Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Proposed Approval of a Revision to the Sulfur Dioxide State Implementation Plan for United States Steel-Gary Works
| Published date | 13 February 2019 |
| Citation | 84 FR 3740 |
| Record Number | 2019-02215 |
| Section | Proposed rules |
| Court | Environmental Protection Agency |
3740
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules
agency to prepare a regulatory flexibility
analysis of any rule subject to notice-
and-comment rulemaking requirements
under the Administrative Procedure Act
or any other statute unless the agency
certifies that the rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
(i.e., small businesses and small
governments). The danger zone is
necessary to protect public safety during
use of the small arms range. Unless
information is obtained to the contrary
during the comment period, the Corps
certifies that the proposed rule would
have no significant economic impact on
the public. After considering the
economic impacts of this proposed
danger zone regulation on small entities,
I certify that this action will not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
c. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act
Due to the administrative nature of
this action and because there is no
intended change in the use of the area,
the Corps expects that this regulation, if
adopted, will not have a significant
impact to the quality of the human
environment and, therefore, preparation
of an environmental impact statement
will not be required. An environmental
assessment will be prepared after the
comment period is closed and all
comments have been received and
considered.
d. Unfunded Mandates Act
This proposed rule does not impose
an enforceable duty among the private
sector and, therefore, it is not a Federal
private sector mandate and it is not
subject to the requirements of either
Section 202 or Section 205 of the
Unfunded Mandates Act. We have also
found under Section 203 of the Act, that
small governments will not be
significantly and uniquely affected by
this rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 334
Danger zones, Marine safety,
Navigation (water), Restricted areas,
Waterways.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the Corps proposes to amend
33 CFR part 334 as follows:
PART 334—DANGER ZONE AND
RESTRICTED AREA REGULATIONS
■1. The authority citation for 33 CFR
part 334 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 40 Stat. 266 (33 U.S.C. 1) and
40 Stat. 892 (33 U.S.C. 3).
■2. Revise § 334.390 to read as follows:
§ 334.390 Atlantic Ocean south of entrance
to Chesapeake Bay; firing range.
(a) The danger zone. (1) A section
extending seaward for a distance of
12,000 yards between two radial lines
bearing 030° True and 083° True,
respectively, from a point on shore at
latitude 36°46′48″ N, longitude
75°57′24″ W; and an adjacent sector
extending seaward for a distance of 15
nautical miles between two radial lines
bearing 083° True and 150° True,
respectively, from the same shore
position. The datum for these
coordinates is WGS–1984.
(b) The regulations. (1) To
accommodate ingress and egress within
the southern approach to the
Chesapeake Bay Federal navigation
channels, no live fire exercise will take
place within the area northeast of, and
defined by a line intersecting points
latitude 36°47′59″ N, longitude
75°46′05″ W and latitude 36°44′25″ N,
longitude 75°38′ 57″ W, and this area is
open to unrestricted surface navigation.
(2) Within the remainder of the
danger zone vessels shall proceed
through the area with caution and shall
remain therein no longer than necessary
for the purpose of transit.
(3) When firing is in progress during
daylight hours, red flags will be
displayed at conspicuous locations on
the beach. When firing is in progress
during periods of darkness, red flashing
lights will be displayed from
conspicuous locations on the beach
which are visible from the water a
minimum distance of four (4) nautical
miles.
(4) Firing on the ranges will be
suspended as long as any vessel is
within the danger zone.
(5) Lookout posts will be manned by
the activity or agency operating the
firing range at the Naval Air Station
Oceana, Dam Neck Annex, in Virginia
Beach, Virginia. After darkness, night
vision systems will be utilized by
lookouts to aid in locating vessels
transiting the area.
(6) There shall be no firing on the
range during periods of low visibility
which would prevent the recognition of
a vessel (to a distance of 7,500 yards)
which is properly displaying navigation
lights, or which would preclude a vessel
from observing the red range flags or
lights.
(7) Throughout the entire danger zone
anchoring, dredging, trawling and any
bottom disturbing activities should be
conducted with caution due to the
potential of unexploded ordnance
(UXO) and other munitions and
explosives of concern (MEC) on the
bottom.
