
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 39 (Friday, February 27, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10644-10652]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04014]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0991; EPA-R05-OAR-2013-0435; FRL-9923-43-Region 5]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Indiana; Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2010 NO2 
and SO2 NAAQS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve elements of state implementation plan (SIP) submissions from 
Indiana regarding the infrastructure requirements of section 110 of the 
Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and 
sulfur dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
(NAAQS). The infrastructure requirements are designed to ensure that 
the structural components of each state's air quality management 
program are adequate to meet the state's responsibilities under the 
CAA.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 30, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2012-0991 (2010 NO2 infrastructure SIP elements) and 
Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2013-0435 (2010 SO2 infrastructure 
SIP elements) by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: (312) 408-2279.
    4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and 
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and 
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal 
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for 
deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office 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 Docket ID. EPA-R05-OAR-2012-
0991 and EPA-R05-OAR-2013-0435. EPA's policy is that all comments 
received will be included in the public docket without change and may 
be made available online at www.regulations.gov, 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 
www.regulations.gov or email. The

[[Page 10645]]

www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, 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 email comment 
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email 
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 docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal 
holidays. We recommend that you telephone Sarah Arra, Environmental 
Scientist, at (312) 886-9401 before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist, 
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-9401, arra.sarah@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information 
section is arranged as follows:

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. What is the background of these SIP submissions?
III. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate these SIP submissions?
IV. What is the result of EPA's review of these SIP submissions?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    When submitting comments, remember to:
    1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying 
information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number).
    2. Follow directions--EPA may ask you to respond to specific 
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
    3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and 
substitute language for your requested changes.
    4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information 
and/or data that you used.
    5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you 
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
    6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.
    7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of 
profanity or personal threats.
    8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline 
identified.

II. What is the background of these SIP submissions?

A. What state SIP submissions does this rulemaking address?

    This rulemaking addresses submissions from the Indiana Department 
of Environmental Management (IDEM). The state submitted its 
infrastructure SIP for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS on January 15, 
2013, and the 2010 SO2 NAAQS on May 22, 2013.

B. Why did the state make these SIP submissions?

    Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, states are required to 
submit infrastructure SIPs to ensure that their SIPs provide for 
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS, including 
the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. These submissions 
must contain any revisions needed for meeting the applicable SIP 
requirements of section 110(a)(2), or certifications that their 
existing SIPs for the NAAQS already meet those requirements.
    EPA highlighted this statutory requirement in an October 2, 2007, 
guidance document entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under 
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and 
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (2007 Memo) 
and has issued additional guidance documents, the most recent on 
September 13, 2013, ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation 
Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)'' 
(2013 Memo). The SIP submissions referenced in this rulemaking pertain 
to the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2), and 
address the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. To the extent 
that the prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) program is non-
NAAQS specific, a narrow evaluation of other NAAQS will be included in 
the appropriate sections.

C. What is the scope of this rulemaking?

    EPA is acting upon the SIP submissions from IDEM that address the 
infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for 
the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. The requirement for 
states to make a SIP submission of this type arises out of CAA section 
110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP 
submissions ``within 3 years (or such shorter period as the 
Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national 
primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),'' and 
these SIP submissions are to provide for the ``implementation, 
maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The statute directly 
imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the 
requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA's 
taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. 
Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that ``[e]ach 
such plan'' submission must address.
    EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the 
purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 
110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term 
``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to 
distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions 
that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA, such 
as ``nonattainment SIP'' or ``attainment plan SIP'' submissions to 
address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I of 
the CAA, ``regional haze SIP'' submissions required by EPA rule to 
address the visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A, and 
nonattainment new source review (NNSR) permit program submissions to 
address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D.
    This rulemaking will not cover three substantive areas that are not 
integral to

[[Page 10646]]

acting on a state's infrastructure SIP submission: (i) Existing 
provisions related to excess emissions during periods of start-up, 
shutdown, or malfunction at sources, that may be contrary to the CAA 
and EPA's policies addressing such excess emissions (``SSM''); (ii) 
existing provisions related to ``director's variance'' or ``director's 
discretion'' that purport to permit revisions to SIP-approved emissions 
limits with limited public process or without requiring further 
approval by EPA, that may be contrary to the CAA (``director's 
discretion''); and, (iii) existing provisions for PSD programs that may 
be inconsistent with current requirements of EPA's ``Final New Source 
Review (NSR) Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as 
amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (``NSR Reform''). Instead, EPA 
has the authority to address each one of these substantive areas in 
separate rulemakings. A detailed history, interpretation, and rationale 
as they relate to infrastructure SIP requirements can be found in EPA's 
May 13, 2014, proposed rule entitled, ``Infrastructure SIP Requirements 
for the 2008 Lead NAAQS'' in the section, ``What is the scope of this 
rulemaking?'' (see 79 FR 27241 at 27242-27245).

III. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate these SIP submissions?

    EPA's guidance for these infrastructure SIP submissions is embodied 
in the 2007 Memo. Specifically, attachment A of this memorandum 
(Required Section 110 SIP Elements) identifies the statutory elements 
that states need to submit in order to satisfy the requirements for an 
infrastructure SIP submission. EPA issued additional guidance 
documents, the most recent being the 2013 Memo which further clarifies 
aspects of infrastructure SIPs that are not NAAQS specific.

