82 FR 57694 - Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report State Implementation Plan
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 234 (December 7, 2017)
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 234 (December 7, 2017)
| Page Range | 57694-57698 | |
| FR Document | 2017-26304 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 234 (Thursday, December 7, 2017)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 57694-57698] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-26304] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0211 FRL-9971-60-Region 5] Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report State Implementation Plan AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve the Indiana regional haze progress report under the Clean Air Act as a revision to the Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP). Indiana has satisfied the progress report requirements of the Regional Haze Rule. Indiana has also met the requirements for a determination of the adequacy of its regional haze plan with its negative declaration submitted with the progress report. DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 8, 2018. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05- OAR-2016-0211 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to [email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Becker, Life Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR- 18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-3901, [email protected]. 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. EPA's Analysis of Indiana's Regional Haze Progress Report and Adequacy Determination III. What action is EPA taking? IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background States are required to submit a progress report every five years that evaluates progress towards the Reasonable Progress Goals (RPGs) for each mandatory Class I Federal area within the State and in each mandatory Class I Federal area outside the State which may be affected by emissions from within the State. See 40 CFR 51.308(g). States are also required to submit, at the same time as the progress report, a determination of the adequacy of the State's existing regional haze SIP. See 40 CFR 51.308(h). The first progress report is due five years after the submittal of the initial regional haze SIP. [[Page 57695]] Indiana initially submitted its regional haze plan on January 14, 2011. The final corrected version was submitted on March 10, 2011. EPA finalized a limited approval of Indiana's regional haze plan into its SIP on June 11, 2012. 77 FR 32418. As part of the action, EPA also approved limits for the aluminum fabricating facility owned and operated by Alcoa, Inc. and located in Warrick County, Indiana, which were determined by EPA to satisfy the requirements for best available retrofit technology (BART). Indiana submitted its five-year progress report on March 30, 2016. This is a report on progress made in the first implementation period towards RPGs for Class I areas outside of Indiana. Indiana does not have any Class I areas within its borders. This progress report SIP included a determination that Indiana's existing regional haze SIP requires no substantive revision to achieve the established regional haze visibility improvement and emissions reduction goals for 2018. EPA is proposing to approve Indiana's progress report on the basis that it satisfies the applicable requirements of the rule at 40 CFR 51.308. II. EPA's Analysis of Indiana's Regional Haze Progress Report and Adequacy Determination On March 30, 2016, Indiana submitted a revision to its regional haze SIP to address progress made in the first planning period towards RPGs for Class I areas that are affected by emissions from Indiana's sources. This progress report also included a determination of the adequacy of the state's existing regional haze SIP. Even though Indiana has no Class I areas within its borders, the State reviewed technical analyses conducted by the Midwest Regional Planning Organization (MRPO) and other regional planning organizations (RPOs) to determine which Class I areas are affected by Indiana's emissions. The five relevant RPOs are the Mid-Atlantic and Northeastern Visibility Union (MANE-VU) for the Northeastern states, the Visibility Improvement State and Tribal Association of the Southeast (VISTAS), MRPO, the Central Regional Air Planning Association (CENRAP), and Western Regional Air Partnership (WRAP). The following Class I areas in other states were identified as possibly being impacted by Indiana sources (77 FR 3975, January 26, 2012): Southeastern U.S. (VISTAS)--Sipsey Wilderness Area, AL; Mammoth Cave National Park, KY; Great Smoky Mountains National Park, NC and TN; James River Face Wilderness Area, VA; Shenandoah National Park, VA; and Dolly Sods/Otter Creek Wilderness Areas, WV Eastern U.S. (MANE-VU)--Acadia National Park, ME; Moosehorn Wilderness Area, ME; Great Gulf Wilderness Area, NH; Brigantine Wilderness Area, NJ; and Lye Brook Wilderness Area, VT Northern U.S. (MRPO and CENRAP)--Isle Royale National Park, MI; Seney National Wildlife Refuge, MI; Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness Area, MN; and Voyageurs National Park, MN South Central U.S. (CENRAP)--Hercules-Glades Wilderness Area, MO; Mingo Wilderness Area, MO; Caney Creek Wilderness Area, AR; and Upper Buffalo Wilderness Area, AR A. Regional Haze Progress Report SIPs The following section includes EPA's analysis of Indiana's progress report submittal and an explanation of the basis of our proposed approval. 