(c) Enforcement. The regulation in
this section shall be enforced by the
Commander, Naval Air Force Atlantic,
U.S. Fleet Forces Command, Norfolk,
Virginia, and such agencies as he or she
may designate.
Dated: February 7, 2019. Approved:
Thomas P. Smith,
Chief, Operations and Regulatory Division,
Directorate of Civil Works.
[FR Doc. 2019–02157 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3720–58–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2018–0126; FRL–9989–32–
Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Proposed
Approval of a Revision to the Sulfur
Dioxide State Implementation Plan for
United States Steel-Gary Works
AGENCY
: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION
: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY
: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 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 (US
Steel-Gary Works). The proposed SIP
revision pertains to the removal of all
sulfur dioxide (SO
2
) emission
limitations for the facility’s coke plant,
which permanently ceased operation on
March 30, 2015, and other
administrative changes. The SIP
revision provides for an overall
reduction in SO
2
emissions at the
facility.
DATES
: Comments must be received on
or before March 15, 2019.
ADDRESSES
: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2018–0126 at http://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
blakley.pamela@epa.gov. 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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
3741
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules
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
:
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. Summary of Changes to Existing Rule
III. Summary of 110(l) Analysis
IV. What action is EPA taking?
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
US Steel-Gary Works is an integrated
steel mill located in Gary, Indiana. On
March 30, 2015, the facility
permanently ceased the operation of its
entire coke plant. The coke plant
consisted of the coal handling facilities,
coke oven batteries, coke byproducts
recovery plant, coke oven
desulfurization facility, and #2 coke
plant boiler house.
IDEM amended 326 Indiana
Administrative Code (326 IAC) 7–4.1–20
to remove SO
2
emission limitations
applicable to the coke plant. IDEM held
a public hearing on October 11, 2017
and received one question regarding
whether US Steel-Gary Works would be
required to reapply for permits if they
chose to reopen the coke plant facility.
IDEM confirmed that US Steel-Gary
Works would have to reapply for
permits if they chose to reopen the coke
plant.
IDEM adopted the revised rule on
October 11, 2017, which became
effective on February 21, 2018.
II. Summary of Changes to Existing
Rule
The existing rule 326 IAC 7–4.1–20
contained the SO
2
emission limitations
for various emission units at US Steel-
Gary Works, depending on the operation
status of the coke oven gas
desulfurization unit. The sole purpose
of the coke oven gas desulfurization unit
was to control coke oven gas emissions
from the coke plant. IDEM revised 326
IAC 7–4.1–20 to remove all SO
2
sources
and emission limits associated with the
coke plant. IDEM renumbered and
retained the remainder of the rule which
contains SO
2
emission limitations for
other operating units at the facility such
as the turboblower boiler house units,
number 4 boiler house units, blast
furnace stove stacks, 84-inch hot strip
mill units, number 3 sinter plant
windbox gas cleaning systems, and
baghouses.
III. Summary of 110(l) Analysis
According to Clean Air Act (CAA)
Section 110(l), EPA cannot approve a
revision of a SIP if the revision would
interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment of
the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards and Reasonable Further
Progress (as defined in Section 171 of
the CAA). Indiana’s submission is
consistent with CAA Section 110(l)
because the changes to the facility will
result in a decrease in SO
2
emissions in
excess of 3792.2 tons per year.
IV. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to approve IDEM’s
March 6, 2018 submittal as a revision to
its existing SIP for US Steel-Gary Works.
EPA is requesting comments on the
proposed approval.
V. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
revisions to Indiana rule 326 IAC 7–4.1–
20 U.S. Steel-Gary Works Sulfur Dioxide
Emission Limitations, effective on
February 21, 2018. EPA has made, and
will continue to make, these documents
generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region 5 Office (please contact the
person identified in the ‘‘For Further
Information Contact’’ section of this
preamble for more information).
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 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
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).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
3742
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 30 / Wednesday, February 13, 2019 / Proposed Rules
1
See December 9, 1976 memorandum from Roger
Strelow, Assistant Administrator for Air and Waste
Management, to Regional Administrators,
‘‘Guidance for Determining Acceptability of SIP
Regulations in Non-Attainment Areas.’’ See also 44
FR 53761, 53762 (September 17, 1979).
2
Only a portion of the Commonwealth of Virginia
is included in the OTR.
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: December 21, 2018.
James O. Payne
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2019–02215 Filed 2–12–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2018–0764; FRL–9989–45–
Region 3]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Pennsylvania; Allegheny County
Reasonable Available Control
Technology for the 2008 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
AGENCY
: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION
: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY
: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
state implementation plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection
(PADEP) on behalf of the Allegheny
County Health Department (ACHD) for
the purpose of satisfying the volatile
organic compound (VOC) reasonably
available control technology (RACT)
requirements for source categories
covered by control technique guidelines
(CTGs) under the 2008 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS). This action is being taken
under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES
: Written comments must be
received on or before March 15, 2019.
ADDRESSES
: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2018–0764 at http://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
spielberger.susan@epa.gov. 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
:
Megan Goold, (215) 814–2027, or by
email at goold.megan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
: On July
24, 2018, PADEP submitted, on behalf of
ACHD, a SIP revision addressing the
VOC CTG RACT requirements set forth
by the CAA for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS for Allegheny County (the 2018
VOC CTG RACT Submission for
Allegheny County).
I. Background
A. General
Ozone is formed in the atmosphere by
photochemical reactions between VOCs
and oxides of nitrogen (NO
X
) in the
presence of sunlight. In order to reduce
ozone concentrations, the CAA requires
control of VOC and NO
X
emission
sources to achieve emission reductions
in moderate or more serious ozone
nonattainment areas. Among effective
control measures, RACT controls
significantly reduce VOC and NO
X
emissions from major stationary
sources.
RACT is defined as the lowest
emission limitation that a particular
source is capable of meeting by the
application of control technology that is
reasonably available considering
technological and economic feasibility.
1
CAA section 172(c)(1) provides that
SIPs for nonattainment areas must
include reasonably available control
measures (RACM) for attainment of the
NAAQS, including emissions
reductions from existing sources
through adoption of RACT. A major
source in a nonattainment area is
defined as any stationary source that
emits or has the potential to emit NO
X
or VOC emissions above a certain
applicability threshold that is based on
the ozone nonattainment classification
of the area: Marginal, Moderate, Serious,
or Severe. See ‘‘major stationary source’’
in CAA sections 182(b), 184(b) and 302.
CAA sections 182(b)(2) and 182(f)(1) of
the CAA require states with moderate
(or worse) ozone nonattainment areas to
implement RACT controls on all
stationary sources and source categories
covered by a CTG document issued by
EPA and on all major sources of VOC
and NO
X
emissions located in the area.
EPA’s CTGs establish presumptive
RACT control requirements for various
VOC source categories. The CTGs
typically identify a particular control
level that EPA recommends as being
RACT. In some cases, EPA has issued
Alternative Control Techniques
guidelines (ACTs) primarily for NO
X
source categories, which in contrast to
the CTGs, only present a range for
possible control options but do not
identify any particular option as the
presumptive norm for what is RACT.
CAA section 183(c) requires EPA to
revise and update CTGs and ACTs as
the Administrator determines necessary.
EPA issued eleven new CTGs from 2006
through 2008. A list of CTGs issued by
EPA can be found at https://
www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-
pollution/control-techniques-guidelines-
and-alternative-control-techniques.
States are required to implement RACT
for the source categories covered by
CTGs through the SIP. Source categories
that are not covered by the CTGs are
termed non-CTG sources (non-CTG
sources are not covered by this SIP
revision).
CAA section 184(a) of the CAA
established a single ozone transport
region (OTR), comprising all or part of
12 eastern states and the District of
Columbia.
2
The entire Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania is part of the OTR and,
therefore, must comply with the RACT
requirements in CAA section
184(b)(1)(B) and (2). Specifically,
section 184(b)(1)(B) requires the
implementation of RACT in OTR states
with respect to all sources of VOC
covered by a CTG. Additionally, section
184(b)(2) states that any stationary
source with the potential to emit 50 tons
per year (tpy) of VOCs shall be
considered a major source and requires
the implementation of major stationary
source requirements in the OTR states
as if the area were a moderate
nonattainment area. A major source in
a nonattainment area is defined as any
stationary source that emits or has the
potential to emit NO
X
or VOC emissions
above a certain applicability threshold
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:05 Feb 12, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\13FEP1.SGM 13FEP1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