IV. What is the result of EPA's review of these SIP submissions?

    As noted in the 2013 Memo, pursuant to section 110(a), states must 
provide reasonable notice and opportunity for public hearing for all 
infrastructure SIP submissions. IDEM provided the opportunity for 
public comment for its 2010 NO2 NAAQS infrastructure SIP 
that ended on January 14, 2013. The state did not receive any comments 
during the comment period. IDEM provided the opportunity for public 
comment for its 2010 SO2 NAAQS infrastructure SIP that ended 
on May 17, 2013. The state did not receive any comments during the 
comment period. EPA is also soliciting comment on our evaluation of the 
state's infrastructure SIP submission in this notice of proposed 
rulemaking. IDEM provided detailed synopses of how various components 
of its SIP meet each of the requirements in section 110(a)(2) for the 
2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS, as applicable. The 
following review evaluates the state's submissions.

A. Section 110(a)(2)(A)--Emission Limits and Other Control Measures

    This section requires SIPs to include enforceable emission limits 
and other control measures, means or techniques, schedules for 
compliance, and other related matters. EPA has long interpreted 
emission limits and control measures for attaining the standards as 
being due when nonattainment planning requirements are due.\1\ In the 
context of an infrastructure SIP, EPA is not evaluating the existing 
SIP provisions for this purpose. Instead, EPA is only evaluating 
whether the state's SIP has basic structural provisions for the 
implementation of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See, e.g., EPA's final rule on ``National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards for Lead.'' 73 FR 66964 at 67034.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IDEM's authority to adopt emissions standards and compliance 
schedules is found at Indiana Code (IC) 13-14-8, IC 13-17-3-4, IC 13-
17-3-11, and IC 13-17-3-14. To maintain the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, 
Indiana implements nitrogen oxide controls and emission limits in 326 
Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 10-1, 326 IAC 10-3, 326 IAC 10-5, and 
326 IAC 10-6. To maintain the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, Indiana 
implements SO2 controls and emission limits in 326 IAC 7-
1.1, 326 IAC 7-3, 326 IAC 7-4, and 326 IAC 7-4.1 EPA proposes that 
Indiana has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(A) with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2 
NAAQS.
    As previously noted, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove 
any existing state provisions or rules related to SSM or director's 
discretion in the context of section 110(a)(2)(A).

B. Section 110(a)(2)(B)--Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System

    This section requires SIPs to include provisions to provide for 
establishing and operating ambient air quality monitors, collecting and 
analyzing ambient air quality data, and making these data available to 
EPA upon request. This review of the annual monitoring plan includes 
EPA's determination that the state: (i) Monitors air quality at 
appropriate locations throughout the state using EPA-approved Federal 
Reference Methods or Federal Equivalent Method monitors; (ii) submits 
data to EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) in a timely manner; and, (iii) 
provides EPA Regional Offices with prior notification of any planned 
changes to monitoring sites or the network plan.
    IDEM continues to operate an air monitoring network; EPA approved 
the state's 2014 Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan on October 30, 
2013, including the plan for NO2 and SO2. IDEM 
enters air monitoring data into Air Quality System (AQS), and the state 
provides EPA with prior notification when changes to its monitoring 
network or plan are being considered. EPA proposes that Indiana has met 
the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(B) with 
respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.

C. Section 110(a)(2)(C)--Program for Enforcement of Control Measures; 
PSD

    States are required to include a program providing for enforcement 
of all SIP measures and the regulation of construction of new or 
modified stationary sources to meet NSR requirements under PSD and NNSR 
programs. Part C of the CAA (sections 160-169B) addresses PSD, while 
part D of the CAA (sections 171-193) addresses NNSR requirements.
    The evaluation of each state's submission addressing the 
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) covers: (i) 
Enforcement of SIP measures; (ii) PSD provisions that explicitly 
identify oxides of nitrogen (NOX) as a precursor to ozone in 
the PSD program; (iii) identification of precursors to fine particulate 
matter (PM2.5) and the identification of PM2.5 
and PM10 \2\ condensables in the PSD program; (iv) 
PM2.5 increments in the PSD program; and, (v) GHG permitting 
and the ``Tailoring Rule.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ PM10 refers to particles with diameters between 
2.5 and 10 microns, oftentimes referred to as ``coarse'' particles.
    \3\ In EPA's April 28, 2011, proposed rulemaking for 
infrastructure SIPS for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, 
we stated that each state's PSD program must meet applicable 
requirements for evaluation of all regulated NSR pollutants in PSD 
permits (see 76 FR 23757 at 23760). This view was reiterated in 
EPA's August 2, 2012, proposed rulemaking for infrastructure SIPs 
for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (see 77 FR 45992 at 45998). In 
other words, if a state lacks provisions needed to adequately 
address NOX as a precursor to ozone, PM2.5 
precursors, PM2.5 and PM10 condensables, 
PM2.5 increments, or the Federal GHG permitting 
thresholds, the provisions of section 110(a)(2)(C) requiring a 
suitable PSD permitting program must be considered not to be met 
irrespective of the NAAQS that triggered the requirement to submit 
an infrastructure SIP, including the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.

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

[[Page 10647]]

Sub-Element 1: Enforcement of SIP Measures
    IDEM maintains an enforcement program to ensure compliance with SIP 
requirements. IC 13-14-1-12 provides the Commissioner with the 
authority to enforce rules ``consistent with the purpose of the air 
pollution control laws.'' Additionally, IC 13-14-2-7 and IC 13-17-3-3 
provide the Commissioner with the authority to assess civil penalties 
and obtain compliance with any applicable rule a board has adopted in 
order to enforce air pollution control laws. Lastly, IC 13-14-10-2 
allows for an emergency restraining order that prevents any person from 
causing, or introducing contaminants, that cause or contribute to air 
pollution. EPA proposes that Indiana has met the enforcement of SIP 
measures requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2010 
NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: PSD Provisions that Explicitly Identify NOX 
as a Precursor to Ozone in the PSD Program
    EPA's ``Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient 
Air Quality Standard--Phase 2; Final Rule to Implement Certain Aspects 
of the 1990 Amendments Relating to New Source Review and Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration as They Apply in Carbon Monoxide, Particulate 
Matter, and Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for Reformulated Gasoline'' (Phase 
2 Rule) was published on November 29, 2005 (see 70 FR 71612). Among 
other requirements, the Phase 2 Rule obligated states to revise their 
PSD programs to explicitly identify NOX as a precursor to 
ozone (70 FR 71612 at 71679, 71699-71700). This requirement was 
codified in 40 CFR 51.166.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Similar changes were codified in 40 CFR 52.21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Phase 2 Rule required that states submit SIP revisions 
incorporating the requirements of the rule, including these specific 
NOX as a precursor to ozone provisions, by June 15, 2007 
(see 70 FR 71612 at 71683, November 29, 2005).
    EPA approved revisions to Indiana's PSD SIP reflecting these 
requirements on July 2, 2014 (see 79 FR 37646, July 2, 2014), and 
therefore proposes that Indiana has met this set of infrastructure SIP 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2010 
NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 3: Identification of Precursors to PM2.5 and the 
Identification of PM2.5 and PM10 Condensables in 
the PSD Program
    On May 16, 2008 (see 73 FR 28321), EPA issued the Final Rule on the 
``Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate 
Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)'' (2008 NSR Rule). 
The 2008 NSR Rule finalized several new requirements for SIPs to 
address sources that emit direct PM2.5 and other pollutants 
that contribute to secondary PM2.5 formation. One of these 
requirements is for NSR permits to address pollutants responsible for 
the secondary formation of PM2.5, otherwise known as 
precursors. In the 2008 rule, EPA identified precursors to 
PM2.5 for the PSD program to be SO2 and 
NOX (unless the state demonstrates to the Administrator's 
satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that NOX emissions in an 
area are not a significant contributor to that area's ambient 
PM2.5 concentrations). The 2008 NSR Rule also specifies that 
VOCs are not considered to be precursors to PM2.5 in the PSD 
program unless the state demonstrates to the Administrator's 
satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that emissions of VOCs in an area are 
significant contributors to that area's ambient PM2.5 
concentrations.
    The explicit references to SO2, NOX, and VOCs 
as they pertain to secondary PM2.5 formation are codified at 
40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(b) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)(b). As part of 
identifying pollutants that are precursors to PM2.5, the 
2008 NSR Rule also required states to revise the definition of 
``significant'' as it relates to a net emissions increase or the 
potential of a source to emit pollutants. Specifically, 40 CFR 
51.166(b)(23)(i) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(23)(i) define ``significant'' for 
PM2.5 to mean the following emissions rates: 10 tpy of 
direct PM2.5; 40 tpy of SO2; and 40 tpy of 
NOX (unless the state demonstrates to the Administrator's 
satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that NOX emissions in an 
area are not a significant contributor to that area's ambient 
PM2.5 concentrations). The deadline for states to submit SIP 
revisions to their PSD programs incorporating these changes was May 16, 
2011 (see 73 FR 28321 at 28341, May 16, 2008).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ EPA notes that on January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals 
for the D.C. Circuit, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 
706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir.), held that EPA should have issued the 2008 
NSR Rule in accordance with the CAA's requirements for 
PM10 nonattainment areas (Title I, Part D, subpart 4), 
and not the general requirements for nonattainment areas under 
subpart 1 (Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, No. 08-1250). 
As the subpart 4 provisions apply only to nonattainment areas, EPA 
does not consider the portions of the 2008 rule that address 
requirements for PM2.5 attainment and unclassifiable 
areas to be affected by the court's opinion. Moreover, EPA does not 
anticipate the need to revise any PSD requirements promulgated by 
the 2008 NSR rule in order to comply with the court's decision. 
Accordingly, EPA's approval of Indiana's infrastructure SIP as to 
elements (C), (D)(i)(II), or (J) with respect to the PSD 
requirements promulgated by the 2008 implementation rule does not 
conflict with the court's opinion. The Court's decision with respect 
to the nonattainment NSR requirements promulgated by the 2008 
implementation rule also does not affect EPA's action on the present 
infrastructure action. EPA interprets the CAA to exclude 
nonattainment area requirements, including requirements associated 
with a nonattainment NSR program, from infrastructure SIP 
submissions due three years after adoption or revision of a NAAQS. 
Instead, these elements are typically referred to as nonattainment 
SIP or attainment plan elements, which would be due by the dates 
statutorily prescribed under subpart 2 through 5 under part D, 
extending as far as 10 years following designations for some 
elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2008 NSR Rule did not require states to immediately account for 
gases that could condense to form particulate matter, known as 
condensables, in PM2.5 and PM10 emission limits 
in NSR permits. Instead, EPA determined that states had to account for 
PM2.5 and PM10 condensables for applicability 
determinations and in establishing emissions limitations for 
PM2.5 and PM10 in PSD permits beginning on or 
after January 1, 2011. This requirement is codified in 40 CFR 
51.166(b)(49)(i)(a) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)(a). Revisions to states' 
PSD programs incorporating the inclusion of condensables were required 
to be submitted to EPA by May 16, 2011 (see 73 FR 28321 at 28341, May 
16, 2008).
    EPA approved revisions to Indiana's PSD SIP reflecting these 
requirements on July 2, 2014 (see 79 FR 37646), and therefore proposes 
that Indiana has met this set of infrastructure SIP requirements of 
section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2010 NO2 and 
SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 4: PM2.5 Increments in the PSD Program
    On October 20, 2010, EPA issued the final rule on the ``Prevention 
of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 
Micrometers (PM2.5)--Increments, Significant Impact Levels 
(SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC)'' (2010 NSR 
Rule). This rule established several components for making PSD 
permitting determinations for PM2.5, including a system of 
``increments'' which is the mechanism used to estimate significant 
deterioration of ambient air quality for a pollutant. These increments 
are