1. Status of Implementation of All Measures Included in the Regional Haze SIP In its progress report, Indiana summarized the implementation status of the control strategies that were included in its 2011 regional haze SIP, specifically, the status of the on-the-books emissions reduction measures in addition to reductions from federal regulatory programs such as: Tier 2 Vehicle Emissions and Gasoline Standards Rule; Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine and Highway Diesel Fuel Rule; Non-road Engine Diesel Fuel Rule (Tier 4); and Maximum Achievable Control Technology. In its regional haze strategy, Indiana did not rely on additional emissions controls from other states. Indiana also noted the following additional controls measures, which are expected to result in emissions reductions between 2011 and 2018, but were not relied upon in Indiana's Regional Haze SIP: 2010 SO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (75 FR 35519, June 22, 2010); Mercury and Air Toxics Standard Rule (79 FR 68777, November 19, 2014); and Tier 3 Vehicle Emissions and Fuel Standard Program (79 FR 23414, April 28, 2014). In its regional haze SIP, Indiana relied on the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) to meet the sulfur dioxide (SO2 ) and nitrogen oxides (NOX ) BART requirements for its electric generating units (EGUs) as well as to ensure reasonable progress. Indiana's progress report describes the litigation regarding CAIR and Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) that has had a substantial impact on EPA's review of the regional haze SIPs of many states. In 2005, EPA issued regulations allowing states to rely on CAIR to meet certain requirements of the Regional Haze Rule. See 70 FR 39104 (July 6, 2005).\1\ A number of states, including Indiana, submitted regional haze SIPs consistent with these regulatory provisions. CAIR, however, was remanded (without vacatur) to EPA in 2008, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008), and replaced by CSAPR. 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). Implementation of CSAPR was scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012, when CSAPR would have superseded the CAIR program. However, numerous parties filed petitions for review of CSAPR, and at the end of 2011, the D.C. Circuit issued an order staying CSAPR pending resolution of the petitions and directing EPA to continue to administer CAIR. Order of December 30, 2011, in EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, D.C. Cir. No. 11-1302. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ CAIR required certain states like Indiana to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2 ) and nitrogen oxides (NOX ) that significantly contribute to downwind nonattainment of the 1997 National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for fine particulate matter (PM2.5 ) and ozone. See 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA finalized a limited approval of Indiana's regional haze SIP on June 11, 2012. 77 FR 39177. In a separate action, published on June 7, 2012, EPA finalized a limited disapproval of the Indiana regional haze SIP because of the state's reliance on CAIR to meet certain regional haze requirements, and issued a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the deficiencies identified in the limited disapproval of Indiana and other states' regional haze plans. 77 FR 33642. The FIP relied on CSAPR to meet certain regional haze requirements, notwithstanding that CSAPR was stayed at the time. Following additional litigation and the lifting of the stay, EPA began implementation of CSAPR on January 1, 2015. Regarding the status of BART and reasonable progress control requirements for non-EGU sources in the state, one non-EGU source, the Alcoa facility in Warrick County, was identified as BART-eligible and shown to contribute significantly to visibility impairment at Class I areas in other states. EPA approved Indiana's alternative BART strategy of controlling emissions from a non-BART boiler unit in our June 11, 2012, limited approval of Indiana's regional haze SIP. 77 FR 34218. EPA proposes to conclude that Indiana has adequately addressed the [[Page 57696]] status of control measures in its regional haze SIP. Indiana describes the implementation status of measures from its regional haze SIP, including the status of control measures to meet BART and reasonable progress requirements, the status of measures from on-the-book controls and the status of federal regulatory programs. 2. Summary of Emissions Reductions Achieved in the State Through Implementation of Measures In its progress report, Indiana discusses the emissions reductions resulting from the control strategies included in its 2011 regional haze SIP. As described above, throughout the litigation surrounding CAIR and CSAPR, EPA continued to implement CAIR. Thus, CAIR was in effect through the end of 2014. Indiana listed its EGUs' emissions of SO2 and NOX for 2005, 2009, and 2013, along with its CSAPR budgets. In the progress report, Indiana showed that 2013 state-wide SO2 emissions from EGUs were 268,217 tons, below the CSAPR budget of 285,424 tons. Indiana also showed that 2013 state-wide NOX emissions from EGUs were 103,048 tons, below the CSAPR budget of 109,726 tons. Indiana's SO2 and NOX EGU emissions for 2013 were 6% lower than the 2013 CSAPR budgets for both pollutants. Table 1 below summarizes the emission reductions reported by Indiana. Table 1--Indiana EGU Emissions Reported to the Clean Air Markets Program Division (CAMD) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOX (tons) NOX budget SO2 (tons) SO2 budget Year (tons) (tons) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2005............................................ 