9038 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 27 / Thursday, February 11, 2021 / Proposed Rules 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2020–0369; FRL–10016– 

82–Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Indiana; Two 

Revised Sulfur Dioxide Rules for Lake 

County 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Indiana sulfur dioxide 

(SO2) State Implementation Plan (SIP). 

The State of Indiana has requested these 

SIP revisions in order to satisfy the 

requirements of a Federal consent 

decree. If approved, these revisions 

would limit annual bypass venting 

limits in the sulfur-containing waste gas 

emissions from a coking and power 

generating facility in Lake County, 

Indiana which is owned and operated 

by Indiana Harbor Coke Company 

(IHCC) and Cokenergy LLC (Cokenergy). 

The revisions would also require 

Cokenergy to operate and maintain a 

permanent SO2 flow rate monitor and 

improve the percent control capture 

efficiency of the facility. The 

rulemaking also includes technical 

corrections and clarifications that do not 

have a substantive effect of the 

application of the rule. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 15, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2020–0369 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

aburano.douglas@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: 

Andrew Lee, Physical Scientist, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–7645, 

lee.andrew.c@epa.gov. The EPA Region 

5 office is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

Federal holidays and facility closures 

due to COVID–19. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. 

I. Background 

On July 10, 2020, the Indiana 

Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM) submitted a 

request for revisions of the Indiana SO2

SIP for IHCC and Cokenergy, which 

operate a coking and power generating 

facility in East Chicago, Indiana. IHCC 

operates four coke oven batteries, and 

Cokenergy uses the coke oven gases to 

generate steam and electricity. The 

electricity and coke are used by the 

neighboring steel mill operated by 

ArcelorMittal. Under the terms of a 

consent decree entered on October 25, 

2018, the two companies requested that 

Indiana revise 326 Indiana 

Administrative Code (IAC) 7–4.1–7 

(Cokenergy) and 326 IAC 7–4.1–8 

(IHCC) to address emissions of sulfurcontaining waste gases. See United 

States and the State of Indiana v. 

Indiana Harbor Coke Company and 

Suncoke Energy, Inc. and Coke Energy, 

LLC, Civil Action No. 18–cv–35 

(N.D.Ind. 2018). Indiana’s adoption and 

submittal of these revised rules to EPA 

for approval into the SIP satisfy part of 

the consent decree’s requirements. 

II. Changes for the Facility 

IHCC’s coke batteries produce coke as 

their main product. Hot coke oven gas 

is generated from heating coal in coke 

ovens to approximately 2,000 °F. The 

volatile products from the coal, 

produced by the high heat, are then 

combusted with oxygen to provide heat 

from above and gas flues in the bottom 

of the chamber collect the combustion 

gases and provide heat from below. This 

recycling of gases is the fuel used for the 

ovens during normal operations. Once 

almost all the coke oven gases are 

combusted, the gas passes from the 

different ovens in a battery into a 

common tunnel and passes into an 

afterburner which oxidizes any gases 

that are not fully combusted. The gas 

stream is then directed to one of the 

sixteen heat recovery steam generators 

(HRSGs) operated by Cokenergy, where 

this heat is used to make steam to 

generate electricity. The coke oven gas 

cools as it passes through the HRSG, 

allowing the gas to be routed through air 

pollution control devices, including a 

flue gas desulfurization (FGD) unit and 

a baghouse, before venting through the 

main stack. When a HRSG is offline 

because of maintenance, malfunction or 

process concerns, or for any other 

reason, some of the gases must be 

vented through the common tunnel 

afterburner to a bypass vent stack 

because the extreme temperature of the 

gases would damage the pollution 

control equipment downstream. IHCC 

has sixteen bypass vent stacks, one 

associated with each HRSG. 

The revised SIP decreases the amount 

of coke oven gas which can be allowed 

to vent to the atmosphere through the 

bypass vent stacks. Previously, the 

facility was permitted to vent fourteen 

percent (14%) of the coke oven waste 

gas through the common tunnel on an 

annual basis. Now, during normal 

operation of the HRSG, the revised rule 

limits venting gases out through the 

bypass vent stacks to a maximum of 

thirteen percent (13%) of the coke oven 

waste gases leaving the common tunnel, 

as determined on an annual basis. 

However, if Cokenergy undertakes 

HRSG ‘‘retubing,’’ as defined in 326 IAC 

7–4.1–7(e), then venting gases out 

through the bypass vent stacks is 

allowed up to a maximum of fourteen 

percent (14%) of the coke oven waste 

gases leaving the common tunnel, as 

determined on an annual basis for the 

calendar year that Cokenergy undertakes 

the HRSG retubing. The rule requires 

the facility to verify that the fourteen 

percent venting limit in 326 IAC 7–4.1– 

7(d)(1) is warranted by the retubing 

activities. If less than 3.25% of the 

annual venting is due to the retubing 

activities, then the facility may only 

vent 13% of their annual emissions via 

the bypass vent stacks. Overall, this 

action would increase the control 

capture efficiency of the facility by 

increasing the percentage of the exhaust 

gas stream routed to control devices. 

Rule 326 IAC 7–4.1–7 retains the 

combined SO2 limit for Cokenergy’s 

heat recovery coke carbonization waste 

gas stack and the 16-bypass vent stacks 

operated by IHCC for a 24-hour average 

SO2 emission limit of 1,656 pounds per 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 27 / Thursday, February 11, 2021 / Proposed Rules 9039 

hour. The revised rule adds a 

requirement that Cokenergy install, 

operate, and maintain a permanent SO2

flow rate monitor to continuously 

measure the flow rate in the heat 

recovery coke carbonization waste gas 

stack. 

The revised proposed rule 326 IAC 7– 

4.1–8 continues to require that IHCC 

comply with the following 

requirements: The coke ovens must 

recycle the gases emitted during the 

coking process in such a way that the 

recycled gases must be the only fuel 

source used for the ovens during normal 

operations, the gases must not be routed 

directly to the atmosphere unless they 

first pass through the common tunnel 

afterburner, and a maximum of 19% of 

the coke oven waste gases leaving the 

common tunnel may be vented to the 

atmosphere on a 24-hour basis. The 

sulfur dioxide limits on IHCC’s coke 

oven battery operations in 326 IAC 7– 

4.1–8(a) are unchanged. 326 IAC 7–4.1– 

8 includes the same new limitations on 

bypass vent stack usage as in 326 IAC 

7–4.1–7, as discussed above. The 

rulemaking also includes technical 

corrections and clarifications that do not 

have a substantive effect of the 

application of the rules. 

III. Compliance With the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) 

CAA section 110(l) states that SIP 

revisions cannot be approved if they 

interfere with applicable requirements 

concerning attainment and reasonable 

further progress. EPA proposes to find 

that this proposed action is consistent 

with CAA section 110(l) because the 

proposed changes retain and/or tighten 

the existing SO2 limits. EPA is therefore 

proposing to approve Indiana’s revised 

rules 326 IAC 7–4.1–7 and 326 IAC 7– 

4.1–8. 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is proposing to approve Indiana’s 

July 10, 2020 request to revise 326 IAC 

7–4.1–7 and 326 IAC 7–4.1–8. The 

proposed SO2 SIP revisions are expected 

to strengthen the SIP and will also fulfill 

the requirements of the Federal consent 

decree with Cokenergy LLC and IHCC. 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this proposed rule, 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 Indiana rules 326 IAC 7–4.1– 

7 ‘‘Cokenergy LLC sulfur dioxide 

emission limitations’’ and 326 IAC 7– 

4.1–8 ‘‘Indiana Harbor Coke Company 

sulfur dioxide emission limitations’’, 

effective on April 24, 2020. 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 it is not a significant 

regulatory action 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). 

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: February 3, 2021. 

Cheryl Newton, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2021–02741 Filed 2–10–21; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2020–0559; FRL–10019– 

84–Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Ohio NSR 

Permit Timing 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revised paragraph of the Ohio Revised 

Code (ORC) into Ohio’s state 

implementation plan (SIP) under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA). This revision will 

allow for the extension of an installation 

permit which is the subject of an appeal 

by a party other than the owner or 

operator of the air contaminant source. 

The extension will allow the date of 

termination of the permit to be no later 

than eighteen months after the effective 

date of the permit plus the number of 

days between the date in which the 

permit was appealed and the date the 

appeal was resolved. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 15, 2021. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2020–0559 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

damico.genevieve@epa.gov. For 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS