[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 124 (Thursday, June 27, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30628-30631]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13494]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2018-0126; FRL-9995-67-Region 5]


Air Plan Approval; Indiana; SO2 Emission Limitations for United 
States Steel-Gary Works

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a March 
6, 2018 request by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management 
(IDEM) to revise its State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the United 
States Steel-Gary Works coke plant. The submission involves the removal 
of sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission limitations for the coke 
plant at the United States Steel-Gary Works (US Steel-Gary Works). The 
coke plant permanently ceased operation on March 30, 2015. The 
submission also contains several other administrative changes. The 
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) associated with this final action 
was published on February 13, 2019. EPA received several comments.

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 29, 2019.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2018-0126. All documents in the docket are listed on 
the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business 
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted 
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is 
not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard 
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either 
through www.regulations.gov or at the 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 Emily Crispell, Environmental Scientist, at (312) 
353-8512 before visiting the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Emily Crispell, Environmental 
Scientist, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8512, crispell.emily@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. Background
II. Public Comments and EPA Responses
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

[[Page 30629]]

I. Background

    On March 30, 2015, US Steel-Gary Works permanently ceased the 
operation of its coke plant. IDEM has verified that the coke plant 
units were decommissioned and permanently shut down. IDEM then removed 
the coke plant units from US Steel Gary-Works Part 70 operating permit 
(IDEM permit number 089-37337-00121 and 089-35392-00121). IDEM has also 
revised the SO2 SIP rules for US Steel-Gary Works, which are 
currently codified at 326 Indiana Administrative Code (326 IAC) 7-4.1-
20, by removing the SO2 emission limitations applicable to 
the coke plant operation which allowed SO2 emissions from 
the coke plant. SO2 emission limitations which were not 
applicable to the coke plant operation were retained. US Steel-Gary 
Works would be required to reapply for a Title V operating permit to 
reopen the coke plant facility. Administrative changes such as 
renumbering were also made. EPA proposed approval of the SIP on 
February 13, 2019, and started a 30-day public comment period on the 
proposal. 84 FR 3740.