210,646 .............. 870,812 .............. 2009............................................ 113,601 .............. 413,726 .............. 2013............................................ 103,048 109,726 268,217 285,424 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. Assessment of Visibility Conditions and Changes for Each Mandatory Class I Federal Area in the State Indiana noted in its progress report that it does not have any Class I areas within its boundaries, and as the applicable provisions pertain only to states containing Class I areas, no further discussion is necessary. EPA concurs, and proposes to conclude that Indiana has adequately addressed the applicable provisions of 40 CFR 51.308(g). 4. Analysis Tracking Emissions Changes of Visibility-Impairing Pollutants In its progress report, Indiana tracked changes in emissions of visibility-impairing pollutants using its 2005 base emissions and projected 2018 emissions in its regional haze plan submitted in 2011. The progress report gives current annual emissions for SO2 and NOX that can be compared to the base emissions and 2018 projected emissions. Base emissions of SO2 in 2005 were 956,031 tons, with a 64 percent reduction to 346,429 tons in 2014. Indiana reported 2011 SO2 total emissions of 425,786 tons. The NOX base emissions in 2005 were 283,059 tons, with a 42 percent reduction to 164,520 tons in 2014. Indiana reported 2011 NOX emissions of 180,674 tons. Indiana noted that SO2 emissions have been reduced considerably between 2005 and 2014, based on actual reported emissions. These reductions were due primarily to regulations focused on reducing SO2 emissions from coal-burning power plants and other large sources, such as various types of boilers and incinerators, which are the largest emitters of SO2 . The actual decrease in NOX emissions was not as substantial as the decrease in SO2 emissions between 2005 and 2014. This is because the NOX SIP call which significantly reduced NOX emissions took place in 2004 (before the examined timeframe of 2005-2014), and NOX emissions from sources other than EGUs combined are much higher than NOX emissions from EGUs alone. Actual NOX emissions reported from contributing sources in Indiana decreased incrementally over the first five-year timeframe (2005-2009) by 38%. The NOX emissions reduction between 2010 and 2014 decreased by only 13%, due to increases in NOX emissions from point, mobile, and non-road sources in 2010 and 2011; but total NOX emissions decreased by 42% between 2004 and 2014. These reductions show that Indiana is in line with improvements predicted by the modeling for 2012 and will likely exceed visibility improvements anticipated by 2018. Table 2 below summarizes the actual SO2 and NOX emission from contributing sources in Indiana between 2005 and 2014. Table 2--Actual (Reported) SO2 and NOX Emissions From Contributing Sources in Indiana ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SO2 NOX Year (tons) (tons) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2005.............................................. 956,031 283,059 2006.............................................. 920,251 260,810 2007.............................................. 797,900 276,402 2008.............................................. 669,936 273,903 2009.............................................. 480,884 174,828 2010.............................................. 480,628 187,988 2011.............................................. 425,786 180,674 2012.............................................. 343,124 171,136 2013.............................................. 340,786 165,778 2014.............................................. 346,429 164,520 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EPA concurs and proposes to conclude that Indiana has adequately addressed the applicable provisions of 40 CFR 51.308. 5. Assessment of Any Significant Changes in Anthropogenic Emissions In its progress report, Indiana indicated that no significant changes in anthropogenic emissions have impeded progress in reducing emissions and improving visibility in Class I areas impacted by Indiana sources. As mentioned above, Indiana acknowledges in its progress report that there was an increase in total NOX emissions from contributing sources in Indiana in 2010 and 2011. To address this potential concern, Indiana points out that NOX emissions began to decrease once again in 2012, and continued to decrease every subsequent year through 2014. Indiana also states that the decrease in SO2 and NOX emissions between from 2005 and 2009 was so significant that the slight increase of NOX in 2010 and 2011 had no actual impact in the overall progress made from 2005 to 2014. For these reasons, Indiana does not consider the increase of NOX emission in 2010 and 2011 a problem that has or will impede future visibility progress in [[Page 57697]] states with Class I areas potentially impacted by Indiana sources. EPA concurs and proposes to conclude that Indiana has adequately addressed the applicable provisions of 40 CFR 51.308. 6. Assessment of Whether the Implementation Plan Elements and Strategies Are Sufficient To Enable Other States To Meet RPGs In its progress report, Indiana states that it has implemented, or expects to implement by 2018, all controls from its regional haze plan. The state noted in the progress report that its emissions are on track for the 2018 goals, including reductions that are ahead of pace for the key pollutants, SO2 and NOX . Indiana assessed each of the areas identified in the MRPO report as being impacted by Indiana sources using information provided by the MRPO, technical documents from the other RPOs, and letters received from other states indicating their decisions regarding reasonable progress goals. Indiana's long term strategy relied on the emission reductions from CAIR, a program that has now been replaced by CSAPR. At the present time, the requirements of CSAPR apply to sources in Indiana under the terms of a FIP. The Regional Haze Rule requires an assessment of whether the current ``implementation plan'' is sufficient to enable the states to meet all established reasonable progress goals. 40 CFR 51.308(g). The term ``implementation plan'' is defined for purposes of the Regional Haze Rule to mean ``any [SIP], [FIP], or Tribal Implementation Plan.'' 40 CFR 51.301. EPA is considering measures in any applicable FIP, as well as those in a state's regional haze SIP, in assessing the adequacy of the ``existing implementation plan'' under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(6) and (h). EPA applies this requirement as an assessment of emissions and visibility trends and other readily available information. Indiana determined that its regional haze SIP is sufficient to enable other States to meet the RPGs for the Class I areas impacted by the State's emissions. EPA proposes to conclude that Indiana has adequately addressed the applicable provisions of 40 CFR 51.308. 7. Review of the State's Visibility Monitoring Strategy Indiana's progress report states there are no Class I areas within its borders and thus finds that the State is not required to have a visibility monitoring strategy in place. EPA concurs, and proposes to conclude that Indiana has adequately addressed the requirements for a monitoring strategy for regional haze and propose to determine no further modifications to the monitoring strategy are required. B. Determination of Adequacy of Existing Regional Haze Plan In its progress report, Indiana submitted a negative declaration to EPA regarding the need for additional actions or emission reductions in Indiana beyond those already in place and those to be implemented by 2018 according to Indiana's regional haze plan. Indiana determined that its regional haze plan is adequate to meet the Regional Haze Rule requirements and expects Class I areas affected by Indiana to achieve the reasonable progress goals. EPA finds that the state is on track to meet the visibility improvement and emission reduction goals. Because monitored visibility values and emission trends indicate that Class I areas impacted by Indiana's sources are meeting or exceeding the RPGs for 2018, and are expected to continue to meet or exceed the RPGs for 2018, EPA proposes to conclude that Indiana has adequately addressed the provisions under 40 CFR 51.308(h). C. Public Participation On January 14, 2016, Indiana provided an opportunity for Federal Land Managers (FLMs) to review the revision to Indiana's SIP reporting on progress made during the first implementation period toward RPGs for Class I areas outside the state that are affected by emissions from Indiana's sources. Comments were received from the U.S. Forest Service and National Park Service. Indiana's progress report, in Appendix D, includes the FLM comments and the State's responses to the comments. On February 19, 2016, Indiana published notification for a request for public hearing and solicitation for full public comment on the draft progress report in widely distributed publications. A public hearing was not requested, and no comments were received. EPA proposes to find that Indiana has addressed the applicable requirements in 51.308(i) regarding FLM consultation. III. What action is EPA taking? EPA is proposing to approve Indiana's Regional Haze five-year progress report, submitted March 30, 2016, as meeting the applicable regional haze requirements as set forth in 40 CFR 51.308(g) and 51.308(h). IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the Clean Air Act the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Clean Air Act 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 Clean Air Act. 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 Clean Air Act; 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 [[Page 57698]] 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, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: November 17, 2017. Robert A. Kaplan, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. 2017-26304 Filed 12-6-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![57694 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 234 / Thursday, December 7, 2017 / Proposed Rules
IV. What action is EPA taking? • Does not provide EPA with the follow the online instructions for
EPA is proposing to approve a portion discretionary authority to address, as submitting comments. Once submitted,
of Ohio’s December 4, 2015, submission appropriate, disproportionate human comments cannot be edited or removed
certifying that the current Ohio SIP is health or environmental effects, using from Regulations.gov. For either manner
sufficient to meet the required practicable and legally permissible of submission, EPA may publish any
infrastructure requirements under CAA methods, under Executive Order 12898 comment received to its public docket.
