96-2832. Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Indiana  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 28 (Friday, February 9, 1996)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 4897-4899]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-2832]
    
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    40 CFR Part 52
    
    [IN62-1-7234a; FRL-5342-7]
    
    
    Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Indiana
    
    AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
    
    ACTION: Direct final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: The United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) is 
    approving an August 25, 1995, State request for a site-specific 
    revision to the Indiana sulfur dioxide (SO2) State Implementation 
    Plan (SIP). This revision amends the SO2 emission limitations 
    applicable to the Joseph E. Seagram and Sons, Inc. (Seagram), facility 
    in Lawrenceburg, Indiana, so that two boilers may not operate 
    simultaneously on coal or fuel oil. The Seagram facility has 
    essentially operated under these restrictions for several years, 
    thereby emitting less SO2 than the previous rules had allowed. The 
    incorporation of this restriction into the Indiana SO2 SIP was 
    deemed to be necessary after dispersion modeling in support of an 
    SO2 SIP revision for Cincinnati, Ohio predicted violations of the 
    National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for SO2 in Dearborn 
    County, Indiana, if Seagram were to operate at the previously allowed 
    SO2 emission rates. The restrictions contained in Indiana's August 
    25, 1995, submittal will eliminate the predicted violations in Dearborn 
    County, and their approval by USEPA will enable final Federal approval 
    of the Cincinnati, Ohio SO2 SIP revision.
    
    DATES: This action is effective on April 9, 1996 unless an adverse 
    comment is received by March 11, 1996. If the effective date is 
    delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
    
    ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: J. Elmer Bortzer, 
    Chief, Regulation Development Section, Regulation Development Branch 
    (AR-18J), United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 
    West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
        Copies of the State's submittal and USEPA's analysis (Technical 
    Support Document) are available for inspection at the following 
    location: United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air 
    and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 
    60604. (It is recommended that you telephone Mary Onischak at (312) 
    353-5954 before visiting the Region 5 Office.)
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Onischak at (312) 353-5954.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    I. Introduction
    
        Indiana has revised the SO2 emission limits for the Joseph E. 
    Seagram and Sons, Inc., distillery in Lawrenceburg, Indiana, as 
    codified by the State at 326 Indiana Administrative Code (326 IAC) 7-4-
    13 (3) (Dearborn County Sulfur Dioxide Emission Limitations), and 
    submitted this rule on August 25, 1995, to USEPA as a site-specific 
    SO2 SIP revision. The SIP revision limits the use of sulfur-
    bearing fuels at the Seagram distillery in Lawrenceburg, Indiana, and 
    is intended to address potential 
    
    [[Page 4898]]
    violations of the SO2 NAAQS in Dearborn County, Indiana. The SIP 
    revision was found complete in a letter dated October 20, 1995.
    
    II. Emission Limitation
    
        In the previously approved SO2 SIP for Dearborn County, 
    Indiana's rule 326 IAC 7-4-13 limited the emissions at each of 
    Seagram's Boilers 5 and 6 to 1.92 pounds sulfur dioxide per million 
    British Thermal Units (lb/MMBTU). In addition, if Boiler Number 6 was 
    operating on any fuel other than natural gas, the previous rule only 
    allowed Boiler Number 5 to emit 1.07 lb/MMBTU. In response to a January 
    5, 1994, request by USEPA, Indiana amended 326 IAC 7-4-13(3) to state 
    that when both Boilers 5 and 6 are in operation, only one boiler may 
    use coal or fuel oil. The rule also requires Seagram to keep records of 
    its fuel usage and report this information to the State of Indiana.
    