[[Page 10648]]

codified in 40 CFR 51.166(c) and 40 CFR 52.21(c), and are included in 
the table below.

Table 1--PM2.5 Increments Established by the 2010 NSR Rule in Micrograms
                             per Cubic Meter
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Annual
                                            arithmetic      24-hour max
                                               mean
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class I.................................               1               2
Class II................................               4               9
Class III...............................               8              18
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2010 NSR Rule also established a new ``major source baseline 
date'' for PM2.5 as October 20, 2010, and a new trigger date 
for PM2.5 as October 20, 2011. These revisions are codified 
in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(i)(c) and (b)(14)(ii)(c), and 40 CFR 
52.21(b)(14)(i)(c) and (b)(14)(ii)(c). Lastly, the 2010 NSR Rule 
revised the definition of ``baseline area'' to include a level of 
significance of 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter, annual average, for 
PM2.5. This change is codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i) 
and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(15)(i).
    On July 12, 2012, and supplemented on December 12, 2012, IDEM 
submitted revisions intended to address the increments established by 
the 2010 NSR Rule for incorporation into the SIP, as well as the 
revised major source baseline date, trigger date, and baseline area 
level of significance for PM2.5. IDEM also requested that 
these revisions satisfy any applicable infrastructure SIP requirements 
related to PSD. Specifically, revisions to 326 IAC 2-2-6(b) contain the 
Federal increments for PM2.5, 326 IAC 2-2-1(ee)(3) contains 
the new major source baseline date for PM2.5 of October 20, 
2010, 326 IAC 2-2-1(gg)(1)(C) contains the new trigger date for 
PM2.5 of October 20, 2011, and 326 IAC 2-2-1(f)(1) contains 
the new baseline area level of significance for PM2.5. It 
should be noted that Indiana's submitted revisions explicitly include 
only the PM2.5 increments as they apply to Class II areas, 
and not the PM2.5 increments as they apply to Class I or 
Class III areas. However, Indiana's requested revisions specify that if 
areas in the state are classified as Class I or III in the future, it 
would require that the PSD increments pursuant to 40 CFR 52.21 be 
adhered to.
    On August 11, 2014 (79 FR 46709), EPA finalized approval of the 
applicable infrastructure SIP PSD revisions; therefore, we are 
proposing that Indiana has met this set of infrastructure SIP 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2010 
NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 5: GHG Permitting and the ``Tailoring Rule''
    With respect to Elements C and J, EPA interprets the CAA to require 
each state to make an infrastructure SIP submission for a new or 
revised NAAQS that demonstrates that the air agency has a complete PSD 
permitting program meeting the current requirements for all regulated 
NSR pollutants. The requirements of Element D(i)(II) may also be 
satisfied by demonstrating that the air agency has a complete PSD 
permitting program correctly addressing all regulated NSR pollutants. 
Indiana has shown that it currently has a PSD program in place that 
covers all regulated NSR pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHGs).
    On June 23, 2014, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision 
addressing the application of PSD permitting requirements to GHG 
emissions. Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection 
Agency, 134 S.Ct. 2427. The Supreme Court said that the EPA may not 
treat GHGs as an air pollutant for purposes of determining whether a 
source is a major source required to obtain a PSD permit. The Court 
also said that the EPA could continue to require that PSD permits, 
otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs, 
contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of Best 
Available Control Technology (BACT).
    In order to act consistently with its understanding of the Court's 
decision pending further judicial action to effectuate the decision, 
the EPA is not continuing to apply EPA regulations that would require 
that SIPs include permitting requirements that the Supreme Court found 
impermissible. Specifically, EPA is not applying the requirement that a 
state's SIP-approved PSD program require that sources obtain PSD 
permits when GHGs are the only pollutant (i) that the source emits or 
has the potential to emit above the major source thresholds, or (ii) 
for which there is a significant emissions increase and a significant 
net emissions increase from a modification (e.g. 40 CFR 
51.166(b)(48)(v)).
    EPA anticipates a need to revise Federal PSD rules in light of the 
Supreme Court opinion. In addition, EPA anticipates that many states 
will revise their existing SIP-approved PSD programs in light of the 
Supreme Court's decision. The timing and content of subsequent EPA 
actions with respect to the EPA regulations and state PSD program 
approvals are expected to be informed by additional legal process 
before the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 
Circuit. At this juncture, EPA is not expecting states to have revised 
their PSD programs for purposes of infrastructure SIP submissions and 
is only evaluating such submissions to assure that the state's program 
correctly addresses GHGs consistent with the Supreme Court's decision.
    At present, EPA is proposing that Indiana's SIP is sufficient to 
satisfy Elements C, D(i)(II), and J with respect to GHGs because the 
PSD permitting program previously approved by EPA into the SIP 
continues to require that PSD permits (otherwise required based on 
emissions of pollutants other than GHGs) contain limitations on GHG 
emissions based on the application of BACT. Although the approved 
Indiana PSD permitting program may currently contain provisions that 
are no longer necessary in light of the Supreme Court decision, this 
does not render the infrastructure SIP submission inadequate to satisfy 
Elements C, (D)(i)(II), and J. The SIP contains the necessary PSD 
requirements at this time, and the application of those requirements is 
not impeded by the presence of other previously-approved provisions 
regarding the permitting of sources of GHGs that EPA does not consider 
necessary at this time in light of the Supreme Court decision.
    For the purposes of the 2010 NO2 and SO2 
NAAQS infrastructure SIPs, EPA reiterates that NSR reform regulations 
are not within the scope of these actions. Therefore, we are not taking 
action on existing NSR reform regulations for Indiana. EPA approved 
Indiana's minor NSR program on October 7, 1994 (see 59 FR 51108); \6\ 
and since that date, IDEM and EPA have relied on the existing minor NSR 
program to ensure that new and modified sources not captured by the 
major NSR permitting programs do not interfere with attainment and 
maintenance of the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ EPA proposed approval of revisions updating Indiana's minor 
NSR construction permit rules on January 5, 2015 (see 80 FR 201). 
However, EPA believes that the rules that were in place at the time 
of Indiana's submittal were adequate for the purposes of 
infrastructure for the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Certain sub-elements in this section overlap with elements of 
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), section 110(a)(2)(E) and section 110(a)(2)(J). 
These links will be discussed in the appropriate areas below.

[[Page 10649]]

D. Section 110(a)(2)(D)--Interstate Transport

    Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires SIPs to include provisions 
prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in one state 
from contributing significantly to nonattainment, or interfering with 
maintenance, of the NAAQS in another state.
    On February 17, 2012, EPA promulgated designations for the 2010 
NO2 NAAQS, stating for the entire country that, ``The EPA is 
designating areas as ``unclassifiable/attainment'' to mean that 
available information does not indicate that the air quality in these 
areas exceeds the 2010 NO2 NAAQS'' (see 77 FR 9532). For 
comparison purposes, EPA examined the design values \7\ from 
NO2 monitors in Indiana and surrounding states. The highest 
design value based on data collected between 2011 and 2013 was 64 ppb 
at a monitor in Chicago, IL, compared to the standard which is 100 ppb 
for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. Additionally, Indiana has SIP 
approved rules that limit NOX emissions, including rules in 
response to the Clean Air Interstate Rule at 326 IAC 24-1, controls for 
Clark and Floyd Counties at 326 IAC 10-1, specific source categories at 
326 IAC 10-3, limits on Internal Combustion Engines at 326 IAC 10-5 and 
limits for Indiana Gas and Electric Company at 326 IAC 10-6. EPA 
believes that, in conjunction with the continued implementation of the 
state's SIP-approved PSD and NNSR regulations found in 26 IAC 2-2, 
these low monitored values of NO2 will continue in and 
around Indiana. In other words, the NO2 emissions from 
Indiana are not expected to cause or contribute to a violation of the 
2010 NO2 NAAQS in another state, and these emissions are not 
likely to interfere with the maintenance of the 2010 NO2 
NAAQS in another state. Therefore, EPA proposes that Indiana has met 
this set of requirements related to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 
2010 NO2 NAAQS. EPA is not taking action on this 
infrastructure element in regards to the 2010 SO2 NAAQS and 
will do so in a future rule making.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The level of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS for is 100 parts 
per billion (ppb) and the form is the 3-year average of the annual 
98th percentile of the daily 1-hour maximum. For the most recent 
design values, see http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires SIPs to include provisions 
prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in one state 
from interfering with measures required to prevent significant 
deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility in another state.
    EPA notes that Indiana's satisfaction of the applicable 
infrastructure SIP PSD requirements for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS 
has been detailed in the section addressing section 110(a)(2)(C). EPA 
further notes that the proposed actions in that section related to PSD 
are consistent with the proposed actions related to PSD for section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and they are reiterated below.
    EPA has previously approved revisions to Indiana's SIP that meet 
certain requirements obligated by the Phase 2 Rule and the 2008 NSR 
Rule. These revisions included provisions that: Explicitly identify 
NOX as a precursor to ozone, explicitly identify 
SO2 and NOX as precursors to PM2.5, 
and regulate condensable PM2.5 and PM10 in 
applicability determinations and establishing emissions limits. EPA has 
also previously approved revisions to Indiana's SIP that incorporate 
the PM2.5 increments and the associated implementation 
regulations including the major source baseline date, trigger date, and 
level of significance for PM2.5 per the 2010 NSR Rule. EPA 
is proposing that Indiana's SIP contains provisions that adequately 
address the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
    States also have an obligation to ensure that sources located in 
nonattainment areas do not interfere with a neighboring state's PSD 
program. One way that this requirement can be satisfied is through an 
NNSR program consistent with the CAA that addresses any pollutants for 
which there is a designated nonattainment area within the state.
    Indiana's EPA-approved NNSR regulations are contained as part of 
its PSD program regulations, and can be found in 326 IAC 2-3 consistent 
with 40 CFR 51.165, or appendix S to 40 CFR part 51. Therefore, EPA 
proposes that Indiana has met all of the applicable PSD requirements 
for the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS related to section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).
    With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility 
protection of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), states are subject to 
visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C of the 
CAA (which includes sections 169A and 169B). The 2013 Memo states that 
these requirements can be satisfied by an approved SIP addressing 
reasonably attributable visibility impairment, if required, or an 
approved SIP addressing regional haze.
    In this rulemaking, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove 
Indiana's satisfaction of the visibility protection requirements of 
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2010 NO2 or 
SO2 NAAQs. Instead, EPA will evaluate Indiana's compliance 
with these requirements in a separate rulemaking.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Indiana does have an approved regional haze plan for non-