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), specifically (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). Do not submit electronically any
prongs one and two, as set forth above. In addition, the SIP is not approved information you consider to be
EPA is requesting comments on the to apply on any Indian reservation land Confidential Business Information (CBI)
proposed approval. or in any other area where EPA or an or other information whose disclosure is
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a restricted by statute. Multimedia
V. Statutory and Executive Order tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
Reviews Indian country, the rule does not have accompanied by a written comment.
Under the CAA, the Administrator is tribal implications and will not impose The written comment is considered the
required to approve a SIP submission substantial direct costs on tribal official comment and should include
that complies with the provisions of the governments or preempt tribal law as discussion of all points you wish to
CAA and applicable Federal regulations. specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 make. EPA will generally not consider
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). FR 67249, November 9, 2000). comments or comment contents located
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, outside of the primary submission (i.e.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
EPA’s role is to approve state choices, on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
provided that they meet the criteria of Environmental protection, Air system). For additional submission
the CAA. Accordingly, this action pollution control, Incorporation by methods, please contact the person
merely approves state law as meeting reference, Intergovernmental relations, identified in the FOR FURTHER
Federal requirements and does not Particulate matter, Reporting and INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the
impose additional requirements beyond recordkeeping requirements. full EPA public comment policy,
those imposed by state law. For that Dated: November 17, 2017. information about CBI or multimedia
reason, this action: Robert A. Kaplan, submissions, and general guidance on
• Is not a significant regulatory action Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. making effective comments, please visit
subject to review by the Office of http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
[FR Doc. 2017–26291 Filed 12–6–17; 8:45 am]
Management and Budget under commenting-epa-dockets.
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, Michelle Becker, Life Scientist,
January 21, 2011); ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Attainment Planning and Maintenance
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 AGENCY Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory Environmental Protection Agency,
action because SIP approvals are 40 CFR Part 52 Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
exempted under Executive Order 12866. [EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0211 FRL–9971–60– Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–3901,
• Does not impose an information Region 5] Becker.Michelle@epa.gov.
collection burden under the provisions SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Regional Throughout this document whenever
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Haze Five-Year Progress Report State ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
• Is certified as not having a Implementation Plan EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
significant economic impact on a section is arranged as follows:
substantial number of small entities AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). I. Background
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 II. EPA’s Analysis of Indiana’s Regional Haze
U.S.C. 601 et seq.); ACTION: Proposed rule.
Progress Report and Adequacy
• Does not contain any unfunded Determination
mandate or significantly or uniquely SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
III. What action is EPA taking?
affect small governments, as described Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act the Indiana regional haze progress
report under the Clean Air Act as a I. Background
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism revision to the Indiana State States are required to submit a
implications as specified in Executive Implementation Plan (SIP). Indiana has progress report every five years that
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, satisfied the progress report evaluates progress towards the
1999); requirements of the Regional Haze Rule. Reasonable Progress Goals (RPGs) for
• Is not an economically significant Indiana has also met the requirements each mandatory Class I Federal area
regulatory action based on health or for a determination of the adequacy of within the State and in each mandatory
safety risks subject to Executive Order its regional haze plan with its negative Class I Federal area outside the State
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); declaration submitted with the progress which may be affected by emissions
• Is not a significant regulatory action report. from within the State. See 40 CFR
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR DATES: Comments must be received on 51.308(g). States are also required to
28355, May 22, 2001); or before January 8, 2018. submit, at the same time as the progress
• Is not subject to requirements of ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, report, a determination of the adequacy
section 12(d) of the National identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– of the State’s existing regional haze SIP.
