitted by Indiana for the purpose of complying with 
standards under which States develop, and submit to EPA, programs for 
issuing operating permits to all major stationary sources, and to 
certain other sources.

DATES: Comments on this proposed action must be received on or before 
August 29, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the State's submittal and other supporting 
information used in developing the proposed approval are available for 
inspection during normal business hours at the following location: EPA 
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, AR-18J, Chicago, Illinois, 60604. 
Please contact Nancy Mugavero at (312) 353-4890 to arrange a time if 
inspection of the submittal is desired.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Mugavero, AR-18J, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois, 60604, Telephone Number: (312) 
353-4890, E-Mail Address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This section provides additional information 
by addressing the following questions:

    What is being addressed in this document?
    What are the program changes that EPA proposes to approve?
    What is involved in this proposed action?

What Is Being Addressed in This Document?

    As required under subchapter V of the Clean Air Act (``the Act'') 
as amended (1990), EPA has promulgated regulations which define the 
minimum elements of an approvable State operating permits program and 
the corresponding standards and procedures by which the EPA will 
approve, oversee, and withdraw approval of State operating permits 
programs (see 57 FR 32250 (July 21, 1992)). These regulations are 
codified at 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 70. Pursuant to 
subchapter V, generally known as Title V, States develop, and submit to 
EPA, programs for issuing these operating permits to all major 
stationary sources and to certain other sources.
    The EPA's program review occurs under section 502 of the Act and 
the part 70 regulations, which together outline criteria for approval 
or disapproval. Where a program substantially, but not fully, meets the 
requirements of part 70, EPA may grant the program interim approval for 
a period of up to 2 years. If EPA has not

[[Page 39294]]

fully approved a program by 2 years after the November 15, 1993 date, 
or by the expiration of an interim program, it must establish and 
implement a Federal program.
    The Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) submitted 
its Title V operating permits program (Title V program) for approval on 
August 10, 1994. EPA promulgated interim approval of the Indiana Title 
V program on November 14, 1995 (60 FR 57188), and the program became 
effective on December 14, 1995. Subsequently, EPA extended Indiana's 
Title V interim approval period on several occasions, most recently to 
December 1, 2001 (65 FR 32036).
    IDEM submitted amendments to its Title V program for our approval 
on May 22, 1996. These amendments were intended to correct interim 
approval issues identified in the November 14, 1995, action.

What Are the Program Changes That EPA Proposes To Approve?

A. Title V Interim Approval Corrections

    On November 14, 1995, EPA promulgated interim approval for the 
Indiana Title V program, stating the State must amend the insignificant 
activity threshold for SO2 and hazardous air pollutants 
(HAPs) to receive full approval. The SO2 threshold was 10 
pounds per hour (lb/hr) or 50 pounds per day (lb/day), which is 
equivalent to 9.13 tons per year (tpy). The HAPs threshold was 4 tpy 
for one HAP or 10 tpy for any combination of HAPs. EPA believed that 
these thresholds were too high and noted that they were significantly 
above what EPA had accepted in other State programs.
    On May 22, 1996, IDEM submitted revised program regulations, 
including 326 IAC 2-7-1(20)(A)(iii) which defines the insignificant 
activity threshold for SO2 emissions as 5 lb/hr or 25 lb/
day. A source must meet both the lb/hr and the lb/day levels to qualify 
as an insignificant activity. These levels equal a maximum potential of 
4.56 tpy of SO2. Indiana's lb/day thresholds are more 
stringent than a simple tpy threshold. A source limited to 25 lb/day 
would have to operate at its maximum potential for every day of a 
calendar year to achieve emissions of 4.56 tpy. In reality, such 
sources would have lower annual emissions. The 4.56 tpy SO2 
threshold is equivalent to Indiana's thresholds for nitrogen oxides and 
particulate matter approved by EPA in the November 14, 1995, 
rulemaking. EPA believes that this SO2 insignificant 
activity threshold is reasonable and resolves the interim approval 
issue.
    In addition, IDEM has amended 326 2-7-1(20)(C)(i) and (ii) to 
define the insignificant activity threshold for HAP emissions as 5 lb/
day or 1 tpy for a single HAP and 12.5 lb/day or 2.5 tpy for any 
combination of HAPs. A source must meet both the lb/day and the tpy 
levels to qualify as an insignificant activity. Indiana's lb/day 
thresholds are more stringent than a simple tpy threshold. A source 
limited to 5 lb/day per HAP would have to operate at its maximum 
potential for every day of a calendar year to achieve emissions of 0.91 
tpy and a source limited to 12.5 lb/day for a combination of HAPs would 
have to operate at its maximum potential for every day of a calendar 
year to achieve emissions of 2.28 tpy. In reality, such sources would 
have lower annual emissions. EPA believes that IDEM's new HAP 
insignificant activity levels are reasonable and resolve the interim 
approval issue.