EGUs. Indiana's plan for EGUs relied on the Clean Air Interstate 
Rule that has been recently superseded by the Cross State Air 
Pollution Rule to which Indiana EGU sources are also subject.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires each SIP to contain adequate 
provisions requiring compliance with the applicable requirements of 
section 126 and section 115 (relating to interstate and international 
pollution abatement, respectively).
    Section 126(a) requires new or modified sources to notify 
neighboring states of potential impacts from the source. The statute 
does not specify the method by which the source should provide the 
notification. States with SIP-approved PSD programs must have a 
provision requiring such notification by new or modified sources. A 
lack of such a requirement in state rules would be grounds for 
disapproval of this element.
    Indiana has provisions in its EPA-approved PSD program in 326 IAC 
2-2-15(b)(3) requiring new or modified sources to notify neighboring 
states of potential negative air quality impacts, and has referenced 
this program as having adequate provisions to meet the requirements of 
section 126(a). EPA is proposing that Indiana has met the 
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 126(a) with respect to the 
2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. Indiana does not have any 
obligations under any other subsection of section 126, nor does it have 
any pending obligations under section 115. EPA, therefore, is proposing 
that Indiana has met all applicable infrastructure SIP requirements of 
section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii).

E. Section 110(a)(2)(E)--Adequate Resources

    This section requires each state to provide for adequate personnel, 
funding, and legal authority under state law to carry out its SIP, and 
related issues. Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) also requires each state to 
comply with the requirements respecting state boards under section 128.
Sub-Element 1: Adequate Personnel, Funding, and Legal Authority Under 
State Law To Carry Out Its SIP, and Related Issues
    Indiana's biennial budget and its environmental performance 
partnership agreement with EPA document funding and personnel levels 
for IDEM every two years. As discussed in earlier

[[Page 10650]]

sections, IC 13-14-1-12 provides the Commissioner of IDEM with the 
authority to enforce air pollution control laws. Furthermore, IC 13-14-
8, IC 13-17-3-11, and IC 13-17-3-14 contain the authority for IDEM to 
adopt air emissions standards and compliance schedules. EPA proposes 
that Indiana has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of this 
portion of section 110(a)(2)(E) with respect to the 2010 NO2 
and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: State Board Requirements Under Section 128 of the CAA
    Section 110(a)(2)(E) also requires each SIP to contain provisions 
that comply with the state board requirements of section 128 of the 
CAA. That provision contains two explicit requirements: (i) That any 
board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders under this 
chapter shall have at least a majority of members who represent the 
public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their 
income from persons subject to permits and enforcement orders under 
this chapter, and (ii) that any potential conflicts of interest by 
members of such board or body or the head of an executive agency with 
similar powers be adequately disclosed.
    On November 29, 2012, IDEM submitted rules regarding its 
Environmental Rules Board at IC 13-13-8 for incorporation into the SIP, 
pursuant to section 128 of the CAA. On December 12, 2012, IDEM provided 
a supplemental submission clarifying that the Environmental Rules Board 
established by IC 13-13-8, which has the authority to adopt 
environmental regulations under IC 4-22-2 and IC 13-14-9, does not have 
the authority to approve enforcement orders or permitting actions as 
outlined in section 128(a)(1) of the CAA. Therefore, section 128(a)(1) 
of the CAA is not applicable in Indiana.
    Under section 128(a)(2), the head of the executive agency with the 
power to approve enforcement orders or permits must adequately disclose 
any potential conflicts of interest. IC 13-13-8-11 ``Disclosure of 
conflicts of interest'' contains provisions that adequately satisfy the 
requirements of section 128(a)(2). This section requires that each 
member of the board shall fully disclose any potential conflicts of 
interest relating to permits or enforcement orders under the Federal 
CAA, as amended by the CAA Amendments of 1990. IC 13-13-8-4 defines the 
membership of the board, and the commissioner (of IDEM) or his/her 
designee is explicitly included as a member of the board. Therefore, 
when evaluated together in the context of section 128(a)(2), the 
commissioner (of IDEM) or his/her designee must fully disclose any 
potential conflicts of interest relating to permits or enforcement 
orders under the CAA. EPA concludes that IDEM's submission as it 
relates to the state board requirements under section 128 is consistent 
with applicable CAA requirements. EPA approved these rules on December 
6, 2013 (78 FR 77599). Therefore, EPA is proposing that IDEM has 
satisfied the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements for this 
section of 110(a)(2)(E) for the 2010 NO2 and SO2 
NAAQS.