    III. Relationship to the Hamilton County, Ohio SIP
    
        The need for revisions to Indiana's Dearborn County SO2 SIP 
    became apparent during USEPA's review of an Ohio SO2 SIP revision, 
    which had been requested by USEPA on December 22, 1988. On October 18, 
    1991, the State of Ohio submitted to USEPA the revised SO2 SIP for 
    Hamilton County, Ohio. Hamilton County, Ohio, is adjacent to Dearborn 
    County, Indiana. In the course of Ohio's SIP development, dispersion 
    modeling was used to evaluate the emissions from significant SO2 
    sources in and around Hamilton County, including some sources in 
    Indiana. One of the Indiana sources considered in the Ohio modeling 
    study was the Seagram facility. Ohio's modeling predicted violations of 
    the 3-hour and 24-hour SO2 standard at receptor points in Dearborn 
    County, Indiana, when Seagram was modeled at its highest allowable 
    SO2 emission rate in accordance with USEPA guidance; in addition, 
    the Seagram facility was shown to be the main contributor to the 
    modeled violations in Dearborn County.
        Seagram's highest allowable emission rate assumed that Boiler 
    Number 5 operated continuously on fuel oil. However, in a letter dated 
    September 1, 1992, Seagram informed Ohio and Indiana that Boiler Number 
    5, Seagram's standby boiler, had not operated on fuel oil in the 
    previous six years.1 On January 5, 1994, USEPA requested that 
    Indiana incorporate this restriction into its SO2 SIP as an 
    enforceable limitation on Seagram's operation.
    
        \1\ The company also stated in the letter that it did not intend 
    to operate Boiler Number 5 on fuel oil while Boiler Number 6 was 
    operating on coal or fuel oil, without first notifying and obtaining 
    permission from Ohio and Indiana. USEPA notes that the rule being 
    approved today does not contain any such notification/permission 
    mechanism.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Because some Hamilton County, Ohio, SO2 sources also 
    contributed to the modeled violations in Dearborn County, Indiana, 
    USEPA could not approve the Hamilton County, Ohio SO2 SIP before 
    the modeled violations were fully addressed. Instead, USEPA 
    conditionally approved the Hamilton County, Ohio, SO2 SIP on 
    August 23, 1994, under the condition that approvable revisions to the 
    Dearborn County, Indiana SO2 SIP would be submitted to USEPA by 
    September 23, 1995. Indiana met this condition, submitting the Seagram 
    rule revision to USEPA on August 25, 1995. With enforceable boiler use 
    restrictions in the Indiana SIP, the Seagram facility's SO2 
    emissions may be included in the Hamilton County SO2 dispersion 
    modeling study at a lower level than had been assumed previously. Ohio 
    has already modeled the Seagram facility at the lower emissions allowed 
    under the boiler restrictions, and found that the predicted SO2 
    NAAQS violations in Dearborn County were eliminated. USEPA has reviewed 
    this modeling and determined that it is acceptable. Federal approval of 
    Indiana's August 25, 1995, SIP revision will therefore enable USEPA to 
    finalize the Hamilton County, Ohio, SO2 SIP approval.
    
    IV. Final Rulemaking Action
    
        For the reasons discussed above, USEPA is approving 326 IAC 7-4-13 
    (3). Indiana's revised Dearborn County SO2 rule creates an 
    enforceable restriction on the operations of fossil fuel-fired boilers 
    at the Seagram facility. This rule addresses the potential SO2 
    NAAQS violations predicted by an Ohio modeling study, and will provide 
    for attainment of the SO2 NAAQS in Dearborn County, Indiana.
        The USEPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because 
    USEPA views this action as a noncontroversial revision and anticipates 
    no adverse comments. However, USEPA is publishing a separate document 
    in this Federal Register publication, which constitutes a ``proposed 
    approval'' of the requested SIP revision and clarifies that the 
    rulemaking will not be deemed final if timely adverse or critical 
    comments are filed. The ``direct final'' approval shall be effective on 
    April 9, 1996, unless USEPA receives adverse or critical comments by 
    March 11, 1996.
        If the USEPA receives comments adverse to or critical of the 
    approval discussed above, USEPA will withdraw this approval before its 
    effective date by publishing a subsequent Federal Register document 
    which withdraws this final action. All public comments received will 
    then be addressed in a subsequent rulemaking document. Please be aware 
    that the USEPA will institute a second comment period on this action 
    only if warranted by significant revisions to the rulemaking based on 
    comments received in response to this action. Any parties interested in 
    commenting on this action should do so at this time. If no such 
    comments are received, USEPA hereby advises the public that this action 
    will be effective on April 9, 1996.
        Nothing in this action should be construed as permitting, allowing 
    or establishing a precedent for any future request for revision to any 
    SIP. The USEPA shall consider each request for revision to the SIP in 
    light of specific technical, economic, and environmental factors and in 
    relation to relevant statutory and regulatory requirements.
        This action has been classified as a Table 3 action for signature 
    by the Regional Administrator under the procedures published in the 
    Federal Register on January 19, 1989 (54 FR 2214-2225), as revised by a 
    July 10, 1995, memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator 
    for Air and Radiation. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has 
    exempted this regulatory action from Executive Order 12866 review.
        Under sections 202, 203, and 205 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
    Act of 1995 (``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 
    1995, USEPA must undertake various actions in association with proposed 
    or final rules that include a Federal mandate that may result in 
    estimated costs of $100 million or more to the private sector, or to a 
    State, local, and/or tribal government, in the aggregate. The USEPA 
    must also develop a plan with regard to small governments that would be 
    significantly or uniquely affected by the rule.
        This rule approves the incorporation into the SIP of an existing 
    State rule which applies only to a single private sector source located 
    in Dearborn County, Indiana. It imposes no additional requirements. To 
    the extent that the rules being approved by this action will impose any 
    mandate upon this source, such a mandate will not result in estimated 
    annual costs of $100 million or more to the source. The rule does not 
    impact any governments. 
    
    [[Page 4899]]
    Therefore, no action is required under the Unfunded Mandates Act.
        Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., USEPA 
    must prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis assessing the impact of 
    any proposed or final rule on small entities. (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604.) 
    Alternatively, USEPA may certify that the rule will not have a 
    significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. Small 
    entities include small businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, 
    and government entities with jurisdiction over populations of less than 
    50,000.
        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 impose any new requirements, I certify 
    that it does not have a significant impact on any small entities 
    affected. Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship 
    under the Clean Air Act, preparation of a regulatory flexibility 
    analysis would constitute Federal inquiry into the economic 
    reasonableness of the State action. The Clean Air Act forbids USEPA to 
    base its actions concerning SIPs on such grounds. Union Electric Co. v. 
    USEPA, 427 U.S. 246, 256-66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
        Under Section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
    judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
    of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by April 9, 1996. Filing a 
    petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
    does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
    review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
    review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
    rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
    to enforce its requirements. (See Section 307(b)(2).)
    
    List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
    
        Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Sulfur oxides.
    
        Note: Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation 
    Plan for the State of Indiana was approved by the Director of the 
    Federal Register on July 1, 1982.
    
        Dated: November 21, 1995.
    Valdas V. Adamkus,
    Regional Administrator.
    
        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. 7401-7671q.
    
    Subpart P--Indiana
    
        2. Section 52.770 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(103) to read 
    as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 52.770  Identification of plan.
    
    * * * * *
        (c) * * *
        (103) On August 25, 1995, the State submitted regulations adopted 
    by the Indiana Air Pollution Control Board as part of title 326 of the 
    Indiana Administrative Code for incorporation into the Indiana sulfur 
    dioxide State Implementation Plan.
        (i) Incorporation by reference.
        (A) 326 Indiana Administrative Code 7-4-13(3); Dearborn County 
    sulfur dioxide emission limitations; effective May 18, 1995. Published 
    in the Indiana Register, Volume 18, Number 9, June 1, 1995.
    
    [FR Doc. 96-2832 Filed 2-8-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
4/9/1996
Published:
02/09/1996
Department:
Environmental Protection Agency
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Direct final rule.
Document Number:
96-2832
Dates:
This action is effective on April 9, 1996 unless an adverse comment is received by March 11, 1996. If the effective date is delayed, timely notice will be published in the Federal Register.
Pages:
4897-4899 (3 pages)
Docket Numbers:
IN62-1-7234a, FRL-5342-7
PDF File:
96-2832.pdf
CFR: (1)
40 CFR 52.770