Technology Transfer and Advancement OAR–2016–0211 at http:// See 40 CFR 51.308(h). The first progress
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because www.regulations.gov, or via email to report is due five years after the
application of those requirements would Aburano.Douglas@epa.gov. For submittal of the initial regional haze
be inconsistent with the CAA; and comments submitted at Regulations.gov, SIP.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:04 Dec 06, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07DEP1.SGM 07DEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_57928/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 234 / Thursday, December 7, 2017 / Proposed Rules 57697
states with Class I areas potentially for a monitoring strategy for regional IV. Statutory and Executive Order
impacted by Indiana sources. haze and propose to determine no Reviews
EPA concurs and proposes to further modifications to the monitoring Under the Clean Air Act the
conclude that Indiana has adequately strategy are required. Administrator is required to approve a
addressed the applicable provisions of
B. Determination of Adequacy of SIP submission that complies with the
40 CFR 51.308.
Existing Regional Haze Plan provisions of the Clean Air Act and
6. Assessment of Whether the applicable Federal regulations. 42
Implementation Plan Elements and In its progress report, Indiana U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus,
Strategies Are Sufficient To Enable submitted a negative declaration to EPA in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
Other States To Meet RPGs regarding the need for additional actions role is to approve state choices,
In its progress report, Indiana states or emission reductions in Indiana provided that they meet the criteria of
that it has implemented, or expects to beyond those already in place and those the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this
implement by 2018, all controls from its to be implemented by 2018 according to action merely approves state law as
regional haze plan. The state noted in Indiana’s regional haze plan. meeting Federal requirements and does
the progress report that its emissions are Indiana determined that its regional not impose additional requirements
on track for the 2018 goals, including haze plan is adequate to meet the beyond those imposed by state law. For
reductions that are ahead of pace for the Regional Haze Rule requirements and that reason, this action:
key pollutants, SO2 and NOX. Indiana expects Class I areas affected by Indiana • Is not a significant regulatory action
assessed each of the areas identified in to achieve the reasonable progress goals. subject to review by the Office of
the MRPO report as being impacted by EPA finds that the state is on track to Management and Budget under
Indiana sources using information meet the visibility improvement and Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
provided by the MRPO, technical emission reduction goals. October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
documents from the other RPOs, and January 21, 2011);
Because monitored visibility values • Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
letters received from other states and emission trends indicate that Class
indicating their decisions regarding FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
I areas impacted by Indiana’s sources action because SIP approvals are
reasonable progress goals. are meeting or exceeding the RPGs for
Indiana’s long term strategy relied on exempted under Executive Order 12866;
2018, and are expected to continue to • Does not impose an information
the emission reductions from CAIR, a
meet or exceed the RPGs for 2018, EPA collection burden under the provisions
program that has now been replaced by
proposes to conclude that Indiana has of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
CSAPR. At the present time, the
adequately addressed the provisions U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
requirements of CSAPR apply to sources
under 40 CFR 51.308(h). • Is certified as not having a
in Indiana under the terms of a FIP. The
Regional Haze Rule requires an C. Public Participation significant economic impact on a
assessment of whether the current substantial number of small entities
‘‘implementation plan’’ is sufficient to On January 14, 2016, Indiana under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
enable the states to meet all established provided an opportunity for Federal U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
reasonable progress goals. 40 CFR Land Managers (FLMs) to review the • Does not contain any unfunded
51.308(g). The term ‘‘implementation revision to Indiana’s SIP reporting on mandate or significantly or uniquely
plan’’ is defined for purposes of the progress made during the first affect small governments, as described
Regional Haze Rule to mean ‘‘any [SIP], implementation period toward RPGs for in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
[FIP], or Tribal Implementation Plan.’’ Class I areas outside the state that are of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
40 CFR 51.301. EPA is considering affected by emissions from Indiana’s • Does not have Federalism
measures in any applicable FIP, as well sources. Comments were received from implications as specified in Executive
as those in a state’s regional haze SIP, the U.S. Forest Service and National Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
in assessing the adequacy of the Park Service. Indiana’s progress report, 1999);
‘‘existing implementation plan’’ under in Appendix D, includes the FLM • Is not an economically significant
40 CFR 51.308(g)(6) and (h). comments and the State’s responses to regulatory action based on health or
EPA applies this requirement as an the comments. safety risks subject to Executive Order
assessment of emissions and visibility On February 19, 2016, Indiana 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
trends and other readily available published notification for a request for • Is not a significant regulatory action
information. Indiana determined that its public hearing and solicitation for full subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
regional haze SIP is sufficient to enable public comment on the draft progress 28355, May 22, 2001);
other States to meet the RPGs for the report in widely distributed • Is not subject to requirements of
Class I areas impacted by the State’s publications. A public hearing was not section 12(d) of the National
emissions. EPA proposes to conclude requested, and no comments were Technology Transfer and Advancement
that Indiana has adequately addressed received. Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
the applicable provisions of 40 CFR application of those requirements would
EPA proposes to find that Indiana has be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
51.308.