F. Section 110(a)(2)(F)--Stationary Source Monitoring System

    States must establish a system to monitor emissions from stationary 
sources and submit periodic emissions reports. Each plan shall also 
require the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, 
and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators 
of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources. The state 
plan shall also require periodic reports on the nature and amounts of 
emissions and emissions-related data from such sources, and correlation 
of such reports by each state agency with any emission limitations or 
standards established pursuant to this chapter. Lastly, the reports 
shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection.
    The Indiana state rules for monitoring requirements are contained 
in 326 IAC 3. Additional emissions reporting requirements are found in 
326 IAC 2-6. Emission reports are available upon request by EPA or 
other interested parties. EPA proposes that Indiana has satisfied the 
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) with respect to 
the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.

G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)--Emergency Powers

    This section requires that a plan provide for authority that is 
analogous to what is provided in section 303 of the CAA, and adequate 
contingency plans to implement such authority. The 2013 Memo states 
that infrastructure SIP submissions should specify authority, rested in 
an appropriate official, to restrain any source from causing or 
contributing to emissions which present an imminent and substantial 
endangerment to public health or welfare, or the environment.
    326 IAC 11-5 establishes air pollution episode levels based on 
concentrations of criteria pollutants. This rule requires that 
emergency reduction plans be submitted to the Commissioner of IDEM by 
major air pollution sources, and these plans must include actions that 
will be taken when each episode level is declared, to reduce or 
eliminate emissions of the appropriate air pollutants. Similarly, under 
IC 13-17-4, Indiana also has the ability to declare an air pollution 
emergency and order all persons causing or contributing to the 
conditions warranting the air pollution emergency to immediately reduce 
or discontinue emission of air contaminants. EPA proposes that Indiana 
has met the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(G) related to authority to implement measures to restrain 
sources from causing or contributing to emissions which present an 
imminent and substantial endangerment to public health or welfare, or 
the environment with respect to the 2010 NO2 and 
SO2 NAAQS.

H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)--Future SIP Revisions

    This section requires states to have the authority to revise their 
SIPs in response to changes in the NAAQS, availability of improved 
methods for attaining the NAAQS, or to an EPA finding that the SIP is 
substantially inadequate.
    IDEM continues to update and implement needed revisions to 
Indiana's SIP as necessary to meet ambient air quality standards. As 
discussed in previous sections, authority to adopt emissions standards 
and compliance schedules is found at IC 13-4-8, IC 13-17-3-4, IC 13-17-
3-11, and IC 13-17-3-14. EPA proposes that Indiana has met the 
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(H) with respect to 
the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.

I. Section 110(a)(2)(I)--Nonattainment Area Plan or Plan Revisions 
Under Part D

    The CAA requires that each plan or plan revision for an area 
designated as a nonattainment area meet the applicable requirements of 
part D of the CAA. Part D relates to nonattainment areas.
    EPA has determined that section 110(a)(2)(I) is not applicable to 
the infrastructure SIP process. Instead, EPA takes action on part D 
attainment plans through separate processes.

[[Page 10651]]