II. Public Comments and EPA Responses

    The public comment period on EPA's February 13, 2019 NPRM closed on 
March 15, 2019. EPA received four comments. One of the comments was not 
relevant to the proposed action and three were relevant and adverse. 
EPA's response to the comments are as follows:
    Comment 1: The commenter stated that SO2 is harmful to 
the environment. The commenter also noted that it is a good idea to 
have emission limitations on large companies. The commenter further 
stated that SO2 is one of the main reasons for acid rain, 
which can harm infrastructure and wildlife.
    EPA Response 1: The environmental effects information provided by 
the commenter is not in dispute in this rulemaking. This rulemaking 
instead addresses whether IDEM's SIP revision is adequate to meet the 
requirements of Clean Air Act (CAA) section 110(l) which provide that 
EPA shall not approve a SIP revision if the plan would interfere with 
any applicable requirement concerning attainment of the National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Reasonable Further Progress 
(as defined in Section 171 of the CAA), or any other applicable 
requirement of the CAA. EPA proposed to find that IDEM's SIP revision 
is consistent with CAA section 110(l) because the changes to the 
facility will result in a decrease in SO2 emissions in 
excess of 3,792 tons per year. See 84 FR 3741. US Steel-Gary Works will 
still retain enforceable SO2 emissions limits from operating 
scenario b of the original rule for its remaining operating emissions 
units. The effect of removing the limits that applied to the coke plant 
(and of retiring the permit terms that authorized such emissions 
described in IDEM permit number 089-37337-00121 and 089-35392-00121) is 
to eliminate the allowable coke plant SO2 emissions that 
were previously authorized.
    Comment 2: The commenter stated that numerous studies have shown 
the harmful health effects of SO2 on humans and animals, 
including respiratory problems and fatality when inhaled in large 
quantities. The commenter also claimed that the wording of the revision 
was vague, stating that an overall reduction in SO2 would be 
allowed, but without a concrete value. The commenter also stated that 
the rule is unenforceable and lacks specificity.
    EPA Response 2: The NPRM specifically states that changes to the 
facility will result in a decrease in SO2 emissions in 
excess of 3,792 tons per year. 84 FR 3741. Concerning the 
enforceability of the emission limits at US Steel-Gary Works, the 
changes to and approval of the rule into the SIP removes the previously 
allowable levels of SO2 emissions from the now-shutdown coke 
plant. This, combined with the removal of permit terms allowing coke 
plant SO2 emissions, has the effect of not allowing any 
SO2 emissions to occur from the coke plant. If the coke 
plant were to come back into operation, before it could have any 
SO2 emissions it would have to obtain regulatory and/or 
permit terms that would make such emissions permissible at all and set 
new emission limits that are both state and federally enforceable. 
Regarding the commenter's statement about the health effects, EPA finds 
that this SIP revision provides for a reduction in excess of 3,792 tons 
per year in allowable SO2 emissions and does not interfere 
with Indiana's ability to attain or maintain the NAAQS which are 
protective of public health.
    Comment 3: The commenter stated that there should be no tolerances 
for SO2 emissions, and that SO2 emission 
limitations should not be removed. The commenter noted that 
SO2 is partly responsible for acid rain, which is one of the 
main reasons that the CAA was amended. The commenter added that 
companies should have SO2 limitations and that the removal 
of SO2 standards would be ``disastrous'' to our environment. 
The commenter also believes that EPA should stop issuing permits that 
allow facilities to emit SO2 and EPA should research 
technology to produce power or products without emitting harmful 
pollutants.
    EPA Response 3: This action removes references to emission 
limitations for decommissioned emissions units associated with the coke 
plant at US Steel-Gary Works which were permanently shut down on March 
30, 2015. By removing the limits for the shutdown coke plant units and 
by surrendering its permit terms for those emission units, US Steel-
Gary Works is no longer allowed to emit SO2 from those coke 
plant emission units without obtaining enforceable operating permits. 
By removing those emissions limits US Steel-Gary Works will reduce 
allowable emissions of SO2 by approximately 3792.2 tons per 
year. This rulemaking does not increase any allowable emissions at US 
Steel-Gary Works. All remaining emissions units at US Steel-Gary Works, 
which were not associated with the coke plant, are retaining 
enforceable emissions limits from operating scenario b of the original 
rule.
    The commenter's statement about the removal of the SO2 
standards being disastrous to the environment is unrelated to this 
rulemaking. The standards for SO2 are regulated under the 
NAAQS. Regarding the commenter's statement that EPA should stop issuing 
permits that allow facilities to emit SO2, the CAA title V 
part 70 permitting program allows states to issue legally enforceable 
operating permits that are compliant with the NAAQS. Lastly, the 
commenter stated that EPA should research clean energy technology. EPA 
provides grants to institutions researching clean energy technology and 
EPA's clean energy programs can be found on this website https://www.epa.gov/energy/clean-energy-programs.

III. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving IDEM's March 6, 2018 submittal as a revision to 
its existing SIP for US Steel-Gary Works. Specifically, EPA is 
approving revisions to Indiana rule 326 IAC 7-4.1-20 ``U.S. Steel-Gary 
Works sulfur dioxide emission limitations''.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is finalizing regulatory text that includes 
incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 
51.5, EPA is finalizing the incorporation by reference of the Indiana 
Regulations described in the amendments to 40 CFR part 52 set forth 
below. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents 
generally available through www.regulations.gov, and at the EPA

[[Page 30630]]

Region 5 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more 
information). Therefore, these materials have been approved by EPA for 
inclusion in the State implementation plan, have been incorporated by 
reference by EPA into that plan, are fully federally enforceable under 
sections 110 and 113 of the CAA as of the effective date of the final 
rulemaking of EPA's approval, and will be incorporated by reference in 
the next update to the SIP compilation.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 62 FR 27968 (May 22, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian 
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has 
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose 
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by August 26, 2019. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor 
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may 
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or 
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to 
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

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

    Dated: June 13, 2019.
Cathy Stepp,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.


0
2. In Sec.  52.770, the table in paragraph (c) is amended under 
``Article 7. Sulfur Dioxide Rules,'' ``Rule 4.1. Lake County Sulfur 
Dioxide Emission Limitations,'' by revising the entry for ``7-4.1-20'' 
to read as follows:


Sec.  52.770  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                        EPA--Approved Indiana Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Indiana
   Indiana citation             Subject          effective date      EPA approval date             Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Article 7. Sulfur Dioxide Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

[[Page 30631]]

 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Rule 4.1. Lake County Sulfur Dioxide Emission Limitations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
7-4.1-20.............  U.S. Steel-Gary Works          2/21/2018  6/27/2019, [insert        .....................
                        sulfur dioxide emission                   Federal Register
                        limitations.                              citation].
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2019-13494 Filed 6-26-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