B. Other Title V Program Revisions

    In addition to revising the SO2 and HAPs insignificant 
activity thresholds, the May 22, 1996, submittal also contained other 
amendments to the State Title V regulations. We have identified 
inconsistencies between some of these revisions and the requirements of 
40 CFR part 70. Indiana is currently in the process of revising these 
regulations to address the inconsistencies with part 70. Therefore, we 
are not taking action on these other revisions in today's document. As 
mentioned in more detail below, any uncorrected deficiencies will be 
addressed in a notice of deficiency to be published by EPA by December 
1, 2001.

C. Implementation of Section 112(g)

    As a condition of approval of the Title V program, States are 
required to implement section 112(g) of the Act. The EPA promulgated 
rulemaking on December 27, 1996 (61 FR 68384) requiring States to 
certify that their program meets all section 112(g) requirements. 
Indiana submitted a letter to EPA on May 1, 1998, certifying that the 
State regulations in 326 IAC 2-1-3.4 meet the section 112(g) 
requirements. The EPA sent a letter to Indiana on June 18, 1998, 
acknowledging the certification of Indiana's 112(g) program. This 
program became federally enforceable on June 29, 1998.

What Is Involved in This Proposed Action?

A. Proposed Action

    The EPA proposes full approval of the operating permits program 
submitted by IDEM based on the revisions submitted on May 22, 1996, 
which satisfactorily address the program deficiencies identified in 
EPA's November 14, 1995 interim approval rulemaking.

B. Citizen Comment Letters on Indiana Title V Program

    On May 22, 2000, EPA promulgated a rulemaking that extended the 
interim approval period of 86 operating permits programs until December 
1, 2001. (65 FR 32035) The action was subsequently challenged by the 
Sierra Club and the New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG). 
In settling the litigation, EPA agreed to publish a document in the 
Federal Register that would alert the public that they may identify and 
bring to EPA's attention alleged programmatic and/or implementation 
deficiencies in Title V programs and that EPA would respond to their 
allegations within specified time periods if the comments were made 
within 90 days of publication of the Federal Register notice.
    Several citizens commented on what they believe to be deficiencies 
with respect to the Indiana Title V program. EPA takes no action on 
those comments in today's action and will respond to them by December 
1, 2001. As stated in the Federal Register document published on 
December 11, 2000, (65 FR 77376) EPA will respond by December 1, 2001 
to timely public comments on programs that have obtained interim 
approval; and EPA will respond by April 1, 2002 to timely comments on 
fully approved programs. We will publish a notice of deficiency (NOD) 
when we determine that a deficiency exists, or we will notify the 
commenter in writing to explain our reasons for not making a finding of 
deficiency.

Administrative Requirements

    Under Executive Order 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed action is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' and therefore is not subject to review by the 
Office of Management and Budget. Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) the Administrator certifies that this proposed 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities because it merely approves state law as 
meeting federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements 
beyond those imposed by state law. This rule does not contain any 
unfunded mandates and does not significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(Public Law 104-4) because it proposes to approve pre-

[[Page 39295]]

existing requirements under state law and does not impose any 
additional enforceable duties beyond that required by state law. 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, 
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 
67249, November 9, 2000). This rule also does not have Federalism 
implications because it 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, 
``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). The rule merely proposes 
to approve existing requirements under state law, and does not alter 
the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the State and the Federal government established in the Clean 
Air Act. 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) or Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001), because it 
is not a significantly regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
    In reviewing State operating permit programs submitted pursuant to 
Title V of the Clean Air Act, EPA will approve State programs provided 
that they meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act and EPA's 
regulations codified at 40 CFR part 70. 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 State 
operating permit program for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews an operating 
permit program , to use VCS in place of a State program 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.

List of Subjects in Part 70

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Operating permits, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

    Dated: July 13, 2001.
Gary Gulezian,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 01-18884 Filed 7-27-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P