J. Section 110(a)(2)(J)--Consultation With Government Officials; Public 
Notifications; PSD; Visibility Protection

    The evaluation of the submissions from Indiana with respect to the 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) are described below.
Sub-Element 1: Consultation With Government Officials
    States must provide a process for consultation with local 
governments and Federal Land Managers (FLMs) carrying out NAAQS 
implementation requirements.
    IDEM actively participates in the regional planning efforts that 
include state rule developers, representatives from the FLMs, and other 
affected stakeholders. Additionally, Indiana is an active member of the 
Lake Michigan Air Director's Consortium, which consists of 
collaboration with the States of Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, 
Minnesota, and Ohio. EPA proposes that Indiana has met the 
infrastructure SIP requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) 
with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: Public Notification
    Section 110(a)(2)(J) also requires states to notify the public if 
NAAQS are exceeded in an area and must enhance public awareness of 
measures that can be taken to prevent exceedances.
    IDEM monitors air quality data daily, and reports the air quality 
index to the interested public and media if necessary. IDEM also 
participates and submits information to EPA's AIRNOW program, and 
maintains SmogWatch, which is an informational tool created by IDEM to 
share air quality forecasts for each day. SmogWatch provides daily 
information about ground-level ozone, particulate matter concentration 
levels, health information, and monitoring data for seven regions in 
Indiana. IDEM also maintains a publicly available Web site that allows 
interested members of the community and other stakeholders to view 
current monitoring data summaries, including those for NO2 
and SO2.\9\ EPA proposes that Indiana has met the 
infrastructure SIP requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) 
with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See http://www.in.gov/idem/airquality/2489.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sub-Element 3: PSD
    States must meet applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) 
related to PSD. IDEM's PSD program in the context of infrastructure 
SIPs has already been discussed in the paragraphs addressing section 
110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and EPA notes that the proposed 
actions for those sections are consistent with the proposed actions for 
this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J).
    Therefore, EPA proposes that Indiana has met all of the 
infrastructure SIP requirements for PSD associated with section 
110(a)(2)(D)(J) for the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 4: Visibility Protection
    With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility 
protection, states are subject to visibility and regional haze program 
requirements under part C of the CAA (which includes sections 169A and 
169B). In the event of the establishment of a new NAAQS, however, the 
visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C do not 
change. Thus, we find that there is no new visibility obligation 
``triggered'' under section 110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS becomes 
effective. In other words, the visibility protection requirements of 
section 110(a)(2)(J) are not germane to infrastructure SIPs for the 
2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.

K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)--Air Quality Modeling/Data

    SIPs must provide for performing air quality modeling for 
predicting effects on air quality of emissions from any NAAQS pollutant 
and submission of such data to EPA upon request.
    IDEM continues to review the potential impact of major and some 
minor new and modified sources using computer models. Indiana's rules 
regarding air quality modeling are contained in 326 IAC 2-2-4, 326 IAC 
2-2-5, 326 IAC 2-2-6, and 326 IAC 2-2-7. These modeling data are 
available to EPA or other interested parties upon request. EPA proposes 
that Indiana has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(K) with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2 
NAAQS.

L. Section 110(a)(2)(L)--Permitting Fees

    This section requires SIPs to mandate each major stationary source 
to pay permitting fees to cover the cost of reviewing, approving, 
implementing, and enforcing a permit.
    IDEM implements and operates the title V permit program, which EPA 
approved on December 4, 2001 (66 FR 62969); revisions to the program 
were approved on August 13, 2002 (67 FR 52615). In addition to the 
title V permit program, IDEM's EPA-approved PSD program, specifically 
contained in 326 IAC 2-1.1-07 contains the provisions, requirements, 
and structures associated with the costs for reviewing, approving, 
implementing, and enforcing various types of permits. EPA proposes that 
Indiana has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(L) with respect to the 2010 NO2 and SO2 
NAAQS.

M. Section 110(a)(2)(M)--Consultation/Participation by Affected Local 
Entities

    States must consult with and allow participation from local 
political subdivisions affected by the SIP.
    Any IDEM rulemaking procedure contained in IC 13-14-9 requires 
public participation in the SIP development process. In addition, IDEM 
ensures that the requirements of 40 CFR 51.102 are satisfied during the 
SIP development process. EPA proposes that Indiana has met the 
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(M) with respect to 
the 2010 NO2 and SO2 NAAQS.

V. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to approve most elements of submissions from IDEM 
certifying that its current SIP is sufficient to meet the required 
infrastructure elements under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2010 
NO2 and SO2 NAAQS. EPA's proposed actions for the 
state's satisfaction of infrastructure SIP requirements, by element of 
section 110(a)(2) are contained in the table below.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Element                     2010 NO2         2010 SO2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A): Emission limits and other control               A                A
 measures.............................
(B): Ambient air quality monitoring                  A                A
 and data system......................
(C): Program for enforcement of                      A                A
 control measures.....................
(D)1: Interstate Transport-                          A               NA
 Significant contribution.............
(D)2: Interstate Transport- interfere                A               NA
 with maintenance.....................
(D)3: PSD.............................               A                A

[[Page 10652]]

 
(D)4: Visibility......................              NA               NA
(D)5: Interstate and International                   A                A
 Pollution Abatement..................
(E): Adequate resources...............               A                A
(E): State boards.....................               A                A
(F): Stationary source monitoring                    A                A
 system...............................
(G): Emergency power..................               A                A
(H): Future SIP revisions.............               A                A
(I): Nonattainment area plan or plan                 +                +
 revisions under part D...............
(J)1: Consultation with government                   A                A
 officials............................
(J)2: Public notification.............               A                A
(J)3: PSD.............................               A                A
(J)4: Visibility protection...........               +                +
(K): Air quality modeling and data....               A                A
(L): Permitting fees..................               A                A
(M): Consultation and participation by               A                A
 affected local entities..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the above table, the key is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.........................................  Approve.
NA........................................  No Action/Separate
                                             Rulemaking.
+.........................................  Not germane to
                                             infrastructure SIPs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Order 
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).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Sulfur 
dioxide, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: February 12, 2015.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2015-04014 Filed 2-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