addressed the applicable requirements and
7. Review of the State’s Visibility in 51.308(i) regarding FLM consultation. • Does not provide EPA with the
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
Monitoring Strategy discretionary authority to address, as
III. What action is EPA taking?
Indiana’s progress report states there appropriate, disproportionate human
are no Class I areas within its borders EPA is proposing to approve Indiana’s health or environmental effects, using
and thus finds that the State is not Regional Haze five-year progress report, practicable and legally permissible
required to have a visibility monitoring submitted March 30, 2016, as meeting methods, under Executive Order 12898
strategy in place. EPA concurs, and the applicable regional haze (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
proposes to conclude that Indiana has requirements as set forth in 40 CFR In addition, the SIP is not approved
adequately addressed the requirements 51.308(g) and 51.308(h). to apply on any Indian reservation land
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:04 Dec 06, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07DEP1.SGM 07DEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_57928/page/4.svg)
![57698 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 234 / Thursday, December 7, 2017 / Proposed Rules
or in any other area where EPA or an DATES: We will accept comments by removing the DPS due to recovery.
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a received or postmarked by the end of Therefore, we are reviewing the
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of the day on January 8, 2018. potential implications for the GYE final
Indian country, the rule does not have ADDRESSES: Comment submission: You rule in light of the Humane Society
tribal implications and will not impose may submit comments by one of the ruling. We are seeking public comment
substantial direct costs on tribal following methods: on this subject (see Request for Public
governments or preempt tribal law as • U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments). Below we summarize our
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 Comments Processing, ATTN: FWS–R6– recovery strategy to assist the public in
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). ES–2017–0089, U.S. Fish and Wildlife providing public comment on the
Service, MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, impacts that Humane Society might
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Falls Church, Virginia 22041–3803. have on grizzly bear.
Environmental protection, Air • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// Recovery Strategy
pollution control, Incorporation by www.regulations.gov. Follow the
reference, Intergovernmental relations, instructions for submitting comments to The grizzly bear was originally
Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2017–0089. distributed in various habitats
Reporting and recordkeeping FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: throughout Western North America
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile Hilary Cooley, Grizzly Bear Recovery from Central Mexico to the Arctic
organic compounds. Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ocean. Current distribution in the lower
Dated: November 17, 2017. Service, University Hall, Room 309, 48 States consists of five small
Robert A. Kaplan, Missoula, MT 59812; by telephone (406) populations with an estimated total
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 243–4903. Persons who use a population of 1,800 bears. The 1993
telecommunications device for the deaf Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan (USFWS
[FR Doc. 2017–26304 Filed 12–6–17; 8:45 am]
may call the Federal Relay Service at 1993, p. 15) identified seven grizzly bear
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
(800) 877–8339. ecosystems, including five with either
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: self-perpetuating or existing populations
and two additional areas, the Bitterroot
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Background Mountains in Idaho and the San Juan
In 1975, the Service listed the grizzly Mountains in Colorado, where grizzly
Fish and Wildlife Service bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) under the bears are known to have existed in the
Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. recent past. While no resident
50 CFR Part 17 1531 et seq.) as threatened in the lower population currently exists in the
48 United States (40 FR 31734, July 28, Bitterroot Ecosystem, that ecosystem
[Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2017–0089; 1975). On June 30, 2017, the Service contains adequate habitat to sustain a
FXES11130900000C6–178–FF09E42000] published a final rule (82 FR 30502, population. The Recovery Plan suggests
June 30, 2017; RIN 1018–BA41) that further evaluation is needed on the
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife status of the San Juan Mountains, where
and Plants; Possible Effects of Court designating the GYE population of
grizzly bears as a DPS, finding that the no grizzly bears exist today (USFWS
Decision on Grizzly Bear Recovery in 1993, p.16).
the Conterminous United States DPS was recovered, and removing that
DPS from the Federal List of The Service’s overarching vision for
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. recovery of grizzly bears in the lower 48
Interior. The final rule became effective on July States, to recover and delist populations
ACTION: Regulatory review; request for 31, 2017, and remains in effect. Grizzly individually in each of the ecosystems
comments. bears in the remaining area of the lower as recovery is achieved, was outlined in
48 States remain listed as threatened the Recovery Plan (USFWS 1993, pp.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and under the ESA as amended. The status 16, 33) and further discussed in our
Wildlife Service (Service), are seeking of any grizzly bear population may be 2011 5-year status review (USFWS 2011,
public comment on a recent D.C. Circuit changed only through formal pp. 12–14). The review also found that
Court of Appeals ruling, Humane rulemaking. the lower-48-State listing is consistent
Society of the United States, et al. v. On August 1, 2017, the Court of with our 1996 DPS Policy and
Zinke et al., 865 F.3d 585 (D.C. Cir. Appeals for the District of Columbia recommended that the current entity, on
2017), that may impact our June 30, Circuit issued a ruling, Humane Society the whole, should retain its threatened
2017, final rule delisting the Greater of the United States, et al. v. Zinke et status (USFWS 2011, p. 104). We
Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) grizzly al., 865 F.3d 585 (D.C. Cir. 2017), that recognized that sufficient evidence
bear Distinct Population Segment (DPS). affirmed the prior judgement of the exists to support multiple DPSs within
In Humane Society of the United States, district court vacating the 2011 delisting the lower-48-State listing, but indicated
et al. v. Zinke et al., the court opined rule for wolves in the Western Great that further subdivision of the lower-48-
that the Service had not evaluated the Lakes (WGL) (76 FR 81666, December State listing was unnecessary at the time
status of the remainder of the listed 28, 2011). The 2011 rule designated the (USFWS 2011, p. 14). Prior to the 5-year
entity of wolves in light of the Western gray wolf population in Minnesota, status review, the Service had attempted
Great Lakes (WGL) wolf DPS delisting Wisconsin, and Michigan, as well as to delist the GYE grizzly bear
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
action and what the effect of lost portions of six surrounding States, as population as a DPS (72 FR 14866,
historical range may have on the status the WGL DPS, determined that the WGL March 29, 2007). That determination
of the WGL wolf DPS. We also describe DPS was recovered, and delisted the was subsequently vacated by the
in this notice our strategy to recover WGL as a DPS. Federal District Court for the District of
grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) in This court opinion may impact the Montana (Greater Yellowstone Coalition
the lower 48 States of the United States GYE final rule, which also designated a v. Servheen et al., 672 F.Supp. 2d 1105
and provide a brief recovery update for portion of an already-listed entity as a (D. Mont. 2009), and the vacatur was
each ecosystem. DPS and then revised the listed entity upheld by the Ninth Circuit in Greater
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:04 Dec 06, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\07DEP1.SGM 07DEP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_57928/page/5.svg)
Document Created: 2017-12-07 00:35:01
Document Modified: 2017-12-07 00:35:01
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule. | |
| Dates | Comments must be received on or before January 8, 2018. | |
| Contact | Michelle Becker, Life Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR- 18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-3901, [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 82 FR 57694 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Nitrogen Dioxide; Particulate Matter; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; Sulfur Oxides and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR